9 year old accidently shoots her instructor with an Uzi!
Discussion
pcvdriver said:
Agrispeed said:
The argument given also ignored the fact that some people need guns; such as farmers... I would hate to try and control rabbits or deer without a gun...
I hope it is a joke.
That'll be the first time I've heard of a farmer needing an Uzi, or similar for vermin control. I believe they tend to go for bolt action rifles and/or shotguns.I hope it is a joke.
a 9 y/o newbie is allowed to fire an Uzi (a weapon with an infamy for recoil), on auto, without being taught to stand properly (i'd argue that a stance so side-on is wrong) and, the instructor stands right beside her (rather than behind diagonal)....sorry, this just doesn't make sense.
unnecessary and sad lost of life and damage to another.
unnecessary and sad lost of life and damage to another.
Jimbeaux said:
pcvdriver said:
Agrispeed said:
The argument given also ignored the fact that some people need guns; such as farmers... I would hate to try and control rabbits or deer without a gun...
I hope it is a joke.
That'll be the first time I've heard of a farmer needing an Uzi, or similar for vermin control. I believe they tend to go for bolt action rifles and/or shotguns.I hope it is a joke.
paranoid airbag said:
All machines break eventually, and what are guns but machines? Especially cheap machines owned by people with little funds and probably poor impulse control. Sometimes machines get given away or recycled, sometimes by relatives smart enough to realised the owner can't be trusted with them (coincidentally if the owner is doing time, it's both easier to conclude that and easier to remove it from their possession).
We've never put someone in prison for owning a car running on leaded petrol, AFAIK. How many do you see? Not that I'm saying this would be politically possible, but a ban on manufacture of handguns specifically and 30 years or so (yes, a few presidential terms - one of the reasons it wouldn't be) could achieve a lot.
You'd see a lot more cars that run on leaded petrol if there weren't any unleaded runners to replace them. I'm pretty sure there would still be rather a lot of guns in circulation after 30 years had elapsed - they do have over 300 million to start with. Guns are pretty simple, easy to use maintain machines. I've personally fired a shotgun that was over a hundred years old and functioned as well as the day it was made. The Uzi in the story which prompted the thread will be over 30 years old.We've never put someone in prison for owning a car running on leaded petrol, AFAIK. How many do you see? Not that I'm saying this would be politically possible, but a ban on manufacture of handguns specifically and 30 years or so (yes, a few presidential terms - one of the reasons it wouldn't be) could achieve a lot.
There would also be a problem with small scale manufacturing. Anyone with a machine shop can make a gun.
pcvdriver said:
So you'd agree that there is no rational need for public ownership of automatic assault weapons then?...although however, there is a credible need for certain types of firearms - to be used for farming and hunting purposes.
You need to be a bit precise about these things. The ownership of automatic weapons is miniscule in the US; you can't legally own a new one and old ones are prohibitively expensive. A outright ban would make bugger all impact on crime.
"Assault weapon" is poorly defined. The previous assault weapon ban effectively banned various weapons based on the cosmetics and was a bit daft. It generally tends to refer to military styled rifles which are functionally identical to various hunting weapons.
Most gun crime is committed with pistols. I think these would be the logical place to start if you wanted to make an impact.
pcvdriver said:
Agrispeed said:
The argument given also ignored the fact that some people need guns; such as farmers... I would hate to try and control rabbits or deer without a gun...
I hope it is a joke.
That'll be the first time I've heard of a farmer needing an Uzi, or similar for vermin control. I believe they tend to go for bolt action rifles and/or shotguns.I hope it is a joke.
BoRED S2upid said:
Nasty accident that I've just seen the video it looks like he changes it from one shot so she's not expecting it on the next fire.
Just to add - I might have been tempted to say "well, she might be experienced [at shooting] for her age". She's holding it like an imperial stormtrooper.How the hell would a firearm instructor decide even an adult holding a gun like that could control it in auto?
Jimbeaux said:
What? 
You see, that you make that suggestion with a straight face shows me that you are not in touch. The law abiding citizens(some) will turn them in; however, the thugs will not, especially seeing as how their ability to impose their will without recourse will be increased 10 fold. Knowing that, many good people will keep theirs as well. I will assume, just in case, that that suggestion was a joke and you are about to offer something realistic.
I think you need to have a look at the massive gun buyback and tighter licensing that happened in Australia after Port Arthur in 1996. You see, that you make that suggestion with a straight face shows me that you are not in touch. The law abiding citizens(some) will turn them in; however, the thugs will not, especially seeing as how their ability to impose their will without recourse will be increased 10 fold. Knowing that, many good people will keep theirs as well. I will assume, just in case, that that suggestion was a joke and you are about to offer something realistic.Huge success overall. Yes. Come criminals still have guns. But they also still drive unregistered. And import drugs. They are criminals.
Overall crime rates involving firearms have decreased significantly.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/20...
The gun range where this incident happened now requires the shooter to be at least 5 foot tall and 12 years old.
So that's OK then.
So that's OK then.
Colonial said:
I think you need to have a look at the massive gun buyback and tighter licensing that happened in Australia after Port Arthur in 1996.
It did wonders for plastic drainpipe sales..
t.Dr Jekyll said:
Colonial said:
Huge success overall. Yes. Come criminals still have guns. But they also still drive unregistered. And import drugs. They are criminals.
Well that's all right then. At least decent law abiding people are unarmed.I'd still like to know what predicates all this fear that makes Americans feel they need to own so many guns, they don't have a monopoly on crime but seems they just can't stop shooting each other
A reduction in gun deaths would follow a reduction in gun ownership, seems Americans just like being shot :-/
Not easy to judge if carrying arms is right or wrong.I have visited Amerika a few times on holidays.It is a massive country and I should inmagine every state has it's own beauty.
I liked driving there got on well with the people black white and Mexican.I take people as they are.Of course there are plenty of uneducated people in the States not that different from Europe.Also very intelligent folks who know there way around.
If I lived there permanently I problaby would carry a weapon.
I liked driving there got on well with the people black white and Mexican.I take people as they are.Of course there are plenty of uneducated people in the States not that different from Europe.Also very intelligent folks who know there way around.
If I lived there permanently I problaby would carry a weapon.
Edited by Foppo on Thursday 28th August 07:23
Edited by Foppo on Thursday 28th August 07:25
FredClogs said:
If it was illegal to own a gun and you owned one you wouldn't be law abiding, I'm not saying in that case you'd deserve to be sort but you couldn't say you weren't warned.
I'd still like to know what predicates all this fear that makes Americans feel they need to own so many guns, they don't have a monopoly on crime but seems they just can't stop shooting each other
A reduction in gun deaths would follow a reduction in gun ownership, seems Americans just like being shot :-/
A reduction in alcohol related illness and deaths would follow a reduction in alcohol consumption. If you drink alcohol it seems you just like dying from Cirrhosis of the liver.I'd still like to know what predicates all this fear that makes Americans feel they need to own so many guns, they don't have a monopoly on crime but seems they just can't stop shooting each other
A reduction in gun deaths would follow a reduction in gun ownership, seems Americans just like being shot :-/
Nope, can't argue with your reasoning at all.
I didn't buy any of my guns out of fear.
Dr Jekyll said:
Well that's all right then. At least decent law abiding people are unarmed.
And there decent, law abiding children aren't dead from playing with their decent law abiding guns. The majority of deaths in the US from firearms appear to be accidental deaths (ignoring suicide - people will kill themselves no matter what). But yet there is such an effective fear campaign that people assume that only a gun will make them safe.
I grew up around guns on a farm. They were useful for pest control. I now live in the inner city. I have no need for a gun.
Finally, the ease of accessing a gun has been greatly reduced. This ease in accessing guns (and the ease in accessing guns that have fallen off the back of a truck) is one of the main contributing factors in the huge rate of deaths from firearms in the US compared to other countries. But yet restriction is somehow seen as the dangerous option.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff