U.S. father fatally shoots son mistaken for intruder

[cgtours]

Incidents like this destroys the entire family left behind. Tragic. We have had so many such cases in South Africa due to our out of control Crime. Attackers are brutal and torture for ATM Pin Numbers and codes for Safes in the home, invariably the risk of females being raped as well and all this before they are killed in case of recognition afterwards. Some have their faces covered in Masks. . Numerous horrific slaughter of Farming families have taken place. Too gruesome to even describe. So if there is any suspect noise early hours of the morning, or sometimes early evening and now even during the day, people shoot first as it is a split second decision or they get brutally killed. They enter even Security Housing Developments, also irrespective if electric fences and Gates, Highwalls, Security Cameras, Burglar Guards and even vicious dogs ( which are mostly poisoned earlier on or killed off first. Better to have the Guard dogs inside from Sunset. So these terrible accidents happen. Very sad.

[sirineou]

I can drive like a f1 racer, but because some morons cannot drive fast I have to follow the regulations.

I can take drugs like a champion, but because some morons can't I cannot buy them in shops.

In USA Kinder chocolate are forbiddent because some kids swallow them and shock, so all the kids cannot buy them.

In USA you cannot eat raw milk cheese, because "it is not safe"

You cannot drink before majority, but you can buy a rifle for your 12yrs old kid.....

You cannot have an abortion before medical check, discussion with a shrink, face the bigots raw of shame...but you can buy guns in Wallmart.

Smoking law is harsher than gun selling

Oh and do not forget the main thing : guns are designed to kill or aim...nothing else, not to open beers...

Cars are not designed to kill

IMHO guns are designed to protect (as are armies, medicine, chemotherapy, safety training, etc.). Not such an alien thought.

Even though we have these things designed to protect, they are still misused (N. Korea, belligerents of WW2, etc.).

BTW, I am all for better control which weeds out the cons and certifiable idiots. The best we can do. However, you ban all weapons and you end up with a defenseless crowd at a Paris concert.

I am quite sure guns are banned from concerts in USA as well

You obviously haven't been to the USA. Try an outdoor concert in Texas, Wyoming or Montana, which states boast responsible gun laws and control, along with a better-trained citizenry in self-protection. The very last venues that would be visited by any self-respecting terrorist.

Or music lover

[rosst]

Sympathy for the father, a nightmare of massive proportions.

Too late for gun control in the US, it is like trying to sop up the Atlantic with a dish sponge.

The whole place is awash with guns and gun culture, too late to change, use education to minimise these incidents.

The Australian experience is different, we did not have anywhere near the ratio of guns to people.

Our socialist policies also minimise the numbers of desperate criminals and illegal guns cost too much for most of the druggies, they would sooner have the hit.

RIP young man.

[MiKT]

I seldom post opinions on Aussie, New Zealand, Euro, British or any thread with which I am not personally familiar. I have no personal involvement with any of these nations so why should I waste my time.

America is loved or hated, no in between. Like Man U. People can't help having an opinion even if they have never been to America or if they don't really know any Americans. Years ago I had a European friend tell me that she only watched American news because it was the only news that mattered. Wow. But it's mostly true. It is hard to find an American who cares about the internal politics of another country they have never been to or have no connection to. I mean, no one gives a crap really. Many of the people in those countries don't care either so they follow the big dog, the USA. Just like with football (soccer)...people around the world live in countries with crappy teams so they become fans of Man U. Sad. ;-)

Well there you go, I actually agree with something you have said for once. Man U is Crap.........Oh no you didn't actually say that did you. Back to square one, Silly Billy.

Some of us actually do know about guns and do care about the US, which is why we think you should do something sensible about gun control. Nobody in there right mind seriously expects or wants all guns to be taken away, but it would be nice if Americans stopped feeding each other bogy man scare mongering and were able to live their lives a bit more fear free.

PS I only watch Fox News as its so goddam awful, its a kind of masochistic entertainment like hitting you head on a brick wall or watching Man U, its nice when it stops.

[MiKT]

This may come as a shock to the hysterical anti-gun posters but guns are not going to be confiscated from law abiding citizens in America, because this father shot his son.

Hysterical? Seriously? Given the constant gun-related incidents that occur so regularly in the U.S., and the head in the sand philosophy of the gun lobby, that adjective was ludicrous.

It is so easy to act holier than thou about this issue. If you really believe your rhetoric, how about wearing a T-shirt that says, "I am not armed and refuse the protection of any legal gun owners who I beg to keep their distance and not interfere with any poor misunderstood criminal who is about to kill me."

How about a t shirt that says "Legal gun owners keep away and let me get on with committing suicide" which is what most guns in the US are used for. If you can't bring yourself to admit that gun sales need to be moderated, its just sad, sad, sad.

Sorry you need to live quivering with fear and trepidation all the time, even at concerts apparently. I would like to bet that very, very, very few people in Paris today are scared to go to a concert even now and would be happy if all their fellow concert goers were armed to the teeth as has been advocated here for the US...... 555 ......because they know that then they really would have something to be scared about.

[CMNightRider]

This incident brings to mind, everything happens for a reason. Sometimes the reason is you are stupid or you made a poor choice. About 90,000,000 gun owners killed no one yesterday..................just saying.

[GeorgesAbitbol]

This incident brings to mind, everything happens for a reason. Sometimes the reason is you are stupid or you made a poor choice. About 90,000,000 gun owners killed no one yesterday..................just saying.

mmm you should watch the news

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&authuser=0&q=shot+dead&oq=shot+dead&gs_l=news-cc.3..43j43i53.934046.935423.0.935545.9.7.0.2.2.0.119.514.6j1.7.0...0.0...1ac.1.XsQCy4z-Vwg

At least 5 in US the last 24 hours

[OMGImInPattaya]

He should have taken it upon himself to get proprely trained in the use of a firearm for home and personal defense. I bet now he wishes that he did. However, this is no reason to repeal the Second Amendment.

[neverdie]

He should have taken it upon himself to get proprely trained in the use of a firearm for home and personal defense. I bet now he wishes that he did. However, this is no reason to repeal the Second Amendment.

No that's right, why would you want to make little changes to the second amendment just in order to save the lives of a few innocent children? There's too many people Living In the USA already and children are such easy targets.

Here's a good idea, let's put more guns onto the street, it's bound to make a difference.

[MiKT]

He should have taken it upon himself to get proprely trained in the use of a firearm for home and personal defense. I bet now he wishes that he did. However, this is no reason to repeal the Second Amendment.

No the government should have ensured he had a very good reason and was trained and competent to be allowed to keep a firearm in his home properly secured. Quoting a 200 year old piece of paper does not cut it.

The whole point of the second ammendment was to have a trained and instantly available militia in the event of an attack on the US by an outside country, when the US was just a few millions of people in an agricultural society, not to allow free reign for every nut in a hugely different society.

Do you really think the framers of the US constitution wanted "Black" people or "Indians" or "Mexicans", I should say "Hispanics", to have guns? I don't think so, it was a slave owning society.

Stop burning witches, get it amended.

Edited January 14, 2016 by MiKT

[sirineou]

What's the use in defending a tragic incident like this?

One could give a "what if" story such as, what if the intruder had been a 19 year old thug with his own gun ready to shoot anybody that resisted him.

Sadly it wasn't and if it had been you would never have read about it here.

So what's the use. You critics are going to criticize regardless and since the vast majority of you are not Americans, nobody really cares what your opinions are anyway.

Keep tilting at windmills all you want. Just don't expect it to do any good.

How very Thai of ChuckD in showing his Americaness.

I'm an American and many of us do care and appreciate the opinions of non-Americans.

...and my experience is you are in the minority.

I choose to be a little stronger willed than to accept opinions from those that have never done anything but go to school and read books, or in this case...

Never owning or firing a firearm, never having been to the US and not likely to ever go and having no idea what the Constitution means to many of us.

I seldom post opinions on Aussie, New Zealand, Euro, British or any thread with which I am not personally familiar. I have no personal involvement with any of these nations so why should I waste my time.

I must admit I did make a couple of silly posts on the Johnny Depp led dog invasion of Australia but hopefully this will not be held against me.

I've always been an advocate of the Abe Lincoln quote...

"It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt".

Good advice for many on this forum to follow.

"I've always been an advocate of the Abe Lincoln quote...

"It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt".

Good advice for many on this forum to follow."

physician, heal thyself

phrase of physician

1. 1.

   proverb

   before attempting to correct others, make sure that you aren't guilty of the same faults.

[aTomsLife]

He should have taken it upon himself to get proprely trained in the use of a firearm for home and personal defense. I bet now he wishes that he did. However, this is no reason to repeal the Second Amendment.

No the government should have ensured he had a very good reason and was trained and competent to be allowed to keep a firearm in his home properly secured. Quoting a 200 year old piece of paper does not cut it.

The whole point of the second ammendment was to have a trained and instantly available militia in the event of an attack on the US by an outside country, when the US was just a few millions of people in an agricultural society, not to allow free reign for every nut in a hugely different society.

Do you really think the framers of the US constitution wanted "Black" people or "Indians" or "Mexicans", I should say "Hispanics", to have guns? I don't think so, it was a slave owning society.

Stop burning witches, get it amended.

"The whole point of the second ammendment was to have a trained and instantly available militia in the event of an attack on the US by an outside country, when the US was just a few millions of people in an agricultural society, not to allow free reign for every nut in a hugely different society."

No, that is not the whole point, but just one of them. Another reason citizens are entitled to bear arms is to guard against government tyranny, despite your hyperbolic and nonsensical comparison to "burning witches."

Most gun violence is directly attributable to gang activity and takes place in poor, urban areas where the sale of guns has already been banned and it is near impossible to own one legally. So there goes your argument that the government "should have ensured...blah, blah, blah." In the U.S., the government can no more ensure any form of gun prohibition than they could alcohol prohibition. If you can't grasp that, then you're out of your element here and have no place in this discussion.

Of the USA's 2.5-million deaths per year, gun homicides are responsible for 11,000 of them, or .0044%--as in, not even half of 1%. Yet to listen to you, one would think he'd need to army-crawl through airport Customs as bullets whistled by over his head.

The OP is the result of an accident--a tragic one, yes, but an accident nonetheless. It's no excuse to trample on the inalienable rights of all Americans, nor will it prove one. Ever.

[Grouse]

This may come as a shock to the hysterical anti-gun posters but guns are not going to be confiscated from law abiding citizens in America, because this father shot his son.

No, you would have to do something really bad for that to happen

Like killing loads of kids.... Oh, sorry, that's already been done

Er..... Yeah, you are correct, nobody will ever be able to take your guns. Impossible to shame you or make you understand.....

[Grouse]

He should have taken it upon himself to get proprely trained in the use of a firearm for home and personal defense. I bet now he wishes that he did. However, this is no reason to repeal the Second Amendment.

Who said anything about repealing it!

AMEND it with 21st century unambiguous wording so that any idiot can understand it

Edited January 14, 2016 by Grouse

[timmyp]

Great that he was properly armed to defend himself, or things could have gotten ugly.

[seedy]

Troll / Flaming posts removed

[bangon04]

yeah, the US even needs more GUNS GUNS GUNS to make it an even safer place than it already is...... how SICK !!! Obama got that right..... no guns, no shootings. It is as simple as that (and most civilized countries in Europe where guns r near to non-existent in public are living prove of that)

I do agree with you the US has 270 million registered guns not counting the illegal ones

who is protecting who ?

Any supporter of the American blanket right to own guns will tell you that legally bought and held firearms (like in Walmart by some moron who has no training or common sense or a secure place to store a weapon) will never, ever, ever be stolen or pawned or otherwise fall into the hands of an illegal user.

The evidence from countries with strict gun controls where illegal firearms are too expensive or too difficult for the average moron in the street to acquire, is obviously false and irrelevant to them.

The fact that organised crime will always find a way to own illegal weapons is the major argument for having no controls whatsoever in the US.

[aTomsLife]

This may come as a shock to the hysterical anti-gun posters but guns are not going to be confiscated from law abiding citizens in America, because this father shot his son.

No, you would have to do something really bad for that to happen

Like killing loads of kids.... Oh, sorry, that's already been done

Er..... Yeah, you are correct, nobody will ever be able to take your guns. Impossible to shame you or make you understand.....

Bad things happen, and governments can't protect you from all of it, especially at times when the government itself is the aggressor. But maybe it's impossible to make you understand, so never mind that now.

I wrote an earlier post (#134) wherein I demonstrated that gun homicides make up less than half of 1% of all deaths in the U.S. Maybe you didn't see it. Or maybe you did and ignored it so you could continuing slinging mud, asserting that Americans need to give up their guns, but won't because they've no shame.

Your knee-jerk argument reminds me of the idiots who, after a shark attack on a human, believe it's good policy to go out and massacre all the sharks near the scene.

[lostboy]

This may come as a shock to the hysterical anti-gun posters but guns are not going to be confiscated from law abiding citizens in America, because this father shot his son.

Hysterical? Seriously? Given the constant gun-related incidents that occur so regularly in the U.S., and the head in the sand philosophy of the gun lobby, that adjective was ludicrous.

It is so easy to act holier than thou about this issue. If you really believe your rhetoric, how about wearing a T-shirt that says, "I am not armed and refuse the protection of any legal gun owners who I beg to keep their distance and not interfere with any poor misunderstood criminal who is about to kill me."

Dude. You are seriously fashioned challenged if you would think anyone would wear such a shirt. You are clearly straight. You would have to be seriously obese to wear a shirt big enough to include all those words. Straight, fat, white men. I am getting a picture of a stereotype here.

Go 2A! What a fine replacement slogan for the now disgraced Confederate Battle Flag.

[GeorgesAbitbol]

This may come as a shock to the hysterical anti-gun posters but guns are not going to be confiscated from law abiding citizens in America, because this father shot his son.

No, you would have to do something really bad for that to happen

Like killing loads of kids.... Oh, sorry, that's already been done

Er..... Yeah, you are correct, nobody will ever be able to take your guns. Impossible to shame you or make you understand.....

Bad things happen, and governments can't protect you from all of it, especially at times when the government itself is the aggressor. But maybe it's impossible to make you understand, so never mind that now.

I wrote an earlier post (#134) wherein I demonstrated that gun homicides make up less than half of 1% of all deaths in the U.S. Maybe you didn't see it. Or maybe you did and ignored it so you could continuing slinging mud, asserting that Americans need to give up their guns, but won't because they've no shame.

Your knee-jerk argument reminds me of the idiots who, after a shark attack on a human, believe it's good policy to go out and massacre all the sharks near the scene.

After the lack of rules for car accidents they made law to regulate the speed, driving under influence, vision test, health test for elderies, proper permit which requires hours of mandatory training.

It is the same for drugs then, why not allow all the drugs and just ask the people to be responsible...oh yes, there are regulations because we are in a society, so we need to walk at the same speed as the slowest members...

If you think it is normal to have guns sized and designed for kids so they are attractives, if you think having a "gun channel" so you can order rifles from home, if you think it is normal to not have any regulation for sales from an owner to another...then let' see how 2016 will be in term of massacres and other deaths due to lack of regulation in USA.

It started well : already more than 400 "incidents" in 15 days

[aTomsLife]

This may come as a shock to the hysterical anti-gun posters but guns are not going to be confiscated from law abiding citizens in America, because this father shot his son.

No, you would have to do something really bad for that to happen

Like killing loads of kids.... Oh, sorry, that's already been done

Er..... Yeah, you are correct, nobody will ever be able to take your guns. Impossible to shame you or make you understand.....

Bad things happen, and governments can't protect you from all of it, especially at times when the government itself is the aggressor. But maybe it's impossible to make you understand, so never mind that now.

I wrote an earlier post (#134) wherein I demonstrated that gun homicides make up less than half of 1% of all deaths in the U.S. Maybe you didn't see it. Or maybe you did and ignored it so you could continuing slinging mud, asserting that Americans need to give up their guns, but won't because they've no shame.

Your knee-jerk argument reminds me of the idiots who, after a shark attack on a human, believe it's good policy to go out and massacre all the sharks near the scene.

After the lack of rules for car accidents they made law to regulate the speed, driving under influence, vision test, health test for elderies, proper permit which requires hours of mandatory training.

It is the same for drugs then, why not allow all the drugs and just ask the people to be responsible...oh yes, there are regulations because we are in a society, so we need to walk at the same speed as the slowest members...

If you think it is normal to have guns sized and designed for kids so they are attractives, if you think having a "gun channel" so you can order rifles from home, if you think it is normal to not have any regulation for sales from an owner to another...then let' see how 2016 will be in term of massacres and other deaths due to lack of regulation in USA.

It started well : already more than 400 "incidents" in 15 days

But that's just it, Sherlock, guns already are regulated.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_law_in_the_United_States

[GeorgesAbitbol]

No, you would have to do something really bad for that to happen

Like killing loads of kids.... Oh, sorry, that's already been done

Er..... Yeah, you are correct, nobody will ever be able to take your guns. Impossible to shame you or make you understand.....

Bad things happen, and governments can't protect you from all of it, especially at times when the government itself is the aggressor. But maybe it's impossible to make you understand, so never mind that now.

I wrote an earlier post (#134) wherein I demonstrated that gun homicides make up less than half of 1% of all deaths in the U.S. Maybe you didn't see it. Or maybe you did and ignored it so you could continuing slinging mud, asserting that Americans need to give up their guns, but won't because they've no shame.

Your knee-jerk argument reminds me of the idiots who, after a shark attack on a human, believe it's good policy to go out and massacre all the sharks near the scene.

After the lack of rules for car accidents they made law to regulate the speed, driving under influence, vision test, health test for elderies, proper permit which requires hours of mandatory training.

It is the same for drugs then, why not allow all the drugs and just ask the people to be responsible...oh yes, there are regulations because we are in a society, so we need to walk at the same speed as the slowest members...

If you think it is normal to have guns sized and designed for kids so they are attractives, if you think having a "gun channel" so you can order rifles from home, if you think it is normal to not have any regulation for sales from an owner to another...then let' see how 2016 will be in term of massacres and other deaths due to lack of regulation in USA.

It started well : already more than 400 "incidents" in 15 days

But that's just it, Sherlock, guns already are regulated.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_law_in_the_United_States

Hey Watson, Look at the regulations in details and you will see that what you see is not entirely right (or wrong if you prefer)

In Texas there is no regulation for sales between two individuals.... and so much more

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Texas

Elementary my Dear Watson

Edited January 14, 2016 by GeorgesAbitbol

[aTomsLife]

No, you would have to do something really bad for that to happen

Like killing loads of kids.... Oh, sorry, that's already been done

Er..... Yeah, you are correct, nobody will ever be able to take your guns. Impossible to shame you or make you understand.....

Bad things happen, and governments can't protect you from all of it, especially at times when the government itself is the aggressor. But maybe it's impossible to make you understand, so never mind that now.

I wrote an earlier post (#134) wherein I demonstrated that gun homicides make up less than half of 1% of all deaths in the U.S. Maybe you didn't see it. Or maybe you did and ignored it so you could continuing slinging mud, asserting that Americans need to give up their guns, but won't because they've no shame.

Your knee-jerk argument reminds me of the idiots who, after a shark attack on a human, believe it's good policy to go out and massacre all the sharks near the scene.

After the lack of rules for car accidents they made law to regulate the speed, driving under influence, vision test, health test for elderies, proper permit which requires hours of mandatory training.

It is the same for drugs then, why not allow all the drugs and just ask the people to be responsible...oh yes, there are regulations because we are in a society, so we need to walk at the same speed as the slowest members...

If you think it is normal to have guns sized and designed for kids so they are attractives, if you think having a "gun channel" so you can order rifles from home, if you think it is normal to not have any regulation for sales from an owner to another...then let' see how 2016 will be in term of massacres and other deaths due to lack of regulation in USA.

It started well : already more than 400 "incidents" in 15 days

But that's just it, Sherlock, guns already are regulated.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_law_in_the_United_States

"After the lack of rules for car accidents they made law to regulate the speed, driving under influence, vision test, health test for elderies, proper permit which requires hours of mandatory training."

And yet there are still road fatalities.

"It is the same for drugs then, why not allow all the drugs and just ask the people to be responsible..."

And yet there are still overdoses.

"...because we are in a society, so we need to walk at the same speed as the slowest members."

That's actually not how it works at all.

"It started well : already more than 400 "incidents" in 15 days"

I'd ask you to define "incidents," but what's the point. You're already ignoring that we're a country of 320 million people, and thus also ignoring how your figure works out per capita. Why don't you calculate it and see. That is, if you even have a calculator capable of displaying that many zeros.

[aTomsLife]

Bad things happen, and governments can't protect you from all of it, especially at times when the government itself is the aggressor. But maybe it's impossible to make you understand, so never mind that now.

I wrote an earlier post (#134) wherein I demonstrated that gun homicides make up less than half of 1% of all deaths in the U.S. Maybe you didn't see it. Or maybe you did and ignored it so you could continuing slinging mud, asserting that Americans need to give up their guns, but won't because they've no shame.

Your knee-jerk argument reminds me of the idiots who, after a shark attack on a human, believe it's good policy to go out and massacre all the sharks near the scene.

After the lack of rules for car accidents they made law to regulate the speed, driving under influence, vision test, health test for elderies, proper permit which requires hours of mandatory training.

It is the same for drugs then, why not allow all the drugs and just ask the people to be responsible...oh yes, there are regulations because we are in a society, so we need to walk at the same speed as the slowest members...

If you think it is normal to have guns sized and designed for kids so they are attractives, if you think having a "gun channel" so you can order rifles from home, if you think it is normal to not have any regulation for sales from an owner to another...then let' see how 2016 will be in term of massacres and other deaths due to lack of regulation in USA.

It started well : already more than 400 "incidents" in 15 days

But that's just it, Sherlock, guns already are regulated.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_law_in_the_United_States

Hey Watson, Look at the regulations in details and you will see that what you see is not entirely right (or wrong if you prefer)

In Texas there is no regulation for sales between two individuals.... and so much more

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Texas

Elementary my Dear Watson

Good news, Sherlock! For people uncomfortable living in Texas, my investigation shows they have 49 other choices.

[GeorgesAbitbol]

No, you would have to do something really bad for that to happen
Like killing loads of kids.... Oh, sorry, that's already been done

Er..... Yeah, you are correct, nobody will ever be able to take your guns. Impossible to shame you or make you understand.....

Bad things happen, and governments can't protect you from all of it, especially at times when the government itself is the aggressor. But maybe it's impossible to make you understand, so never mind that now.

I wrote an earlier post (#134) wherein I demonstrated that gun homicides make up less than half of 1% of all deaths in the U.S. Maybe you didn't see it. Or maybe you did and ignored it so you could continuing slinging mud, asserting that Americans need to give up their guns, but won't because they've no shame.

Your knee-jerk argument reminds me of the idiots who, after a shark attack on a human, believe it's good policy to go out and massacre all the sharks near the scene.

After the lack of rules for car accidents they made law to regulate the speed, driving under influence, vision test, health test for elderies, proper permit which requires hours of mandatory training.
It is the same for drugs then, why not allow all the drugs and just ask the people to be responsible...oh yes, there are regulations because we are in a society, so we need to walk at the same speed as the slowest members...
If you think it is normal to have guns sized and designed for kids so they are attractives, if you think having a "gun channel" so you can order rifles from home, if you think it is normal to not have any regulation for sales from an owner to another...then let' see how 2016 will be in term of massacres and other deaths due to lack of regulation in USA.
It started well : already more than 400 "incidents" in 15 days

But that's just it, Sherlock, guns already are regulated.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_law_in_the_United_States

"After the lack of rules for car accidents they made law to regulate the speed, driving under influence, vision test, health test for elderies, proper permit which requires hours of mandatory training."

And yet there are still road fatalities.

"It is the same for drugs then, why not allow all the drugs and just ask the people to be responsible..."

And yet there are still overdoses.

"...because we are in a society, so we need to walk at the same speed as the slowest members."

That's actually not how it works at all.

"It started well : already more than 400 "incidents" in 15 days"

I'd ask you to define "incidents," but what's the point. You're already ignoring that we're a country of 320 million people, and thus also ignoring how your figure works out per capita. Why don't you calculate it and see. That is, if you even have a calculator capable of displaying that many zeros.

I can already notice one zero here...
Go look at the ratio per capita on the relevant websites... you can even compare with other countries...

[GeorgesAbitbol]

Bad things happen, and governments can't protect you from all of it, especially at times when the government itself is the aggressor. But maybe it's impossible to make you understand, so never mind that now.

I wrote an earlier post (#134) wherein I demonstrated that gun homicides make up less than half of 1% of all deaths in the U.S. Maybe you didn't see it. Or maybe you did and ignored it so you could continuing slinging mud, asserting that Americans need to give up their guns, but won't because they've no shame.

Your knee-jerk argument reminds me of the idiots who, after a shark attack on a human, believe it's good policy to go out and massacre all the sharks near the scene.

After the lack of rules for car accidents they made law to regulate the speed, driving under influence, vision test, health test for elderies, proper permit which requires hours of mandatory training.
It is the same for drugs then, why not allow all the drugs and just ask the people to be responsible...oh yes, there are regulations because we are in a society, so we need to walk at the same speed as the slowest members...
If you think it is normal to have guns sized and designed for kids so they are attractives, if you think having a "gun channel" so you can order rifles from home, if you think it is normal to not have any regulation for sales from an owner to another...then let' see how 2016 will be in term of massacres and other deaths due to lack of regulation in USA.
It started well : already more than 400 "incidents" in 15 days

But that's just it, Sherlock, guns already are regulated.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_law_in_the_United_States

Hey Watson, Look at the regulations in details and you will see that what you see is not entirely right (or wrong if you prefer)
In Texas there is no regulation for sales between two individuals.... and so much more

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Texas

Elementary my Dear Watson

Good news, Sherlock! For people uncomfortable living in Texas, my investigation shows they have 49 other choices.

Nope Watson, as Texas is not the only state with such stupid lack of regulation...but tou just agreed that the regulation has flaws so it is better than nothing
Elementary my dear Watson

[aTomsLife]

I can already notice one zero here...

Go look at the ratio per capita on the relevant websites... you can even compare with other countries...

Yeah, here's another two - .0044% - as in not even one percent, as in the percentage of the population involved in gun homicides. That's the third time I'm writing that here. And it will be the third time it's ignored, no doubt.

As for comparing countries? Yeah, I'll get right on that. Right after I compare the statistics for pool drownings in Florida vs. those in Alaska.

[aTomsLife]

But that's just it, Sherlock, guns already are regulated.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_law_in_the_United_States

Hey Watson, Look at the regulations in details and you will see that what you see is not entirely right (or wrong if you prefer)

In Texas there is no regulation for sales between two individuals.... and so much more

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Texas

Elementary my Dear Watson

Good news, Sherlock! For people uncomfortable living in Texas, my investigation shows they have 49 other choices.

Nope Watson, as Texas is not the only state with such stupid lack of regulation...but tou just agreed that the regulation has flaws so it is better than nothing

Elementary my dear Watson

Where did I say, or even insinuate, there were flaws? I only argued that if people don't like the laws/regulations of one state, they are free to move to another.

Anyone who doesn't like Texas, for example, can move to Washington D.C., where owning hand guns is illegal. But--oh yeah, never mind--it's also the place with more gun violence than anywhere in the country...so much for more regulation fixing everything.

[MiKT]

He should have taken it upon himself to get proprely trained in the use of a firearm for home and personal defense. I bet now he wishes that he did. However, this is no reason to repeal the Second Amendment.

No the government should have ensured he had a very good reason and was trained and competent to be allowed to keep a firearm in his home properly secured. Quoting a 200 year old piece of paper does not cut it.

The whole point of the second ammendment was to have a trained and instantly available militia in the event of an attack on the US by an outside country, when the US was just a few millions of people in an agricultural society, not to allow free reign for every nut in a hugely different society.

Do you really think the framers of the US constitution wanted "Black" people or "Indians" or "Mexicans", I should say "Hispanics", to have guns? I don't think so, it was a slave owning society.

Stop burning witches, get it amended.

"The whole point of the second ammendment was to have a trained and instantly available militia in the event of an attack on the US by an outside country, when the US was just a few millions of people in an agricultural society, not to allow free reign for every nut in a hugely different society."

No, that is not the whole point, but just one of them. Another reason citizens are entitled to bear arms is to guard against government tyranny, despite your hyperbolic and nonsensical comparison to "burning witches."

Most gun violence is directly attributable to gang activity and takes place in poor, urban areas where the sale of guns has already been banned and it is near impossible to own one legally. So there goes your argument that the government "should have ensured...blah, blah, blah." In the U.S., the government can no more ensure any form of gun prohibition than they could alcohol prohibition. If you can't grasp that, then you're out of your element here and have no place in this discussion.

Of the USA's 2.5-million deaths per year, gun homicides are responsible for 11,000 of them, or .0044%--as in, not even half of 1%. Yet to listen to you, one would think he'd need to army-crawl through airport Customs as bullets whistled by over his head.

The OP is the result of an accident--a tragic one, yes, but an accident nonetheless. It's no excuse to trample on the inalienable rights of all Americans, nor will it prove one. Ever.

They are not inalienable rights kid and until you can grasp that you are out of your element and have no place in this discussion.

I will say it again, its just a piece of paper with no more ligitimacy than section 44, Hitlers final solutions or Kim Jongs declaration of a Hydrogen bomb.

Guard against government tryanny in 2016! and you wonder why I mention Witches?

Do you even know what country TV is in and how such a statement makes us laugh?

Get real boy. Get real, your just a spoilt kid crying in case sombody takes his toys away.

If you follow TV you will know that all the statistics have been done to death and None, I repeat None have ever justified the stupid lack of gun control in the US that reduces your president to tears.

Of course something can be done to improve the situation. Of course it can. The rest of the moderatly civilised world manages it, but the great US is helpless like a baby is it?

Stop bleeding hearting and take some positive steps to save some lives.

[aTomsLife]

He should have taken it upon himself to get proprely trained in the use of a firearm for home and personal defense. I bet now he wishes that he did. However, this is no reason to repeal the Second Amendment.

No the government should have ensured he had a very good reason and was trained and competent to be allowed to keep a firearm in his home properly secured. Quoting a 200 year old piece of paper does not cut it.

The whole point of the second ammendment was to have a trained and instantly available militia in the event of an attack on the US by an outside country, when the US was just a few millions of people in an agricultural society, not to allow free reign for every nut in a hugely different society.

Do you really think the framers of the US constitution wanted "Black" people or "Indians" or "Mexicans", I should say "Hispanics", to have guns? I don't think so, it was a slave owning society.

Stop burning witches, get it amended.

"The whole point of the second ammendment was to have a trained and instantly available militia in the event of an attack on the US by an outside country, when the US was just a few millions of people in an agricultural society, not to allow free reign for every nut in a hugely different society."

No, that is not the whole point, but just one of them. Another reason citizens are entitled to bear arms is to guard against government tyranny, despite your hyperbolic and nonsensical comparison to "burning witches."

Most gun violence is directly attributable to gang activity and takes place in poor, urban areas where the sale of guns has already been banned and it is near impossible to own one legally. So there goes your argument that the government "should have ensured...blah, blah, blah." In the U.S., the government can no more ensure any form of gun prohibition than they could alcohol prohibition. If you can't grasp that, then you're out of your element here and have no place in this discussion.

Of the USA's 2.5-million deaths per year, gun homicides are responsible for 11,000 of them, or .0044%--as in, not even half of 1%. Yet to listen to you, one would think he'd need to army-crawl through airport Customs as bullets whistled by over his head.

The OP is the result of an accident--a tragic one, yes, but an accident nonetheless. It's no excuse to trample on the inalienable rights of all Americans, nor will it prove one. Ever.

They are not inalienable rights kid and until you can grasp that you are out of your element and have no place in this discussion.

I will say it again, its just a piece of paper with no more ligitimacy than section 44, Hitlers final solutions or Kim Jongs declaration of a Hydrogen bomb.

Guard against government tryanny in 2016! and you wonder why I mention Witches?

Do you even know what country TV is in and how such a statement makes us laugh?

Get real boy. Get real, your just a spoilt kid crying in case sombody takes his toys away.

If you follow TV you will know that all the statistics have been done to death and None, I repeat None have ever justified the stupid lack of gun control in the US that reduces your president to tears.

Of course something can be done to improve the situation. Of course it can. The rest of the moderatly civilised world manages it, but the great US is helpless like a baby is it?

Stop bleeding hearting and take some positive steps to save some lives.

Good grief. You're a "special" kind of special, aren't you?

"Guard against government tryanny in 2016! and you wonder why I mention Witches?

Do you even know what country TV is in and how such a statement makes us laugh?"

So let me get this straight: you're saying that in 2016 there's no reason to guard against government tyranny, and then reference Thailand, a country which is in the grips of martial law...

"Get real boy. Get real, your just a spoilt kid crying in case sombody takes his toys away."

I've never owned a gun in my life. I just respect my fellow Americans' INALIENABLE rights.

If you follow TV you will know that all the statistics have been done to death and None, I repeat None have ever justified the stupid lack of gun control in the US that reduces your president to tears.

If no statistics ever justified the lack of gun control, why won't anyone rebut the stat I keep providing:

• In total, 2.5-million Americans die every year.
• 11,000 are gun homicides.
• That equals .0044%
• Less than one percent does not an epidemic make.

So go ahead: REBUT THAT ALREADY! and quit your ethnocentric, bleeding heart nonsense.

You're just another victim of yellow journalism, and your post is exhibit A for why logic and reason should always take precedence over emotion.