5 year old shoots 2 year old sister

With their bare hands?



Doesn't sound like the dude had a gun. I'm guessing mace would have been sufficient. Originally Posted by Doove

Yeah mace works. A little crosswind comes along and can affect you as well. Don't trust a can of mace. This guy was a hardened criminal and was probably use to being sprayed with the stuff. That guy was not there for a social call. Although she didn't want to do it she felt she had no other choice, and her action was justified. Besides Mace and pepper spray is really only good if you can run and get away from someone. Not good as a home defense weapon.

With their bare hands? Originally Posted by Doove

No, guns, from the Mexican cartels that would quickly fill their orders. Actually they already do. After 43 years of failed prohibition, you would think we would have learned our lesson when it comes to what they are capable of supplying.

Let me think.....I think (I could be off by a couple of feet) that I can get a gun anywhere in my place within about 15 feet. I have built some of my own furniture and who knows what surprise is behind that panel.

I love the scene in the TV show Psych. The cop (Timothy Oliphant) is thought to have murdered someone and all of his guns have been taked from his apartment. He is unarmed and the lead actor arrives with the real murderer. The murderer is going to shoot the lead and then kill the cop to make it look like a murder-suicide. The cops listens to the whole plan and starts walking towards the killer, reaches into a large bowl of peanuts, and comes up with a gun that was in the bottom of the bowl. Great hiding place!

Another thought, I bet more little children kill other little children in Chicago than in all of Kentucky. Wonde why they don't talk about that? Because it happens so often it is not longer news.

With their bare hands?



Doesn't sound like the dude had a gun. I'm guessing mace would have been sufficient. Originally Posted by Doove

I can agree with that, having a mace handy would be a good idea as well.

Let me think.....I think (I could be off by a couple of feet) that I can get a gun anywhere in my place within about 15 feet. I have built some of my own furniture and who knows what surprise is behind that panel.

I love the scene in the TV show Psych. The cop (Timothy Oliphant) is thought to have murdered someone and all of his guns have been taken from his apartment. He is unarmed and the lead actor arrives with the real murderer. The murderer is going to shoot the lead and then kill the cop to make it look like a murder-suicide. The cops listens to the whole plan and starts walking towards the killer, reaches into a large bowl of peanuts, and comes up with a gun that was in the bottom of the bowl. Great hiding place!

Another thought, I bet more little children kill other little children in Chicago than in all of Kentucky. Wonder why they don't talk about that? Because it happens so often it is not longer news. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

you need a firearm within reach.

There is some logic to that. As soon as the police show that they are capable of keeping guns out of the criminals hands, I'd bring it up again. Personally, I have no faith in LE protecting me in my home, so I'd rather at least have the possiblility of defending myself and my family. Originally Posted by nwarounder

I don't think anyone would disagree with your last sentence. LE can't be everywhere, and the odds of them being at the site of a crime being committed is very low. Of course, you have to balance the pluses for keeping a gun in your home vs. the minuses.

Listen to this 911 tape and tell me what ya think. To me she was lucky she was able to arm herself.


http://youtu.be/43lAdgrsQyE Originally Posted by acp5762

On the other hand, how many innocent people are killed BECAUSE there was a gun in the house. I read and hear about far more killings in the home because (1) there is a domestic argument and one person picks up a gun and shoots the other person, and (2) guns are not secured properly and a child picks up the gun and shoots someone else.

And then factor in the gun accidents in which someone is just injured.

But, again, I am not on my soapbox. If you or anyone else wants to have a gun in your home for protection, you have the right to do so and I support that right.

You liberals that want gun control would be well served by us splitting up the country. Your new country could have strict gun control, our country could have the current laws and common law rulings. If nothing else, it would be an interesting social experiment to see which side's opinion is actually right. Originally Posted by Jewish Lawyer

There is no one right or wrong on this issue. It just depends on what one seeks and what they are willing to give up to that end.

If the 2 year old had a gun, she could've defended herself. Originally Posted by jbravo_123

The best screening for firearms ownership would probably be an IQ test. Originally Posted by bojulay

The fucking pro life loons would call that a form of abortion.

Let me think.....I think (I could be off by a couple of feet) that I can get a gun anywhere in my place within about 15 feet. I have built some of my own furniture and who knows what surprise is behind that panel.

I love the scene in the TV show Psych. The cop (Timothy Oliphant) is thought to have murdered someone and all of his guns have been taked from his apartment. He is unarmed and the lead actor arrives with the real murderer. The murderer is going to shoot the lead and then kill the cop to make it look like a murder-suicide. The cops listens to the whole plan and starts walking towards the killer, reaches into a large bowl of peanuts, and comes up with a gun that was in the bottom of the bowl. Great hiding place!

Another thought, I bet more little children kill other little children in Chicago than in all of Kentucky. Wonde why they don't talk about that? Because it happens so often it is not longer news. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

JD, you are a queer as a three dollar bill. Where do you come up with your stupid ass shit? ButtFucsareUs

On the other hand, how many innocent people are killed BECAUSE there was a gun in the house. I read and hear about far more killings in the home because (1) there is a domestic argument and one person picks up a gun and shoots the other person, and (2) guns are not secured properly and a child picks up the gun and shoots someone else.

And then factor in the gun accidents in which someone is just injured.

But, again, I am not on my soapbox. If you or anyone else wants to have a gun in your home for protection, you have the right to do so and I support that right. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

I understand what you're saying, but Iam not concerned with statistics. We're talking about self defense. There is only two ways in which a person can defend himself, lethal and nonlethal. When it comes to home defense it's lethal, the best way to accomplish that is with a firearm.

I can agree with that, having a mace handy would be a good idea as well. Originally Posted by bojulay

+1 Al Capone once demonstrated that a baseball bat is a good back-up tool when one's pistol or submachine gun isn't handy.

I understand what you're saying, but Iam not concerned with statistics. We're talking about self defense. There is only two ways in which a person can defend himself, lethal and nonlethal. When it comes to home defense it's lethal, the best way to accomplish that is with a firearm. Originally Posted by acp5762

Never said otherwise. I choose not to own a gun and feel 100% safe in my home day and night. You do not feel that way so you choose to own a gun. All I'm doing is pointing out that having a gun in the home is not all up-side.

Since a would-be home invader has absolutely no idea which homeowners are armed and which are not. as I've said before, the #1 proven way to prevent a home invasion is to have a sign in your yard stating the home is protected by xyz Home Protection. If you want more security, have a home security system installed so that a siren goes off when someone unexpected tries to enter the home. You don't even need the system monitored. Any criminal will haul ass as soon as he hears that alarm go off.

I understand what you're saying, but Iam not concerned with statistics. We're talking about self defense. There is only two ways in which a person can defend himself, lethal and nonlethal. When it comes to home defense it's lethal, the best way to accomplish that is with a firearm. Originally Posted by acp5762

The thing is, we should all be concerned about statistics. If we have something that's causing more harm than the good it's doing then we should all be concerned about that.

You can argue nuclear/chemical/biological weapons are more lethal and effective than firearms but no one (at least anyone sane) is arguing that those types of weapons should be readily available to the general public.

It's all a matter of degree and what society deems an acceptable cost vs benefit.

Never said otherwise. I choose not to own a gun and feel 100% safe in my home day and night. You do not feel that way so you choose to own a gun. All I'm doing is pointing out that having a gun in the home is not all up-side.

Since a would-be home invader has absolutely no idea which homeowners are armed and which are not. as I've said before, the #1 proven way to prevent a home invasion is to have a sign in your yard stating the home is protected by xyz Home Protection. If you want more security, have a home security system installed so that a siren goes off when someone unexpected tries to enter the home. You don't even need the system monitored. Any criminal will haul ass as soon as he hears that alarm go off. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Everything has an up and down side. For instance if your electricity ever goes out does your Alarm work? In the case of a Natural disaster people become bold they may loot homes and businesses. I generally feel quite safe in my home. I've never been a victim of any crime Circumstances can change beyond our control and sometimes an edge is not a bad thing.

speedie that is called appealing to an false authority. You make up your mind based on news reports that you see where many more are killed by guns in the home. You rarely see the news reports where (and there are many more) someone saved their or others lives with a gun in the house.

I personally think that whether or not you use a Gun to solve your problems depends upon the type of environment you grow up in. There was a shooting on a Playground in Richmond, VA where I was living at the time (about 14 Years ago). A 6 Year old boy shot a 6 Year old girl that he had had a problem with on the Playground the day before. He used a Gun he took from his Mother's Drug Dealer Boyfriend's stash. The Boy's Father (who Mom was still Married to) was in Prison on a Manslaughter charge. In their "World" it is perfectly acceptable to take a Gun and maim or kill someone to solve your problem and possibly not even give it a second thought. But again this was a case of an improperly secured weapon being obtained by a person that should never have had access to it.

I think the root of the problem is a complete lack of understanding on the part of most of the people envolved in these recent publized shootings (the people that commited these henious acts, not the victims) about the level of harm a Firearm can do. A majority of them have no Military Service, No background Hunting or Fishing and seem to have developed this Video Game fantasy violence mentality. America unfortunately is a very violent Society. More people have been killed on our City streets as a result of Gun violence than in 10 Years of "Active Combat" in Iraq and Afganistan. It's time to figure out why this is happening and make it stop. But expanded background checks for legal gun buyers and taking weapons away from legitimate owners is not going to solve the problem.