9yr old girl kills her gun instructor with an uzi (page 11)

AndDontCallMeShirley

Just because someone disagrees with you does not mean their logic is faulty, however there may be a fault in your logic if you cannot see that indiscrimate military grade weapons do not sit in the same category as cars, motorbikes, power tools or any of the other things that could potentially cause a fatal accident.

I didn't say that.

Try reading all of my posts before blasting me:

"Regardless, after watching the video, it's obvious she was not qualified to handle this gun and the instructor should have seen that. A tragedy."

"I'm not advocating that 9 year-olds should be firing automatic weapons. I think some are assuming that I am."

I don't see that responding to your post is me 'blasting' you, I responded point by point to your post that I quoted. You were the one claiming that an accident with a nail gun or car or skis is the same as one with a military grade weapon.

I was responding to what you wrote only and haven't claimed that you were advocating children firing automatic weaponry, that should be clear from my post.

What I would say is that you do seem to be defending the indefensible by claiming this was just an accident, at what point do responsible gun owners say there is a discourse to be had with regards to sensible gun control. So far it looks like the only people who have a say in the US is irresponsible gun owners and their knee-jerk aversity to any kind of gun controls whatsoever.

TD

Caedes, I do agree with you on the inadvisabilty of a civilian using an Uzi for self defense (At least in full auto mode) --Just a minor pedant point.

The 9X19 is a pistol cartridge (As opposed to a rifle cartridge) and a fairly low powered one at that. The reason for this is that it became so popular over the years and such a wide range of firearms chambered in this cartridge were produced, that ammunition manufacturers had to keep the lowest common denominator in mind for liability reasons. In this case, it was extremely cheap and poor quality pistols with cast zinc components (e.g. Jennings, Raven, Lorcin, etc.) Modern 9mm ammunition often won't even cycle the action in an authentic WWII era Luger and the minimum powder charge in 60's era reloading tables is actually above the maximum powder charge in 90's era reloading tables. (I kid you not.)

AndDontCallMeShirley

What I would say is that you do seem to be defending the indefensible by claiming this was just an accident

If it wasn't an accident, then the only other option is that it was deliberate. I guess we'll soon read a story about the authorities charging this 9 year-old girl for murder in the first degree.

So far it looks like the only people who have a say in the US is irresponsible gun owners and their knee-jerk aversity to any kind of gun controls whatsoever.

Do your homework, Caedes. The states that have the most stringent gun control laws also have the highest gun crime rates. And, to refute your ridiculous assertion, by and large responsible, law abiding gun owners are the majority...they just don't make the evening news like the nutjobs do.

You were the one claiming that an accident with a nail gun or car or skis is the same as one with a military grade weapon.

I'm not going to argue with you about something I didn't say. You're too obtuse to get it (or it doesn't serve your purpose to get it).

bohm

ADCMS: If it wasn't an accident, then the only other option is that it was deliberate

It was an accident which could only happend because someone gave this girl a loaded uzi and told her to shoot it.

A law preventing something this outrageously stupid would also very likely have prevented this accident.

This is a very simple point and I got no idea why it seem so easy to miss. For instance, suppose the same parents had put the 9 year old in a car and let her drive on the freeway and suppose she then hit someone who died. We could then re-use all the same silly arguments: "Skiing is dangerous too! A nail gun is also dangerous! Some 9 year old can drive just fine! My grandpa let me drive a tractor when i was 8 and i didnt hit anyone!"; it would not change the fact there is no particular good reasons to let 9 year olds drive and plenty of reasons to assume it is fairly dangerous in general --- just like handing them a loaded military-graded weapon they are not strong enough to shoot safely and ask them to shoot it.

Now ofcourse driving is not a moralized issue for you like gun control and so you don't loose your ability to sense nuances. Also, you are not up in arms with a number of silly arguments to "protect" driving rights by insisting 9 year olds should drive on the freeway.

AndDontCallMeShirley

It was an accident which could only happend because someone gave this girl a loaded uzi and told her to shoot it.

A law preventing something this outrageously stupid would also very likely have prevented this accident.

I've stated a number of times that this was an avoidable accident, I do not advocate that children shoot this kind of weapon, and I have no problem with laws that say as much.

What the hell are you still arguing about???????

AndDontCallMeShirley

Caedes claimed this was not an accident. Well, if not an accident, then it was deliberate. Is anyone going to go down that path?

For those here who don't own a dictionary (bohm, caedes- listen up), here is the definition of "accident":

.

1 a : an unforeseen and unplanned event or circumstance

b : lack of intention or necessity : chance <met by accident rather than by design>

2 a : an unfortunate event resulting especially from carelessness or ignorance

b : an unexpected and medically important bodily event especially when injurious <a cerebrovascular accident>

c : an unexpected happening causing loss or injury which is not due to any fault or misconduct on the part of the person injured but for which legal relief may be sought.

-------------------

If this incident does not fall within the definition of an "accident" then what does? Unless you are going to argue that the end result was certain (that someone would lose their life) but all parties involved decided to go ahead anyway just for the fun of it. That would be deliberate.

-----

The simple fact of the matter is this: neither the girl, her parents, the shooting range owner or the shooting instructor did anything illegal. Did one or all of them fail to use discretion and common sense? Most certainly. If this is a problem that needs to be addressed with legislation, then I have no problem with that. I am not advocating that children be allowed to shoot military weapons. . How many times do I have to say this?

bohm

ADCMS: I've stated a number of times that this was an avoidable accident, I do not advocate that children shoot this kind of weapon, and I have no problem with laws that say as much. What the hell are you still arguing about???????

Yes, it appears I may be confusing you with ADCMS from page 2 whom my comment was directed to.

It's not as if the parents just handed their 9 year-old an Uzi and told her to go out and play.

She was receiving instruction by a professional in a controlled setting.

Sometimes accidents just happen regardless of all the safety precautions taken.

Skateboards, archery, motorcycles, monkey bars, bikes, downhill skiing and gymnastics are also dangerous kid activities that carry varying degrees of risk (sometimes a high degree/potentially lethal).

Try as you might to make everything risk-free, it just isn't realistic. It's always easy to dissect, criticize and condemn in hindsight.

Seing we agree these things should be regulated and it was inexcuseable to give her this weapon in what was obviously not a controlled setting it seem we do not in fact disagree.

TD

I don't think it was all one or the other.

To be fair to Caedes, the phrase was, "...just an accident."

Yes, it was an accident, but it was certainly not just an accident in the sense that it could have happened to anyone.

BizzyBee

The problem with the phrase "just an accident" is that it is dismissive of further analysis which might lead to a solution that prevents this happening in the future. It implies that, as a accident, it was unavoidable.

Of course it was an ACCIDENT. But it wasn't just an accident. It was much more than just an accident. It was tragically bad judgement on the part of the adults who were supposed to be in charge. And it should lead to policy changes for all shooting ranges, enforced by the feds if necessary.

OMG! Gun control!

9yr old girl kills her gun instructor with an uzi

Share this