One more tragic incident
 

According to a Cincinnati paper, an 8 year old boy was killed Saturday when one of his brothers aimed a BB pistol at him and pulled the trigger. Turns out, it was a real handgun. The boys were playing at an uncle's house when it happened.

I guess the uncle wanted to be prepared for intruders so the pistol was not locked away and was loaded.

Too many children are killed this way.

Sounds like Uncle Fool had a weapon without proper training or background.

Less weapons with more control on who can own. NOW!!!!

If the NRA gets it's way, it will no longer be necessary to lock up your guns as you will not be charged in these type of cases.

Also, the Florida Legislature is proposing expanding the 'Stand Your Ground Law' to make it perfectly legal to fire warning shots into the air. What a stellar idea. Can you imagine sitting at the town squares and having warning shots fired all around you?

Reading these stories makes me sick to my stomach. I have an eight year old great nephew.

Now is the time to contact your FL legislator, since their annual session begins on Tuesday. Not that it will do any good.

gun controls will not eliminate stupidity!

It would stop unqualified people from buying guns and ammunition like it was popcorn and soda.

If you are opposed to firearms for self-defense, and don't want one in your home .... don't buy one.

If the stupid uncle did not have a loaded pistol that was not locked away, the 8 year old boy would still be alive.

Kind of like the loaded 12 gauge pump shotgun laying under the bed waiting to blow away a burglar, isn't it?

...but the boy's uncle did want a pistol for self protection; he bought one; kept it loaded and handy; and his 8 year old nephew got killed with it.

There are many many accidental shooting every year. We need control to help this horrible statistic come down.

Gun accidents happen because too many gun owners have no ability to do so.

First, I do not own a gun and never have. No fascination with guns ever in my life.

Now, I say that so it is clear I have "no dog in the race" so to speak. I have followed this conversation for years and have come to an opinion AND have a question for both sides of the debate.

My opinion.....this is another of those cable news issues, made important by them as they accent individual crimes and ignore the big picture totally. That has led it to be a political issue totally....one side versus the other and when that happens we have selected statistics supplied and nothing but emotion. That is my opinion as I watch from "the sidelines"....politics !!

Now, my question for both sides is this.....it took me a while to find this article which I read awhile back but finally found it. From Forbes magazine....and knowing that most folks simply ignore links that they do not feel will back their viewpoint, will try to give you an overview and ask both sides for opinions...

"Disarming Realities: As Gun Sales Soar, Gun Crimes Plummet"

"According to DOJ’s Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. gun-related homicides dropped 39 percent over the course of 18 years, from 18,253 during 1993, to 11,101 in 2011. During the same period, non-fatal firearm crimes decreased even more, a whopping 69 percent. The majority of those declines in both categories occurred during the first 10 years of that time frame. Firearm homicides declined from 1993 to 1999, rose through 2006, and then declined again through 2011. Non-fatal firearm violence declined from 1993 through 2004, then fluctuated in the mid-to-late 2000s.

And where did the bad people who did the shooting get most of their guns? Were those gun show “loopholes” responsible? Nope. According to surveys DOJ conducted of state prison inmates during 2004 (the most recent year of data available), only two percent who owned a gun at the time of their offense bought it at either a gun show or flea market. About 10 percent said they purchased their gun from a retail shop or pawnshop, 37 percent obtained it from family or friends, and another 40 percent obtained it from an illegal source.

While firearm violence accounted for about 70 percent of all homicides between 1993 and 2011, guns were used in less than 10 percent of all non-fatal violent crimes. Between 70 percent and 80 percent of those firearm homicides involved a handgun, and 90 percent of non-fatal firearm victimizations were committed with a handgun. Males, blacks, and persons aged 18-24 had the highest firearm homicide rates."

Disarming Realities: As Gun Sales Soar, Gun Crimes Plummet - Forbes

I do not believe that the sources are in anyway at all political which is important...While I understand the debate in itself, as it has been going on a long long time (even before the internet), all I see is the magnifying of single events that have characters or circumstances in involved that will show good on television.

PLEASE...dont give me the little smart retort about the children in CT. or another sensational crime. Of course that was a tragedy under any and all circumstances....I would love to hear unemotional debate on the subject, and love an response to my opinion.

I am not sufficiently informed to go deeper....I just see it as another media fueled political debate until I hear other wise.

I am a gun owner and have been for approx 55 years. I still practice gun safety, use shooting ranges to stay proficient with weapons. I truly believe it should be at least as involved to buy any weapon or even more so than it is to obtain a drivers license.

Yes, I know, and the uncle was a moron and should be prosecuted or sued. But, in the meantime, most gun owners are responsible so let's not overreact by constraining our legitimate right to self defense. That's where these discussions seem to always lead.

What about drivers of vehicles killing children, their drowning or dying in fires? The tragic deaths of children from these causes far outnumber their accidental deaths from guns yet the latter deaths appear to get the most publicity, largely from anti-gun media.

RealClearPolicy - How Common Are Child Gun Accidents?

Absolutely, this was a terrible tragedy. However, how old was the brother that pulled the trigger? Was he old enough to know better? Even if it had been a BB pistol, pointing it at his brother and pulling the trigger was unacceptable. Was this truly an accident or negligent behavior by an older brother? As soon as they are old enough to understand, all children should be taught gun safety and the consequences of mishandling firearms. As far as children dying from gun accidents, 2010 figures from the CDC list firearm deaths as 1.5% of all unintentional fatalities of children 14 and under. Motor vehicle accidents were number one at 34%, suffocation number two at 27%, drowning number three at 18%, fires number four at 7%, etc. Firearm deaths were number eight on the list.

Anyone ever remember that we have "the right to bear arms " according to, I believe, the constitution? You can't punish all for the stupidity of some. Firm approver of the NRA and "stand your ground ". The uncle's life is over because he was careless. Most gun owners have a brain.

Allow me to correct, or at least put into proper context what you are saying.

1. Laws governing the locking of guns is mostly a state effort, which is good although there are laws on the books now. A federal law passed in 2005 covers it and in Florida ..."states that any person who stores or leaves a loaded firearm on premises under his or her control, and who knows or reasonably should know that a person under age 16 is likely to gain access to the firearm without the lawful permission of the minor’s parent or person having charge of the minor, or without supervision required by law, must do one of the following:

Keep the firearm in a securely locked box or container;

Keep the firearm in a location which a reasonable person would believe to be secure; or

Secure the firearm with a trigger lock.1

According to what I could find, the NRA is also in strong support of that....can you allow us where you are getting the NRA proposal ??

2. The expansion of the Stand your Ground law simply is clarifying. About 23 states have this law, and problem was in Florida that you were in more serious danger if you pulled a gun and warned someone.....you seemed to be better of LEGALLY to shoot. That is the clarification being made. Just wanted to clarify the way your presented it.

NRA fights for the right to leave unsecured guns around children.


NRA News Fights For The Right To Leave Unsecured Guns Around Children | Blog | Media Matters for America

WITH all due respect, have you actually read that article ? Beyond the headline I mean ?? WOW is all I can say.

And,as I said, it is still very misleading to say what you said and I again do not have a dog in this race, but misleading stuff like this tends to distort any discussion...it just aint true...PLEASE read the article. This is an article I will keep as I am engaged in ongoing work on the media distortion of facts.

I am not defending the NRA, just defending honesty actually.

I will offer the following from the NRA website...

"Store guns so they are not accessible to unauthorized persons.
Many factors must be considered when deciding where and how to store guns. A person's particular situation will be a major part of the consideration. Dozens of gun storage devices, as well as locking devices that attach directly to the gun, are available. However, mechanical locking devices, like the mechanical safeties built into guns, can fail and should not be used as a substitute for safe gun handling and the observance of all gun safety rules."

Education and Training|NRA Gun Safety Rules

Your post is an excellent example of the pure emotionalism that always seems to surround this debate. It's not about scaring people ... it's not about having a bogeyman to point at ... it's about a right to defend yourself.

The source you cite is also mega-partisan thus hardly persuasive.

[QUOTE=TexaninVA;838364]

. it's about a right to defend yourself.


I guess the 8 year old boy's uncle defended himself with his pistol quite well?

Now, he will have to have a lawyer defend him!

When I was in elementary school, in a one-square-mile middle-to-upper class suburb of Pittsburgh, our family doctor, who was obviously intelligent enough to get through medical school, kept a loaded gun in the desk in his home office. His teenage son and younger son were fooling around in the office after school one day, and found the gun. The teenager pointed it at his younger brother. It went off and killed the brother. I was there in school when the principal showed up and pulled their young sister out of the classroom. She was younger than I, but the news somehow traveled fast through the school.

This family was never the same. The son and the father retreated to a place no one could reach. We were a close-knit community, back in the '60s, with elementary through high school all at the same spot, within walking distance for everyone. Everyone knew everyone. Everyone used Dr. Koenig. Everyone experienced the devastation that ensued.

My first point is that it doesn't take a moron to fail to practice safety where guns are concerned. It crosses all socio-economic boundaries, all intelligence levels.

My second point is that many of us formed our views about gun ownership from personal experiences. I know I did. I was only in the sixth grade. I knew these people, played with Steve and Danny Koenig, and I am haunted to this day.

I know some will say anecdotal, blah, blah, blah. But it keeps happening, doesn't it?

This debate is seemingly going the way of politics, and single stories. To those who have strong opinions.....if gun deaths plummet as gun sales soar.....what do you think that means ? And please leave your politics at the door. Again, my opinion, this subject falls into that category of media spurred, media flamed political discussions. SILENCE until a noteworthy death occurs, then time to make some point with no regard to facts.

I sincerely want to hear counters to what appears to be solid information, not political mish mash

I respect your feelings, but according to statistics, it does NOT keep happening. I have a special interest in the media control over our life...not sure where this fits, but thus far as sales rise, deaths go down, BUT if a story can tug at us, the media will explode with it and repeat it over and over.

I would ask why can't we put our politics aside when having such a discussion,but our media does not allow that.

I understand what you are saying Bucco, but "facts" can be and are often manipulated to make the point favored by the author. Personal experiences, rational opinions, and even politics ( much to my dismay) are or can be, a legitimate part of the discussion.

But Bucco... the rate of incidence may be going down, but the accidents are still happening.

You are absolutely correct, but as you maintained in a separate debate...I think the facts were supplied by the DOJ, the FBI, etc, not a media or group with special interests.

My point about the personal stories is to simply point out, this is ONLY an issue when a STORY sadly occurs that fits the position to be told. It does not seem ever to go anywhere near facts or context. It is left entirely to emotions, which is why the selection of and presentation of selected stories is used.

Listen I do not own a gun, have no feelings at all about the NRA...I was/am struck by the seemingly political only discussions....

I think that is inspired by the media.

I took this opportunity to ask the OP and others who have, or seem to have, strong feelings on this how they feel about the FACTS.

I have no desire to divide....but I do not like discussions that may or may not, influence legislation in this country to be devoid of discussion of facts...and you know I agree that source is important...presented by the countries law enforcement experts.

To allow that is just like giving it up and allowing the loudest and best financed to dictate law.

I will shut up and go away, but discussing single incidents wrapped around seeking legislation, without allowing facts to enter is wrong in my .

Yes..sadly. But do you ever hear this debate in context...do you ever hear how sad a situation was, but keep in mind, etc. Do you ever hear a legitimate, adult conversation.

I may have missed them, but all I hear is sensationalism, and attempts to put folks on the defense. I recall my reading these facts, but NEVER hearing anything about them anywhere. And when alluded to, you are put on the defensive (as I am feeling)

I simply asked a question about what folks think about those stats...I have heard about the NRA alleged and untrue movement, stand your ground, etc.

Locking of guns are covered by law...federal and state (in 23 states).....what is our point of these sensational stories if it has no point EXCEPT ..for what ?

Let us discuss much more strict punishment for DUI, which does factually kill many...let us make a headline for every crash that kills children because of DUI. Those stories are presented in a much different light !

[quote=buggyone;838372]So what would you truly, honestly like to see? The Australian solution where private ownership of firearms is outlawed? What would you recommend?

Well, we may be talking in the same vein. One of my points was that personal experience with gun tragedy colors many people's views on gun ownership laws--including mine. If they could show me that if everyone bought a gun these incidents would disappear, I'd be out at the nearest gun shop.

I do, however, think we hear about every innocent person who is killed by a drunk driver. And I think it has gone a long way toward tightening the drinking/driving laws and penalties.

But where are the penalties for the idiots who leave loaded guns lying around the house for whatever reason? Do they end up in jail like the drunk drivers? I'd like to see those statistics, because I believe they are simply pitied because they suffered a tragedy but not made to pay for their stupidity/laziness/lack of awareness.

This is the way to do it
 

[quote=TexaninVA;838415]A common misconception is that firearms are illegal in Australia and that no individual may possess them. While it's true that Australia has restrictive firearms laws, rifles and shotguns (including semi-automatic), as well as handguns are all legal within a narrow set of criteria.


the federal government and the states and territories agreed to a uniform approach to firearms regulation, including a ban on certain semiautomatic and self-loading rifles and shotguns, standard licensing and permit criteria, storage requirements and inspections, and greater restrictions on the sale of firearms and ammunition. Firearms license applicants are required to take a safety course and show a “genuine reason” for owning a firearm, which could not include self-defense. The reasons for refusing a license would include “reliable evidence of a mental or physical condition which would render the applicant unsuitable for owning, possessing or using a firearm.” A waiting period of twenty-eight days would apply to the issuing of both firearms licenses and permits to acquire each weapon.

A common-sense approach, IMO.

Well said, and deeply felt.

[quote=TexaninVA;838415]I do not know about Australian rules. I was on a recent cruise to Australia and several Australians that I spoke with were surprised to find out I could obtain a concealed carry permit with no testing of rules or skill but just by paying about $110.

I do not advocate banning guns. I advocate showing a legitimate need for carrying and not the b.s. about "it is my right" to carry. It is just ridiculous to think carrying a gun in The Villages is necessary.

I advocate "smart" guns so kids could not accidently shoot them.

[quote=buggyone;838471]:BigApplause::BigApplause:

[quote=buggyone;838471]
Just out of curiosity, in your opinion what would be "a legitimate reason for carrying a gun"? Particularly if you consider it b.s. "That it is your Right", per the 2nd Amendment of our a Constitution.

[quote=Cajulian;838483]Get your quotes right if you are going to quote someone. I said Legitimate NEED. Please play your semantics games with someone else. If you do not think I am right, so be it. 'Nuff said

Big sigh!!!! When will all this madness end?

[QUOTE=buggyone;838489]Ouch. That IS important. Especially when stating opposing views.

[quote=buggyone;838471]I support what you say here. I also apologize for hi jacking your thread, but I never posted until we leaped to "stand your ground" and condemnation of the NRA as a knee jerk reaction. There are laws governing what you are alarmed about and they should be enforced.

[quote=buggyone;838471]There are legitimate reasons why someone might be carrying a concealed weapon in the Villages. I had a stalker for maybe a school year @ 1989-1990- Gail P-- at the University of Minnesota Law Library while on the reference desk. She was well known to the U of MN police as she had chained herself to her previous fixation's desk. Her rights were emphasized though. She harassed my live- in girlfriend Jennifer V. at the time who was a year behind me in law school. (Class of 1990) My girlfriend complained to the Director of the Law Library M. Kathleen Price about it and to anyone else who would listen including me. This stalking kept on as her rights again were important. The last straw for the administration seemed to be her following me home one day. I, of course, complained about it. She seemed to have something quite off about her especially when judged by her previous behavior around the U of MN. And, I am no George Clooney.

I believe that others on TOTV have had these kind of experiences-- stalkers, angry ex-spouses, jilted lovers, cheating, etc.-- which can get even worse if for some reason bad choices in friendship and/or romances were made. I have also certainly made quite a lot of those especially in law school (U of MN- Class of 1989). You see what you want to see in some person and that person turns out far different from the image that you had of her.

A lot of reasons for carrying a concealed weapon would probably involve bad judgments within relationships.

Personally, I do not think I could ever shoot another human being and shudder at the idea of doing such a thing. But, I suppose if loved ones' lives were threatened then that is another matter.

I would like to see more arguments based on facts like some of these on this thread. I still see no need for many of the weapons on the US streets to be in the hands of law abided citizens. Of course, the criminals will still be able to get weapons because they never follow the laws that apply to citizens.

And, there might be a legitimate need for a loaded gun in a bedroom especially if domestic violence has been in that household and one of the parties is a lot stronger than the other. I do not see any easy answers.

I grew up in Reno, Nevada were guns in preteens hands was a common occurrence especially if you lived in more rural area of Reno. You did learn gun safety however and accidents caused by negligence, stupidity, or ill will still happened.

[quote=buggyone;838471]Let's focus on where we agree as a means to progress ...

1. I'm glad you don't advocate banning guns. That's a non-starter anyway.

2. The law permits people to carry hence assumes the need. However, I agree that making sure people are trained in the use of firearms is both reasonable and desirable.

3. I also agree that carrying concealed within the interior of TV is not needed at present ... however Leesburg and other impoverished places is another story. I would carry there for sure. You can also make a case to carry on the periphery ...ie recent robbery of an elderly woman in broad daylight just off 441.