bannination wrote:"She They are both idiots by allowing guns around her infant.
Really, that doesn't qualify as idiot in your book?"
No. That's a knee-jerk reactionary statement. Matters not who was around the gun. I'm certain that at one time or the other that while shopping, she was close to a number of looney tunes who shouldn't be within a mile of a gun, and could have easily lifted her purse or rifled through it when her back was turned.
You turn your back on your purse with a loaded weapon in it? Forget that, you carry your loaded weapon in your purse?
It's my understanding that bigfoot lives out in those parts. One should always be prepared for the late night rogue samsquanch encounter.
If I'm not mistaken, a sumsquatch can be defeated with anything that produces an open flame. And if that fails, it's well known that a normal human can out run any lumbering sumsquatch that happens to be around if need be.
I looked this up on Trulia: property crime in Kootenai County ID affects 2.66% of the population and violent crime affects .26% of the population. Both of these figures are marginally greater for Kootenai County than for the state of Idaho as a whole, but I attribute this to the fact that there's probably not much to do in Kootenai County other than bitch about the name of your County, which invariably leads to trouble. They may be better off renaming it Kooty County, which is more laid back and humorous.
Last edited by neoplacebo on Sun Jan 11, 2015 5:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Having a legal right and license to carry a firearm does not prevent anyone from also being an idiot. No article I've read says what brand of "9mm semi-automatic" she had. But let's say it had a safety on it for sake of discussion. The odds of the two-year old clicking off the safety and then pulling the trigger are infinitesimally small. He couldn't have just brushed his hand across it. A safety isn't that easy to move. You pretty much have to make a conscious effort - and move it or attempt to move it in the right direction. But if anybody doesn't want to consider her an idiot for leaving her firearm in her purse in a condition where it could readily be fired by the kid, okay, let's look at the alternative. Sometime in the past, she taught the kid how to use the gun, including releasing the safety. Now she's not an idiot, right? Just bringing the kid up to defend himself in the mean streets of small-town Idaho.
O Really wrote:Having a legal right and license to carry a firearm does not prevent anyone from also being an idiot
Depending on the licensing requirements, it could certainly reduce the number of idiots with them. That's just my opinion with no empirical sources.
Could, but doesn't because the licensing requirements are so ridiculously low everywhere. 50 shots and a multiple-guess test that's even easier than a driver's test? That the instructor gives you hints? The "NRA certified instructor" says, for only very slightly exaggerated example, "always treat a firearm as if it were loaded...you need to remember that...wink-wink. I said 'you need to remember that.'" Then the test question "when picking up a firearm, do you consider it (a) loaded (b) found (c) broken (d) stolen"
O Really wrote:Having a legal right and license to carry a firearm does not prevent anyone from also being an idiot
Depending on the licensing requirements, it could certainly reduce the number of idiots with them. That's just my opinion with no empirical sources.
Could, but doesn't because the licensing requirements are so ridiculously low everywhere. 50 shots and a multiple-guess test that's even easier than a driver's test? That the instructor gives you hints? The "NRA certified instructor" says, for only very slightly exaggerated example, "always treat a firearm as if it were loaded...you need to remember that...wink-wink. I said 'you need to remember that.'" Then the test question "when picking up a firearm, do you consider it (a) loaded (b) found (c) broken (d) stolen"
I bet people still fail that test question.
It definitely depends on the licensing requirements, which sad to say, as you pointed out, may as well be non-existent.
The only drawback is that it makes things harder (or ridiculous) for non-idiots... Maybe if we could get a some license requirements for breeding, therefore solving multiple problems at once.
bannination wrote: "You turn your back on your purse with a loaded weapon in it? Forget that, you carry your loaded weapon in your purse? Like I said, idiot."
Women have had thousands of dollars that they were carrying in their purse stolen when they turned their back for just a brief moment; that's a pointless argument. Men and women alike have been robbed of pocket or purse contents, whether confronted or had their pocket/purse picked. So I ask you......what good is a gun in your purse/pocket if it's not loaded? duh.
Vrede wrote:"What prettier word would you suggest to describe a toddler killing his idiot Mom?" You're the politically correct one here, I'm surprised you don't know the answer to that; your callousness and disrespect to a victim of a deadly accident, and her family, is typical of a sniveling libtard. How does "accidently shot his mother" appeal to you"?
"Do you think he chambered the round, too?" What good is an unloaded gun?
"It's not rocket surgery to know that you never, ever allow a toddler access to a gun s/he can fire, forgive me for laughing." Nor is it rocket science to figure out that the gun wasn't intentionally left out in the open shopping cart for the kid to play with either. Forgive me for laughing.
bannination wrote: "You turn your back on your purse with a loaded weapon in it? Forget that, you carry your loaded weapon in your purse? Like I said, idiot."
Women have had thousands of dollars that they were carrying in their purse stolen when they turned their back for just a brief moment; that's a pointless argument. Men and women alike have been robbed of pocket or purse contents, whether confronted or had their pocket/purse picked. So I ask you......what good is a gun in your purse/pocket if it's not loaded? duh.
Your "duh" doesn't really address the practicalities of the issue. The usefulness of any weapon under a given condition has a lot of variables. Sure, an unloaded gun isn't much good as a gun, but a loaded gun you can't get to isn't much good, either. This lady could have been jumped in the parking lot while she was loading her groceries and kid and she'd never be able to get close to her weapon. On the other hand, walking around with a loaded gun in your hand all the time is a bit excessive. Match your defense to your expected or most likely threat. Bottom line, there are a lot of other considerations, weapons, and precautions related to self-defense - and a gun isn't even in the top three.
bannination wrote: "You turn your back on your purse with a loaded weapon in it? Forget that, you carry your loaded weapon in your purse? Like I said, idiot."
Women have had thousands of dollars that they were carrying in their purse stolen when they turned their back for just a brief moment; that's a pointless argument. Men and women alike have been robbed of pocket or purse contents, whether confronted or had their pocket/purse picked. So I ask you......what good is a gun in your purse/pocket if it's not loaded? duh.
That doesn't make any sense; if the thief takes the purse with thousands of dollars in it, and the purse also has a loaded gun in it, well, that's just a bonus for the thief. Like I posted on the previous page, if this woman had been using a shoulder holster, or any other kind of arrangement to keep the weapon on her person, or even just kept it in her coat pocket, she would still be alive, her family would not be grieving for a lifetime and second guessing what went wrong. She was stupid about her gun, no doubt about it, and she's dead because of it. Along with her child perhaps suffering a lifetime of guilt if he even remembers the event.
That's just my opinion with no empirical sources.
