Shit Happens, you move on. Kids Die everyday ranging from Car Crashes to random acts.

Depending on the State's law the Parents more than likely could get charged with negligent homicide or involuntary manslaughter.

If you have kids, SECURE YOUR WEAPONS!!!

 

Another one I wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole: Sad news on child abuse in daycares.

 

I meant the Korean ship

 

I'm just saying I won't ever be desensitized when it comes to gory news about toddlers and babies.

 

Where else is there to go with the thread? After being "shocked," it's an accidental shooting. Nothing more nothing less, and they've been happening since the rifle was invented. Anyone else trying to make more of it either has an agenda or is completely oblivious to the world around them. So it begs the question, why even start threads like this.

 

Thats why i never posted about the Asshole convicted RAPIST who killed his 1 yearold for interupting his gaming.

 

The thing that gets me the most is this.

Why do I need to go and take a test, get a learners permit, take classes, take another test then get my license for Driving.

However, for guns, you don't have to do any of the above.

Go to a gun show, show your license and get a gun.

I am not against guns. I am against us not forcing gun owners to take training classes on how to use guns and how to store them.

It's so simple, and yet, no one gives two shits.

 

Thats my opinion to. but ive been trying to avoid bringing politics in to here.

 

Is that political though?

If I said you shouldn't need a license to drive. Would that be political?

 

Without trying to get too political, the major difference between driving and owning a weapon in the american legal perspective is that driving has not been enshrined as a constitutional right.

I think we can all agree safe ownership and care of personal firearms is a serious responsibility, however.

 

As a Former Army Certified instructor, yes everyone who handles a weaopn shuld be trained in the basics - the 4 fundamentals of shooting- with 1 of the 4 safety. Safety is a catch all term but it covers everything from securing your weapon, up to how to handle your weapon on the range.

The right to "travel" has been established as a right in the constitution.

The U.S. Supreme Court in Crandall v. Nevada, 73 U.S. 35 (1868) declared that freedom of movement is a fundamental right and therefore a state cannot inhibit people from leaving the state by taxing them. In United States v. Wheeler, 254 U.S. 281 (1920), the Supreme Court reiterated its position that the Constitution did not grant the federal government the power to protect freedom of movement. However, Wheeler had a significant impact in other ways. For many years, the roots of the Constitution's "privileges and immunities" clause had only vaguely been determined.[5] In 1823, the circuit court in Corfield had provided a list of the rights (some fundamental, some not) which the clause could cover.[6][7] The Wheeler court dramatically changed this. It was the first to locate the right to travel in the privileges and immunities clause, providing the right with a specific guarantee of constitutional protection.[8] By reasoning that the clause derived from Article IV of the Articles of Confederation, the decision suggested a narrower set of rights than those enumerated in Corfield, but also more clearly defined those rights as absolutely fundamental.[9]
But the Supreme Court began rejecting Wheeler's reasoning within a few years. Finally, in United States v. Guest, 383 U.S. 745 (1966), the Supreme Court overruled Chief Justice White's conclusion that the federal government could protect the right to travel only against state infringement


The U.S. Supreme Court also dealt with the right to travel in the case of Saenz v. Roe, 526 U.S. 489 (1999). In that case, Justice John Paul Stevens, writing for the majority, held that the United States Constitution protected three separate aspects of the right to travel among the states: the right to enter one state and leave another, the right to be treated as a welcome visitor rather than a hostile stranger (protected by the "privileges and immunities" clause in Article IV, § 2), and (for those who become permanent residents of a state) the right to be treated equally to native born citizens (this is protected by the 14th Amendment's Citizenship Clause).


The Court's establishment of a strong constitutional right to freedom of movement has also had far-reaching and unintended effects. For example, the Supreme Court overturned state prohibitions on welfare payments to individuals who had not resided within the jurisdiction for at least one year as an impermissible burden on the right to travel (Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969)). The Court has also struck down one-year residency requirements for voting in state elections (Dunn v. Blumstein, 405 U.S. 330 (1972)), one-year waiting periods before receiving state-provided medical care (Memorial Hospital v. Maricopa County, 415 U.S. 250 (1974)), civil service preferences for state veterans (Attorney Gen. of New York v. Soto-Lopez, 476 U.S. 898 (1986)), but upheld higher fishing and hunting license fees for out-of-state residents (Baldwin v. Fish and Game Commission of Montana, 436 U.S. 371 (1978)).[11][12][13]
Current US Code addresses air travel specifically. In 49 U.S.C. § 40103, "Sovereignty and use of airspace", the Code specifies that "A citizen of the United States has a public right of transit through the navigable airspace."

 

That doesn't apply to specifically owning and driving a car though, at least not in a current state of jurisprudence? If anything, that bit about hunting and fishing for outside residents may act as a ruling that strengthens the government's power to issue licenses.

 

this stuff makes me sick. if you have to own a gun. you need to follow two rules. 1. keep it unloaded and if you are not sure if it is loaded or not check and make sure it is not.

2. lock up your guns.

 

Wow, that's terrible.  

 

Sounds like some NRA excuse. "Hey, you can die of many causes, so why bother eliminating one that could easily be eliminated? You're gonna die anyway! F*ck when and how!"

 

Yup and btw i was only trying to save any hastle with out starting a Gun debate.
my mind was made up on my stance with Dunblane.

 

Well everyone, I hope you enjoyed your guns because soon your not gonna have them anymore.

 

^ AAAAND heres what i was trying to avoid.

 

Yeah, because that's definitely been what's happened legislatively for the last couple decades every time something like this happened.

 

Yes because I come on here championing the NRA. Fuck the NRA- They are a lobbying group now, they are more about making money than protecting gun rights / making sensible laws

Let me show you one of the deadliest weapons to children right now in the USA: