(06-25-2015, 10:57 AM)Duchess Wrote:

I haven't seen any gun owners in Mock, nor in my real life, who have a problem with a waiting period or background checks but I frequently read about it online.

Background checks are fine by me as well... I'm even in favor of them for private and/or family transactions.

It takes almost no time at all to do an FFL transfer, at which time a NICS check is run. It's not that inconvenient to have to do it in my opinion, and I think you'd find most gun owners okay with it.

I am a gum owner and a CCP holder. I chew and carry at the same time.

My handgun purchases (yes . . . plural) were based upon careful thought and test firing.

I waited for over two weeks, for one of my firearms, to be special ordered.

I don't give a damn about a waiting period.

I support background checks but am not under the illusion a clean background will prevent irresponsible ownership or killings.

Kinda like mandatory car insurance . . . I still carry uninsured motorist protection. That's because I know everyone obeys the law!

I stopped posting these stories for a while because they're too sad and it's too maddening that most of these negligent parents aren't prosecuted.



A 3-year-old Lenawee County boy died Sunday after accidentally shooting himself with a pistol, Michigan State Police said.

Troopers were dispatched at 1:25 p.m. to 12919 Tipton Highway, about 14 miles north of Adrian. Jonathan Kaufman, 3, of Clinton, was pronounced dead at the scene.

Troopers and emergency medical personnel arrived on scene within minutes, police said in a written statement.

It appears the child found a loaded 40-caliber handgun that was stored in a closet inside the home, according to evidence collected and statements from the victim’s family, police said.

The child was alone in the home and his father and older brother were outside. The child accidentally pulled the trigger, firing one round and causing a fatal head injury, police said.

http://www.toledoblade.com/local/2015/06...mLqB2wA.99
----------------------

I think it's time for a national safety law to protect children from irresponsible gun owners. A kid gets a loaded gun in your home and shoots it, you go to jail for felony neglect. You get reported for having loaded guns laying around with kids in the house, CPS has a case against you for neglect. Period.

With so much gun storage safety material (which is really just fucking common sense) available, free locks available, and such, there's no excuse for these so called "accidents". None.

Nope

There is a waiting period. The media says no though so people react. Its a non-issue compared to illegal use of guns but the legal users get blamed. And the obtainability of guns by street punks should be addressed. What are the gun laws in Baltimore and what is the death rate by guns? Lets see.............We will use the same source .

Regulated firearms[edit]

The Maryland State Police maintain a registry of "regulated firearms" that are allowed to be sold within the state. Dealers must forward the manufacturer-included shell casing (or one provided by the federally licensed gun shop) in its sealed container to the Department of State Police Crime Laboratory upon sale, rental, or transfer of a "regulated firearm" for inclusion in their ballistics database, known as the Integrated Ballistics Identification System

Residents may only purchase handguns manufactured after January 1, 1985 that are on the approved handguns list from the Maryland Handgun Roster
Wiki guns

******************************************************

There have been 144 homicides in 2015 to date in Baltimore. How many were "legal" handguns? My guess would be 5 and those were self-defense.

But Check it out..........

Death by illegal gun owners

***************************************************

Are the "laws" not good enough? Or is it enforcement that is lacking.

And why should the "legal" owners be responsible for the illegal ones? Because they are an easier target. And the authorities have their addresses and info..........its easier.

I hate unnecessary laws, but there's no reason this type of child endangerment and neglect (post 1663) should be treated any differently than any other form of child endangerment and neglect.

Currently, whether or not the adults/parents are held accountable in the case of child shootings is based more on how guns are generally viewed in the state than on how children are viewed nationally (and globally), in my observation. That's messed up.

It has nothing to do with the teaching kids gun safety; these are little ones and it's idiotic to suggest they have mature brains and should be accountable for adults failure to protect them from deadly weapons.

It also has nothing to do with adults being able to shoot an intruder in an instant. If you can't keep loaded guns out of reach of your toddlers, you're a bigger threat to them than any imagined assailant.

It's about preventing more toddlers from shooting themselves and others in an instant. I can't think of a good argument against it being made legally mandatory to store guns safely at homes with children. But, I'm sure there are plenty of arguments that would get tossed out there anyway and the NRA would fight any attempt to get it passed.

I hate reading stories of little kids being killed and killing others every month because of asshole adults.

If the adults are assholes, isn't it likely the kid would grow up to be an asshole too? I mean the dad is dumb enough to keep a loaded gun in the house, chances are the kid would have been eventually dumb enough to do the same. So maybe it's just natural selection. Maybe gun ownership is like smoking and abortion... weeding the weak out of society. Maybe we should make a law that all adults HAVE to own guns, and the ones that are smart enough to keep them empty get to keep their kids. Or, if the kids are smart enough to not shoot themselves, they get a pass too.

The proof that Darwin's Law doesn't hold true is the fact that you and MS are alive to invoke it, Cutz.

Well, as long as we're taking it upon ourselves to make laws ensuring kids have a chance at life, let's outlaw that abortion thing, single mothers, McDonalds, and sugar.

Somebody hit you with a dip stick today, Cutz?

I wasn't suggesting laws to make sure kids have "a chance at life".

I was suggesting a law to ensure that adults who neglect and endanger children with deadly weapons be held accountable for the injury and death inflicted, no matter where it occurs in this country -- just like they are for other forms of child neglect and endangerment.

But, you go on ahead and push for laws against single mothers, McDonald's and sugar if you consider them equivalent to loaded weapons in the hands of toddlers.

funny how you cut out that abortion part... since murdering children is legal that way.

In all seriousness, and not just pushing buttons, of course parents of children (under 14) that kill themselves or others should be held accountable for their child. If they were negligent, they committed a crime. Such parents are often charged and found guilty. No matter where they live. Just because one state has safe storage laws and calls a death an accident and charges the parent, while another state declares it a homicide because they want to charge the parents, doesn't really matter. It's not about guns, it's about bad parents. Same as kids that accidentally ingest poison, or drown in the tub, or get left in a car on a hot summer day, etc.

Dateline recently did a story on kids & guns. They gave small groups of kids gun education and then cut them loose into an area that had a gun on the table, within moments of being told about the dangers of guns they saw the gun and they handled the gun. They were being secretly filmed so that their parents in another room could see what they did. These kids were probably 7,8,9 yrs. old and simply telling them about the dangers of guns was not working. Those little boys were fascinated by that gun. It took repeated attempts at trying to educate them before it finally sunk in.

Adults who are irresponsible with their weapon/s need to be prosecuted. There are no gun accidents involving kids. It's all irresponsibility.

Telling them about the dangers is one thing, showing them is another. After my kids & grandkids could recite the 10 rules of firearm safety I would then take them out shooting. I liked starting them small and working up. First was paper targets, then came water bottles full of water with red food coloring in them. Their eyes always lit up when they seen those milk jugs explode in a mist of red. After that we would go small game hunting. It was at that point the lightbulb turned on. They seen what a firearm could do. They really understand how deadly they are after you shoot a squirrel out of a tree, we walk up and there it is, Dead. They realize there is no reset button to bring it back to life , like in their video games.
Anyway, that is what seamed to work for me and I would be willing put my grandson to the test mentioned above.

The moral of the story was that you can't just tell kids guns are dangerous, you have to reiterate it. It's not enough to tell them about it once or twice. They used several groups of children, not just the set of 4 I mentioned and telling them what could happen did no good whatsoever, it had to be said over & over again.

That's not exclusive to children or to guns. I was told by hundreds of adults the dangers of drinking alcohol, and I still went out every Friday night in college and drank too much, once even fell down in front of traffic while intoxicated.

You can tell a kid that Pine-Sol isn't maple syrup, and 10 minutes later he could be drinking Pine-Sol. I agree that parents are to blame, but who blames Pine-Sol for making their product so deadly?

I bet you weren't a toddler in college, Cutz. Just a hunch.

I understand that children can and do get injured and killed by common household items when their parents aren't watching them, and that not all of those parents are generally negligent.

I also understand that some of those parents get prosecuted for neglect and some don't, depending on the circumstances.

I wouldn't mind if there was one sweeping national Child Safety law requiring homes with children under a certain age to have household cleaners locked up or safety-capped, and requiring parents to check the effin' car for their kid before they exit the vehicle in the heat, and requiring the use of pool tarps. Etc... Your toddler gets injured or dies because you failed to do any of those things, you automatically get charged with neglect or endangerment.

But, I was specifically addressing guns. Guns -- unlike household cleaners, cars, and pools -- cause injuries and death when they are used for their sole intended purpose. They are designed to shoot. There is no reason for unlocked loaded guns to be accessible to toddlers anywhere in any state. And, I think the dipshit adults who put children in foreseeable danger should be legally considered negligent in all cases.

Such a law could not get passed in the current political environment, it's just my wish. I think it would prompt otherwise decent gun-friendly parents to take appropriate safety precautions with their weapons (which would not only result in better protection of the children, but also the gun-owning parents).

I'd also like to see child gun deaths consistently classified from state-to-state so they could finally be quantified and tracked/monitored. Make them all "homicides", fine by me.

Make another law, make another law, make another law. I am so sick of hearing I wish they would make a law against this or that that I wanna puke. We need less government involvement in our private life, not more. Just like locks only keep the honest person out, laws are only followed by the honest people. What good does a law do if people are still gunna break them and, since we are discussing guns, in this case a kid shoots themselves and dies. The kid is still dead, the law didn't help. And I don't wanna hear the tired old, If it only saves one life its worth it.
What we need is some sort of incentive towards gun owners that safely store them. Big buck kick back when a safe is purchased, or a big tax rightoff. Laws people wont listen to. You wanna get their attention talk putting $$$$$ in their pocket. Hell, even I would think about buying a safe if that were the case.

(06-29-2015, 11:49 PM)Cutz Wrote: So maybe it's just natural selection. Maybe gun ownership is like smoking and abortion... weeding the weak out of society.

Most smoking related deaths occur between the ages of 50-70, so that's a little too late to apply the natural selection theory. Abortion is all you've got. And most times it seems that the worst parents are the ones who opted out of an abortion. Like the morons who leave a gun in their toddlers reach.

(06-30-2015, 03:00 AM)Cutz Wrote: funny how you cut out that abortion part... since murdering children is legal that way.

I can't believe you said that......my God!

I hope to God some of these grass root organizations designed to reduce the number of guns here in America, will be successful for the sake of every innocent person who has died by gunfire.
Don't want to hear about Pine Sol, knives, ropes, hatchets, swords, vehicles, Liquid Plummer, lysol, etc. The issue is gun ownership.....