Sounds like part of the problem is that this is a serious weapon but resembles a toy. Yes, I do think there is something wrong when a gun manufacturer peddles weapons for kids in their favorite colors. This is an instrument of death, not a Barbie wardrobe change.

It looks like a gun. You have it backwards my friend. Those cool little plastic revolvers that you got in the holsters on your 4th birthday and played like you were the sheriff, well those are toys to represent a firearm. Not vice versa. Good Lord.

 

And what does the color mean? The one we have is laminated wood, please go to the website, you can see them all. A barbie doll wardrobe change? What the heck does that mean?

I'd like to reaffirm, I own this gun. I have a difficult time believing that this gun wasn't in the ready to fire position. The cocking mechanism is spring loaded, and it's very difficult to pull back to arm the weapon. Unless it was a remarkably strong 5 year old, with abnormally strong hands, I can't believe for a second that it wasn't already loaded and prepared to fire. It's possible I'm mistaken, but I doubt it. And we may never know the truth, but if I'm correct, there really isn't any way on God's green earth this isn't the fault of the owner/parent.

I'd like to reaffirm, I own this gun. I have a difficult time believing that this gun wasn't in the ready to fire position. The cocking mechanism is spring loaded, and it's very difficult to pull back to arm the weapon. Unless it was a remarkably strong 5 year old, with abnormally strong hands, I can't believe for a second that it wasn't already loaded and prepared to fire. It's possible I'm mistaken, but I doubt it. And we may never know the truth, but if I'm correct, there really isn't any way on God's green earth this isn't the fault of the owner/parent.

I agree, I've handled this gun also.

It looks like a gun. You have it backwards my friend. Those cool little plastic revolvers that you got in the holsters on your 4th birthday and played like you were the sheriff, well those are toys to represent a firearm. Not vice versa. Good Lord.

 

And what does the color mean? The one we have is laminated wood, please go to the website, you can see them all. A barbie doll wardrobe change? What the heck does that mean?

A .22 rifle with an all-pink stock most certainly does resemble a toy. Traditional or red-white-blue models for boys, pretty pink models for girls. (You can even buy a matching pink sling.) I'm not arguing the 2nd Amendment. I'm arguing the wisdom of a gun manufacturer (whose website has been taken down, by the way) to peddle deadly weapons for kids like Schwinn sells bikes in different colors. Kids under 10 often have poor concepts of making a distinction between "weapon" and "toy," and this shooter was only 5.

Should the parents whose kids get killed by pit bulls also go to jail.

 

If they negligently left their kids unattended with the dog (and not just pit bulls, ANY DOG yes they should)

 

And let me include leaving a child unattended in a bathtub, leaving a kid in a hot car and numerous other "accidents" that result in the death of a child should result in charges for negligence. Being a parent is a legal responsibility. Just because they feel remorse after a tragedy like this doesn't release them of that responsibility.

A .22 rifle with an all-pink stock most certainly does resemble a toy. Traditional or red-white-blue models for boys, pretty pink models for girls. (You can even buy a matching pink sling.) I'm not arguing the 2nd Amendment. I'm arguing the wisdom of a gun manufacturer (whose website has been taken down, by the way) to peddle deadly weapons for kids like Schwinn sells bikes in different colors. Kids under 10 often have poor concepts of making a distinction between "weapon" and "toy," and this shooter was only 5.

So you want to blame the manufacturer. I suggest you stop in your local gun store, ask to see one, try to pull back the cocking mechanism, then you tell me if the average 5yo can pull it back. And for the record, it was an adult who purchased the gun. I'm sure the 5yo didn't trade it for a turkey lunchable with oreos in it one day at the lunch table. I don't care if it was blue, pink or maroon. This is a parent issue, not a manufacturer issue. They make pink pistols for ladies as well. That negligent by the manufacturer if a lady takes one and goes on a shooting spree?

I agree with spindoc. Many families teach their children a healthy respect for guns and how to use them properly. Having a gun manufactored and geared toward a small child is not negligence. That occurs with a parent buying the weapon and not storing it properly.

I agree with spindoc. Many families teach their children a healthy respect for guns and how to use them properly. Having a gun manufactored and geared toward a small child is not negligence. That occurs with a parent buying the weapon and not storing it properly.

 

This.

So you want to blame the manufacturer. I suggest you stop in your local gun store, ask to see one, try to pull back the cocking mechanism, then you tell me if the average 5yo can pull it back. And for the record, it was an adult who purchased the gun. I'm sure the 5yo didn't trade it for a turkey lunchable with oreos in it one day at the lunch table. I don't care if it was blue, pink or maroon. This is a parent issue, not a manufacturer issue. They make pink pistols for ladies as well. That negligent by the manufacturer if a lady takes one and goes on a shooting spree?

I think you and I and all your supporters can agree that lack of parental oversight is the reason why this 2-year-old is dead. That’s a given. Where we disagree is when you declare this is solely a parent issue. It’s more than that. When deadly weapons are made to resemble toys and come in bright colors, then kids can become confused as to whether it’s a toy or a gun.

 

Here’s a story link to similar tragedy. Kids find pretty pink (adult) pistol in Mommy and Daddy’s bedroom. A few days later, there’s a funeral.

 

This Is What Happens When You Sell Pink Guns That Look Like Toys - Business Insider

I think you and I and all your supporters can agree that lack of parental oversight is the reason why this 2-year-old is dead. That’s a given. Where we disagree is when you declare this is solely a parent issue. It’s more than that. When deadly weapons are made to resemble toys and come in bright colors, then kids can become confused as to whether it’s a toy or a gun.

 

Here’s a story link to similar tragedy. Kids find pretty pink (adult) pistol in Mommy and Daddy’s bedroom. A few days later, there’s a funeral.

 

This Is What Happens When You Sell Pink Guns That Look Like Toys - Business Insider

Unless somehow kids are able to purchase these guns on their own, blaming the manufacturer is a slanted viewpoint that's typical of the anti-gun crowd and serves no purpose. This was a parenting issue from start to finish.

With the logic above, it begs the question, which came first? The gun or the toy that resembled it? The whole point of my contention is that the gun could have been any make, any model. This one was a cricket. Could have been an AK-47. Both would have ended the life of the sister. Would you have been happier with the parents/manufacturer if it would have been the AK instead because it wasn't marketed towards kids?

 

5th frame is tasteless even by Pett's standards IMO

I think you and I and all your supporters can agree that lack of parental oversight is the reason why this 2-year-old is dead. That’s a given. Where we disagree is when you declare this is solely a parent issue. It’s more than that. When deadly weapons are made to resemble toys and come in bright colors, then kids can become confused as to whether it’s a toy or a gun.

 

Here’s a story link to similar tragedy. Kids find pretty pink (adult) pistol in Mommy and Daddy’s bedroom. A few days later, there’s a funeral.

 

This Is What Happens When You Sell Pink Guns That Look Like Toys - Business Insider

 

This is a sad situation that again, comes down to parental negligence. If the gun had been secured, this would not have happened, regardless of its color.

With the logic above, it begs the question, which came first? The gun or the toy that resembled it? The whole point of my contention is that the gun could have been any make, any model. This one was a cricket. Could have been an AK-47. Both would have ended the life of the sister. Would you have been happier with the parents/manufacturer if it would have been the AK instead because it wasn't marketed towards kids?

I think you're tap-dancing around the fact that gun manufacturers are indeed targeting (no pun intended) extremely young kids to boost future sales, and everyone knows this is not the right thing to do. Actually, this marketing strategy by the gun manufacturers runs counter to the NRA's Eddie Eagle GunSafe program, which teaches children "pre-K through third grade" four important steps to take if they find a gun: Stop, don't touch, leave the area, contact an adult.

 

So on one hand we've got the NRA issuing common-sense advice for kids, and on the other hand we've got gun manufacturers turning out deadly weapons in orange and bright pink in hopes that mom or dad, or grandma and grandpa will buy a firearm for Johnny or Susie's 5th birthday.

Twoto I get what your saying. But if no gun manufacturer ever had made a pink, orange or blue rifle it would not prevent the accident that occurred due to parental negligence. I also agree with you that by making guns in colors to appeal to children it does make it harder for kids to recognize the difference from a real gun and a toy. When my son got his first rifle he was around 5 or 6 years old also. It was "his" gun but my responsibility. Either myself or my father-in-law always had control of "his" rifle. When not being used it was kept out of reach on a gun rack and he knew to NEVER touch any gun without one of us first checking it and handing it to him. To this day if I hand him a weapon the first thing he will do is recheck the firearm to verify if the gun is loaded or not.