Boy kills himself with family gun

[TenPenny]

Actually, handguns are made for a bunch of reasons: to kill game, to punch holes in targets, or to provide the ability to stop an attacker.

In the first instance, killing is the entire point, in the second there is no correlation, and in the third killing is simply an unpleasant side effect.

But, like practically everything else, weapons need to be handled correctly to be safe.......

You so funny, you must be on city council.

The 'punch holes in targets' is a derivative use, using targets instead of people. To kill game is a pathetic attempt; tell me, who hunts deer or ducks with a handgun in North America?

The third is stupid - the whole point is to kill people, and you hope the intruder runs away first. That's the whole point of a handgun, if it wasn't meant to kill people, you wouldn't carry it for self defense, you'd carry a banana. The whole point of a handgun is that it is for killing people, and you hope people are scared off by it. That's the point of it.

 

[CDNBear]

Pistol deer hunt - YouTube

 

[skookumchuck]

It seems these days that people spend much time feeling sorry for illegal drug addicts, wanting lately to supply them with drugs even though they made a wrong choice.
However, an argument can be made that the choices these addicts made are responsible for numerous deaths in the drug trade, not just among themselves, that would mean all illegal drug addicts share the responsibility.
How does that stack up against the very very small percentage of legal gun owners involved in an accidental death or murder due to a wrong choice? Why should they all share the responsibility when they have not made a wrong choice? Do anti gun types feel sorry, even for those few? Or do they merely reload their rhetoric and carry on?

Simple, consider it a wrong choice to own a firearm:roll:

 

[mentalfloss]

Fuzzy doesn't make those.

No, I fuzzed up. I posted this in a hurry before leaving work. Colpy suggested 'In the news' - that's fine.

 

[CDNBear]

No, I fuzzed up. I posted this in a hurry before leaving work.

That's why you shouldn't blow a fatty, right after you get up.

 

[mentalfloss]

That's why you shouldn't blow a fatty, right after you get up.

You blow fatties? :lol:

 

[CDNBear]

You blow fatties? :lol:

Obviously not, I'm not the one, that "Fuzzed up".

Maybe you shouldn't blow fatties and post either. You keep Fuzzing up.

 

[taxslave]

That's why you shouldn't blow a fatty, right after you get up.

Who waits that long? Or don't you smoke in bed?

 

[CDNBear]

Who waits that long? Or don't you smoke in bed?

I don't partake.

I'd feel like a Fuzzy if I Fuzzed up and posted an article like this in the haha sub section.

 

[bobnoorduyn]

You so funny, you must be on city council.

The 'punch holes in targets' is a derivative use, using targets instead of people. To kill game is a pathetic attempt; tell me, who hunts deer or ducks with a handgun in North America?

The third is stupid - the whole point is to kill people, and you hope the intruder runs away first. That's the whole point of a handgun, if it wasn't meant to kill people, you wouldn't carry it for self defense, you'd carry a banana. The whole point of a handgun is that it is for killing people, and you hope people are scared off by it. That's the point of it.

First, you punch holes in paper to become proficient with the firearm for the same reason I have to go to sim every six months to be proficient in what I do. You hope to never have to kill someone just as I hope to never have to deal with the catastophic failures simulated in the sim. But when you do have to meet the challenge, you are able to react decicively because of training and repetition rather than by guesswork or instinct.

Second, yes, handguns are used for hunting. I have used my .22 Ruger to hunt grouse. I have fired a Thompson Centre Contender that was chambered in .257 Roberts, ideal for deer and I can hit a 4" steel target a 100 yards, and buddy also has a .410 shot barrel and a .410 slug barrel for it. I want one in 300 Savage, (because I already have the dies for reloading them). They are only illegal for hunting in Canada because our wimpy Canadian masters have an irrational fear of hanguns. Hunting pistols are as accurate and powerful as rifles. I was not convinced until we tested both with chronometers and other high tech gear. The only advantages a rifle has over a pistol are that they give a more stable shooting platform while standing and the weight helps to absorb the recoil. The barrel length of a rifle is actually a detriment to accuracy because it flexes, the longer the barrel, the more the flex, or whip.

Third, yes, all basic firearm designs come from the need to kill, though they can be modified for different purposes, but the basic design is the same. A handgun is designed as a defense firearm, it is a reactive tool. If you go looking for action, take some friends, and a tank. A pistol allows you to fight your way back to your gun. It also allows you to get yourself out of a threatening situation, a banana won't do that. Sure you hope you'll scare away the assailant, but you have the access to force if you need it. At my age, I know I can't outrun or fight my way out of a situation. Defense of self and those under my care is a basic human right and that far and away trumps anyone else's right to the "feeling" of safety.

 

[AyameTaylor]

I am slightly confused as to how this belongs in the Jokes section. x.x

 

[shadowshiv]

This shows as being posted under "fun and jokes" am i missing something?

That's a good obversation. I'm certain that it was unintentional. I'll move the thread to the In The News subforum.

 

[Colpy]

You so funny, you must be on city council.

The 'punch holes in targets' is a derivative use, using targets instead of people. To kill game is a pathetic attempt; tell me, who hunts deer or ducks with a handgun in North America?

The third is stupid - the whole point is to kill people, and you hope the intruder runs away first. That's the whole point of a handgun, if it wasn't meant to kill people, you wouldn't carry it for self defense, you'd carry a banana. The whole point of a handgun is that it is for killing people, and you hope people are scared off by it. That's the point of it.

About THIS you shouldn't argue with me.....it is one of the few subjects I know something about.

You really thing this was made for killing people?

Or this?????

Handgun hunting is extremely popular in the USA.........with every major company making guns specifically for the hunter's market......

Now, do you think this was made to kill people?? Or as a derivitive of any killing machine?? This is a free pistol, a single shot .22 rimfire used in paper punching competitions.

As for killing people, if you want to kill someone, you take a rifle or a shotgun. Pistols are ONLY useful because they are easy to carry, and then you have it when you are attacked, and you can use it to STOP your attacker. Usually, such things work out with no shots fired, the display is enough, but if you do need to shoot an attacker, whether he dies or not is besides the point.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Another young life taken via family gun.:-(

So the operative question now is: Will this family get rid of all their weapons to ensure a gun free zone. There are enough situations around the home etc where kids can hurt themselves without having guns accessible to the children. If a home or family car is not safe for kids.......that leaves a lot to be desired.

or will gun lovers excuse this as just another "one off"???

 

[AyameTaylor]

Honestly Ocean Breeze I think this while sad is something that people will use as an example as to why guns are bad.

They are tools just like anything else, it's the parents fault for having the gun in the car within the reach of a child in the first place. If the parent was responsible then they would not have done so, even if it was just for a second. It's like letting a kid loose in a wood shop and hoping they won't loose a finger or their life.

Go after the parents not the weapons in this case as it is completely they're fault.

As for "one Off" no sadly it's not a one off, Most incidences where guns kill minors are because of negligence with the weapon in one manner or another. If you own a gun it's your responsibly to teach your child that it is dangerous just like anything else and your responsibility to ensure the gun is in safe keeping AWAY from children fingers.

 

[earth_as_one]

I agree with Colpy regarding proper handling of a firearm.

IMO, If you illegally store or handle a firearm, then you should be held responsible for the consequences. I would support negligent homicide charges, similar to the homicide charges resulting from a death resulting from DUI.

 

[Colpy]

Another young life taken via family gun.:-(

So the operative question now is: Will this family get rid of all their weapons to ensure a gun free zone. There are enough situations around the home etc where kids can hurt themselves without having guns accessible to the children. If a home or family car is not safe for kids.......that leaves a lot to be desired.

or will gun lovers excuse this as just another "one off"???

Virginia Tech was a gunfree zone.

The École Polytechnique was a gunfree zone.

The island of Utøya in Tyrifjorden, Buskerud, Norway was a gunfree zone.

In the USA, firearms are used well over a million times a year in self-defense. How many lives do youy think have been saved in that statistic????

Guns and Self-Defense by Gary Kleck, Ph.D.

Just to back up Mr. Kleck, here is an irrefutable statistic.....in the USA gun legislation has radically EASED access to firearms. Beginning in 1989, laws allowing the carry of handguns in the USA, have been passed in 80% plus of the states.
The murder rate has dropped 40%.
The accident rate for firearms in the USA is dropping as well.

Your attitude is driven by emotion, and is factually unsupportable.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

I agree with Colpy regarding proper handling of a firearm.

IMO, If you illegally store or handle a firearm, then you should be held responsible for the consequences. I would support negligent homicide charges, similar to the homicide charges resulting from a death resulting from DUI.

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.

 

[karrie]

Ridiculous. Honestly, there needs to be some sort of selection in life. I would like to think that people survived to become adults not because other people dulled all the sharp edges to life.

You do understand that evolutionary pressure as it applies to a species IS what what drives us to try to protect as many young as possible and not see it as okay to lose those that someone deems 'lesser' than them, right? It drives me nuts when people start throwing out pop culture 'science' as a reason to throw your hands in the air over the horror of someone's child dying.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Your attitude is driven by emotion, and is factually unsupportable.

My attitude is driven by the fact of having to deal with the results of these shootings in ER and intensive care. If that is "emotional" so be it. Maybe the gun loving crowd should attend ER during a shootout and deal with the victims injuries. Give them a different perspective . All the laws and debates matter little when one is striving to save a gunshot victim. 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.