Originally Posted by MikeOMania (Post 20342731)

A 2y old one? WTF??????

Originally Posted by Rochard (Post 20342739)

Anyone ever notice a lot of this crap goes down at Wal Mart?

Originally Posted by 420 (Post 20342752)

How do we know it was an accident?

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam (Post 20342740)

I suppose he opened the safety first then pulled the trigger :upsidedow

Why would she need a CCW in "The shooting occurred in the Wal-Mart in Hayden, Idaho, a town about 40 miles northeast of Spokane, Washington." anyway?

Lot of bears in the WalMart there?

Originally Posted by directfiesta (Post 20342766)

So sad ....

If only there would have been another 2 year old " good " kid with a gun , he could have stopped it !

:2 cents:

Originally Posted by blackmonsters (Post 20342757)

Maybe it was self defense because the mom was reaching for the gun too.

:2 cents:

Originally Posted by crockett (Post 20342721)

If only the mother had a gun, or perhaps if one of the customers had a gun they could of taken out the toddler.

Police: Boy, 2, accidentally kills mom in Hayden, Idaho Wal-Mart - CBS News

Originally Posted by sandman! (Post 20342796)

your an idiot :2 cents::2 cents:

Originally Posted by Rochard (Post 20342739)

Anyone ever notice a lot of this crap goes down at Wal Mart?

Originally Posted by MiamiBoyz (Post 20342750)

This brought a smile to my face

Originally Posted by bronco67 (Post 20342758)

Idaho...makes sense.

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis (Post 20342801)

Originally Posted by sandman! (Post 20342796)

your an idiot :2 cents::2 cents:

Originally Posted by bronco67 (Post 20342758)

Idaho...makes sense.

Originally Posted by crockett (Post 20342721)

If only the mother had a gun, or perhaps if one of the customers had a gun they could of taken out the toddler.

Police: Boy, 2, accidentally kills mom in Hayden, Idaho Wal-Mart - CBS News

Originally Posted by aka123 (Post 20343065)

Why people keep their guns loaded? Isn't it enough that there are ammo in the magazine?

In hunting it is generally advised to unload the gun even when you jump across a stream, climb over a fence, etc. And then other people carry loaded guns in their everyday tasks?

Originally Posted by aka123 (Post 20343065)

Why people keep their guns loaded? Isn't it enough that there are ammo in the magazine?

In hunting it is generally advised to unload the gun even when you jump across a stream, climb over a fence, etc. And then other people carry loaded guns in their everyday tasks?

Originally Posted by crockett (Post 20343189)

Because many people whom require carrying a gun to feel safe, tend to fantasize that they will end up in some Westren shoot out or Rambo fight scene where that extra second required to chamber a round will make all the diffrence in the world. These people are of course irresponsible and shouldn't be carrying a gun in the first place.

There is also the chance that she was carrying a revolver of some sort so only the safety had to be turned off and trigger pulled. Either way she was obviously not responsible enough to carry a gun as she either let the toddler fiddle around in her purse with a loaded gun or she left her purse with the child out of sight long enough for the kid to get it.

Originally Posted by PR_Glen (Post 20343198)

you think a 2 year old could pull the trigger on a revolver with one hand in the purse?

Originally Posted by tony286 (Post 20343277)

I dont care if people want guns but there should be a 8 hr class every Saturday for 8 weeks and a test you have to pass to own a gun. These people aren't taught to respect the tool they have and that's why stupid shit like this happens. Also the 8 week class would scare away the crazies and out of anger killings.

Originally Posted by crockett (Post 20342760)

This is yet another case that shows people whom carry guns for self defense are more likely to die from their own gun than someone else's.

Originally Posted by crockett (Post 20343583)

I have my Concealed weapon permit and of course took the class required which in my opinion was a joke. It seemed the entire class was about how to cover your own ass if you shoot someone and where you can and can't carry.

There was not much gun safety training and next to no hands on testing. The hands on was everyone lining up at the gun range to shoot a 22 cal revolver. The instructor actually held the gun and you pulled the trigger twice. It was a joke. It was bam bam you hit the target you passed..

Originally Posted by AaronM (Post 20343692)

That's some serious horse shit you're spewing there son.

Kindly do some actual research before spouting off random inaccurate crap like this. :2 cents:

Originally Posted by crockett (Post 20343709)

So how can you call that BS?

Originally Posted by crockett (Post 20343709)

It's pretty common sense to see that owning a gun increases the chance you will be shot by that gun.

Originally Posted by crockett (Post 20343709)

Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed - science-in-society - 06 October 2009 - New Scientist

Overall, Branas's study found that people who carried guns were 4.5 times as likely to be shot and 4.2 times as likely to get killed compared with unarmed citizens. When the team looked at shootings in which victims had a chance to defend themselves, their odds of getting shot were even higher.

Now think of what you are arguing Aaron..

It's pretty common sense to see that owning a gun increases the chance you will be shot by that gun. If you don't own a gun, it's pretty hard to shoot yourself with out one now isn't it? You can't accidendly shoot yourself or someone else if you don't have a gun.

Clear example is the case this topic is about. If the woman wasn't carrying a gun she would be alive right now.

So how can you call that BS?

Originally Posted by AaronM (Post 20343740)

Because of this part right here....




Nowhere in that article does it say that owning a gun increases your chances of being shot by that gun. The title seems accurate though. "Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed"

One thing it's saying that does make sense is this:

"While it may be that the type of people who carry firearms are simply more likely to get shot, it may be that guns give a sense of empowerment that causes carriers to overreact in tense situations, or encourages them to visit neighbourhoods they probably shouldn't, Branas speculates."


Then there's this:

"We don't have an answer as to whether guns are protective or perilous," Branas says. "This study is a beginning."


So, you're not only "putting words into their mouth" but you're also assuming this research is accurate when those researching it say it's not complete.

Obviously if there's no gun around, you're not going to get shot. That's a pretty dumb thing to even bring into the conversation. :2 cents:

Originally Posted by crockett (Post 20343752)

You can try to twist words if you want, but basic facts are basic facts. If you have a gun, being own it, carry it or store it in your closet you are more at risk of being shot or someone else getting shot by that gun than if you don't own a gun.

Originally Posted by MetaMan (Post 20343920)

Aaron you're wrong again. Get over it.

Originally Posted by crockett (Post 20342760)

[T]his woman obviously had the gun cocked and loaded as a 2 yo wouldn't have been able to shoot the gun by just fiddling around with it in her purse. This is yet another case that shows people whom carry guns for self defense are more likely to die from their own gun than someone else's. ...

Originally Posted by AaronM (Post 20343930)

I am huh?

That's interesting because I quoted the article and quoted the OP and neither of them are saying the same thing.

Where exactly am I wrong about that?