I don't think this will be in "The Armed Citizen"

[Curval]

Originally posted by SOB
That is a horrible tragedy, and while I believe the blame is most certainly with the mother, I think locking her up would make a bad situation worse.  Unless there are some serious issues going on in that family beside this.  She made a mistake, and the hell she's going through now is punishment enough.

She made a mistake.  Mistakes happen.

Had she been living here she would not have been able to make that mistake.

Keep your guns, but don't be surprised or horrified by these events.  Expect only more of them.

[beet1e]

Wow! I'm in complete agreement with SOB!

A tragic occurrence indeed. Would a four year old have been able to kill the two year old if the only tools at his disposal had been a) a butter knife; b) the family car; c) a baseball bat; d) a hammer - ????

My money says it's highly unlikely. And that's because those items could be used to kill someone, but are not specifically designed for the purpose. Of course, some wise arse (or even Mr. Toad) will be quick to point out that more people die on the roads than in accidental shootings. If true, this would only be because motor vehicles are used by a much greater proportion of the population, and on a much more frequent basis than guns.

Way back when I was new to these AH BBS gun debates, I asked Tomato if she had ever felt tempted to buy a gun for protection, as guns were quite legal in the country where she comes from. And believe me, the case for having one there would have been be much stronger than in the relatively peaceful USA.

She said NO. Why not? Because of the risk of just such a tragedy as the one described above. It's impossible to keep one's eye on the children all the time, and she was afraid that one of her boys might get inside her bag or glove compartment or wherever the gun was kept, and accidentally fire a shot while she was driving - or some similar scenario.

It's all about having a sense of proportion. In the white areas where Tomato lived, it was relatively safe. The risk of being attacked/robbed/burgled was much smaller than the risk of a gun tragedy like the one here.

[Leslie]

Tomato made you sell your guns Beet1e?



Les

[Jackal1]

I heard he traded em for a bowl of grits.

[Curval]

?

Where did he say he ever had any guns?

[lazs2]

curval is correct and on the right track... if you live in a country or place with no gun freedoms at all then this particular accident would not happen... In a country of allmost 300,000,000 you would save the lives (maybe) of less than 70 children a year (those 4 year or younger who have such accidents).

If my, and all the other law abiding gun owners giving up their guns would have saved this child then I am sorry...  I am not gonna do it.  He is gonna have to die.

The same could be said for swimming pools or pet dogs or bicycles... giving em all up would save a lot of childrens lives but it isn't worth it.

As a gun owner I still feel that I can mourn some child or innocent who was killed by a gun tho... Just as a pool owner has the right to rail against people who allow their children to drown.

The perps of this weekends little gun carnage were... insane... or violent criminals or.... carless and unlucky gun owners with very hyper kids.

I see nothing here that would make me want to give up my rights.

They are more than acceptable in order for me and my countryment to have the right to own and protect ourselves with firearms.

lazs

[lazs2]

and beet... I talked to tomato about this.  I believe that she didn't have any training with firearms and was worried about them for some of the wrong reasons.   We joked that no kid was gonna puill it out of her shoulder holster for instance and if he did... he was probly old enough to use it.

also... the risk vs benifiet... the risk is that 60-80 children a year will die due to gun accidents in a country of allmost 300,000,000 vs 1.5-3 million crimes a year stopped due to someone using a gun.   the cost is certainly worth it.    How many children are killed on skateboards or bikes and how many are saved by same?

lazs

[Bodhi]

gotta love the liberal blame game...

1. the gun
2. NRA
3.  George Bush
4. the gun
5. NRA
6. Dick Cheney
7. conservative pigs
8. NRA
9. Donald Rumsfeld
10. mother

[Jackal1]

I have to agree that the lives saved each year far outweighs the risks. The one lone CC holder in the recent Tyler, Tx episode on the steps of the courthouse is a good example. This guy gave his life by keeping this guys attention and pelting him with rounds while people got to safety. The perp had came prepared to take out as many people as possible and wore body armor. If this one lone man had not been there with his concealed weapon there would have been many, many more die that day.
The above instance is an accident, pure and simple. A tragic one yes, but an accident all the same.
Kids die on a regualr basis in the bathtub. One slip, one moment of non attendance and it can turn tragic in a heart beat.

[Seagoon]

Guys,

You are ignoring the real danger to kids out there - 5 gallon buckets. I am alarmed that anyone can just walk into a Wal-Mart and buy a 5 gallon bucket, without a background check additionally via a dangerous oversight, persons on the terrorist watchlist can still buy as many 5-gallon "assault style" buckets as they can fit in a rented Ryder truck. Plus don't even get me started on the "Floor and Tile show" loophole! Read the following information and call your legislators today!

FROM: http://www.kidsource.com/kidsource/content2/infant_drowning.html

Large buckets and young children can be a deadly combination. The U. S . Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) estimates that annually about 50 infants and toddlers drown in buckets containing liquid used for mopping floors and other household chores. Most of the drowning victims have been between 8 and 14 months old.

Between 1984 and 1992, over 200 young children were reported to have drowned in buckets and 21 others were hospitalized. More than 90 percent of the reported incidents where bucket size was noted involved the 5-gallon size.

Of all buckets, the 5-gallon size presents the greatest hazard to young children because of its tall, straight sides and weight, even with just a small amount of liquid. At 14-inches high, a 5-gallon bucket is about half the height of a young child. That, combined with the stability, makes it nearly impossible for top-heavy infants and toddlers to free themselves when they fall into the bucket head first. A child can drown in a small amount of water.

Children are naturally curious and easily attracted to water. At the crawling and pulling up stages while learning to walk, they can quickly get into trouble. CPSC believes that bucket drownings happen when children are left momentarily unattended, crawl to a bucket, pull themselves up, and lean forward to reach for an object or play in the water.

Parents and caregivers who are using 5-gallon buckets for household chores are warned not to leave a bucket containing even a small amount of liquid unattended where a young child may gain access to it. A child can drown in the time it takes to answer a telephone.

WARNING

Children can fall into bucket and drown.

Keep children away from bucket with even a small amount of liquid.

[Curval]

Once again...I'm not suggesting that you give up your guns in the US.

All I am doing is saying that you should stop telling me how much of a victim I potentially am because I am at the mercy of a crimminal with a gun in a country where guns are banned or that gun ownership is a right I should be insisting I have in my country.

I noticed in the recent church shooting that no-one was able to stop that lunatic from killing 7 people.  So much for arguments that use "protection" as the main selling point.  Same applies to the Atlanta courtroom killings.  No-one was able to stop this guy even outside the courthouse...and he even killed another federal agent while on the run.  

Goodness...what is tomorrow's newpaper going to bring?

But..argue silly points about buckets and swimming pools.  Fact is you aren't ever going to be able to tell me that myself, my wife or my children would be safer or better off in any way through gun ownership.  It is just b/s.

[Airhead]

Seagoon, we've discussed the dangers of five gallon buckets before and all of us generally agreed the Government should require holes to be drilled in the bottom of the buckets to prevent child drownings.

We CAN make this a better and safer world through legislation.

[beet1e]

Originally posted by lazs2
curval is correct and on the right track... if you live in a country or place with no gun freedoms at all then this particular accident would not happen...

The trouble with Britain today - and Bermuda - is that our freedom to be shot has been taken away. I demand my right to be shot!

As for your other rhetoric, Lazs, I'm not so sure. You're fond of telling me that the cities with the most guns have the lowest gun crime, and yet in my town there are no guns to speak of, and yet there is no gun crime whatsoever, and hasn't been in the 22 years I've lived here.

Furthermore, you talk about all the lives being saved by guns. If more guns made a safer society, the US would be the safest country on the planet. It isn't, and even though guns are outlawed here, the annual tally of gun homicides is well under 1% of the US figure.

I wonder how easy it would be for a four year old child to drown a two year old child in a five gallon bucket.

[Curval]

Seagoon,

How would you comfort the mother if she was part of your congregation?  Would you tell her your bucket story?

[Airhead]

I can't read Beet's post, but I'll bet I know what he said-

"Guns are bad! No guns is good! America has guns, so America is bad! England has no guns, so we are good!  Bleat bleat, I'm a sheep!"

(OK, so I put that last part in myself but I'll bet the rest is damn close to what he said.)