Daily, DAILY there are children who are killed, harmed, kill others or harm others with "responsible" gun owners' weapons.

 

That just is not happening.

 

Talk about fear mongering.

What does this have to do with keeping squirrely 13-year-old foster kids separated from loaded guns? A better analogy might be when cowboys in 1870 had to take off their gunbelts before they could hit the saloons in Dodge City.

 

The two rights have nothing to do with each other individually. All I am saying is if one thinks it's ok for the state to limit one of them, then it's easy to extrapolate it would be ok to limit another one. The thought process is the same.

The two rights have nothing to do with each other individually. All I am saying is if one thinks it's ok for the state to limit one of them, then it's easy to extrapolate it would be ok to limit another one. The thought process is the same.

All rights under the Bill of Rights have strings attached. Yes? Why would guns be different from freedom of speech, for instance? I can say whatever I want, but I can't yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater, and if I slander someone, I can be sued in court. First Amendment allows me to own a newspaper unshackled by government interference, but I still can be sued for libel.

 

The 2nd Amendment does not mean the feds or the state cannot impose rules. That's what metal detectors at courthouses and airports are about.

Question for the NRA supporters - is there any law controlling gun ownership and/or use that is constitutional?

 

I did not mean this to be taken as a rhetorical question. Anyone want to provide an opinion or answer to the question?

I did not mean this to be taken as a rhetorical question. Anyone want to provide an opinion or answer to the question?

 

I think the silence is your answer....

Injury Research and Policy Gun Research :: Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, Ohio

So, on average, 4.11 children are hurt or killed by guns per day.

So, on average, 4.11 children are hurt or killed by guns per day.

 

Actually, I read it to be that's the number that are killed by guns per day. Can only imagine how much higher it is when you take into account those that are injured.

So, on average, 4.11 children are hurt or killed by guns per day.

Car wrecks are the leading cause of death for kids 0-14. 2,136 deaths in that age group in 2003. If we extrapolate your number of 4.11 per day, that would be 1,500 per year.

 

I'm going to wait for the outrage about the danger of vehicles in foster care and the call for banning all foster parents from having cars.

And there are laws and regulations about transporting children in vehicles. Car seats, front facing vs. Rear facing. Harness requirements....all these things impeding you right to own a car.

Injury Research and Policy Gun Research :: Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, Ohio

 

So, on average, 4.11 children are hurt or killed by guns per day.

 

Here's how facts can be blured.

 

From the link:

 

Gun-Related Injury Facts

• Nearly 1,500 children younger than 18 years of age die from shootings every year.

• More American homes have guns than dogs.

• 1 in 3 families with children have at least one gun in the house. There are more than 22 million children living in homes with guns.

• Most of the victims of unintentional shootings are boys. They are usually shot by a friend or relative, especially a brother.

• Half of all unintentional shooting deaths among children occur at home, and almost half occur in the home of a friend or relative.

 

First stat states 1,500 kids under 18 are killed every year from shootings. Ok, that may be very true, and I can't/won't argue that fact. And its horrible. However, how many of those are accidents/unintentional? Because unlike stats they throw out below that one, this particular stat does not carry the unintentional as a qualifier. By adding the unintentional qualifier to everything below it, they change the focus in the middle of the discussion.

 

So, as we know this organization believes guns should not be in the home. That is stated in the link: "The American Academy of Pediatrics believes the best way to prevent gun-related injuries to children is to remove guns from the home". Of the 1,500 number they state, how many of those were out right murders, drive by shootings, killed by a crazy mommy/daddy like the two young girls by their retired cop dad a few days ago? That's info that's needed before they change the platform to "unintentional"...which I believe them to mean accidental shootings in or near the home.

 

Then, again when you change the focus to "unintentional" shootings...how many of those were deemed to have taken place in a completely irresponsible household/setting? Hey, if Billy Bob only has half a brain and is completely irresponsible with a gun because he's strung out on meth and drunk most of the time and has children, then I don't want him having guns either. And even more importantly shouldn't have the kids. I'd argue very very few accidental shootings happen in responsible gun owners homes.

 

So, with that said, I think there is a lot of info missing here that is pertinent to the discussion.

Well, if they were murders, they would be deemed intentional, thus those statistics are separate. And I will bet you dimes to donuts, every one of those gun owners felt they were responsible gun owners. Everytime it's discussion comes up on BGP, the response by the majority is "It's a tragedy...but..." If I drive my car with an unrestrained 2 year old and have a wreck and they are killed, it doesn't matter if I had never had a wreck before, thereby being considered a responsible driver. If my 13 year old takes my car and runs over a pedestrian, it's my fault. The same should apply to weapons. And similar laws should govern the ownership, and similar penalties should apply if just that ONE time a owner was irresponsible.

Unintentional don't mean it didn't happen.

Well, if they were murders, they would be deemed intentional, thus those statistics are separate. And I will bet you dimes to donuts, every one of those gun owners felt they were responsible gun owners. Everytime it's discussion comes up on BGP, the response by the majority is "It's a tragedy...but..." If I drive my car with an unrestrained 2 year old and have a wreck and they are killed, it doesn't matter if I had never had a wreck before, thereby being considered a responsible driver. If my 13 year old takes my car and runs over a pedestrian, it's my fault. The same should apply to weapons. And similar laws should govern the ownership, and similar penalties should apply if just that ONE time a owner was irresponsible.

 

Probably. But because they THINK they are doesn't mean they are. I know several drunks who say they drive better while drinking. Doesn't make it so.

Well, if they were murders, they would be deemed intentional, thus those statistics are separate. And I will bet you dimes to donuts, every one of those gun owners felt they were responsible gun owners. Everytime it's discussion comes up on BGP, the response by the majority is "It's a tragedy...but..." If I drive my car with an unrestrained 2 year old and have a wreck and they are killed, it doesn't matter if I had never had a wreck before, thereby being considered a responsible driver. If my 13 year old takes my car and runs over a pedestrian, it's my fault. The same should apply to weapons. And similar laws should govern the ownership, and similar penalties should apply if just that ONE time a owner was irresponsible.

 

That's just it. The first stat says 1,500 under 18 die from shootings. It does not stipulate intentional or unintentional. Later down they add the "unintentional" qualifier. That's my point, that's how you blur "facts". So the way I read it and the way I bet the fact actually is...1,500 kids 18 under die from shootings is a total number, and not an "unintentional only" number.