A child at the age of 5 has no business with a gun. He cannot make decisions
relating to gun safety. Nobody under the age of 10 should be shooting a gun, and
even then it should be supervised. How can anybody think it is ok for a 5 year
old to have access to a deadly weapon? That is nuts.
Mistake 1: giving a gun to a 5-year old.Mistake 2: failing to secure
the gun when not in use.Mistake 3: not ensuring that the unsecured
weapon was unloaded.My heart aches for the boy and his parents. But
this was foolishness and utterly preventable.
Children and guns is a fascinating topic.A few years ago one of the
networks did a little experiment with kids. They explained to them if they
encountered a gun, they should leave it alone and tell an adult, they must not
play with it. To the astonishment of gun-owning parents who had repeatedly
trained their kids on how to properly deal with a situation where a gun is
found, the experiment showed a high percentage of the time the kids went ahead
and played with the guns.On the other hand, thinking about the issue
from the pro-gun standpoint, where bad guys can attack from any direction, at
anytime, at anyplace... isn't it really a form a child abuse to *not* allow
children to defend themselves from bad guys? I mean, if your 10 year old goes
to the ice cream store and a bad guy comes in, why does the 10 year old have to
be defenseless? We're told incessantly that the police
can't be everywhere, and that's why citizens need the right to carry
weapons. Doesn't the exact same logic apply to children?
Brahmabull, why do you wan to take away his 2nd Amendment right to arm
himself.What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not
understand?This is the 3rd time in as many weeks that a child has
shot by another child playing with guns, how can the NRA or any rabid gun
worshiper defend this kind of nonsense?
Did the kid have an NRA membership card in his pocket? If he did, then
it's all okay. Even little folks have their rights. What part of
"shall not be infringed" don't you all understand? Where is there
an age limit in the Second Amendment?
As a liberal I would say that juvenile should be supervised with an adult if
using a firearm. The younger they are the the closer the supervision needs to
be. I would also say that guns should be secured to protect children from
thinking they would be fun to show their off to their friends.As a
conservative: I would you say you it's never to soon to practice your right
to bare arms. If a fetus had one, they could defend themselves against abortion.
If you start taking away guns from kids; teens will be next, then adults. Then
how will we defend oursleves from... the USA. You know, from ourselves.
It's a slippery slope when you start talking about limiting our
children's 2nd Amendment rights. Gun control is not the answer.
This is where the pro-gun lobby's argument breaks down. When they throw
out the tired old "protect my family against intruders" argument, what
they fail to tell you is those same family members the gun is supposed to
protect are far more likely to kill themselves or another family member with the
gun than an intruder.The bottom line is gun ownership for protection
is a red herring...what it boils down to is gun owners like having guns because
it gives them a feeling of power.
Happy Valley HereticOrem, UTBrahmabull, why do you wan to take away
his 2nd Amendment right to arm himself.What part of "shall not be
infringed" do you not understand?=========== Ya --
the gun-lobby thinks you can't "Constitutionally ban" weapons from
ANYONE....including children, criminals and the mentally insane.The
blood of this child is on the hands of all uber-pro-gun kooks....