BamaD
Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote:
ORIGINAL: BamaD quote:
ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote:
ORIGINAL: Kirata quote:
ORIGINAL: tazzygirl I would PREFER holding the parents accountable when children are left home, unattended, with a loaded gun in the house. That's it? Period? The end? As it seems to me, the examples clearly show that at least some young people of a certain age can be left alone with firearms present, perfectly safely, and to their benefit if untoward circumstances arise. Why do you PREFER to ignore evidence of that fact even when it's put right under your nose? K. One had no training, as admitted by the mother. The other, we have no clue what training, if any, he had. I PREFER for parents to actually have to accept responsibility for their own actions. This kid will have to go through years of therapy. Even adults get skattered after shooting someone, and we expect a kid to be able to handle that? My point is that this never should have happened in the first place. We wouldnt be having this discussion if the 14 year old didnt have access to a gun and was murdered. I am thankful he wasnt. I have no issues with him knowing how to defend himself. I resent that any kid that age is placed into that position to begin with. And yet everyone wants to applaud the fact that a kid had to shoot someone trying to break into his home when, had he been with his father, either his father would have shot the man or this situation never would have come up. Better the 14 year old than nobody. Better the 14 year old have to shoot at someone that no one shoot at someone. Makes your parenting post that much clearer No better that the 14 year old was able to protect himself than nobody to protect him and you are too smart not to know that is what I meant.
|