9yr old girl kills her gun instructor with an uzi

by EndofMysteries 137 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Caedes

  ADCMS,

  At every stage I have quoted in my posts what I was replying to, the fact that your position has changed over the course of this thread is not something I have any control over. You didn't give a simple synopsis of what happened, you claimed it was just an accident and that it was the same as car accidents or sport accidents and made the point that if people asked for gun control it was the same as asking for cars or skiing to be banned. Would you like me to quote your posts 3266, 3267 and 3268 as evidence?

  This was not an accident, any reasonable person can see that it could have been forseen that giving a child an uzi was going to result in this kind of incident. Any kind of health and safety management assessement should have asked the question what could possibly go wrong if we give small children automatic weapons. They either didn't ask the question or ignored the obvious solution to the problem. Quite clearly the responsibility for this incident lies with the instructor and weapon range manager and with the parents for allowing their child to be in that situation.

  I am sure if you had asked the guy who died or the parents they would have told you they were responsible gun owners. I am sure the vast majority of gun owners do act responsibly, my point was that you can't always trust peoples own assessment of their competence and that the only discussion going on in the states by gun owners is people stating that they will not support any level of gun control. The very act of saying you support no or little gun control is being irresponsible.

  I hate to break it to you but comparing levels of gun control between states in the US is laughable, try comparing with japan or the UK if you want to see the effects of genuine gun control.

  TD,

  I would be interested to know what the effects of the lower powered cartridge have on the mechanism, presumably a lower power cartridge results in less muzzle climb? Is there a mechanism in the uzi to minimise the muzzle climb problem? Is it possible that a lower power cartridge somehow makes the weapon less controllable?
• 

  AndDontCallMeShirley

  if people asked for gun control it was the same as asking for cars or skiing to be banned. Would you like me to quote your posts 3266, 3267 and 3268 as evidence?

  Yes, you may quote what I said if you think it'll help you, caedes. I'm not sure if you are being deliberately obtuse or simply can't see the point I'm making.

  What I'm saying is this: the knee-jerk reaction when an incident like this occurs is: guns are dangerous, therefore no one should have guns.

  My point is, how far does the argument go? If people want to outlaw guns because they are "dangerous", then what else will be banned based solely on that criteria? If something is banned simply because it is perceived by special interest groups as "dangerous", then almost anything could be banned, right?

  I'm not saying that the instructor or parents exercised good judgment. This incident will perhaps result in some changes, either by legislation or other means, that will prevent a repeat of this type of tragedy in the future. I hope it does.

  I think one thing is true, caedes: you are going to believe whatever you want to believe despite what I say. I'm not going to box with you.

  caedes: TD, I would be interested to know what the effects of the lower powered cartridge have on the mechanism, presumably a lower power cartridge results in less muzzle climb? Is there a mechanism in the uzi to minimise the muzzle climb problem? Is it possible that a lower power cartridge somehow makes the weapon less controllable?

  Why ask TD this question? You've already made plain what your retort will be, so nothing TD explains should make any difference to you:

  caedes: This was not an accident, any reasonable person can see that it could have been forseen that giving a child an uzi was going to result in this kind of incident. Any kind of health and safety management assessement should have asked the question what could possibly go wrong if we give small children automatic weapons.

  If TD answers that the weapon is controllable for this or that reason, will you change your position? Doubtful.

  "This was not an accident, any reasonable person can see that it could have been forseen". -- caedes

  If this was true the authorities would be pressing charges for negligent homocide or manslaughter. The authorities are not pressing any charges. They see it as an unfortunate, arguably avoidable, accident.

  The instructor's widow and family are not blaming anybody either. They see it as an unfortunate accident.

  Hindsight is always 20/20. Unless you have a crystal ball, Caedes. Do you?

  --

  caedes...read my posts rather than reading into them. You'll see things much clearer. Any alleged 'switching of position' is your perception, and I can't do anything about that.
• 

  AndDontCallMeShirley

  Caedes: I hate to break it to you but comparing levels of gun control between states in the US is laughable, try comparing with japan or the UK if you want to see the effects of genuine gun control.

  Are we talking about gun control as it relates to overall violent crime rates? I hate to break it to you, Caedes, but the availability of guns does not correlate to more crime. You cite the UK as an example. Okay, it is true that they have stricter gun control laws than the USA. But, their violent crime rates are greater than the USA.

  Unless, of course, you are arguing that gun crime is bad while any other violent crime is acceptable, so we should only focus myopically on gun crime and turn a blind eye to overall violent crime.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ooa98FHuaU0&feature=player_embedded

  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1196941/The-violent-country-Europe-Britain-worse-South-Africa-U-S.html

  Furthermore, my comparison between states [in the USA] is not "laughable", as you claim. If I want to know how much sushi people in Boston eat only compared to how much sushi people in Los Angeles eat, it is irrelevant how much sushi people in Tokyo eat. It has nothing to do with the comparison I'm making.

  I'm comparing apples to apples; you are comparing apples to oranges.

  For example: DC (has a handgun ban, 35.8 murders per 100,000)... Vermont has the least restrictive gun laws in the country (don't even need a permit to conceal carry) and their murder rate is 2.6 per 100,000
• 

  Caedes

  ADCMS,

  Your knee jerk reaction was to claim that it was just an accident so we should do nothing because other wise we have to ban cars and nail guns. I am saying that you can ban small children from having or using this type of weapons, you don't have to ban cars as well.

  Should we ban small children from other dangerous activities? Personally I think each case should be looked at on it's own merits. In this case you have a culture developing that directly puts people in danger and hence legislation is appropriate. So in answer to your question no, you are not going to see things banned because a 'special interest' group (for that read general public) says so, each case is going to be different.

  Perhaps you should look at it another way, you live in a democracy, that democracy imposes its will on you in lots of different ways; how many members of the general public have to die before the general public get to decide for you that your way of life is too dangerous to tolerate?

  I asked TD to expand on a point he made earlier, I am an engineer I am interested to know if TD thinks there were technical reasons why this weapon is so dangerous in the hands of children? You seem to be reading a lot into my posts, I have no retort for TD, it's just an interesting technical detail. Would it make any difference to my conclusion that it is simple to ban children from using this sort of weapon? No, but that doesn't mean I cannot ask someone a question. I am also interested in why you think I should not ask TD a question?

  I'm afraid I was unaware that people let children engage in such a stupidly dangerous activity before this story broke, if you had asked me a month ago I would have said the same thing.

  I would say the owner and manager of the range should be held partly responsible for the instructors death for allowing this in the first place.
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  This is one sad story. What was the kid's parents thinking?!!! What was the instructor thinking?!!! Everything about this incident screams unsafe level of probability.

  Now we have a deceased individual survived by grieving loved ones, and a traumatized child.

  I taught my children how to shoot when they were about the same age as this child. But the idea of putting a semi-automatic firearm in their hands was unthinkable at that age! Anyone whos's fired a semi-auto knows simply triggering off two rounds back to back can lead to dire consequences if you lose control, and from what I see that's precisely what happened in this case.
• 

  James Brown

  Uzzis are for drive bys in the hood.
• 

  AndDontCallMeShirley

  caedes: Your knee jerk reaction was to claim that it was just an accident so we should do nothing

  Show me where I said this.

  In fact, in my post above (#3359), which I doubt you even read, I said this: "I'm not saying that the instructor or parents exercised good judgment. This incident will perhaps result in some changes, either by legislation or other means, that will prevent a repeat of this type of tragedy in the future. I hope it does."

  You're so focused on firing off a glib retort you don't even absorb what I say...just like you've done with the rest of my posts.

  Caedes: Should we ban small children from other dangerous activities? Personally I think each case should be looked at on it's own merits.

  This is what I've said throughout the thread. Yet when you say it it's 'profound', when I say it you don't see it.

  Caedes: your way of life is too dangerous to tolerate?

  My way of life? You don't know anything about me. Do you live in the USA, Caedes?

  Caedes: I'm afraid I was unaware that people let children engage in such a stupidly dangerous activity before this story broke

  People who do this kind of thing are a very small minority. Responsible gun owners like myself are just as upset as everyone else. Stop painting everyone with the same brush and making sweeping generalizations about millions of people.

  Read the comments below this follow-up story. Gun owners agree the decisions made leading to this incident were highly irresponsible. It also reveals your claims as completely baseless and judgmental:

  https://news.yahoo.com/apnewsbreak-girl-said-uzi-too-much-her-160913332.html
• 

  Simon

  Seems weird that 'responsible gun owners' wouldn't want more control over who can have guns. Wouldn't it make you safer?

  I'm a responsible car driver and I want the government to control who else is allowed to be on the roads.

  Why would I object to it?
• 

  TD

  Caedes,

  I would be interested to know what the effects of the lower powered cartridge have on the mechanism, presumably a lower power cartridge results in less muzzle climb?

  "Free recoil" is what the shooter actually feels and lower power = less free recoil in theory. However the other half of the equation is the ergonomics, weight of the weapon and the rate of fire.

  Is there a mechanism in the uzi to minimise the muzzle climb problem?

  Nothing I'm aware of other than aftermarket foregrips and buttstocks

  Is it possible that a lower power cartridge somehow makes the weapon less controllable?

  I don't think so. An Uzi chambered in 45 ACP is most defintely harder to control than the 9mm version.
• 

  TD

  Seems weird that 'responsible gun owners' wouldn't want more control over who can have guns. Wouldn't it make you safer?

  That's one thing I don't understand about the whole situation. In order to legally own one of these weapons, you must be licensed. You have to pay an annual fee; you have to pass a background check at the federal level; you volunatarily surrender some of your rights pertaining to search and seizure and local law enforcement has to sign off on it. Local law enforcement can deny your request to be licensed without prejudice, which means that in some states and locales, it's simply impossible.

  Why should anyone except the person who went through all this be allowed to shoot the weapon?