US boy, 3, killed self with gun he found in mother's purse

[Jdietz]

NRA can't read.

Edited June 13, 2015 by Jdietz

[PHP87]

3 pages and I have yet to see a competent anti-gun argument.

Instead, I see numerous posts filled with bumper sticker slogans and complete ignorance.

Why is it that the most ignorant people are in such a hurry to prove their ignorance to the world?

[PHP87]

Maybe to stop other idiots from leaving loaded guns laying around. What did she think it was, a loaf of bread?

If every idiot in the US wasn't allowed to own a gun, the chance of an event like this would be much less likely.

If every idiot on TV wasn't allowed to post on a subject they know nothing about, this thread would have about 2-3 posts.

Instead, we get post after post of bumper sticker slogans and utter ignorance on display by those that know next to nothing about firearms, but for some reason, want to show off that ignorance to the members of TV

And sadly, they think they aren't talking out of their rear end.

[Jdietz]

Please go back to watching Faux news and the NRA Holy Bible, instead of multiple rants about how it's great for children to kill themselves in the name of your own so called personal defense.

If you want to throw out statistics compare crime rate and gun related deaths to countries with serious gun control.

[d2b2]

Php87 believes his same canned response will gain credence if he keeps applying to every comment. He seems quick to point out everyone's ignorance, yet fails to post a reasoned response and resorts only to name calling and bullying. It is exactly the type of trolling I have come to expect on this website. It is shame, because it could be a forum of open and helpful discussion, but quickly the comments fall to the level PHP87, rendering the discussion moot and useless.

[IAMHERE]

My money says she killed the kid and made up the story.

[RickBradford]

His research finds that American civilians use their firearms as often as 2.5 million times every year defending against a confrontation with a criminal

What an awful statistic, quite apart from the gun debate itself.

Almost 1 per cent of civilians in one of the world's richest countries are threatened on a yearly basis by criminals, to a level where they feel the need to use firearms to defend themselves.

That's a societal issue which could use some examination.

[Jonmarleesco]

If the US must persist in its indulgance of the gun carrying culture, perhaps they should introduce a compulsory IQ test ... for purchasers and sellers.

[Jonmarleesco]

Maybe to stop other idiots from leaving loaded guns laying around. What did she think it was, a loaf of bread?

If every idiot in the US wasn't allowed to own a gun, the chance of an event like this would be much less likely.

If every idiot on TV wasn't allowed to post on a subject they know nothing about, this thread would have about 2-3 posts.

Instead, we get post after post of bumper sticker slogans and utter ignorance on display by those that know next to nothing about firearms, but for some reason, want to show off that ignorance to the members of TV

And sadly, they think they aren't talking out of their rear end.

Safe, then, to assume you are an expert on the subject - or some aspect of it?

[Seastallion]

Maybe to stop other idiots from leaving loaded guns laying around. What did she think it was, a loaf of bread?

If every idiot in the US wasn't allowed to own a gun, the chance of an event like this would be much less likely.

Yes, because anyone in the US can buy a gun. Again, more ignorance. Why do people that know so little feel the need to prove it?

Whoosh...straight over your head despite it being quite obvious. Case in point, your last sentence.

[Scott]

I will post this only once: Stay on topic and stop with the personal remarks directed at other posters. Suspensions will be given.

[Seastallion]

Maybe to stop other idiots from leaving loaded guns laying around. What did she think it was, a loaf of bread?

If every idiot in the US wasn't allowed to own a gun, the chance of an event like this would be much less likely.

If every idiot on TV wasn't allowed to post on a subject they know nothing about, this thread would have about 2-3 posts.

Instead, we get post after post of bumper sticker slogans and utter ignorance on display by those that know next to nothing about firearms, but for some reason, want to show off that ignorance to the members of TV

And sadly, they think they aren't talking out of their rear end.

oops.

Edited June 13, 2015 by Seastallion

[ICECOOL]

I hear the pro gun people say "Guns do not kill..people do" and "we have the right to protect ourselves"

Glad I live in a country where I don't feel so scared of people around me that I feel the need to carry a loaded gun.

RIP young child.

I am sure I will not have to wait for the next similiar news story from the good ole USA

No, you live in an insulated bubble of self-denial believing that you will never be the victim of a violent crime.

Actually I was raised to respect and use firearms as I lived in the country where they were necessary to remove vermin and put down injured animals. Then I lived for 35 years in Sydney Australia which is probably one of the most violent cities in Australia and you are correct I have never felt I would be the victim of violent crime. Maybe learning martial arts helped. Now I live in Thailand and nothing has changed. I have been to the US (NYC and Boston) and a lot of other countries I didn't feel I needed a gun there either. I would expect a lot of non Americans would feel the same.

Thats not to say I don't take personal security seriously I just use common sense

[Guest]

The technology is there to render the gun only usable by the owner.

It's high time it was enforced.

Sure, unless your palms are sweaty or wet, or the batteries are low, or any number of other factors as we all know that technology never fails, right?

This would also add hundreds to the cost of a firearm, punishing low-income people who often are the people that have the greatest need to protect themselves.

This argument has been debated and the reason why it hasn't been implemented is because if it fails 0.00001% of the time, that's too many, not including other factors such as the cost which is punitive.

What part of "Shall not be infringed" don't you people get?

When a system is invented that works 100% of the time under all conditions and is cost-effective, then I'll consider it. Until then, it's nothing more than mental masturbation.

You mean they excellent way the safety on a loaded handgun prevents accidental discharge?

Imagine the question, "If there was a foolproof system that was free of charge, that ensured only the registered owner of a gun could fire it, would you be in favor of it?"

I would say many responsible gun owners would love that.

The rest neeed to turn in their guns .. they simply do not get it.

[Guest]

3 pages and I have yet to see a competent anti-gun argument.

Instead, I see numerous posts filled with bumper sticker slogans and complete ignorance.

Why is it that the most ignorant people are in such a hurry to prove their ignorance to the world?

Because they know that in a world without guns, people would not get shot with guns. That math is absolute and true.

Those are the people who really want to know the real reason so many people want guns.

Lots of people think there is more to the story, and that story involves a meaningful sense of insecurity and feelings of inferiority being compensated for with a guns.

many gun owners are simply bullies who do not want that feling to go away, no matter how rational or "for the greater good" the end of guns would be.

In short, they enjoy the power and the feeling of superiority.

In short.

[Guest]

I hear the pro gun people say "Guns do not kill..people do" and "we have the right to protect ourselves"

Glad I live in a country where I don't feel so scared of people around me that I feel the need to carry a loaded gun.

RIP young child.

I am sure I will not have to wait for the next similiar news story from the good ole USA

No, you live in an insulated bubble of self-denial believing that you will never be the victim of a violent crime.

PHP87, Sir, have you ever been the victim of violent crime, and if so, did you employ a gun to defend yourself?

[Guest]

My money says she killed the kid and made up the story.

Your money is counterfeit.

[Guest]

Maybe to stop other idiots from leaving loaded guns laying around. What did she think it was, a loaf of bread?

If every idiot in the US wasn't allowed to own a gun, the chance of an event like this would be much less likely.

If every idiot on TV wasn't allowed to post on a subject they know nothing about, this thread would have about 2-3 posts.

Instead, we get post after post of bumper sticker slogans and utter ignorance on display by those that know next to nothing about firearms, but for some reason, want to show off that ignorance to the members of TV

And sadly, they think they aren't talking out of their rear end.

Pot meet kettle, kettle .... meet pot.

[CMNightRider]

Tragic as it is, I feel a bit ....it will never change, and more children will die, most certainly, while the NRA continues to lobby for guns for everybody.

The NRA promotes gun safety and had nothing to do with this incident. Without exception, every time a firearm incident is posted on Thai Visa, I see the same anti-gun, American haters come out of the woodwork with immature and idiotic anti-guns posts. If you don't like guns don't own one.

[nemrut]

This type of incident happens far too often in the US, and most likely, occurs much more often when victims are fatally wounded but do not die and goes unreported.

USA - land of the free, negligent and living in denial.

BS - More children under the age of 5 drown in backyard swimming pools than by gunshots.

But don't let facts get in the way of an ignorant rant.

And just how does someone get "Fatally wounded, but do not die" and incredulously, "goes unreported"?

Just because one type of event occurs more often than another doesn't dismiss the severity of the situation. People expect car accidents but they dont expect gun rampages of which the US leads by far of any developed country.

Based on your logic we should dismiss gun incidents in the US as trivial because far more people die from car accidents not to mention 5yr olds drowning in swimming pools.

There are too many gun incidents in the US where young children are injured that go unreported even if they are documented by health personnel. The news media deems which are newsworthy and which are not (eg, child shoots parent, child shoots self, child kills shooting instructor).

[Linky]

3 pages and I have yet to see a competent anti-gun argument.

Instead, I see numerous posts filled with bumper sticker slogans and complete ignorance.

Why is it that the most ignorant people are in such a hurry to prove their ignorance to the world?

The repeated deaths of children isnt a good enough anti gun argument for you then.

Says a lot about you.

[cookee68]

As sad as it is, she should be charged for leaving a loaded gun where a child can get hold of it is neglect

[Scott]

Off-topic post and reply removed.

[stevenl]

As sad as it is, she should be charged for leaving a loaded gun where a child can get hold of it is neglect

In general there are a few reasons why somebody should be charged: punishment for a crime committed , protect society from them or have them learn from it.

Which would be the case here?

[sirineou]

As sad as it is, she should be charged for leaving a loaded gun where a child can get hold of it is neglect

In general there are a few reasons why somebody should be charged: punishment for a crime committed , protect society from them or have them learn from it.

Which would be the case here?

both

the child is part of society, and need to be protected from some one leaving a loaded gun where it could gain access to it

and they need to learn not to leave loaded guns where children or others can get to them.

[MaxYakov]

As sad as it is, she should be charged for leaving a loaded gun where a child can get hold of it is neglect

In general there are a few reasons why somebody should be charged: punishment for a crime committed , protect society from them or have them learn from it.

Which would be the case here?

both

the child is part of society, and need to be protected from some one leaving a loaded gun where it could gain access to it

and they need to learn not to leave loaded guns where children or others can get to them.

A third, and very important, reason is to set an example for others.

Here are a few cases where the adults were victims of their own negligence:

Idaho Toddler Shoots and Kills His Mother Inside a Walmart Store (UK Guardian)

Three-year-old Boy Shoots Pregnant Mother and Father in New Mexico (UK Independent)

[SABloke]

Another tragic loss.

41Sl-xZPSFL._SX300_.jpg

Bumper sticker slogans. The typical "argument" of the anti-gun crowd. Fits their sound byte attention span.

I guess a "Real Man" like you will single-handily fight off 3 armed home invaders, right tough guy?

Even if you had a gun you'd probably still end up dead in a 1 vs 3 engagement

I'd also think that armed home invaders would he more inclined to shoot you if you were pointing a gun back at them.

Edited June 14, 2015 by SABloke

[PHP87]

I've used well-researched facts, logic and statistics to make my point while the anti-gun crowd has used emotion, insults and hysterics to make theirs.

Having been born and raised in San Francisco, I've predictably seen these "debates" end up like this with facts being dismissed in favor of emotions and hysterics, and trotting out the "NRA" boogeyman.

Will these people ever grow up? Doubtful, as they continue to use the same tactics year after year, decade after decade.

The amazing part is how vehemently many of these people argue their point despite having little to no knowledge of firearms and/or firearm laws.

Yet they think they are out-debating someone that is far more knowledgeable on the subject, when in fact, all they do is embarrass themselves with their staggering display of ignorance.

And worse, they can't wait to dance on the grave of a gunshot victim in order to say "See, I told you so!" and to further their agenda, all the while ignoring the 3 Million crimes prevented by law-abiding gun owners per year in the US that doesn't make the nightly news.

I guess preventing a crime doesn't sell as well as some poor kid getting shot, but just because it goes unreported doesn't mean it didn't happen according to the FBI

3 Million people prevented from being crime victims every year. Anywhere from simple robbery to assault, to rape to murder.

Seems like the anti-gun crowd would gladly trade those victims to eliminate guns, which we know is impossible as criminals will simply make their own guns, use edged weapons or other dangerous implements to victimize others.

If people believe that a complete gun ban will end crime or greatly reduce it, they are living in a fantasy.

And please, stop comparing island countries like AUS and the UK with the US as those countries don't have the same societal issues the US does with "multi-culturalism" and the gang element that comes with it.

Not to mention, knife crime has skyrocketed in the UK while in the US, gun ownership has gone up, while crime has gone down as evidenced in the graph I posted earlier.

So if there are more guns in the hands of US citizens, why hasn't the crime rate gone up in a correlating number, or even gone up instead of dropped?

Have any of you read the works of John Lott or Gary Kleck, the two anti-gun researchers that performed the most comprehensive studies to prove that more guns equals more crime, but in the end found the opposite?

Answer me this, gun grabbers:

When some of you have an argument that consists of something other than emotion, hysterics and name-calling, let me know and I'll be glad to debate this subject with you.

And yes, I keep repeating the same arguments because none of you have responded to them in a logical way. Instead many of you have engaged in name-calling and hysterics, all the while ignoring the mountains of evidence I posted.

[PHP87]

I hear the pro gun people say "Guns do not kill..people do" and "we have the right to protect ourselves"

Glad I live in a country where I don't feel so scared of people around me that I feel the need to carry a loaded gun.

RIP young child.

I am sure I will not have to wait for the next similiar news story from the good ole USA

No, you live in an insulated bubble of self-denial believing that you will never be the victim of a violent crime.

PHP87, Sir, have you ever been the victim of violent crime, and if so, did you employ a gun to defend yourself?

No, but one morning at about 4:00 AM I awoke to a ruckus. I thought our cat had caught another mouse, but when I came out of my room to investigate my Father yelled at me to "Get back in my room and don't come out until I tell you"

I couldn't see exactly what was going on, but I did see two pairs of legs on the floor and my Father standing over them.

Turned out we had a break-in by a couple of very nasty people with lengthy violent criminal histories and my Father was able to subdue them with a little .25 semi-auto.

I was about 5 years old at the time and I can remember it like it was yesterday.

Fast forward 35 years: I'm living out in the country, about 5 miles from the main road and I'm home from work with the flu. There's a knock at the door. Since I wasn't expecting anyone, I look out a side window and see one kind of shady looking character at the door and another shady character peaking around back.

I lived on a guest house on a large horse ranch and my closest neighbor was a half mile away.

I wasn't going to answer the door, but the guy kept knocking and they looked suspicious.

I grabbed my Beretta 92, put one round in the chamber and inserted a mag with 15 rounds.

I opened the door a bit with my left hand and with my foot jammed against the door to prevent further opening. In my right hand, I had my Beretta 92 with a round in the chamber and the hammer cocked, safety off behind my back.

The shady guy started asking questions (Known as the "Interview process" - read the 5 stages of an assault to learn more. http://makingsenseofselfdefense.blogspot.com/2008/12/5-five-stages-of-physical-assault.html)

Knowing that an attempted attack was imminent, and the 2nd person had joined his accomplice at my front door, I let them see that I was holding a firearm, but not in an obvious way. More like I had done so by accident. The looks on their faces rapidly changed and they stopped with their "interview" and got the hell out of there fast.

A few day later I read in the local paper that two violent escaped cons from the midwest were captured in the area and they fit the description of my visitors to a tee, including the stolen car they were driving. They had traveled the country financing their "trip" by committing crimes. Some violent.

Imagine if I were a woman home alone, or that I had been unarmed?

So without a shot being fired, 4 dangerous thugs were prevented from doing untold harm to a number of people.

These incidents didn't occur in rough, inner cities or in bad neighborhoods either. Crime can and does happen anywhere. The better prepared, the better chance you have at living thru a possible life-ending ordeal.

[Basil B]

Dallas, some nutter with a gun(s) and pipe bombs shoots up a police station...

That sort of thing just does not happen in the UK, although gun licences are heavenly restricted and a total ban on hand guns, some criminals do get their hands on fire arms, but thankfully only a few and most shooting seem to be turf wars between criminal gangs.

Edited June 14, 2015 by Basil B