3-Year-Old Fatally Shot Near Broad Ripple Park After Gun Fell Off Counter
A neighbor to the family said "I've known they had guns; they've carried them in public on their side, they've got permits for them and I just thought they always were a little bit more responsible than that."
I guess not.
16 comments:
This happens two or three times in a typical week. Hundreds of kids are shot or killed every year because their parents are incompetent fools.
The obvious solution is to mandate that all guns have a safety interlock that prevents the trigger from being pulled if the weapon is not properly gripped by an adult hand. This would prevent thousands of accidental shootings from dropped weapons and kids who get hold of their idiot parents' guns.
It would also be a huge profit center for the gun industry as people turn in their dangerous old weapons for safer models.
What part of "infringed" don't you understand, Nikto?:)
But seriously, I didn't realize the stats were that high. That's at least a hundred times a year.
The obvious solution is to mandate that all guns have a safety interlock that prevents the trigger from being pulled if the weapon is not properly gripped by an adult hand.
As the 'child proof' caps on pill bottle's has worked sooooo well.
Hundreds of kids are shot or killed every year
Less than one hundred.
http://webappa.cdc.gov/cgi-bin/broker.exe
Oh and I notice that you don't have anything more to say about Zimmerman. I guess he was already tried and convicted in the kangaroo court of Markadaffya.
Oh and I notice that you don't have anything more to say about Zimmerman. I guess he was already tried and convicted in the kangaroo court of Markadaffya
Considering that's what happened the first time. And the second time. Oh, and the third time......
I don't have much more to say about him because it's obvious what's going to happen with him.
Obvious? Oh really?
First, he defends himself from an attack and you convict him in the court of your own head. He successfully argues self defence.
Next you convict him for 'pointing a gun at his wife', yet there was again no evidence of what you are convinced he did.
Then you again convict him for doing same to his girlfriend. And rather than learning from your first two mistakes, you double down and 'convict' him again. And again the facts just don't seem to play out the way you think they are supposed to....
So considering you've been wrong EVERY TIME, just what is it that is supposed to be obvious?
She chose not to press charges so I guess that means it never happened. It really doesn't matter, GD. Eventually, he'll end up in prison just like OJ. Did you think he was innocent as well?
so I guess that means it never happened
Typical Markadelphia; never, ever, ever admit error.
George Zimmerman's girlfriend wants case dropped, document say
But in a signed affidavit filed by Zimmerman's attorney, Jayne Weintraub, Scheibe says Zimmerman "never pointed a gun at or toward my face in a threatening manner" and claims police misinterpreted her.
"I believe that the police misinterpreted me and that I may have misspoken about certain facts in my statement to the police," she said. "I do not feel that the arrest report accurately recounts what happened."
It may never have happened so it's possible he's not guilty. Or she is like many other frightened women out there who are afraid of their psychotic asshole boyfriends. Maybe she should buy a gun:) Either way, he will end up in prison.
Did OJ murder his wife? Yes or no?
Yes OJ is guilty. Not that it has ANY relevance to this....
But you are still making no sense.
Your base line is he is a bad man. Based upon what? He shot Martin. You feel it was unjustified. That feeling does not line up with either the facts or the jury decision.
You think he pointed a gun at his wife. That does not match with the evidence found by the investigation.
You think he pointed a gun at his girlfriend. A girlfriend who has now recanted her story. Could she be like other scared women in a similar situation? Sure. But since she was unsuccessfully trying to sell her 'story' to the media prior to the event I'd say she isn't exactly in a similar situation.
So every situation you use to judge Zimmerman is not borne out by the facts in evidence. Yet you persist in insisting he is 'bad' and will end up in prison. Still waiting on how this imaginary story of yours makes anything 'obvious'.
But OJ was acquitted much in the same way at Zimmerman. As you have stated previously, the evidence showed that he didn't do it.
It's fascinating how the content tells a slightly different story than the headline:
Headline: 3-Year-Old Fatally Shot Near Broad Ripple Park After Gun Fell Off Counter
Content: Investigators have indicated that they believe the child accidentally shot himself in the head after he pulled the gun off a kitchen counter.
So the headline says the gun jumped off the counter and shot the child in the head all by itself.
But the content says the child's actions lead to his shooting.
Two very different things.
Curious children are amazing. They can get to places no one expects in much shorter times than you would think. Still, there is a lot unstated in the story. Why was a loaded gun on the counter? How did the child get to it? Was there good reason to think he couldn't reach it? What was going on in the house at the time?
It's amazing how the left (including Markadelphia) will quote "do not judge" yet will immediately judge all gun owners based on insufficient information whenever they hear of an incident.
Let's face it, guns are dangerous. They're supposed to be. They wouldn't be useful for self-defense if they weren't. That's why they must always be treated as such. Follow the basic safety rules. Make sure young children never have unsupervised access to firearms, and train them in gun safety as early and as thoroughly as possible. Apparently gun owners as a whole are doing exactly that, since the number of such accidents has been dropping for decades even as the number of privately owned guns have been increasing over the same time period.
The evidence showed that OJ was guilty. (Indeed, that same evidence led to his losing the civil suit.) There is only one reason OJ was acquitted; his defense attorneys claimed the lead detective (and probably the entire police department) was racist and tampered with the evidence. That caused enough doubt in the juror's minds to acquit. Later analysis showed that even if the claims of racism were true, there is no way that much evidence could be tampered with.
There is no such dispute over the evidence in the Zimmerman case. Period. There is no analogy.
Once again, you're proving that you live by "My mind is made up. Don't bug me with the facts."
But OJ was acquitted much in the same way at Zimmerman. As you have stated previously, the evidence showed that he didn't do it.
NMN said it, but let me put in my two cents...
Bzzzt! Wrong. The EVIDENCE of both cases, of which I am familiar with and you apparently do not shows otherwise.
Post a Comment