I'm proud to own guns.

[bushmaster06]

If they only save one child, they are worth having.

Woody

Sure enough. When I say that I'm putting ARs together to arm my child army I'm not really joking. I don't know what the futuer holds, but I'll be damned in they won't have a means to defend themselves.

 

[bushmaster06]

We should get grubbermitt handouts of firearms and a monthly stipend of ammunition for said firearms.

Operation KACS (keep a child safe)

After all, it is only for the children!

If we're going to have the ATF, they're job should be to make sure that every American has as much booze, smokes, and guns as they want, not to curtail possession of those things.

 

[bushmaster06]

I mean, I get the point, but think it'd be interesting to see if there's any statistics on how many times a firearm is used to protect a child versus how many die from them.

Keeping a child safe, in my opinion, should also very very much include proper storage and discipline for instance on the part of the adult.

Raise your kids right and it won't be much of a problem. Our oldest had a fully stocked gun cabinet in his room when he was about 14. He never shot anyone. Instead, he competed in 4H trap and skeet and went to nationals for archery.

 

[bushmaster06]

Does this make it better?



https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/26/health/children-accidental-shootings/index.html

So such an infrequent occurance as to be statistically insignificant. Got it.

 

[TedKennedy]

Raise your kids right and it won't be much of a problem. Our oldest had a fully stocked gun cabinet in his room when he was about 14. He never shot anyone. Instead, he competed in 4H trap and skeet and went to nationals for archery.

You are fortunate. Don't trick yourself into believing children "raised right" won't go off the rails.

 

[Rez Exelon]

So such an infrequent occurance as to be statistically insignificant. Got it.

You make such a statement ignoring the original post I made --- what's the statistics on how many times a gun is used to actively defend a child. I'd really like to compare and contrast the numbers. Is it a once a year occurrence? 10x? 100x? By the numbers there is 280case/9 years IIRC, so roughly 2.5 kids getting killed per month. What's the point of comparison to the initial statement of "If they only save one child, they are worth having."?

 

[bushmaster06]

You are fortunate. Don't trick yourself into believing children "raised right" won't go off the rails.

It's up to the parents to figure out if their kids are competent enought to be trusted with firearms, or a car, or even a cell phone. It's almost like there is a high level of responsibility to be a parent.

 

[TedKennedy]

It's up to the parents to figure out if their kids are competent enought to be trusted with firearms, or a car, or even a cell phone. It's almost like there is a high level of responsibility to be a parent.

Bless your heart.

 

[bushmaster06]

You make such a statement ignoring the original post I made --- what's the statistics on how many times a gun is used to actively defend a child. I'd really like to compare and contrast the numbers. Is it a once a year occurrence? 10x? 100x? By the numbers there is 280case/9 years IIRC, so roughly 2.5 kids getting killed per month. What's the point of comparison to the initial statement of "If they only save one child, they are worth having."?

I'm going to guess that the original statement of "If they only save one child, they are worth having" is tongue in cheek to be used against the gun grabbers who like to say that if taking guns away from people save one child then it's worth it to trample people's rights.

As for the stats? I don't care very much what they say. Stats are so easy to portray whatever outcome you want that they shouldn't be trusted very much.

 

[bushmaster06]

Bless your heart.

Don't let freedom scare you too much.