Post by greggerypeccary on May 3rd, 2013 at 2:32pm
polite_gandalf wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 8:24am:
|
Depends what's on, I suppose.
This would bore me to death in 30 seconds flat:
| Australian Politics Forum | |
|
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl
General Discussion >> Thinking Globally >> US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1367487307 Message started by freediver on May 2nd, 2013 at 7:35pm |
|
|
Title: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by freediver on May 2nd, 2013 at 7:35pm
Not an accident in my opinion. This is negligence. WTF are the yanks doing making guns specifically for children?
http://www.news.com.au/world-news/us-boy-5-accidentally-shoots-and-kills-sister-2/story-fndir2ev-1226633510209 A FIVE-year-old boy who was playing with a .22 caliber rifle he'd been given as a gift accidentally shot and killed his two-year-old sister in their Kentucky home, officials said. The shooting happened on Tuesday in rural Cumberland county and the little girl was rushed to a hospital where she was pronounced dead, the state police said. Cumberland County Coroner Gary White identified the girl as Caroline Starks and said the children's mother was cleaning the house at the time and had stepped outside onto the porch. "She said no more than three minutes had went by and she actually heard the rifle go off. She ran back in and found the little girl," Mr White told WKYT news. The rifle had been given to the boy last year and was kept in the corner of a room. The parents didn't realise a shell had been left in it. "It's a Crickett," he told the Lexington Herald-Leader. "It's a little rifle for a kid...The little boy's used to shooting the little gun." An autopsy was set to be conducted overnight, but Mr White said he expects the shooting will be ruled accidental. "Just one of those crazy accidents," Mr White said. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Amadd on May 2nd, 2013 at 8:59pm
It sounds pretty crazy to be giving a 5yr old a firearm of any sort, let alone a rifle. Even an air rifle or a slingshot can kill.
The reaction seems to be as bemusing as the blatant negligence. Hopefully in future years, when the kid is all screwed up, he will at least be able to blame his dumbass parents. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by gandalf on May 2nd, 2013 at 9:03pm
Yes its f*cked up FD. And yet when I look back at my childhood growing up on a farm, guns were lying around everywhere: a rifle was permanently sitting in our ute in case any rabbits happened to pass by - and also as a handy euthenaser for terminally ill stock. The shotgun (semi automatic) was regularly leaning up against the stove in the kitchen when sparrows and starlings were around. All the other rifles (some high powered) were literally just lying around the house or garage like pieces of furniture. I was completely desensitised to guns - and they were never kept locked away safe from small children. Crazy innit? Though its true I never heard of rifles custom made for 5 year olds.
But anyway, that all changed pretty much overnight when the Port Arthur gun laws were pushed through. The semi automatic shotty went, and metal cabinets with secure locks were bought for the remaining guns we were allowed to keep. I have to say, it was a wake up call for me personally. It changed our culture, and no longer did I think of guns as these normal things that were quite in place just lying around the house and vehicles. The laws were one of the best things for this country IMO - in more ways than one. I now look back on those pre-regulation days with a overwhelming sense of "what the f*ck were we thinking??" |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by life_goes_on on May 2nd, 2013 at 9:15pm
I used to own quite a few firearms - from pistols to ex military weapons.
They were fun for a while to own, but I can't come up with a single reason as to why I should have had any right, or for that matter, need, to actually own them. I certainly don't feel any less "safe" since I got rid of them. But our distant cousins, the Americans, seem to think that gun ownership is as important as breathing. Yanks: they might talk the same language, but they're as foreign as Russians. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 3rd, 2013 at 2:31am
Freedriver, explain to me how this is anything other than a case of parental neglect. It's the gun's fault the people who were supposed to be supervising the five year old got lax and failed in their duty as parents.
|
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by JC Denton on May 3rd, 2013 at 3:18am Quote:
can't you say this about basically everything? what reason does somebody need to own a t.v? if anything televisions and electrial appliances are indirectly and in accumulation quite dangerous as well, due to their energy requirements. people want to own guns because they think they're fun. i don't like the NRA style arguments about "tyranny" and whatnot particularly either, but i think "i want to own a gun because they're fun" is as good as any. question is whether or not that want measures up against the potential utilitarian drawbacks of mass gun ownership; that's something i don't have an answer for. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by gandalf on May 3rd, 2013 at 8:19am Chard wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 2:31am:
Oh Chard, please tell me you are not serious?? They are manufacturing and marketing little guns specifically aimed (no pun intended) at small children - and you don't see any inherent problems in that?? FFS, I even saw one coloured a pretty pink for little girls. These killing machines are basically being marketed as toys. What sort of a f*cked up society is this?? |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by gandalf on May 3rd, 2013 at 8:24am JC Denton wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 3:18am:
Oh I just love this line of argument. Like you can just pick up a TV, point it towards someone and kill them instantly. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Peter Freedman on May 3rd, 2013 at 9:26am
Next will come the argument that cars and knives should be banned.
Guns may be "fun" but they are lethal weapons designed to kill. For parents to give one to a small boy is crazy and shows how mad America has become. Now that boy has to live with having killed his sister. I trust the parents will be prosecuted, but probably not. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by gandalf on May 3rd, 2013 at 10:22am Peter Freedman wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 9:26am:
they will have to live with the "oh how stupid were we to put a gun in the hands of our 5 year old boy" bad taste in their mouth for the rest of their lives. That is punishment enough. Cricketts, on the other hand, will continue making millions irresponsibly selling guns as toys with a free conscience. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by FriYAY on May 3rd, 2013 at 11:47am
Tragic.
I feel for the little boy, so, so sad. I’d like to kick the parents arses till their noses bleed. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chimp_Logic on May 3rd, 2013 at 12:36pm Chard wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 2:31am:
...of course, that's all it is. Guns should be compulsory in every home, school yard and class room from the age of 2 onwards Nuclear devices should also be available to whoever can afford them and maintain them properly in their back yards Its in the constitution - you are allowed to defend yourself Personally I prefer an Apache helicopter with a full range of computer guided missiles and machine gun artillery. Parents need to be close by though we need someone to blame in case something goes wrong |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by dsmithy70 on May 3rd, 2013 at 12:40pm
Seems they are busy modifying now
Quote:
http://www.crickett.com/ |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 3rd, 2013 at 2:32pm polite_gandalf wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 8:24am:
Depends what's on, I suppose. This would bore me to death in 30 seconds flat: |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 3rd, 2013 at 4:55pm polite_gandalf wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 8:19am:
And it still comes down to adults purchasing them, purchasing the ammunition, and then properly suprrvising their child. Quote:
No, they aren't being marketed as toys and you're either the most clueless bastard ever or the most dishonest asshole in the thread for saying such. By all means, show me where Cricket, on any of their products, says "this is a toy, adult supervision is not required", otherwise you're full of poo. Given that this is the second thread I've called you on your bullshit I'm begining to suspect that you know f*ck all about the topic of firearms. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 3rd, 2013 at 5:00pm Dsmithy70 wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 12:40pm:
Yes, theyvvre modifying the site, because having to shut the site down because the server is getting an order of magnitude more hits then it can handle totally doesn't make sense... |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 3rd, 2013 at 5:03pm polite_gandalf wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 8:19am:
F*cked up indeed. I'm still hoping that these pink kids' guns are a joke and that I've been sucked in by an internet prank. No parent in their right mind would buy these things. I shudder to think what sort of people are responsible for manufacturing and marketing them. http://theobamacrat.com/2013/05/02/cricket-my-first-rifle/ |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by life_goes_on on May 3rd, 2013 at 5:08pm
Go, Barbie, go!!!!!
|
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 3rd, 2013 at 5:12pm Chard wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 5:00pm:
Yeah, that must be it. ::) " ... if Cricket Gun Company were so proud of their product and their marketing to children strategy …why remove the Cricket Gun website…..like a pedophile in the night?" http://theobamacrat.com/2013/05/02/cricket-my-first-rifle/ |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 3rd, 2013 at 5:13pm
Ok, appearently I'm dealing with idiots, so I'll make this simple for you.
1. Who bought the five year old a rifle? It was the patents. 2. Who bought the ammunition for that rifle? The parents. 3. Who loaded the rifle, put it in the hands of a five year old, and then failed to proprrly supervise that five year old? The parents. The responsibility for this begins and ends with the kids patents. Saying its the gun's fault is everybit as smacking retarded as blaming cars because someone decided to drink and drive. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by life_goes_on on May 3rd, 2013 at 5:15pm
You don't need to spell it out... I get it... guns don't kill children - parents do....
....via their children armed with guns. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 3rd, 2013 at 5:18pm Chard wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 5:13pm:
The responsibility for this begins with the manufacturer, and ends with the parents. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 3rd, 2013 at 5:19pm Life_goes_on wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 5:15pm:
Fixed to better reflect reality. Actually, I really do have spell it out for you stupid f*cks. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by life_goes_on on May 3rd, 2013 at 5:23pm Chard wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 5:19pm:
I stand corrected. You're completely and utterly correct. Then let's just suppose that it's probably for the best that there's restrictions on completely dumb-arse parents being able to obtain firearms for what are probably their damn dumb-arse children. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 3rd, 2013 at 5:26pm greggerypeccary wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 5:18pm:
Bullshit. Did Cricket put that gun in that kids hands? No, the kids parents did. Is it Cricket's responsibility to supervise that child? No, that's a job for the parents that bought the rifle. Did Cricket load that rifle? No, the parents did. Did Cricket put a loaded firearm into the hands of a five year kid and then walk away from that kid while it was still loaded with the safety off? No, the kids parents did that. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 3rd, 2013 at 5:29pm Life_goes_on wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 5:23pm:
Oh, you're so close. You've almost hit the nail instead of marring the wood. What we need is comprehensive manditory firearms training given by certified instructors as part pf the process for purchasing firearms. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by life_goes_on on May 3rd, 2013 at 5:40pm Chard wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 5:29pm:
A question: Why do you think that your (i.e. in yank land) firearm related homicide rate is roughly 12-15 times ours after corrections are made for differences in population? Don't say gangs, 'cause allowances for them will only bring it down to about 10 times. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 3rd, 2013 at 5:44pm Chard wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 5:26pm:
No. It's Cricket's responsibility to not manufacture guns for children. The responsibility for this most certainly begins with the manufacturer, and ends with the parents. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by dsmithy70 on May 3rd, 2013 at 6:13pm Chard wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 5:29pm:
Are you serious???? Apparently its communism or some such crap if you have to wait a few days to check if your not a smacking psychopath. What would the NRA make of such a suggestion. My god man what are you, a bloody LIBERAL? |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 3rd, 2013 at 6:47pm Life_goes_on wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 5:40pm:
There are plenty of reasons and not a damn one is because of firearms. To say otherwise is evety bit as daft as saying the reason why Russia has a higher rate of alcoholism is due to plentiful vodka. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 3rd, 2013 at 6:51pm greggerypeccary wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 5:44pm:
Only they aren't marketing guns to kids, they're manufacuring and marketing towards parents that want to teach their children how to shoot or otherwise engage them in shooting sports. It's still the responsibility of the parent to provide and supervise a safe environment for doing that. It's not the manufacturer's fault the child's parents we operating a product in an unsafe mannet. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 3rd, 2013 at 7:04pm Dsmithy70 wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 6:13pm:
By all means, pleease quotewhere I've ever saud mental health screenings would be communist. Better yer, explain your logic in how you got that from me stating the need for more thorough standards for being able to purchade a firearm, yiu slackwit. Quote:
They'd be against. It's one of the many gripes I have with the NRA. Oh, wait, you're being a dishonest shitbird again and you're trying to insinuate that because I'm a member of the NRA that I must agree with all pocies and actions that organization has. Quote:
Your mother's a liberal. I'm a conservative. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Peter Freedman on May 3rd, 2013 at 7:13pm
Whenever Chard becomes abusive, which is most of the time, you know it is out of desperation.
The parents are the end of the chain. Before them come the stores that sell the guns, the advertising agencies that market them and the manufacturers. Throw in the politicians that allow these weapons to be sold, the nut jobs of the NRA and all Americans who believe a constitution written over 200 years ago envisaged five-year-olds bearing arms. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by gandalf on May 3rd, 2013 at 7:19pm greggerypeccary wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 5:44pm:
That would be commonsense greggery - something that doesn't seem to exist on Planet America. Only on Planet America can someone apparently claim with a straight face that a company that markets kiiling machines specifically for children - obviously knowing that stupid parents who take no responsibility for their children's safety will contribute a large proportion of their profits - have completely clean hands when one of their customers inevitably dies. And by the way Chard, no one is denying the parents aren't responsible too. You seem to be running a strawman there. There are obviously multiple responsible parties here - which includes the parents and company that sold them. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by dsmithy70 on May 3rd, 2013 at 7:22pm Chard wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 7:04pm:
Your mother's a liberal. I'm a conservative. [/quote] It was tongue in cheek, sarcasm if you will. For you to even suggest such a reasonable position means you actually think rather than just regurgitating the numpties rhetoric. Posting on an Aussie site means you need to realise sometimes when we take the piss we are actually agreeing/complimenting |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 3rd, 2013 at 7:59pm Peter Freedman wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 7:13pm:
No, it's exasperation at having to deal with terminally rishonest assholes. Quote:
By that absurd logic car kanufacturers are partially responsible for automobile accidents that happen entirely due to operator error. Quote:
They also didn't envisage parents stupid enough to leave their children unsuprrvised with a loaded firearm. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 3rd, 2013 at 8:08pm polite_gandalf wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 7:19pm:
See my previous statement about car manufacturers and unsafe operators. It's nit the goddamn manufacturers fault if you choose to operation their product in an unsafe manner. Quote:
Bullshit. You'e trying to claim that the manufacturer is to blame when someone operates their product in an unsafe manner. Every goddamn firearm sold commercially in the US has watnings against what the parents did in the owners manual, if you choose to ignore the warning telling you to not allow children to use a firearm unsupervised then that is your fault. You would be the party making the decision to ignore the warning, not the manufacturer. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Peter Freedman on May 3rd, 2013 at 9:11pm
Chard, by "rishonest" (sic) you mean anyone who dares disagree with you.
A car manufacturer would be responsible only if the car had a safety fault that contributed to the accident. A car is not designed to kill, a gun is. Your argument is so old and totally absurd. A gun should never be put in the hands of a child. Anyone who is a part of that appalling situation must share part of the guilt. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by hawil on May 3rd, 2013 at 9:21pm freediver wrote on May 2nd, 2013 at 7:35pm:
This is a real tragedy caused by the American obsessions with firearms. What was even more shocking, was the segment, where parents instruct rather very young children to shoot at targets. I think at such a young age, it would be more appropriate to play with any sort of ball. I really feel sorry for the boy and the parents, who acted in such negligent manner, although I can't see that any punishment of the parents would do any good. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 4th, 2013 at 1:09am Peter Freedman wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 9:11pm:
Bullshit. A tool is a tool. If you use that tool in an unsafe manner then it is your fault, not the goddamn manufacturer. Also, way to be an immense douche by pointing out a typo. Quote:
That's your opinion. The fact remains that had the parents of that five year old provided adequate supetvision the shooting would not have happened. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Andrei.Hicks on May 4th, 2013 at 1:16am
.
 image_009.jpg (61 KB | 46
) |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 4th, 2013 at 2:08am
Demotivational Posters: For when you can't actually refute an argument, post a decade old meme!
Ok, lets look at the facts here. The mother of the children left a five-year old to "play" with an unsecured rifle while she cleaned the house. She also either failed to clear the rifle beforehand or she left unsecured ammunition where he son could find it. So right off the bat she commited the following errors, 1. She left an unsecured firearm where children could get access to it. 2. She knowingly allowed a five year old to "play" with an actual firearm. 3. She failed to either teach proper gun safety to that child despite living in a household with firearms in it. 4. She failed to properly clear the weapon and/or had unsecured ammo around the home. Not a single bit of that is the fault of Cricket, the rifle's manufacturer. Now keep in mind that in the US there at tens of thousands of "youth" rifles purchased by parents to teach there children to shoot. If this is so dangerous then why am Iam not seeing more stories like the OP? Oh, right, because Stephanie Sparks is an idiot who let a five year old "play" with a loaded firearm unsupervised while she was busy cleaning, her two year old died because of it, and you goulish f*ckwits are to busy screaming "guns are bad" to understand that had Stephanie Sparks not left a five year old alone with a gun that this incident wouldn't have happened. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Peter Freedman on May 4th, 2013 at 6:17am
The same week a boy, aged eight, shot and killed his sister, aged five, in west Alaska.
|
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Peter Freedman on May 4th, 2013 at 6:26am Chard wrote on May 4th, 2013 at 2:08am:
Ok, Chard, let's see if I can get through to you. Unlikely, but there is always hope. A gun is a weapon, not a toy. It has no place in the hands of a child barely out of nappies. The parents were crazy to give a lethal weapon to a five-year-old. But some parents do stupid things. They could be prevented doing this stupid thing if the gun wasn't built, advertised and sold as suitable for children. I guess the difference between us is that you think it is acceptable for a 5yo to have a gun as long as there is parental supervision. I don't. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by KJT1981 on May 4th, 2013 at 6:27am Peter Freedman wrote on May 4th, 2013 at 6:17am:
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/teen-sleepover-killer-walks/story-e6freuy9-1225811858460 |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by KJT1981 on May 4th, 2013 at 6:30am Quote:
...and if the car wasn't built by GMH that the drunk was driving that hit and killed my friend on his motor bike he would still be alive today. FFS Freedman you are an idiot. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Spot of Borg on May 4th, 2013 at 7:04am
Well 4 year olds arent marketed to or allowed to drive
SOB |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by KJT1981 on May 4th, 2013 at 7:13am Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 4th, 2013 at 7:04am:
Jesus, were you born this thick or did it happen later in life Miss Borg? Head injury? Lack of oxygen to your brain when your mother tried to drown you at birth? Someone tie a plastic bag over your head? |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Peter Freedman on May 4th, 2013 at 7:41am KJT1981 wrote on May 4th, 2013 at 6:30am:
Numberplate, we have already dealt with that stupid argument which is raised by imbeciles like yourself. I realise the gin makes it hard for you to think clearly, but do try, there's a dear. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Peter Freedman on May 4th, 2013 at 7:44am
But I am sorry to hear your friend was killed. Someone like you would have so few.
|
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Spot of Borg on May 4th, 2013 at 7:47am KJT1981 wrote on May 4th, 2013 at 7:13am:
Oh so you disagree? Car ads are targeted @ 4 year olds? a 4 year old can drive? Where is your evidence? SOB |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by KJT1981 on May 4th, 2013 at 8:54am Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 4th, 2013 at 7:47am:
Fair dinkum Miss Borg you are a complete tool. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by gandalf on May 4th, 2013 at 9:01am Chard wrote on May 4th, 2013 at 2:08am:
over 500 children die in the US each year from gun accidents. Do you think thats acceptable? Look, we get that the parents are responsible - no one is disputing that. But like what Peter Freedman said: Peter Freedman wrote on May 4th, 2013 at 6:26am:
In a nutshell. 5 year olds are not capable of handling a rifle on their own - fact. I would go even further and say 5 year olds can't be trusted to handle a rifle even with the tightest parental supervision possible. They simply don't have the physical strength, motor neuron development or mental capacity to be trusted holding a rifle. For that reason, it is irresponsible for manufacturers to market and sell rifle's specifically for children as young as 5. Or to take a slightly different angle, consider another aspect of the manufacturer's responsibility. As I understand it, whenever adults purchase a gun, the seller is obliged to perform a background check to ensure guns don't fall into the wrong hands right? So what happens when parents buy guns for their 5 year old kids? Does the seller have to perform any checks to ensure the parents will be responsible supervisors? Somehow I doubt it. Likely they perform a criminal background check on the parents, but not on whether they will supervise responsibly. Can't imagine how that could be done anyway. So basically, companys like Cricketts sell guns to parents, to be used by their small children - knowing full well that they can only be safely used by the strictest of parental supervision, without having any idea whether the parents will or can be that responsible. In short, Cricketts is grossly negligent in marketing and selling guns specifically for small children as young as 5. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 4th, 2013 at 10:56am Peter Freedman wrote on May 4th, 2013 at 6:26am:
Are you rearing impaired? Reason I ask is you just quote me saying itvs not a toy and for some reason you completely missed this. Quote:
You forgot "plastered with warnings that it isn't a toy and direct afult supervision is required". Guess what Stephanie Sparks did? She left a child alone with a loaded gun. How you think itvs the manufacturers fault for that is simply amazing and really makes me wonder just how far up your ass your head really is. Quote:
Bullshit. The difference is I believe parents are responsible for their children and not a third party, especially when the parent does exactly what that third party told them not to do. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 4th, 2013 at 11:16am polite_gandalf wrote on May 4th, 2013 at 9:01am:
And in almost every single case the failure point in gun safety was at the parents end. How smacking hard is it for you to understand that if you choose to store or operate a product in an unsafe manner, especially in ways the manufacturer is specifically warning you against, then it isn't the manufacturers fault that you are an idiot. Quote:
Which part of "Stephanie Sparks let a child play with a loaded rifle as if it were a toy and pissed off to do housework" are you not getting? Quote:
Cricket's responsibility ended the second Stephanie Sparks gave a firearm to a five year old as a toy, failed to clear the weapon or left ammunition laying about where said child could find it, and then left that child unattended. There are three completely seperate instances of negligence on her part. The Manufacturer speciffically warned against all three of the things she did, yet she did them, not the manufacturer. Three seperate instances of negligence, Stephanie Sparks might as well have pulled the trigger her self. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Andrei.Hicks on May 4th, 2013 at 11:19am
I have a gun at home. It's kept far away from the kids and its not hung out as a toy to be played with.
The State of California affords me the right to take force with this registered weapon should I be in fear of my life and subject to home invasion. All perfectly fine and I think the legislation does need working on. I happen to agree with the President on this area. I don't agree with him on healthcare and taxes but I do on gun control. This country, Chard, whether you like it or not - has a serious fking gun problem to be fixed. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 4th, 2013 at 11:24am Chard wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 6:51pm:
The manufacturer is making guns specifically for kids. It's the manufacturer's responsibility to not make guns for children. You seem to be having trouble understanding this simple point. The responsibility for this begins with the manufacturer, and ends with the parents. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 4th, 2013 at 11:24am Andrei.Hicks wrote on May 4th, 2013 at 11:19am:
No' we have a massive smacking problem with idiots that can't follow clearly written instructions. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Andrei.Hicks on May 4th, 2013 at 11:26am Chard wrote on May 4th, 2013 at 11:24am:
Really? Those guys in Compton, Inglewood and Watts aren't reading the instructions correctly? |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 4th, 2013 at 11:33am greggerypeccary wrote on May 4th, 2013 at 11:24am:
No, the manufacturer's responsibility ended the second Stephanie Sparks decided to ignore the warning label on the front of the box. But thanks for proving my point about the warning labels. Gotta say it's pretty smacking hilarious you missed that when you went for a picture that was supposed to prove the manufacturer is somehow at fault. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 4th, 2013 at 11:34am greggerypeccary wrote on May 4th, 2013 at 11:24am:
No, the manufacturer's responsibility ended the second Stephanie Sparks decided to ignore the warning label on the front of the box. But thanks for proving my point about the warning labels. Gotta say it's pretty smacking hilarious you missed that when you went for a picture that was supposed to prove the manufacturer is somehow at fault. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Andrei.Hicks on May 4th, 2013 at 11:39am
Manufacturing weapons for children - is absolutely fking retarded.
|
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 4th, 2013 at 11:47am Chard wrote on May 4th, 2013 at 11:34am:
I can assure you, the manufacturer is at fault: they make the guns for children, not the parents. If they didn't make the guns the parents couldn't buy them. The responsibility for this begins with the manufacturer, and ends with the parents. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 4th, 2013 at 11:49am Andrei.Hicks wrote on May 4th, 2013 at 11:39am:
To say the least. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Spot of Borg on May 4th, 2013 at 12:17pm KJT1981 wrote on May 4th, 2013 at 8:54am:
If you dont have an argument then go away troll SOB |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by gandalf on May 4th, 2013 at 12:30pm Chard wrote on May 4th, 2013 at 11:16am:
So no responsibility at all for manufacturers selling guns to idiots who they know full well won't be responsible? Quote:
You completely miss my point. If, as I contend, 5 year olds have neither the physical or mental faculties to hand any guns, why is there a company marketing and selling a category of rifle specifically for children as young as 5? Why would parents buy such a rifle - if not to allow their children to do something they should never let them do? You may as well be arguing that Cricketts should only market such a weapon if they are reasonably confident that no one will be stupid enough to actually buy it for its intended use. :P |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Peter Freedman on May 4th, 2013 at 12:57pm
Chard isn't worth bothering with. He thinks debating is about obscenity and obnoxious abuse.
|
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 4th, 2013 at 1:24pm polite_gandalf wrote on May 4th, 2013 at 12:30pm:
1. Demonstrate that Cricket somehow knows which one of their thousands of customers is an idiot and which are not. 2. Demonstrate under US law how a manufacturer is responsible for intentional missuse of their products despite clearly worded warnings. Quote:
You completely miss my point. If, as I contend, 5 year olds have neither the physical or mental faculties to hand any guns, why is there a company marketing and selling a category of rifle specifically for children as young as 5? Why would parents buy such a rifle - if not to allow their children to do something they should never let them do?[/quote] As it turns out there are thousands of parents thay bought a Cricket or other uouth rifle and managed to do so in a safe manner. The point that you are missing is that Stephanie Sparks allowed her son to pkay with a loaded weapon bt himself. That's three different things the federally mandated warnings firearms manufacturers have to put on their products yell you specifically not to do. Quote:
That's what the warning labels are for, dumbass. It's not the manufacturer's responsibilith to hold your hand and make sure you're not a complete retard. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 4th, 2013 at 1:25pm Peter Freedman wrote on May 4th, 2013 at 12:57pm:
Pete, what did I tell you about being a passive-agressive bitch? |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 4th, 2013 at 2:54pm Peter Freedman wrote on May 4th, 2013 at 12:57pm:
If that were the case, he'd surely be the master debater. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 4th, 2013 at 2:57pm Chard wrote on May 4th, 2013 at 1:24pm:
Correct. It's the manufacturer's responsibility to not make guns specifically for children. The manufacturer failed spectacularly, as did the parents. The responsibility for this begins with the manufacturer, and ends with the parents. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Morning Mist on May 4th, 2013 at 3:17pm
Peccy, you're engaging in circular reasoning again. You're stating the conclusion in your premise.
|
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 4th, 2013 at 3:38pm Chard wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 2:31am:
Didn't you even bother to read the first line of his post? "WTF are the yanks doing making guns specifically for children?" How's the Cricket website going, by the way? :-/ |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Peter Freedman on May 4th, 2013 at 4:28pm
The parents failed in their duty by buying the gun in the first place. The retailer failed in his duty by selling the gun when he knew it was to be given to a child.
The advertising agency failed in its duty by advertising a lethal weapon as suitable for children. The manufacturer failed in his duty by making the damn thing. And Chard is a failure all round. QED. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by WorldSacred on May 4th, 2013 at 4:32pm
NRA: "...and if a good guy with a gun was around to stop this child with a gun, a tragedy like this would never have happened..."
|
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by gandalf on May 4th, 2013 at 5:39pm Quote:
Thats not the point and you know it. This sort of negligence will only ever affect a minority of customers, but it is a minority that the manufacturer should be acutely aware exists. Chard wrote on May 4th, 2013 at 1:24pm:
No I got that loud and clear. The point you are missing is that the incredibly high risk of a child and/or their parent not heeding this warning - because the design of the rifle (toy sized, coloured a pretty pink etc) misleads them into thinking the rifle is not as deadly as they should - wouldn't be an issue if the damned thing wasn't invented, marketed and sold in the first place. Also show some respect and stop the ad-homs. I won't stoop to that level, and neither should you. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 5th, 2013 at 3:58am polite_gandalf wrote on May 4th, 2013 at 5:39pm:
That's what the goddamn warning labels on the box and in the owners manual are for. If you fail to heed those warnings then it isn't the manufacturets responsibility if you or those around you are harmed through your actions. Quote:
Bullshit. He targey demographic for rifles like the cricket are gun owners, people who should already know full well that itvs not a goddamn toy. Also, if it's such a high risk then why is it thie is the first time ivve even heard of Cricket despite being an avid marksman for three decades? Oh, right, because the number of registed gun owners who aren't unsafe idiots massively outnumbers unsafe idiots like Stephanie Sparks. Quote:
By that logic automotive accidents wouldn't be an issue if cars hadn't been invented, marketed, and sold. How smacking hard is it for you to understand that no matter what you do to promote safety that there is always that 0.01% of the population that will ignore warnings? Quote:
Stop being an obtuse moron and I will. Also, appealing to me with a barely concealed style-over-substance whine is more likely to draw my contempt than anything else. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 5th, 2013 at 4:09am Peter Freedman wrote on May 4th, 2013 at 4:28pm:
Show evidence that the retailer knew that Stephanie Sparks would give a loaded rifle to her son and then walk away, you dishonest poo. Quote:
Show evidence that the advertising agency knew that Stephanie Sparks would give a loaded rifle to her son and walk away, you dishonest poo. Quote:
Show evidence that Cricket knew Stephanie Sparks would ignore all manfacturers warnings that it was not a toy and required adult supervision at all times. Then show the same for the manufacturer of the ammunition used, you dishonest poo. Quote:
And you're an eadilly butthurt, pathalogically dishonest shithead. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by gandalf on May 5th, 2013 at 8:33am
There is clearly no point continuing this debate Chard when you choose to reduce your argument to hurling abuse at everyone.
I'll just sign off by reaffirming my main point that I think its a bad idea - and yes irrespsonsible for a company to market and sell weapons for young children who have neither the mental nor physical strength to operate such weapons safely. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Spot of Borg on May 5th, 2013 at 9:31am
Chard you wont be able to do here what you did on my forum because they already tolerate that crap.
In fact they encourage it. SOB |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by simonhall1900 on May 5th, 2013 at 9:42am
The parents are responsible for not making sure the rifle was NOT available to this kid without adult supervision. But I do think kids as young as that shouldn't go anywhere near guns.........14 - 16 years of age maybe with adult supervision and only on a range.
|
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 5th, 2013 at 9:51am polite_gandalf wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 8:33am:
Absolutely. His entire "argument" seems to be "I like guns and anybody who says something bad about them is a poo head". polite_gandalf wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 8:33am:
Absolutely. That's the point he seems incapable of understanding. Of course the parents are ultimately responsible here, however, the responsibility started with the gun manufacturer: they've completely failed society by manufacturing guns specifically designed for children. Frankly, I don't know how those people sleep at night. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Peter Freedman on May 5th, 2013 at 10:07am
It's a pity when someone like Chard can take what begins as a rational debate and trash it to the stage where others can't be bothered continuing any more.
|
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Robert Paulson on May 5th, 2013 at 10:11am
Tragedy caused by stupidity. But let's face it, this isn't going to change anybodys mind on guns.
Back to your bickering. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 5th, 2013 at 10:21am ... wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 10:11am:
Absolutely. The stupidity of a manufacturer designing guns specifically for children, and the stupidity of the parents buying the gun in the first place and then leaving a child unsupervised with it. Stupidity all around. ... wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 10:11am:
Exactly. Once a gun nut, always a gun nut. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 5th, 2013 at 11:04am polite_gandalf wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 8:33am:
Then maybe try not being dishonest when arguing with me. So far all I'm seeing is you endlessly repeating that a manufacturer is somehow responsible not only when you use their products in an unsafe manner, but they should magically know who will use their procts safely before their product is even purchased. For example, this nxt bit of stupidity... Quote:
Right here is a perfect example of you making a dishonest argument. They're not marketing or selling them to young children. They're marketing them to parents who want to teach their children marksmanship, and offer a rifle sized such that a child can operate it, and the manufacturer warns that it's not a toy and requires afult sipervision. The kind of parent that would buy this product is also likely to be an experience shooter themselves, which means they should be familiar with the four laws of gun safety. You say it's unsafe for a child to learn to shoot and then ignore that thousands of parents teach their children to shoot without incident. Stephanie Sparks is the one that considered a rifle a childs toy, despite a manufacturer warning to the contrary. Stephanie Sparks also failed to make sure the rifle wasn't loaded (first law of gun safety is all guns are always loaded). Stephanie Sparks then left her choldren unattended violating manufacturers warning calling for adult supervision. The manufacturer did everything they are legally responsible for. Stephanie Sparks did everything she was legally not supposed to do. Your continued insistence that Cricket is at all responsible flies in the face of US Law, basic fidearms safety protocol, and firearms death statistics that all say you are wrong, and you continuing to ignore that is the greatest bit of dishonesty you've displayed. So pardon the bugger out of me for taking offense when someone continues to be a dishonest prick to me. You want reasonable then you can goddamn well be reasonable yourself and cease being intellectually dishonest. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 5th, 2013 at 11:06am Peter Freedman wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 10:07am:
Hey, Pete, how about instead of being a passive-aggressive bitch you show the evidence I requested for the wild ass claims you made? |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 5th, 2013 at 11:10am Chard wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 11:04am:
The manufacturer is responsible because they are the ones who designed a gun specifically for children in the first place. You failure to grasp this fundamental fact is, quite frankly, alarming. Responsibility for this tragedy starts with the gun manufacturer, and ends with the parents. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Peter Freedman on May 5th, 2013 at 11:56am Chard wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 11:06am:
Thanks, but I'll pass. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 5th, 2013 at 1:00pm greggerypeccary wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 11:10am:
No, they created a product in response to a consumer demand. You ciuld keep insisting that theyvre guilty for filling that demand but youvd be ignoring the face that Cricket has sold tens of thousands of rifles and so far Stephanie Sparks is the only documented case of someone missusing their product. Worse, youvre still ignoring that under US law if you operate a product in a manner that the manufacturer warns you is unsafe then you are the one responsible, not the manufacturer. Here's an example. McDonald's coffee has a label on the side of the cup warning that the contents are extremely hot. You, for some reason, decide to intentionally pour that coffee on your crotch. Who is responsible? Is it McDonalds for makint piping hot coffee od is the fault yours for ignoring the warning label and pouring scaling hot coffee on you junk? Under your logic McDonalds would be responsible for you ignoring their warning. You failure to grasp this fundamental fact is, quite frankly, alarming. Quote:
Wrong. Under our laws if you ignore the manufacturet and opetate their product unsafely the only petson you have to hlame is yourself. Stop blaming other parties, responsibility for that two year olds death began and ended with the person that let her tive year old brother play with a loaded gun. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 5th, 2013 at 1:02pm Peter Freedman wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 11:56am:
Is that your childish way of saying you cannot provide evidence to back your claims or are you still being a bitch, Pete? |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 5th, 2013 at 1:38pm Chard wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 1:00pm:
A decision that is morally reprehensible. Just because a consumer demand exists, it doesn't mean supplying that demand is the right thing to do. Responsibility for this tragedy starts with the gun manufacturer, and ends with the parents. The stupid parents have to suffer with this for the rest of their lives. Hopefully Cricket will go broke: they need to pay for their greed-driven irresponsibility. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 5th, 2013 at 1:51pm |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 5th, 2013 at 2:06pm wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 1:38pm:
In your opinion it's "immoral". In legal fact it's completely kosher under US law. Quote:
Again, that's your opinion and if the product was illegal or unsafe to operate then you'd have a point. Problem is the product Cricket produced is A) completely legal in the US, and B) is perfectly safe to operate if you follow the manufacturer's instruction. Sparks not only failed to heed those instructions, she did so in a way that she could he held criminally liable for. Quote:
And what measure are you using to make that conclusion? It sure as hell doesn't have any legal basis on cricket's part. Quote:
So will their son, who gets to spend the rest of his pife knowing he killed his sister because his mother is an irresponsible twat. Quote:
Doubtful. If anything people will buy more of their products. It happens evety time when a shooting happens that gets some fool in congress to indruce a gun control bill. For example, after Congresswoman Gabreil Giffords was shot there was a call for banning high capacity magazines. Know what happened? Sales for high capacity pistol magazines jumped by just shy of 300%. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Andrei.Hicks on May 5th, 2013 at 2:10pm Chard wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 1:00pm:
You can't seriously run with that answer?! There's a consumer demand in Inglewood for crack cocaine. Shall we allow that to be openly traded too?? |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 5th, 2013 at 2:15pm Andrei.Hicks wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 2:10pm:
It certainly was his most ludicrous answer thus far. He'll start to back peddle now: watch out for terms like "legal" and "illicit". ;) |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 5th, 2013 at 2:18pm Andrei.Hicks wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 2:10pm:
I thought you were in the US. How do you know about our drug problems here in the Perth suburbs? ;) |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by life_goes_on on May 5th, 2013 at 2:24pm
We don't have crack in Australia.
|
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Andrei.Hicks on May 5th, 2013 at 2:24pm
City of Champions.
So they say. I'll take their word for it. image_012.jpg (22 KB | 46
) |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Andrei.Hicks on May 5th, 2013 at 2:27pm Life_goes_on wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 2:24pm:
I guess sometimes there are benefits living in a country a decade behind the rest of us. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 5th, 2013 at 2:36pm Life_goes_on wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 2:24pm:
We don't have as much as the US, but we certainly have it (some). |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 5th, 2013 at 2:42pm Andrei.Hicks wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 2:10pm:
If firearms were illegal in the US you'd have a point. Since firearms are legal here and crack cocaine is illegal it just means you're terrible at analogies. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 5th, 2013 at 2:43pm Andrei.Hicks wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 2:24pm:
Inglewood in Perth has a pub and ... Well, it has a pub. :-/ |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 5th, 2013 at 2:44pm greggerypeccary wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 2:15pm:
Bingo! http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1367487307/101#101 ::) |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by life_goes_on on May 5th, 2013 at 2:46pm
You could probably go and brew up a batch yourself (it's easy) - but you can't go and buy the stuff here.
Cocaine is just way too expensive here to make turning it into crack commercially viable. Wholesale prices here for cocaine are around four times or more than what they are in the US. People will pay $20 for a bag of rock that will provide around an hour of being high, but they're going to be extremely resistant at paying $100 for that same bag. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Andrei.Hicks on May 5th, 2013 at 2:53pm
Chard, the fact genuine, decent legislation amendments to gun control in ths country is shot down by Republicans in the pocket of the NRA is not something to be proud.
Gun laws here are absolutely retarded. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 5th, 2013 at 3:05pm greggerypeccary wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 2:44pm:
Beats the hell out of making knee-jerk generalizations . Considering that so fwr your entire argument is "itvs immoral because, um...because I say so" I find it hilarious you gripe about me using a definable standard that's actually relevant to OP article. But hey, why actually make a coherent factual argument when you can pat youself on the back instead. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 5th, 2013 at 3:06pm Life_goes_on wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 2:46pm:
I've got a few hours to kill this afternoon. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 5th, 2013 at 3:08pm Chard wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 3:05pm:
That was your plan 'B', was it? Hmmm, it might be time for you to consider a third option. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 5th, 2013 at 3:14pm Andrei.Hicks wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 2:53pm:
By all means, show me where I've ever disagreed with that. I thought I made it clear in the last gun thread that I'm in favor of gun control. Quote:
That's mostly because traditionally we've allowed the states to decide on how they want to handle gun laws. It's actually pretty rare to see the fedal government create and implement gun laws that force all the states to use the same statutes. Last one I can recall that's still in effect is the background check s and waiting period for first time pistol purchases. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 5th, 2013 at 3:19pm greggerypeccary wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 3:08pm:
Greg, all you have is opinion and whatever convoluted morales you subscribe to for an argument. You could try and prove me wrong, but that would require you to A) know what the hell your claims talking about, and B) not be a dishonest asshole. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Andrei.Hicks on May 5th, 2013 at 3:24pm
Well I haven't read the last thread but if you're suggesting the law is not to blame when we allow companies to make firearms for children.....
It's a reasonable assumption you're a tad loose on the gun control. I think people who think citizens should have ak-47s and grenade launchers would agree with the law for kids. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 5th, 2013 at 3:28pm Chard wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 3:19pm:
Already ticked that box. You claimed that "The responsibility for this begins and ends with the kids parents. " However, you were quickly shown that the responsibility for this begins with the manufacturer, and ends with the parents. The rest has just been icing on the cake. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by ian on May 5th, 2013 at 3:43pm
every child should own a pair of boxing gloves and be taught how to use them.
|
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 5th, 2013 at 4:05pm greggerypeccary wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 3:28pm:
The only thing you've shown is the ability to repeat yourself. That you faoled to actually address any of my arguments proves that. Quote:
The last thing your fatass needs is more cake. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 5th, 2013 at 4:07pm Chard wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 4:05pm:
I do love a sore loser. Better luck next time old boy. ;) |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Morning Mist on May 5th, 2013 at 5:51pm greggerypeccary wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 3:28pm:
Logic fallacies, Peccy. You're engaging in circular reasoning and begging the question. Stating the conclusion in your premise is not an argument! How's that law degree going for ya? |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 5th, 2013 at 11:44pm Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 5:51pm:
Chard has been shown up (again) as a fool. His "argument" has been destroyed. Life is good. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 6th, 2013 at 4:32am greggerypeccary wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 11:44pm:
Slapping yourself on the back and actually doing are two different things. How about you try actuaply responding to my arguments instead of repeating the same thing over and over like a broken record. Here, I'll even be a nice guy and respost it for you. wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 1:38pm:
In your opinion it's "immoral". In legal fact it's completely kosher under US law. Quote:
Again, that's your opinion and if the product was illegal or unsafe to operate then you'd have a point. Problem is the product Cricket produced is A) completely legal in the US, and B) is perfectly safe to operate if you follow the manufacturer's instruction. Sparks not only failed to heed those instructions, she did so in a way that she could he held criminally liable for. Quote:
And what measure are you using to make that conclusion? It sure as hell doesn't have any legal basis on cricket's part. Quote:
So will their son, who gets to spend the rest of his pife knowing he killed his sister because his mother is an irresponsible twat. Quote:
Doubtful. If anything people will buy more of their products. It happens evety time when a shooting happens that gets some fool in congress to indruce a gun control bill. For example, after Congresswoman Gabreil Giffords was shot there was a call for banning high capacity magazines. Know what happened? Sales for high capacity pistol magazines jumped by just shy of 300%. Put up or shut up time, fatty. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 6th, 2013 at 7:38am Chard wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 4:32am:
Already ticked that box. You claimed that "The responsibility for this begins and ends with the kids parents. " However, you were quickly shown that the responsibility for this begins with the manufacturer, and ends with the parents. Better luck next time. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 6th, 2013 at 7:46am Chard wrote on May 3rd, 2013 at 5:00pm:
Taking them an awful long time to rectify the problem. http://www.crickett.com/ Seems like they realise they've done the wrong thing and have subsequently run for cover. "When contacted by ABCNews.com, a representative for Keystone Sporting Arms, located in Milton, Pa., said that the company is not answering questions." http://www.kugn.com/common/more.php?m=58&ts=1367522402&article=DAA2B145B33D11E286DEFEFDADE6840A&mode=2 Funny that. Can't expect too much from irresponsible gun nuts though. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Morning Mist on May 6th, 2013 at 9:14am greggerypeccary wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 11:44pm:
The gun manufacturer did nothing illegal, and the parents purchasing the gun did it legally. This is the same type of 'reasoning' you use in the asylum seeker issue. You appeal to the law and block out all other considerations to the topic. Now you're ignoring the legalities here and appealing to your personal morals. Since you palm off all other issues surrounding asylum seekers with "it's not against the law to claim asylum", the simple retort here is "it's not against the law to manufacture or purchase the gun in question." Suck it up. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 6th, 2013 at 9:17am Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 9:14am:
I've never suggested anything to the contrary. What I've said is, responsibility for this tragedy starts with the gun manufacturer and ends with the parents. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Morning Mist on May 6th, 2013 at 9:22am
Until you take other people's views on the asylum issue seriously, don't expect any leeway here.
|
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Spot of Borg on May 6th, 2013 at 9:30am Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 9:22am:
It has absolutely nothing to do with asylum seekers SOB |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by FriYAY on May 6th, 2013 at 10:22am greggerypeccary wrote on May 4th, 2013 at 11:24am:
Can a 5 year old buy that gun? |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by dsmithy70 on May 6th, 2013 at 10:35am FriYAY wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 10:22am:
No But after 9 pages of back & forth. The question should have possibly been framed better. Is it moral to make & market guns for very small children? Most rifles can be used by kids over 10 anyway, why do we need extra small guns for children under that age? But anyhoo, we've had some fun & old Chard has been able to abuse foreigners who cant understand his countries culture of gloried death & violence. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 6th, 2013 at 11:02am FriYAY wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 10:22am:
Nope. 5 year olds can't enter an adult shop and purchase sex toys either. In that case, I assume you'd have no problem with a company manufacturing small vibrators, in a bright pink colour, and calling them "My First Vibrator". They could have pictures of a cute little animal on the box - maybe a beaver. It's legal, and kids can't enter the shops to buy them, so it's all good isn't it? You'd have no problem with a company who manufactured such an item and then sold them to the parents. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by FriYAY on May 6th, 2013 at 11:27am Dsmithy70 wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 10:35am:
No, I don’t think marketing guns at very small children is “morally” right. I guess in the US many see it as no different to little pink fishing rods. But still – the parent has to buy it, give it to the child and take responsibility in regards to the firearms safe storage and use. Again, marketing, sales and profit. The manufacture may need to look at the “morals” of it, but while it is legal I can’t see how the responsibility is theirs, totally rests with the purchaser. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by FriYAY on May 6th, 2013 at 11:32am greggerypeccary wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 11:02am:
Pathetic analogy. As for the highlighted bit, manufacturers can’t just “sell” things, people have to “buy” them. You do understand that I hope. Addressed nothing I said, go stamp your angry widdle feet elsewhere. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 6th, 2013 at 11:45am FriYAY wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 11:32am:
No, it was a very good one actually. So, you'd have no problem with a company that manufactured "My First Vibrator"? Perfectly legal. Kids can't buy them. So ... |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 6th, 2013 at 11:48am greggerypeccary wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 7:38am:
Shown where? All you've done is repeat the same claim and all you've offered as a counter-argument is arbitrary morals. How about you cease being a pussy and actually make a rational counter-argument. And no, saying "it just is" doesn't qualify. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 6th, 2013 at 11:50am FriYAY wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 11:32am:
This is quite possibly the most idiotic thing I've seen in this forum ... ever! When a sales transaction takes place, there are two parties: the buyer, and the seller. You do understand that I hope. Seriously, this place gets dumber by the day ::) |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Annie Anthrax on May 6th, 2013 at 11:50am Chard wrote on May 4th, 2013 at 2:08am:
There are degrees of fault. I don't think anyone is suggesting the parents are not to blame - they are. Primarily for buying a 5 year old a gun in the first place, but also for all the reasons you suggest. It's an absolute tragedy - I'm sure in retrospect, the parents wish they'd never bought the gun for their son. They have to live with that and their poor little boy has to live with the nightmarish images of killing his sister. The thing is, your entire culture needs to change in regards to its views on gun ownership. It cannot be guaranteed that all (or even most) gun owners will use or store their weapons responsibly. Having such a critically dangerous 'right' as the one to gun ownership is hazardous to your citizenry. Irresponsible people are everywhere. Until your regulations change, more children will die. I can't recall a single incident in Australia where a child has accidentally shot another child - I'm not saying it hasn't happened...just that it's rare enough for me not to have heard of a single case. Doesn't that sound like a better way to live? |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 6th, 2013 at 11:51am Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 9:30am:
He's pointing out Greg's hypocrisy, you smacking idiot. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 6th, 2013 at 11:52am Chard wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 11:51am:
Which doesn't exist, by the way. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by FriYAY on May 6th, 2013 at 11:59am greggerypeccary wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 11:45am:
Well “if” this ever happened and “if” parents bought them for their kids then I’d be against it, just like I’m against parents buying .22 rifles for their kids. BUT How does any of that absolve the parents of their responsibility once the item is purchased (in this case a gun)? No one if forcing anyone to buy anything. Until that changes the purchaser has the responsibility for the safe use and storage of the gun. The parent’s negligence led to this tragedy. Out of interest, do you have any links to the legalities of manufacturing and marketing sex toys to children? |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by FriYAY on May 6th, 2013 at 12:04pm greggerypeccary wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 11:50am:
And the buyer isn’t forced to buy a thing. You’re making it sound like the poor old buyer has no choice. “You'd have no problem with a company who manufactured such an item and then sold them to the parents” The purchase is free choice. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Spot of Borg on May 6th, 2013 at 12:10pm Chard wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 11:51am:
What hypocrisy DH? SOB |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 6th, 2013 at 12:10pm Annie Anthrax wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 11:50am:
Please. I could make a more convincing case for outlawing cars based on that logic. After all, cars kill far more people in thus country than guns do. Worse, you seem to be ignoring the fact that the vast majority of gun owners exercise their Second Amendment rights safely and responsibly. So why should the rights of around 100,000,000 citizens be infringed on when the number of people commiting crimes or otherwise being a danger to themselves or others is less than 1/100th of a percent of that number? Quote:
And here comes the emotional appeal... No, as a matter of fact the idea of giving up my rights for an illusion of safety so overly emotional people like you can pat themselves on the back sounds like a terrible idea. Even better, I can cite multiple examples of laws inacted and subsequently abolished that cake about thanks to the same irrational emotion-based thinking you just described, and in every instance, from the tailed assault weapons ban to the prohibition of alcohol, such measures either failed to have an effect or actually made things worse. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 6th, 2013 at 12:11pm Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 12:10pm:
Go back and read Mist's post, you semi-literate cretin. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Annie Anthrax on May 6th, 2013 at 12:23pm Chard wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 12:10pm:
How do you take emotion out of an issue like this? What are the ramifications of irresponsible gun ownership if not emotional? Grief, regret, horror etc. What do you think the desperation to hold on to gun rights is based on? Looks like a healthy dose of fear to me. There is nothing wrong with emotion. Arguing emotive points does not make an argument less valid because rationality and emotion are not mutually exclusive. The problem is when an emotional response causes irrational thinking and there is nothing irrational about my point. You're welcome. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Andrei.Hicks on May 6th, 2013 at 12:42pm
I think I sit in the halfway house of people's view on this one.
Probably due to my fortune of living in this country, but at the same time coming from Britain - where we have no "gun" culture for want of a better word, so have grown up in a very different environment and can see that side of it. I like that I can have a gun in my house for use should I be subject to a home invasion. I like that the state of California affords me the right to shoot dead an intruder should I be in fear of my life and my family's life. I think it is an intrinsic right that I should be able to use justified lethal force to protect my property. Now where I draw the line - is that whilst I support citizens having the right to a handgun, I cannot understand Congressman not voting for a bill which takes AK 47s, grenade launchers and the like away from citizens. Why I would need an M16 to take out an intruder is beyond me. America has a gun problem. We have too many guns out there and too many in the wrong hands. It needs to be re-worked and the NRA should hold its head in shame with some of its statements. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Spot of Borg on May 6th, 2013 at 12:51pm Chard wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 12:11pm:
What hypocrisy DH? SOB |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 6th, 2013 at 1:09pm FriYAY wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 12:04pm:
Nobody suggested otherwise. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 6th, 2013 at 1:16pm FriYAY wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 11:59am:
It doesn't. I've never said that the parents aren't partially to blame for this tragedy. They clearly are. They're absolute idiots. Chard stated: "The responsibility for this begins and ends with the kids parents." I say: "The responsibility for this begins with the manufacturer, and ends with the parents." I'm not letting the parents off at all. However, the company have to shoulder some of the blame for designing and manufacturing a gun specifically for children. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 6th, 2013 at 1:33pm Chard wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 12:10pm:
No, you couldn't: cars aren't designed to kill. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 6th, 2013 at 1:34pm Annie Anthrax wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 12:23pm:
It's easy. All you need to do is approach the subject like a rational adult. Quote:
Doesn't matter simply because making laws based on emotions that vary from person is irrational. Quote:
It's based on it being a right specifically granted to the citizens. Nothing emotional about it, most of us are just wanting to maintain our rights under the Bill of Rights of the US Constitution. Quote:
Fear of what? Paper targets and game animals? Quote:
The irrationality comes from letting your emotion blind you to facts. You cannot be totally objective about something if your OODA loop is based in emotion. Quote:
The irrational bit is where you tried to argue that 100,000,000 law abiding citizens should lose their rights because less than 1/100th of the population are idiots. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 6th, 2013 at 1:42pm greggerypeccary wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 1:16pm:
Still waiting for you to give an actual reason for that idea that isn't based on arbitrary morals greggerypeccary wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 1:33pm:
For something that isn't designed to kill cars manage to kill and injure more people in the US than firearms. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 6th, 2013 at 1:53pm Chard wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 1:42pm:
What would you like it based on then? |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 6th, 2013 at 2:00pm greggerypeccary wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 1:53pm:
How about something more objective than whatever arbitrary moral standard you subscribe to. Hell, I gave two perfectly good objective standards earier and ivm begining to think the only reason you rejected them is because they don't agree with your argument. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 6th, 2013 at 2:01pm Chard wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 1:42pm:
Yes, I'm aware of that. Nobody denies the fact that car accidents can and do kill people. If I covered your body in enough paper cuts, you'd probably end up bleeding to death too. Unfortunately, children have been known to drown in nappy buckets. Cars, paper, and nappy buckets, however, were not designed to kill. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 6th, 2013 at 2:05pm greggerypeccary wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 2:01pm:
Doesn't matter what the intended purpose is. To say otherwise ignores the fact at 1/3 of my coutry's population manages to safely own and operate firearms. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 6th, 2013 at 2:16pm Chard wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 2:05pm:
To you, no. We've established that. To others, yes. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by FriYAY on May 6th, 2013 at 2:19pm greggerypeccary wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 1:16pm:
I think it is inappropriate that a gun is designed for and marketed to children. But it isn’t illegal to do so, no blame, perhaps some shame. However it still has to be purchased and once purchased the buyer is responsible for the safe use and storage of the weapon. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 6th, 2013 at 2:22pm FriYAY wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 2:19pm:
Yep. Agreed. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by FriYAY on May 6th, 2013 at 2:24pm greggerypeccary wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 2:22pm:
OK…..we’ll have to find something else to argue about. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by greggerypeccary on May 6th, 2013 at 2:29pm FriYAY wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 2:24pm:
No, we won't!!! :) |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by Chard on May 7th, 2013 at 5:03am greggerypeccary wrote on May 6th, 2013 at 2:16pm:
Again you are ignoring the fact that 100,000,000 registered gun owners in the US own and operate firearms in a safe and responsible manner. All this about guns being somehow inherently different from any other product because of designed use is a bullshit emotional appeal, Greg. |
|
Title: Re: US boy, 5, accidentally shoots and kills sister, 2 Post by JC Denton on May 8th, 2013 at 4:52pm
what about people who use guns to shoot targets. isnt a tool's purpose ultimately subjective regardless of what its original (by the first person who created it) intended purpose was.
knives were probably originally designed to kill too. i think the biggest problem with the gun control debate is the lack of good data on both sides. the actual empirical record (WHICH IS WHAT ALL DEBATE SHOULD BE BASED ON) is really spotty at best. its hard to make policy prescriptions when you've got no real, good, hard data actually informing the discussion. otherwise, all you have shonky NRA arguments about impending tyranny and hysterical emotional responses to tragic black swan events. |
|
Australian Politics Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.5.2! YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2025. All Rights Reserved. |
