Fatal shooting of firing range instructor by 9 year old girl and an Uzi

[magnifier661]

Right for all whom? For all 9 years old? I have a 9 y/o and let me tell you, this is not a right she needs, heck, the kid can't even keep the floor of her room safe for human habitat.

I handled plenty of guns in my time and I have seen what they can do when you put them in the hands of people that had actually gone through extensive safety training - some people really should not handle guns no matter how much supervision and education you give them - putting one in a 9 y/o hands is moronic on so many levels it is not even funny, even if there are properly trained instructors there. The blame, imho, is both on the parents for bringing a kid there for the activity and the instructor for allowing them to do so and not properly monitoring it - and to me, at least, anyone that puts kids in a position like that is a moron and maybe, just maybe, society should stop the morons from putting innocents (kids) in these situations.

FWIW - I personally do not care for Uzi's at all, they are crappy little guns and you can see that these things were designed in the 50s or so. I do not have any desire to fire guns anymore, but when I did - Uzi's were pretty much my least favorite semi's.

Compare apples to apples. It is illegal for a 9 year old to own a gun.

 

[andalusian]

Compare apples to apples. It is illegal for a 9 year old to own a gun.

I have no problems with adults owning guns, given proper procedures to get them. I do believe however that there are some things minor should not do, and firing semi automatics seems pretty much like a good restriction to put on minors.

 

[magnifier661]

Actually, I'm not even going that far with this particular issue. Perhaps ranges could have state set protocols for children or something lie that. My real problem isn't with this exact issue, it's with the unwillingness of people on all sides to (of many issues) to realize there are common sense measures that should be adhered to. Not overly restrictive ones meant to punish law abiding citizens like disallowing "evil looking" guns instead of paying attention to the actual usage and effect of the gun of issue at hand. And not overly loose laws like allowing person to person gun sales that avoid a background check.

Protocols are fine. I'm not against that. What I'm against is using a few incidents to ban guns

 

[magnifier661]

I have no problems with adults owning guns, given proper procedures to get them. I do believe however that there are some things minor should not do, and firing semi automatics seems pretty much like a good restriction to put on minors.

100% agree. I would go even further and put a restriction on caliber bullets for minors.

 

[MadeFromDust]

I have no problems with adults owning guns, given proper procedures to get them. I do believe however that there are some things minor should not do, and firing semi automatics seems pretty much like a good restriction to put on minors.

So bolt-action rifles, revolvers, and pump shotguns are okay?

 

[andalusian]

So bolt-action rifles, revolvers, and pump shotguns are okay?

No. Only Staples big red buttons. If we are preparing the future generation for war, let's not muck around and get them directly to the WMDs.

 

[MadeFromDust]

Yes because that's totally what people buy guns for.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

I also know that 90+ million gun owners did not harm anyone yesterday or have a single accident.

link? this seems preposterous

 

[Further]

Is it illegal? Are you sure?

Whatever company might try and make nukes would need the resources of a government. See Oak Ridge and Savannah River facilities for example.

As someone who has worked with radioactive material, the government plays a very tight role, huge fines and possibly more dire repercussions for mishandling or not following rules with the material. And transferring from one lab to another for totally legit reasons means establishing and getting approved a new protocol.

 

[MadeFromDust]

link? this seems preposterous

What does? I don't see 90 million gun stories bannered across the headlines. We are not living in a war zone despite what certain media outlets want you to believe.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

What does? I don't see 90 million gun stories bannered across the headlines. We are not living in a war zone despite what certain media outlets want you to believe.

ah i read that as none of them harmed anyone or had an accident. which they obviously do, every day

 

[Natebishop3]

Sure, we could use RPGs (and we have, in the past) to show that we all have limits. It doesn't matter which we use, when the point is the same: even so-called free societies establish limits.

We have limits. Do you have any idea how hard it is to buy a machine gun?

This was a controlled environment. People can go to ranges, or sometimes large events, where they can rent a machine gun and fire off a few rounds. It's extremely expensive to shoot a machine gun.

Why does every damn news story about guns have to turn into a debate about gun control? I really don't see how this event has any bearing whatsoever on gun control.

 

[donkiez]

I watch the news every day, and I also know that 90+ million gun owners did not harm anyone yesterday or have a single accident. Punishing the entire population for the actions of a minute fraction is ludicrous.

Thousands of airplanes landed safely yesterday also, but we still push for better safety protocalls and training, as well as requiring ID to travel and more advanced security measures. Is that punishment?

 

[MadeFromDust]

That's not what I said. Read again carefully.

 

[donkiez]

ah i read that as none of them harmed anyone or had an accident. which they obviously do, every day

They do, gun accidents are a daily occurance in our country. Its becoming common enough that it doesn't make front page all the time, which is scarey.

 

[MadeFromDust]

Thousands of airplanes landed safely yesterday also, but we still push for better safety protocalls and training, as well as requiring ID to travel and more advanced security measures. Is that punishment?

How is this a comparison? And I'm not sure what your solution proposal is.

 

[Natebishop3]

Parents who simply turn over their kids to a business thinking the business has all safety measures put into place are not being responsible parents in my eyes. Everything from play gyms, paintball, trampoline centers, boating events, firing guns . . . and many others. These businesses are often more concerned about turning a profit than ensuring child safety. Even if the business put safety high on the list, sometimes the people making the decisions aren't the sharpest knives in the drawer.

Parents should do their due diligence before allowing a child to partake in potentially dangerous activities.

How many parents turn their kids over to an instructor to teach them how to swim? Is that not a potentially dangerous activity?

There are a ton of potentially dangerous activities, but we rely on certified professionals to provide us with a safe environment to conduct these activities. I'm sure the parents thought this was going to be a perfectly safe environment. It's a range. It's most likely a certified instructor. I imagine they probably asked for the smallest caliber machine gun available, which would be something like the Uzi (9mm). Not everyone knows that an Uzi has ridiculous recoil. The range should have known better and the instructor should have done a better job. He was standing in a horrible position.

Is it a great idea to have a 9 year old shoot a machine gun? I guess that depends on the gun and the situation. I probably wouldn't do it, but that's not to say there isn't a safe scenario.

 

[donkiez]

Why does every damn news story about guns have to turn into a debate about gun control? I really don't see how this event has any bearing whatsoever on gun control.

Because gods, guns and gays are all people seem to care about these days. they are polarizing enough to distract from other issues. Just look on this forum which threads break 3 pages of replies and its always the same people saying the same shit.

And Obama

 

[MadeFromDust]

I think our solution is to apply bubble wrap.

New safety protocol:

 

[barfo]

Is it illegal? Are you sure?

Whatever company might try and make nukes would need the resources of a government. See Oak Ridge and Savannah River facilities for example.

Yes, it's illegal. The reason Iran doesn't yet have the nuke isn't because they can't afford it. It's because we've systematically denied them access to things they'd need to build one. And the government would do the same to you if you were a serious threat to build one.

barfo

 

[Further]

Protocols are fine. I'm not against that. What I'm against is using a few incidents to ban guns

You and I actually have similar views regarding firearm laws. I don't wish to outlaw guns, but I do think background checks should be mandated for every sale. I also want it to be easier for loved ones or health professionals to get at least temporary holds on people's rights to own guns. So if a parent of a 25 year old goes to the cops afraid their child is about to do something deadly with their weapons, they should be able to get the guns removed until a psychologist says they are not a danger to themselves or society.

I'm also not sure about a couple issues, magazine capacity limits and being able to get fully auto with a tax stamp. I'm not for or against on these. I love having 15 rounds in my HK USP, but I also don't think it's necessary, and shooting an AR with 250 round drum seems a bridge too far.

I guess I'm still just mulling over all the individual issues under the gun control tent.

 

[DaLincolnJones]

Outrage aimed at the second amendment from one death at a sanctioned range..

Hundreds murdered on purpose each year, and no faux outrage..http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/09/20/chicago-shootings-back-of-the-yards/2841251/

sounds about right..yeah..sure..its all about her evil parents, or the crazy folk that believe in the second amendment....pfft

 

[Minstrel]

We have limits.

I never said we didn't, I was responding to someone (blue32) who felt that limits were for China. And what the limits should be are always worth debating.

Why does every damn news story about guns have to turn into a debate about gun control? I really don't see how this event has any bearing whatsoever on gun control.

So you mean basically what I said here?

I actually agree that this incident is relatively meaningless (beyond the scope of the tragedy of someone dying) and isn't a particularly strong reason for gun control.

 

[Natebishop3]

You and I actually have similar views regarding firearm laws. I don't wish to outlaw guns, but I do think background checks should be mandated for every sale. I also want it to be easier for loved ones or health professionals to get at least temporary holds on people's rights to own guns. So if a parent of a 25 year old goes to the cops afraid their child is about to do something deadly with their weapons, they should be able to get the guns removed until a psychologist says they are not a danger to themselves or society.

I'm also not sure about a couple issues, magazine capacity limits and being able to get fully auto with a tax stamp. I'm not for or against on these. I love having 15 rounds in my HK USP, but I also don't think it's necessary, and shooting an AR with 250 round drum seems a bridge too far.

I guess I'm still just mulling over all the individual issues under the gun control tent.

How many people have been killed because of a registered machine gun? I'm willing to bet that this guy is one of a very small number of people. Machine guns are expensive. They're expensive to buy and expensive to shoot. Plus the stamp takes a really long time. Machine guns are not a problem in this country.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MadeFromDust]

How many people have been killed because of a registered machine gun? I'm willing to bet that this guy is one of a very small number of people. Machine guns are expensive. They're expensive to buy and expensive to shoot. Plus the stamp takes a really long time. Machine guns are not a problem in this country.

Not to mention illegal. Who mentally unstable enough to attack people with a fully automatic weapon is capable of acquiring one legally? I can't recall that happening ever.

 

[Further]

How many people have been killed because of a registered machine gun? I'm willing to bet that this guy is one of a very small number of people. Machine guns are expensive. They're expensive to buy and expensive to shoot. Plus the stamp takes a really long time. Machine guns are not a problem in this country.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think you are correct on everything you stated. But I just worry that one of these movie theater or school campus shooters will get their hands on one and instead of killing a half dozen, end up killing several times more. Perhaps it's an irrational fear. I am certainly for being able to get suppressors with a stamp, that would make hunting better and shooting with friends much nicer, to get rid of that dangerous noise. But I see little benefit to the full auto. As I said, I'm not on either side, just thinking about these issues.

 

[Natebishop3]

Not to mention illegal. Who mentally unstable enough to attack people with a fully automatic weapon is capable of acquiring one legally? I can't recall that happening ever.

They're a finite item because technically machine guns are illegal, but you can purchase one that was made before the ban took effect. A Thompson for example costs around 20k. Who has that kind of money laying around?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MadeFromDust]

Guns are illegal in Chicago where there is more gun violence than any city in America. "Gun-Free Zones" are the places where the most gun violence occurs. In Switzerland 1 in 2 citizens own a firearm. Lowest crime rate in the world.

I'm curious how anti-gun advocates will react to these facts.

 

[Natebishop3]

I think you are correct on everything you stated. But I just worry that one of these movie theater or school campus shooters will get their hands on one and instead of killing a half dozen, end up killing several times more. Perhaps it's an irrational fear. I am certainly for being able to get suppressors with a stamp, that would make hunting better and shooting with friends much nicer, to get rid of that dangerous noise. But I see little benefit to the full auto. As I said, I'm not on either side, just thinking about these issues.

Even a mac10 is around 4 or 5k. Your standard issue maniac doesn't have that kind of money. Plus, they're a bullet hose. The firing rate and aim is completely ineffective. They would have to reload constantly. An AR would actually be much more effective.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Further]

Even a mac10 is around 4 or 5k. Your standard issue maniac doesn't have that kind of money. Plus, they're a bullet hose. The firing rate and aim is completely ineffective. They would have to reload constantly. An AR would actually be much more effective.

I guess the way things are with the tax stamp is ok. At least for now, I don't see this being an issue. See, common sense can work. Bring up a topic and think it through. But the all in or all out crowds aren't helping.