5 year old given rifle as gift, kills 2 year old sister

[Davros]

If they can't sell the fear of weapons seizing government, their entire argument falls apart.

 

[cooleddie74]

Not like it was the most bulletproof argument to begin with. No pun intended.

 

[gturner]

Well, so you've even lost anti-gun crusaders Joe Scarborough and Piers Morgan on background checks.

Amusingly, we already have background checks and they can't work much better than the currently do, unless you live in the fantasy land where criminals selling guns to each other check each other for a valid ID and then call federal law enforcement for permission to commit a crime (you should push for bank robbery permits). The system fails to respond so often that honest private gun sellers will just assume that the buyer was just being victimized by Obama campaign operatives and go ahead and sell the gun anyway, taking care to pass it through three or four hacked identities to keep everything legal, when their not running background checks on their daughter's new boyfriend's family.

 

[Chatty]

I know it's probably been said in this thread before, having 19 pages and all, but banning guns isn't the solution. Teaching safe gun handling is.

And the gun should never have been left where he could get to it, whether loaded (as it was) or unloaded. Guns are not toys. My father taught me to handle guns when I was a teen after he retired from the AF and I'm now 53 with four grandchildren. For a five year old, the gun should have been put up until a responsible adult could supervise and teach him gun safety.

And water guns just teach a kid that they can point a gun at others and 'shoot' them, it doesn't teach them that bullets will kill if shot into a living thing.

 

[JarodRussell]

You wouldn't give a 5-year-old a kitchen knife or access to household chemicals, so why would you give him access to a gun?

 

[Chatty]

That was my point, the rifle should have been put up until a responsible adult could take him somewhere safe to teach him to shoot it. It was gross negligence for the parents to leave it leaning in a corner, loaded or not.

 

[JarodRussell]

That was my point, the rifle should have been put up until a responsible adult could take him somewhere safe to teach him to shoot it. It was gross negligence for the parents to leave it leaning in a corner, loaded or not.

My point goes even further: would you really ever give a 5-year old a kitchen knife? You wouldn't, not even for "educational purposes" like showing how to cut vegetables with it. You don't do that with a 5-year old.

You also don't confront a 5-year-old with pornography.
You wouldn't let a 5-year-old drive a car.
You wouldn't let a 5-year-old shop for groceries.
You wouldn't give a 5-year-old a lighter.
You wouldn't give a 5-year-old a hair-dryer next to a filled bathtub.
You wouldn't give a 5-year-old your razor blade.
You wouldn't give a 5-year-old beer or cigarettes.

So why the FUCK would you EVER give a 5-year-old a FUCKING GUN?!?!

 

[Peach Wookiee]

I can disagree about the teaching to cut veggies. My brother did so at school at the age of four. Granted, that was 1979.

 

[JarodRussell]

I can disagree about the teaching to cut veggies. My brother did so at school at the age of four. Granted, that was 1979.

I'd say that's way too early. At four, the kid's going to say "I can handle this shit" at SOME point and going to try something with the knife that will end up badly when nobody else is around.

There is the fascination of forbidden stuff (when you clearly forbid a kitchen knife, the kid is at some point going to play with it anyways), but then there's also the false sense of confidence (that the kid thinks it can handle it because it did have a course).

At that early age, you need to satisfy the kid's curiosity by showing it to them, let them touch it, show them what it's capable of, etc... . But THEN clearly forbid it. As it's "not a toy".

And for kids at that age, everything IS a toy.

 

[Davros]

Amusingly, we already have background checks

Except that gun show loophole everybody has been trying to close.

and they can't work much better than the currently do,

Your opinion.

unless you live in the fantasy land where criminals selling guns to each other check each other for a valid ID and then call federal law enforcement for permission to commit a crime (you should push for bank robbery permits).

Why would they go to a criminal, when they could just go to a gun show? And if we can't have a law because criminals will break it, why do we have any laws?

The system fails to respond so often that honest private gun sellers will just assume that the buyer was just being victimized by Obama campaign operatives and go ahead and sell the gun anyway, taking care to pass it through three or four hacked identities to keep everything legal, when their not running background checks on their daughter's new boyfriend's family.

Family and friends were exempt from the expanded background checks that were recently filibustered in the senate.

 

[SeerSGB]

Another group of parents for "parents of the year":

A 2-year-old boy is recovering after Randolph County deputies say he found a handgun inside his home, put it in his mouth, and the weapon fired.

Deputies say the toddler found his father's .45-caliber handgun in his parents' bedroom on Saturday.

Authorities say the boy is expected to survive after being taken to a Winston-Salem hospital.

Gods damn it people. Guns + Kids in the house = Lock that shit up where they can't get to it.

The Randolph County Sheriff's Office and the district attorney will decide if the parents should be charged for leaving the pistol improperly locked.

"Should be charged"? The two year old got the gun and was able to fire it. Yes, I would think that means the damn thing wasn't properly stored and/or locked.

 

[Stoo]

Wow, it's lucky the kid survived.

Apart from matters of locks, why was the thing lying around loaded?

 

[gturner]

Amusingly, we already have background checks

Except that gun show loophole everybody has been trying to close.

The FFL dealers at the gunshows already run background checks, and have ever since the NCIS system was implemented in 1998, since the law says all FFL dealers must run background checks, regardless of where the sale is made. That's why Google suggests "myth" following "gun show loophole". I remember when the irritating issue at gun shows was running phone lines for all the vendor booths so they could run the checks.

 

[MacLeod]

Isn't it NICS check?

 

[Owain Taggart]

And for kids at that age, everything IS a toy.

Exactly! Amen! To a kid that age, there simply isn't any distinction. As I've said before in this thread, a kid isn't going to know any better. They're often going to mimic what is being done by their parents. And I keep going over in my mind how much worse that could have been with that fact in mind, say if he sees kids playing with toy guns and grabs his. An accident waiting to happen, no matter what.

 

[cooleddie74]

Wow, it's lucky the kid survived.

Apart from matters of locks, why was the thing lying around loaded?

The parents are idiots who don't deserve to own a firearm. That's why.

 

[Tribble puncher]

I have no problem with making guns for kids. I learned to shoot as a young child, as did my siblings, and my in-laws. Building guns that fit a child's shorter arms is fine. A kid who grows up shooting and learning proper safety practices will be safe as an adult as well. I've seen plenty of adults (go find pictures of some of our politicians crusading against guns for some examples) who were downright scary with a gun because they had no idea how to handle one because they were never taught. It's easier to teach a child than an adult.

The problem here isn't the existence of such a gun; the problem is giving a 5-year old their own gun. Even more of a problem is the fact that the gun was sitting in the corner with a bullet in it. There are two major problems right there and that's what these parents should be brought up on charges for. If a parent buys a gun for their kid, it is absolutely incumbent upon them to store the gun properly and never have it anywhere the kid can get access to it without adult supervision and the kid absolutely must be taught and be able to demonstrate proper safety practices before the gun is ever loaded.

You can tell what kinds of parents these people are, Mom went out for "3 minutes" (prob. smoking a cigarette while kids are running around in house.) but as above poster stated, the problem is not that guns made for children exist, it's that adult's like these are idiot's with firearm's. the gun should have been safely locked up with a trigger lock installed on it.

 

[Jimi_James]

I had avoided this story but came across it again yesterday and didn't find out until then that it had taken place in Ky, where I currently reside. It's makes my proud to know my state is full of such intelligent individuals...and by proud, I mean terribly ashamed.

I hate it here, but I suppose there is stupid everywhere. Anyone on the west coast want a house guest? I'm ready to leave Ky.

 

[JarodRussell]

I have no problem with making guns for kids. I learned to shoot as a young child, as did my siblings, and my in-laws. Building guns that fit a child's shorter arms is fine.

All for recreational purposes of course.

 

[Davros]

Amusingly, we already have background checks

Except that gun show loophole everybody has been trying to close.

The FFL dealers at the gunshows already run background checks, and have ever since the NCIS system was implemented in 1998, since the law says all FFL dealers must run background checks, regardless of where the sale is made. That's why Google suggests "myth" following "gun show loophole". I remember when the irritating issue at gun shows was running phone lines for all the vendor booths so they could run the checks.

That doesn't cover private sales. Educate yourself on the issue.