May 6, 201313 yr Any guess as to why this is? Presumption that most bike riders will be younger than most motorcyclists? Seems like a disconnect to me, also. Even adult cyclists are required to wear them here. Yes...though...disconnected is an understatement.
May 6, 201313 yr Several things had to happen in order for this tragedy to occur. A gun company had to decide to market cute-colored deadly weapons. A parent had to decide, "Isn't that cute/cool? That's the deadly weapon I want my 5 year-old child to have!" The VAST majority will have been conscientious stewards of said deadly weapon, but... ...Most important - BY FAR - that parent (or someone in authority) had to leave the deadly weapon where the 5 year-old could get at it, unsupervised. The bullet from the deadly weapon had to strike the 2 year-old in such a manner so as to result in a mortal wound.
May 6, 201313 yr I have no issues with responsible gun ownership. But I would NEVER allow my children to have toy guns. I made sure they knew that guns were dangerous weapons, and not to be taken lightly. I understand what Two to place is saying, and agree that it's another layer of the issue. But, the core issue, the one that cannot continue and why I am for harsher gun laws, is that many adults are not responsible gun owners. Too many kids are killed or kill due to the irresponsibility of their parents gun ownership and the parents are rarely held responsible. I totally agree. But it's not on the manufacturer. Not remotely.
May 6, 201313 yr I totally agree. But it's not on the manufacturer. Not remotely. I am not a fan of "fashion weaponry" at all.
May 6, 201313 yr For everyone or just kids? And why? Anyone. I'll be lambasted....but to me a gun is like a tool....I didn't buy a pink weed eater or chain saw....
May 6, 201313 yr Anyone. I'll be lambasted....but to me a gun is like a tool....I didn't buy a pink weed eater or chain saw.... I understand that logic. I don't necessarily think everyone subscribes to it. Some women like the pink grips on a gun. I don't understand the issue with a laminated wood stock on a cricket either. It's the child's first weapon. One he should be proud of and learn the respect for. While I understand your point, I don't think color had anything to do with this case at all. It would have been the same outcome if it had been a similar model in walnut brown. I think you and I agree mom with the issue in the lap of the parent. And I'll state again, I'd say it would be extremely difficult for the avg 5yo to engage the bolt to arm this weapon. So, it was left out, loaded, and armed.
May 7, 201313 yr If a parent allows their child to ride their bike or skateboard without protective gear , they SHOULD be held liable. I'm not sure what the laws are everywhere else, but in Louisville, bike helmets are a law....which is really ironic as motorcyclists do not have to wear helmets...but I digress...That's not the point I'm making. The point is there are no call for bans, manufacturers aren't blamed and the bikes aren't demonized nor are the owners of bikes. I am not a fan of "fashion weaponry" at all.Why? Color or fashion doesn't cause crimes, right?
May 7, 201313 yr Several things had to happen in order for this tragedy to occur. A gun company had to decide to market cute-colored deadly weapons. A parent had to decide, "Isn't that cute/cool? That's the deadly weapon I want my 5 year-old child to have!" The VAST majority will have been conscientious stewards of said deadly weapon, but... ...Most important - BY FAR - that parent (or someone in authority) had to leave the deadly weapon where the 5 year-old could get at it, unsupervised. The bullet from the deadly weapon had to strike the 2 year-old in such a manner so as to result in a mortal wound. How did the first thing have anything to do with this?
May 7, 201313 yr Is there seriously an argument being made that a gun company is targeting 5 year olds by making their guns in pink? Everyone stop and think how that statement fails on so many levels.
May 7, 201313 yr Is there seriously an argument being made that a gun company is targeting 5 year olds by making their guns in pink? Everyone stop and think how that statement fails on so many levels.Exactly!
May 7, 201313 yr Is there seriously an argument being made that a gun company is targeting 5 year olds by making their guns in pink? Everyone stop and think how that statement fails on so many levels. Good luck with that.
May 7, 201313 yr Is there seriously an argument being made that a gun company is targeting 5 year olds by making their guns in pink? Everyone stop and think how that statement fails on so many levels. Why did Crickett pull the plug on its website? Company That Sold Rifle That Killed 2-Year-Old Yanks Its Kids Advertising | TPM News
May 7, 201313 yr Why did Crickett pull the plug on its website? Company That Sold Rifle That Killed 2-Year-Old Yanks Its Kids Advertising | TPM News How many commercials have you seen on Nickelodeon for a pink cricket? Or on any chanenl for that matter? What about billboards next to Chuckie Cheese? Guess what, there are none. The only place you find gun adds is in gun magazines. And last time I checked there aren't any kiddie gun magazines. Barney isn't coming on his show packing a purple AR. There is no marketing campaigne towards 5 year olds by gun companies. They market to adults who buy guns like this for thier kids. Yes, if I'm going to buy a gun for my son I will let him go pick it out. And yes he will probably be more inclined to pick the one that is a cool color. But guess what, it's still on me as the adult to make sure the gun is safely secured in my house. If Spindoc comes over packing a gun in my house it is still my responsibilty to make sure while the gun is in my house it is secured safely from kids. Put the balme where it belongs, on the parents.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.