I let an 8 year old shoot a pound of tannerite. That's not only letting a child shoot a scary AR15 but also explosives a couple hundred times the power of a firecracker. Adult supervision is a must.
But study after study shows that if the guns are stored safely then child death and injury rate is much much less
My boys ride horses, skateboards, ripsticks, bicycles, and just about anything else without a helmet. They carry pocket knives. They do wear ear and eye protection when they shoot.
And short of random, mandatory home inspections without a warrant, there is no way to enforce storage requirements. Therefore accidents will still occur in families that prefer to go through life recklessly or criminally. Therefore nothing more can be done without laws that would never pass constitutional muster.
So what are you saying? Passing laws requiring people to store guns safely will make stupid people store them that way......why I bet that just works fine for everybody required to buckle their children up or not illegally leave them in a hot car while they shop, or leave their illegal drugs in plain view. Do any of those laws fix stupid? I bet study after study on those topics would show buckling kids up, or not leaving them in hot cars, or illegally purchasing drugs and leaving them lie about would reduce child deaths and injuries as well but the truth is, law abiding good parents already use common sense and follow not only the law but good parenting skills, stupid people...not so much. Like I said, emotionalism is all that's left for the anti-gunners in light of real facts. - - - Updated - - - Don't underestimate the emotional....they think everything can be fixed with a few good laws!
These studies isn't very honest mixing gang violence and gang shootings in the same catagory as "children". The highest rate of gun violence , gang violence, is 17-24. Using 17--19 year olds counted in one study and age 1 to 24 in another is just ridiculous to catsgorize them as "children". These groups are one of the reason lawful citizens should be able to protect themselves.
I usually grease the top of the car up and try to get them to hang on during long road trips. Plus they get to eat all the bugs they can swallow on the way. - - - Updated - - - My kids like to play russian roulette with a glock semi auto. - - - Updated - - - You know what's interesting about these studies? They are written by people who know nothing about guns, and believed by those who know even less. Meanwhile in New York, it has rained babies the 3rd time this year.
I will give you this you will stoop to anything to try and prove a lie,again all you have done is prove there are stupid people in the world.I still don't see one case our any statistics that show how many guns have killed on their own.It doesn't matter how you try and twist things it still shows people are the problem and not guns,and don't try the burned out saying if there wasn't any guns they couldn't use one.There is far to many other things to be used for that to help either,yes maybe quicker and easier but what you want to to suffer more before they die.That is the only thing you would accomplish with that way of thinking.
Here we go again. Another RW nut claiming that we are going to "ban" guns. {sigh} Oh, and what a great idea! Puting weapons that kill in the hands of a 5 year old! double {sigh}
If BowerBird is such a threat to you, how come I have never heard of him (or her)? I suspect that you are talking about someone who is pretty much washed out in Congress. But, go ahead and nurse your paranoia. I own a piece of a survivalist store and we have everything you need to fight off Jade Helm. Be afraid. be VERY afraid.....
When you fell off the turnip truck I think you landed in your head. The post I made in this thread was directed at the thread creator. If you couldn't figure that Bowerbird was a PF member I might have to bring out the sock puppets to explain this stuff to you. But seeing as you have fewer than 100 posts I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're just a newfag that doesn't know the PF community. Look into the OP of the thread some and learn her anti gun crap. Suck her kangaroo dick and swallow all the gravy.
I suppose liberals like Obama saying he would like to ban handguns isn't a ban but 'common sense gun control' eh?
Prove that they are not. Hillary Clinton has already stated that she supports the firearm restrictions of the nation of Australia, which outlawed the private ownership of many types of firearms.
you say gun control but in reality you mean control of guns,and if Hillary gets elected then this country is even worse off then I thought, are we that close to bottom of the barrel already.I think it is ironic that you LW seem to think a few irresponsible parents with guns, that makes us all that way.I thought we were beyond that kind of ignorance but I guess not.I bet you have the criminals on your side,you keep trying to make it easier for them.If you get rid of all the legal guns then everybody will be living in a Gun Free Zone and we see how well that works.If you live in a safer area,you probable have legal gun owners in your area keeping it that way,you should go thank your neighbors.
Wrong. There is not one child or teen injured by a firearm every hour. From the CDC Nonfatal Injury Report: Age group 0-4 Nbr Firearm injuries 114 509 is 122 10-14 is 302 15-19 is 2590 That's all injuries from firearms which received (not required but received) medical treatment from simple treat & release to hospitalization. Total 3,128, not 8,760 which is the hours in a year. As usual your sources are wrong (USA Today is a pop rag not a scientific source) and your numbers exaggerated. Stick to Australia.
Actually, it is control of people, not guns. Guns don't do anything without people so the authoritarians are chomping at the bit to exert more government force on law abiding citizens.
Almost one child or teen an hour is injured by a firearm seriously enough to require hospitalization, a new analysis finds. Six percent of the 7,391 hospitalizations analyzed in 2009 resulted in a death, says the study in February's Pediatrics, released Monday. Scary statistics, but then an average of 38 children an hour are admitted to hospital after being attacked by a dog, and we don't do anything about that either.
Stating a fact is not an appeal to emotion There is a real cost to having a lot of loose guns in your society - some of it is an injury rate for children far and above other industrialised nations
What was the cost of mass shootings because you didn't care enough about the kids to protect them.Oh that's my fault right because I have a legal,and you know what mine are still all accounted for,so I guess it wasn't my fault after all.Just another whole in your theory.
Excellent post. One of the most common tactics of the anti-gun press is redefining the age of a "child" to include 19 year-old-gang members (or 24-year-old gang members in the New England Journal article). It's absolutely pitiful and an obvious sign of desperation. The most pathetic thing is the New England Journal of Medical actually publishing this garbage, since they wouldn't publish an article titled "Strokes Kill 130,000 Children Per Year" (if the age of a "child" was arbitrarily redefined to anyone younger than 115). The last resort of someone with an argument that has no leg to stand on is to make up nonsense like this.
