8 year old accidently shoots himself with an Uzi

@Intrepid,

"Intrepid" wrote:

"OmSigDAVID" wrote:
He is a Canadian; thay r not very brave;
self-defense scares them. Thay need GOVERNMENT to do that.

What a completely stupid and childish thing to say.

Maybe stupid and childish. But I wouldn't go so far as to say it was as stupid and childish as the insults that have been directed at the people who defend gun rights here.....

"Intrepid" wrote:

Canadians, as a people, have participated in every major conflict there has been and have helped to keep the free world free.

The fact that we are intelligent enough to realize that guns are not good for the public good and only add to the decline in population have nothing to do with cowardice.

I don't think Canadians have "realized" that (and it isn't true regardless).

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

"Intrepid" wrote:
"OmSigDAVID" wrote:
He is a Canadian; thay r not very brave;
self-defense scares them. Thay need GOVERNMENT to do that.

What a completely stupid and childish thing to say.

Maybe stupid and childish. But I wouldn't go so far as to say it was as stupid and childish as the insults that have been directed at the people who defend gun rights here.....

"Intrepid" wrote:
Canadians, as a people, have participated in every major conflict there has been and have helped to keep the free world free.

The fact that we are intelligent enough to realize that guns are not good for the public good and only add to the decline in population have nothing to do with cowardice.

I don't think Canadians have "realized" that (and it isn't true regardless).

Where are your facts and statistics? Provide proof that it isn't true.

1 Reply

@parados,

parados wrote:

maporsche wrote:
Ok,

#1, you need to exclude suicide and murders. We should only be looking at accidental gun deaths (that number is closer to 1,000 if I remember correctly)

why do I need to exclude them? If we are examining the impact of an item on society, why should we exclude intentional deaths? That would make no sense whatsoever.

Intentional deaths should be excluded because they are caused by the presence of the killer, not by the presence of the gun.

Take away the guns, and murderers still commit murder.

Take away the guns, and suicidal people still kill themselves.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

You may want to note that they are talking about gun deaths.

2 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Do I think it is likely that I would need the 45 in bear country hell no however do I think that the extra weight is worth the cost of carrying it just in case yes.

.45 ACP is a bit light for bear defense.....

Better than nothing I suppose.

I suppose it also depends on the size of the bears in your area.

2 Replies

@Intrepid,

what a twisted web of crap this has become...

Kid had NO business with that gun, sideshow boring...

1 Reply

@Intrepid,

Intrepid wrote:

You really don't get it. Do you. You keep comparing things that are not manufactured for the purpose of killing but with which people can be killed.

What's wrong with doing that?

The anti-freedom brigade is always griping about people being killed by guns. If they really cared about people being killed, why don't they care just as much when someone is killed by something other than a gun?

Intrepid wrote:

A gun is made for the purpose of killing.

Target-shooting guns are made for the purpose of punching holes in non-living objects.

Self-defense guns are made for the purpose of saving lives.

1 Reply

@Intrepid,

Intrepid wrote:

Also, it is illegal to carry guns into some National Parks etc. What do you think the chances of being attacked by a bear are? Maybe you could find statistics on this as well.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- New regulations will let people carry concealed weapons in some national parks.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ijDA5bgxiHlTvS_r-SSjskS1Tq1wD94SN5B00

0 Replies

@Intrepid,

Intrepid wrote:

Bullshit. Killing is never wholesome or good.

You would starve to death if no one ever killed (unless you were a plant and were able to use photosynthesis).

1 Reply

@Rockhead,

Rockhead wrote:

what a twisted web of crap this has become...

Kid had NO business with that gun, sideshow boring...

Exactly. This has turned into a haven for the gun nuts. Logic has taken a holiday.

There cannot be a reasonable argument for that child having that gun and dying in the process of pleasing his gun nut father.

0 Replies

@Merry Andrew,

Merry Andrew wrote:

There is, however, a federal law against private ownership of fully automatic weapons.

No there isn't.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

Intrepid wrote:
Bullshit. Killing is never wholesome or good.

You would starve to death if no one ever killed (unless you were a plant and were able to use photosynthesis).

Even a moron would understand that this referred to killing of humans. We are not talking about the food chain here.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

Target-shooting guns are made for the purpose of punching holes in non-living objects.

Self-defense guns are made for the purpose of saving lives.

The child was not shooting a target pistol. He was shooting a uzi.

What is a self defence gun as opposed to guns used for crime?

1 Reply

@parados,

parados wrote:

The federal law only states you can't own a fully automatic weapon without a federal license.

Federal registration, actually.

(Just to nitpick.)

1 Reply

@oralloy,

indeed. (re the nitpicking crap, btw)

0 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

Private citizens can be licensed to own fully automatic weapons. I'm not sure how stringent the requirements are.

The federal law requires you to get permission from your local police chief (or sheriff or other similar head of local law enforcement) before you can have the gun registered to you.

This can lead to some abuses. Some police chiefs have an anti-freedom agenda and decide to abuse their authority by never giving permission at all. Others are corrupt and will only give permission if you contribute a lot of money to their reelection fund.

You also have to have your fingerprints checked by the feds. They deliberately drag their feet and take 3 to 4 months to do the check.

0 Replies

@Intrepid,

Intrepid wrote:

You seem to be blinded to cjhsa's childish and boorish behaviour.

I guess.

It looked to me like he expressed that it was a tragic death, and got about a dozen vicious insults in return.

Intrepid wrote:

Other than this post, what have you contributed to this thread? You have not even addressed the topic.

At the time, I had just started reading the thread. (I got here from a link you posted, BTW.)

The beginning of the thread seemed to just consist of cjhsa expressing that it was a tragedy, followed by a bunch of people insulting him.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

If you have read the entire thread then I am sure that you have seen it in a different light.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

After seeing the size holes a 45 acp round will create in an oak 2 by 4 I do not think that any bear but perhaps a polar bear could stand up to 7 such hits over a period of 2 or 3 seconds at point blank range.

The 45 acp round was design to do what a 38 round could not put a drug up and enraged human down cold and it did a fine job in the Manila war .

Bears are far tougher then humans but not that tougher!

1 Reply

@oralloy,

cj draws insults as a salt lick draws deer...

(give that some thought)

0 Replies

8 year old accidently shoots himself with an Uzi

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know