Children Sacrificed to Pay for Easy Access to Guns

[Anonymous]

June 26, 2016 - A 14-year-old girl who was shot in the face Saturday night is expected to survive, police said. ... Sgt. Paul Parizek, the public information officer for the Des Moines Police Department, said it appears the shooting was accidental, as several juveniles were mishandling the gun. ... There were other children in the house at the time of the shooting, including an older woman, who were all escorted away from the house by paramedics during the crime scene investigation.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/crime-and-courts/2016/06/26/police-14-year-old-accidentally-shot-face-expected-survive/86409834/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Based on statistics of how many guns are there vs number of gun related accidents, it's pretty clear that gun owners in general are keeping things very safe as is. Why do I need to register my gun with the state police? To facilitate inspection and seizure? No, I will not register my guns with the agency that may come and take it away from me because the government thinks it knows better about what's good for its citizens than the citizens themselves. As for annual inspections - if the government had the resources to do home-to-home inspections, their time and resources would be better spent making sure everyone's fire alarms and carbon monoxide detectors were working correctly.

No, your steps are not necessary to keep guns safe. What I *can* get behind are mandatory background checks and gun safety classes.

This is where you start to sound like a paranoid criminal rather than responsible gun owner. No one's taking away your legal guns; the Second Amendment continues to protect your right to own the guns. It's just registering them with the state government, like we all register our cars and our boats. Registering them makes lots of sense because police officers responding to an address with guns will know what they're walking into and can keep everyone safe. Also, if someone owns a gun but does something later makes them disallowed (like gets convicted for a felony), then the government should know who they so the gun can be transferred. Why would you possibly be against that? And the safety inspection is only for those homes that have both guns and kids. If you want to avoid an annual safety inspection, then just store your guns away from the kids.

When gun people refuse to even report their guns to the state government, they start to sound like people who have something dirty to hide. If you're a lawful and safe gun owner, you should encourage reporting guns to the government, because it helps keep guns away from the bad people.

Why aren't you for safety?

I don't see why you think that is paranoid. I only have to point you to our neighbor to the north, Canada, to show you exactly how it will occur. First they require registration, then they make a gun illegal based on some arbitrary standard, usually a knee jerk reaction to how a gun looks, next the owners receive a notification to surrender their now illegal guns. I am not paranoid if what I am fearful of is actually happening in a country that otherwise is very similar to our own. This is not just in my head, not a what-if scenario, it's actually what's happening.

Cars and boats are different from guns. One of the reasons we have a second amendment is a balance of power between the individual and the government. This is why registration of guns by the government is a conflict of interest. There is no such conflict of interest with respect to cars and boats.

With regards to police officers, I like the default position that our police officers assume all suspects are armed. Your idea of having the officer lookup in a database somewhere to see if a perp has a gun will only lead to cases of false sense of security with tragic results.

I have nothing against taking guns away from someone who is not allowed to own one. However you cannot trample on the rights of everyone else just to make this happen. Imagine if the government wanted to install a GPS tracker on everyone, including you, so that when they need to find a criminal, they'll know exactly where he is. You have nothing to hide, right? Why would you possibly be against that?

When people refuse to even report their whereabouts to the state government, they start to sound like people who have something dirty to hide. If you are a lawful person, you should encourage GPS tracking of individuals by the government, because it helps with catching the bad people.

Why aren't you for catching bad people?

[Anonymous]

I don't know if I agree with the PP about the yearly inspections and such, BUT I have never understood the weirdness re: gun registration. Other than "it might lead to confiscation" (which, yes, is completely paranoid), what exactly is the reason one might oppose gun registration? I think it goes hand in hand with the background checks. I think just like cars, we need to know who owns which gun. Yes, even if you are gifting it to a family member. The private sales are the ones that worry me most.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Based on statistics of how many guns are there vs number of gun related accidents, it's pretty clear that gun owners in general are keeping things very safe as is. Why do I need to register my gun with the state police? To facilitate inspection and seizure? No, I will not register my guns with the agency that may come and take it away from me because the government thinks it knows better about what's good for its citizens than the citizens themselves. As for annual inspections - if the government had the resources to do home-to-home inspections, their time and resources would be better spent making sure everyone's fire alarms and carbon monoxide detectors were working correctly.

No, your steps are not necessary to keep guns safe. What I *can* get behind are mandatory background checks and gun safety classes.

This is where you start to sound like a paranoid criminal rather than responsible gun owner. No one's taking away your legal guns; the Second Amendment continues to protect your right to own the guns. It's just registering them with the state government, like we all register our cars and our boats. Registering them makes lots of sense because police officers responding to an address with guns will know what they're walking into and can keep everyone safe. Also, if someone owns a gun but does something later makes them disallowed (like gets convicted for a felony), then the government should know who they so the gun can be transferred. Why would you possibly be against that? And the safety inspection is only for those homes that have both guns and kids. If you want to avoid an annual safety inspection, then just store your guns away from the kids.

When gun people refuse to even report their guns to the state government, they start to sound like people who have something dirty to hide. If you're a lawful and safe gun owner, you should encourage reporting guns to the government, because it helps keep guns away from the bad people.

Why aren't you for safety?

I don't see why you think that is paranoid. I only have to point you to our neighbor to the north, Canada, to show you exactly how it will occur. First they require registration, then they make a gun illegal based on some arbitrary standard, usually a knee jerk reaction to how a gun looks, next the owners receive a notification to surrender their now illegal guns. I am not paranoid if what I am fearful of is actually happening in a country that otherwise is very similar to our own. This is not just in my head, not a what-if scenario, it's actually what's happening.

Cars and boats are different from guns. One of the reasons we have a second amendment is a balance of power between the individual and the government. This is why registration of guns by the government is a conflict of interest. There is no such conflict of interest with respect to cars and boats.

With regards to police officers, I like the default position that our police officers assume all suspects are armed. Your idea of having the officer lookup in a database somewhere to see if a perp has a gun will only lead to cases of false sense of security with tragic results.

I have nothing against taking guns away from someone who is not allowed to own one. However you cannot trample on the rights of everyone else just to make this happen. Imagine if the government wanted to install a GPS tracker on everyone, including you, so that when they need to find a criminal, they'll know exactly where he is. You have nothing to hide, right? Why would you possibly be against that?

When people refuse to even report their whereabouts to the state government, they start to sound like people who have something dirty to hide. If you are a lawful person, you should encourage GPS tracking of individuals by the government, because it helps with catching the bad people.

Why aren't you for catching bad people?

Thanks for your response. I understand better the deep refusal of even self-proclaimed "safe" gun owners to engage in basic safety procedures. I also understand your objection is based on valuing your paranoia about some future regulation (which would violate the Second Amendment) over the lives of children and other people around you. Sorry, but your paranoia does not justify the safety risk everyone else faces.

I hope everyone reading this passes along the message to their representatives that state registration should be required. It's already required in DC. Should be expanded to Maryland and Virginia. Please also encourage annual inspections for guns in homes with children.

[Anonymous]

Philadelphia trauma hospital coordinator - and gun owner - is offering FREE gun locks for anyone who has a gun and a child.

What's the reaction from the "gun rights" crowd? To crap all over him and refuse to comply. From one commenter: "My state requires that a trigger lock be sold with every firearm. I have a big bag full of them - To me they are useless."

If the gun owners won't control themselves, then the rest of us need to control them. Contact your state representative and push for gun safety regulations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Philadelphia trauma hospital coordinator - and gun owner - is offering FREE gun locks for anyone who has a gun and a child.

What's the reaction from the "gun rights" crowd? To crap all over him and refuse to comply. From one commenter: "My state requires that a trigger lock be sold with every firearm. I have a big bag full of them - To me they are useless."

If the gun owners won't control themselves, then the rest of us need to control them. Contact your state representative and push for gun safety regulations.

Link -- http://www.phillymag.com/news/2016/06/24/should-i-buy-a-gun-lock/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't know if I agree with the PP about the yearly inspections and such, BUT I have never understood the weirdness re: gun registration. Other than "it might lead to confiscation" (which, yes, is completely paranoid), what exactly is the reason one might oppose gun registration? I think it goes hand in hand with the background checks. I think just like cars, we need to know who owns which gun. Yes, even if you are gifting it to a family member. The private sales are the ones that worry me most.

Both of these points were just explained in the post immediately above yours. Take a read.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I don't see why you think that is paranoid. I only have to point you to our neighbor to the north, Canada, to show you exactly how it will occur. First they require registration, then they make a gun illegal based on some arbitrary standard, usually a knee jerk reaction to how a gun looks, next the owners receive a notification to surrender their now illegal guns. I am not paranoid if what I am fearful of is actually happening in a country that otherwise is very similar to our own. This is not just in my head, not a what-if scenario, it's actually what's happening.

Cars and boats are different from guns. One of the reasons we have a second amendment is a balance of power between the individual and the government. This is why registration of guns by the government is a conflict of interest. There is no such conflict of interest with respect to cars and boats.

With regards to police officers, I like the default position that our police officers assume all suspects are armed. Your idea of having the officer lookup in a database somewhere to see if a perp has a gun will only lead to cases of false sense of security with tragic results.

I have nothing against taking guns away from someone who is not allowed to own one. However you cannot trample on the rights of everyone else just to make this happen. Imagine if the government wanted to install a GPS tracker on everyone, including you, so that when they need to find a criminal, they'll know exactly where he is. You have nothing to hide, right? Why would you possibly be against that?

When people refuse to even report their whereabouts to the state government, they start to sound like people who have something dirty to hide. If you are a lawful person, you should encourage GPS tracking of individuals by the government, because it helps with catching the bad people.

Why aren't you for catching bad people?

Thanks for your response. I understand better the deep refusal of even self-proclaimed "safe" gun owners to engage in basic safety procedures. I also understand your objection is based on valuing your paranoia about some future regulation (which would violate the Second Amendment) over the lives of children and other people around you. Sorry, but your paranoia does not justify the safety risk everyone else faces.

I hope everyone reading this passes along the message to their representatives that state registration should be required. It's already required in DC. Should be expanded to Maryland and Virginia. Please also encourage annual inspections for guns in homes with children.

Basic safety procedures? How does registration lead to safety? What does improve safety are gun safety classes and awareness campaigns.

How is confiscation of an illegal firearm a violation of the second amendment? Illegal firearms can be and are confiscated on a regular basis in the US, all of which is perfectly fine per the second amendment. Here's just one example:

https://www.atf.gov/news/pr/more-50-guns-seized-and-four-men-charged-illegal-firearms-trafficking-operation

The second Amendment leaves quite a bit of room for the states to regulate firearms, this is why there is why there are such pronounced differences between what is and isn't an illegal firearm depending on which side of the Potomac river you are on.

Once again, it's not paranoia if it has happened in the past, is happening now, and will happen in the future if you allow it.

Your opinion is based off of such shallow and incorrect understanding of the relevant facts and laws that your subsequent call to gun registration is cringe worthy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know if I agree with the PP about the yearly inspections and such, BUT I have never understood the weirdness re: gun registration. Other than "it might lead to confiscation" (which, yes, is completely paranoid), what exactly is the reason one might oppose gun registration? I think it goes hand in hand with the background checks. I think just like cars, we need to know who owns which gun. Yes, even if you are gifting it to a family member. The private sales are the ones that worry me most.

Both of these points were just explained in the post immediately above yours. Take a read.

But even assuming your claims about Canada are true (and I suspect they aren't), Canada doesn't have a Second Amendment! Since the US has a clear Second Amendment, your guns have all these extra rights ... or at least that's what you keep telling us! So because we have the Second Amendment, you don't need to fear "confiscation" by the government, and you can submit to reasonable safety steps.

Gun owners aren't really interested in safety. Or if they are interested in safety, it's a much lower priority than things like keeping the guns secret and unidentified. IMHO, you may have a right to own a gun, but you don't have a right to keep it secret, or a right to store it in an unsafe way.

If you want to prevent strict regulation of all guns, then you need to make sure they're maintained safely. You've failed that test so far. Each dead child is proof.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know if I agree with the PP about the yearly inspections and such, BUT I have never understood the weirdness re: gun registration. Other than "it might lead to confiscation" (which, yes, is completely paranoid), what exactly is the reason one might oppose gun registration? I think it goes hand in hand with the background checks. I think just like cars, we need to know who owns which gun. Yes, even if you are gifting it to a family member. The private sales are the ones that worry me most.

Both of these points were just explained in the post immediately above yours. Take a read.

posted while I was typing.

Still not sure I buy those arguments. But I also don't buy that the second amendment allows for unregulated gun ownership.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:June 26, 2016 - A 14-year-old girl who was shot in the face Saturday night is expected to survive, police said. ... Sgt. Paul Parizek, the public information officer for the Des Moines Police Department, said it appears the shooting was accidental, as several juveniles were mishandling the gun. ... There were other children in the house at the time of the shooting, including an older woman, who were all escorted away from the house by paramedics during the crime scene investigation.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/crime-and-courts/2016/06/26/police-14-year-old-accidentally-shot-face-expected-survive/86409834/

they have no idea how they got a gun? HUH?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stop using children to push an obnoxious, freedom-killing political agenda.

You figure out how to stop killing children then. If you want to own guns, you need to figure out how to keep them safe. Clean up your own mess.

That's an easy one, concentrate on parental skills. Mandatory annual parenting skills training and testing. Random drug testing of all parents. Random home inspections of all parents. Three strikes and you lose legal rights to your kids and they go to foster care.

Sounds good. You call Noah's mom, or Jett's dad, and tell them what terrible parents they are. Have the NRA help you make those calls, and maybe some of the Republicans in Congress too.

Do you suggest telling them it's not their fault they bought guns? You are not making any sense whatsoever.

I'm pretty sure the parents of the dead children know full well they messed up, and I've got no problem with criminal charges. But all the criminal charges in the world won't bring back the children killed by your guns.

If we want to try to slow this line of child gun victims, we need to act before they get shot, not after. You gun people have a responsibility to develop and implement safety rules and laws that stop the senseless deaths. If you want your gun hobby to be permitted, you need to keep it safe. If you can't keep it safe, then the rest of us have no choice but to regulate you.

How's this for a start? ... Every gun must be registered with the state police. When you register your gun, you have to indicate whether any children will be in the primary place where you keep the gun. Once per year, someone from the state will visit your property to check that the gun is stored safely and that any children living there are aware of proper safety precautions. IMHO, that's a good start. Do you disagree?

If you want to keep your gun, you need to put up with the steps necessary to keep it safe.

Excuse the heck out of me, but how is an idiot parent on the other side of the country my fault again? Please elaborate, because I honestly fail to comprehend what my guns have to do with it.

[Anonymous]

... your subsequent call to gun registration is cringe worthy.

Here's what makes me cringe ...

April 30, 2016 -- PAULDING COUNTY, GA. - A 3-year-old boy who accidentally shot and killed himself after finding a loaded weapon inside his Paulding County home will be laid to rest Saturday afternoon. Holston Cole will be buried at 2 p.m. at West Ridge Church in Dallas. Investigators say the toddler was at the house with his family when the boy’s parents heard the shot around 7 a.m. on Tuesday. They found him with a single shot to the chest.




That's him on the far right. He's the one who's being sacrificed to pay for your paranoia and your gun hobby.

[Anonymous]

Seriously, charge the parents - they are the reason their children are dead. And they should pay for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know if I agree with the PP about the yearly inspections and such, BUT I have never understood the weirdness re: gun registration. Other than "it might lead to confiscation" (which, yes, is completely paranoid), what exactly is the reason one might oppose gun registration? I think it goes hand in hand with the background checks. I think just like cars, we need to know who owns which gun. Yes, even if you are gifting it to a family member. The private sales are the ones that worry me most.

Both of these points were just explained in the post immediately above yours. Take a read.

But even assuming your claims about Canada are true (and I suspect they aren't), Canada doesn't have a Second Amendment! Since the US has a clear Second Amendment, your guns have all these extra rights ... or at least that's what you keep telling us! So because we have the Second Amendment, you don't need to fear "confiscation" by the government, and you can submit to reasonable safety steps.

Gun owners aren't really interested in safety. Or if they are interested in safety, it's a much lower priority than things like keeping the guns secret and unidentified. IMHO, you may have a right to own a gun, but you don't have a right to keep it secret, or a right to store it in an unsafe way.

If you want to prevent strict regulation of all guns, then you need to make sure they're maintained safely. You've failed that test so far. Each dead child is proof.

My claims regarding Canada's confiscation of registered buns are true:

http://www.winnipegsun.com/2014/03/05/rmps-arbitrary-gun-ban-is-frightening

Why is it that people who share opinions like yours are always the ones that are not well informed of the relevant facts, and require spoon feeding of information. You'd think that since you are so passionate about gun safety, you would spend some time researching.

And yet again, the second amendment allows for regulation of guns, for making certain gun types illegal, and for confiscation of illegal weapons, as it occurs every day. The second amendment offers broad protection to the individual for the right to bear arms, but it does not prevent the government from declaring a specific gun format or function as illegal and proceed to confiscate the now-illegal weapons.

I do care very much about gun safety. I also care about protecting my right to bear arms and not to give in to government action that would compromise that right.

Your all-or-nothing logic when it comes to gun safety is irrational. You could make the same argument for knives, cars, or anything else that has the potential of hurting someone by accidental misuse or malfunction. We don't live in a world of zero risks.