16
   

8 year old accidently shoots himself with an Uzi

 
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Nov, 2008 03:54 pm
What 's your favorite submachinegun, Gunga ?
Mine is the 9mm H & K MP5.

I also like the .45 Thompson sub, with round drum magazine





David
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Nov, 2008 03:58 pm
@cjhsa,
Quote:

In the meantime, how many children have been killed or seriously
injured in car or household accidents? Do those stories piss you off too? Just asking.

U just NEVER hear liberals complaining about accidents,
unless guns are involved, CJ.
Has a liberal ever complained about a juvenile death
in a boating accident ?





David
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Nov, 2008 05:22 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
WoW! That thing [the 454] is a cannon...


I view it as a stupid cartridge and a stupid idea. Power wise it's like a 45/70 which is a stupid idea for a pistol altogether and it's a much shorter cartridge meaning more pressure than a 45/70, harder on barrels and components, more recoil, just generally stupid. There is nothing in North America which a single shot with heavy 44mag ammo won't kill and nothing in Africa which could get to you quickly enough that you'd have to kill it with a pistol which the 44 wouldn't kill. Near as I can tell it's a pure macho thing with no real use or utility.

gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Nov, 2008 05:27 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
What 's your favorite submachinegun, Gunga ?


My main interests in weapons are bows and shotguns... I view submachine guns as a misuse of technology and have zero interest in them. They're basically crowd control devices and to my thinking if you think you NEED one of them you're probably looking at something the wrong way or doing something wrong and that applies to military organizations as well as to anything else.

If there's such a thing as a military rifle which I like or find more interesting than others it's probably still the FAL even though it's largely outmoded.

Again if I were to design a military rifle for my own army it wouldn't look like anything anybody can buy today.
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Nov, 2008 05:33 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:

If a fishing pole never kills,
then its purpose is unfullfilled.

If u don 't understand that, I ll just leave it there.





David




You never make yourself very clear. Although, I must admit, it is somewhat easier now that you have attempted to use the English language without all the phonetics crap.

Are you say that a fishing pole is a killing device because fish die after they are caught with one? If you are, I hope you realize that a tool used to catch fish is not a tool for killing them. If you are not referring to this.....what are you talking about?
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Nov, 2008 05:35 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
I find it funny that you feel you have standing to criticize the grammar usage of others with the way you mangle the English language.

Quote:
Parados' semi-hysterical assertion assumes, with no evidence,
with only naked prejudice and open contempt for the minds of people of that age
that thay are either too stupid or too spastic or uncoordinated
to handle a steering wheel, or to operate the brakes on a car
and that teaching them to drive must be hopelessly futile because of their assumed inferiority;
in other words: GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT, with no effort to prove anything,
simply to proceed with criminal prosecution of freedom minded adults.
That is VERY unAmerican and very anti-logical.
MY argument says no such thing. It seems the only way you can defeat my argument is to turn it into something I never said.

When a parent allows a child to do something dangerous and the supervision is so lax that the child dies as a result, the parent bears responsibility. It doesn't mean the child is spastic or stupid. (I won't argue one way or the other about your coordination. The readers are free to do that on their own.) Adults have a duty to provide some protection for children. Even you can't be so stupid as to not agree with that or do you think it is OK to give 5 year olds loaded guns?
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Nov, 2008 05:40 pm
@gungasnake,
For a military rifle, I own a .308 Winchester lever action Savage 99,
with a rotating magazine. Tho I recognize the functional value
of a shotgun, I am not a shotgun person. I 've never owned one,
and only fired one very few times. I really enjoy submachineguns,
tho I must agree that most of the time u don 't actually NEED one.

Automatic rifles are fun; M16A1 is like a toy u got for Christmas,
qua recoil; the M14 on fully automatic; AK 47
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Nov, 2008 05:47 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
If somebody were to ask my opinion on the most sophisticated firearm of any type in the world today, I'd probably say the Beretta Xtrema-2 shotgun. You might want to take a look at it on the web.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Nov, 2008 05:57 pm
@Intrepid,
Quote:

You never make yourself very clear. Although, I must admit,
it is somewhat easier now that you have attempted to use the
English language without all the phonetics crap.

I have eased up on it to a limited extent.


Quote:

Are you say that a fishing pole is a killing device because fish die
after they are caught with one?

It woud be cruel to eat them while thay live.

Fishing poles were invented for eating fish from lakes, rivers,
the ocean, etc.; a lot like shooting deer.
If u seek to argue that thay don 't perish while still on the hook,
I fail to understand what good this distinction does us.
The poles are for harvesting fish for sustenance.
I really enjoy fish, if not overcooked.





David

OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Nov, 2008 06:02 pm
@gungasnake,
Quote:

If somebody were to ask my opinion on the most sophisticated firearm
of any type in the world today, I'd probably say the Beretta Xtrema-2 shotgun.
You might want to take a look at it on the web.

Thanks; I 'll look at it.

Let the record indicate that I also love gunnery practice
with full belt fed machineguns, tho I have had a lot more
practice with different SMGs.





David
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Nov, 2008 06:05 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:

Fishing poles were invented for eating fish from lakes, rivers,
the ocean, etc.; a lot like shooting deer.

By that argument, all the following are killing devices.

Plates, pots and pans, microwave ovens, McDonald's cardboard containers.
roger
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Nov, 2008 06:06 pm
@gungasnake,
Agree. If you need a rifle, get a rifle. Handguns are for close quarters defense.
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Nov, 2008 06:14 pm
How did a thread about a family tragedy turn into a dissertation on firearms?
[For the record, I like firearms and do a fair bit of target practice. Have fired several tytpes of smgs on government ranges (including the Uzi, AK47 and -- yes -- Thompson, but with a stick mag, not drum).] However, this did not start out as a gun thread and, in courtesy to Littlek, should not be degraded to such.
littlek
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Nov, 2008 06:21 pm
@Merry Andrew,
I was wondering that myself Merry Andrew. I too have used firearms before. I have done target shooting at outdoor and indoor ranges with both hand guns and shotguns. I am not anti-gun all-together. I think the adults in this situation were unbelievably stupid and should be held accountable in some way.
roger
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Nov, 2008 06:23 pm
@littlek,
Embarrassed
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Nov, 2008 08:00 pm
@parados,
Quote:

I find it funny that you feel you have standing to criticize the grammar
usage of others with the way you mangle the English language.

I believe that my grammar is fully consistent with logic,
and with the rules of grammar, excluding my rejection
of the rule against splitting infinitives
because I am not
(usually) speaking Latin.
When the subject of my sentence is one person at the beginning,
it does not mysteriously become some other number of folks at the end.
I am prepared to logically defend my use of grammar,
or any deviation therefrom (unless its just a typo).


Quote:
Parados' semi-hysterical assertion assumes, with no evidence,
with only naked prejudice and open contempt for the minds of people of that age
that thay are either too stupid or too spastic or uncoordinated
to handle a steering wheel, or to operate the brakes on a car
and that teaching them to drive must be hopelessly futile because of their assumed inferiority;
in other words: GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT, with no effort to prove anything,
simply to proceed with criminal prosecution of freedom minded adults.
That is VERY unAmerican and very anti-logical.



Quote:

MY argument says no such thing.
It seems the only way you can defeat my argument
is to turn it into something I never said.

We disagree as to both of those assertions,
and I ratify what I posted.

U implied, with no evidence, and with no respect for people of a certain age group,
that thay cannot drive cars,
and u seemed to imply that no amount of training woud teach them,
as if driving teachers had thrown up their hands in disgust
at the clumsy stupor of children, disabling them from driving.
Do u know of ANY such study ??
I hope that u will tell me that I misinterpreted u.

I have been around plenty of adults and children with guns,
and I have never seen an injury from gunfire
(altho I have heard that thay have occurred).
I am confident that I am a lot safer firing a submachinegun
than I have been on a bike (from which I have fallen, in childhood, with bloody injuries).

I re-iterate my point:
the passion is not against accidental juvenile death (as if he chased a ball in front of a car),
or fell off a boat; the passion is hoplophobic rage against GUNS.

I wonder if liberals woud rather lose 3 boys to drowning
instead of 1 boy to acccidental gunfire; just wondering.


Quote:

When a parent allows a child to do something dangerous and
the supervision is so lax that the child dies as a result, the parent bears responsibility.

Someone has already questioned as to the children who got killed
on amusement park rides, asking if the parents were liable for
their failure to examine the machinery like a rollercoaster ride
and assess its security. Many, many kids are annually hit by cars walking to and from school;
(what is the ratio to deaths from accidental submachinegun fire ?) This is probably the first time
in American history that a child accidentally shot himself in the head with a submachinegun.
Shoud parents be criminally prosecuted for the pedestrian traffic fatalities ?
Shoud children be allowed to ride in planes ?
I see them there on almost every flight.
More planes have crashed than submachineguns have shot anyone
at target practice. Shoud parents inspect the plane and watch
the pilot, to avoid criminal prosecution ?

Quote:

Adults have a duty to provide some protection for children.
Even you can't be so stupid as to not agree with that

Such a sweet compliment, but I will not capitulate to your blandishments.
We agree that thay do,
but u make gunnery practice seem like he was playing Russian Roulette,
or juggling bottles of nitroglycerin. If a person does not bend
his elbows and keeps his weapon pointed downrange, this accident will not occur.
It was a fluke. If the gun had a longer stock or barrel,
he 'd just have a little bruise on the nose or forehead.
American citizens shoud not lose their freedom
because of a fluke. When kids got killed playing ball,
other kids were not stopped from doing so.

Just teach them to be more careful.
I have long recommended firearms safety and proficiency training in public schools.




Quote:
or do you think it is OK to give 5 year olds loaded guns?

Only in an emergency, if he needs one to defend his life,
or in training him with little .22 caliber revolvers or .22 rifles
when thay are being taught the safe n proficient use of guns.


I did not have that training at 5, but I had it at 8.
My neighbors in Arizona did too; we had no trouble.





David
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Nov, 2008 08:04 pm
@parados,
Quote:

By that argument, all the following are killing devices.

Plates, pots and pans, microwave ovens, McDonald's cardboard containers.

No, because the food is not alive
when it reaches the plate.
The food IS alive when he reaches the fishing pole.
Yes ?
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Nov, 2008 08:05 pm
@roger,
Quote:

Handguns are for close quarters defense.

Thay ARE;
that and for target practice.





David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Nov, 2008 08:21 pm
@Merry Andrew,
Quote:

How did a thread about a family tragedy turn into a dissertation on firearms?
[For the record, I like firearms and do a fair bit of target practice.
Have fired several tytpes of smgs on government ranges
(including the Uzi, AK47 and -- yes -- Thompson, but with a stick mag,
not drum).] However, this did not start out as a gun thread and,
in courtesy to Littlek, should not be degraded to such.

I beg to differ, Andy.
The opening paragraf said:
Quote:
I can't even articulate how pissed off this story makes me.[emphasis added by David]

I understood that to be angrily condemnatory of people like me, who believe in
allowing children the freedom that I had and loved, when I was 8.
I was defending this freedom.
If I had a child, I 'd deem myself morally bound to invite him
to learn the safe, defensive use of firearms.





David
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Nov, 2008 09:12 pm
@gungasnake,
Quote:

I view it as a stupid cartridge and a stupid idea.

I tend to agree with u,
ergo the fact of my not having fired one
nor having any plans to buy one.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 02/24/2024 at 05:54:19