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

[rcuhljr]

Most violent deaths in the US are not legitimate self-defense. A good number of gun deaths are actually suicide. Guns definitely cause, or fulfill, more problems then they solve, if you look at the numbers.

Can you explain how guns cause violence? When you're done with that the rap, rock and roll, and video game industries would like to have a word with you.

True, there are fewer house robberies than in some countries. But there's more violence in general. More street robberies. The problem, of course, is not necessarily guns, but poverty, poor education, poor health care (psychiatric wellness included), and a society built around commercialism and valuing money as the ultimate indicator of status.

I've never disagreed with this. Human nature and our current condition lead to violence, I'm simply being a realist about dealing with it.

 

[Heathrow]

When did I say you shouldn't change your nature? Go ahead and change your nature. That doesn't involve removing items capable of causing harm. So when our hypothetical women shoots her hypothetical killer, what new crime is her violence causing? Can you tell me how spousal abuse is fueled by greed or desperation?

The abusive husband is probably afraid of being left by the wife and is prone to acting irrational I can't tell you the specific emotional cause of every crime every committed but I think it's fair enough to say that they will all have one.

Since you have failed give any motivation for your would be killer I will make it for you. He is a lower class man with extremely limited means and a family of young children with no mother. This night, upon realizing that he can not by any means make ends meet this month, he attempts to mug a woman walking home with her child.
The woman shoots him in defense and he survives, he is hospitalized but unable to pay his medical or legal bills eventually he is jailed and his children are sent to child services. They all resent the law and authority in general for what it has done to their family, the eldest son specifically takes it very badly. He develops antisocial behavior and eventually turns to a life of crime in order to sustain himself being unable to function in regular society. Eventually his life is ended in a gun battle following a botched bank robbery along with the lives of two police officers, three other robbers and a half dozen civilians.
So was the woman right to shoot her would be mugger or should she perhaps have just given him her purse and informed the police afterwards? It is obviously not an ideal solution but is it better?

My example may be drastic but I'm illustrating a point: who knows what a violent act will cause? Actions have repercussions, violent acts tend to have violent repercussions.

Guns are only one way people inflict pain and suffering on others, they are also, incidentally, probably the easiest way. If we curb peoples access to them I fail to see how this is a bad thing, as I said in a previous post guns are tools that humans have yet to prove they can use responsibly. Maybe someday people will be responsible enough to have a rifle that they can take to the shooting range and not be tempted to use on their fellow man but until that day comes it is better to remove the danger entirely.

This discussion has now gotten quite ridiculous so I'm leaving. If nothing else I hope you take away this at least: if you must be violent then only use violence as your last resort, I'm sure you'll be pleasantly surprised by how often you can avoid it all together.

Good day.

 

[Threx]

This is mind boggeling like I've read this over atleast 5 times and the actual article atleast 3 and I just don't even understand how that kid was even aloud to hold that gun. There are multiple reasons why this never should of happend.

A. You don't give a child a gun and if your an instructor thats got to be like rule #1

B. Why did this kids parents let him even hold the gun what good is going to come from it abosolutely nothing.

C. Why is is the uzi's fault I mean you have to go through so many safety courses and you not aloud to even touch a gun with out all these lisences. Let alone let an 8 year old hold one that was previously LOADED.

 

[xplay3r]

Okay, that is pretty fricken' awful and my European agrees with the OP on all points... however, there must be a large chunk of sensible Americans who can also see that from the start that whole situation was wrong.

It's unreasonable to assume that such stupidity is typical of America and not displayed elsewhere in other forms... Darwin awards have a catalogue of idiocy, it's highly unfortunate that the main bulk of the stupidity in this case was not from the victim but the victims guardians... if you can call them that.

I have to say, I'm an american, and there are ALOT of us who are sane individuals, the biggest problem with this country is the media, they report on the tragic accidents, and the insane individuals because when you see it, you can't look away, so they get better ratings.

I would never take an 8 year old to a gun show, I've never been to a gun show even, nor do I own one, I understand the need for them, our fore fathers gave us the right to own guns because when they needed to rise up against a government that caused tyranny, there only defence was guns, so if that need should ever rise again, they wanted the people to have guns to defend themselves.

However there should be limits and there are some, but not everyone is intelligent as they should be.

The moral of this tragic story is use common sence and dont be stupid.

but plese dont judge americans just because the few who run whats reported on, choose to report on the ones who arn't as fortunet as others (I.e. not as intelligent or understanding as most people are)

 

[Aerophyre]

Heathrow's last post was way too long to quote so ill just respond to it.

1) You somehow managed to argue through a wildly assumptive set of circumstances and beliefs that a woman preventing herself from being mugged is a bad thing. To this I can only both shake my head and sigh. Women of the world: Prvent rape, just say yes. Heathrow told you so!

2) Banning guns will prevent gun crime, just like banning drugs has elminated drug crime! I...oh, wait.... dammit, nevermind.....

 

[rcuhljr]

The abusive husband is probably afraid of being left by the wife and is prone to acting irrational I can't tell you the specific emotional cause of every crime every committed but I think it's fair enough to say that they will all have one.

I never said they wouldn't, but you haven't explained why I should have to be at risk for other peoples emotional problems, and why they should be at risk of mine?

Since you have failed give any motivation for your would be killer I will make it for you. He is a lower class man with extremely limited means and a family of young children with no mother. This night, upon realizing that he can not by any means make ends meet this month, he attempts to mug a woman walking home with her child.
The woman shoots him in defense and he survives, he is hospitalized but unable to pay his medical or legal bills eventually he is jailed and his children are sent to child services. They all resent the law and authority in general for what it has done to their family, the eldest son specifically takes it very badly. He develops antisocial behavior and eventually turns to a life of crime in order to sustain himself being unable to function in regular society. Eventually his life is ended in a gun battle following a botched bank robbery along with the lives of two police officers, three other robbers and a half dozen civilians.
So was the woman right to shoot her would be mugger or should she perhaps have just given him her purse and informed the police afterwards? It is obviously not an ideal solution but is it better?

Clearly she should have been a better shot.

My example may be drastic but I'm illustrating a point: who knows what a violent act will cause? Actions have repercussions, violent acts tend to have violent repercussions.

Silly anecdotes don't prove much. maybe she gives him her purse and he shoots her anyways, and she was the only biologist who could have saved humanity from upcoming plague! oh no he doomed humanity! The only thing we know at that point in time is she is being a decent human being and he's attempting to use force to deprive someone else of their rights. His are forfeit.

Guns are only one way people inflict pain and suffering on others, they are also, incidentally, probably the easiest way. If we curb peoples access to them I fail to see how this is a bad thing, as I said in a previous post guns are tools that humans have yet to prove they can use responsibly.

So you'd better ban every other easy way instead of addressing the real problem...

This discussion has now gotten quite ridiculous so I'm leaving. If nothing else I hope you take away this at least: if you must be violent then only use violence as your last resort, I'm sure you'll be pleasantly surprised by how often you can avoid it all together.

Good day.

I've never thrown a punch, I think I've figured out how to avoid unnecessary violence.

 

[Flamingpenguin]

I dunno, maybe other americans (Unlike me) think if they aren't allowed to own guns then the government will enslave us all or something. Plus I know people that still hunt for fun. And on another note I find it pretty disturbing that here you can literally walk into Wal Mart and just buy a gun.

 

[yzzlthtz]

Most violent deaths in the US are not legitimate self-defense. A good number of gun deaths are actually suicide. Guns definitely cause, or fulfill, more problems then they solve, if you look at the numbers.

Can you explain how guns cause violence? When you're done with that the rap, rock and roll, and video game industries would like to have a word with you.

True, there are fewer house robberies than in some countries. But there's more violence in general. More street robberies. The problem, of course, is not necessarily guns, but poverty, poor education, poor health care (psychiatric wellness included), and a society built around commercialism and valuing money as the ultimate indicator of status.

I've never disagreed with this. Human nature and our current condition lead to violence, I'm simply being a realist about dealing with it.

Lot easier to kill someone, or yourself, with a gun than with most everything else. Pretty hard to do it with a virtual gun, last time I checked...

Having a gun makes you think about your gun. Pick your gun up. Our minds work in patterns, the simple presence of a gun in your house makes you a little more likely to die by gun violence. My uncle shot himself accidentally while cleaning his guns. And he was a veteran. If he weren't allowed to have guns at all, he might still be alive today. Guns are crazy dangerous.

And I said fulfilled, not just cause.

And "realist" is a bit of a subjective term.

 

[SilentHunter7]

Wow, you're not very bright are you, dumbass? You said it only takes place in red states. THIS FUCKING STORY HAPPENED IN Massachusetts! Which is a blue state? I thought it only took place in red states? Who's the fucking dumbass, dumbass?

You should try to learn a little more about the country you make fun of, lest your words betray your ignorance.

You know, I could've sworn I said that the only place where people have "guns are fun for everyone" attitudes are in the reddest of the red areas here in the states. Not that gun violence only happens in those places. Because that would just be stupid, considering gun violence happens everywhere.

Thank God I do not live in the states and their crazy "guns are fun for everyone attitude."

That's only in the worst parts of the red-states. In Pennsylvania, we're much more sensible about stuff like that.

Oh wait, I did. How about that.

 

[atomicmrpelly]

It's illegal for them to have the guns currently, why would they suddenly stop having guns? Why are guns still used in crimes in places where they are illegal? Also why do you say it is the most common? Do you have actual citations for that claim? I can provide some but you won't like it.

The point of this debate is that guns are legal in America...

And no of course I don't have citations, I didn't realise I was writing a dissertation I thought it was just a pointless post on an internet forum. If you want to provide us all with your citations we'd be happy to laugh at you.

 

[WlknCntrdiction]

Not even going to read all these pages of replies but basically I agree with this:

Maybe if more 'defective' guns could find their way into circulation, the problem of bad parenting of this magnitude will solve itself before it becomes a problem.

What were the parents thinking??? Seriously?? Idiots.

 

[laikenf]

Come on people, guns are weapons, not tools, there is a big difference:
-Tools are instruments or devices that where created for the purpose of facilitating a job or mechanical operations.
-Weapons are devices that are created for the purpose of attacking or defending.

BIG difference, please do not confuse both terms as some people in this thread often have. Of course anything in the hands of a human being can become a tool, like for example using an M-16 as a lever for a given situation, but was it designed as such?

Edit: I don't really think the problem with guns is their legal status, it's more of a control issue I guess.

 

[rcuhljr]

The simple presence of a gun in your house makes you a little more likely to die by gun violence.

The presence of a pool makes me more likely to drown to (and is more dangerous to my kids) for less of a benefit.

My uncle shot himself accidentally while cleaning his guns. And he was a veteran. If he weren't allowed to have guns at all, he might still be alive today. Guns are crazy dangerous.

Of course guns are dangerous, so are bandsaws, cars, and axes. However if someone is cleaning a gun and accidentally shoots themselves, they screwed up and ignored one of the primary rules for gun safety, I don't feel particularly sorry for them, just like I don't feel bad for people who don't wear seatbelts or use motorcycle helmets.

The point of this debate is that guns are legal in America...

Correct, so explain why if other countries making guns illegal didn't stop gun crime, it would if we did it in America. When talking about America it is allowed to discuss and support parallels with other countries.

And no of course I don't have citations, I didn't realise I was writing a dissertation I thought it was just a pointless post on an internet forum. If you want to provide us all with your citations we'd be happy to laugh at you.

So you have no support for your argument you just like to pretend your right because it feels good? Ok won't waste any more time on you.

 

[rcuhljr]

Come on people, guns are weapons, not tools, there is a big difference:
-Tools are instruments or devices that where created for the purpose of facilitating a job or mechanical operations.
-Weapons are devices that are created for the purpose of attacking or defending.

BIG difference, please do not confuse both terms as some people in this thread often have. Of course anything in the hands of a human being can become a tool, like for example using an M-16 as a lever for a given situation, but was it designed as such?

Edit: I don't really think the problem with guns is their legal status, it's more of a control issue I guess.

You are aware that some of the first tools were spears and bows and arrows?

 

[rcuhljr]

FML, am I the only sane american here that thinks Gun Control is a good thing? We no longer need the right to bear arms, or rather UZIS, because non one is attacking us on our homesoil. We are no longer at war with those snobby tea drinkers. And I am not quite sure about what weapons are allowed in this stupid law but, it seems to me that the biggest issue is the hunters. Well all they really need is muzzle loaders, and a shotgun, and maybe, and I MEAN MAYBE, like police officer maybe, a handgun. But a UZI. really.

Im sorry I am going on a rant here. Let me sum it up this way. The NRA and Republicans need to get with the times.

All the glaring inaccuracies of your post aside, You are aware many democrats, libertarians, and others not in the 'NRA' and 'Republicans' are pro gun rights?

 

[ottenni]

Wow, that is horrible.

What strikes me is that the kid who was supposedly a gun instructor gave the gun to an eight year old. I mean there is nothing wrong with firearms if you treat them with respect and understand the danger they can represent and handle them accordingly and responsibly, and i cant see how that happened here, even if the gun did malfunction if you are operating a firearm in a public space like that you should always assume it is about to fire or malfunction, treat it with respect.

 

[Torque2100]

More children are killed by cars every year than guns. So should we ban the automobile?

Guns are dangerous, they are tools that are designed to kill and they do that job very well. However, just because something is dangerous does not mean it should be banned. It means that it should be treated with respect. The child was fatally injured because of an obvious failure to follow basic safety rules. Such as, always assume the gun is loaded.

As for the original poster being closed minded, yes you are. In fact, you sound like a fascist. Yes, wanting to take guns away from private citizens makes you a fascist. End of discussion.

 

[Woem]

Now here is the real issue: the gun jams, and the kid shoots himself in the head. Quote from the article:

The boy's family claims the gun was defective and unreasonably dangerous, and they blame the failure to properly service it.

So the big issue in this whole story is that the gun jammed and as a result of that, the kid shot himself. It's no problem that the kid is at a gun show in the first place, or that a teen is handing out guns to kids, or that the kid is trying out guns. That's all just fine. But because it wasn't cleared properly the Uzi was deemed unreasonably dangerous. So when an Uzi is cleared properly it is reasonably dangerous for a kid to try out? If the kid hadn't shot himself it would have been a successful family trip. This really blows my mind. No pun intended.

Wow, lot of posts that I'm not going to read because I assume if anyone had brought this up, the OP would have been edited.

No, saying the Uzi was unreasonably dangerous because it wasn't cleared properly has nothing to do with whether "when an Uzi is cleared properly it is reasonably dangerous for a kid to try out"

All they are saying is that Uzi that are not properly cleared are unreasonably dangerous to anyone.

It's like if a family is on a car lot, and a kid gets in a car and drives off, and the car blows up when it gets hit from behind in the gas tank because of faulty manufacturing. It wouldn't have mattered if it was the kid or an adult taking a test drive--the injury *in this case* would have occurred in either situation.

In other words, it shouldn't be a defense (at least in cases like this, where we are talking about a product just put out there into the world) to say 'this person is not authorized to do this' when the reason they were injured had nothing to do with the reason they were not authorized--that's letting someone get away with bad behavior because they got lucky that someone else was behaving badly at the same time.

I think uzis are just dangerous period. They shouldn't be available for commercial use.

Are they legally available for civilian use? As far as I can see the Uzi, Mini Uzi and Micro Uzi (this is the one the kid was testing) are not available, but the Uzi Pistol is. And that's "just" a semi-automatic pistol.