8-year-old's Uzi death at gun show

[Lexodus]

First question:
What the fuck was an 8 year old doing at a gun fair?
Second question:
What the fuck was he doing holding the fucking uzi in the first place? And why the fuck was it loaded?!
Third question:
WHAT THE FUCK WAS HE POINTING A FUCKING UZI AT HIS OWN FUCKING HEAD FOR??????

 

[O maestre]

Guns, as has been stated before, are not toys. They are not supposed to be used for entertainment. I am vehemently against civilians in our so-called civilized "western" portion of the world handling guns of any sort. Where i live practically no civilians bear arms and we are doing fine. If weapons are to be had they should be venerated as tools of death, destruction and nastiness. and if they have to be profiled to fulfil some gleeful morbid exhibition, they should not be loaded with any kind of ammunition, least of all live rounds.

The very idea of giving an 8 year old a loaded weapon should have ruffled at least a few people, if anything it is dumber than wandering around during a violent thunderstorm, with your head wrapped in foil, bare foot and wielding an iron fork in an out stretched hand cursing all the gods known to man while smoking a cigarette near a petrol station, next to a group of shifty religious people. Something might not happen at all, but the odds against that are in the magnitude of dangerous. best case scenario you might drop the fork in your eye.

The point is that someone is bound to get hurt if enough people do it. However much like Woem, the tc wrote, perhaps my European mindset cannot possibly fathom any of this at all, since incidents like this seem to happen often in the U.S.

 

[Mcface]

Yet the Americans are still so firm about defending their right to bear arms, you never seem to hear about guns saving people just constant tragic accidents and attacks with them.

A convenient store around where I live was robbed, the owners wife was shot and killed. Needless to say he bought a handgun. Several months later, they came back to rob the store again, the clerk fired, blew 3 of the guys fingers off and saved his own life, and possibly others. The guy who tried to rob it the second time was linked to the first robbery by ballistics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uw-0nfVC2Rk
ONE guy with ONE pistol defends his home, and family from 4 would be murderers with hand guns and assault rifles. I think this guy was a DEA agent and that was a hit squad out for revenge.

 

[CobaltBomber]

Huh. That sucks. See, this is why you need to take classes, so this shit doesn't happen.

 

[O maestre]

Trust me, it's much better to get gets involved with guns at a young age, so they grow up respecting, and knowing how to properly use, or handle a weapon.
The fact a 15 year old kid was doing the instructing however, is bat-shit-fucking insane.

Well this little learning excursion did not go that well, wouldn't you say? i have to ask if you honestly think that a gun show is the best way for rudimentary weapon skills to be "passed" on?
and while i can understand what you mean, but by your logic toddlers should be instructed to operate motorized vehicles. i hope this does not seem offensive or sarcastic, i am just asking honestly.

 

[Spaghetti]

I think the concern of this childs death is kind of in the wrong place.

We shouldn't be worried that the gun was deffective,

We SHOULD be worried that An 8 year old child is being given an UZI

Does this not seem absurd?
I'm opposed to the fact that people are allowed to buy guns will nilly as they are now. But to give an 8 year old child a loaded, automatic weapon with the saftey off is the most idiotic thing anyone can do. Actually, giving a loaded, automatic weapon with the saftey off to anyone who isn't in the Military is an idiotic thing to do.

It's interesting that the common argument for supporting weapon ownership is personal protection. People need to buy a gun to protect themselves from bad guys with guns. This seems (somewhat) logical. But there is nothing stopping the bad guys from getting the gun in the first place. He can just walk into a wall mart with fake ID and buy one over the counter.

Also, we need to look at the "Constitutional" Argument the NRA likes to use. Pro-Gun people use the line from the Second Amendment: "The right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed". Great, there would be no argument if that's what the 2nd Amendment said...except they skipped a few words. Here's the complete Amendment:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

People are allowed to buy guns to help keep in place a working militia. Last time I checked, there are no militia's in America anymore, and therefore there is no reason in the constitution as to why a person has the right to own a gun.

 

[paasi]

Why try to discuss this?

The very nature of this story shows there's no point in trying to have discussion because so many Americans (as evidenced here) are extremely defensive of their gun culture.

No point.

While giving up and crossing our fingers in hopes that Americans won't kill themselves would be easy, still the rest of the world must attempt to do something to stop this insanity.
They defend their guns because a couple of centuries ago someone wanted to be safe from bears and hostile natives.
Personally I think there is nothing more foolish than outdated rules in an otherwise modern nation.

You are by all means entitled to your opinion, and I agree that outdated rules in a modern nation are rather idiotic.

However, banning guns doesn't strike me as a good idea. They make up a fair portion of our economy, and the vast majority of gun owners only use them for recreational purposes and make sure to follow the rules of gun safety. It's stories like this that makes us look bad.

Many of us [gun owners] aren't at all unreasonable concerning gun control, and it's unfair to assert that we cling to our firearms for the sole purpose of defending ourselves. Plus, we Americans in general are very uncomfortable with the idea of removing things from the Bill of Rights in general. It just doesn't feel right.

Personally, I don't oppose gun control- It's pretty obvious that something isn't right about our system, but there's got to be a better answer than banning firearms completely. It can't just be black and white. The more shades of gray you can see, the better.

I'm not aiming for total firearm ban, but for a law that restricts aqusistion of firearm permit to over 18 and a step by step perole and separate permits for aquisition of higher calibre weapons.
These things have worked very nicely here in Finland so I don't see why they wouldn't work in the US.
And I know of the thing with the constitution, but no matter how uncomfortable it is some things must be done to ensure safety and credibility of a nation.

 

[Heathrow]

Sorry, I'm confused I thought we'd banned the use of fully automatic weapons in the US why did this kid even have an Uzi?

"Automatic weapons," is a misleading statement. AK-47s are legal. But they're automatic weapons, aren't they? No, because the civilian model is semiauto. One pull, one bullet. Same with any other "automatic weapon" that's legal to buy. Yes, unmodded automatic weapons are illegal.

I didn't think that AK-47s were legal to sell, I thought the ban on automatic weapons meant that US customers were limited to one pull one shot hand guns and rifles but I suppose the gun companies wanted to continue selling in the states so modifying their weapons does make sense.

It's not illegal to own or operate a fully automatic weapon as long as it's licensed and was manufactured before 1986 source [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearm_Owners_Protection_Act]

Well, that's a scary thought. Thanks for the info, I guess I could have just googled that myself. ^^

Now since I'm posting I guess I might as well throw down my two cents. I believe that people do not have the right do decide whether other humans live or die and to that extent I do not support guns or the ownership of guns. I believe that most people will agree with me that pacifism is a noble goal for our race; to that end I believe gun control law is important and that we should be phasing gun use out of our culture as much as possible.

 

[Woem]

The kid shouldn't have been near the gun in the first place, and it's also the teens fault for giving him a faulty gun. Still, sounds more like manslaughter than anything.

Well sadly enough the teen is now facing an involuntary manslaughter charge in a $4 million lawsuit.

 

[paasi]

First question:
What the fuck was an 8 year old doing at a gun fair?
Second question:
What the fuck was he doing holding the fucking uzi in the first place?
Third question:
WHAT THE FUCK WAS HE POINTING A FUCKING UZI AT HIS OWN FUCKING HEAD FOR??????

to the first: Irresponsible parents

second:yet again, irresponsible parents

third: irr... i mean, apparently on firing a burst he lost control and recoil popped the gun 180 degrees.

 

[Vredesbyrd67]

Keep in mind, this WAS in Massachusetts.

 

[Woem]

Sorry, I'm confused I thought we'd banned the use of fully automatic weapons in the US why did this kid even have an Uzi?

"Automatic weapons," is a misleading statement. AK-47s are legal. But they're automatic weapons, aren't they? No, because the civilian model is semiauto. One pull, one bullet. Same with any other "automatic weapon" that's legal to buy. Yes, unmodded automatic weapons are illegal.

I'm no specialist on this topic but the Micro Uzi the kid was holding did actually have automatic fire. Even if it a Micro Uzi, it's still an Uzi.

 

[Lexodus]

First question:
What the fuck was an 8 year old doing at a gun fair?
Second question:
What the fuck was he doing holding the fucking uzi in the first place?
Third question:
WHAT THE FUCK WAS HE POINTING A FUCKING UZI AT HIS OWN FUCKING HEAD FOR??????

to the first: Irresponsible parents

second:yet again, irresponsible parents

third: irr... i mean, apparently on firing a burst he lost control and recoil popped the gun 180 degrees.

Even scarier: it jammed TWICE before he wasted himself! What the fuck is wrong with these people?

 

[rcuhljr]

Guns, as has been stated before, are not toys. They are not supposed to be used for entertainment.

Well you're entitled to your opinions, however millions of people around the world use them for entertainment. Hunting, target shooting, sport shooting. That doesn't even go into the weapons categories in general, blades in martial arts, bows are used frequently for entertainment, all of these are Olympic sports, as is the Javelin throw, another weapon.

Where i live practically no civilians bear arms and we are doing fine. If weapons are to be had they should be venerated as tools of death, destruction and nastiness.

That really just sounds like an unhealthy obsession on your part. I'm perfectly fine with your choice to live where you do not have the option of gun ownership, however impugning my decision without evidence is poor form. I believe the most basic human right is that of self defense thus here I am.

The very idea of giving an 8 year old a loaded weapon should have ruffled at least a few people

That's because it is incredibly dumb, that's why it's headline news. You've got a world with billions of people on it, we are discovering new ways to be stupid every day. There is no huge surge of 8 year olds with automatic weapons in unsafe conditions. However we develop biased perceptions because stories like this are what the media reports since they seem more interesting.

 

[Heeman89]

Trust me, it's much better to get gets involved with guns at a young age, so they grow up respecting, and knowing how to properly use, or handle a weapon.
The fact a 15 year old kid was doing the instructing however, is bat-shit-fucking insane.

Well this little learning excursion did not go that well, wouldn't you say? i have to ask if you honestly think that a gun show is the best way for rudimentary weapon skills to be "passed" on?
and while i can understand what you mean, but by your logic toddlers should be instructed to operate motorized vehicles. i hope this does not seem offensive or sarcastic, i am just asking honestly.

I agree with your first part there, a gun show is by far the WORST place to learn rudimentary weapon skills. I guess at 10 years of age I learned how to use my first handgun but it was not at a gun show it was with my father (former weapon instructor in the US Army) in the backyard but at the age of 14 I had to take not one but TWO hunter safety courses to get my youth hunting permit(which still meant even though I've taken the required safety courses a parent/guardian still had to be present while hunting) and one course was basically all weapon safety. I'm guessing Massachusetts has different laws regarding who can display and handle weapons at a gun show, also with allowing ammo in the weapons. I've been to gun shows where if you were under 18 you couldn't go in parent/guardian there or not. All the guns shows I've been too no ammo was allowed in weapons (could be sold though)

Now you second point there really that's taking it to the extreme, of course no one is going to let a toddler drive a car, I bet no one is going to let a toddler hold a gun either but I do agree with Mcface, learning how to properly use them at a younger age (I would say no less the 10 years of age, my opinion) helps in showing proper knowledge and respect for firearms, I'm glad my father took the time to make sure I understood how dangerous firearms were, and that they weren't toys.

 

[Tranka Verrane]

Canada has more guns per person than America, yet significantly less crime. Obviously, the guns aren't going off by themselves, now are they?

Bit of an aside, but this is a myth. Gun ownership for sure isn't the whole story, but it's a big factor, and good indication of the mindset of the population. Canada comes 8th in worldwide gun ownership, and the US is first by a long way, with 50% more per head than it's closest rival.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_gun_ownership

 

[paasi]

This Ururu117's arguments are mostly illogical, contradictory and supported by myths, half-turths... reminds me a bit of evolutionists. heh.

Just another troll rooting for guns.

 

[The_Echo]

Which is more defective: The Uzi or the kid's family?

The parents. At least the gun did its job right.

 

[Heathrow]

Guns, as has been stated before, are not toys. They are not supposed to be used for entertainment.

Well you're entitled to your opinions, however millions of people around the world use them for entertainment. Hunting, target shooting, sport shooting. That doesn't even go into the weapons categories in general, blades in martial arts, bows are used frequently for entertainment, all of these are Olympic sports, as is the Javelin throw, another weapon.

Guns are tools, tools are not good or bad on their own; they are defined by the intent of the person using them. There is no problem with a tool being used for entertainment. I'll admit there is a certain childish glee the spectacle and destruction of explosions and guns; so there is a purpose for guns in sport. However, humans have thus far been unable to divorce guns from their use as tools to kill and maim. Think of it this way humanity is a young child wishing to play with a dangerous toy, it is entertaining but it is dangerous too and until we have learned not to hurt ourselves we should not be allowed to play with it.

 

[rcuhljr]

Actually, giving a loaded, automatic weapon with the saftey off to anyone who isn't in the Military is an idiotic thing to do.

This is the same line of faulty reasoning that wants only the police to be armed.

It's interesting that the common argument for supporting weapon ownership is personal protection. People need to buy a gun to protect themselves from bad guys with guns. This seems (somewhat) logical. But there is nothing stopping the bad guys from getting the gun in the first place. He can just walk into a wall mart with fake ID and buy one over the counter.

Who said it was only for protection from people with guns? Firearms are an equalizer. Do you think women should be stripped of the easiest way to equalize themselves with a statistically larger and stronger attacker? Also you are aware that firearms vendors do background checks, right?

Also, we need to look at the "Constitutional" Argument the NRA likes to use. Pro-Gun people use the line from the Second Amendment: "The right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed". Great, there would be no argument if that's what the 2nd Amendment said...except they skipped a few words. Here's the complete Amendment:
People are allowed to buy guns to help keep in place a working militia. Last time I checked, there are no militia's in America anymore, and therefore there is no reason in the constitution as to why a person has the right to own a gun.

I've never seen a credible pro second amendment site that left out part of the amendment, can you cite that? Secondly please research the subject in more depth to understand how the sentence reads to understand why your argument is incorrect. If reading the court briefings isn't exciting, here's an easy to watch youtube video. video [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1GNu7ldL1LM] Long story short, it lists one reason the right must be preserved, not the exclusionary reason, and it extends the right to all people. Also militias does not necessarily refer to standing militias, but the fact that you can form an armed militia easily if all the conscripts own their own weapons(you can also look up the obselete definition of regulated link [http://www.guncite.com/gc2ndmea.html]). Also look at various statements by the founders regarding gun ownership if you want to know their likely feelings.

Now since I'm posting I guess I might as well throw down my two cents. I believe that people do not have the right do decide whether other humans live or die

So you are pro gun ownership then? Because otherwise you're voluntarily giving over the right to decide who lives and dies to the people who are stronger then you, bigger then you, or willing to break the law. I just can't make sense out of that. You don't want someone else deciding if you live or die, so you give up your ability to stop them?