Student shot at Tacoma, Wash., school

[Ban Hammer 13,110]

This is merely the price the nation pays for insisting on easy as can be access to firearms. There are and should be no surprises on any of these type events. Sadness, sure. Surprises, absolutely not.

no, this is the result of awful parenting and easy child access to firearms.

given that above by et, i'm surprised i made it past high school. i grew up with guns around and never had the inclination to touch one without permission from my father. i agree with you, lisa, that it's a lack of parenting, parental control, and the criminal element that provides such. maybe an automatic death sentence for someone illegally providing firearms to underaged users is in order.

I agree that lack of parental oversight is a contributing factor, but we wouldn't leave a nuclear warhead in our living room with a big red button on it and just tell our kids never to push the button. Any time a law is proposed that puts legal responsibility on the gun owners to keep them locked away from children, the NRA lobbies against it. There are many things we can do right now to make these kinds of tragedies from ever happening, but look who is fighting against implementing any reasonable solutions.

maybe bust that azz if they even look at it

i'm sure my dad woulda whipped 10 pounds off my azz off if i'd touched any of the guns when i was a kid.

You suggested earlier making parents legally responsible for the safety of their children, right? So if the parents happen to own the guns, but leave them accessible to children, then what? Unless you want to try these teenagers who decide to go on a killing rampage as adults, the adults who are responsible for their child should be partly culpible if they are the gun owner.

yes, they are legally responsible for the safety of their kids. yet some are probably scared to discipline the kids too. when is the last time a kid did something and got his butt whipped and people kept their nose out of it? no, instead we have all kinds of agencies crying abuse.

as for having a gun, some kid gets it and goes and kills people. i suppose you have a car and keep your car keys locked up for that very reason too? just to be sure your kids don't drink and drive?

[Ban Hammer 13,110]

The teenagers who decide to go on a killing rampage should be tried as adults.

The adults who are responsible for giving them access to the guns should be tried as well.

So do you support laws requiring gun owners to take certain steps to ensure their firearms are safe from children?

As far as trying teenagers as adults - I don't think thats a solution - certainly won't be a deterrent. I'd rather see school programs that teach teenagers anger management and conflict resolution.

bwahahahaha

right, anger management and conflict resolution in schools. like any of them will pay attention to that.

[mybackpages 0]

This is merely the price the nation pays for insisting on easy as can be access to firearms. There are and should be no surprises on any of these type events. Sadness, sure. Surprises, absolutely not.

no, this is the result of awful parenting and easy child access to firearms.

given that above by et, i'm surprised i made it past high school. i grew up with guns around and never had the inclination to touch one without permission from my father. i agree with you, lisa, that it's a lack of parenting, parental control, and the criminal element that provides such. maybe an automatic death sentence for someone illegally providing firearms to underaged users is in order.

I agree that lack of parental oversight is a contributing factor, we wouldn't leave a nuclear warhead in our living room with a big red button on it and just tell our kids never to push the button. Any time a law is proposed that puts legal responsibility on the gun owners to keep them locked away from children, the NRA lobbies against it. There are many things we can do right now to make these kinds of tragedies from ever happening, but look who is fighting against implementing any reasonable solutions.

But you know the reason the NRA lobbies against is because they know the real agenda of the anti-gun crowd is a total ban on personal ownership. Give them an inch and they'll take a mile ...

Law enforcement doesn;t agree with the NRA.

[Ban Hammer 13,110]

This is merely the price the nation pays for insisting on easy as can be access to firearms. There are and should be no surprises on any of these type events. Sadness, sure. Surprises, absolutely not.

no, this is the result of awful parenting and easy child access to firearms.

given that above by et, i'm surprised i made it past high school. i grew up with guns around and never had the inclination to touch one without permission from my father. i agree with you, lisa, that it's a lack of parenting, parental control, and the criminal element that provides such. maybe an automatic death sentence for someone illegally providing firearms to underaged users is in order.

I agree that lack of parental oversight is a contributing factor, we wouldn't leave a nuclear warhead in our living room with a big red button on it and just tell our kids never to push the button. Any time a law is proposed that puts legal responsibility on the gun owners to keep them locked away from children, the NRA lobbies against it. There are many things we can do right now to make these kinds of tragedies from ever happening, but look who is fighting against implementing any reasonable solutions.

But you know the reason the NRA lobbies against is because they know the real agenda of the anti-gun crowd is a total ban on personal ownership. Give them an inch and they'll take a mile ...

Law enforcement doesn;t agree with the NRA.

Cops and Gun Control: The REAL Story

One of the driving forces behind LEAA’s founding was to dispel the false impression that America’s police favor more gun control.

We know, and research backs us up, an overwhelming majority of America’s rank-and-file cops support private ownership of firearms.

That’s because they know, better than most, that disarming honest citizens does nothing to reduce crime, but will deprive citizens of the means of defending themselves from violent predators.

Many cops are firearms and shooting sports enthusiasts. (If you doubt this, count the number of law enforcement types you see next time you go to the range or on a hunting trip!) These officers know first hand that the kind of gun control popular among liberal activists will do nothing to reduce real crime or deter real criminals. They also know that the kind of extreme gun control measures being pushed by liberals today places an inordinate burden on law abiding shooting enthusiasts and legitimate gun dealers.

And many veteran law enforcement officers can recount episodes where the intervention of an armed private citizen has saved lives ­ often the officer’s!

So Why Do so many Americans

Believe Cops Want More Gun Control

In part because that is what gun control advocates want you to believe. In their campaign to pass legislation the Brady Bill and the 1994 gun ban, for example, pro-gun control forces routinely called on cops to help make their case. Mostly big city chiefs and political appointees, (what we at LEAA like to call “photo op cops”) these few police bureaucrats have helped create a public impression that America’s cops favor gun control. (In some outrageous cases, police officers who actually opposed the legislation were forced by their superiors to appear in staged photographs as if they were solidly behind gun control!)

Next time you see cops willingly participate in pro-gun control debate, notice how few of them are front-line street level officers.

Recently, a Florida sheriff created headlines when he called for renewal of the 1994 Clinton Gun ban. He even demonstrated on nationwide TV the “devastating effects” that so-called banned weapons would have in the hands of criminals. It turns out the fully-automatic military weapon he demonstrated was not even covered by the 1994 ban.

This “law enforcement professional" was then exposed for what he really was: a long time liberal politician who had been appointed to the office of sheriff as part of a political payoff. Nevertheless, people like this sheriff and other police bureaucrats, often appointed by liberal big city political machines, claim to speak for rank and file police.

more here

link

[one...two...tree 2,762]

This is merely the price the nation pays for insisting on easy as can be access to firearms. There are and should be no surprises on any of these type events. Sadness, sure. Surprises, absolutely not.

no, this is the result of awful parenting and easy child access to firearms.

given that above by et, i'm surprised i made it past high school. i grew up with guns around and never had the inclination to touch one without permission from my father. i agree with you, lisa, that it's a lack of parenting, parental control, and the criminal element that provides such. maybe an automatic death sentence for someone illegally providing firearms to underaged users is in order.

I agree that lack of parental oversight is a contributing factor, but we wouldn't leave a nuclear warhead in our living room with a big red button on it and just tell our kids never to push the button. Any time a law is proposed that puts legal responsibility on the gun owners to keep them locked away from children, the NRA lobbies against it. There are many things we can do right now to make these kinds of tragedies from ever happening, but look who is fighting against implementing any reasonable solutions.

maybe bust that azz if they even look at it

i'm sure my dad woulda whipped 10 pounds off my azz off if i'd touched any of the guns when i was a kid.

You suggested earlier making parents legally responsible for the safety of their children, right? So if the parents happen to own the guns, but leave them accessible to children, then what? Unless you want to try these teenagers who decide to go on a killing rampage as adults, the adults who are responsible for their child should be partly culpible if they are the gun owner.

yes, they are legally responsible for the safety of their kids. yet some are probably scared to discipline the kids too. when is the last time a kid did something and got his butt whipped and people kept their nose out of it? no, instead we have all kinds of agencies crying abuse.

as for having a gun, some kid gets it and goes and kills people. i suppose you have a car and keep your car keys locked up for that very reason too? just to be sure your kids don't drink and drive?

Fear of being beaten senseless by your father is not a very effective deterrent and more than likely will teach the kid that violence is a solution.

It would depend on the age of the child. I have a 15 year old son, for example. He's too old to spank nor would I think it would be right for me to threaten him with physical harm if he gets into something that I don't want him into. If he were only 5 - all the spankings in the world isn't going to stop him from being curious and if I left a loaded handgun in my dresser drawer, if he were ever alone and had access to the room, he'd more than likely take it out and at least look at it. That is the nature of kids.

How about another solution - if you're a parent, you should be required to keep your firearms locked away and safe from children and only those children of yours who've completed a gun safety course and are of a reasonable age (say 15) can have keys to the firearms?

[Fandango 1,439]

This is merely the price the nation pays for insisting on easy as can be access to firearms. There are and should be no surprises on any of these type events. Sadness, sure. Surprises, absolutely not.

no, this is the result of awful parenting and easy child access to firearms.

given that above by et, i'm surprised i made it past high school. i grew up with guns around and never had the inclination to touch one without permission from my father. i agree with you, lisa, that it's a lack of parenting, parental control, and the criminal element that provides such. maybe an automatic death sentence for someone illegally providing firearms to underaged users is in order.

I agree that lack of parental oversight is a contributing factor, but we wouldn't leave a nuclear warhead in our living room with a big red button on it and just tell our kids never to push the button. Any time a law is proposed that puts legal responsibility on the gun owners to keep them locked away from children, the NRA lobbies against it. There are many things we can do right now to make these kinds of tragedies from ever happening, but look who is fighting against implementing any reasonable solutions.

No one's saying that the guns should just be out for access. Children should NOT have access to firearms. That also falls back on the parental responsibility

[garya505 2]

The teenagers who decide to go on a killing rampage should be tried as adults.

The adults who are responsible for giving them access to the guns should be tried as well.

So do you support laws requiring gun owners to take certain steps to ensure their firearms are safe from children?

As far as trying teenagers as adults - I don't think thats a solution - certainly won't be a deterrent. I'd rather see school programs that teach teenagers anger management and conflict resolution.

I support laws that penalize personal irresponsibility, but I don't support feel-good legislation that accomplishes nothing except taking away our freedoms.

Trying teenagers as adults gets them off the street, so yes it prevents crime.

I believe in personal responsbility - do the crime, do the time. When I was a stupid kid and got in trouble, my parents and local law enforcement came down hard on me, and I'm very happy they did.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The teenagers who decide to go on a killing rampage should be tried as adults.

The adults who are responsible for giving them access to the guns should be tried as well.

So do you support laws requiring gun owners to take certain steps to ensure their firearms are safe from children?

As far as trying teenagers as adults - I don't think thats a solution - certainly won't be a deterrent. I'd rather see school programs that teach teenagers anger management and conflict resolution.

bwahahahaha

right, anger management and conflict resolution in schools. like any of them will pay attention to that.

Getting back to the whole notion of bad parenting - how do you suppose most children learn how to express their anger or their problem solving skills? Unless you're in favor of regulating parenting, we need alternative solutions that can steer children who come from less than perfect homes to find the skills they need to make it in this world, including managing anger and problem solving. Those two skills would take any child a long way in this world once they become adults.

[Ban Hammer 13,110]

Fear of being beaten senseless by your father is not a very effective deterrent and more than likely will teach the kid that violence is a solution.

It would depend on the age of the child. I have a 15 year old son, for example. He's too old to spank nor would I think it would be right for me to threaten him with physical harm if he gets into something that I don't want him into. If he were only 5 - all the spankings in the world isn't going to stop him from being curious and if I left a loaded handgun in my dresser drawer, if he were ever alone and had access to the room, he'd more than likely take it out and at least look at it. That is the nature of kids.

How about another solution - if you're a parent, you should be required to keep your firearms locked away and safe from children and only those children of yours who've completed a gun safety course and are of a reasonable age (say 15) can have keys to the firearms?

maybe you don't like the concept, but it works.

so whatcha gonna do with your son? send him to his room?

kids are not curious if they are familiar with the handgun. take him out, show him what it does. impress upon him the dangers associated with it.

keeping firearms locked away is all well and wonderful in a perfect world, steven. i'll be sure to post a sign for any burglars to ring the doorbell and wait 5 minutes before invading my home so i can get the gun safe unlocked and be ready.

btw, i think your age of 15 is too high. i was walking around hunting with a shotgun at age 12, and i was nra hunter safety course certified at that age too. it's a slippery slope in that some might try to make that law become such where no kid under 15 can handle a firearm.

also of note - is it not true that most of these school shootings occur with kids 15-18? if so, your idea above is a non-starter.

The teenagers who decide to go on a killing rampage should be tried as adults.

The adults who are responsible for giving them access to the guns should be tried as well.

So do you support laws requiring gun owners to take certain steps to ensure their firearms are safe from children?

As far as trying teenagers as adults - I don't think thats a solution - certainly won't be a deterrent. I'd rather see school programs that teach teenagers anger management and conflict resolution.

bwahahahaha

right, anger management and conflict resolution in schools. like any of them will pay attention to that.

Getting back to the whole notion of bad parenting - how do you suppose most children learn how to express their anger or their problem solving skills? Unless you're in favor of regulating parenting, we need alternative solutions that can steer children who come from less than perfect homes to find the skills they need to make it in this world, including managing anger and problem solving. Those two skills would take any child a long way in this world once they become adults.

you are, in effect, replacing the parents job with that.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Fear of being beaten senseless by your father is not a very effective deterrent and more than likely will teach the kid that violence is a solution.

It would depend on the age of the child. I have a 15 year old son, for example. He's too old to spank nor would I think it would be right for me to threaten him with physical harm if he gets into something that I don't want him into. If he were only 5 - all the spankings in the world isn't going to stop him from being curious and if I left a loaded handgun in my dresser drawer, if he were ever alone and had access to the room, he'd more than likely take it out and at least look at it. That is the nature of kids.

How about another solution - if you're a parent, you should be required to keep your firearms locked away and safe from children and only those children of yours who've completed a gun safety course and are of a reasonable age (say 15) can have keys to the firearms?

maybe you don't like the concept, but it works.

so whatcha gonna do with your son? send him to his room?

kids are not curious if they are familiar with the handgun. take him out, show him what it does. impress upon him the dangers associated with it.

keeping firearms locked away is all well and wonderful in a perfect world, steven. i'll be sure to post a sign for any burglars to ring the doorbell and wait 5 minutes before invading my home so i can get the gun safe unlocked and be ready.

btw, i think your age of 15 is too high. i was walking around hunting with a shotgun at age 12, and i was nra hunter safety course certified at that age too. it's a slippery slope in that some might try to make that law become such where no kid under 15 can handle a firearm.

also of note - is it not true that most of these school shootings occur with kids 15-18? if so, your idea above is a non-starter.

You think spanking my 15 year old is going to keep him in line??? Hahaha...Charles, wait until you're a parent and you'll quickly discover that the threat of violence is a dead end street with teenagers. For one, he's as tall as me (6'1"). After a certain age, all you really can do as a parent is set up consequences for your child's behavior and no, sending them to their room isn't what I mean. In the real world, can your boss kick your ####### when you fall out of line? Of course not, but he can do other things that deter you from stepping out of line. If you talk about trying teenagers as adults, then be consistent and treat them like adults.

I agree that you should teach your kids, starting when they are very young about how to handle firearms, but there's got to be an age minimum - we don't let teenagers drive until their 16, some states now have it at 18. In the company of an adult - if a 12 year old wants to go out hunting and he's been safety certified, sure.

As far as having firearms in your home as a burglar deterent - that's silly. For one, you realize that if an unarmed burglar is in your house and you shoot him, you'll go to jail? Secondly, most deaths from firearms in a home happen from accidents and most often involve young children. So you'd rather defy logic and keep an unlocked and loaded handgun in your drawer where your 5 year old son could get it then keep it locked up for fear that burglars will exploit that fact?

Edited January 3, 2007 by Steven_and_Jinky

[Fandango 1,439]

The teenagers who decide to go on a killing rampage should be tried as adults.

The adults who are responsible for giving them access to the guns should be tried as well.

So do you support laws requiring gun owners to take certain steps to ensure their firearms are safe from children?

As far as trying teenagers as adults - I don't think thats a solution - certainly won't be a deterrent. I'd rather see school programs that teach teenagers anger management and conflict resolution.

bwahahahaha

right, anger management and conflict resolution in schools. like any of them will pay attention to that.

Getting back to the whole notion of bad parenting - how do you suppose most children learn how to express their anger or their problem solving skills? Unless you're in favor of regulating parenting, we need alternative solutions that can steer children who come from less than perfect homes to find the skills they need to make it in this world, including managing anger and problem solving. Those two skills would take any child a long way in this world once they become adults.

Isn't that what you're proposing with school programs?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The teenagers who decide to go on a killing rampage should be tried as adults.

The adults who are responsible for giving them access to the guns should be tried as well.

So do you support laws requiring gun owners to take certain steps to ensure their firearms are safe from children?

As far as trying teenagers as adults - I don't think thats a solution - certainly won't be a deterrent. I'd rather see school programs that teach teenagers anger management and conflict resolution.

bwahahahaha

right, anger management and conflict resolution in schools. like any of them will pay attention to that.

Getting back to the whole notion of bad parenting - how do you suppose most children learn how to express their anger or their problem solving skills? Unless you're in favor of regulating parenting, we need alternative solutions that can steer children who come from less than perfect homes to find the skills they need to make it in this world, including managing anger and problem solving. Those two skills would take any child a long way in this world once they become adults.

Isn't that what you're proposing with school programs?

Schools are a supplement to parenting, but not a replacement. The reality is some people are better at parenting than others. But what we do we do about the parents who are less than perfect - a father with a short temper for example? Take their children away? If school is to prepare children with skills for the real world it would be worth the money invested in programs that teach them social skills (anger management, conflict resolution).

[Ban Hammer 13,110]

Fear of being beaten senseless by your father is not a very effective deterrent and more than likely will teach the kid that violence is a solution.

It would depend on the age of the child. I have a 15 year old son, for example. He's too old to spank nor would I think it would be right for me to threaten him with physical harm if he gets into something that I don't want him into. If he were only 5 - all the spankings in the world isn't going to stop him from being curious and if I left a loaded handgun in my dresser drawer, if he were ever alone and had access to the room, he'd more than likely take it out and at least look at it. That is the nature of kids.

How about another solution - if you're a parent, you should be required to keep your firearms locked away and safe from children and only those children of yours who've completed a gun safety course and are of a reasonable age (say 15) can have keys to the firearms?

maybe you don't like the concept, but it works.

so whatcha gonna do with your son? send him to his room?

kids are not curious if they are familiar with the handgun. take him out, show him what it does. impress upon him the dangers associated with it.

keeping firearms locked away is all well and wonderful in a perfect world, steven. i'll be sure to post a sign for any burglars to ring the doorbell and wait 5 minutes before invading my home so i can get the gun safe unlocked and be ready.

btw, i think your age of 15 is too high. i was walking around hunting with a shotgun at age 12, and i was nra hunter safety course certified at that age too. it's a slippery slope in that some might try to make that law become such where no kid under 15 can handle a firearm.

also of note - is it not true that most of these school shootings occur with kids 15-18? if so, your idea above is a non-starter.

You think spanking my 15 year old is going to keep him in line??? Hahaha...Charles, wait until you're a parent and you'll quickly discover that the threat of violence is a dead end street with teenagers. For one, he's as tall as me (6'1"). After a certain age, all you really can do as a parent is set up consequences for your child's behavior and no, sending them to their room isn't what I mean. In the real world, can your boss kick your ####### when you fall out of line? Of course not, but he can do other things that deter you from stepping out of line. If you talk about trying teenagers as adults, then be consistent and treat them like adults.

I agree that you should teach your kids, starting when they are very young about how to handle firearms, but there's got to be an age minimum - we don't let teenagers drive until their 16, some states now have it at 18. In the company of an adult - if a 12 year old wants to go out hunting and he's been safety certified, sure.

As far as having firearms in your home as a burglar deterent - that's silly. For one, you realize that if an unarmed burglar is in your house and you shoot him, you'll go to jail? Secondly, most deaths from firearms in a home happen from accidents and most often involve young children. So you'd rather defy logic and keep an unlocked and loaded handgun in your drawer where your 5 year old son could get it then keep it locked up for fear that burglars will exploit that fact?

ah steven steven.........yes, i think spanking a 15 year old keeps them in line. i know it did for me. dad is 74 and i'd still not cross him. and news flash - i have a 17 year old daughter to further add to your ramblings above, she lives with her mother, so no kids in the house.

you're a parent first. remember that. if that means you have to send your kid to the azz whupping academy to make your point, then do so.

the comment about the boss doing something is a red herring btw. this is about parents and kids, not bosses and workers. please stick to the topic.

i don't agree with teaching kids about guns until they are 16 or 18. that's about 6-8 years too late in my opinion. i fired a gun for the first time when i was 9 or 10. and i'm talking about a 12 gauge, not a bb gun. it gave me a healthy respect just from the recoil of it.

believe what you will about firearms in a house being a deterrent. yes, i can shoot someone in my house whether they are armed or not. it's called "in fear for my life" and not for one minute do i believe that anyone breaking into my home would be unarmed, especially out in the country. furthermore, there's plenty here to arm any burglar

the only one defying logic, steven, is your attempt to inflict upon me your idea that guns in the home won't help a homeowner. i'm about 30 minutes from a call to 911 till arrival. do you expect me to hold off some armed burglar with coffee and donuts till the cops arrive?

i don't have a 5 year old son, btw, nor do you, so that's not worth discussing is it?

one additional note - i just got my concealed carry handgun license today. i'm sure those reading this thread will understand who knows jack about guns.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Fear of being beaten senseless by your father is not a very effective deterrent and more than likely will teach the kid that violence is a solution.

It would depend on the age of the child. I have a 15 year old son, for example. He's too old to spank nor would I think it would be right for me to threaten him with physical harm if he gets into something that I don't want him into. If he were only 5 - all the spankings in the world isn't going to stop him from being curious and if I left a loaded handgun in my dresser drawer, if he were ever alone and had access to the room, he'd more than likely take it out and at least look at it. That is the nature of kids.

How about another solution - if you're a parent, you should be required to keep your firearms locked away and safe from children and only those children of yours who've completed a gun safety course and are of a reasonable age (say 15) can have keys to the firearms?

maybe you don't like the concept, but it works.

so whatcha gonna do with your son? send him to his room?

kids are not curious if they are familiar with the handgun. take him out, show him what it does. impress upon him the dangers associated with it.

keeping firearms locked away is all well and wonderful in a perfect world, steven. i'll be sure to post a sign for any burglars to ring the doorbell and wait 5 minutes before invading my home so i can get the gun safe unlocked and be ready.

btw, i think your age of 15 is too high. i was walking around hunting with a shotgun at age 12, and i was nra hunter safety course certified at that age too. it's a slippery slope in that some might try to make that law become such where no kid under 15 can handle a firearm.

also of note - is it not true that most of these school shootings occur with kids 15-18? if so, your idea above is a non-starter.

You think spanking my 15 year old is going to keep him in line??? Hahaha...Charles, wait until you're a parent and you'll quickly discover that the threat of violence is a dead end street with teenagers. For one, he's as tall as me (6'1"). After a certain age, all you really can do as a parent is set up consequences for your child's behavior and no, sending them to their room isn't what I mean. In the real world, can your boss kick your ####### when you fall out of line? Of course not, but he can do other things that deter you from stepping out of line. If you talk about trying teenagers as adults, then be consistent and treat them like adults.

I agree that you should teach your kids, starting when they are very young about how to handle firearms, but there's got to be an age minimum - we don't let teenagers drive until their 16, some states now have it at 18. In the company of an adult - if a 12 year old wants to go out hunting and he's been safety certified, sure.

As far as having firearms in your home as a burglar deterent - that's silly. For one, you realize that if an unarmed burglar is in your house and you shoot him, you'll go to jail? Secondly, most deaths from firearms in a home happen from accidents and most often involve young children. So you'd rather defy logic and keep an unlocked and loaded handgun in your drawer where your 5 year old son could get it then keep it locked up for fear that burglars will exploit that fact?

ah steven steven.........yes, i think spanking a 15 year old keeps them in line. i know it did for me. dad is 74 and i'd still not cross him. and news flash - i have a 17 year old daughter to further add to your ramblings above, she lives with her mother, so no kids in the house.

you're a parent first. remember that. if that means you have to send your kid to the azz whupping academy to make your point, then do so.

the comment about the boss doing something is a red herring btw. this is about parents and kids, not bosses and workers. please stick to the topic.

i don't agree with teaching kids about guns until they are 16 or 18. that's about 6-8 years too late in my opinion. i fired a gun for the first time when i was 9 or 10. and i'm talking about a 12 gauge, not a bb gun. it gave me a healthy respect just from the recoil of it.

believe what you will about firearms in a house being a deterrent. yes, i can shoot someone in my house whether they are armed or not. it's called "in fear for my life" and not for one minute do i believe that anyone breaking into my home would be unarmed, especially out in the country. furthermore, there's plenty here to arm any burglar

the only one defying logic, steven, is your attempt to inflict upon me your idea that guns in the home won't help a homeowner. i'm about 30 minutes from a call to 911 till arrival. do you expect me to hold off some armed burglar with coffee and donuts till the cops arrive?

i don't have a 5 year old son, btw, nor do you, so that's not worth discussing is it?

one additional note - i just got my concealed carry handgun license today. i'm sure those reading this thread will understand who knows jack about guns.

You'd spank your 17 year old daughter? :oh:

[arwensun1965 0]

My Husband has a concealed gun license, when we were talking about this subject I asked about burglers and such, being from England where we are not allowed guns it was an interesting subject to talk about.

Jon said "honey the law says if someone comes into the house with the intent to harm you or your family then you have the right to protect yourselves" but some burgulars have sued householders for shooting them, so what is the point.

Nowadays it seems the victim has no rights at all, just let these people do what they want because nothing is going to stop them short of shooting them dead!!!!!