Teaching kids about firearm safety is a good idea. Handing a 9 year old girl an uzi set to full auto fire and saying 'have a go' is not. The instructor needs nominating for a Darwin award.
Gun control
- Thread starter ukbob
- Start date
Good job, parents. Not only is your daughter scarred for life, but she's also trained in using automatic weapons. Future NRA leader for sure...
Its one of thoses stories that is almost funny. I cant believe this happens
A kid and any gun is beyond crazy, but A fecking Uzi?
A kid and any gun is beyond crazy, but A fecking Uzi?
A 9 year old, with an Uzi.
Christ.
Christ.
Parents must be proud of their decision to let that girl take a shot life...
On the news this morning, the panel was more concerned with the fact that the parent wasn't assisting the kid, than the fact that a 9 year old was ALLOWED TO HOLD AND FIRE A MOTHERfeckING UZI... and breathe
Idiots, the lot of them
Idiots, the lot of them
This doesn't surprise me really. People and lifestyles around the Nevada/Arizona/Utah border are different. It's Hannity anti-government country writ large. Google Cliven Bundy or Warren Jeffs.
I got my uzi back, you dudes is wack
I have sympathy for the little girl, but apart from that there is something quite amusing about this incident, no?
Maybe I'm just twisted, I don't know.
Maybe I'm just twisted, I don't know.
They just did a piece on (BBC) Newsnight. The Guns for America bloke just argued that being so young she should have been given a .22 instead and he added that the instructor who got killed was just unlucky. Apparently he was 16 (I think) times more likely to have died driving to the range. So that's ok then.
He also added that the America having guns was one of the reasons why they 'aren't British anymore' in a strange dig at us. No mention of parental responsibility
at all. Larry Pratt, a total twat.
Gun Owners of America, I meant. Larry Twatt. My phone won't let me edit a post when my broadband is being iffy. You try to put the cursor at one point and it ends up thred lines away.
She is probably the only blameless one in this sorry episode. Hope she comes through it ok.
That came on my shuffle a few days ago.https://uk.news.yahoo.com/girl-accidentally-kills-gun-instructor-uzi-051336902.html?vp=1#4WCsHsF
The guy died and I cannot say I feel sorry for him.
The guy died and I cannot say I feel sorry for him.
Damn.
It's almost funny until you realise that someone actually died. Plus the poor girl will be mentally scarred for life.
What kind of asshole thinks it's a good idea to get a 9 year old kid to fire an automatic weapon?
What kind of asshole thinks it's a good idea to get a 9 year old kid to fire an automatic weapon?
Check out his facebook and you will see what kind
As a resident of Arizona I just want to say a couple of things. First, having traveled all over the world this is one of the best places in the world to live for many reasons. Second, I could unfortunately see this incident coming from a mile away, tragic but with the amount of gun love over here it was always possible.
What? Why is teaching kids how to use a gun a good idea? The whole concept should be up for the Darwin award as well.
Teaching practical use comes later, after they understand how firearms work, what they are capable of, how they should be handled and stored, the responsibility that comes with owning one or even holding one, etc. These are important things to know so one doesn't do something stupid or reckless that inadvertently kills someone.
Safety training, which is what you are advocating, is a good thing.
While that's a good idea,it's still really the equivalent of teaching kids to juggle knives, while practices and understanding of how dangerous the knives are important it's really best for that we take the knives away.
Last edited:
For a 9 year old kid the most appropriate teaching they could receive is "don't ever fecking touch one, under any circumstances"
Taking them to a range is just frigging retarded.
Taking them to a range is just frigging retarded.
I can't think of any reason for a 9 year old to know how to use a gun at all. Beyond telling them what it is and not to touch the thing ever, they shouldn't have anything to do with a weapon.
Sums it up for me...
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Across the United States on Wednesday, a heated national debate began on the extremely complex issue of children firing military weapons.
“Every now and then, the nation debates an issue that is so complicated and tricky it defies easy answers,” says pollster Davis Logsdon. “Letting small children fire automatic weapons is such an issue.”
Logsdon says that the thorny controversy is reminiscent of another ongoing national debate, about whether it is a good idea to load a car with dynamite and drive it into a tree.
“Many Americans think it’s a terrible idea, but others believe that with the correct supervision, it’s perfectly fine,” he says. “Who’s to say who’s right?”
Similar, he says, is the national debate about using a flamethrower indoors. “There has been a long and contentious national conversation about this,” he says. “It’s another tough one.”
Much like the long-running national debates about jumping off a roof, licking electrical sockets, and gargling with thumbtacks, the vexing question of whether children should fire military weapons does not appear headed for a swift resolution.
“Like the issue of whether you should sneak up behind a bear and jab it with a hot poker, this won’t be settled any time soon,” he says.
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Across the United States on Wednesday, a heated national debate began on the extremely complex issue of children firing military weapons.
“Every now and then, the nation debates an issue that is so complicated and tricky it defies easy answers,” says pollster Davis Logsdon. “Letting small children fire automatic weapons is such an issue.”
Logsdon says that the thorny controversy is reminiscent of another ongoing national debate, about whether it is a good idea to load a car with dynamite and drive it into a tree.
“Many Americans think it’s a terrible idea, but others believe that with the correct supervision, it’s perfectly fine,” he says. “Who’s to say who’s right?”
Similar, he says, is the national debate about using a flamethrower indoors. “There has been a long and contentious national conversation about this,” he says. “It’s another tough one.”
Much like the long-running national debates about jumping off a roof, licking electrical sockets, and gargling with thumbtacks, the vexing question of whether children should fire military weapons does not appear headed for a swift resolution.
“Like the issue of whether you should sneak up behind a bear and jab it with a hot poker, this won’t be settled any time soon,” he says.
Teach the controversy.
Land of the free home of the batshit insane
Nothing that has been said before, but still he makes few more good points...
The 4 kids of the instructor wish the girl well and peace. Some moving words.
http://nypost.com/2014/09/16/kids-of-arizona-gun-instructor-who-was-killed-by-girl-wish-her-peace/
http://nypost.com/2014/09/16/kids-of-arizona-gun-instructor-who-was-killed-by-girl-wish-her-peace/
Personally I like the idea you can have a gun to protect yourself in America, anyone trespasses on your land and are threat to you and your family you should be able to defend your family from this threat and a gun is a good deterrent for that - Of course there's negatives to firearms, but i bet having a firearm does prevent crime, which probably barely gets a mention on discussions like this. This country (Britain), if someone tries to rob your house and you kick the shit of the intruder you'll get time for it, so which country really has it backwards?
What i don't understand is the need for big feck off guns, can a small handgun not do the same job as a shotgun would?
What i don't understand is the need for big feck off guns, can a small handgun not do the same job as a shotgun would?
Last edited:
If guns are a detergent to intruders you would imagine crime rates would be much lower in the USA than other countries but I think for most crime statistics the opposite is true.
Why would you need to kick the shit out of someone? Excessive force, even against dickheads, is a bad thing.
But America also have a higher population than most. End of the day if someone wants to commit a crime, they will do it, gun or no gun.
Anyway guns will become a problem for everywhere soon, not just America, look up 3d printed guns on Youtube, scary stuff.
Whilst 3d printing is going to bring lots of positives to the world, its going to have its dark side and this will be probably the main one.
But which have higher crime rates according to population?
The USA has a murder rate of 5 pa per 100,000 people the UK has a rate of 1 pa per 100,000.
The USA would be closer to developing country murder rates rather than a developed country.
Is that an actual stat? If so what percentage are gun crime?
If those stats are correct, I'm betting the problem is more to do with gang crime, that is America's real problem more so than the second amendment.
Last edited:
Yes that was an actual stat for all homicides.
For gun related homicides the deaths per 100,000 is 3.6 is the USA and 0.04 in the UK.
Lots of other developed countries have gangs, there are very few that don't really, so it doesn't really explain why murder rates in the USA are closer to those of African and South American countries than developed country rates
And cannot verify the statistics but according to this article gang relayed deaths account for only a small proportion of gun related homicides.
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/5071639
Certainly not nearly enough to account for a five times higher homicide rate than in the UK.
The numbers in that article seem very low, from the crime statistics I've read I think around 60%-70% of gun murders in the US are gang related.
The problem is if you start allowing the general public to have guns then they will inevitably find themselves in the hands of criminals. How many illegal guns are homemade? I'd say almost all illegal guns in America were once legal guns. If you live in a society full of easy access to guns just because you happen to have one doesn't mean that threat won't be there, it just means that the person will more likely be armed which in my opinion is a worse situation.
There are only around 200 justifiable homicides in the US each year compared with 600 accidental gun deaths, there are also a lot of murders where people see a threat which isn't there or are too trigger happy.
You can kick the shit out of a criminal breaking into your house in the UK without going to prison. Unless they run out of your house and you chase them down the street and beat them half to death most courts will give you the benefit of doubt regarding justifiable force.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/andrew-woodhouse-dad-who-broke-3055668
This guy broke broke a burglar's legs and didn't go to prison.
Feck, this guy shot a 13 year old and only got a suspended sentence.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...eak-home-campaign-violence-spared-prison.html