Guns aren't stupid, People with Guns Are.

I guess he needed a gun for those times when a 3 year old predator tried to steal from him.

I wonder David if you think the thief got what he deserved in this case.

http://www.wtsp.com/news/local/article/315433/8/Uncle-of-3-year-old-who-shot-himself-arrested

Quote:

TAMPA, Florida - 3-year-old Jadarrius Speights accidentally shot and killed himself inside the bedroom of an apartment he shared with his mother, father, and uncle, according to the Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office.

It happened Monday evening around 7:10 p.m.

Detectives say 29-year-old Jeffrey Walker shared a bedroom with his nephew Jadarrius and allegedly left a 9mm handgun in a backpack. Walker left the room, and detectives believe Jadarrius got the gun out of the backpack and shot himself.

3 Replies

@parados,

I'd like to see any report of a gun owner who has defended himself and his family from violence - MORE OFTEN than the accidents that have happened from gun ownership to family members.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Please know that when I defended myself from violence,
I had not the slightest interest in relative safety statistics,
no matter what thay might be. If thay'd been 1000:1,
I'd have defended myself the same way.

Note also that no statistics serve to liberate government,
investing the damn thing with new jurisdiction.

The citizen's personal freedom endures regardless of any statistics.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Of course you don't! That's the dilemma for people who understand violence in the home of people with guns.

You just don't care for those thousands who kill themselves with guns because it's available in the home.

You suffer from myopia in the brain.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Yes, I DON'T care.
I have no duty to care; I did not pledge myself to "care".

The people that u allege to "understand" have the option to leave the Land of the FREE.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Nobody asked you "to care." The stats speak for themselves. Those who lost loved ones care, as did the parents of children and teachers killed at Sandyhook Elementary School.

Quote:

Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting Newtown, Connecticut December 14 2012 27 killed

1 Reply

@parados,

parados wrote:

I guess he needed a gun for those times when a 3 year old predator tried to steal from him.

I wonder David if you think the thief got what he deserved in this case.

I don't; just an accident.

Years ago, I met a veteran who said that during the invasion of Germany,
a little boy threw an inflammable liquid on him
and tried to get to him with a match, before he shot him.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Wow, going back in time - like almost 70 years to find an example of why somebody had to shoot another person.

It takes a special kind of person to remember "one incident" during a World War when so much atrocities happened - over and beyond what he "remembered."

There's no c....

1 Reply

@parados,

My memory goes back to the incident of 2 English boys (about maybe 10 years old, was it ?)
who kidnapped a much younger boy, then tortured him to death
(no guns involved).

The victim was probably not able to use any defensive weapon,
but if he had been able to use one, then I 'd wish that he'd have succeeded
in killing the youthful kidnappers.

Qua most violent crimes, I wish that the victims had been better armed
than the predators (regardless of age).

David

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

Wow, going back in time - like almost 70 years to find an example of why somebody had to shoot another person.
It takes a special kind of person to remember "one incident" during a World War when so much atrocities happened - over and beyond what he "remembered."

It shows the principle.
That's what counts.

He almost got burned. Maybe he CARED about that.

David

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

Those who lost loved ones care, as did the parents of children and teachers killed at Sandyhook Elementary School.

Let's hope that future victims will be better armed than future predators.
Defensive tactical training shud be offered in schools,
at the earliest feasible years.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

As was proven in Boston, more guns will not protect everybody.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

True. If someone has a toothache or a flat tire,
guns will not protect him from those things.

Guns r good for other things.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Yes, I'll repeat again; it's good for killing your own family members more than it protects them.

Your brain refuses to digest this simple fact.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

I already told u:
Sometimes people NEED to kill their family members,
to avoid death or personal injury.

Family fites r very, very very common occurrences
in the routine of police. Thay sometimes get very bloody.

People did not wait until guns were invented
to start killing their relatives.

2 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

You're missing the whole point - intentionally. There's no c.......

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

You're missing the whole point - intentionally.

I find the point that u allege
to be devoid of merit.

David

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

I wrote,

Quote:

it's good for killing your own family members more than it protects them.

You wrote,

Quote:

Sometimes people NEED to kill their family members,

No confusion here!

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Yeah, think of Andrea Yates drowning all of her children
in their bathtub. I wish that the older boys had been able to grab good guns.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Okay, how many were drowned vs how many were killed by a gun?

Numbers, please!

1 Reply

Guns aren't stupid, People with Guns Are.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know