• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Mother accidentally shoots and kill teenage daughter

Who the hell would want to go to the UK anyway?
Me for one. I've been to UK in my travels. Great pubs, friendly people that almost speak English, some of the best museums since they have been looting the globe once the figured out how to get off their island.
 
Me for one. I've been to UK in my travels. Great pubs, friendly people that almost speak English, some of the best museums since they have been looting the globe once the figured out how to get off their island.
👍
 
I don't mean this disrespectful... but if you knew anything about modern guns, you would know that a modern .44 pistol absolutely does not malfunction.
Easily - you could take one of these guns and literally thrown it down a flight of steel stairs and it would not fire. Guns are not like the movies.
Having a loaded hand gun with the safety OFF in a room with children.... is monumentally disregarding safety of others.
Again - having a gun, loaded, cocked and safety off is extremely ignoring risk.
well it seems like you're talking about a 44 which is typically a revolver. Double or single acting it doesn't have a safety on off switch. Single acting would be safe when it was half cocked. And the devil would be safe when the hammer isn't cocked assuming it has an external hammer.

Just sayin... the likelihood of this woman carrying a loaded, cocked safety off pistol with a 6.5lb trigger firing while looking for her keys??
If it was a revolver which it probably wasn't you're talking about a 44 in those are typically revolvers. It wouldn't have an on-off safety switch. Also the average poll weight of a trigger on a revolver is one and a half to 5 lb. So it's six and a half pound trigger is above the average.

If we're talking about a single acting semi-auto most of them operate where you can only put the safety on when the hammers cocked. I'm sure there's exceptions and then there's single over doubles. And then there is also a striker fire where you generally have very little control over whether the hammer's cocked if you load it around in the hammer's cocked. And quite a few one of the most popular carried handguns that set up this way is a Glock. They don't have on-off safety switches.


If I was the investigative officer I would be very suspicious.
Of what why someone's carrying around a pistol for self-defense that has a six and a half pound trigger? Found someone talk to the hammer on their striker fire pistol are white Glocks don't have a safety switch?

I can't really read the article provided in the op unless I give Fox News my email address which I refuse to do. Though I have no idea what kind of gun it is was it a double acting semi-auto was it a double acting revolver was it a single acting no longer was it a Glock 19 was it a single acting simiano all of these things are going to have something to say about how these safeties function.

But I don't think any of this crap has anything to do with it I think the problem was just carrying a gun loosely in her purse. That is careless and now she knows exactly why.
 
Are you a Gun Zealot?
I certainly hope so.


Speculation.
True. But it is fairly likely that that is what the gun is.


Speculation.
That is incorrect. The characteristics of a Glock are known.


But what is not speculation is that the manner in which Radley carried her weapon, unholstered and loose in her purse, no doubt with a chambered round, was unquestionably unsafe and unquestionably deadly.
True.


Are they?
Yes.


"Violating people's civil liberties for no reason" is the only thing that gun control people care about.
Proof of that?
Look at the way they relentlessly strive for outlawing pistol grips and flash suppressors, or outlawing certain styles of guns, or outlawing certain brand names of guns.


Are black people the Zealots or would that be the KKK?
Both I assume.

The KKK is zealous in their hatred of black people.

I would hope that black people are zealous in their desire to be safe from harm.


I believe in reviewing, changing, and likely adding more controls on guns, and some people's access to them.
Are you placing me in the pigeon hole of being as "vile as the KKK is."
It would depend on the specifics of what you are trying to do.
 
Thanks for pointing out the absurdity of the 2nd amendment.
Protecting our freedom from the left is hardly absurd.


Exercising religion doesn't kill anyone.
Tell that to all the women who were burned at the stake for witchcraft.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Even Glocks have a safety mechanism. But it should have been in a holster. My wife has purses with built in holsters.
The safety system on a Glock is not the sort of thing they were picturing when they referred to a safety though.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not to you, maybe, but there's millions of them and they matter to the Congresscritters.
The NRA matters more. Much more.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does training do anyone any harm? Could it possibly mitigate the risk of accidents?
Depends on the degree of the training.

Requiring people to undergo the same training that Navy Seals go through, just to own a gun, would be harmful.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't mean this disrespectful... but if you knew anything about modern guns, you would know that a modern .44 pistol absolutely does not malfunction.
Easily - you could take one of these guns and literally thrown it down a flight of steel stairs and it would not fire. Guns are not like the movies.
Says who? Is that something like Boeing's claims that their planes are safe? What if the gun was a Sig P320?

How did .40 morph into .44?
 
Why do you hate children?
His post is sarcasm. You're attacking an ally.


Perhaps - if all those deaths in the tub were caused by someone other than the bathers themselves.
But they’re not.
So now suicides and accidental deaths don't count?

That's okay. Bathtubs and stairways are also used in murders. Take for example a victim who is deliberately pushed down a flight of stairs.


There’s really no number of false equivalencies that will buttress your argument, no matter how high you stack them.
Guns have no equivalents.
That is incorrect. Bathtubs and stairways kill people just as dead as guns do.


I’m seeking to end bullshit false equivalencies that are constantly proffered in defense of gun fatalities.
The equivalences are not false.

People who die from bathtubs and stairways are just as dead.
 
Do you know what is highly unlikely to happen in most other civilized western nations?
A child being shot to death in a classroom or by a reckless family member who carelessly has a gun in their purse.
Those things happen only in the USA, a nation with an addiction to firearms.
That is incorrect. There are guns in other countries. Gun accidents as well.


You equate freedom with owning a gun.
That's a false sense of security, not freedom.
Freedom is not being indebted to a bank, owing no one.
Freedom is being able to travel whenever and wherever you choose.
That's what freedom is.
That is incorrect. Free people always have the right to keep and bear arms.

Anyone who lacks the right to keep and bear arms, is not free.


Good luck with that.
You need a special license to bring firearms into the UK and likely all other nations.
If you're caught, You'll get decade in prison.
So get the required license.

The US allows guns to be checked as luggage without requiring a special license.


You can't bring a gun into the UK
You're not going to get a section 5 permit.
You need a legal reason to do so and "for my protection" isn't a legal reason and you'll be denied.
The UK is not a free country.

The lack of freedom in the UK says nothing about the state of other nations. Other countries remain free.

Switzerland issues full-auto rifles to their militiamen and allows them to keep them at home.

Finland considers "national defense" to be a valid reason for civilians to own semi-auto AK-47s with 30-round magazines.

Austria, Italy, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Estonia consider "home defense" a valid reason for civilians to own semi-auto rifles with 10-round magazines.

Austrians can buy a used lever action rifle without even being subjected to a background check. Swiss citizens can buy a bolt action rifle without even being subjected to a background check.

The Czech Republic allows anyone with a clean record to get a license to carry concealed handguns with 20-round magazines.

Even New Zealand allows people to have lever-action rifles and semi-auto shotguns.
 
That is incorrect. There are guns in other countries. Gun accidents as well.



That is incorrect. Free people always have the right to keep and bear arms.

Anyone who lacks the right to keep and bear arms, is not free.



So get the required license.

The US allows guns to be checked as luggage without requiring a special license.



The UK is not a free country.

The lack of freedom in the UK says nothing about the state of other nations. Other countries remain free.

Switzerland issues full-auto rifles to their militiamen and allows them to keep them at home.

Finland considers "national defense" to be a valid reason for civilians to own semi-auto AK-47s with 30-round magazines.

Austria, Italy, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Estonia consider "home defense" a valid reason for civilians to own semi-auto rifles with 10-round magazines.

Austrians can buy a used lever action rifle without even being subjected to a background check. Swiss citizens can buy a bolt action rifle without even being subjected to a background check.

The Czech Republic allows anyone with a clean record to get a license to carry concealed handguns with 20-round magazines.

Even New Zealand allows people to have lever-action rifles and semi-auto shotguns.
You are more likely to be shot and killed with a gun in the US than any other nation on earth. That is a fact.
Children don’t get shot to death while in class in other countries, it just doesn’t happen, and if it does, it’s a rare anomaly.
And I disagree , owning a gun does not make you free, not being in debt and having the freedom to travel whenever and wherever you wish, that’s real freedom
Guns do not equal freedom.
 
Yeah?
What happens to you if you need your gun and you can't get to it with your off hand?
What happens to you if you need your gun and the threat can get to you before you can rack your slide?
Why don't police officers carry emtpy chamber?
Why don't police officers carry a gun with a chambered round in a bag?
 
Would mandatory training help mitigate the frequency of these types of accidents?
Seeing as there are only about 500 deaths a year from firearms accidents and there are almost 400 million firearms in this country what frequency exactly are you talking about.
 
Seeing as there are only about 500 deaths a year from firearms accidents and there are almost 400 million firearms in this country what frequency exactly are you talking about.
Exactly as I said it.

Do you think firearms training mitigates the frequency of firearms accidents? Why does the military and law enforcement agencies insist on it?
 
Last edited:
Me for one. I've been to UK in my travels. Great pubs, friendly people that almost speak English, some of the best museums since they have been looting the globe once the figured out how to get off their island.
That cracked me up. When I was in London I heard more Russian than English, and half the English I did hear was mush. ;)
 
It's fascinating to me that some gun owners would rather plan for the one in a million chance that they might have to actually use their gun in self defense, versus the 99.9% of time that the gun will just be sitting there, loaded, one mistake away from accidentally killing someone.

I think those people either suffer from anxiety, or else have unresolved trauma that causes them constant fear of being unprepared for a potential attacker.
Yes I am sure the extremely biased opinions of a gun control zealot actually represent the beliefs and thoughts of people who carry a firearm.
 
You are more likely to be shot and killed with a gun in the US than any other nation on earth. That is a fact.
Children don’t get shot to death while in class in other countries, it just doesn’t happen, and if it does, it’s a rare anomaly.
And I disagree , owning a gun does not make you free, not being in debt and having the freedom to travel whenever and wherever you wish, that’s real freedom
Guns do not equal freedom.
Guns give BillyBob the illusion of freedom.
 
Exactly as I said it.

Do you think firearms training mitigates the frequency of forearms accidents? Why does the military and law enforcement agencies insist on it?
Noticed you didn’t actually address anything I said in my post. Rather telling.

You think firearms training stops people from doing dumb or careless things.
Interesting.
 
Noticed you didn’t actually address anything I said in my post. Rather telling.

You think firearms training stops people from doing dumb or careless things.
Interesting.
I think firearms training mitigates the frequency of people doing careless/stupid things with firearms.

What do you have against firearms training? You wouldn't want the army sending soldiers out untrained, would you?
 
Well at least you are consistent. Good luck getting many on the left to agree with that when just asking them to support getting an ID to vote is to much.
 
Negligence requires that someone ignored an obvious risk or acted with disregard for the safety of others.
If you're the DA, do you think you can prove either?

Sure:
  • Loose in purse so cant reliably grasp it properly, esp. in a hurry
  • No holster, other objects/finger can get in between trigger and add pressure depending on handling of purse
  • no safety or safety off
  • round chambered (if semi-auto)

Which of these apply here? Obvious risks ignored. And as such, disregard for the safety of others. (Proven by outcome)

I carry with a round chambered but safety on. It's always in a holster.
 
Well at least you are consistent. Good luck getting many on the left to agree with that when just asking them to support getting an ID to vote is to much.
I don't care what the "left" thinls about it. Being an educated voter doesn't infringe on the right to vote. Being an educated gun owner doesn't infringe on the right to bear arms.
 
Thats it, keep those kids "safe"!!!

Way to go NRA Mom!!!!!

applause.gif
 
You are more likely to be shot and killed with a gun in the US than any other nation on earth. That is a fact.
Children don’t get shot to death while in class in other countries, it just doesn’t happen, and if it does, it’s a rare anomaly.
And I disagree , owning a gun does not make you free, not being in debt and having the freedom to travel whenever and wherever you wish, that’s real freedom
Guns do not equal freedom.

What are all those people in Mexico being killed with? I don't believe you. Support your claim or admit you made it up.
 
Back
Top Bottom