5-Year Old Tragically Kills Baby Sister with Rifle 'Made for Youths'

[QUOTE=andgar923]Sorry, but this is ridiculous.

We have laws that prevent drivers under a certain age from driving, from drinking, because it's dangerous (along with other reasons).

Why should a child regardless of whether they're supervised or not be allowed to use a gun?

Don't know about you, but I wouldn't let a 10 year old (let alone a 5 year old) use a gun anywhere around me.[/QUOTE]

Because they then learn how to respect guns and how to properly use them.

Just like Cenk said....


American culture has a really bad sickness when it comes to guns.. people are getting blown away at an amazing clip (no pun) and yet we still have idiots trying to defend this sh*t

there is no way in hell there should be anyone in this thread arguing over whether a f*ckin 5 yr old should have any access to a gun [B]AT ALL[/B]..

just shows how stupid some muthaf*ckers are in this country :facepalm

[QUOTE=Balla_Status]Because they then learn how to respect guns and how to properly use them.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. I remember when my dad first showed me how to shoot a fcking BB gun. He acted like it was the most serious shit ever. This is not a toy, never point a gun at anything you don't intend to destroy, keep your finger off the trigger until you are ready to fire, etc. I grew up with a respect for guns, not a fear.

Kids need to be taught respect and responsibility, not fear.

The posts above mine (not Balla Status) are examples of an irrational fear of guns.

[LEFT][COLOR=#000000][QUOTE] The posts above mine (not Balla Status) are examples of an irrational fear of guns.
[/QUOTE]

Its irrational to fear what cant harm you. There is nothing irrational about fearing poorly policed weapons capable of killing dozens of people at any given moment for no reason.

That said...

My dad let me fire a gun when I was a kid. We had BB guns. I was a boyscout shooting a bow and arrow(and I mean deadly ones...not kid shit). I had knives...hatchets. Whatever. Not all kids are the same just as all adults arent.

But....there is no good reason to produce guns for children. Too many things can go wrong.

Ive never felt the need to own a gun and ive never felt unsafe.

Few friends of mine do. Its pretty...whatever.

There is no reason at all not to check on anyone trying to get one though. Of my 3 close friends who have guns...2 of them have them illegally and one is a felon who bought it at the flea market.

Hes not a threat to me...but society isnt better for him being able to get a gun any time he wants. Dude was robbing mexicans a few years back...
[/COLOR][/LEFT]

[QUOTE=bmulls]Exactly. I remember when my dad first showed me how to shoot a fcking BB gun. He acted like it was the most serious shit ever. This is not a toy, never point a gun at anything you don't intend to destroy, keep your finger off the trigger until you are ready to fire, etc. I grew up with a respect for guns, not a fear.

Kids need to be taught respect and responsibility, not fear.[/QUOTE]


Well I guess we should supervise 5 yr olds and let them drink and also drive too so they learn to respect that too... :rolleyes:


[quote]The posts above mine (not Balla Status) are examples of an irrational fear of guns.[/quote]

its actually common sense.. but I see you and hawker dont have much of that..


kids can wait a few years before you have them shooting guns... they wont have any less "respect" for it..

and it has nothing to do with infringing on people's right to own guns. Some Americans are just dumb asses and paranoid over their guns..

[QUOTE=kNicKz]So you're going to compare total stats with countries that have different population amounts?

:roll:

Retarded sheep :roll:

*peace*[/QUOTE]
death [B][SIZE="5"]rate[/SIZE][/B]

[QUOTE]death rate refers to the number of deaths over a given period divided by the person-years lived by the population over that period. [SIZE="5"][B]It is expressed as number of deaths per 1,000 population.[/B][/SIZE][/QUOTE]

I'm not even going to insult you.

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]Well I guess we should supervise 5 yr olds and let them drink and also drive too so they learn to respect that too... :rolleyes:


its actually common sense.. but I see you and hawker dont have much of that..


kids can wait a few years before you have them shooting guns... they wont have any less "respect" for it..

and it has nothing to do with infringing on people's right to own guns. Some Americans are just dumb asses and paranoid over their guns..[/QUOTE]

Dude, kids can drown in swimming pools too. They can suffocate in plastic bags. They can get hit by cars, fall out of apartment windows, drink bleach. There are a million ways kids can (and do) die with household objects. We don't ban these things because parents are expected to teach their kids the dangers of these items.

This is why your fear of guns is irrational.

[QUOTE=brantonli]If it can help prevent more accidents like this, why would you say no? Do we value rights over life?
[/QUOTE]
You can only wish that each and everyone of this gun loving idiots that are ok with thousands of people dying because they have their "rights", would lost everyone they love by the misuse of a gun.

[QUOTE=bmulls]Dude, kids can drown in swimming pools too. They can suffocate in plastic bags. They can get hit by cars, fall out of apartment windows, drink bleach. There are a million ways kids can (and do) die with household objects. We don't ban these things because parents are expected to teach their kids the dangers of these items.

This is why your fear of guns is irrational.[/QUOTE]
lol this dumbass calling someone else irrational after comparing swimming pools and plastic bags to guns. :lol

:roll:

[QUOTE=bmulls]Dude, kids can drown in swimming pools too. They can suffocate in plastic bags. They can get hit by cars, fall out of apartment windows, drink bleach. There are a million ways kids can (and do) die with household objects. We don't ban these things because parents are expected to teach their kids the dangers of these items.
[/quote]

the only difference is that guns are specifically designed to kill things. they only have one purpose... you don't swim in a gun... you cant clean your clothes with guns.. they dont have any other practical purpose but killing..

So lets give a 5 yr old a gun so he can blow his sister's head off instead of waiting until the kid is older...

[quote]This is why your fear of guns is irrational.[/QUOTE]

:facepalm part of 'respecting' guns is understanding that they do not belong in the hands of children..

that makes what Im saying very rational...

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]the only difference is that guns are specifically designed to kill things. they only have one purpose... you don't swim in a gun... you cant clean your clothes with guns.. they dont have any other practical purpose but killing..

So lets give a 5 yr old a gun so he can blow his sister's head off instead of waiting until the kid is older...



:facepalm part of 'respecting' guns is understanding that they do not belong in the hands of children..

that makes what Im saying very rational...[/QUOTE]

[IMG]http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2012/0801/play_g_olypistol_576.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://www.bubblews.com/assets/images/news/824355324_1363436874.jpg[/IMG]

Didn't know killing people was an olympic sport...

[QUOTE=bmulls]Dude, kids can drown in swimming pools too. They can suffocate in plastic bags. They can get hit by cars, fall out of apartment windows, drink bleach. There are a million ways kids can (and do) die with household objects. We don't ban these things because parents are expected to teach their kids the dangers of these items.

This is why your fear of guns is irrational.[/QUOTE]
Is your argument really that since kids can die from literally anything that guns shouldn't be targeted for potential recklessness ? Such a dumb argument..

You're deflecting the problem.

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]the only difference is that guns are specifically designed to kill things. they only have one purpose... you don't swim in a gun... you cant clean your clothes with guns.. they dont have any other practical purpose but killing..

So lets give a 5 yr old a gun so he can blow his sister's head off instead of waiting until the kid is older...

:facepalm part of 'respecting' guns is understanding that they do not belong in the hands of children..

that makes what Im saying very rational...[/QUOTE]

Just plain false. There's no point in debating you if you're just going to lie or make shit up. You can target shoot with guns. 99% of the bullets fired every year are fired at paper targets. Target shooting is an Olympic sport. People use guns for recreation MUCH more often than they use them for killing (including hunting).

The fact that some stupid parents let their kid have unrestricted access to a gun does not mean we need more fcking laws that punish the millions of the responsible parents.

It's pathetic and embarrassing how you want the government to control every aspect of your life, and the fact that you're proud of it is even sadder.

[QUOTE=tpols]Is your argument really that since kids can die from literally anything that guns shouldn't be targeted for potential recklessness ? Such a dumb argument..

You're deflecting the problem.[/QUOTE]

No, I already said the parents are stupid and should be charged with manslaughter.

My response was to the people saying kids shouldn't be allowed to use guns even when supervised by their parents. My point was that is just like saying kids shouldn't be allowed to swim even with supervision. I wouldn't let a 5 year old kid use a swimming pool by himself, but there's no problem teaching a kid to swim with adults around. Same thing with guns, yet people have this irrational fear of them. They try to use an isolated incident like this and then demand more fcking laws when there are millions of parents who teach their children responsibility every day.

[LEFT][COLOR=#000000][QUOTE] [LEFT][COLOR=#000000]It's pathetic and embarrassing how you want the government to control every aspect of your life, and the fact that you're proud of it is even sadder.
[/COLOR][/LEFT]
[/QUOTE][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000] [/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000]How is limiting access to say...land mines, hand grenades, or weaponized chemical agents more controlling than not letting a guy have a weapon that could kill 50 people in moments?[/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000] [/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000]Or do you think limiting all weapons is too much control?[/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000] [/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000]Where do you draw the line?[/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000] [/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000]I could kill more people with a gun than I could with one standard hand grenade. You ok with me getting a few no questions asked? You take my word that im not crazy just because you have no proof I am?[/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000] [/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000]What makes keeping me from getting a single use hand grenade reasonable but not a gun I could kill 30 people with in moments?[/COLOR][/LEFT]

[QUOTE=bmulls]Just plain false. There's no point in debating you if you're just going to lie or make shit up. You can target shoot with guns. 99% of the bullets fired every year are fired at paper targets. Target shooting is an Olympic sport. People use guns for recreation MUCH more often than they use them for killing (including hunting).[/quote]

you just said guns arent toys... How are they used for recreation then? your story isnt adding up...

either they are dangerous and need to be respected or they are for recreation and not harmful... which one is it?

[quote]The fact that some stupid parents let their kid have unrestricted access to a gun does not mean we need more fcking laws that punish the millions of the responsible parents.
[/quote]


newsflash>>>>> You are not a responsible parent if you give your 5 yr old a gun...

Like I said, if that is the case? then "responsible parents" should be able to let their kids drink and drive also.. :confusedshrug: makes about as much sense as giving a toddler a friggin rifle




[quote]It's pathetic and embarrassing how you want the government to control every aspect of your life, and the fact that you're proud of it is even sadder.[/QUOTE]


Oh cut it out... that whole "nanny state" argument is a copout.. You said yourself earlier that [B]a gun is not a toy[/B] right?

well if it is not a toy? why give it to a 5 yr old?

you said yourself that kids suffocate themselves, and drown in swimming pools.... all types fo sh*t right???

So if a child is dumb enough to put a plastic bag over his own head and suffocate himself? how is it a good idea to trust him with a gun? It doesnt make any sense

a kid with a gun could shoot someone else's kid ..... didnt a kid recently shoot a grown ass woman?

you need a much better argument pal...

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855][LEFT][COLOR=#000000][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000] [/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000]How is limiting access to say...land mines, hand grenades, or weaponized chemical agents more controlling than not letting a guy have a weapon that could kill 50 people in moments?[/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000] [/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000]Or do you think limiting all weapons is too much control?[/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000] [/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000]Where do you draw the line?[/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000] [/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000]I could kill more people with a gun than I could with one standard hand grenade. You ok with me getting a few no questions asked? You take my word that im not crazy just because you have no proof I am?[/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000] [/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000]What makes keeping me from getting a single use hand grenade reasonable but not a gun I could kill 30 people with in moments?[/COLOR][/LEFT][/QUOTE]

I guess I draw the line at what can be reasonably used for self defense. You can not use a grenade, rocket launcher, chemical weapons or a nuke for self defense without risking serious collateral damage and killing innocent people.

[QUOTE=Balla_Status][IMG]http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2012/0801/play_g_olypistol_576.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://www.bubblews.com/assets/images/news/824355324_1363436874.jpg[/IMG]

Didn't know killing people was an olympic sport...[/QUOTE]


I dont see any 5 yr olds or children in those pics hawker...

no one is talking about banning guns outright... we are saying that regulations on gun use is very reasonable, but some americans (you and bmulls) seem to object to any common sense ideas on how to curb some of the senseless things that get people killed due to guns..

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]you just said guns arent toys... How are they used for recreation then? your story isnt adding up...

either they are dangerous and need to be respected or they are for recreation and not harmful... which one is it?

newsflash>>>>> You are not a responsible parent if you give your 5 yr old a gun...

Like I said, if that is the case? then "responsible parents" should be able to let their kids drink and drive also.. :confusedshrug: makes about as much sense as giving a toddler a friggin rifle







Oh cut it out... that whole "nanny state" argument is a copout.. You said yourself earlier that [B]a gun is not a toy[/B] right?

well if it is not a toy? why give it to a 5 yr old?

you said yourself that kids suffocate themselves, and drown in swimming pools.... all types fo sh*t right???

So if a child is dumb enough to put a plastic bag over his own head and suffocate himself? how is it a good idea to trust him with a gun? It doesnt make any sense

a kid with a gun could shoot someone else's kid ..... didnt a kid recently shoot a grown ass woman?

you need a much better argument pal...[/QUOTE]

A gun is not a toy, this has nothing to do with the fact that they can be used for target shooting. You're a fcking clown and your bullshit doesn't even deserve a response. I'm done with you, I'll respond to the non retarded posters instead.

[QUOTE=bmulls]A gun is not a toy, this has nothing to do with the fact that they can be used for target shooting. You're a fcking clown and your bullshit doesn't even deserve a response. I'm done with you, I'll respond to the non retarded posters instead.[/QUOTE]


:roll:everyone is clowning your responses, but Im the bad guy?... you're just mad because you dont make any sense and you are tripping over your own BS

you are the one who brought up target practice and recreation... now you say it has nothing to do with target shooting...

Im asking you to make some sense for a change....

Is it a toy? You say no...

So Im asking you, why in the hell would you trust a kid with a gun if it isnt a toy?

You say kids die from all types of dumb sh*t, and so Im asking you how in the hell does that make it [B]MORE[/B] logical to give a child a gun?

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855][LEFT][COLOR=#000000][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000] [/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000]How is limiting access to say...land mines, hand grenades, or weaponized chemical agents more controlling than not letting a guy have a weapon that could kill 50 people in moments?[/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000] [/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000]Or do you think limiting all weapons is too much control?[/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000] [/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000]Where do you draw the line?[/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000] [/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000]I could kill more people with a gun than I could with one standard hand grenade. You ok with me getting a few no questions asked? You take my word that im not crazy just because you have no proof I am?[/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000] [/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000]What makes keeping me from getting a single use hand grenade reasonable but not a gun I could kill 30 people with in moments?[/COLOR][/LEFT][/QUOTE]

Why are you nitpicking his post? It clearly states in his post that guns are used for sport in the olympics. Grenades and landmines aren't. Therefore they are not available.

Am i missing something?

[QUOTE=brantonli] Do we value rights over life?

[/QUOTE]

Yes.

Benjamin Franklin:
[quote]People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.[/quote]

[IMG]http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/33571249.jpg[/IMG]

[QUOTE=Blue&Orange]death [B][SIZE="5"]rate[/SIZE][/B]



I'm not even going to insult you.[/QUOTE]

Cool story bro. I forgot that the countries you're comparing America to have the exact same size, population density, and geography. Thank you for enlightening me. rate stats are bs when you are comparing apples and oranges.

*ignores london violent crime rate in debate LOL*

NRA releases statement:

[I]"The 2 year old should have had a gun of her own to protect herself"[/I]

[quote=bmulls]I guess I draw the line at what can be reasonably used for self defense. You can not use a grenade, rocket launcher, chemical weapons or a nuke for self defense without risking serious collateral damage and killing innocent people.[/quote]

I could use an awful lot of illegal weapons for self defense. Just depends on the situation.

For example...

Im guessing if I install a gang of land mines around my house with signs saying they are there....the government arrests me(carefully no doubt)...you are on my side?

Is a land mine on my own property not defending said property?

I have signs.

Anyone hurt is likely at fault. Either they didnt read or they were violating my posted signs.

Is a land mine ok for self defense?

Military style heavy duty machine guns?

You cool with me owning anything that doesnt blow up?

[QUOTE=kNicKz]wait... you don't live in America?

[IMG]http://cdn.niketalk.com/2/2f/350x700px-LL-2ff5111e_michael-jordan-laughing.gif[/IMG]

Son, go back to stalking theoo.....you don't even know what a redneck is...[/QUOTE]
he was a student at Texas A&M which has the highest % of rednecks at a uni in the world. Trust me on this one

[QUOTE=Rubio2Gasol]NRA releases statement:

[I]"The 2 year old should have had a gun of her own to protect herself"[/I][/QUOTE]


:applause: that seems over like a joke and over the top? well check this out..

[quote]

[QUOTE=The Macho Man]You're lucky you didn't say this to his face, he'd choke your punk ass out, bro.[/QUOTE]


he'd wind up in the ICU with a broken jaw if he even tried :cheers:

[QUOTE=boozehound]he was a student at Texas A&M [/QUOTE]

Nevermind. Millwad....there is a lot to America that you have not seen. I'm sorry that you were at Texas A&M

[QUOTE=kNicKz]Why are you nitpicking his post? It clearly states in his post that guns are used for sport in the olympics. Grenades and landmines aren't. Therefore they are not available.

Am i missing something?[/QUOTE]
wtf do the olympics have to do with the 2nd amendment? Its a legit point. Our right to keep and bear arms is already infringed. There is no constitutional difference between the US govt restricting access to machine guns (or tanks or grenades, etc) and assault weapons (or other currently legal guns). Either the 2nd amendment peeps need to argue that the feds have no right to limit any arms or they have to admit that it is constitutional for the feds to set limits on the types of arms allowed, whatever that may be.

[QUOTE=kNicKz]Cool story bro. I forgot that the countries you're comparing America to have the exact same size, population density, and geography. Thank you for enlightening me. rate stats are bs when you are comparing apples and oranges.

*ignores london violent crime rate in debate LOL*[/QUOTE]
These morons forget when comparing America to these other counties that they don't have nearly as many minorities as America. They also don't have shithole mexico next to them to bring in more poverty, violence and drugs because the moron obama won't do shit about the border and illegal immigration.

[QUOTE=MAC system]These morons forget when comparing America to these other counties that they don't have nearly as many minorities as America. They also don't have shithole mexico next to them to bring in more poverty, violence and drugs because the moron obama won't do shit about the border and illegal immigration.[/QUOTE]

Then they fail to talk about how the areas with the most gun control (chicago) are what is making the rate so high :roll:

[QUOTE=kNicKz]Cool story bro. I [B]forgot that the countries you're comparing America to have the exact same size, population density, and geography. Thank you for enlightening me. rate stats are bs when you are comparing apples and oranges.[/B]

*ignores london violent crime rate in debate LOL*[/QUOTE]
u can't be this dumb? can u? :facepalm

Well you didn't even knew what death rate was, so yeah u are dumb :lol

[QUOTE]Gun-related death rates in the United States are eight times higher than they are in countries that are economically and politically similar to it[/QUOTE]
According to this Einstein, this is apples to oranges because geography is different, you know mountains and rivers are different, not comparable. :lol

wow you really want to take the crown for most retarded on this thread from bmulls.

I wonder why you rednecks keep saying US is the best country in the world, it's apple to oranges comparison, no other country have the exact same size :roll:



It's simple as this, and it's pretty obvious on this thread, intelligent people want gun restrictions, really dumb people don't.

[QUOTE=Blue&Orange]u can't be this dumb? can u? :facepalm

Well you didn't even knew what death rate was, so yeah u are dumb :lol


According to this Einstein, this is apples to oranges because geography is different, you know mountains and rivers are different, not comparable. :lol

wow you really want to take the crown for most retarded on this thread from bmulls.

I wonder why you rednecks keep saying US is the best country in the world, it's apple to oranges comparison, no other country have the same size :roll:



It's simple as this, and it's pretty obvious on this thread, intelligent people want gun restrictions, really dumb people don't.[/QUOTE]

Intelligent? Do you even have a college degree?

[QUOTE=Balla_Status]Holy s[COLOR="Black"]h[/COLOR]it dude. You really need to relax. Scared? :roll: I lived in Texas my whole life and I was never scared at all.

Plenty of children have been taught how to safely use a gun under parental supervision. Why do you idiots think passing laws will guarantee anything?

It's ok for a five year old to shoot a gun under parental supervision but he shouldn't have been "playing around" with a gun.[/QUOTE]

You are mentally challenged and not worthy a reply but I'll do it anyway.

You logic fails completely and scared isn't really the right world, uncomfortable is a much better fitting word.

So me feeling uncomfortable is crazy and I'm an idiot but rednecks like fail to see the bigger picture. I'm not the one who's so paranoid that I feel the need to protect myself with a gun, people like you are.. :facepalm

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855]I could use an awful lot of illegal weapons for self defense. Just depends on the situation.

For example...

Im guessing if I install a gang of land mines around my house with signs saying they are there....the government arrests me(carefully no doubt)...you are on my side?

Is a land mine on my own property not defending said property?

I have signs.

Anyone hurt is likely at fault. Either they didnt read or they were violating my posted signs.

Is a land mine ok for self defense?

Military style heavy duty machine guns?

You cool with me owning anything that doesnt blow up?[/QUOTE]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katko_v._Briney

This is a famous court case that is taught in most entry level tort law courses. It will explain why "booby traps" like landmines are unlawful. The gist is that we as a society value life over mere property. If you are home, you are justified in shooting an intruder. You are not justified in booby trapping your house.

As far as machine guns, I'm not sure if you were aware or not, but there are already a quarter million legally owned machine guns in the United States. That's 240,000 fully automatic machine guns owned by civilians. Now don't shit your government loving pants just yet. As of 1995, there were a grand total of TWO murders committed with machine guns since [B]1934[/B]. Two murders in nearly 80 years.

edit for source:

[url]http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcfullau.html[/url]

[QUOTE=bmulls]Intelligent? Do you even have a college degree?[/QUOTE]

Intelligence has nothing to do with a college degree, you're the best example of that. You are mentally challenged and a redneck and I guess that you have a college degree so you're basically the perfect example.

It has nothing to do with rights to begin with.

People respect rights as far as thye want to. I bet much of the country wouldnt want to respect a terrorists right to remain silent. I wouldnt. If dude in Boston knew where a huge terror cell was hiding...and we knew he knew..like...we had his cell phone video footage of being there with them planning future attacks..id want it beaten out of him. **** his rights.

If one of those insane church types forever talking about dead soldiers being the wrath of god pickets a funeral of my family....id feel in the right if I go beat his ass. Forget what he has a right to say.

And to an extent thats how it works. You cant incite a riot...cant yell bomb at the airport....cant threaten to murder the president at the gate of the whitehouse.

There is a LOT you arent free to say.

But thats cool....because its about safety.

Given time the second will go the way of the first...protected as much as makes sense given the times.