People are Getting Shot by Toddlers on a Weekly Basis This Year

[countryboy]

Here is what I said,

I could be more explicit in those suggestions if you want: For example, increasing the amount of gun safety training could be obtained by increasing the number of associated hours (or requiring such training) if you want to obtain a license to purchase firearms or a certain number of gun safety training hours could be required on a yearly basis. In terms of the gun safety regulation, we could mandate that firearms be kept locked in a safe while at home or equipped with additional safety features like a more complex gun safety or a fingerprint lock. The gun liability insurance seems fairly self-explanatory.

You'll need to get rid of the pesky 2A before any of that can be foisted...er...implemented on society. You should concentrate on that first.

 

[reinoe]

The War On Toddlers is a neverending struggle.

 

[MrT]

You'll need to get rid of the pesky 2A before any of that can be foisted...er...implemented on society. You should concentrate on that first.

None of my recommendations would violate the second amendment

 

[countryboy]

None of my recommendations would violate the second amendment

Then you must be completely ignorant of the English language.

 

[MrT]

Then you must be completely ignorant of the English language.

I am an attorney that is bar certified in two states. My comprehension skills when it comes to the English language is just fine. But please, go ahead and ask me, "What part of shall not infringe do you not understand?"

 

[countryboy]

I am an attorney that is bar certified in two states. My comprehension skills when it comes to the English language is just fine. But please, go ahead and ask me, "What part of shall not infringe do you not understand?"

If you are not ignorant of the English language, then you are a usurper. Perhaps try a dictionary. :shrug:

Oh and, you'll forgive me if I am skeptical about your "credentials". Everyone's impoe-ent on the interwebz. :roll::roll::roll::roll:

 

[MrT]

If you are not ignorant of the English language, then you are a usurper. Perhaps try a dictionary. :shrug:

Oh and, you'll forgive me if I am skeptical about your "credentials". Everyone's impoe-ent on the interwebz. :roll::roll::roll::roll:

A usurper? Ok...

I also don't care if you respect or believe my credentials.

 

[blackjack50]

Mandatory government safety training and equipment. When I say mandatory...I mean mandatory that the government provide it in every county of the nation. 1 facility where you can go train safely and get free safety equipment like locks or safes. Voluntary to use...mandatory to provide.

 

[countryboy]

A usurper? Ok...

I also don't care if you respect or believe my credentials.

Yes, a usurper. Blatant, and obvious.

 

[TurtleDude]

I am an attorney that is bar certified in two states. My comprehension skills when it comes to the English language is just fine. But please, go ahead and ask me, "What part of shall not infringe do you not understand?"

ah great, then you might tell me what existing natural right the founders all believed in was intended to be recognized by the second amendment

and you can also tell me why the commerce clause was actually intended to allow the federal government to regulate actions of private citizens in their own sovereign states with the term "commerce among the STATES"

I am waiting

 

[MrT]

ah great, then you might tell me what existing natural right the founders all believed in was intended to be recognized by the second amendment

and you can also tell me why the commerce clause was actually intended to allow the federal government to regulate actions of private citizens in their own sovereign states with the term "commerce among the STATES"

I am waiting

Why is the intent of the Founding Fathers (even if their collective intent was somehow singular) the most important factor? We out and out reject the medical and scientific opinions of the leading experts from 250 years ago. Unquestioning reliance upon the intent of legal and political experts of 250 ago also seems unreasonable

 

[MACS-24]

Or that phallically challenged and paranoid gun owners don't care about endangering their own families more like :lol:

I'm sure you do know there are many female gun owners so I guess this is more proof you have no argument and have successfully continued to fly under the radar of moderation.

 

[TurtleDude]

Why is the intent of the Founding Fathers (even if their collective intent was somehow singular) the most important factor? We out and out reject the medical and scientific opinions of the leading experts from 250 years ago. Unquestioning reliance upon the intent of legal and political experts of 250 ago also seems unreasonable

nice avoidance. fail

 

[MrT]

nice avoidance. fail

Right back at ya.

 

[Bodi]

Moral of the Story: "Don't give a baby guns..."

Liberal Moral Logic: "Somebody died...... Ban everything"

Is that logic official or are you just making it up?

 

[TurtleDude]

Right back at ya.

wrong: I have consistently noted what the second amendment was intended to do and no one has ever been able to contradict it since they cannot find any evidence that the founders intended anything in the way of federal gun control powers. and the anti gun cabal continues to lose academically as honest liberal scholars such as Levinson and Amar confirm that individual rights were guaranteed by the second.

 

[Reformedfindlay]

Why is the intent of the Founding Fathers (even if their collective intent was somehow singular) the most important factor? We out and out reject the medical and scientific opinions of the leading experts from 250 years ago. Unquestioning reliance upon the intent of legal and political experts of 250 ago also seems unreasonable

Cool. While we're at it, let's remove all those other outdated rights too.

Right to counsel? Psssh, that was so 2 centuries ago.

Right to trial by jury? Ugh, how outdated!

Free speech? Laaaaaammmeeee

(I hate sarcasm, but this is irresistible)

 

[MrT]

Cool. While we're at it, let's remove all those other outdated rights too.

Right to counsel? Psssh, that was so 2 centuries ago.

Right to trial by jury? Ugh, how outdated!

Free speech? Laaaaaammmeeee

(I hate sarcasm, but this is irresistible)

There are several points in the continuum in between "let us apply a strict interpretation of the constitution based on our perception of their intent" and "let's abandon the constitution."

 

[MrT]

wrong: I have consistently noted what the second amendment was intended to do and no one has ever been able to contradict it since they cannot find any evidence that the founders intended anything in the way of federal gun control powers. and the anti gun cabal continues to lose academically as honest liberal scholars such as Levinson and Amar confirm that individual rights were guaranteed by the second.

No, you are still dodging my request that you establish WHY we need to rely solely on founder's intent. The document was clearly designed and intended to be adjusted for new generations. So why should reliance on a strict interpretation founder's intent be necessary?

 

[Reformedfindlay]

There are several points in the continuum in between "let us apply a strict interpretation of the constitution based on our perception of their intent" and "let's abandon the constitution."

There aren't several points in the continuum. Rather, you wish to abandon what you don't like.

I don't see you having the same sentiment for say... the commerce clause.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

People are getting shot by toddlers on a weekly basis this year - The Washington Post

In 2015 so far, at least 13 toddlers (ages 3 and under) have inadvertently killed themselves with firearms, 18 more injured themselves, 10 injured other people, and 2 killed other people. And these numbers are likely an uncount as there are likely to be instances of toddlers shooting people that result in minor injuries and either no report or no media coverage.

It is difficult to draw broad conclusions based on these numbers, but in a study of accidental shootings by children of all ages, there are estimates that "more than two-thirds of these tragedies could be avoided if gun owners stored their guns responsibly and prevented children form accessing them."
#NotAnAccident Index

In a country where there are more guns than people, and where certain portions of the population are pushing for more guns in more locations, it is inevitable that a certain number of small children are going to get their hands on an unsecured firearm. It stands to reason that, if we want to limit those instances, we need to increase the amount of gun safety training or increase the gun safety regulations (like mandating gun lockups in home) or discuss gun liability insurance to help cover these injuries.

so 13.....


In a country of how many millions of toddlers, how is this actually an issue?


Unsecured gun and the toddler gets it, negligent homicide if you must, but the idea of forcing locks and insurance is not the answer for these 13 who died in nearly all of 2015.


Statistically irrelevant.

 

[Reformedfindlay]

No, you are still dodging my request that you establish WHY we need to rely solely on founder's intent. The document was clearly designed and intended to be adjusted for new generations. So why should reliance on a strict interpretation founder's intent be necessary?

We should especially rely on the father's intent since no clear amendments were made to alter that amendment of the constitution. If the people feel that the 2A should have a different meaning then there would've been a 28A addressing that issue that the people are so worried and uptight about.

 

[Reformedfindlay]

so 13.....


In a country of how many millions of toddlers, how is this actually an issue?


Unsecured gun and the toddler gets it, negligent homicide if you must, but the idea of forcing locks and insurance is not the answer for these 13 who died in nearly all of 2015.


Statistically irrelevant.

He can't reconcile with the fact that there are some darwin award-winning families out there.

He thinks big brother needs to get his hands dirty.

 

[PIPEWRENCH]

so 13.....


In a country of how many millions of toddlers, how is this actually an issue?


Unsecured gun and the toddler gets it, negligent homicide if you must, but the idea of forcing locks and insurance is not the answer for these 13 who died in nearly all of 2015.


Statistically irrelevant.

:thumbs::thumbs:

Just another attempt by the anti-gun nuts to come up with something to restrict our rights and freedom.

 

[Reformedfindlay]

Why is the intent of the Founding Fathers (even if their collective intent was somehow singular) the most important factor? We out and out reject the medical and scientific opinions of the leading experts from 250 years ago. Unquestioning reliance upon the intent of legal and political experts of 250 ago also seems unreasonable

That's a cop out.

But I guess that's what happens when you get confronted by a better attorney