[QUOTE=prooboo;40497746]I'm not sure if it's an actual rifle. 22 caliber handguns are often used as target pistols, and as such are called "long rifles". For example, a Ruger Mark 2 or 3 is often called a long rifle, even though it looks like this:
[img]http://www.shootersforum.com/attachments/rimfire-handguns/7015d1204989659-questions-concerning-22-ruger-mark-iii-rugerhunterflutedbull.jpg[/img]
Though if it were a ruger, the parent would have had to unlock the gun for the child because rugers are designed for the explicit purpose of being almost impossible for an idiot to accidentally hurt themselves with (the safety mechanism is not simply a switch, it's a process of pulling the slide back and other things at the same time. I havent gone shooting in a while so I don't remember). 22 Long rifles are often given to kids as their first guns (it was my first gun) because they're: 1. a low calibre so it offers less kickback for a young person. 2. meant almost explicitly for target shooting. and 3. in the case of a gun like a ruger, one of the safest guns you can buy. Personally, I don't think anybody under the age of 13 should be handling a gun at all, let alone own one.
edit: just read one of the articles said it was a crickett rifle. not a long-rifle like I said, but still a "my first gun" rifle.[/QUOTE]
It was a rifle. The "long rifle" you're referring to is the name of the ammo, .22 LR (long rifle).
Why on EARTH, would you give a fucking gun to a child, even a toddler, as a 'gift'?
I have completely lost faith in mankind.
And I thought my 16-year old brother was bad. My mum's boyfriend buys him EVERYTHING from guns and bows and arrows to fireworks for fuck sake. I'm surprised he's not even arrested for it.
I remember asking for a taser gun last year or the year before to defend myself with, if I ever get physically or sexually attacked again, only to be refused one, "because I'm a girl".
[QUOTE=The golden;40490917]Crazy?
Try disturbingly obsessed.[/QUOTE]
Way to generalize how most Americans are with a stupid statement that isn't even close to being true.
[editline]2nd May 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=The golden;40493339]Well this sort of crap is what is a product of American gun culture. This shit is much MUCH more rare everywhere else [B][I]because we don't give guns to fucking infants.[/I][/B][/QUOTE]
You're acting like this is a fucking common occurrence , this is really rare, but it's nigh impossible to stop people for making stupid decisions. If the parents were smart, and actually had some capacity for logic, they wouldn't do this.
[editline]2nd May 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=codemaster85;40496467]Not really, i got smacked for even holding the barrel of my bb gun up and was told to keep it pointed down. If you treat the bb gun like a real gun it has the same impact. Its fucking stupid period to give a child a gun if they 10 or below. All of you defending giving them a gun that early and go shooting scare me.[/QUOTE]
No one is defending [i]giving kids guns as gifts that young, or letting them keep them[/i] We need [b]responsible[/b] parents that can properly show a kid firearm safety and let them shoot a few rounds at a range under constant supervision. Hell, the parent should hold the gun partially for the kid and let him shoot, better safe than sorry.
I'm seriously mad of all the people going "OH america is crazy about guns!!"
It's seriously not that bad, Most of the people I know don't have any, If they do its only around like 2-4 and that's it.
The US has a downright romanticized view of firearms that prevent actually useful legislation from being enacted, and only letting half-assed one's through.
The byproduct of that is making it piss easy for idiots & criminals to get their hands on them, and harming legitimate and responsible owners.
[t]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_xpE1FpQmWuk/TGhsFpUw7WI/AAAAAAAACek/C8N5YR-nAgA/s1600/crickett.22+011.jpg[/t]
Fucking hell this thing looks like something you'd find in a toy shop
[QUOTE=FreyasFighter;40500255]Why on EARTH, would you give a fucking gun to a child, even a toddler, as a 'gift'?
I have completely lost faith in mankind.
And I thought my 16-year old brother was bad. My mum's boyfriend buys him EVERYTHING from guns and bows and arrows to fireworks for fuck sake. I'm surprised he's not even arrested for it.
I remember asking for a taser gun last year or the year before to defend myself with, if I ever get physically or sexually attacked again, only to be refused one, "because I'm a girl".[/QUOTE]
Arrested for buying legal firearms, archery supplies, and harmless pyrotechnics? ? And tazers are fucking stupid for anyone other than a cop to use. Get a pistol instead.
[QUOTE=Van-man;40500659]The US has a downright romanticized view of firearms that prevent actually useful legislation from being enacted, and only letting half-assed one's through.
The byproduct of that is making it piss easy for idiots & criminals to get their hands on them, and harming legitimate and responsible owners.[/QUOTE]
I don't think laws would have prevented this.
[QUOTE=Protocol7;40502159]I don't think laws would have prevented this.[/QUOTE]
In turn it would slowly lead to people treating guns less like toys, and more like potentially lethal tools.
see, i still don't get why America's gun culture apparently isn't a problem. i mean, yeah you can give your kid a rifle so long as he's properly trained, but what i don't understand is why you'd take the risk of giving him a weapon in the first place. why is it so important that they learn to shoot and maintain a firearm before they've even hit puberty that you would willingly put those around them at great personal risk?
[QUOTE=Van-man;40502313]In turn it would slowly lead to people treating guns less like toys, and more like potentially lethal tools.[/QUOTE]
That's not the fault of the legislature, and there are very few people who actually treat guns as toys. Again, the reckless gun owners are greatly outnumbered by the responsible ones.
[QUOTE=Van-man;40492325]Only when America actually becomes progressive when it comes to firearms.
you =/= all kids[/QUOTE]
why
why is there any sort of change needed by the government. christ all-mighty, it was a freak accident where the parents didn't make sure the gun was unloaded and locked away, that's the parents fault, not the goddamn country's.
[editline]2nd May 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Cone;40502373]see, i still don't get why America's gun culture apparently isn't a problem. i mean, yeah you can give your kid a rifle so long as he's properly trained, but what i don't understand is why you'd take the risk of giving him a weapon in the first place. why is it so important that they learn to shoot and maintain a firearm before they've even hit puberty that you would willingly put those around them at great personal risk?[/QUOTE]
Because a lot of places are big on hunting and as long as the parent knows how to handle a weapon properly themselves, there's virtually no risk.
This was a matter of people not understanding what the fuck they were dealing with, having apparently LOADED the gun before being at a range or anything like that, and then not locking it up.
Firearms are tools, if some guy ran out and bought a jackhammer for his kid (extreme but w/ever) without knowing how to operate one safely and properly, you'd be reading a headline of "2 year old sister pulped by 5 year old operating jackhammer" or something heinous like that
[editline]2nd May 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Virtanen;40497762]the scariest thing imo is that the gun used was one from a line of guns specifically designed for kids[/QUOTE]
you're right, kids should have to learn on a gun massively disproportionate to themselves and have a much higher chance of harming themselves or others.
Terrible things cars.. they run you over..
[QUOTE=Daemonz;40504759]Terrible things cars.. they run you over..[/QUOTE]
Cars are also registered, insured, requiring a permit to use, and can be used for transporting people and/or cargo.
[QUOTE=viper shtf;40501017]Arrested for buying legal firearms, archery supplies, and harmless pyrotechnics? ? And tazers are fucking stupid for anyone other than a cop to use. Get a pistol instead.[/QUOTE]
Freya is in the UK you kno, so buying a gun for someone to use at home/in a field/somewhere is vastly different to having one for personal protection when you're out and about, afaik it isn't legal.
[QUOTE=Daemonz;40504759]Terrible things cars.. they run you over..[/QUOTE]
Cars are designed for transportation.
Guns are designed to kill.
do you really not see the difference here
[QUOTE=Aetna;40493202]You're wrong. I'm sorry, you can be an irresponsible fuck and still follow [B]extremely basic instructions[/B]. Guns are not complicated magical sticks, they're machines, and after watching children as young as 2 play with iPads and other devices that are considered for use by adults, I know for a fact that wielding a firearm is possible and safe. My roommates 2 year old has a bright green plastic BB gun, and he is already aware of the fact he is not to point it at any of us or the dogs, and he doesn't. Bottom line, parents need to raise their kids better.[/QUOTE]
Comparing harmless iPads to freaking guns is just so stupid, really?
[QUOTE=RayvenQ;40504984]Freya is in the UK you kno, so buying a gun for someone to use at home/in a field/somewhere is vastly different to having one for personal protection when you're out and about, afaik it isn't legal.[/QUOTE]
Actually I didn't know she (he?) Is in the UK. Aren't the Brits banned from defending themselves though?
[QUOTE=Last or First;40505079]Cars are designed for transportation.
Guns are designed to kill.
do you really not see the difference here[/QUOTE]
This is really a dumb argument.
I can and have fired many guns and never killed one living thing. I was using the guns at a firing range, on targets, as designed, and still did not kill anything.
People need to face the TRUE fact that a gun is simply a tool. Like any tool, in and of itself it is not deadly. Like any tool, it CAN be deadly.
You can kill someone with a screwdriver, a car, a gun, a piece of rope, you name it.
This is just another case of people, adults specifically, being careless with safety. No law can force a person to be safe. How many kids drown every summer in backyard pools when the supervising adult takes their eyes off them 'just for a minute'? The pool is not to blame.
[QUOTE=viper shtf;40505506]Aren't the Brits banned from defending themselves though?[/QUOTE]
What on earth are you talking about?
[QUOTE=cecilbdemodded;40505760]This is really a dumb argument.
I can and have fired many guns and never killed one living thing. I was using the guns at a firing range, on targets, as designed, and still did not kill anything.
People need to face the TRUE fact that a gun is simply a tool. Like any tool, in and of itself it is not deadly. Like any tool, it CAN be deadly.
You can kill someone with a screwdriver, a car, a gun, a piece of rope, you name it.
This is just another case of people, adults specifically, being careless with safety. No law can force a person to be safe. How many kids drown every summer in backyard pools when the supervising adult takes their eyes off them 'just for a minute'? The pool is not to blame.[/QUOTE]
You are completely missing the point.
A pool is not designed to drown people, it's designed for people to swim in. A screwdriver or a hammer is not designed to kill, they are designed to build things. A car is not designed to kill, it is designed to transport. A rope is not designed to kill, it is designed to be tied to things.
A gun, however, is a weapon. It is designed to kill. The [I]targets[/I] are designed to be shot at, yes, but that doesn't mean that a gun is designed to shoot at targets. An airsoft gun or nerf gun is designed to shoot at targets, as they are much less harmful and don't waste ammo. A paintball gun is also much less harmful, and uses much simpler ammo that is designed to mark things, not destroy them. A gun, an actual gun, on the other hand, is designed to destroy and kill. There are target ranges where you can shoot without destroying anything of value, but those are designed for the gun, not what the gun is designed for. Target ranges are for practice or simulation.
Let's say a gun is a tool. What is it designed to do? It can't build anything. It isn't designed to move things. It's not designed to shape, collect, measure, tighten, gather info, etc. It's designed to kill or harm. That's the purpose of a gun. To say otherwise is completely idiotic.
[QUOTE=viper shtf;40505506]Actually I didn't know she (he?) Is in the UK. Aren't the Brits banned from defending themselves though?[/QUOTE]
No, but self defense is not a legitimate reason to own a firearm in the UK.
[QUOTE=Last or First;40505079]Cars are designed for transportation.
Guns are designed to kill.
do you really not see the difference here[/QUOTE]
People keep saying 'guns are designed to kill' as if it is this damning fact that means... well, anything.
Microwave ovens are designed to kill. So are mousetraps. So is rat poison.
'Now hold on', you say, 'Mousetraps don't kill people!'. And that's true, but have you tried drinking rat poison, and have you seen what happens to children put in microwaves?
'But those aren't designed to kill people!'. That is true. And you know what? A .22 plinker rifle isn't designed to kill people either. Nor is a hunting rifle. They can be used to kill humans but it's not their purpose, they apply force indiscriminately as used by their owners. Just like rat poison, which can be a household item just as surely as an assassination tool.
Really 'designed to kill' appeals to emotion and little else.
[QUOTE=Cone;40502373]see, i still don't get why America's gun culture apparently isn't a problem. i mean, yeah you can give your kid a rifle so long as he's properly trained, but what i don't understand is why you'd take the risk of giving him a weapon in the first place. why is it so important that they learn to shoot and maintain a firearm before they've even hit puberty that you would willingly put those around them at great personal risk?[/QUOTE]
Because they are not at great personal risk if they are supervised. Often they come from gun-owning families that love to shoot, and are typically from rural areas were sport shooting, plinking, and hunting are very popular. It's part of their way of life. Somewhere between 7 and 11 is when most children learn how to shoot. 5 is a little young.
In addition, firearms ownership can teach responsibility and respect. Both of which are important values to teach children.
[QUOTE=Last or First;40506061]You are completely missing the point.
A pool is not designed to drown people, it's designed for people to swim in. A screwdriver or a hammer is not designed to kill, they are designed to build things. A car is not designed to kill, it is designed to transport. A rope is not designed to kill, it is designed to be tied to things.
A gun, however, is a weapon. It is designed to kill. The [I]targets[/I] are designed to be shot at, yes, but that doesn't mean that a gun is designed to shoot at targets. An airsoft gun or nerf gun is designed to shoot at targets, as they are much less harmful and don't waste ammo. A paintball gun is also much less harmful, and uses much simpler ammo that is designed to mark things, not destroy them. A gun, an actual gun, on the other hand, is designed to destroy and kill. There are target ranges where you can shoot without destroying anything of value, but those are designed for the gun, not what the gun is designed for. Target ranges are for practice or simulation.
Let's say a gun is a tool. What is it designed to do? It can't build anything. It isn't designed to move things. It's not designed to shape, collect, measure, tighten, gather info, etc. It's designed to kill or harm. That's the purpose of a gun. To say otherwise is completely idiotic.[/QUOTE]
Let's say rat poison is a tool. What is it designed to do? It can't build anything. It isn't designed to move things. It's not designed to shape, collect, measure, tighten, gather info, etc. It's designed to kill or harm. That's the purpose of rat poison. To say otherwise is completely idiotic.
...Should we be regulating rat poison because it is 'designed to kill'? Or is 'designed to kill' a pointless qualifier that applies to far more than just firearms?
[QUOTE=catbarf;40506398]Let's say rat poison is a tool. What is it designed to do? It can't build anything. It isn't designed to move things. It's not designed to shape, collect, measure, tighten, gather info, etc. It's designed to kill or harm. That's the purpose of rat poison. To say otherwise is completely idiotic.
...Should we be regulating rat poison because it is 'designed to kill'? Or is 'designed to kill' a pointless qualifier that applies to far more than just firearms?[/QUOTE]
Kinda hard to take someone hostage with rat poison, considering it can't really be used as a convenient ranged weapon.
That's why firearms should be treated as a wholly separate thing.
Fairly easy to use, ranged, and most of the time can also repeatedly fire shots.
Rat poison can pretty only be used to poison food if killing is your intention, and it also isn't instantaneous.
[QUOTE=Van-man;40506497]Kinda hard to take someone hostage with rat poison, considering it can't really be used as a convenient ranged weapon.
That's why firearms should be treated as a wholly separate thing.
Fairly easy to use, ranged, and most of the time can also repeatedly fire shots.
Rat poison can pretty only be used to poison food if killing is your intention, and it also isn't instantaneous.[/QUOTE]
Thank you for proving my point.
It doesn't matter whether it's 'designed to kill', there are much more important and practical factors than that one useless sound bite. People in this thread keep talking about it being 'designed to kill' as if that's a unique, special, and [I]inherently[/I] dangerous characteristic that sets them apart from other technologies, and that isn't the case.
Guns shouldn't be regulated simply because they're designed to kill, they should be regulated because they're very effective at killing people when misused. If you're going to refute a comparison of guns to cars, the fact that one is meant to kill people and the other isn't is meaningless. Again, rat poison is designed to kill while cars aren't, yet the damage a car can inflict if misused is greater, and cars are more heavily regulated.
If being 'designed to kill' mattered, then logically rat poison and even antibiotics would be restricted and regulated. Obviously the idea of restricting antibiotics because it kills bacteria is absurd- it doesn't matter in the slightest that it's primary function is killing, because while it kills bacteria effectively, it poses no risk to the public. What matters is what, inherently, the object is capable of doing to innocents if misused, not a label related to its function.
I'm a strong pro-firearm advocate... but giving a 5 year old a gun is incredibly unintelligent.
Cigarettes and booze are legal but you aren't allowed to market them to children, firearms manufacturers shouldn't be allowed to market to children either.
If parents want their kids to be responsible with firearms they can teach them to use [i]actual firearms[/i] instead of ones that look like toys
[QUOTE=catbarf;40506157]People keep saying 'guns are designed to kill' as if it is this damning fact that means... well, anything.
Microwave ovens are designed to kill. So are mousetraps. So is rat poison.
'Now hold on', you say, 'Mousetraps don't kill people!'. And that's true, but have you tried drinking rat poison, and have you seen what happens to children put in microwaves?
'But those aren't designed to kill people!'. That is true. And you know what? A .22 plinker rifle isn't designed to kill people either. Nor is a hunting rifle. They can be used to kill humans but it's not their purpose, they apply force indiscriminately as used by their owners. Just like rat poison, which can be a household item just as surely as an assassination tool.
Really 'designed to kill' appeals to emotion and little else.[/QUOTE]
...Did you just say that [I]microwave ovens[/I] are designed to [I]kill[/I]?
Rat poison and mouse traps are designed to kill. They're designed to kill rats. The harm from a mousetrap isn't on the level to permanently damage someone, although it's still a bad idea to keep them around small children nonetheless.
A hunting rifle is designed to kill animals. A gun you have for defense defends you by harming people. They shouldn't be given to children.
And guns are regulated anyway, because again, they are designed to harm or kill and are [I]weapons[/I].
Cars are regulated for safety too, but to put a car on the same level as a gun is stupid, because cars aren't designed to run into people or things, they're designed to move. There are many deaths from cars, but cars are a basic part of life and the vast majority of these deaths are accidents. Guns, on the other hand, are weapons. They are not a necessary part of life. They are useful for defense, yes, but there's also pepper spray, tasers, etc. There's nothing wrong with having a gun for defense, but 1. having a gun is nowhere near as necessary for daily life as cars are, and 2. guns are regulated and not meant to be given to children. You should be careful with any guns you own to keep them out of reach of children, and you definitely shouldn't be giving them directly to children. Cars are kinda [I]naturally[/I] out of reach for kids, however, as they can't exactly reach the pedals. Most people keep their car keys out of reach of small kids anyway, and the vast vast majority don't give them to them to keep, as they [I]kinda[/I] need the keys to get to places.
I'm not even sure where I'm going with this anymore, to be honest.
But on the other hand, I'm not even sure what the point is of saying "ooh, well cars kill people too!" in a thread about giving a gun to a child, other than being deliberately dense and having a gun fetish.
[QUOTE=catbarf;40506398]Let's say rat poison is a tool. What is it designed to do? It can't build anything. It isn't designed to move things. It's not designed to shape, collect, measure, tighten, gather info, etc. It's designed to kill or harm. That's the purpose of rat poison. To say otherwise is completely idiotic.
...Should we be regulating rat poison because it is 'designed to kill'? Or is 'designed to kill' a pointless qualifier that applies to far more than just firearms?[/QUOTE]
Rat poison shouldn't be given to children.
[sub]Did you [I]seriously[/I] say that microwaves are designed to kill? [I]Seriously?[/I][/sub]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.