Toddlers Killed More Americans Than Terrorists Did

[miffy]

In my state you have to go to the police station to get a gun permit. Tight gun laws don't mean that nobody has guns. If you want to own a gun for sport shooting, hunting or farm use you can. I know a few people with gun licences, all of them responsible people.

Gun laws weren't always this tight though. Boys used to be given rifles & air guns as toys.

[DistantStar]

If I read the Second Amendment literally I read it as only people in a militia should have guns. The closest thing we have to that in this day and age is the National Guard. Obviously it was written in a far, far different US than we have now. I don't see how that doesn't mean we can't have a lot of regulation on who and how gets to have them, given that. Though I don't see a way to regulate sheer blind idiocy, unfortunately. I am all for LOTS of regulation. I'm something of a minority as I live in Idaho for crying out loud. Note: I don't want to take away everybody's guns. Really. I just want to feel safer knowing that people who have them know what the fuck they are doing with them - lots and lots of classes, at the least. This argument isn't going to go away, the whole issue is ingrained in the Constitution.

I repeat - no problem here with responsible educated gun ownership. But I can't comprehend the "I've got GUNS 'cuz I'm Murican!" crowd. Guns are not status symbols. They are tools with specific uses. They are NOT FUCKING TOYS!

[Savoring Samsara]

The 270,000,000 figure has got to be total number of guns, not total number of people who own guns. For most of the people I know, the number of guns they own is either zero or lots. Not a lot of middle ground for some reason.

I grew up in an area of the United States where deer hunting is a long-standing tradition (to the point that "gun deer opener" is an acceptable excuse to get out of high school for a week), as well as a necessity. Because humans have so greatly reduced the numbers of the whitetail deer's natural predators, like wolves and coyotes, the deer overrun their entire habitat if they're not kept in check by hunting. Then you get things like deer eating farmers' fields bare, or running out into the middle of the highways and causing serious, often fatal, accidents. So unfortunately, because of the changes we have wrought in our environment, there is now a clear need for gun ownership to manage wildlife in many areas of this country.

There were no hunters in my family, and I've never fired a gun. But when I was a kid, going to "hunter's safety" class and then being entrusted with your first rifle was a rite of passage and a mark of maturity, only afforded to people who had shown themselves to be ready for it. Most kids from hunting families did that little ritual at about 10 or 11. I am in support of this sort of thing continuing. However, I find it much harder to justify widespread civilian handgun ownership by people who have not received proper training and have no intention of using that gun on anything other than humans - and military style weaponry is right out, for any purpose. If you need 20 bullets to take down a deer, you just suck as a hunter and shouldn't be out there anyway.

[ILoveJellybeans]

Those poor babies. So many young lives ruined :(

There is no reason for a 6 year old to have a gun. Who wants to give their child something with the power to kill. You wouldnt let them play with knives, or poison, or power tools, or let them drive a car, as they can kill someone or themselves with them.

[fundyfunland]

I think what annoys me most is the fact that by saying this makes it inflammatory. No shit sherlock, guns are always going to be controversial and opinions will differ. To liken exchange of views to the 'peanut butter wars' (which actually if you ever read it, is quite interesting) is almost like saying ZOMG don't talk about that or get the popcorn ready. So what. If people do not want to get involved in discussions stay out of them. Really annoys me people bring up those topics as if they should not be discussed because people have already discussed them and ZOMG it's drama. The forum is fluid and people move on. They should be able to discuss whatever they want and those who want to swerve it, can.

Cripes! This was meant to be sarcasm! That being said, we have had gun ownership discussions on here before, and they seemed to have brought out a lot of trolls, and I'm talking about the fundies who lurk on here only to jump into these types of topics, and say seriously inflammatory things.

[debrand]

The only gun I knew about at age 5 was a water gun and you were only allowed to squirt water with them. I didn't shoot a BB Gun until I was like 12 or older and only shot a rifle once. Why would anyone want their child to have that? That's like giving a car to a 5yo. But my child's mature enough to operate adult machinery!!!!! is still bullshit if they are 5. They can't even see over the wheel and have zero knowledge of what a car does. Driving a car is for adults and it's not a toy and it's not a game. It's a 2-ton or more piece of metal machinery and requires serious training. It can easily kill if not careful. A gun is no different. It's for adults to use and it's not a game and it's absolutely not a toy. It's a machine that is used to kill things, mostly animals, and it can and has killed people. It is NOT a toy! If it's not a toy, children should be nowhere near it. The end.

I think that a car is a pretty good analogy. We don't let parents decide if their kids are mature enough to drive a car on the highway, why do we let them decide parents decide if a six year old can own a gun

[laura oz]

In the US, there are many communities that still hunt for food. In addition, if you live on a farm or a ranch, animals need to be defended or put down at times, it's just part of the cycle. Not everyone lives in an urban or suburban environment.

I absolutely believe in background checks, and even stronger ones than what are currently in place. However, they are still not going to keep guns out of the hands of idiots. It's like going for your driving test. Are you really going to drive over the speeding limit or show up drunk on the day of your road test? So you have to concentrate on keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and the medically unstable. Those tools willing to give their 4 year old guns? They will LIE to get a gun, and then let their 4 year old touch it because they are so mature (God, that one just about caused me to slap myself). Put a law in place that says if your underaged child kills someone because you did not secure your gun, you go down for MURDER.

I liked your post, but we need a love clicker. I wish there was a smilie for standing up and applauding. If I have to read one more story about a child who is shot by another child, or a child who shoots an adult, I'm going to scream. There has got to be a change somewhere to stiffen penalties, and maybe then people will lock away their goddamned guns so children can't get to them.

[Minerva]

Obviously the solution to this is more good guys with guns. Those toddlers wouldn't shoot their siblings if they knew everyone in the room was armed. /sarcasm

[fundyfunland]

Obviously the solution to this is more good guys with guns. Those toddlers wouldn't shoot their siblings if they knew everyone in the room was armed. /sarcasm

Exactly! We need to arm the teachers to make sure they take out the students who have guns in school too! Of course, they'll need shooting practice, bc it's not that easy to get a good shot. :?

[Artemis]

What is the age of criminal responsibility in the USA? Surely it would make sense to ensure that no-one who cannot be held responsible for their actions has a gun?

[Peppercorn]

DD (turns 5 in July) has a 22 pistol. She has seen a watermelon shot with a large calibre gun and KNOWS what it can do. Everyone says it is too young, how mature is your kid? Ivy is smart, and can grasp things on a higher level than most 4 year olds (or DH's friends) I think that we coddle our children too much. If our great grand parents were able to raise sheep and elp around the farm (and farming implements can be dangerous) why can't they learn things now?

I gave a bottle of poison to my 4 yr old. We play-acted a poisoning with her babydoll, so she's seen the vomiting and bleeding and dying in agony and KNOWS what it can do. Dear little Ivy is so mature and smart that I trust her not to feed the poison to her siblings or pets (or DH's friends!). I refuse to coddle my children. I was raised in a house filled with poisonous substances and I didn't die, so why can't Ivy learn now?

Gotta run. CPS is knocking!

[RachelB]

What is the age of criminal responsibility in the USA? Surely it would make sense to ensure that no-one who cannot be held responsible for their actions has a gun?

My brother and I, who are now very close, didn't get along at all when we were young. In fact, we were pretty awful to each other. We were raised in part by someone who had a temper and didn't manage it well, and neither one of us had yet developed the kind of impulse control or emotional management that we have now (nor the political commitment to pacifism we have now).

I don't think anyone ought to have access to a gun prior to developing some serious impulse control and emotional management.

[Mommy22alyns]

I looked at your link. :?

and

and

Oh my holy what the FUCK. This cannot be for real. Please tell me that is a spoof site! :o

[miffy]

Sun Turnip needs to research military training. Its not a prerequisite to already know how to fire a gun. Also being a good shot comes naturally to some people. My grandmother was by all accounts an excellent markswoman in her day, she never had any real target practice or anything. She just has highly developed fine motor skills, even at 93.

[DistantStar]

Part of being drafted is that they TEACH YOU TO USE YOUR WEAPONS, DUMBASS!

[NoneandDoneinCali]

That watermelon argument is beyond the pale - I'm an adult woman in my early thirties who was raised in a gun free home (we had archery lessons as kids, but to be honest I've never even held a gun). Yet even *I* am tempted to let fire at a watermelon, just because the explosion sounds awesome. I seriously doubt any child who has seen a piece of fruit explode in a spectacular fashion is going to learn a valuable lesson on gun safety.

Are these weirdos cool with giving fireworks to their three year olds too? Tiny fireworks made for tiny hands? Tiny little matches? Because, hey! They watched Tom and Jerry, and poor Tom got all sooty when bombs exploded in his hands. That'll teach them, right?

[Jinger Jar]

Last week a four-year-old boy in Arizona shot and killed his father. They were visiting a friend's house and the boy found the gun out in the open, picked it up, and fired it at his dad.

http://www.clarionledger.com/viewart/20 ... ots-father

I've recounted this in other threads about kids and guns, but I grew up with a boy who accidentally shot and killed his father in a hunting accident. That incident radically changed his personality and his friendships. He was stigmatized at school; he went from being Just One of Us to That Kid Who Killed His Dad. He ended up dropping out of school, which looking back was probably one of the least of his problems. I think Dale would have *a lot* to say about the blaise attitude these people have about their kids' access to and relationships with guns.

[2xx1xy1JD]

Oh my holy what the FUCK. This cannot be for real. Please tell me that is a spoof site! :o

Sadly, it's real. (I was one of the posters against guns) This wasn't the only thread in which gun stuff came up, and some of the posters were the same.

[Arete]

Better still. Ban guns.

Homicide by gun in Scotland 2012 zero.

Homicide by gun in US 2012 9146.

The US has the same rate of homicide by gun per 100,000 population as the West Bank and Gaza.

Hunting and sport are not banned in Scotland there are 280,000 civilian gun owners for this purpose, so not like those who survive by hunting or require for legitimate (farming) means, suffer. Bearing in mind there is a total ban on handguns. The civilian gun ownership in the US is 270,000,000.

This and other useful facts brought to you from the person that cannot believe Kinder eggs are banned in the US as a hazard, but guns are just fine for kids.

I lost the thread of the arguement here, OKTBT. We both seem to be saying that gun ownership is acceptable for hunting and farming, but you make the statement to ban guns (?) You may think my statement that all the liscencing in the world is not going to make a dent with idiots who allow 5 year olds to have guns to be harsh or flippant, but it is the truth. The only things they understand is death and punishment.

[OkToBeTakei]

I lost the thread of the arguement here, OKTBT. We both seem to be saying that gun ownership is acceptable for hunting and farming, but you make the statement to ban guns (?) You may think my statement that all the liscencing in the world is not going to make a dent with idiots who allow 5 year olds to have guns to be harsh or flippant, but it is the truth. The only things they understand is death and punishment.

I think it is the differences maybe in country. Here even when handguns were legal it was not legal to carry one or say common to have one laying about your car or house. There was police checks, rules in place etc. But it didn't work. So they banned all guns except rifles and shotguns.

Getting a licence

Getting a licence is a long and complicated business. Every stage of the process is designed to reduce the likelihood of a gun falling into the wrong hands. It starts with an application form which asks specific questions about why the individual wants a gun, telling them they need to show "good reason".

The criteria are tougher for firearms than shotguns because weapons that fire bullets must only be used for specific purposes in specific places. These would include deer stalking or sports shooting on an approved range.

In contrast, shotguns tend to be used in more general rural circumstances, such as by farmers who are protecting livestock from foxes - and police recognise that landowners need guns for pest control.

Independent referees provide confidential character statements in which they are expected to answer in detail about the applicant's mental state, home life and attitude towards guns.

Officers check the Police National Computer for a criminal record and they speak to the applicant's GP for evidence of alcoholism, drug abuse or signs of personality disorder. Social services can also be asked for reasons to turn down an applicant.

Finally, senior officers must be sure that prospective shotgun holders have a secure location for the weapon, typically a dedicated gun cabinet. Each certificate is valid for five years.

So basically for sport or if you are a farmer.

Further proposed moves. Why the UK is where it is now.

What's become clear to police in recent years is that there have been cases, particularly suicides, where doctors have not known that a patient held a firearm.

The answer sound simple: make sure the police tell them. But for years the NHS has remained unconvinced that it could hold such potentially sensitive information securely.

That may now be changing. Police chiefs believe they can devise a system with the NHS to dynamically share information about ownership and mental state.

But the system may require Parliament to legislate to allow private data to be carefully shared between the two public bodies, for this single, particular purpose.

The reality is that gun laws in the UK have developed piecemeal since the end of WWI in response to threats as they are perceived to emerge.

The two most important laws came in the wake of two national tragedies.

Michael Ryan's massacre of 16 people in Hungerford in 1987 led to the banning of all modern semi-automatic rifles, the range of guns that can be fired rapidly without needing to be reloaded.

Nine years later, Thomas Hamilton killed 16 schoolchildren and their teacher when he opened fire at a school in Dunblane. Parliament banned all handguns and there is now a mandatory five-year jail sentence for possession.

The bolded is why I fear the US will find it hard or near impossible to implement. It is now just common to hear of a school shooting or massacre, then backlash of ban, tighten laws, to pry my gun out of my cold dead hands. Until that chasm is bridged I see no change happening. Until lives are put above the right to bear arms :(

[meep]

In towns where gun laws are super strict, there is some of the worst gun crimes (injuries and murders). So there has to be something done in addition to this. I don't know what but just banning guns or making even stricter laws is just not doing the job in some places.

(Only banning guns will just widen the underground gun market. Many Americans would rather die with a rifle in their hands than ever give up their guns/stop buying guns.)

[debrand]

In towns where gun laws are super strict, there is some of the worst gun crimes (injuries and murders). So there has to be something done in addition to this. I don't know what but just banning guns or making even stricter laws is just not doing the job in some places.

(Only banning guns will just widen the underground gun market. Many Americans would rather die with a rifle in their hands than ever give up their guns/stop buying guns.)

I'm not being argumentative but could you give me some links. I keep hearing this from family and friends who would be offended if I asked for proof. Please understand, I don't doubt you, but it is easier to ask for links from you all then my family

Part of the problem in the United States is that this is a large country and if one area doesn't allow guns, it wouldn't be difficult to buy them from a state that allows guns. As long as the gun laws aren't uniform in the US, it will be hard to enforce them

I would make the bullets of certain guns illegal to make or buy. Sure, own a machine gun, you can't use it without ammo.

[OkToBeTakei]

In towns where gun laws are super strict, there is some of the worst gun crimes (injuries and murders). So there has to be something done in addition to this. I don't know what but just banning guns or making even stricter laws is just not doing the job in some places.

(Only banning guns will just widen the underground gun market. Many Americans would rather die with a rifle in their hands than ever give up their guns/stop buying guns.)

See that is just not true. What it is, is a tired argument.

[France Nolan]

It's not entirely a tired argument. I live in New York. We have some of the strictest gun laws in the country. We do have lower rate of gun related crimes than most other major metropolitan areas. The problem with gun crimes in New York, and other places with strict legislation, is that very often the guns recovered at crime scenes ARE illegally bought and sold. They are traced to dealers in other states, and are trafficked into New York. The states where the guns were originally purchased have much looser laws. In NYC itself it's almost impossible to get a gun through legal channels; there's a lucrative black market in selling firearms. Mayors Against Illegal Guns has a fascinating analysis of this: http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org ... report.pdf

I'm in favor of background checks. I'm in favor of strict legislation controlling the sale of firearms. At the same time I do recognize the potential for black market guns. Again, we have extremely strict legislation regarding them but they are still illegally trafficked into our state and kill/injure our citizens. There has to be collective, interstate action.

And I'm not holding my breath. In regards to banning guns entirely, that would require an amendment to the Constitution. Again, I don't necessarily disagree with that position. I don't think amending the Second Amendment is a bad idea. Unfortunately the House of Representatives is STILL holding votes to repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). These are "symbolic" votes as the Senate has upheld the legislation. To say I have no faith in Congress is an understatement.

Then comes the sad reality of money in politics. This isn't unique to the gun lobby, and thank you Citizens United for allowing corporations and political lobby groups to hemorrhage into elections. The NRA has much, much more money than the anti-gun groups do. The NRA can afford to pay politicians large sums of money (aka donate to their campaigns) so when the time comes to vote on gun control legislation, those politicians can't bite the hand that feeds them.

Even sadder is the vested interest of the European firearm industry has in the United States. Because guns are legal and widely available here, we're a great market for them. We buy their products and line their pockets. Awesome. In turn the firms send money to the NRA who then sends the money to politicians and the wheel continues to turn.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/201 ... s-laws-nra

It's a much, much bigger clusterfuck than we realize.

[OkToBeTakei]

I hear you. Living on an island does have benefits. Even without state borders the US has South America tagged on. With the biggest gun stats in the world.

Banning does not eradicate a problem. Never has. It is a tired argument because it is used to prevent even a dialogue about change never mind implementing it. The only way to prove it is to ban then look at the stats. It was far less of an issue in the UK than was predicted, by far. The problems the US have and would have I realise would be far different in every way.

Good old Europe making a euro. Been doing that to you guys since the civil war :hand: Money, money, money.