Toddler reaches into purse and gun goes off killing mom

You compound on my point exactly. "Lets restrict guns!" What does this even mean? Then you rabble on about the gun violence in the US. Next you will rabble on about how we have to keep guns out of the hands of those with mental issues. Next, lets ban all those scary assault rifles! None of these ideas (because they certainly aren't solutions) put a dent on the overall problem. Sure, it might stop a school shooting or two, but it completely ignores the thousands of lives lost on isolated incidents.

 

So . . what could have prevented this tragedy

1. Gun Restrictions - she didn't have the gun . . this would not have happened
2. More Training - maybe if she took more gun training and safety she would have had a holster or the safety on
3.Restrict places guns can be take - No Guns in Grocery Stores *shrug*

What other options are on the table?

Rocket River

 

Well all those accolades apparently don't mean she was intelligent enough to put safety/holster on the gun or store it in a place a toddler couldn't reach.

This somehow makes it even more pathetic.

 

You are just making things up while there is indisputable evidence which states that less guns equals less gun violence.

Source: the rest of the ****ing world

 

As expected, this thread is chock full of ignorance. Exactly 1 person has commented on the correct cause of this tragedy: If you are going to carry a firearm, you carry it on your body at all times to ensure that you and only you have control over the weapon, as well as to ensure that you have it if you need it. This would absolutely not have happened had the mother been doing that.

My carry guns don't have mechanical safeties because they are a hindrance in a fight and can get you killed. They always have one in the chamber too, because if you ever need to use it, then it will in all probability happen too quickly for you to both remember that it doesn't have a round chambered and to actually chamber a round. And remember to hit the safety... This is the best way to carry but only if you are always conscious of your status and always careful.

And if this shocks you, consider the most popular firearms carried by law enforcement today: Glocks. Show me the manual safety on one of the service models. And show me the cop that carries without a round chambered. Good luck, I am not gonna hold my breath, because their safeties are automatic (no switch or button) and ALL cops carry chambered.

But every carry gun should have three safeties: your finger, the weapon's holster, and most importantly your brain. Mom's main safety failed this time - her brain. Putting a firearm with either no safety or a disengaged safety, with a round chambered, inside of her purse next to her toddler was a monumental fail on her part.

Every accidental shooting involves a failure of the most important safety - your brain. Every single firearms accident involves someone doing something stupid, usually not properly securing the firearm as mom did in this case.

The lesson to draw is not that we need to ban guns, because then only criminals will have them. The lesson is for those who own and in particular those who carry, is to *always* be aware of where your firearm is, its status, and always make sure that it is under your control. Always secure your weapons and always apply the four rules of firearm safety things like this won't happen.

 

This. People have too much pride to admit it. Or not enough common sense.

 

And once again, you're suggesting pipe dreams while providing no real solutions.

So I ask again. What is your solution? Banning guns is not a solution. Taking private citizens guns by force is not a solution. Any idiot understands by miraculously making every gun disappear ends gun violence. And any idiot can suggest that idea. Anyone with a bit of sense understands gun owners are not going to give this up with out a fight.

Your suggestion makes about as much sense as the war on drugs. Futile.

 

Well it apparently isn't obvious to way, way too many people here. For too many here the problem is the gun, not the person who screwed up. And there are a LOT of people here who know absolutely nothing about firearms or carry issues, yet still like to spout of about it as if they actually know something.

But hey, thanks for the great contribution. First post I've ever seen of yours, it was totally worth it.

 

Guns don't kill people, toddlers kill people. Outlaw toddlers today.

 

Toddlers need to be trained in gun control

 

No, we just need to legalize abortions all the way to the 96th trimester.

 

There are many police officers that go their entire career without having to use their weapon... As a civilian, how often do you have to use your gun...???

Between cops getting killed, people getting shot in Wal-Mart, and people like Cliven Bundy _ like it or not stricter gun laws are coming.

 

It's funny that you started your post the way you did, because the absolute, without a doubt, number 1 cause of this tragedy is that she had a gun. Period. She. Had. A. Gun. If she's a person that lacks awareness of her belongings, but she doesn't HAVE A GUN, then this wouldn't have happened. A lack of awareness is not the problem.

 

"Philip Alpers, an adjunct associate professor at the Sydney School of Public Health and a specialist in firearm injury prevention, has documented that after the laws were changed, the risk of an Australian being killed by a gun fell by more than 50 percent. Australia’s gun homicide rate, 0.13 per 100,000 people, according to GunPolicy.org, is a tiny fraction of that of the United States (3.6 per 100,000 people). It should be noted that our gun homicide rates were already in decline, but the gun laws accelerated that slide.

In a 2010 paper, economists Andrew Leigh and Christine Neill found that the law change had led to a 65 percent decline in the rate of firearm suicides. Firearm homicides fell by 59 percent."

Australia had nearly 1 million personally owned hand guns before a ban was enacted in the mid-90s after a mass killing.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...8458dc-0c09-11e3-8974-f97ab3b3c677_story.html

Banning guns is the solution. Other countries have already proved this. People who oppose gun bans have no substantial proof for their cause, only anecdotes like, "oooo, the scawy robbers will now have guns!"

Jim Jeffries is a stand-up comedian who really hits the nail on the head on how ludicrous it is that we don't have gun control laws:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fP3HJVp3n9c

 

'Your 1st amendment gives me the right to say your 2nd amendment sucks dxxk'... Lol...

 

Banning guns is not a solution because its not going to happen. How hard is this to understand? So again, you are arguing a moot point. You're welcome to reference all the studies that prove gun bans lower violence. At the end of the day, gun owners are not giving up their guns and politicians will not touch complete gun bans with a 10 foot pole. End of story.

 

Seriously. If that mom had been smart enough to abort that kid, she'd still be alive today. Interesting fact, everyone who has ever had, or will ever have a child will die. How many people are we going to let die before we ban children?

 

Also, a strict ban on having children would prevent gun violence. If no one had children at all we'd completely eliminate gun violence worldwide within 100 years or so.

 

First off... apologies to the Hangout folks who don't normally have to see these political arguments that usually reside in the D&D.

Second... "Sure, it might stop a school shooting or two"