• 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 wounds both parents with 1 shot from handgun

Why is putting your child at an entirely unnecessary additional risk irrelevant ? It all boils down to the fact that guns make intentional or accidental killings far too easy and your stats bear this out.
 
Last edited:
Why is putting your child at an entirely unnecessary additional risk irrelevant ? It all boils down to the fact that guns make intentional or accidental killings far too easy and your stats bear this out.
So you don't care about children being safe as long as your political agenda is served. Got it.
 
So you don't care about children being safe as long as your political agenda is served. Got it.

I have no political agenda I merely asked you why putting your children at an additional and unnecessary risk was acceptable to you ?
 
Well, I have a gun, but I keep it stored and unloaded and ammunition separate, um, someone call me a lefty now.

Guns are weapons -- period. Someone is going to get hurt. Happens each and every day. The love of guns has consequences.
 
I have no political agenda I merely asked you why putting your children at an additional and unnecessary risk was acceptable to you ?
I speak agaist carrying a gun in a purse so your question doesn't apply to me. I support vigerous prosecution of people who let prohibited persons have access to their gun, I support a safe storage law and I argue that your gun should either be on your person or unloaded and locked.

You people want to use stories like this as excuse to ban guns. To just ban things is a purly anti-American mode of thought. We don't do that here. We don't ban computers because of internet bullying or child porn. We don't ban alcohol or driving just because of drunk drivers. We prosecute people who abuse freedoms, not ban freedoms.
 
Last edited:
Guns are weapons -- period. Someone is going to get hurt. Happens each and every day. The love of guns has consequences.
Yes, guns are weapons....what's your point? I carry a small caliber hangun for the sole and express purpose of killing a human being should the need arise. I'm not seeing your point.

Love of anything has consiquenses. Look at falconry and tell me no one's ever been bitten by their raptor.
 
Last edited:
I speak agaist carrying a gun in a purse so your question doesn't apply to me. I support vigerous prosecution of people who let prohibited persons have access to their gun, I support a safe storage law and I argue that your gun should either be on your person or unloaded and locked.

You people want to use stories like this as excuse to ban guns. To just ban things is a purly anti-American mode of thought. We don't do that here. We don't ban computers because of internet bullying or child porn. We don't ban alcohol or driving just because of drunk drivers. We prosecute people who abuse freedoms, not ban freedoms.

Freedom to intentionally kill far more easily is a freedom few would choose to indulge. The human condition is too unpredictable for that to be warranted and your own horrendous statistics make that point far better than I could
 
Freedom to intentionally kill far more easily is a freedom few would choose to indulge.
Indeed many "gun owners" don't own a firearm for self defence, and even fewer choose to regulerly carry a handgun for the same. It remains a right, however. The solution to negligence or abuse is prosecution, not a ban.

The human condition is too unpredictable for that to be warranted and your own horrendous statistics make that point far better than I could
That's exactly why I carry a gun.
 
An nuclear warhead is an inanimate object too so shouild we just let everyone have one of those ?

Are saying a gun is as dangerous as a nuclear weapon? Weren't you in a military or something?
 
Guns are weapons -- period. Someone is going to get hurt. Happens each and every day. The love of guns has consequences.

So then we should ban anything that can hurt?
 
I have no political agenda



I merely asked you why putting your children at an additional and unnecessary risk was acceptable to you ?

The only children at risk are the ones being raised by morons. My kids won't be at risk. I wasn't at risk. Seriously. Do you not understand how guns work?
 
Are saying a gun is as dangerous as a nuclear weapon? Weren't you in a military or something?

Just making the point that all weapons are inanimate objects minus humans. Its the inherent lethality when combined that matters, which is why I earlier posed the question 'who would need or want an AR15 or AK47 in their lives ? I used to use the 7.62mm Belgian FN SLR in my service and never once did it cross my mind that having such a weapon anywhere near my family would be a good idea. Having seen what it could do quite the opposite in fact
 
The only children at risk are the ones being raised by morons. My kids won't be at risk. I wasn't at risk. Seriously. Do you not understand how guns work?

I don't doubt that 99% of parents of children killed or injured by firearms kept in the home have said the very same thing
 
Just making the point that all weapons are inanimate objects minus humans. Its the inherent lethality when combined that matters, which is why I earlier posed the question '

You realize without proper care a Nuke could cause all kinds of hazards if left alone? Guns? No. Take the bullets out and it is a hunk of metal. Nukes are radioactive.

who would need or want an AR15 or AK47 in their lives ?

Nowhere in the constitution does it say "'need." We have an amendment there to keep people from trampling our rights.

Additionally an ar15 is an excellent hunting platform. Accurate. Easy to modify. Easy to change caliber. The .223 is good for small game, pests, and predators (even the 2 legged kind).

Oh. And did you know that "assault weapons" are made up less for murders than CLUBS. Hm?

I used to use the 7.62mm Belgian FN SLR in my service and never once did it cross my mind that having such a weapon anywhere near my family would be a good idea. Having seen what it could do quite the opposite in fact

Which explains your fear.

Btw I hope you don't own a pool. Man you might as well give your family a bomb and the detonator.
 
I don't doubt that 99% of parents of children killed or injured by firearms kept in the home have said the very same thing

And I don't doubt they are morons. I'm not. Let's see what the rules are.

1) Lock up your gun.
2) lock up your ammo somewhere else
3) explain to your kid that it is not a toy.
4) explain it again.
5) satisfy the kids curiosity so they don't want to play with it.
6) teach them to never point it at someone.

These 6 rules are so extraordinarily simple. That is probably why considerably less than .025% of gun owners have dealt with a child being injured or killed. Do you know about %? Statistics?

Oh and I will mention that I used the lowball estimate of gun owners (40 mil) and the highest kid death by firearms...which includes murders and suicides. Maybe 10K.

.025% isn't exactly a lot. More kids are way more likely to die from motor vehicles or pools.
 
Btw I hope you don't own a pool. Man you might as well give your family a bomb and the detonator.

A pool is not a weapon there is a huge difference between an accident and an intent to kill. Casual access to lethal firearms greatly facilitate such intent
 
And I don't doubt they are morons.

Well I don't doubt that many must be frankly given the facts

A study of firearm storage patterns in U.S. homes found that “of the homes with children and firearms, 55% were reported to have 1 or more firearms in an unlocked place,” and 43% reported keeping guns without a trigger lock in an unlocked place A 2005 study on adult firearm storage practices in U.S. homes found that over 1.69 million children and youth under age 18 are living in homes with loaded and unlocked firearms In addition, 73% of children under age 10 living in homes with guns reported knowing the location of their parents’ firearms

Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence
 
Last edited:
Guns are weapons -- period. Someone is going to get hurt. Happens each and every day. The love of guns has consequences.

Cars are weapons too, ask any CONservative or gun hugger or NRA leg humper.
 
And the point you chose to miss is that all weapons are inanimate objects. Its the potential lethality of the weapon once in human hands that matters

Exactly the same with cars. And the accidental (lethal) misuse of cars is much much higher.
 
Exactly the same with cars. And the accidental (lethal) misuse of cars is much much higher.

Its nothing like 'exactly the same' How many people deliberately murder using cars ! :roll:
 
Doh. WAT? you had a point?

Nice try then. See ya!


Can you explain any major distinctions when it comes to safety?

Leave the keys to YOUR CAR in the ignition parked on a street sometime, and let us all know how it works out.
or, better yet,

leave your loaded gun in your purse lying around with children in a room, turn away, go do something in another room,

let us know if that works out too.


So it's about the user, correct? Neither acts on it's own. And both are dangerous if accessible to others (in purse, on street with keys in).

You didnt make your point. I think you made mine.
 
Well I don't doubt that many must be frankly given the facts

A study of firearm storage patterns in U.S. homes found that “of the homes with children and firearms, 55% were reported to have 1 or more firearms in an unlocked place,” and 43% reported keeping guns without a trigger lock in an unlocked place A 2005 study on adult firearm storage practices in U.S. homes found that over 1.69 million children and youth under age 18 are living in homes with loaded and unlocked firearms In addition, 73% of children under age 10 living in homes with guns reported knowing the location of their parents’ firearms

Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence
You ever live In a truly rural area? Kids are working on the farm and as ranch hands and often do have access to a firearm. No big deal. My father was given a shotgun at age 9 and allowed to blow crows out of their garden with it... Not that uncommon at all if you ever set foot a hundred miles from nowhere
 
Its nothing like 'exactly the same' How many people deliberately murder using cars ! :roll:

We covered this...if I have to repeat everything I already wrote, I'll just let you go back and read again. We did discuss your lack of math skills...I hope that doenst extend to reading comprehension as well.

Here, one more time: It doesnt matter. The people are just as dead or injured. The body count is much higher, for a highly regulated piece of machinery, for which the state already qualifies drivers as physically capable of using and requires training.

And it is much more dangerous *for all daily practical purposes* than any gun. It also demonstrates that all the regulation and training *does not make it safe.* And yet, we accept the body count. But people focus on 'scary' guns which are...**in real life** less of a danger to them on a daily basis. :doh
 
Well I don't doubt that many must be frankly given the facts

A study of firearm storage patterns in U.S. homes found that “of the homes with children and firearms, 55% were reported to have 1 or more firearms in an unlocked place,” and 43% reported keeping guns without a trigger lock in an unlocked place A 2005 study on adult firearm storage practices in U.S. homes found that over 1.69 million children and youth under age 18 are living in homes with loaded and unlocked firearms In addition, 73% of children under age 10 living in homes with guns reported knowing the location of their parents’ firearms

Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence

Such statistics are quite misleading and virtually meaningless.

For example, if I were part of that study, I would be part of the 55% with a firearm in an unlocked place...I would be part of the 43% without a trigger lock on my rifle...my kids would be one of those 1.69 million, at least some years ago...they are adults now, who lived in a home with unlocked, though unloaded, firearms...and my kids would be among those 73% who knew where the rifle was located. All they had to do was look at it hanging on the wall.

However, none of that, in the slightest, means that my kids were ever in any kind of danger. For one thing, they knew almost as much as I did about how to deal with that firearm. They had both fired the rifle. They both knew how to load it. They also knew when was the right time to load and fire it.

So...given the huge number of households WITH firearms and the very small number of accidents INVOLVING firearms, I'd say your statistics are pretty much worthless except for the shock value they create from the ignorant.
 
And the point you chose to miss is that all weapons are inanimate objects. Its the potential lethality of the weapon once in human hands that matters

We already called you out on the silliness of using nukes as an example. If you'd like to continue down that path I'd say you are a glutton for punishment.

Here's how useless your silly analogy was: all inanimate objects can be weapons. Nearly anything can be used to kill or harm or defend. Shall we include "everything" in our discussion of a toddler and a handgun? :doh
 
Back
Top Bottom