Journal damn_registrars's Journal: Careless gun owner of the day: 2.5 hits 1 bullet 24
3-year-old toddler in New Mexico shoots father, pregnant mother. Apparently the toddler pulled a gun from mom's purse, squeezed off one shot, and in the process hit dad (first) and pregnant mom (after passing through dear old dad). As usual:
Drobik says the case has been sent to Albuquerque District Attorneyâ(TM)s Office, which will determine whether the parents will be charged with criminal negligence
Which mens this will likely be pushed under the rug. There was also a two-year-old in the room who was fortunately not injured.
Simple solution (Score:2)
Ah, the gun fetish (Score:1)
To your point, though: we're talking about idiot parents here, and it's a blessing that the result wasn't more tragic.
Re: (Score:2)
Cars just don't have the same totemistic mystique.
Which is probably why, in response to the number of automobile fatalities, we have made cars safer, more expensive, more regulated, and generally more restrictive to own. With guns we have essentially done the opposite. Hell, while we have the weakest DUI laws in the industrialized world, the laws for using a car while intoxicated are still more severe than the laws for using a firearm while intoxicated.
Re: (Score:1)
With guns we have essentially done the opposite.
No, we have not, in any way you can reasonably defend.
Re: (Score:2)
in response to the number of automobile fatalities, we have made cars safer, more expensive, more regulated, and generally more restrictive to own. With guns we have essentially done the opposite.
Those are all well supported in regards to vehicles. Let's look at them then for guns.
Are guns safer? No. We still use the same mechanical safeties on guns that have been around for around a hundred years. There are no significant safety improvements on guns made today in comparison to ones made not long after the dawn of the 20th century.
Are guns more expensive? Not even remotely. With all the foreign-made guns on the market and all the advances in manufacturing efficiencies, they are less expensive in every conceivable metric.
Are guns more regulated? No. We haven't changed gun ownership requirements in decades. It is so absurdly difficult to get someone certified as too mentally unstable to own a weapon that such a law might as well not exist.
Are guns more restrictive to own? No. Again, it is absurdly difficult to get your guns taken away. And considering how terrible of a job we do of actually tracking weapons, the restrictions on ownership might as well not exist at all.
So what were you saying?
No, we have not, in any way you can reasonably defend.
Well, I just defended it (again). You just brushed it off because you didn't like it, but you most certainly didn't counter it.
Re: (Score:1)
Expensive? I don't even own any weapons, and that's without buying ammunition.
Regulated? Understood, there are those carrying a totemistic faith in the power of words on paper to bring about the Kingdom of Heaven. Criminals and politicians tend toward poor literacy. "Are guns more restrictive to own?" I don't even know how this differs from "regulated", exactly.
Possibly you could re-state your non-arg
Re: (Score:2)
Safer? Your argument seems to be old=bad.
Better safety technologies - particularly to prevent terrible accidents like this one - have been demonstrated regularly. Yet no manufacturer ever attempts to incorporate them. We have the technology to prevent these kinds of accidents without making the guns less useful if self defense is really the purpose of owning them.
This isn't just the superiority of newer technology. This is about what we can do to actually make these guns purposeful rather than just keeping them as deadly toys.
Expensive? I don't even own any weapons
So you have
Re: (Score:1)
This statement is also provably false as Glock, Springfield, Beretta, Sig Sauer, and others have included trigger safeties, grip safeties, drop safeties, and other features.
GODDAMN, DR, LEARN TO GOOGLE ALREADY.
Never mind, my little OCD Masochist. Carry on.
Re: (Score:1)
Learn what a Model 1911 is. Learn about how it has to be cocked and locked. Read gun threads and see how many people don't use the safeties...
Here's an analogous exercise you won't understand because you're an idiot:
Person A is killed in a car crash because they weren't wearing seatbelts. Had they been wearing seat belts, they would have been unscathed. Please explain how this is Chevrolet's fault.
(Never mind the person was driving a Ford.)
And by the way, damn_registrars
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Let me give you a hint: You favor a set of abverbs.
Re: (Score:1)
...you could convince more weak-minded people that religious faith in the State will bring peace in our time.
And what do you think has 'kept the peace' in the good ol' USofA for almost 150 years? Kittens? Laughing babies... the microwave oven... I would say the washer/dryer and the TV.
Re: (Score:1)
Simple googling would teach you that you're completely wrong as usual. [wikipedia.org]
Trigger safety, grip safety, drop safeties... just because some dorks on gun threads rant about the 1911 doesn't mean that development stopped.
Re: (Score:2)
And much more complicated to operate.
we're talking about idiot parents here, and it's a blessing that the result wasn't more tragic
Actually, it's the worse possible outcome since those Darwin Award-worthy genes have been passed on already.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)