http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/12/30/woman-shot-with-own-gun/21062089/

How could this happen? The weapon was not secured properly?

Imagine what the child would think after growing up and learning about the shooting.

It happened because the firearm was not secured properly.. rather than having it holstered (which is what you're meant to do), she had it in her handbag.. which i believe was in the trolley with the child.. child got it and fired it.. which obviously killed the mother.

 

Honestly, i don't blame the child.. because a) she is a toddler and doesn't know right from wrong.. nor does she even know what a gun is... the mother was a t fault for not securing the firearm in a safe way

Why in the world would you let your child near a loaded firearm?

Damn, sad to hear.

 

The mother should have had the safety switch on :/ 

She was so dumb she really was. Why would you carry a loaded gun around with you and your four kids that is just asking for trouble. I know you may need to protect your self at some point in time but get some pepper spray or a taser alteast you and your kids can survive that. It is a tragedy but it was totally avoidable. What do you tell this kid when he grows up? You killed your mom when you were 2 but it was really her fault?

 

People need to get it together.  

Why would you keep a loaded firearm in your handbag in the first place?

Damn, sad to hear.

 

The mother should have had the safety switch on :/ 

Not all guns have traditional safety switches like you think of; they have a different kind of safety. A Glock for example has a trigger safety where there is a mini trigger (for the lack of a better term) on the trigger that has to be depressed before the trigger can be pulled.

 

What this lady did wrong is not having it holstered in her purse. As the deputy said, I am a supporter of concealed weapon permits but you have to be responsible when you own and carry a firearm especially if you have children.

Not all guns have traditional safety switches like you think of; they have a different kind of safety. A Glock for example has a trigger safety where there is a mini trigger (for the lack of a better term) on the trigger that has to be depressed before the trigger can be pulled.

 

What this lady did wrong is not having it holstered in her purse. As the deputy said, I am a supporter of concealed weapon permits but you have to be responsible when you own and carry a firearm especially if you have children.

Ahh, makes sense though really it was stupid of her to carry that in a purse.

Why would you keep a loaded firearm in your handbag in the first place?

That's the strange part of the story. Was she afraid of something? Was someone after her?

That's the strange part of the story. Was she afraid of something? Was someone after her?

 

Or was she just like most other Americans thinking they NEED a firearm and they need it to defend themselves? Another reason Americans should get over their 2nd amendment.

 

Fucking madness.

Or was she just like most other Americans thinking they NEED a firearm and they need it to defend themselves? Another reason Americans should get over their 2nd amendment.

 

Fucking madness.

Let's climb back down the tree before we fall off, shall we?

 

What I'm not understanding is how you're in the United Kingdom, but you're able to judge whether or not Americans need a firearm to defend themselves. You are in a country that has some of the least gun crimes on Earth, and you're judging an entire country that faces gun crimes daily? Something just doesn't seem right there. You cannot judge an entire nation and jump to a conclusion as close-minded and ignorant as that. At least provide some examples, reason, as to why you feel this way. At least provide some logic, because I can't see any logic here.

 

Once criminals have their guns taken, I'll be sure to give up mine. To reverse my interpretation of your argument against you, I think it's ridiculous that UK Officers don't carry guns. What if someone starts shooting? What can an ordinary officer do besides run and hide and wait for the armed Police? It's fucking insane and makes no sense!

 

I don't actually care about the UK Police not carrying guns, just wanted to provide an example on how you appear right now.

Edited January 5, 201511 yr by CriminalKillaz

Let's climb back down the tree before we jump off, shall we?

 

What I'm not understanding is how you're in the United Kingdom, but you're able to judge whether or not Americans need a firearm to defend themselves. You are in a country that has some of the least gun crimes on Earth, and you're judging an entire country that faces gun crimes daily? Something just doesn't seem right there. You cannot judge an entire nation and jump to a conclusion as close-minded and ignorant as that. At least provide some examples, reason, as to why you feel this way. At least provide some logic, because I can't see any logic here.

 

Once criminals have their guns taken, I'll be sure to give up mine.

 

Here's my logic. How often do you hear of a citizen protecting themselves against a criminal or other threat, as opposed to a citizen getting injured or killed by themselves or another citizen. I said most, not all Americans as well. Why couldn't you just have pepper spray, or any other means on non lethal defense equipment. Do you want a gun to protect yourself, or to protect your rights.

Here's my logic. How often do you hear of a citizen protecting themselves against a criminal or other threat, as opposed to a citizen getting injured or killed by themselves or another citizen. I said most, not all Americans as well. Why couldn't you just have pepper spray, or any other means on non lethal defense equipment. Do you want a gun to protect yourself, or to protect your rights.

Just because it isn't reported doesn't mean that it doesn't occur. Let's jump across the river here, and look at it from the opposing view. Millions of Americans own guns, and how often do you hear of a million shootings in a single day, week, month, year, 10 years? Nationwide, I'll take a guess that there are less than 200  shootings a day. 200 shootings, of over a million legal and law-abaiding gun owners? I'd say that's an exceptional marigin. If we were to put it into a "fractional" form: 200/1,000,000,000 a day.

 

Just because something is illegal, doesn't mean that it won't happen. Let's say that owning a gun is 100% illegal in the United States. Criminals will still find ways to smuggle weapons into the country. Now guess what we have happening? Criminals are now smuggling guns into the United States, and Americans are helplessly being massacred by gun crime with no way to defend themselves. If someone busts down my door with a gun I'm not going to grab pepper spray, that's retarded. I'm going to grab my own gun and defend myself until law enforcement arrives. If the criminals can own guns either way, why can't law abiding American citizens? A gun puts my 80 year-old grandmother on equal grounds with a 300 pound attacker. A gun puts my mother on equal grounds with a group of 5 gangbangers.

 

Once criminals guns are taken, I'll be sure to give up mine.

Edited January 5, 201511 yr by CriminalKillaz

Why would you keep a loaded firearm in your handbag in the first place?

 

Protection probably.

Just because something is illegal, doesn't mean that it won't happen. Let's say that owning a gun is 100% illegal in the United States. Criminals will still find ways to smuggle weapons into the country. Now guess what we have happening? Criminals are now smuggling guns into the United States, and Americans are helplessly being massacred by gun crime with no way to defend themselves. If someone busts down my door with a gun I'm not going to grab pepper spray, that's retarded. I'm going to grab my own gun and defend myself until law enforcement arrives. If the criminals can own guns either way, why can't law abiding American citizens? A gun puts my 80 year-old grandmother on equal grounds with a 300 pound attacker. A gun puts my mother on equal grounds with a group of 5 gangbangers

 

Criminals smuggle guns into the UK too, I don't feel the need to buy an m4 carbine rifle down the high street at my local gun dealer.

 

If someone breaks into your home and they do happen to have a gun, just do as they say. You don't always have to fight back.

 

The pepper spray comment was with regards to incidents such as attempted rape, muggings ect.

 

I don't think there would be a helpless massacre either. More then likely it would be criminals killing criminals.

 

I understand the want for protection, but is the risk, as you've seen from this sad story, worth it for the odd chance that something does happen to you? A gun doesn't PROMISE protection either.

 

One more question, why do many Americans feel the need they need a machines gun that can fire of 600 rounds or god knows how many to protect themselves? I honestly think it's a good excuse to have a guy and play around with it. I don't support the 2nd amendment, but then again, I'm British so what do I know. This is my opinion.

 

I won't reply anymore as I feel I've gone too far off topic.

Criminals smuggle guns into the UK too, I don't feel the need to buy an m4 carbine rifle down the high street at my local gun dealer.

 

If someone breaks into your home and they do happen to have a gun, just do as they say. You don't always have to fight back.

 

The pepper spray comment was with regards to incidents such as attempted rape, muggings ect.

 

I don't think there would be a helpless massacre either. More then likely it would be criminals killing criminals.

 

I understand the want for protection, but is the risk, as you've seen from this sad story, worth it for the odd chance that something does happen to you? A gun doesn't PROMISE protection either.

 

One more question, why do many Americans feel the need they need a machines gun that can fire of 600 rounds or god knows how many to protect themselves? I honestly think it's a good excuse to have a guy and play around with it. I don't support the 2nd amendment, but then again, I'm British so what do I know. This is my opinion.

 

I won't reply anymore as I feel I've gone too far off topic.

Though gun smuggling happens in the UK on a much smaller scale I'm sure. The US and UK cannot be compared, they are too much different.

 

Doing as the criminal says doesn't always ensure harmony. Why would I helplessly sit at the mercy of an armed criminal when I had a chance to fight back with my gun? If they've broken into my home, then I have every right to shoot them. They're trespassing onto my property and clearly don't care about the well-being of myself or my belongings. You came into my home, you face the consequences. It's your fault.

 

Pepper spray isn't legal in all states to own.

 

And what about collateral damage? What about those innocent people that are caught in the crossfire, and become victims? What happens when the criminals decide to target the people that aren't criminals? Now we've got innocent people being helplessly murdered.

 

Someone is much less likely to bother me if I own a gun, than if I own pepper spray or a bat. If you don't want to get shot, don't come onto my property. Not that hard to comprehend here people. It's an American right and should remain that way, which is why I consider myself an American Conservative.

 

Not all gun supporters support all guns. I support the ownership of guns, but I do not support the ownership of an assault rifle, unless otherwise hunting.

Pepper spray isn't legal in all states to own.

So you can own a handgun and/or a rifle but not pepper spray? This seems absolutely ridiculous to me.

 

 

It's an American right and should remain that way...

That "right" was written in the 1700's when a gun couldn't hit the broadside of a barn from the inside and took over a minute to reload. They didn't expect a bunch of lunatics running with rifles that can put thirty shots downrange in under ten seconds because if they had, I'm pretty sure they wouldn't of wrote that amendment in the first place.

So you can own a handgun and/or a rifle but not pepper spray? This seems absolutely ridiculous to me.

 

That "right" was written in the 1700's when a gun couldn't hit the broadside of a barn from the inside and took over a minute to reload. They didn't expect a bunch of lunatics running with rifles that can put thirty shots downrange in under ten seconds because if they had, I'm pretty sure they wouldn't of wrote that amendment in the first place.

Yes but you are required to own a license to purchase a gun. It vary's from state to state. American politics aren't perfect, and neither is the rest of the world. People tend to forget that, both in and out of the States.

 

Our founding fathers' still would have given the people the right to bear arms, regardless of technology. As time advances technology improves, I'm sure this was common sense to our founding fathers'. The right to bear arms gives the people opportunity to overthrow a tyrannical and corrupt government, by force if necessary; which is why the right to bear arms was created to begin with. If the government committed treacherous acts against the people, the people would have the necessary equipment to overthrow that government. As time advances, technology improves. I can't name a single military that still uses Muskets.

 

So yes our founding fathers' still would have given us the right to bear arms. It's the ideology and concept that comes with the right to bear arms, not the physical and literal outcome. That depends solely on society and personal choice. Making guns illegal won't stop people from getting them. All it will do is stop law abiding citizens from getting guns, and now only criminals are able to have guns, because criminals will have guns either way.

Edited January 5, 201511 yr by CriminalKillaz

Why would you keep a loaded firearm in your handbag in the first place?

 

Because in the US, we have the right to do so in order to protect our lives and property, and in most states, the lives and property of the people around us. Carrying an unsecured firearm and leaving it near a child was very irresonsible, and this poor woman paid a high price for her negligence.

 

Or was she just like most other Americans thinking they NEED a firearm and they need it to defend themselves? Another reason Americans should get over their 2nd amendment.

 

Fucking madness.

 

It's not really madness. Do you have smoke detectors in your home? How about a fire extinguisher? Do you have seat belts and airbags in your car?

Are you expecting your house to catch fire? Are you planning to get into a car accident? Of course not... But both of those things could happen to you any time, so you are prepared for the chance that it could happen to you and you have the appropriate tools to reduce the risk to your life and property.

Firearms are no different. I exercise my right to carry a concealed firearm, not because I feel that I NEED to, but because I can and one day I might unexpectedly have to use it to save my life or my friend's lives.

 

Here's my logic. How often do you hear of a citizen protecting themselves against a criminal or other threat, as opposed to a citizen getting injured or killed by themselves or another citizen. I said most, not all Americans as well. Why couldn't you just have pepper spray, or any other means on non lethal defense equipment. Do you want a gun to protect yourself, or to protect your rights.

 

Citizens use their concealed carry rights more often than people realize. Why would it make the news? A law abiding citizen doing the right thing and protecting himself from a criminal is way things are supposed to happen,. It's not really news worthy.

 

Criminals smuggle guns into the UK too, I don't feel the need to buy an m4 carbine rifle down the high street at my local gun dealer.

 

If someone breaks into your home and they do happen to have a gun, just do as they say. You don't always have to fight back.

 

The pepper spray comment was with regards to incidents such as attempted rape, muggings ect.

 

I don't think there would be a helpless massacre either. More then likely it would be criminals killing criminals.

 

I understand the want for protection, but is the risk, as you've seen from this sad story, worth it for the odd chance that something does happen to you? A gun doesn't PROMISE protection either.

 

One more question, why do many Americans feel the need they need a machines gun that can fire of 600 rounds or god knows how many to protect themselves? I honestly think it's a good excuse to have a guy and play around with it. I don't support the 2nd amendment, but then again, I'm British so what do I know. This is my opinion.

 

I won't reply anymore as I feel I've gone too far off topic.

 

Most Americans do not feel the need to buy an M4 carbine rifle either, and fortunately, we cannot buy those at our local gun dealers. Fully automatic weapons are highly regulated and not legal for your average citizen to own or posses.

 

If someone breaks into your home, do as they say? What if their intent is to kill you? What if they came to rob you but decide to kill you because they weren't expecting you to be home and they don't want you to provide their description to the police? You can't "do as they say" if you're dead. And why should I have to do as a criminal says? Criminals deserve no sympathy or leniency.

 

Pepper spray is not as effective as people think, and often serves to do nothing more than just make people angry which can make things more dangerous for you as a victim. I've been pepper sprayed through law enforcement training, and it really wasn't that bad and I had to fight through the spray. It doesn't work as well as people think, and if my life is on the line it's not a chance I'm willing to take.

 

So you can own a handgun and/or a rifle but not pepper spray? This seems absolutely ridiculous to me.

 

That "right" was written in the 1700's when a gun couldn't hit the broadside of a barn from the inside and took over a minute to reload. They didn't expect a bunch of lunatics running with rifles that can put thirty shots downrange in under ten seconds because if they had, I'm pretty sure they wouldn't of wrote that amendment in the first place.

 

Yes, the state laws can be rather counter intuitive sometimes.

 

As for the second amendment and the time it was written, in the 1700's those black powder muzzle loading muskets were "high tech, military grade assault rifles". If they wanted people then to have military grade weapons, why shouldn't the logic continue further in time? Of course, today we can't own "military grade" weapons anyway, because those are highly restricted and not legal for citizens to own or posses under most circumstances.

Furthermore, one of the interpretations behind the second amendment was that the civilian populous should be armed with weapons capable of protecting the country from an invading army, or the army of our own tyrannical government. The armed civilian population during the revolutionary war is one of the reasons this country earned its independence, and the second amendment was written in part to ensure that the American people would be capable of defending that freedom.

Edited January 5, 201511 yr by johnclark1102

Because in the US, we have the right to do so in order to protect our lives and property, and in most states, the lives and property of the people around us. Carrying an unsecured firearm and leaving it near a child was very irresonsible, and this poor woman paid a high price for her negligence.

 

 

It's not really madness. Do you have smoke detectors in your home? How about a fire extinguisher? Do you have seat belts and airbags in your car?

Are you expecting your house to catch fire? Are you planning to get into a car accident? Of course not... But both of those things could happen to you any time, so you are prepared for the chance that it could happen to you and you have the appropriate tools to reduce the risk to your life and property.

Firearms are no different. I exercise my right to carry a concealed firearm, not because I feel that I NEED to, but because I can and one day I might unexpectedly have to use it to save my life or my friend's lives.

 

 

Citizens use their concealed carry rights more often than people realize. Why would it make the news? A law abiding citizen doing the right thing and protecting himself from a criminal is way things are supposed to happen,. It's not really news worthy.

 

 

Most Americans do not feel the need to buy an M4 carbine rifle either, and fortunately, we cannot buy those at our local gun dealers. Fully automatic weapons are highly regulated and not legal for your average citizen to own or posses.

 

If someone breaks into your home, do as they say? What if their intent is to kill you? What if they came to rob you but decide to kill you because they weren't expecting you to be home and they don't want you to provide their description to the police? You can't "do as they say" if you're dead. And why should I have to do as a criminal says? Criminals deserve no sympathy or leniency.

 

Pepper spray is not as effective as people think, and often serves to do nothing more than just make people angry which can make things more dangerous for you as a victim. I've been pepper sprayed through law enforcement training, and it really wasn't that bad and I had to fight through the spray. It doesn't work as well as people think, and if my life is on the line it's not a chance I'm willing to take.

 

 

Yes, the state laws can be rather counter intuitive sometimes.

 

As for the second amendment and the time it was written, in the 1700's those black powder muzzle loading muskets were "high tech, military grade assault rifles". If they wanted people then to have military grade weapons, why shouldn't the logic continue further in time? Of course, today we can't own "military grade" weapons anyway, because those are highly restricted and not legal for citizens to own or posses under most circumstances.

Furthermore, one of the interpretations behind the second amendment was that the civilian populous should be armed with weapons capable of protecting the country from an invading army, or the army of our own tyrannical government. The armed civilian population during the revolutionary war is one of the reasons this country earned its independence, and the second amendment was written in part to ensure that the American people would be capable of defending that freedom.

Spot on, well said.