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.
