8 year old accidently shoots himself with an Uzi

It amazes me that there are still idiots who equate weapons made for the purpose of killing to skateboards etc. Once a gun nut, always a gun nut. The gunpowder must do something to their brain.

Lord firearms are evil so any accident involving them should be punish by law no matter what the situation happen to had been?

That kind of logic only fly with silly old women of either sex my friend.

Having firearms within reach of adults at home is the same as having a few fire extinguishers within reach and for the same reason.

Fire Departments are nice however your home could be burned down by the time they could get a fire truck on site and you and your family could also be dead by the time the police department would arrived on site also.

I am away from home often and my wife sleep far better with a loaded 38 by her bedside as a result. We both also have CC licenses and when the situation call for being arm when traveling we are so arm.

Firearms are not of themselves evil and the same standards for accidence death involving them should be apply as in any other accidence death situation not some higher standard because little old ladies don’t like firearms.

Not surprised Turdpid. It doesn't take much to amaze you.

You still working on that tic-tac-toe strategy guide?

Here we go with your half-wit argument that firearms protect your right to free expression. You just make the assertion, you don't even offer a logical argument for the case. Which is something which you are undoubtedly unable to do. When was the last time you saw someone prevented from expressing their opinions publicly in a lawful manner by someone else with a firearm? When was the last time you saw someone able to express his or her opinion publicly in an otherwise lawful manner only because they threatened the general public with a firearm. You're completely full of poop with that idiotic argument.

Skateboards, bicycles, automobiles and snowboards do not have as their primary intent to maim or kill others. There is no other purpose for firearms. To attempt to equate these things which are harmless by intent with an object the only intent of which is to harm or kill others is the height of stupidity.

We expect no less from you.

It's pathetic to see you attempt to offer this as "logic." The intent of fire extinguishers is not to maim or kill. The only purpose of a firearm is to maim or kill. As usual with the hysteria of the gunnut crowd, you're comparing apples to oranges, and making no logical argument at all.

ditto

The more I think of this position of your the more I need to shake my head.

Let see my wife and I go to a gun range to practice and afterward as I walked behind our car her foot slip off the brake and she run me down killing me in the gun range parking lot.

Now instead of her foot slipping of the brake of our car one of our guns slip out of her hand at the gun range and discharge killing me.

Now both was accidents or at least I hope they were accidents and yet as guns are evil and cars are not from your world view my wife should end up being punish for the one accident but not the other?

Little old silly women kind of viewpoint indeed.

Please please tell me what is morally wrong with my wife killing a would be rapist who had broken into our home in the middle of the night?

She would be doing an evil deed if she dare to used a firearm in that situation from your worldview?

Your logic and comprehension are beyond comprehension.

First of all, your silly senarios have absolutely nothing to do with putting a rapid fire weapon in the hands of an eight year old.

Second, it doesn't really matter if your wife shoots you or runs you down with the car....you are still dead. However, the gun was meant for killing. The car was not. At least that was not the purpose for which it was intended when it was created.

The concept of freedom of self-defense is the bedrock of all other freedom.
Your sick mental attitude shows your lust for dependence upon the collective for life itself;
this concept is the pivot of whether citizens live freely in INDIVIDUALISM, or as docile subjects
(i.e., persons held in subjection) of collectivism. Your mindset calls out to government:
"COME RAPE ME OUT OF MY FREEDOM !"

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

That is a complete non sequitur to my response to the stupidity you posted about fire extinguishers. I certainly don't intend to play your game of invoking emotionally charged scenarios.

You simply have no logical basis for a comparison of a firearm, the intent of which is to cause gross bodily harm and possibly even death, and a fire extinguisher, the intent of which is to prevent gross bodily harm and death.

You're a fool if you think you can sucker me into to playing your game of emotive scenarios which have nothing to do with either the idiocy of comparing a fire extinguisher to a firearm; or the topic of the thread, which is a child shooting himself, fatally, with a machine pistol.

Intrepid, why do you even bother arguing with David? It must be awfully frustrating for you. It certainly was for me, so I stopped almost immediately. There are two or three people on this forum -- OmSig the chief of them -- who are obsessed with firearms and totally incapable of reasonable thought on this subject. Some psychologists equate this kind of obsession with penis envy and penis inadequacy. I am not a trained psychologist and, therefore, will not make this accusation. But the obsession and lack of reason is obviously there. To argue against such blindness is equal to banging your head against a stone wall. I treat their posts on this issue just as if it were spam from a troll. Ignore it.

Intrepid are the exact opposite of OmSig though, equally as bad, just on the other side of the argument. You happen to agree with them on this point so you might not see that clearly.

Set, you are so full of ****. The framers of the Bill of Rights clearly intended for 2A to protect 1A. The inability to see the correlation is just part and parcel indicative of the stupidity of the left wing anti-gun crowd.

Knives are for killing too. Do they jump out and kill stuff all by themselvses? Should we ban them? Why do you and Terdboy insist on disarming people who simply want to defend themselves? What is your real motive? Eh fat boy?

Guns are a tool, and like any other tool, can be used correctly or not.

Honestly Set, I think the combination of Cialis, Levitra, Viagra, and Cortisol has rotted what little is left of your grey matter.

It is not obvious; it is not true.
Is is obvious that the only problem was that he bent his elbows, so the muzzle rose.
I have fired Uzis plenty of times (but not enuf) without the slightest ill-effects.
Many OTHER kids have also, with no ill effects.

EVERYONE shoud be in possession of an Uzi, or other SMG,
like the H & K MP5, suppression of crime. Thay shoud have classes
in their safe and accurate use, in the public schools, as thay do
with swimming. Your post shows your contempt and prejudice
against 15 year old people.

This is the first time in American history that this has happened.
How many kids were killed by cars ?
What is the ratio between deaths by cars to submachineguns ?






David

I am going to nail down this dislike of your for evil tools design only to kill.

Now the example of my wife sleeping with an evil firearm a killing tool indeed near her at night and why that is somehow wrong from your viewpoint.

Now we had have the house broken into in the past and as a result we have bars, strong locks, outside lighting and a monitor alarm system and a firearm by the bed.

Now the firearm is not the first line of defense but the very last line and after someone had penetrated all the other defenses why should she not turn to a killing tool to defend herself?

Killings tools are not evil by themselves.

When I go hiking and camping in bear country I take every known precaution not to come into conflict with these fine animals however if all else fail I do take along one hell of a killing tool, my 1911A model 45 military colt.

There is nothing by itself evil with killing tools or any logical reason why an accident involving them should be view in a difference light from an accident not involving them

At no time in this thread or any other thread have i expressed an opinion even remotely resembling this.



This is a sentence fragment, not a sentence, i.e., not a complete idea. From the tenor or your other contributions here, that does not surprise me.

At no time in this thread or in any other thread have i expressed an opinion even remotely resembling this.



At no time in this thread or in any other thread have i expressed an opinion even remotely resembling this.



The word you wanted was "different," not "difference." Once again, you seem incapable of discussing this subject without the insertion of emotive pejoratives such as "evil." At no time have i referred to firearms as "evil." There is a name for the logical fallacy which you are here so desperate to peddle, and that is a straw man argument. You are verging on the hysterical with your arguments, and what passes for an argument on your part relies entirely upon characterizing what i have actually said in a false manner--it relies upon lies. Without a contention that i have described firearms as evil in and of themselves, you have no argument.

There a very good logical reason to view firearms involved in an accident as significantly different from accidents which involve things which were not intended to do gross bodily harm, as is the intent with firearms. So, in the example used by another member of skateboards, accidents involving skateboadrs which will result in gross bodily harm or death are of a very low order of probability. Even when not used properly, skateboards in and of themselves cannot reasonably be considered to be uniformly dangerous, and accidents involving skateboards are very unlikely to result in gross bodily harm or death. On the other hand, firearms are designed and manufactured with the intent of causing gross bodily harm and possibly death, and accidents involving firearms, especially those resulting from situations in which the firearm is improperly handled, have a much higher order of probability of resulting in gross bodily harm or death than is the case with skateboards--higher by many orders of magnitude.

Therefore, to compare firearms to skateboards, or to compare firearms to fire extinguishers, is incredibly stupid.

What evidence that you have that this is so? What sort of drivel which you will attempt to pass off as a logical argument supports this contention?