4-year-old accidentally shoots, kills 2-year-old brother after mistaking gun for toy

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
38,201
18,670
146
I see this point made everytime a shooting takes place and I dont think its a very good one. Its equivalent to saying every man is a responsible genital owner until they arent and become a rapist. It doesnt add anything to the debate. Thanks.
Ineffectual comparison, as not every man or person is a gun owner. You're better off comparing it to vehicles

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tongue-in-cheek?wprov=sfla1

In other words, we're to believe that millions of gun owners are responsible gun owners, yet there's now a consistent flow of irresponsible gun owners who are all of a sudden irresponsible gun owners. To that, I say, they've always been irresponsible with the right to own guns, and the consequences caught up with them in a newsworthy event.

See OP: how the f did a 4 year old get his hands on a loaded weapon...
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,136
30,085
146
I see this point made everytime a shooting takes place and I dont think its a very good one. Its equivalent to saying every man is a responsible genital owner until they arent and become a rapist. It doesnt add anything to the debate. Thanks.

Gun fetishists are always defending the "Responsible (gun) owner" as the poor victim of any and all reasonable regulation. The responsible ____ owner is something of a fantasy, regardless of what you are talking about, because it is only ever defined by what they haven't done. It was always a stupid argument, which is precisely why people keep pointing it out. It sounds like some of you are finally coming around to understand the point?

When it comes to actual policy and practice, you can't make an argument for responsible gun owners because you can't effectively define one. That is, in essence, the entire point of the relevant demographic data of how simply owning a gun drastically increases you or your family/friend's chances of dying or being injured by that gun. It's undeniable. The fetishists make unreasonable requests, such as preventing physicians from collecting wholly relevant health data, like gun ownership, simply because they think it offends the patriotic "responsible gun owner." Until they can actually define the responsible gun owner, which we have established is impossible, they have no standing from which to attack the collection of relevant data.
 
Last edited:

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
36,129
30,521
136
Well the good news is that some guy shot some other guy outside a restaurant after he had shot some other people inside the restaurant so it cancels out this event. And all other similar events.
 

KB

Diamond Member
Nov 8, 1999
5,402
386
126
Until they can actually define the responsible gun owner, which we have established is impossible, they have no standing from which to attack the collection of relevant data.

A responsible gun owner follows the range rules:
  • Treat every weapon as if it were loaded.
  • Keep your finger straight and off the trigger until you intend to fire.
  • Never point your weapon at anything you don't intend to shoot.
  • Keep your weapon on safe until you intend to fire.
  • I will also add: Educates children not to touch the firearm and keeps it in a safe location unreachable by children and robbers.
  • A responsibile gun owner surrounds themselves with others who follow these rules and reminds others who forget.
 

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
38,201
18,670
146
A responsible gun owner follows the range rules:
  • Treat every weapon as if it were loaded.
  • Keep your finger straight and off the trigger until you intend to fire.
  • Never point your weapon at anything you don't intend to shoot.
  • Keep your weapon on safe until you intend to fire.
  • I will also add: Educates children not to touch the firearm and keeps it in a safe location unreachable by children and robbers.
  • A responsibile gun owner surrounds themselves with others who follow these rules and reminds others who forget.
So what process is in place to check and verify ongoing compliance with responsible ownership?
 

UglyCasanova

Lifer
Mar 25, 2001
19,275
1,361
126
Weak laws surrounding I’m sure. I have no issue charging the owner of it with negligent homicide or whatever it would be. Who knows if they can though.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,136
30,085
146
A responsible gun owner follows the range rules:
  • Treat every weapon as if it were loaded.
  • Keep your finger straight and off the trigger until you intend to fire.
  • Never point your weapon at anything you don't intend to shoot.
  • Keep your weapon on safe until you intend to fire.
  • I will also add: Educates children not to touch the firearm and keeps it in a safe location unreachable by children and robbers.
  • A responsibile gun owner surrounds themselves with others who follow these rules and reminds others who forget.

Whoosh.

And yet again, and again and again: that's all well and good until one "accident" when one of those rules are broken, and they are suddenly declared "not a responsible gun owner," as if it was something that they always were.

I hope you are willing to police these folks and make sure they are in compliance every day.

Look, let me make it even easier:

You've got two blokes. Both in their 50s, both "Responsible gun owners" since their teenage years when pops bought them their fist pew-pew toy.

bloke A lives his entire life, never breaking those rules until his death.

bloke B lives his entire life, well up until ~67 when he's teaching the grandkid how to fire the pew-pew out in the backyard and the kid grabs it too quickly out of his hand and it fires, kicking back because of the kid's little hands, and shoots the kid in the face. sad.

suddenly, bloke B is not a responsible gun owner. This is entirely obvious in hindsight, but it obviously helps no one. Here's the problem, and the point: from ages 13-67 for both of these blokes, you are tasked with distinguishing the responsible gun owner from the irresponsible gun owner. One is obviously irresponsible, right?

Please now craft legislation that is some sort of perfect pre-crime determinant of separating the responsible from the irresponsible gun owners.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Ns1

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,947
126
A responsible gun owner follows the range rules:
  • Treat every weapon as if it were loaded.
  • Keep your finger straight and off the trigger until you intend to fire.
  • Never point your weapon at anything you don't intend to shoot.
  • Keep your weapon on safe until you intend to fire.
  • I will also add: Educates children not to touch the firearm and keeps it in a safe location unreachable by children and robbers.
  • A responsibile gun owner surrounds themselves with others who follow these rules and reminds others who forget.

notruescottsman.txt

you guys are retarded.
 

pmv

Lifer
May 30, 2008
13,636
8,522
136
I see this point made everytime a shooting takes place and I dont think its a very good one. Its equivalent to saying every man is a responsible genital owner until they arent and become a rapist. It doesnt add anything to the debate. Thanks.

Crickey, how does one unpack that comment? Did you mean to make a comparison between a gun owner's gun and a man and their gentials?

You do realise that comparison just makes no sense at all? It's a bit mad, even. Though to even try to figure out what you are attempting to say would risk starting a largely unrelated argument about the politics of transexuality.

The only way in which the possession of male genitals gives someone power they would otherwise not have is if you are talking about social power and subscribe to a theory of patriarchy. They aren't an intrinsically dangerous weapon in the way that a gun is, because, hate to break this to you, a penis is not itself a scary powerful weapon.

it's not the possession of them that directly bestows the power to harm, it's the social structure that does that (and perhaps the additional muscle mass that tends to be correlated with them). Kind of how having a lighter skin tone does not in itself give you magical powers. It's not the same sort of power that a gun bestows.

And if you _are_ talking about social power then your point doesn't work because it _is_ valid then to point out that it's not a good argument to justify that power by arguing that most men are 'responsible' with exercising it. Because men with power do abuse it, and you can't tell beforehand which are going to do so, so the answer is clearly to try to reduce or remove those differences of power, not to explain away every occasion in which it is abused by declaring that was an irresponsible patriarch, not like all the others.

All assuming one accepts the notion of patriarchal power in the first place, but then, if one doesn't, you have no argument at all.