Giving rifles to children a bad idea?

[Geaux4it]

I think its a great idea and we should throw in a NRA membership to boot

-Geaux

 

[Nosmo King]

Nope, it's an excellent idea. Of course the pinhead reactionary a like Luddly here will act as if I am demanding that all kids be given rifles.

I started with a bolt action 22 caliber rifle, when I was 8 years old. I had gun safety drilled into my willing brain. Any young child who wants one should be given one.[/QUOTE]

Really? Any young child should get a gun if they want one?

 

[Spiderman]

Can We At Least Agree That Giving .22 Caliber Rifles To Small Children Might Be A Really Bad Idea? - Forbes

n early May of this year, a 2-year-old Cumberland County, Kentucky girl was killed by her 5-year-old brother when a .22 caliber rifle the boy had been playing with—a gift to the child from his parents—discharged. According to the local coroner, the parents believed that the gun, which was kept in a corner of the house where the kids had ready access to the weapon, was not loaded.

....The grieving parents who are suffering the worse loss one can imagine are, no doubt, people who care deeply for their kids and would certainly have never knowingly left a loaded weapon readily available to their kids any more than they would have knowingly invited their little children to take the wheel of the family car. To do so would simply be foolishly dangerous.

... I do not believe that choosing to own a gun makes you, in any way, a bad person unless you use that weapon for evil purposes. For that reason, I respect that those who believe deeply in their 2nd Amendment rights would want to stand up in defense of those rights.

But, seriously, would anyone’s 2nd Amendment rights be infringed upon if we were to ask them Americans to simply acknowledge that there are many things in life that are just not appropriate for use by young children and that a working weapon might well be one such thing?

This is also why carrying guns around is a bad idea.

People make mistakes. Children get killed.

To those who say, ' ... yabut, not very many children ...'

One is way too many.

So one kid getting killed from falling off his bike is too many?

How about one kid getting poisoned by household chemicals?

How about one kid getting killed falling down the stairs?

Drowning in a pool?

Falling out of a tree?

Banning shit because accidents happen is ludicrous.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

When asked to take young family members to the range with me (in order to teach them gun safety), I told the parents of these young family members that their younglings would have to watch a graphic video of the disastrous consequences of FUCKING UP with a gun.

They said no.

Then I also said no.

Should I have taken then anyway, in order to teach them gun basics?

I really don't know what my response has to do with the OP though lol.

 

[skookerasbil]

LOL.....how much of a dummy is the author of this thread?

Americans are more interested in buying guns than signing up for Obamacare!!!


NICS background checks: 1,687,599
Obamacare signups: 49,100

Americans 34 Times More Interested In Buying Guns Than Obamacare | Zero Hedge

 

[Geaux4it]

Can We At Least Agree That Giving .22 Caliber Rifles To Small Children Might Be A Really Bad Idea? - Forbes

n early May of this year, a 2-year-old Cumberland County, Kentucky girl was killed by her 5-year-old brother when a .22 caliber rifle the boy had been playing with—a gift to the child from his parents—discharged. According to the local coroner, the parents believed that the gun, which was kept in a corner of the house where the kids had ready access to the weapon, was not loaded.

....The grieving parents who are suffering the worse loss one can imagine are, no doubt, people who care deeply for their kids and would certainly have never knowingly left a loaded weapon readily available to their kids any more than they would have knowingly invited their little children to take the wheel of the family car. To do so would simply be foolishly dangerous.

... I do not believe that choosing to own a gun makes you, in any way, a bad person unless you use that weapon for evil purposes. For that reason, I respect that those who believe deeply in their 2nd Amendment rights would want to stand up in defense of those rights.

But, seriously, would anyone’s 2nd Amendment rights be infringed upon if we were to ask them Americans to simply acknowledge that there are many things in life that are just not appropriate for use by young children and that a working weapon might well be one such thing?

This is also why carrying guns around is a bad idea.

People make mistakes. Children get killed.

To those who say, ' ... yabut, not very many children ...'

One is way too many.

No its not a bad idea. Your fear of guns is understandable, but you ignorance of public safety is not.

Since the police have no obligation to come to my aid, how do you recommend I protect my self/family and property from thugs who wish to do us grave harm?

-Geaux

 

[MeBelle]

Nope, it's an excellent idea. Of course the pinhead reactionary a like Luddly here will act as if I am demanding that all kids be given rifles.

I started with a bolt action 22 caliber rifle, when I was 8 years old. I had gun safety drilled into my willing brain. Any young child who wants one should be given one.

Really? Any young child should get a gun if they want one?

No, of course not!

Children should be properly trained in handling a .22 rifle.

Many families in rural areas subsistence hunt and trap to feed themselves during the winter months.

I got my first .22 when I was 7 years old. The stock had to be cut four inches off to fit me.

I also had sensible parents and mentors, not to mention the 'village', who through their actions showed me how proper respect of firearms.

Many people can't comprehend that hunting is a means to survive just like fishing to stock the freezers and canning to stock the cupboards.
(No insult to you intended)

 

[MeBelle]

Rifles for everyone!

Only if they are trained, smarty pants!

 

[MeBelle]

Christie is anti-gun.

Are you sure about that?

New Jersey: Governor Christie Vetoes Major Anti-Gun Bills and Gun Owners Secure a Significant and Rare Victory

Posted on August 16, 2013

Today, Governor Chris Christie (R) vetoed a trio of anti-gun bills after nearly seven months of contentious public debate. Misguided anti-gun state lawmakers introduced more than 80 anti-gun bills at the beginning of the year. By this summer, more than a dozen bills cleared both legislative chambers and were sent to the Governor for his consideration and action. Earlier this month, Governor Christie signed ten of those gun bills into law, but he left three deeply flawed bills for today’s action. Your NRA-ILA was there every step of the way to oppose these onerous and overreaching bills. Of all the legislation introduced, the three bills vetoed today were the most egregious.


NRA-ILA | New Jersey: Governor Christie Vetoes Major Anti-Gun Bills and Gun Owners Secure a Significant and Rare Victory

 

[strollingbones]

i honestly cant remember an age....just always had one...a single shot .22.....i was stricter with my son...he didnt get one till he was 12....ancient by standards around here and i am sure he will spend hours telling his therapist about it...

 

[Wildman]

Kids get killed in bathtubs, at lakes, on streets, on swing sets, and in cars with a lot more regularity than they are killed by accidental discharges.

Face it, Luddly. When our society collapses, as it will, thanks to idiots like luddly and hjmick, these kids will be a lot better equipped than they will be to survive.

And that's a good thing.

fantastic photo, those kids will never forget those times out hunting and getting their first deer.., i agree, guns for everyone.......................................................






















............................................................................................................................................. !! after proper familiarization and training.

 

[Nosmo King]

Can We At Least Agree That Giving .22 Caliber Rifles To Small Children Might Be A Really Bad Idea? - Forbes

n early May of this year, a 2-year-old Cumberland County, Kentucky girl was killed by her 5-year-old brother when a .22 caliber rifle the boy had been playing with—a gift to the child from his parents—discharged. According to the local coroner, the parents believed that the gun, which was kept in a corner of the house where the kids had ready access to the weapon, was not loaded.

....The grieving parents who are suffering the worse loss one can imagine are, no doubt, people who care deeply for their kids and would certainly have never knowingly left a loaded weapon readily available to their kids any more than they would have knowingly invited their little children to take the wheel of the family car. To do so would simply be foolishly dangerous.

... I do not believe that choosing to own a gun makes you, in any way, a bad person unless you use that weapon for evil purposes. For that reason, I respect that those who believe deeply in their 2nd Amendment rights would want to stand up in defense of those rights.

But, seriously, would anyone’s 2nd Amendment rights be infringed upon if we were to ask them Americans to simply acknowledge that there are many things in life that are just not appropriate for use by young children and that a working weapon might well be one such thing?

This is also why carrying guns around is a bad idea.

People make mistakes. Children get killed.

To those who say, ' ... yabut, not very many children ...'

One is way too many.

So one kid getting killed from falling off his bike is too many?

How about one kid getting poisoned by household chemicals?

How about one kid getting killed falling down the stairs?

Drowning in a pool?

Falling out of a tree?

Banning shit because accidents happen is ludicrous.

A bicycle is not a hazardous thing in and of itself. But a gun is. Bicycles are designed as a means of transportation. A gun is designed to hurl lead at phenomenal speeds. No one should give household chemicals to a child. Parental responsibility dictates some reasonable hazard.

You rationalize accidents by conflating them without reasonable thought.

If bicycles and staircases were designed primarily to harm, mankind would have come up with reasonable substitutes. Guns, however, have one design purpose.

 

[strollingbones]

we are a gun loving culture...simple as that.....

 

[Nosmo King]

we are a gun loving culture...simple as that.....

And the price of that love of guns is the occasional shooting of innocents. Oh well! We LOVE our guns!





apparently more than our children.

 

[strollingbones]

you certainly cant argue with that point....that we must love our guns more than our children....seems to me adult ignorance kills a lot of kids on a lot of levels

 

[jon_berzerk]

Can We At Least Agree That Giving .22 Caliber Rifles To Small Children Might Be A Really Bad Idea? - Forbes

n early May of this year, a 2-year-old Cumberland County, Kentucky girl was killed by her 5-year-old brother when a .22 caliber rifle the boy had been playing with—a gift to the child from his parents—discharged. According to the local coroner, the parents believed that the gun, which was kept in a corner of the house where the kids had ready access to the weapon, was not loaded.

....The grieving parents who are suffering the worse loss one can imagine are, no doubt, people who care deeply for their kids and would certainly have never knowingly left a loaded weapon readily available to their kids any more than they would have knowingly invited their little children to take the wheel of the family car. To do so would simply be foolishly dangerous.

... I do not believe that choosing to own a gun makes you, in any way, a bad person unless you use that weapon for evil purposes. For that reason, I respect that those who believe deeply in their 2nd Amendment rights would want to stand up in defense of those rights.

But, seriously, would anyone’s 2nd Amendment rights be infringed upon if we were to ask them Americans to simply acknowledge that there are many things in life that are just not appropriate for use by young children and that a working weapon might well be one such thing?

This is also why carrying guns around is a bad idea.

People make mistakes. Children get killed.

To those who say, ' ... yabut, not very many children ...'

One is way too many.

all of my children got firearms

they didnt get to go willie nillie with them

today all safely handle firearms

and teach their children to safely handle firearms

 

[Spiderman]

Can We At Least Agree That Giving .22 Caliber Rifles To Small Children Might Be A Really Bad Idea? - Forbes

This is also why carrying guns around is a bad idea.

People make mistakes. Children get killed.

To those who say, ' ... yabut, not very many children ...'

One is way too many.

So one kid getting killed from falling off his bike is too many?

How about one kid getting poisoned by household chemicals?

How about one kid getting killed falling down the stairs?

Drowning in a pool?

Falling out of a tree?

Banning shit because accidents happen is ludicrous.

A bicycle is not a hazardous thing in and of itself.

It is inherently dangerous for children. You don't let a small child take a bike out in the street without a helmet or supervision do you

But a gun is.

No. A properly stored gun (unloaded and locked up) is not dangerous at all. A child with proper supervision can safely handle a gun.

Bicycles are designed as a means of transportation.

And they are dangerous depending on how responsible the rider is.

A gun is designed to hurl lead at phenomenal speeds.

And a properly handled gun is no danger to anyone.

No one should give household chemicals to a child.

True but kids get poisoned all the time nonetheless because the chemicals are not properly stored or there is inadequate supervision.

Parental responsibility dictates some reasonable hazard.

So is it that parents that are at fault or the gun?

You rationalize accidents by conflating them without reasonable thought.

I'm not rationalizing anything. You said one kid killed by a gun is too many but other accidents kill far more children than guns. Do you care to give a list of potential accidents and the number of child deaths for each that are acceptable?

If bicycles and staircases were designed primarily to harm, mankind would have come up with reasonable substitutes. Guns, however, have one design purpose.

You said a gun is designed to propel a projectile not to harm.

A child properly supervised with a gun is in no more danger than a properly supervised child with a bike, a go cart, a swimming pool etc etc etc etc etc.

Put the blame where it belongs: ON THE PARENTS!

 

[Nosmo King]

So one kid getting killed from falling off his bike is too many?

How about one kid getting poisoned by household chemicals?

How about one kid getting killed falling down the stairs?

Drowning in a pool?

Falling out of a tree?

Banning shit because accidents happen is ludicrous.

A bicycle is not a hazardous thing in and of itself.

It is inherently dangerous for children. You don't let a small child take a bike out in the street without a helmet or supervision do you


No. A properly stored gun (unloaded and locked up) is not dangerous at all. A child with proper supervision can safely handle a gun.



And they are dangerous depending on how responsible the rider is.


And a properly handled gun is no danger to anyone.



True but kids get poisoned all the time nonetheless because the chemicals are not properly stored or there is inadequate supervision.




So is it that parents that are at fault or the gun?

You rationalize accidents by conflating them without reasonable thought.

I'm not rationalizing anything. You said one kid killed by a gun is too many but other accidents kill far more children than guns. Do you care to give a list of potential accidents and the number of child deaths for each that are acceptable?

If bicycles and staircases were designed primarily to harm, mankind would have come up with reasonable substitutes. Guns, however, have one design purpose.

You said a gun is designed to propel a projectile not to harm.

A child properly supervised with a gun is in no more danger than a properly supervised child with a bike, a go cart, a swimming pool etc etc etc etc etc.

Put the blame where it belongs: ON THE PARENTS!

And so we rationalize our love of guns with our disregard to children. We will find outlandish ways to justify guns in the house and call those guns safe. But we do not rationalize when children are killed by guns. We easily, if altogether ham handedly, reason "shit happens" other things are dangerous too. We have come to accept mass shootings as just another tragedy. All to justify our Ramboesque love of guns.

 

[Steven_R]

It's liberty I love, not guns. Guns are merely a means to guarantee that liberty. Are senseless tragedies and crime a small price to pay to not have tyranny is the question at hand.

 

[Ernie S.]

Can We At Least Agree That Giving .22 Caliber Rifles To Small Children Might Be A Really Bad Idea? - Forbes

This is also why carrying guns around is a bad idea.

People make mistakes. Children get killed.

To those who say, ' ... yabut, not very many children ...'

One is way too many.

So one kid getting killed from falling off his bike is too many?

How about one kid getting poisoned by household chemicals?

How about one kid getting killed falling down the stairs?

Drowning in a pool?

Falling out of a tree?

Banning shit because accidents happen is ludicrous.

A bicycle is not a hazardous thing in and of itself. But a gun is. Bicycles are designed as a means of transportation. A gun is designed to hurl lead at phenomenal speeds. No one should give household chemicals to a child. Parental responsibility dictates some reasonable hazard.

You rationalize accidents by conflating them without reasonable thought.

If bicycles and staircases were designed primarily to harm, mankind would have come up with reasonable substitutes. Guns, however, have one design purpose.

Yes guns are designed to kill, but killing isn't inherently wrong. Murder, is and we have laws against murder. Pushing someone down a staircase or purposely running down a kid on a bicycle is against the law and are potentially fatal but responsible people don't use staircases, bicycles or guns in that manner.
The one major difference is that when the boogy man climbs your staircase and appears in your bedroom some dark night, intent on raping your wife, your bicycle is going to be pretty much useless.