Armed 2yo shoots mother @ Walmart

[crockett]

If only the mother had a gun, or perhaps if one of the customers had a gun they could of taken out the toddler.

Police: Boy, 2, accidentally kills mom in Hayden, Idaho Wal-Mart - CBS News

[MikeOMania]

A 2y old one? WTF??????

[fitzmulti]

Crazy, sad, story...but I wouldn't have called that kid "armed"...just using his arm to dig around that purse...

[fitzmulti]

Originally Posted by MikeOMania

A 2y old one? WTF??????

Read the article...not the thread title...

[Rochard]

Anyone ever notice a lot of this crap goes down at Wal Mart?

[Barry-xlovecam]

I suppose he opened the safety first then pulled the trigger

Why would she need a CCW in "The shooting occurred in the Wal-Mart in Hayden, Idaho, a town about 40 miles northeast of Spokane, Washington." anyway?

Lot of bears in the WalMart there?

[blackmonsters]

That's sad.

I don't think it's very easy for a two year old to fire a gun with the safety on.

[blackmonsters]

Originally Posted by Rochard

Anyone ever notice a lot of this crap goes down at Wal Mart?

Yeah, it's pretty amazing that all this stupid shit happens where all the stupid fuckers shop.

.

[hadden]

How strange

[MiamiBoyz]

This brought a smile to my face

[420]

How do we know it was an accident?

[blackmonsters]

Originally Posted by 420

How do we know it was an accident?

Maybe it was self defense because the mom was reaching for the gun too.

[bronco67]

Idaho...makes sense.

[crockett]

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam

I suppose he opened the safety first then pulled the trigger

Why would she need a CCW in "The shooting occurred in the Wal-Mart in Hayden, Idaho, a town about 40 miles northeast of Spokane, Washington." anyway?

Lot of bears in the WalMart there?

It depends on the gun, but my hand gun for instance the safety is the hammer. For this reason I don't leave the gun with a bullet in the chamber. In fact I don't even leave a clip in the gun unless I'm using it.

This woman obviously had the gun cocked and loaded as a 2 yo wouldn't have been able to shoot the gun by just fiddling around with it in her purse. This is yet another case that shows people whom carry guns for self defense are more likely to die from their own gun than someone else's.

I do support gun ownership, but facts are facts. Almost all accidents are caused by gun owners whom are irresponsible and I bet every single one of them belived they are responsible.

[directfiesta]

So sad ....

If only there would have been another 2 year old " good " kid with a gun , he could have stopped it !

[blackmonsters]

Originally Posted by directfiesta

So sad ....

If only there would have been another 2 year old " good " kid with a gun , he could have stopped it !

Maybe a 10 year old could have stopped it but he was run over by a police car.
So let's ban police cars.

[420]

Originally Posted by blackmonsters

Maybe it was self defense because the mom was reaching for the gun too.

Doesn't the baby have to be reaching for the mom's gun for that to work?

She probably bought the kid the wrong toys for xmas. This could be a revenge killing. Why did the investigators jump to the conclusion that it's an accident without investigating further?

[sandman!]

your an idiot

Originally Posted by crockett

If only the mother had a gun, or perhaps if one of the customers had a gun they could of taken out the toddler.

Police: Boy, 2, accidentally kills mom in Hayden, Idaho Wal-Mart - CBS News

[SuckOnThis]

Originally Posted by sandman!

your an idiot

[JIBCONTENT]

So crazy

[Joshua G]

Originally Posted by Rochard

Anyone ever notice a lot of this crap goes down at Wal Mart?

Originally Posted by MiamiBoyz

This brought a smile to my face

Originally Posted by bronco67

Idaho...makes sense.

love these quotes. thanks.

i feel bad for the kid that lost his mom, & is gonna be fucked up for life, all cause of an accident. shame. but mom is to blame. & darwin has no mercy.

[crockett]

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis

[crockett]

Originally Posted by sandman!

your an idiot

Actually I'd say the mother was an idiot, for carrying a loaded gun in her purse and letting her 2yo fiddle with stuff in that same purse.

[420]

Originally Posted by bronco67

Idaho...makes sense.

Town population isn't even over 9000. Everyone carries guns because potato farmers are easy targets for armed robbers.

[dyna mo]

kids these days are spoiled. i didn't get to play with my mom's gun until i was 4, and then it was only in the yard.

[aka123]

Why people keep their guns loaded? Isn't it enough that there are ammo in the magazine?

In hunting it is generally advised to unload the gun even when you jump across a stream, climb over a fence, etc. And then other people carry loaded guns in their everyday tasks?

[just a punk]

Originally Posted by crockett

If only the mother had a gun, or perhaps if one of the customers had a gun they could of taken out the toddler.

Police: Boy, 2, accidentally kills mom in Hayden, Idaho Wal-Mart - CBS News

Guns for everyone

[just a punk]

Originally Posted by aka123

Why people keep their guns loaded? Isn't it enough that there are ammo in the magazine?

In hunting it is generally advised to unload the gun even when you jump across a stream, climb over a fence, etc. And then other people carry loaded guns in their everyday tasks?

A bullet in the barrel and cocked. She got what she deserved.

[crockett]

Originally Posted by aka123

Why people keep their guns loaded? Isn't it enough that there are ammo in the magazine?

In hunting it is generally advised to unload the gun even when you jump across a stream, climb over a fence, etc. And then other people carry loaded guns in their everyday tasks?

Because many people whom require carrying a gun to feel safe, tend to fantasize that they will end up in some Westren shoot out or Rambo fight scene where that extra second required to chamber a round will make all the diffrence in the world. These people are of course irresponsible and shouldn't be carrying a gun in the first place.

There is also the chance that she was carrying a revolver of some sort so only the safety had to be turned off and trigger pulled. Either way she was obviously not responsible enough to carry a gun as she either let the toddler fiddle around in her purse with a loaded gun or she left her purse with the child out of sight long enough for the kid to get it.

[PR_Glen]

Originally Posted by crockett

Because many people whom require carrying a gun to feel safe, tend to fantasize that they will end up in some Westren shoot out or Rambo fight scene where that extra second required to chamber a round will make all the diffrence in the world. These people are of course irresponsible and shouldn't be carrying a gun in the first place.

There is also the chance that she was carrying a revolver of some sort so only the safety had to be turned off and trigger pulled. Either way she was obviously not responsible enough to carry a gun as she either let the toddler fiddle around in her purse with a loaded gun or she left her purse with the child out of sight long enough for the kid to get it.

you think a 2 year old could pull the trigger on a revolver with one hand in the purse?

[SuckOnThis]

My guess is this 2 year old thug was upset that his mom wouldn't buy him some skittles.

[FriendsForNow]

Originally Posted by PR_Glen

you think a 2 year old could pull the trigger on a revolver with one hand in the purse?

If it's a hair trigger.

[pimpmaster9000]

guess the race just kidding LOL

[tony286]

I dont care if people want guns but there should be a 8 hr class every Saturday for 8 weeks and a test you have to pass to own a gun. These people aren't taught to respect the tool they have and that's why stupid shit like this happens. Also the 8 week class would scare away the crazies and out of anger killings.

[crockett]

Originally Posted by tony286

I dont care if people want guns but there should be a 8 hr class every Saturday for 8 weeks and a test you have to pass to own a gun. These people aren't taught to respect the tool they have and that's why stupid shit like this happens. Also the 8 week class would scare away the crazies and out of anger killings.

I have my Concealed weapon permit and of course took the class required which in my opinion was a joke. It seemed the entire class was about how to cover your own ass if you shoot someone and where you can and can't carry.

There was not much gun safety training and next to no hands on testing. The hands on was everyone lining up at the gun range to shoot a 22 cal revolver. The instructor actually held the gun and you pulled the trigger twice. It was a joke. It was bam bam you hit the target you passed..

[AaronM]

Originally Posted by crockett

This is yet another case that shows people whom carry guns for self defense are more likely to die from their own gun than someone else's.

That's some serious horse shit you're spewing there son.

Kindly do some actual research before spouting off random inaccurate crap like this.

[AaronM]

Originally Posted by crockett

I have my Concealed weapon permit and of course took the class required which in my opinion was a joke. It seemed the entire class was about how to cover your own ass if you shoot someone and where you can and can't carry.

There was not much gun safety training and next to no hands on testing. The hands on was everyone lining up at the gun range to shoot a 22 cal revolver. The instructor actually held the gun and you pulled the trigger twice. It was a joke. It was bam bam you hit the target you passed..

Now that I completely agree with. Most CCW education requirements are complete bullshit. Few states require you to show firearms proficiency and none, that I'm aware of, require any training on how to properly draw from concealment etc...

[crockett]

Originally Posted by AaronM

That's some serious horse shit you're spewing there son.

Kindly do some actual research before spouting off random inaccurate crap like this.

Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed - science-in-society - 06 October 2009 - New Scientist

Overall, Branas's study found that people who carried guns were 4.5 times as likely to be shot and 4.2 times as likely to get killed compared with unarmed citizens. When the team looked at shootings in which victims had a chance to defend themselves, their odds of getting shot were even higher.

Now think of what you are arguing Aaron..

It's pretty common sense to see that owning a gun increases the chance you will be shot by that gun. If you don't own a gun, it's pretty hard to shoot yourself with out one now isn't it? You can't accidendly shoot yourself or someone else if you don't have a gun.

Clear example is the case this topic is about. If the woman wasn't carrying a gun she would be alive right now.

So how can you call that BS?

[AaronM]

Originally Posted by crockett

So how can you call that BS?

Because of this part right here....

Originally Posted by crockett

It's pretty common sense to see that owning a gun increases the chance you will be shot by that gun.

Nowhere in that article does it say that owning a gun increases your chances of being shot by that gun. The title seems accurate though. "Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed"

One thing it's saying that does make sense is this:

"While it may be that the type of people who carry firearms are simply more likely to get shot, it may be that guns give a sense of empowerment that causes carriers to overreact in tense situations, or encourages them to visit neighbourhoods they probably shouldn't, Branas speculates."


Then there's this:

"We don't have an answer as to whether guns are protective or perilous," Branas says. "This study is a beginning."


So, you're not only "putting words into their mouth" but you're also assuming this research is accurate when those researching it say it's not complete.

Obviously if there's no gun around, you're not going to get shot. That's a pretty dumb thing to even bring into the conversation.

[bronco67]

Why does someone need a gun to go shopping? In fucking Idaho....

[bronco67]

Originally Posted by crockett

Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed - science-in-society - 06 October 2009 - New Scientist

Overall, Branas's study found that people who carried guns were 4.5 times as likely to be shot and 4.2 times as likely to get killed compared with unarmed citizens. When the team looked at shootings in which victims had a chance to defend themselves, their odds of getting shot were even higher.

Now think of what you are arguing Aaron..

It's pretty common sense to see that owning a gun increases the chance you will be shot by that gun. If you don't own a gun, it's pretty hard to shoot yourself with out one now isn't it? You can't accidendly shoot yourself or someone else if you don't have a gun.

Clear example is the case this topic is about. If the woman wasn't carrying a gun she would be alive right now.

So how can you call that BS?

That's usually my argument also. When you buy a gun, your chances of being shot go way up. Your chances of shooting someone you love by accident have increased from 0.01% to 1000%.

[bronco67]

They would ban pregnancy before banning guns. But if she had kept her legs closed 2 years and 9 months ago, she would still be alive.

and Walmart should change their slogan to "Come for the low prices, and the shootings".

[crockett]

Originally Posted by AaronM

Because of this part right here....




Nowhere in that article does it say that owning a gun increases your chances of being shot by that gun. The title seems accurate though. "Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed"

One thing it's saying that does make sense is this:

"While it may be that the type of people who carry firearms are simply more likely to get shot, it may be that guns give a sense of empowerment that causes carriers to overreact in tense situations, or encourages them to visit neighbourhoods they probably shouldn't, Branas speculates."


Then there's this:

"We don't have an answer as to whether guns are protective or perilous," Branas says. "This study is a beginning."


So, you're not only "putting words into their mouth" but you're also assuming this research is accurate when those researching it say it's not complete.

Obviously if there's no gun around, you're not going to get shot. That's a pretty dumb thing to even bring into the conversation.

You can try to twist words if you want, but basic facts are basic facts. If you have a gun, being own it, carry it or store it in your closet you are more at risk of being shot or someone else getting shot by that gun than if you don't own a gun.

[seeandsee]

fucking guns on every corner

[MetaMan]

Aaron you're wrong again. Get over it.

[brassmonkey]

did they say what kind of gun? must have had the safety off. night terrors for that kid.

[AaronM]

Originally Posted by crockett

You can try to twist words if you want, but basic facts are basic facts. If you have a gun, being own it, carry it or store it in your closet you are more at risk of being shot or someone else getting shot by that gun than if you don't own a gun.

LOL

I'm not the one twisting the words, you are. Actually, you aren't so much twisting them as adding to them then drawing your own conclusions.

Whatever duuuude.

[AaronM]

Originally Posted by MetaMan

Aaron you're wrong again. Get over it.

I am huh?

That's interesting because I quoted the article and quoted the OP and neither of them are saying the same thing.

Where exactly am I wrong about that?

[Barry-xlovecam]

Originally Posted by crockett

[T]his woman obviously had the gun cocked and loaded as a 2 yo wouldn't have been able to shoot the gun by just fiddling around with it in her purse. This is yet another case that shows people whom carry guns for self defense are more likely to die from their own gun than someone else's. ...

Only a lunatic would pack a cocked handgun in their purse ... If that is true, the gene pool was improved this week

[MetaMan]

Originally Posted by AaronM

I am huh?

That's interesting because I quoted the article and quoted the OP and neither of them are saying the same thing.

Where exactly am I wrong about that?

Look it doesnt matter about his irrelevent comment. Facts do not matter. Only made up stats do.

To me you are wrong. Hes wrong. Im right. Its simple as pie.