Boy kills himself with family gun


Ocean Breeze
#61
Quote:

Try to kill em, and then try to save their life......hmmmm


Ya, I shot him, but it's ok, I tried to save his life afterward....all is good.


hmmm. indeed. (and all for 'self defense". which has become a catch all ...)
 
skookumchuck
#62
Quote: Originally Posted by Ocean BreezeView Post

the TOPIC is guns and a child killed by one. IF you want to talk about hospital incidents and toss in everything else you can think of.....please be kind enough to start a thread for that. In the meantime......lets not divert into irrelavent territory. thanks.

Important to note: stats and graphs are just numbers. They totally omit the HUMAN FACTOR. Seems the HUMAN FACTOR is the important one.

It seemed more like you were discussing danger, death, and injury while using firearms to make a very narrow case, you brought up the ER. Irrelevant? I don't think so but carry on. Physician heal thyself.
 
lone wolf
+1
#63
Quote: Originally Posted by Ocean BreezeView Post

when guns are sold........how do the sellers determine if the potential owner is going to be "responsible" or not?? OF course gun owners should be held responsible for any incidents their guns are involved in. (and the victims they kill or maim for life) Not all shootings leave victims dead. Sometimes the wounds are such that their life is permanently disabled leaving them dependant on others and the medical system.

Seems the owner of the gun causing this should be made to pay all expenses for recovery too. But they will claim "self defense" and ignore that .....unless they are sued.

It is not in all places that folks need a gun to make their point. Most places are safe to live in .....or safer by comparison. Seems that the mere presence of so many weapons on so many of the population creates an environment for potential disaster .

This is also an example of human neglegence. and plain carelessness. Even a professional sharp shooter is human and can momentarily leave his weapon exposed , thus creating the potential for disaster. so shooting skills have very little to do with momentary carelessness.

When cars are sold, how do you determine if the buyer is capable or won't loan the vehicle to complete morons. You can't control the world. The best chance is controlling yourself and hoping for the best.
 
bobnoorduyn
#64
Quote: Originally Posted by Ocean BreezeView Post

when guns are sold........how do the sellers determine if the potential owner is going to be "responsible" or not??

That's easy, hire Kreskin (the real one) as a sales clerk. How does the seller of a vehicle, or power saw or baseball bat or samurai sword or kitchen knife, for that matter know that the purchaser is going to be responsible with it?
 
Liberalman
#65
This is a good case for gun control if it had been in place the gun would not have been under the car seat or it would have had a trigger lock on it.

It is a tragic event where the parents will suffer a life long emotional loss by their child's death
Last edited by Liberalman; Mar 17th, 2012 at 12:25 PM..Reason: ....
 
karrie
+1
#66
Quote: Originally Posted by LiberalmanView Post

This is a good case for gun control if it had been in place the gun would not have been under the car seat or it would have had a trigger lock on it.

Washington state law already has laws against the gun being loaded and left alone in the car. What exactly about a new law would make someone follow said law?


RCW 9.41.050: Carrying firearms.

RCW 9.41.050

Carrying firearms.


(1)(a) Except in the person's place of abode or fixed place of business, a person shall not carry a pistol concealed on his or her person without a license to carry a concealed pistol.

(b) Every licensee shall have his or her concealed pistol license in his or her immediate possession at all times that he or she is required by this section to have a concealed pistol license and shall display the same upon demand to any police officer or to any other person when and if required by law to do so. Any violation of this subsection (1)(b) shall be a class 1 civil infraction under chapter 7.80 RCW and shall be punished accordingly pursuant to chapter 7.80 RCW and the infraction rules for courts of limited jurisdiction.

(2)(a) A person shall not carry or place a loaded pistol in any vehicle unless the person has a license to carry a concealed pistol and: (i) The pistol is on the licensee's person, (ii) the licensee is within the vehicle at all times that the pistol is there, or (iii) the licensee is away from the vehicle and the pistol is locked within the vehicle and concealed from view from outside the vehicle.

(b) A violation of this subsection is a misdemeanor.

(3)(a) A person at least eighteen years of age who is in possession of an unloaded pistol shall not leave the unloaded pistol in a vehicle unless the unloaded pistol is locked within the vehicle and concealed from view from outside the vehicle.

(b) A violation of this subsection is a misdemeanor.

(4) Nothing in this section permits the possession of firearms illegal to possess under state or federal law.
 
bobnoorduyn
+2
#67
Quote: Originally Posted by Ocean BreezeView Post

In fact it should be a requirement as part of gun purchasing that the potential buyer attend both, the ER following a shooting AND attend an autopsy of a gun shot victim. Only then will they have the "total" experience of gun ownership.

I don't disagree totally; I think irresponsible louts should be subject to this type of education as part of court ordered remediation such as has been done with DUI offenses, but it isn't a requirement until someone is has shown themselves to be irresponsible.

Quote: Originally Posted by Ocean BreezeView Post

My attitude is driven by the fact of having to deal with the results of these shootings in ER and intensive care.

Just like you don't work at the courthouse to deal with good people, you don't work at the hospital to deal with healthy people. The medical profession is so obsessed with the health of society, (probably because they get emotionally involved) that we are being stangled by legislated bubble wrap lobbied for by doctors. We need to wear helmets for almost everything. The unintended consequence is the extremes people will go to for a thrill. Things we never dared when I was younger; catching air on a bike or skateboard, bungee jumping, base jumping, the list goes on. And to protect ourselved from ourselves, doctors lobby for more restrictive laws.

Just as an aside, doctors and lawyers spend so much time in an institutional setting they cannot help being indoctrinated in the ideology of the zeitgeist, universities are teeming cesspools of leftism.
 
Liberalman
#68
Quote:

Karrie
2)(a) A person shall not carry or place a loaded pistol in any vehicle unless the person has a license to carry a concealed pistol and: (i) The pistol is on the licensee's person, (ii) the licensee is within the vehicle at all times that the pistol is there, or (iii) the licensee is away from the vehicle and the pistol is locked within the vehicle and concealed from view from outside the vehicle.




Quote:

Detectives in Tacoma, Washington questioned the parents and called the shooting a tragic accident. The father has a concealed weapons permit, and no charges were anticipated.



Pretty weak law to me




 
Ocean Breeze
#69
Quote: Originally Posted by bobnoorduynView Post

I don't disagree totally; I think irresponsible louts should be subject to this type of education as part of court ordered remediation such as has been done with DUI offenses, but it isn't a requirement until someone is has shown themselves to be irresponsible.



Just like you don't work at the courthouse to deal with good people, you don't work at the hospital to deal with healthy people. The medical profession is so obsessed with the health of society, (probably because they get emotionally involved) that we are being stangled by legislated bubble wrap lobbied for by doctors. We need to wear helmets for almost everything. The unintended consequence is the extremes people will go to for a thrill. Things we never dared when I was younger; catching air on a bike or skateboard, bungee jumping, base jumping, the list goes on. And to protect ourselved from ourselves, doctors lobby for more restrictive laws.

Just as an aside, doctors and lawyers spend so much time in an institutional setting they cannot help being indoctrinated in the ideology of the zeitgeist, universities are teeming cesspools of leftism.

that is all fine and dandy..........but when you get hurt, shot or ill..........why bother going to the ER or a medical personnel. ?? If you can heal yourself........that is great. Less stress on the medical system.

the point is that gun shot wounds are preventable. Most illnesses , etc are not. No one can say with a straight face that this death was not preventable. We all agree , that the responsibility lay with the gun owning parents. Well, they have to live with it now. Wonder if they still have their guns???
 
bobnoorduyn
#70
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

Well, I don't own a gun, but, the time's hubby's been out of town and I've gone to bed with a knife on my nightstand, should I have had to use it, it would be so that I could get away from a threat, not so I could stick around. I'd be calling 911 for sure, but not going anywhere back near someone who posed a threat to my safety. I'd assume a gun owner would be much the same. The only difference is, with a knife in my hand, I'd be close enough to an attacker to make sure it wasn't hubby coming home unexpectedly. Guns don't afford that surety.

Your home or dwelling is your last point of refuge, you are not legally required to "get away", retreat or escape, that legal precedent has been set. Assailants have frequently been able to continue on a lethal attack even after being stabbed, (and shot, but not often) multiple times.

What guns do afford is the ability to be a threat to an assailant from a safe distance, and usually the sight of one in competent hands diffuses the threat with no shots being fired.
 
Ocean Breeze
+1 / -1
#71
Quote:

I think irresponsible louts should be subject to this type of education as part of court ordered remediation such as has been done with DUI offenses, but it isn't a requirement until someone is has shown themselves to be irresponsible.

why after the fact??? By that time it is too late . No.....these two experiences should be part of the gun registration requirements. Gun buyers need to see first hand what the consequences of their weapon can be. They must be exposed to both the ER and the morgue and then think through the reasons they really want that gun .....as only then can they make a responsible decision re: gun purchases. OF course those that have proven to be irresponsible........like gangs etc......should spend time in both areas . They can do the clean up in the ER and the MORGUE after observing an autopsy.

Quote:

and usually the sight of one in competent hands diffuses the threat with no shots being fired.

the qualifier is "competant hands". kinda raises the question of how many folks would be calm , cool and collected during an intrusion into their private homes. ???
 
bobnoorduyn
+4
#72
Quote: Originally Posted by Ocean BreezeView Post

that is all fine and dandy..........but when you get hurt, shot or ill..........why bother going to the ER or a medical personnel. ?? If you can heal yourself........that is great. Less stress on the medical system.

the point is that gun shot wounds are preventable. Most illnesses , etc are not. No one can say with a straight face that this death was not preventable. We all agree , that the responsibility lay with the gun owning parents. Well, they have to live with it now. Wonder if they still have their guns???

All accidents are preventable, but leading a productive life makes them inevitible. Accidents are just that, accidents. If they weren't, the would be called, in the words of Judge Judy", "an on purpose". Was the dad irresponsible, yes, so was this guy Victoria's police chief disciplined for improperly storing his firearm (external - login to view). You talk about "shootouts", those are not accidents, nor are they preventable because they are intentional. The incidence of accidental shootings pale in comparison to the many other ways people can harm themselves.
 
earth_as_one
+3
#73
Quote: Originally Posted by ColpyView Post

....Careless? Yes.......criminally negligent? Well, maybe, but I think they have been punished enough..... (external - login to view)

Drunk parents who kill their children in car accidents probably feel terrible afterwards too, but they will still be charged with criminal negligence. Leaving a loaded firearm within reach of a child or toddler is criminally negligent.

Obtaining a firearm acquisition certificate should be as difficult as obtaining a driver's license. After a criminal background check and passing a multiple choice exam, the applicant should have to take lessons at a gun club or with a licensed instructor, and finally pass a practical test.
 
Ocean Breeze
-2
#74
Quote: Originally Posted by earth_as_oneView Post

Drunk parents who kill their children in car accidents probably feel terrible afterwards too, but they will still be charged with criminal negligence. Leaving a loaded firearm within reach of a child or toddler is criminally negligent.

Obtaining a firearm acquisition certificate should be as difficult as obtaining a driver's license. After a criminal background check and passing a multiple choice exam, the applicant should have to take lessons at a gun club or with a licensed instructor, and finally pass a practical test.

exellent ! but one must include a day at the morgue and a day in the ER. The potential gun owner must be exposed to the potential damage the weapon do and how it affects the family of the victim etc etc. That would make the requirements for gun ownership more complete . They must be literally interrogated as to WHY the "need" a gun or 'want " one.

those that obtain guns illegally........must be dealt with by the justice system.
 
earth_as_one
#75
An instructional video regarding the dangerous of improperly storing and handling a firearm would be effective enough.
 
bobnoorduyn
+1
#76
Quote: Originally Posted by Ocean BreezeView Post

why after the fact??? By that time it is too late . No.....these two experiences should be part of the gun registration requirements. Gun buyers need to see first hand what the consequences of their weapon can be. They must be exposed to both the ER and the morgue and then think through the reasons they really want that gun .....as only then can they make a responsible decision re: gun purchases. OF course those that have proven to be irresponsible........like gangs etc......should spend time in both areas . They can do the clean up in the ER and the MORGUE after observing an autopsy.

We don't do that when someone buys a vehicle which can do a helluva lot more damage. Why single out firearms? The requirements and processes are pretty involved as is, you just want to make a point, your point.


Quote: Originally Posted by Ocean BreezeView Post

the qualifier is "competant hands". kinda raises the question of how many folks would be calm , cool and collected during an intrusion into their private homes. ???

It comes down to training, you don't go buy something and try to use it before you've learned how, that would be irresponsible. You would be surprised how cool and calm people cam be in the face of danger when they have the confidence of competency. In the instance of a sudden threat there is little time to think of anything else but the matter at hand, it takes time for panic to set in. But it is the gun grabbing progressives that are restricting the opportunities for people to gain proficiency.

Quote: Originally Posted by Ocean BreezeView Post

exellent ! but one must include a day at the morgue and a day in the ER. The potential gun owner must be exposed to the potential damage the weapon do and how it affects the family of the victim etc etc. That would make the requirements for gun ownership more complete . They must be literally interrogated as to WHY the "need" a gun or 'want " one.

those that obtain guns illegally........must be dealt with by the justice system.

Yes but you want a pseudo justice system to deal with those who have not committed any crime, but treat them like ciminals anyway. I'm sure you'ld be happy with a crown of 20 onlookers in the ER watching over the shoulders of doctors and nurses as well. You don't only want to inconvenience your "potential criminals", you want to inconvenience the hospital and forensic staff as well.

You must really hate freedom.
 
Ocean Breeze
#77
Quote:

In the instance of a sudden threat there is little time to think of anything else but the matter at hand,

and what does the gun owner do in a sudden threat situation when his gun is properly locked in the safe or some protective gun holding unit???

One can run all kinds of what if scenarios as it relates to guns, threats , (particularly if the threat him/herself is holding a gun at you & demanding whatever he/she is demanding...)

Quote:

We don't do that when someone buys a vehicle which can do a helluva lot more damage. Why single out firearms? The requirements and processes are pretty involved as is, you just want to make a point, your point.

seems that FIREARMS and a child's death resulting from one is the TOPIC here. If you want to discuss car safety and drivers....start a thread to that effect. It might be an interesting one.
 
bobnoorduyn
+1
#78
Quote: Originally Posted by earth_as_oneView Post

Obtaining a firearm acquisition certificate should be as difficult as obtaining a driver's license. After a criminal background check and passing a multiple choice exam, the applicant should have to take lessons at a gun club or with a licensed instructor, and finally pass a practical test.

You obviously haven't applied for one recently. The only thing missing are the lessons because the liberal minded folk who make up these rules also limit, restrict, or close down the ranges where it can be done. A kind of catch 22, but that was the whole idea anyway.
 
Ocean Breeze
#79
Quote:

Yes but you want a pseudo justice system to deal with those who have not committed any crime, but treat them like ciminals anyway. I'm sure you'ld be happy with a crown of 20 onlookers in the ER watching over the shoulders of doctors and nurses as well. You don't only want to inconvenience your "potential criminals", you want to inconvenience the hospital and forensic staff as well.

You must really hate freedom.


__________________________

Personal attack. Not relavent to the topic. Come on .....there is plenty to debate about guns , gun owners, and all that surrounds the issue. Nothing to do with freedom. Look at all the guns in nations that are not even as free as we are. IF freedom is measured by gun ownership and usage .......then most of the world is free .
 
lone wolf
#80
Quote: Originally Posted by Ocean BreezeView Post

....the qualifier is "competant hands". kinda raises the question of how many folks would be calm , cool and collected during an intrusion into their private homes. ???

Most likely the ones with "competant hands"....

Quote: Originally Posted by earth_as_oneView Post

Drunk parents who kill their children in car accidents probably feel terrible afterwards too, but they will still be charged with criminal negligence. Leaving a loaded firearm within reach of a child or toddler is criminally negligent.

Obtaining a firearm acquisition certificate should be as difficult as obtaining a driver's license. After a criminal background check and passing a multiple choice exam, the applicant should have to take lessons at a gun club or with a licensed instructor, and finally pass a practical test.

Outside of the CPIC and any reference to the word 'gun', you pretty much described getting steering papers.
 
bobnoorduyn
+1
#81
Quote: Originally Posted by Ocean BreezeView Post

and what does the gun owner do in a sudden threat situation when his gun is properly locked in the safe or some protective gun holding unit???

They can either be a victim, like you and all your like minded friends would have it, or they can get to it quickly enough to make it workable, I can have a workable firearm ready in under a minute.


Quote: Originally Posted by Ocean BreezeView Post


One can run all kinds of what if scenarios as it relates to guns, threats , (particularly if the threat him/herself is holding a gun at you & demanding whatever he/she is demanding...)
.

I'm not quite sure what you're saying, but it sounds like you want everyone to be a compliant victim and rely on the good nature of an assailant to not do to your children what they are doing or are going to so to you. It's what the police chiefs have been telling us to do for years, be a victim. They'll come, take pictures, notify your next of kin, and maybe catch the perpetrator at a later date.

Quote: Originally Posted by Ocean BreezeView Post

seems that FIREARMS and a child's death resulting from one is the TOPIC here. If you want to discuss car safety and drivers....start a thread to that effect. It might be an interesting one.

It's all related, if you want to have a discussion in a bubble, fill yer boots.

Quote: Originally Posted by Ocean BreezeView Post

Personal attack. Not relavent to the topic. Come on .....there is plenty to debate about guns , gun owners, and all that surrounds the issue. Nothing to do with freedom. Look at all the guns in nations that are not even as free as we are. IF freedom is measured by gun ownership and usage .......then most of the world is free .

Personal attack? Sorry, didn't know you were that touchy, but these are your ideas, and it is relevant; you want a vetting system that is far and away more odious than what we have, and is in fact what Trudeau envisaged, and he was not exactly a freedom lover.

It has everything to do with freedom, look at all the nations that confiscate guns and see how free they are. Plus, as you limit firearm ownership, the more the populace is dependant on the state for protection, (but the state can't protect you). The more dependant you are on the state, the less freedom you have.
 
Ocean Breeze
#82
Well, I prefer a good security system and a well trained dog . Please don't assume one is a victim just because they are against guns.

but when it comes to gun usage ........there is always a victim. intended or not. & that does not cover the families involved that are part of the ripple effect.

Look, if folks want to own guns that badly fine. Just be sure they can live with the consequences. this incident is case in point.
 
lone wolf
+1
#83
Why would you be so cruel to your dog as to risk exposing him to violence?
 
karrie
+1
#84
Quote: Originally Posted by LiberalmanView Post






Pretty weak law to me



One of the main purposes of the judicial system is to correct behaviour. Do you think this dad needs the law to teach him a lesson about gun storage? Is he at risk of repeat offending? Would taking the father of her child away as well as her losing her child give the mother a feeling of justice having been served?



Quote: Originally Posted by Ocean BreezeView Post

Well, I prefer a good security system and a well trained dog .... Just be sure they can live with the consequences. this incident is case in point.

Can you live with the day a dog trained to injure gets loose and attacks someone? Because that happens WAY more often than gun accidents.
 
Ocean Breeze
#85
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

One of the main purposes of the judicial system is to correct behaviour. Do you think this dad needs the law to teach him a lesson about gun storage? Is he at risk of repeat offending? Would taking the father of her child away as well as her losing her child give the mother a feeling of justice having been served?

[/COLOR][/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT]



Can you live with the day a dog trained to injure gets loose and attacks someone? Because that happens WAY more often than gun accidents.

when I said a well trained dog........that is what I meant. How often do the trained Sheperds that the cops use "get away " and cause injury". Most of the time they are off the leash. Dogs that attack at random are NOT WELL TRAINED. COULD NOT live with having shot someone. No way . Have never even held a gun and never will. IF a highly trained dog is not realistic......then a good security system. That would be the choice.

In reality I have neither. . and yet we have been robbed ........in San Francisco. One of my favorite places to visit.
Last edited by Ocean Breeze; Mar 17th, 2012 at 06:04 PM..
 
karrie
#86
Quote: Originally Posted by Ocean BreezeView Post

when I said a well trained dog........that is what I meant. How often do the trained Sheperds that the cops use "get away " and cause injury". Most of the time they are off the leash. Dogs that attack at random are NOT WELL TRAINED. COULD NOT live with having shot someone. No way . Have never even held a gun and never will. IF a highly trained dog is not realistic......then a good security system. That would be the choice.

In reality I have neither. . and yet we have been robbed ........in San Francisco. One of my favorite places to visit.

The only way to find out for sure if a dog isn't well trained is if it proves you wrong.

A handgun doesn't pose the same problem. It's highly predictable.
 
Ocean Breeze
#87
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

The only way to find out for sure if a dog isn't well trained is if it proves you wrong.

A handgun doesn't pose the same problem. It's highly predictable.

Not sure I follow. How is a handgun "predictable? Does it not depend on outside variables?? Like the skill of the handler , the emotional state of the one handling the gun. The surroundings themselves?? Don't guns jam sometimes?? Maybe I have been watching too many CSI and crime stories

My money is on the well trained dog. (NOT a pitbull or something equally overly aggressive. That is not even a consideration) HEck.........even a small dog trained to alert on unusual sounds , would be fine by me. Yappy ones can do the job quite well.
 
karrie
#88
Quote: Originally Posted by Ocean BreezeView Post

Not sure I follow. How is a handgun "predictable? Does it not depend on outside variables?? Like the skill of the handler , the emotional state of the one handling the gun. The surroundings themselves?? Don't guns jam sometimes?? Maybe I have been watching too many CSI and crime stories

My money is on the well trained dog. (NOT a pitbull or something equally overly aggressive. That is not even a consideration)

Any dog trained to injure IS overly aggressive. Period.

With guns... the human factor is the variable.

With dogs, the variables are the trainer AND the dog AND the behaviour of the people around the dog. It's a nasty mix that often results (even from police dogs), in critical mistakes and injuries. Just google 'police dog mauls child' or 'police dog attacks bystander'. Even the 'well trained' make mistakes.

Keep in mind that what you're suggesting is that people you don't trust to properly maintain, store, or operate a gun, instead get and attempt to train a live animal to injure, that they have no control over if they haven't done the job of training it that they think they did.
 
talloola
#89
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

Any dog trained to injure IS overly aggressive. Period.

With guns... the human factor is the variable.

With dogs, the variables are the trainer AND the dog AND the behaviour of the people around the dog. It's a nasty mix that often results (even from police dogs), in critical mistakes and injuries. Just google 'police dog mauls child' or 'police dog attacks bystander'. Even the 'well trained' make mistakes.

Keep in mind that what you're suggesting is that people you don't trust to properly maintain, store, or operate a gun, instead get and attempt to train a live animal to injure, that they have no control over if they haven't done the job of training it that they think they did.

I hear you karrie, and agree, but my read on the dog thing is, an untrained dog, 'like our labrador', is
a good security device, just being there, knowing he is there, and hearing his barking, and seeing his face,
would in most cases make the perpetrators decide to go next door where there is no dog.


But if they wanted to they could bring a piece of liver with them, would work in their favour.
 
karrie
#90
Quote: Originally Posted by talloolaView Post

I hear you karrie, and agree, but my read on the dog thing is, an untrained dog, 'like our labrador', is
a good security device, just being there, knowing he is there, and hearing his barking, and seeing his face,
would in most cases make the perpetrators decide to go next door where there is no dog.


But if they wanted to they could bring a piece of liver with them, would work in their favour.

my husband's family had a really aggressive outdoor dog when they had their farm. They thought he was an ideal watch dog... he'd only let someone out of their truck once one of the family was with them. They showed up one day and theyd been robbed, the house cleaned out of everything remotely valuable, and the dog was groggy. Whoever it was had simply drugged the poor thing.
 

Similar Threads

118
Montreal family kills daughters
by damngrumpy | Feb 3rd, 2012
18
GW Kills Science
by Scott Free | Jun 30th, 2008
0
Man Kills Family With Carbon Monoxide
by sanctus | Oct 21st, 2007
no new posts