This is going to make the anti-gun crowd go wild
 

Linky

What I want to know, is A) Why did this guy leave his kid alone in the car with a loaded gun, and B) why was the kid not in a car seat? I think those are more important questions that need to be answered.

Darwin strikes again. Who was it that posted the article of the Jackass imitators on the merry-go-round? That was a good look at what absolutely not to do.

that is so sad, they sould lock that dad up, or give him a chance to blow his own brains out.
It's not about gun control, it's about gun awareness

The dumbass should have at least locked his gun. I bet it was a revolver :(

Now, both the son and father are brain dead.


I like it when families share.

Pay attention to what your kids are doing. Bottom line.

Top ten candidate for Darwin award. He is too stupid to have a pet never mind a child.

What would you tell your wife? How could he live with himself?

Technically the child would be up for the Darwin award. In order to get a Darwin award you have to have removed yourself from the gene pool, which the child did. But given the age of the child I think it's a bit insensitive to say that the kid is up for a Darwin award, when clearly the father is really at fault. Since the father is still alive and able to procreate, then there is no basis for a Darwin award.

*sigh*

I hope the child's mother uses the gun on this guy.

First, perhaps things are different up here in the snowy tundra, but why was there a gun in the car to begin with?

Secondly, why the hell does it take so long to decide whether or not to charge him? Yes, he has a permit, but does that negate the requirement to keep the machine safetied and out of the reach of children?

Another reason to never own children.

I'm not anti-gun, but I am anti-idiot.

Carelessness costs lives, especially with death-dealing instruments lying about.

They said it. The guy is a moron and shouldnt have owned a gun in the first place. This is no reason to place restrictions on guns, or even to yell about it. If you want something to yell about, yell about how moronic this guy was.

And ratbastid, guns arent death-dealing instruments, but they certainly have that capability. Like anything, if misused, they can injure or kill you. Just wanted to clarify :D

Fair enough. Maybe I'm slightly anti-gun. :D

So how do you use a gun properly so it doesn't injure or kill what you are shooting at? Guns are a tool. A tool for killing. The power that they represent mean to me that there should be laws that enforce more responsibility upon their owners.

Ah, I don't need to say anything.

Agreed.

i heard about this on howard stern this morning and I about gagged! First off who leaves their gun laying loose inside their car? Second--who the hell lets their 3 yr old child alone in the car?!?!!? Fuckin idoit...let them all rot in prison being butt buddies with bubba and the boys

That father is a moron and should be shot. He is at fault for a: leaving a loaded gun in the car, b: leaving a toddler in the car with the gun, and c: being a complete moron...I say give the guy life in prison or death. Morons like that dont deserve to be set free for stupidity.

Sure, guns were designed to kill. But they dont have to. Most of my guns have never killed anything--I use them to shoot skeet and targets. As for how do you use them properly? Had this man been properly instructed, he would have known: Muzzle Awareness. Trigger Awareness. For those of you that do not own or shoot firearms, this means:

A) Dont point the gun at anything you dont want to shoot. Ever. I dont care if the gun is unloaded, broken, whatever. Never. This also means that the gun should be pointed in the air or at the ground in front of you at all times that you are not actively shooting: read--about to pull the trigger. ALWAYS know EXACTLY what your gun is pointing at.

B) Finger OFF the trigger until you are going to pull it. No excuses.

There are other rules as well: guns unloaded until you are stepping up to the line to shoots, breeches open, safeties on (but never rely on a safety). Most gun clubs will immediately kick you out if you violate ANY of these rules. Properly used, a gun is no more dangerous than a screwdriver.

Guns have the potential to be more dangerous than many other tools. Thats why there are more laws regarding their use. Laws, however, cannot be expected to protect people from their own stupidity.

To shoot skeets, and targets, that is TARGET PRACTICE. The gun was designed to kill. This is what you are practicing to become good at. I don't have a problem with that, you can practice all you want at becoming accurate with a gun. I think you should look within yourself, however, and look at why you are practicing to shoot. Just because you can use this killing tool for another purpose doesn't change what it is. I can use my screwdriver to open paint can lids. It's main use remains and always will remain to screw in a screw. My second point that you quoted, merely emphasied the need for laws governing the responsibilitiies of the owners of these guns. It's too easy to own a gun, with so little penalty if it is misused in america. It's true that nothing is foolproof, because fools are ingenious at foiling such things. But I believe that there would be much less death and suffering if everyone were required to complete a 13 week training course with both a written and a field test to determine whether one was qualified to own a gun, and understood the repercussions of their actions (or inaction). While it is important that citizens have the freedom to arm themselves, it's more important for them to understand what owning weapon such as a gun means.

I usually say "knowledge makes a better trigger lock", but what can a toddler know about gun safety? Original King said it better than I could.

He was irresponsible in leaving a loaded gun out of his sight.

With a gun, it only takes one stupid mistake to make a tragedy.

Preventing this guy from owning a gun is gun control.

In Norway we have quite liberal weapon laws compared to the rest of Europe. You can get a rifle or shotgun by documenting your need to use the weapon for hunting or competition. You can only get handguns if you're using them for competition. If you have no criminal record, it's easy to get a license. It doesn't prevent morons from obtaining guns, but I think it has a healty filtering effect. And it makes people think if they really need a gun. Fully automatic weapons are illegal for civilians as they cannot be used for hunting nor competition.

I don't want to start a big thread on gun control. I've never quite understood the American way, and if you feel guns should be less restricted than alcohol, by all means, go ahead :)

At least it's less likely his retarded genes will carry on. Perhaps guns are good for something, speeding up natural selection.

If you're going to dole out Darwin Awards, please read about them so you know what they are:

<A HREF="http://www.darwinawards.com">Darwin Awards</A>

Darwin Awards are awarded posthumously. Since both father and son are technically alive, sorry - close but no cigar. Besides - the poor kid did nothing any other 3 year-old might not do - all kids are curious about everything at that age. No fault there.

/preserving the sanctity

Quite frankly, I see no reason to sentence this man to death, or necessarily to jail either.

Many people are capable of making really stupid mistakes, and I personally don't know the reasons behind his having a gun in the car.

I had no sympathy for the woman who was injecting shit into her child, but this guy didn't deliberately cause harm to his child. He "made a quick visit to a family friend", which could mean he was inside the house for two minutes to pick something up. Should he have taken the kid with him? Hell yeah. But maybe he knew he was going to carry something heavy to the car, or thought he'd only be inside for 30 seconds. You don't know and I don't know.

Whatever the case may be, the man just lost his child, his son that was named after him, for the sake of his own negligence. Living with that on his conscience is going to be far worse than anything you can spit out at him at this point.

More gun control laws aren't what is needed to prevent this kind of tradgedy. Responsibility is what is called for. When you purchase / carry a gun or any weapon you take responsibility for that weapon. There is nothing wrong with having a loaded gun in his center console as long as it had a lid he is perfectly legal according to FL law with or without a concealed weapons permit. Where he screwed up was leaving it in the presense of an unsupervised child. He should have either taken it with him (either the gun or the child) or if that wasnt convenient just unload the thing and cary the bullets or clip with him (6 bullets or a clip can easily fit in a pants pocket).

I don't think the guy should be handled any more harshly because the child was injured by a gun, but he should get the same penalty as if he left the kid unattended around any other kind of dangerous environment (swimming pool, sharp tool, running vehicle, etc.).

So true.

It doesnt make me wild, it makes me sad.

People like this should not be allowed to own guns, sadly in America the qualifications needed to get a lethal weapon seem pretty light.

This is a tragedy, plain and simple. Clearly the fault lies with the father, but not in the way many will think. Had the father taken the time to teach this kid proper firearm safety this could have been prevented. Leaving a loaded pistol within reach of the kid wasn't the most intelligent thing to do, but I can find no fault with the guy. He will have to live with the consequences.

Everyone should let this be a lesson. Do not lock firearms away from children. Instead teach children proper firearms safety. Show children how dangerous firearms can be. Locking fireamrs away from children is the worst thing you can do, it creates an aura of mystery about them. Once you take away the stigma associated with firearms they become boring.

Just my two cents

Supermidget, I agree about teaching children proper gun control, but the child was three. At that point, they don't understand what they are doing.

I recieved my first firearm when I was three. I had access to it and ammunition at any time I wished. I knew better than to touch it without permission. It is possible to teach a kid that young safe firearm handling. However, it is not very PC anymore...

It's just another proof that people are too stupid to have guns. I'll go with Dogbert on this one: a majority of the people are morons, and I'd rather not see them carrying anything more dangerous than dental floss.

Guns also equal deterrance, just like the cold war.

The child shouldn't have been left alone in the car anyway. The father is a moron, and guns suck nuts.

Re: This is going to make the anti-gun crowd go wild
 

A kid can get out of anything (except Duck Tape) really quickly.

Pardon me?

Since when are guns in America less restricted than alcohol?

Last time I checked, I could by beer in the Grocery store and they didn't even run my ID for a criminal record.

I am not pro or anti gun. I am pro choice. If you want a gun, great. If you don't want a gun, great. The responsible should not be held accountable for the irresponsible.

A little OT, but not by much. Once I asked a friend ( a cop ) why they didn't make a law to outlaw stupid people. He said for 1) jails are too crowded already, and 2) he didn't want to have the fill out the paperwork from shooting that many offenders.

I wasn't really serious.. And I was only thinking about the legal age for liqour vs age limit for buying guns.

This is at least three stupid mistakes:
1) gun was not locked.
2) gun was not secured away from children
3) toddler left alone in vehicle

and possibly 4) gun stored loaded.

Well now, that's a very sad story isn't it.
I wonder why he felt he needed to carry a loaded gun in his car?

Not the firearms fault. So much went wrong here.

1. never leave a child alone in a car under the age you would be able to leave them alone at home.

2. Never have a gun accessible to children. Locked, in a safe, with a trigger lock, however you do it doesn't matter, just do it.

3. Did the guy even have a liscense to have a gun in his car? I don't know all the regulations but some places require that. Others say it has to be locked away or in a case etc.


I agree you SUPERMIDGET that parents should teach children how to use a gun and to respect it. At this child's age though I don't think they could have learned enough yet to prevent this accident. My daughter is 3 and not completely able to understand the significance of the respect of a firearm yet. She's also sometimes clumsy, as children are at that age, who are still learning small motor control. They could have an accident easily enough even when they aren't being stupid with the weapon.

I have allowed her to touch our guns under my constant supervision and I explain things to her. I want her to know how to fire one and how to hold one safely. I still will lock it away though, at least until I'm certain she is proficient in handling a firearm and mature enough to respect it.

I agree. why would you leave a kid with a loaded gun? people like that should not be qualified to own a gun...

The only person that needs to be blamed, is the stupid son-of-a-bitch who left a LOADED gun and a CHILD in the car.

What a waste!

V.

"dont have guns in your house" sounds like better advice to me

I dont want to be accused of flaming nor being a troll...

But to me it is absolutely horrifying that someone would allow a 3 year old child to play with a gun, or have any desire to explain how to use one. To a 3 year old.

Why would people want to teach their children to kill things?

The gun lobby might accuse Michael Moore of many things, but the 10,000+ gun related deaths a year he was quoting at you doesnt come from nowhere.

Anti gun doesn't even enter into it - this guy obviously should never have been allowed to breed,

However, let me note that, if it were illegal to own a handgun, this child might have grown up to vote republican.

If there are guns in the house, you want your kids to grow up with proper respect for them. Part of that is knowing the rules, part of it is understanding how they work, part is how to take care of them. The very last part is how to use them. It's like living near water: you want your kids to know how to swim as soon as possible so that they don't drown. Doing this gives them many more opportunities to get into situations where they could drown, but it's safest on the balance. Having guns in the house is the same principle: make sure accidents don't happen through ignorance and you've won half the battle.

I don't like guns, but the 2nd ammendment deserves my respect as much as the 1st, and I grew up with guns and understand them.

irresponsibility has reached a whole new level, thanks evolution

/scratches head

Well, the usual response is that he would need to kill a carjacker.

Or, save an old lady from a mugger.

These are the usual responses from the gun crowd--don't know why they aren't holding to their usual mantra now.

How would he be able to get a trigger lock off a gun in time to be a hero?

The guy had a license to carry and he put it in his console. We don't know whether the child was in a car seat or whether he was too big to be in one. I wonder if all you gun carriers stick the thing in your pants whenever you run into 7-11?

Anyway, a little senstivitiy is in order--the guy lost his son because of an accident. It's an accident that would have been prevented had he placed a trigger lock on his gun or left it at home. Yet, whenever I mention such a restriction in various other threads the gun crowd wails that they won't be able to whip it out and kill a criminal in enough time.

It's also an accident that would have been prevented had he not been allowed to have a gun at all.

I'm fine with any of these suggestions, yet it isn't the "anti" gun crowd yelling about the right and duty to carry lethal weapons at the ready...

That's a funny remark. I bet you're against the Patriot Act, right? I bet you'd say it strips American's of certain rights and privacy. Well, doesn't every American have the right to bear arms, yet you want to strip us all of that right....... Now you'll say it's different, but only because you like the idea of people like me not being able to own a gun, but like the idea of leaving criminals and terrorists alone so they can do whatever they want.

Strange Famous, where I grew up in rural South Dakota, hunting is a way of life. It is not only accepted but expected that once a child reaches 12 he will start hunting. Most people I know pick up shooting and firearm safety by the time they are five in preparation for their first hunt. Around here it is part of the order of growing up. It goes hunting at 12, drivers license at 14 (12 for farm kids), full driving priviledges at 16, and at 18 you are an adult.

This may seem strange to you, but out here it is a completely different culture. Most people never (or have even thought about it) lock their doors in their whole life. At any farm place chances are there is at least three vehicles with keys in the ignition. I still live in a place where people trust their neighbors. And I can guaruntee you every house has several firearms.

I wouldn't and didn't say any of the shit you just shoved in my mouth.

I take back what I just said. So I'm assuming you support the Patriot Act?

I don't support the Patriot Act, or widespread gun ownership... are you arguing there is some kind of contradiction in this?

Absolutely. The Patriot Act will help to put criminals and terrorists behind bars. Some people think that their lives will be changed, and they don't like the idea that the police/government can do things that they previously couldn't do. So some people feel as though they lose their privacy or other rights. So how can someone who claims to not want to lose rights want to take peoples right to bear arms? We all have that right, don't we? Can you please explain to me how that isn't a contradiction..

I have no problems with people owning guns. I have no problems with the Patriot Act. I have not lost any rights. When people say they have I always ask, "What have you lost? How have you been violated?" I've never once had anyone even be able to answer me. I will admit. The Patriot Act can be used to fuck people, but it isn't happening. So why do people cry about it. What's so wrong with being able to lock up criminals anyway?

Sixate what are you rambling on about? There are many rights to protect in this world, some more basic than others. There are no blacks and whites here, you don't get either 100% freedom or dictatorship. Sometimes you have to break a few eggs. We might have to restrict the rights of Billie Mcinbred in Bumfuck, Texas a little bit to prevent him from keeping loaded guns within the reatch of his children. This does not mean that we need to support spying on people's library records.

Also:
So if the government passes laws making it able for them fuck you up the ass every friday if they suspect that you are a criminal/terrorist, you would not oppose, as you are not a terrorist/criminal? First they came for the jews...

What the fuck are you talking about? Do you even know?

Apparantly I was nodding to a famous poem about govermental prosecution from WW2. I tried to make the point that saying "I don't care what they allow themselves to do as long as they don't act out on it" leads to a pretty slippery slope. You say that you don't care wether the patriot act CAN be used to fuck people up, as long as it isnt. Pretty naive.

To avoid too much patriot act derail: I also tried to explain that some rights might have to be bent in order to fully protect others. This means that the "right" to own weapons might have to be restricted in order to protect people from themselves and others.

Thanks for clarifying, but I disagree. Has the Patriot Act been abused? Have you been violated? Has anyone you know been violated?

The right to own weapons is restricted. Not everyone can get a gun legally, but of course that won't stop anyone from being able to get them now will it?

I live in Norway, so I can't really claim to be to harassed by the "Patriot" act or any other scary neocon laws. Wether or not the laws have been misused is not the point, the point is that they can be misused. The fight for personal freedom is preventive, it is better to secure it while it is there, than to fight for it as it is taken away. The humorous part of this is that you support gun ownership, based on a law designed to make citizens able to fight oppressors, but you don't fight the oppressors currently in administration, and their restrictions of your rights. The very essence of the constitutional right to bear arms is to make people able to protect their rights, why not try to protect your rights all the way, before you need to resort to armed struggle? Better safe than sorry.

When did I ever say that I need a gun to fight the establishment? That's not the case. The fact is times change and laws change and people just need to quit their crying. The law isn't being abused. If it is then people can cry all they want, until then everyone needs to quit their whinning. The law is used to put criminals and terrorists behind bars. Why is that soooo bad? Who violates peoples rights more than criminals and terrorists anyway? Should they have the right to do whatever they want when something can be done to stop them?

My positions on this mirror sixate's exactly, so I won't repeat them. Both the Patriot Act and gun ownership - even less restricted than it is now - are OK with me. Carry on, six...you're doing fine.

Hell of a political discussion we're having here outside the Politics Forum...hmmm.

"Naturally the common people do not want war: neither in Russia, nor England, nor, for that matter, in Germany. That is understood. But, after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."

Reich Marshall Hermann Wilhelm Goring at the Nuremberg Trails


Of course Goring was not especially anti-semetic, but he was happy enough to ignore endsolung and even pretend to support it to keep his position in the Nazi Party.

1, Guns are weapons of destruction, and the wider the ownership of them the more people are destroyed

2, The Patriot Act gives the state totaliterian powers over the people... just another step towards 1984. And it is not just the guilty who need to be afraid, but rather anyone the state decides to call guilty - regardless of any real wrongdoing.

The constant comparisons between Nazi Germany and political decisions that some folks disagree with convince only those already convinced by such hyperbole in the first place.

I'll check back on this thread and move it to the Politics Forum in a bit - that's where it wants to be.

Heh, you really are buying this hook, sink and line aren't you? This is nothing but a blatant display of the most basic ways of restricting people's rights. The government gradually allows themselves to control and monitor the people stricter and stricter, while the people are content because the potential vitcims are just criminals/terrorist/unpopular group of choise anyway. How is it even possible to be this ignorant towards every single lession history can give us regarding oppressing regimes? It seems history will keep on repeating itself until the day a majority of the population is aware of how important it is to protect your rights.

That's the most ridiculous conspiracy theory I ever heard in my life. So your basically saying that you think my government is secretly and slowly trying to take over the population, strip us of everything we have, and put us all in jail? How do you base that judgment when you don't even live here or have any real life experiences with how things work in the US? You just believe whatever propaganda you want to believe. People bitch and cry about crime in the US, but when something is done to help eliminate criminals people cry because their rights to be fucking criminals are taken away... WTF?! I still have not had an answer to my question... Who violates peoples rights more than criminals and terrorists? I can tell you one thing. My government sure as hell doesn't violate me more than criminals.....

Guns are here to stay. There's no getting rid of them. Learn to deal with it. There are fucked up people out there who already have them, and if I want a gun I'll get one. BTW, I plan on buying a gun this year. There's nothing wrong with target practice or hunting, not that I'll be hunting, but that's beside the point.

What state has been abusing the Patriot Act? There are not thousands of people who have been put in jail because of the Patriot Act. The state does not have totalitarian powers.

I am confused by both sides of the argument here. Sixate argues that the grossly misnamed "Patriot Act" is not a slippery slope, yet as a gun owner he of all people should realize just how slick it is. ES et al. just don't seem to realize that gun ownership, and more fundamentaly the right of self defense, is every bit as important as the basic rights that are trampled by the "Patriot Act".

Don't confuse your agenda with other peoples rights.

Ferchristssake...firstly, these laws will stick along for the future, I'm not saying that GWB is going to turn into Stalin over night, but that this kind of legislation paves the way for just that kind of people. Just the same way it has happened in the past. Crime is everywhere, and is more closely connected to poverty and desperation to wether or not people will get shot if they step on eatch others lawn. The problems with the patriot act isn't neccecarily wich kind of govermental actions it allows, but how easy they might get permission to act. You keep saying this only matters to criminals and terrorists, and thus it shouldn't matter to you, but you have to understand that these laws might one day harm innocents, and maybe it already has. When will we ever know if there are any innocent men on Guatanamo? They are kept there without trial, and have already had numerous of their human rights violated.

I don't care if it sounds like I'm wearing tin foil here, it is naive and gullible thinking like that which have paved the way for oppressing regimes to rise from democracies before. I pray it won't happen again, but it takes more than prayer to prevent it.

Problems with gun saftey tend to be democrat issues.

http://www.daveschultz.com/scum/clinton/img161.jpg

Guess who?

I think you misunderstood Goring.

The point wasnt and isnt that America or Russia is somehow Nazi, but that the methods the Nazi's used to drag the German people inti a war are the same methods that everyone uses, Stalinist, Liberal Democratic, or Facist.

1, You make people afraid; of terrorism, of Russia, of America, of whatever.

2, You make people who call for police or who call for the state's powers to be held in check unpatriotic.

Whether you are Blair, or Bush, or Hussain, it works in the same way.

The differnce of course is that in Iraq you would have been jailed for even posting this sort of thing, while in the US you are free to do so. People who whine about the patriot act tend to whine about what future laws will be. The US has had times where civil liberties were supressed to a much much greater degree (Civil War and WWII come to mind first) yet nothing long term came of it.

Exept that in both these cases the country was at war, facing a real threat from an equal enemy, but now the only enemy seems to be the greedy chaps in the white house themselves.

Or even in the UK I am free to post it.

Of course the people in Iraq suffered and suffer more than the British or Americans, that does not mean that Blair is any different to Hussain, just that Blair is more restrained.

Things like "The Patriot Act" allow people like Balir and Bush to get closer to behaving as Hussain did.

http://www.umbc.edu/saf/sanews/volum...ter%20fire.jpg


All laws are a step closer to tyranny, it is a matter of degree of course. The patriot act is VERY minor and you are no closer to a Nazi style death camp then before. If you want to have an open and free society you accept a lot of risk as well, and currently the risk is a bit higher so we need to watch some people a bit closer. If we start putting Muslims into camps let me know.

Do I need to post pictures of London or Dresden after the bombings? Hiroshima perhaps? Two towers ain't nothing, buddy.

Actually no, and in fact I'm sure I know more about WWII then you do, and the Patriot act ain't nothing either.

I would **********************, as I lost a good friend that day.

Edit: I was asked to.

Mods, this thread looks done...

As a CCW holder myself, I only see one real error: he let his carry gun get out of his presence.

Of course, it only took one error (not 4) to result in a dead child.

You have my condolences, I am not saying that 9/11 was irrelevant, just that it is in no way equal to ww2 or the civil war. Thus, i don't really think that this should be used as a excuse for reducing personal freedom. At wartime, the government might have to seize less democratic forms of control for a while, but a few acts of terrorism does not require such actions. I am sorry if I have unintentionally disrespected your loss, but I hope you agree that emotional factors such as this can't choke the debate.

It is not sure that the threat of terror is any greater now than pre-9/11, it might very well be smaller. The only difference is that they succeded this time. Yet, laws are passed as if the threat of terror is increasing. Ironically, many of the actions taken seems to initiate even more hatred and terror.

Well as a member of the "gun crowd" all of those responses would be good.

But what's the point?

The idiot fucked up as surely as looking down the barrel himself and pulling the trigger.

I'm sorry, but I'm not here to defend stupidity.

Edited to add: It's also an accident that would have been prevented if he had just followed basic gun safety, i.e., CCW holders don't let their guns out of their presence/control. And yes, that's EXACTLY what he should have done, stuck the gun in his pocket and gone into the 7/11.

the father should be jailed--anyway who carries a gun in their car console unless they are a drug dealer

I have to agree with both you and Supermidget. The child being 3 may not have understood what they were doing, but that was the parents fault. I have a son who is 2.5 years old. About a month ago, I started teaching him handgun safety.

He does not know where I keep my guns and he never sees me get them out or put them away. The gun is always unloaded whenever he and I look at it. Before he gets to hold it, we go through the firearm safety info. Never point it at anyone. Never point it at the animals...etc, etc, etc. He then gets to hold it under careful supervision. As long as he does not do anything unsafe with it, I don't have a problem.

The last time I showed him a gun, he accidently pointed it toward me. I quickly took the gun away and told him no. You could see the disappointment in his eyes as he knew he had done something wrong. He didn't completely understand what it was that was wrong, but he new it was something. We talked about it so I knew he knew exactly what he had done for me to take it away from him. After we talked about it, he got to hold it again and he was more careful with it. I fully intend to take him shooting when he is 4.

Re: Re: This is going to make the anti-gun crowd go wild
 

True, my kid does this, but he has learned only to do it with permission.

Actually, Yes. The only place I don't carry are places that strictly prohibit it. Hell, I sit at my desk at work and clean guns. Both my own and the ones that belong to other people in my office.

I hadn't given this much thought prior to this, but in the future when I get to a place where I am not allowed to carry, I believe i will leave the gun in the car and stick the magazine in my pocket. Unless of course I'm going into a government building in which case I'll think of something better to do.

In Oklahoma you can leave your concealed carry gun in your car while it is parked on a college campus. I have done this many many times. Vehicle was locked and no one else was in it. No big deal. Like I said, guess I'll have to put the bullets in my pocket.

/me raises hand

I do, and I'm no drug dealer.

Kerry? Couldn't be. Must be Clinton. Looking right down the barrel with the bolt closed. For a Rhodes scholar, he sure did have his shining moments of stupidity, didn't he? Right down the barrel! Jeezus! Well, I suppose he had some sympathy for Monica anyway.

Just an FYI,

There's no magazine in that rifle.

Not that there couldn't be one in the chamber, but in all fairness, there might be more to that picture than it indicates.

It is Al Gore. The picture was taken in Vietnam. Where was GW?

Yeah...anybody that has kids or has been around them knows they will play with anything that they can get their hands on....load gun was a bad idea.....hell that kid could of killed him self with a knife left in the car too....