• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Toddler shoots and kills mother in Hayden Walmart

Jerry said:
I see no reason to assume the child couldn't turn the saftey off.

I feel like you're ok with a 2 year old handling a loaded firearm as long as the gun has a manual safety.

The presence or absence of a manual safety isn't the issue. The gun being left where the 2 year old could get to it is the issue. No training class can make sure you never leave your gun in a bag and step away.
Click to expand...

I'll allow it's possible if you'll acknowledge it would significantly less likely.

I can't really think of any good reason to give a firearm to a 2 year old at all, but unloaded with the action open and under close supervision would be the way I'd choose.

I agree that lady in this story was not handling her weapon properly.

My issue in this topic is the way that manual safeties are consistently decried as dangerous to the user, when my own experience is that it is the absence of manual safeties contribute to accidental shootings.
 
PoS said:
Look I understand where youre coming from and I respect your reasons for keeping a round chambered. Im just speaking strictly for myself in regards to why I dont chamber a round when I carry. To me if someone is within hand to hand range I probably wouldnt use a gun and I have studied and trained in martial arts so Im not gonna wrestle with him on the ground trying to pull my gun out, instead I'll just use hand to hand combatives till he is no longer a threat or until I am far enough away where I can pull out my gun, rack and fire.
Click to expand...

I completely agree. I am not in the 'draw down' bunch. That's also why purse carry is a reasonable option for me. I esp. agree on the close range assessment.

However my post also, especially mentioned not having the ability to rack the slide at all. Having done alot of IDPA training and studying the types of struggles and situations I might get into, something like that....including gun retention...made me decide to do so. And I dont have any concerns about it 'going off,' for some reason I've always been comfortable doing so.
 
WillyPete said:
I'll allow it's possible if you'll acknowledge it would significantly less likely.

I can't really think of any good reason to give a firearm to a 2 year old at all, but unloaded with the action open and under close supervision would be the way I'd choose.

I agree that lady in this story was not handling her weapon properly.

My issue in this topic is the way that manual safeties are consistently decried as dangerous to the user, when my own experience is that it is the absence of manual safeties contribute to accidental shootings.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't allow a 2 year old to possess a semi-automatic pistol under any circumstances. Even if unloaded and with the action open, the child could get their fingers pinched near the slide, or worse could accidentally allow the slide to slam forward, which depending on the gun could remove some skin or the child's entire hand.
 
braindrain said:
But you shooting the beretta more accuratly than a glock is not the same thing as the beretta being more accurate. Only that you shot the beretta better. I see this a lot with 1911 guys. They are used to the trigger on a 1911 and when they shoot a Glock the don't shoot it as well and right away claim the Glock is inaccurate when the truth is they just can't shoot it accuratly. I had the same problem when my unit switched from M9s to Glock 19s. It took me a fair amount of time before I could use the Glock as effectively. Now I am more accurate with a Glock and my split times and other pro timer work are quite a bit faster

No the L92 may be a more accurate but two guns inherent accuracy should not be judged by 1 shooter and one or two examples of each weapon.
Click to expand...

I dont know the technical term for it but some guns do point better, making picking up the target easier. I tried many guns at the range, all in the same 'category' before buying. And proper fit in your hand makes a difference too.

Hence, no Glocks for me. They did not fit my hand well. And they are ugly as sin while my M&P is a handsome machine :mrgreen:
 
Re: Mom Shot, Killed By 2-Year-Old Son at Walmart

Tim the plumber said:

OK, maybe the wild west as on John Wayne films.

You tell me why do you get so attached to tools of death? Why define yourself by such things?
Click to expand...

Again your perspective is skewed. They are not tools of death...they are tools of freedom. Historically and as a current reminder.
 
iguanaman said:
Now that you mention it, she could have got the message from you or someone like you. How would you feel if you were the one who told her she would be safer carrying a gun in her purse at Walmart or sold that mother the AR-15 that killed her and all those children in Sandy Hook? Would you be sorry?
Click to expand...
Nope, not at all sorry.
And prove an AR was used at Sandy Hoax.
 
Lursa said:
I dont know the technical term for it but some guns do point better, making picking up the target easier. I tried many guns at the range, all in the same 'category' before buying. And proper fit in your hand makes a difference too.

Hence, no Glocks for me. They did not fit my hand well. And they are ugly as sin while my M&P is a handsome machine :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

I understand what you are talking about. How a gun feels is a very personal thing and comes a lot from what you are used to. Someone who grew up shooting 1911s is probably not going to like the way a Glock feels atleast not right off the bat due to the difference in grip angle. Not sure if one angle is actually better than the other bit either way it is something that can easily be changed with training.

When we switched from M9s I was always presenting the Glock low and than had to raise the front to align the sites. After thousands of rounds and hours upon hours of training I can now close my eyes and go from position 1 to 4 and have the sights lined up enough to be in the black at 10 meters. Couldn't have done that when we first switched
 
CRUE CAB said:
One, that an AR was used at all and two. Did it really happen.
Its been debated since day one.
Click to expand...

Did it happen? Are you serious? They tore down the entire school after.

What, all those parents losing their kids were faking it? :roll:
 
Lursa said:
Did it happen? Are you serious? They tore down the entire school after.

What, all those parents losing their kids were faking it? :roll:
Click to expand...

Has every school or place of business been torn down following a shooting?
 
CRUE CAB said:
Has every school or place of business been torn down following a shooting?
Click to expand...

So no real answer eh? I"m sure they got all the evidence they needed in almost 2 yrs. Nothing on all the grieving parents?

That's ok...certainly speaks to credibility.
 
Lursa said:
So no real answer eh? I"m sure they got all the evidence they needed in almost 2 yrs. Nothing on all the grieving parents?

That's ok...certainly speaks to credibility.
Click to expand...

Google it, its been hashed on here many times.
 
CRUE CAB said:
One, that an AR was used at all and two. Did it really happen.
Its been debated since day one.
Click to expand...

It has only been debated by deranged conspiracy theorists who ignore all the facts.

of course, this is off topic here. But wow.
 
CRUE CAB said:
Google it, its been hashed on here many times.
Click to expand...

So perhaps you dont really want to own that claim now? Is that an assumption on my part? If so, sorry. Please let me know if you buy into it....you are backing off now.
 
Lursa said:
So perhaps you dont really want to own that claim now? Is that an assumption on my part? If so, sorry. Please let me know if you buy into it....you are backing off now.
Click to expand...

Backed off how? Do I need to have the same conversation that's been had on here a hundred times? I think there are million questions about Sandy Hook and don't believe the official media report at all.
 
CRUE CAB said:
Backed off how? Do I need to have the same conversation that's been had on here a hundred times? I think there are million questions about Sandy Hook and don't believe the official media report at all.
Click to expand...

You implied it didnt even happen.

And I havent been in any threads on its veracity.
 
Lursa said:
You implied it didnt even happen.

And I havent been in any threads on its veracity.
Click to expand...

Google, its your friend. Something happened. Don't know if it were the mass killing they want you to believe.
Try, Sandy Hook actors. Or Crisis actors, or just how did the "families" get unfettered access to the halls of Congress yet, gave hardly any interviews?
Notice how it was all about mental health, that day. Then all of a sudden it was all about gun control. With pffft, Joe Biden leading the charge. LOL
 
Notice they didn't tear down VA Tech, or Columbine afterwards.
 
CRUE CAB said:
Gimme a "fact" that is indisputable.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I don't debate with people who think Sandy Hook was a hoax. I also don't debate with people who think the earth is flat. Just not worth it. Especially not on a thread about a totally different topic.
 
CRUE CAB said:
Notice they didn't tear down VA Tech, or Columbine afterwards.
Click to expand...

And your point is? Mine was that they could have gathered all the evidence they needed in the nearly 2 yrs it took.

We just had a mass shooting here and they are tearing down the cafeteria where it happened. Was that faked too?

Times change. And young kids are more easily traumatized...if it would no longer be a viable learning environment, it was not useful. I dont really agree with the decision but can understand the logic. And that's the key word here....logic.

I'm not saying the govt and the locals in CT didnt use that shooting to further their own agendas but no way in Hell was it faked.

And it's STILL about mental health and gun control. Always has been, always will be unfortunately.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom