15 victims shot in 5 differnt areas in St. Louis

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Who said that? I didn't. I was responding to this statement you made:

Sorry I don't agree with that.

So who's responsible for the 5 year old killing his sister, or the 4 year old killing an adult relative? The 5 and 4 year olds? Or the owner of the firearm that the child had access to?

[Darnell 8,479]

Why, I guess you're right. Let's flood DC, Chicago and other places with guns. Then I want Gary to go there and see the fruits of his labor, up close and personal.

That's what I've been saying, all along - more guns for DC and Chicago.

! ! !

[JohnR! 5,495]

So who's responsible for the 5 year old killing his sister, or the 4 year old killing an adult relative? The 5 and 4 year olds? Or the owner of the firearm that the child had access to?

Considering the maxim that 'Guns don't kill. People do.' the only logical answer to your question is that the kids are responsible for these deaths. They pulled the trigger.

We need more guns. There aren't enough guns going around to make everyone safer.

Edited June 11, 2013 by Gegel

[Darnell 8,479]

Problem is we are living in a society that loves guns. For our side, it's poverty, no education, and a love of all things ignorant(yes, rappers and entertainers are adding to this). For the other side, it's violent movies, video games, and a mentality that having a gun and killing people is as American as Apple pie.

Regardless of 'the side'

this is all just evidence of the slippage on the road into moral decay.

<EOM>

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Considering the maxim that 'Guns don't kill. People do.' the only logical answer to your question is that the kids are responsible for these deaths. They pulled the trigger.

Sure but they pulled a trigger that they should never have been able to get their little fingers on. The question then becomes, who is responsible for them having gotten their fingers onto that trigger? That would be the gun owner. Which in the vast majority of the cases is a parent or grandparent. There is the occasional uncle or whathaveyou. But whoever that adult gun owner is ought to be held to account just as if they pulled that trigger themselves.

[spookyturtle 9,466]

Society is decaying in some ways and areas. To some, human life means nothing. If someone calls you a name, kill them.

[JohnR! 5,495]

Sure but they pulled a trigger that they should never have been able to get their little fingers on. The question then becomes, who is responsible for them having gotten their fingers onto that trigger? That would be the gun owner. Which in the vast majority of the cases is a parent or grandparent. There is the occasional uncle or whathaveyou. But whoever that adult gun owner is ought to be held to account just as if they pulled that trigger themselves.

In a perfect world that would be correct but you must remember that when it comes to guns, everyone flees and nobody is willing to take responsibility. Unfortunately the 2nd amendment has become the shield behind which cowards hide and pretend that these incidents are none of their business.

[Karee 4,191]

So who's responsible for the 5 year old killing his sister, or the 4 year old killing an adult relative? The 5 and 4 year olds? Or the owner of the firearm that the child had access to?

Maybe we're not on the same page here.

If it was an accident and the parent was careless or irresponsible in storing the firearm etc, then the parent should be held accountable for something like negligent homicide of course. But to equate it with the parent putting the gun up to the kids head and pulling the trigger, it's not even in the same ballpark.

Maybe we're saying the same thing. Not sure.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

In a perfect world that would be correct but you must remember that when it comes to guns, everyone flees and nobody is willing to take responsibility. Unfortunately the 2nd amendment has become the shield behind which cowards hide and pretend that these incidents are none of their business.

And that is one of the first things that need to change. It should be very clear and straightforward: with the right to keep and bear arms comes responsibility. Responsibility for any damage these guns do, for example. The second amendment does not grant any relief from the responsibilities that come with owning an instrument specifically designed to cause bodily harm or death.

Maybe we're not on the same page here.

If it was an accident and the parent was careless or irresponsible in storing the firearm etc, then the parent should be held accountable for something like negligent homicide of course. But to equate it with the parent putting the gun up to the kids head and pulling the trigger, it's not even in the same ballpark.

Maybe we're saying the same thing. Not sure.

I could live with the lesser charges as you suggest. Right now, they usually face no charges at all. And that is a travesty.

[JohnR! 5,495]

And that is one of the first things that need to change. It should be very clear and straightforward: with the right to keep and bear arms comes responsibility. Responsibility for any damage these guns do, for example. The second amendment does not grant any relief from the responsibilities that come with owning an instrument specifically designed to cause bodily harm or death.

Responsibility is a word this crowd won't recognize unless it is stenciled on the side of a stock car... We iz Murkhans! We want are guns!!!

Edited June 11, 2013 by Gegel

[Karee 4,191]

Responsibility is a word this crowd won't recognize unless it is stenciled on the side of a stock car... We iz Murkhans! We want are guns!!!

[GandD 5,966]

Sure but they pulled a trigger that they should never have been able to get their little fingers on. The question then becomes, who is responsible for them having gotten their fingers onto that trigger? That would be the gun owner. Which in the vast majority of the cases is a parent or grandparent. There is the occasional uncle or whathaveyou. But whoever that adult gun owner is ought to be held to account just as if they pulled that trigger themselves.

I've been thinking about this. Trying to figure out if the if the parents had some shared responsibility assuming the kid found the grandparents gun. I think you're right. If there's a board with a nail in your driveway and a kid is running across your driveway and steps on it, you're legally liable. You're not supposed to leave these kind of things out in the open.

[Karee 4,191]

I've been thinking about this. Trying to figure out if the if the parents had some shared responsibility assuming the kid found the grandparents gun. I think you're right. If there's a board with a nail in your driveway and a kid is running across your driveway and steps on it, you're legally liable. You're not supposed to leave these kind of things out in the open.

Agreed, but it's not the same thing picking the board up and beating the hell out of the kid with it.

[duraaraa 203]

Bad example. Japan happens to have banned just about all firearm ownership. Japan also has close to no gun violence. When they counted 22 gun deaths in 2007 (yes, that was the annual number across all of Japan), there was national outrage. When we have 26 gun deaths in a single shooting - 20 of those little children to boot - we do absolutely nothing. That is how sick a society we are.

That's kind of my point, which is why I think Japan isn't a bad example. If Japan were to allow guns, I think they would be used much more responsibly than they are in the U.S. Even if you look at the popular video games with kids, let's say, 8-12. In Japan, they want to play Mario. In the US, they want to play Grand Theft Auto.

Even the rap music in Japan... it's never about pimping hos and murdering gang rivals.

It's totally a cultural thing -- gang violence and crime has become cool with the young people in the U.S.

Even in Mongolia, the only people who have guns are those who go out to hunt in the countryside. You never see guns in the city.

Edited June 11, 2013 by duraaraa

[duraaraa 203]

I've been thinking about this. Trying to figure out if the if the parents had some shared responsibility assuming the kid found the grandparents gun. I think you're right. If there's a board with a nail in your driveway and a kid is running across your driveway and steps on it, you're legally liable. You're not supposed to leave these kind of things out in the open.

The fact that one who did this would be legally liable is what I don't like about the U.S.

In any other country, it's an accident which couldn't have been helped -- the kid just wasn't careful when running. In the U.S., we absolutely must find someone to blame, and it's never the one who is injured for being careless.

Why is this bad? The kids grow up feeling no sense of responsibility, they feel like they can get away with anything, and just twiddle their thumbs and sing through life, while someone else is blamed for anything that happens to them. When they grow up, someone from a hard knock country who can actually take responsibility for him/herself swoops in and snaps up the high-paying job the kid might have been able to get had he learned about responsibility.

Edited June 11, 2013 by duraaraa