I think we need a morons with guns thrad

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by Watser?

I usually disarm most of my nastiest boobytraps when there are kids in the house.

Well you're a liberal socialist pussy.

[Watser?]

[SR71]

Originally Posted by SkepticX

Are you aware that in an environment where there are no children, you don't need to ensure children are accounted for?

Or do you think this guy should have somehow sensed his friend was in the area, and had his kid with him, and was dropping by unannounced?

Did you read the article before opining about it?

For the record (anticipating the nonsense that's probably up next), it's entirely possible this was a case of poor storage, but we have to presume the things that would make it so--they're not in the article.

Or do all of you who have no children in the house (residents or visitors) make sure to childproof your houses and apartments and such for some reason?

I read it. Clearly the owner did not have positive control of the weapon. If the threat, whatever the nature might have been, was that imminent that the firearm needed to be loaded and accessible, he should have HAD the gun, right there with him. Leaving a loaded gun around when you don't have positive control is poor gun safety, always, everywhere, period.

[SkepticX]

Originally Posted by SR71

I read it. Clearly the owner did not have positive control of the weapon. If the threat, whatever the nature might have been, was that imminent that the firearm needed to be loaded and accessible, he should have HAD the gun, right there with him. Leaving a loaded gun around when you don't have positive control is poor gun safety, always, everywhere, period.

So you think we should only prepare for emergencies when we expect them or see them coming?

[BrotherMan]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

Well you're a liberal socialist pussy.

That's a cheese eating liberal surrender monkey socialist pussy to you, mister.

[SR71]

Originally Posted by SkepticX

So you think we should only prepare for emergencies when we expect them or see them coming?

What I know is people who have firearms are responsible for the safe use of their own firearms. Accidental shootings do not result from responsible gun use. There is no excuse. Guy is dead, someone fucked up.

[SkepticX]

Originally Posted by SR71

What I know is people who have firearms are responsible for the safe use of their own firearms. Accidental shootings do not result from responsible gun use. There is no excuse. Guy is dead, someone fucked up.

I'd say it's pretty naive to think we have such absolute control of our world. For a case like this, the vast majority of the time, yeah, you're right, but tragic fatal accidents can happen in which no one is at fault.

- Was the victim at fault because he didn't give his friend any advanced notice he was dropping by with his 4 year old? That seems a stretch. Of course he did, apparently, let his kid wander off in his Army buddy's house knowing he hadn't done so (an I'd be surprised if he didn't know his friend kept a gun or two and would more than likely have one ready to go).

- The kid did the shooting, but obviously the kid is innocent (unfortunately he may suffer some serious psychological consequences).

- Should the gun owner have treated his residence as if children might show up at any moment? Maybe, but probably not. Should he have immediately realized a gun he keeps ready for self-defense was out and the kid could get to it when his buddy showed up to surprise him? That's a bit extreme as well. I'm sure he was glad to see his friend and wasn't constantly, actively looking out for any potential threat (life at red alert). Unfortunately the instant the danger was revealed and the instant of the tragedy were one and the same.

So it's entirely plausible, even likely, that there was no neglect here, just a tragically unfortunate set of circumstances.

[ChuckF]

So he wasn't actively looking out for any potential threat, but for tactical reasons required easy access to an unsecured loaded weapon with the safety off?

[SR71]

Originally Posted by SkepticX

I'd say it's pretty naive to think we have such absolute control of our world. For a case like this, the vast majority of the time, yeah, you're right, but tragic fatal accidents can happen in which no one is at fault.

The gun owner is at fault. He didn't take adequate measures to safeguard the weapon. You don't leave a loaded gun around where kids can get at it without you knowing about it, especially if kids are present. That's total gun safety fail. Why can't you see that? Are you saying the owner isn't at fault because he forgot or didn't care that the loaded gun was laying around?

- Was the victim at fault because he didn't give his friend any advanced notice he was dropping by with his 4 year old? That seems a stretch. Of course he did, apparently, let his kid wander off in his Army buddy's house knowing he hadn't done so (an I'd be surprised if he didn't know his friend kept a gun or two and would more than likely have one ready to go).

No, the victim was visiting a friend, and apparently did not have a gun with him or if he did it did not fire at anyone. Definitely not at fault for getting anyone shot.

- The kid did the shooting, but obviously the kid is innocent (unfortunately he may suffer some serious psychological consequences).

Yes, the kid is not at fault, he is a kid that didn't know any better.

- Should the gun owner have treated his residence as if children might show up at any moment? Maybe, but probably not. Should he have immediately realized a gun he keeps ready for self-defense was out and the kid could get to it when his buddy showed up to surprise him? That's a bit extreme as well. I'm sure he was glad to see his friend and wasn't constantly, actively looking out for any potential threat (life at red alert). Unfortunately the instant the danger was revealed and the instant of the tragedy were one and the same.

The owner should treat his weapon as if it could kill someone, always and everywhere. That is a responsibility that goes with owning a firearm. The gun owner fucked up. The accident was preventable and the owner failed to ensure his weapon was used safely. It's his fault. Happy now?

So it's entirely plausible, even likely, that there was no neglect here, just a tragically unfortunate set of circumstances.

Addressed!

[SkepticX]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

So he wasn't actively looking out for any potential threat, but for tactical reasons required easy access to an unsecured loaded weapon with the safety off?

How do you know the gun had a safety, or didn't have one that's depressed along with pulling the trigger? And even if it was a pistol with a safety lever set up, do you think a safety lever is immune to a 4 year old's curiosity?

[ChuckF]

Anyway, yet again, it is possible to imagine that this is actually an example of really excellent gun safety practices. QED.

[SkepticX]

Originally Posted by SR71

Moron with gun itt ^

So no actual answer then, just an unwillingness to consider the issue critically if it turns out ... what, that you're judgement is unwarranted? that there's not one to blame even given such a terrible outcome? that our world isn't fully under our control? that maybe some other fear is real?

[SkepticX]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

Anyway, yet again, it is possible to imagine that this is actually an example of really excellent gun safety practices. QED.

Seems it's more about ignorance and judgmentalism driving the contrary conclusion, actually ... and likely fear.

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by SkepticX

Seems it's more about ignorance and judgmentalism driving the contrary conclusion, actually ... and likely fear.

Oh, ok. I guess one does have to be pretty ignorant and judgmental and fearful to entertain the notion that this toddler shooting his father to death is anything other than a demonstration of excellent gun safety practices.

Freedom triumphs.

[SR71]

Originally Posted by SkepticX

So no actual answer then, just an unwillingness to consider the issue critically if it turns out ... what, that you're judgement is unwarranted? that there's not one to blame even given such a terrible outcome? that our world isn't fully under our control? that maybe some other fear is real?

lol, if someone gets killed in your house with your gun, whose fault is it? What made the gun's location out of the control of the owner? It was in his own house. If not the gun owner, who was responsible? No one? Just an accident? What about the incident was not completely preventable? Let me answer that for you. The gun owner could have prevented this if he had just thought to secure the weapon. He didn't. It was a mistake. A fatal, preventable, mistake. Poor firearm safety practice. He gets an F in firearm safety and is a moron with a gun.

[ChuckF]

SR71 you are not imagining hard enough.

[SR71]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

SR71 you are not imagining hard enough.

Yeah, guess not. Maybe some day I will see how it is when I shoot myself in the penis. Bet I won't be such a hard ass when that happens. Sorry.

[ChuckF]

Don't worry. On that day when you shoot yourself in the penis, I will construct in my mind the factual circumstances necessary to applaud you for superb gun safety practices, and defend you from the ignorant and fearful.

[SkepticX]

That's why I dislike this topic ... it's where the same disease that we recognize as the fanatical religious "thinking" of right wingnuts (intellectual cowardice) infects the left.

[ChuckF]

[chunksmediocrites]

Yes, clearly: the unwillingness of people in this thread to allow that a gun owner is quite likely not actually responsible for securing their own weapon in their own household to avoid being killed by their young child is the same as fanatical religious thinking, and the height of intellectual cowardice. Bravo!

[SkepticX]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

Don't worry. On that day when you shoot yourself in the penis, I will construct in my mind the factual circumstances necessary to applaud you for superb gun safety practices, and defend you from the ignorant and fearful.

You don't even apparently know that many guns don't have traditional safeties (side levers or buttons that are on or off), yet you're quite ready to judge someone guilty of manslaughter based upon that bit of ignorance, so you've clearly demonstrated precisely what I just described (and that's ignoring the fact that most of what you post in this topic is pure mockery without any actual argumentative or intellectual merit at all). And your partner, there, SR71, doesn't deal with the points I raise, opting instead to reassert his conclusions more forcefully.

How is this different from standard issue right wingnut intellectual cowardice?

[SR71]

Yeah, we're being too hard on the guy. He never intended that his carelessness should lead to his friend's son picking up the gun and killing his own father with it. Shit happens. Chances are probably just as good that the guy could have killed some drug crazed armed home invasion criminal or something, someday. Accidental patricide is a small price to pay in defense of law abiding citizens! I say good on him, for being prepared, in case something dreadful happens, eventually! Let's change that "carelessness" to vigilance, with an asterisk.

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by SkepticX

You don't even apparently know that many guns don't have traditional safeties (side levers or buttons that are on or off),

I do know that this is an excellent gun safety practice!

yet you're quite ready to judge someone guilty of manslaughter

Yeah! That's a thing I've said stuff about!

based upon that bit of ignorance, so you've clearly demonstrated precisely what I just described (and that's ignoring the fact that most of what you post in this topic is pure mockery without any actual argumentative or intellectual merit at all). And your partner, there, SR71, doesn't deal with the points I raise, opting instead to reassert his conclusions more forcefully.

How is this different from standard issue right wingnut intellectual cowardice?

I'm sorry. I will try to imagine harder going forward.

[SkepticX]

Originally Posted by SR71

Yeah, we're being too hard on the guy. He never intended that his carelessness should lead to his friend's son picking up the gun and killing his own father with it. Shit happens. Chances are probably just as good that the guy could have killed some drug crazed armed home invasion criminal or something, someday. Accidental patricide is a small price to pay in defense of law abiding citizens! I say good on him, for being prepared, in case something dreadful happens, eventually!

Very emotionally evocative, but would you care to address the actual points that have been made, or would you prefer to continue behaving precisely as fundamentalist believers do when their apologetics are failing and they're not willing to consider their beliefs honestly?