quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin
You guys are so worried about the children, why not worry about all the other things that are dangerous to children.

Missed by a mile. No, actually, you missed the point by 1,000 miles.

No one mentioned "child safety" in particular. The issue is about public carry vs. public safety. The bullet could have hit anyone in that Walmart, child or adult.

Some of us are not nearly so worried about the children as we are about fuckwit adults putting the public in harm's way by availing toddlers of loaded weapons in a crowded public place. The fact that it was an inadvertent 'woops!' in this case all the more argues the point against the mentally inept being allowed public carry. But we only require one or two lessons at the firing range for a PC license, no instructions to the child who happens upon the same weapon. No IQ test for the PC parents, just put the bullet somewhere within two yards of the target and here's your license.


The OP was about the irony of some adult buying and carrying a gun in public, "for protection," when this incident points out that there was no protection at all of this particular adult from her own stupidity. And the observant reader sees that this unfortunate incident also points out the fact that there is no protection from such idiots when they public carry that idiocy into a crowded public place, much less any "safety."

Child or adult; stupid is stupid, and dead is dead.

Keep it in your house, don't bring it into public. Simple as that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin
You guys are so worried about the children, why not worry about all the other things that are dangerous to children.

Missed by a mile. No, actually, you missed the point by 1,000 miles.

No one mentioned "child safety" in particular. The issue is about public carry vs. public safety. The bullet could have hit anyone in that Walmart, child or adult.

Some of us are not nearly so worried about the children as we are about fuckwit adults putting the public in harm's way by availing toddlers of loaded weapons in a crowded public place. The fact that it was an inadvertent 'woops!' in this case all the more argues the point against the mentally inept being allowed public carry. But we only require one or two lessons at the firing range for a PC license, no instructions to the child who happens upon the same weapon. No IQ test for the PC parents, just put the bullet somewhere within two yards of the target and here's your license.


The OP was about the irony of some adult buying and carrying a gun in public, "for protection," when this incident points out that there was no protection at all of this particular adult from her own stupidity. And the observant reader sees that this unfortunate incident also points out the fact that there is no protection from such idiots when they public carry that idiocy into a crowded public place, much less any "safety."

Child or adult; stupid is stupid, and dead is dead.

Keep it in your house, don't bring it into public. Simple as that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Im done flagellating expired equines.
NEXT

if you mean literally flagellating "me please me"... if it's a code for talking about gun control I'm out...

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
Im done flagellating expired equines.
NEXT

if you mean literally flagellating "me please me"... if it's a code for talking about gun control I'm out...

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn
The OP was about the irony of some adult buying and carrying a gun in public, "for protection," when this incident points out that there was no protection at all of this particular adult from her own stupidity. And the observant reader sees that this unfortunate incident also points out the fact that there is no protection from such idiots when they public carry that idiocy into a crowded public place, much less any "safety."

Child or adult; stupid is stupid, and dead is dead.

Keep it in your house, don't bring it into public. Simple as that.

No the point is about the attempt to exploit a tragedy for a cheap and callous attempt at political advantage.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn
The OP was about the irony of some adult buying and carrying a gun in public, "for protection," when this incident points out that there was no protection at all of this particular adult from her own stupidity. And the observant reader sees that this unfortunate incident also points out the fact that there is no protection from such idiots when they public carry that idiocy into a crowded public place, much less any "safety."

Child or adult; stupid is stupid, and dead is dead.

Keep it in your house, don't bring it into public. Simple as that.

No the point is about the attempt to exploit a tragedy for a cheap and callous attempt at political advantage.

Oh right, ya got me there. Caught red handed.

So any reporting of traffic deaths from either drunk driving or manufacturer vehicle defect, or deaths from any cause whatsoever is deemed by you to be only fodder for 'exploitation' for 'political advantage.'

What a sorry excuse for putative cognitive function is your warped politico mind.

There's a real world out there, whenever you deign to get around to it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
No the point is about the attempt to exploit a tragedy for a cheap and callous attempt at political advantage.

quote:

as it is you only have yet another stupid strawman argument.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn


Right. So any concern about vehicle safety or inebriated driving equates to an argument for banning all vehicles.

"We don't have our 'smart cap' on today, do we?"

quote:

And yet accidental drownings are on the top of the list of cause of death. But I have yet to hear anyone seriously suggest we do away with them

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

quote:

And yet accidental drownings are on the top of the list of cause of death. But I have yet to hear anyone seriously suggest we do away with them

I just do not understand this way of thinking...I do not know the statistics for accidental drownings but if new laws were enacted to reduce those... would you oppose them? Can you imagine a national organization of pool builders lobbying against these laws as the NRA lobby's against gun laws to limit child deaths?

Besides the above why would you object to saving the lives of hundreds of children...simply because hundreds of others drown? Can you not hear how ridiculous this argument is?

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn


Right. So any concern about vehicle safety or inebriated driving equates to an argument for banning all vehicles.

"We don't have our 'smart cap' on today, do we?"

You don't read well do you?
I said IF that would make reporting on accidents being used the same way this tragedy is being used. You don't seem to understand the difference the IF makes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn


Right. So any concern about vehicle safety or inebriated driving equates to an argument for banning all vehicles.

"We don't have our 'smart cap' on today, do we?"

You don't read well do you?
I said IF that would make reporting on accidents being used the same way this tragedy is being used. You don't seem to understand the difference the IF makes.

You don't understand the OP, much less any preposition of the English language.

How is the 'tragedy being used'? By simple reporting of facts? Was it mentioned in the OP or in fact in any post herein that "all guns should be banned"?

Clearly, you lack the most basic reading comprehension skills, and so have no grounds whatsoever for calling out anyone else's understanding of the word "IF."

IF the OP or anyone else had mentioned banning of all guns, you might have had a point.

IF wishes were fishes, you'd have a net full of clues.

But alas ...

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
It is because many people on here only see a problem if it is guns and no big deal if it is something else.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
It is because many people on here only see a problem if it is guns and no big deal if it is something else.

No, actually, it's a matter of you and some others in this thread only see a problem if it's any reporting of a fuckwit who does something incredibly stupid with a gun in public and endangering society, and no big deal if it's something else. Certainly not the incidence of this abject stupidity itself. No big deal, that.

quote:


And of course that we must do "something" to keep parents from exposing kids to guns.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
It is because many people on here only see a problem if it is guns and no big deal if it is something else.

No, actually, it's a matter of you and some others in this thread only see a problem if it's any reporting of a fuckwit who does something incredibly stupid with a gun in public and endangering society, and no big deal if it's something else. Certainly not the incidence of this abject stupidity itself. No big deal, that.