Idaho:

2-year old boy kills mother in Idaho Wal-Mart.

Reaches in her purse and shoots her with her own gun.

When interviewed, he said he was opposed to restrictions on carry
permits.

Lesson: Don't shop at Wal-Mart.

wrote:
Idaho:

2-year old boy kills mother in Idaho Wal-Mart.

Reaches in her purse and shoots her with her own gun.

When interviewed, he said he was opposed to restrictions on carry
permits.

Lesson: Don't shop at Wal-Mart.

Hi,
Her FIL said she is very careful person???...

On 1/18/2015 7:17 PM, wrote:
Idaho:

2-year old boy kills mother in Idaho Wal-Mart.

Reaches in her purse and shoots her with her own gun.

When interviewed, he said he was opposed to restrictions on carry
permits.

Lesson: Don't shop at Wal-Mart.

Other lesson: Get a holster, and keep closer
watch over your kids.

-
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

On Monday, January 19, 2015 at 8:26:14 AM UTC-5, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 1/18/2015 7:17 PM, wrote:
Idaho:

2-year old boy kills mother in Idaho Wal-Mart.

Reaches in her purse and shoots her with her own gun.

When interviewed, he said he was opposed to restrictions on carry
permits.

Lesson: Don't shop at Wal-Mart.

Other lesson: Get a holster, and keep closer
watch over your kids.

-

The odds of that happening are staggering. Kid has to get into zipped
closed compartment of bag, take out gun, gun has no safety or safety is
off, gun winds up pointed at mom not into empty space, hit is lethal, etc.
It was certainly a very bad idea to have the gun where the kid could get to
it, but she was very unlucky too. I guess the only good thing here was
that at least it didn't kill the kid, a bystander, etc.

On 1/19/2015 7:31 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Monday, January 19, 2015 at 8:26:14 AM UTC-5, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 1/18/2015 7:17 PM, wrote:
Idaho:

2-year old boy kills mother in Idaho Wal-Mart.

Reaches in her purse and shoots her with her own gun.

When interviewed, he said he was opposed to restrictions on carry
permits.

Lesson: Don't shop at Wal-Mart.

Other lesson: Get a holster, and keep closer
watch over your kids.

-

The odds of that happening are staggering. Kid has to get into zipped
closed compartment of bag, take out gun, gun has no safety or safety is
off, gun winds up pointed at mom not into empty space, hit is lethal, etc.
It was certainly a very bad idea to have the gun where the kid could get to
it, but she was very unlucky too. I guess the only good thing here was
that at least it didn't kill the kid, a bystander, etc.



I'm gonna watch this one and see how long it takes for some bottom
feeding attorney to cook up some crazed theory of liability on the part
of Walmart and files suit on behalf of the husband/father or some other
patron where he claims PTSD as a result of the incident.

wrote in message
...
Idaho:

2-year old boy kills mother in Idaho Wal-Mart.

Reaches in her purse and shoots her with her own gun.

When interviewed, he said he was opposed to restrictions on carry
permits.

Lesson: Don't shop at Wal-Mart.



That's about two months old, pickle nose.

In article ,
Unquestionably Confused wrote:

On 1/19/2015 7:31 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Monday, January 19, 2015 at 8:26:14 AM UTC-5, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 1/18/2015 7:17 PM, wrote:
Idaho:

2-year old boy kills mother in Idaho Wal-Mart.

Reaches in her purse and shoots her with her own gun.

When interviewed, he said he was opposed to restrictions on carry
permits.

Lesson: Don't shop at Wal-Mart.

Other lesson: Get a holster, and keep closer
watch over your kids.

-

The odds of that happening are staggering. Kid has to get into zipped
closed compartment of bag, take out gun, gun has no safety or safety is
off, gun winds up pointed at mom not into empty space, hit is lethal, etc.
It was certainly a very bad idea to have the gun where the kid could get to
it, but she was very unlucky too. I guess the only good thing here was
that at least it didn't kill the kid, a bystander, etc.



I'm gonna watch this one and see how long it takes for some bottom
feeding attorney to cook up some crazed theory of liability on the part
of Walmart and files suit on behalf of the husband/father or some other
patron where he claims PTSD as a result of the incident.

it's obviously a demonstration of bad parenting and CPS should have
immediately removed the child for its own protection

In article ,
wrote:

Idaho:

2-year old boy kills mother in Idaho Wal-Mart.

Reaches in her purse and shoots her with her own gun.

When interviewed, he said he was opposed to restrictions on carry
permits.

Lesson: Don't shop at Wal-Mart.

another one? twice in seven weeks defies the odds

On Mon, 19 Jan 2015 05:31:44 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

On Monday, January 19, 2015 at 8:26:14 AM UTC-5, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 1/18/2015 7:17 PM, wrote:
Idaho:

2-year old boy kills mother in Idaho Wal-Mart.

Reaches in her purse and shoots her with her own gun.

When interviewed, he said he was opposed to restrictions on carry
permits.

Lesson: Don't shop at Wal-Mart.

Other lesson: Get a holster, and keep closer
watch over your kids.

-

The odds of that happening are staggering. Kid has to get into zipped
closed compartment of bag,

Who says it was zipped or closed?

take out gun,

Who says he took it out?

gun has no safety or safety is

Revolvers have no safety.

off, gun winds up pointed at mom not into empty space, hit is lethal, etc.
It was certainly a very bad idea to have the gun where the kid could get to
it, but she was very unlucky too. I guess the only good thing here was
that at least it didn't kill the kid, a bystander, etc.

Malcom, I don't know about any other case recently. This is probably the
same one you saw before.

On Mon, 19 Jan 2015 14:24:43 -0500, wrote:

Revolvers have no safety.

And you know this how?

Sounds like you are clueless of revolvers and a few other things.

On Monday, January 19, 2015 at 2:24:46 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Mon, 19 Jan 2015 05:31:44 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

On Monday, January 19, 2015 at 8:26:14 AM UTC-5, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 1/18/2015 7:17 PM, wrote:
Idaho:

2-year old boy kills mother in Idaho Wal-Mart.

Reaches in her purse and shoots her with her own gun.

When interviewed, he said he was opposed to restrictions on carry
permits.

Lesson: Don't shop at Wal-Mart.

Other lesson: Get a holster, and keep closer
watch over your kids.

-

The odds of that happening are staggering. Kid has to get into zipped
closed compartment of bag,

Who says it was zipped or closed?


Several news reports I saw said that the purse was specially designed
to hold a gun, with a separate, zippered compartment that she used.



take out gun,

Who says he took it out?

According to the news, the police. Read and learn. But then you just
woke up to this story that most of us saw couple weeks ago.




gun has no safety or safety is

Revolvers have no safety.

Which is why I said not having a safety was one of the possibilites.




off, gun winds up pointed at mom not into empty space, hit is lethal, etc.
It was certainly a very bad idea to have the gun where the kid could get to
it, but she was very unlucky too. I guess the only good thing here was
that at least it didn't kill the kid, a bystander, etc.

Malcom, I don't know about any other case recently. This is probably the
same one you saw before.

No ****, Sherlock.

On Mon, 19 Jan 2015 15:37:09 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

According to the news, the police. Read and learn. But then you just
woke up to this story that most of us saw couple weeks ago.

Makes it old news here. Little research.

Two weeks ago was a long time ago ...

wrote in message

Revolvers have no safety.

*most* don't but some do . . .

http://www.forgottenweapons.com/earl...ebley-fosbery/

a manual safety lever on the left side of the grip could be engaged, which
would lock the trigger and the sliding frame both in place

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_%...son_Centennial

This revolver was made with a grip safety

http://www.tarnhelm.com/murabito.html

makes a retrofit kit

bg

On 1/19/2015 1:36 PM, Oren wrote:
On Mon, 19 Jan 2015 14:24:43 -0500, wrote:

Revolvers have no safety.

And you know this how?

Sounds like you are clueless of revolvers and a few other things.



He's not the only one...

Who said that it was a revolver?

Revolvers do not have manual safeties in the sense of something that can
switched on/off, unlike most semi-automatic pistols.

Most modern revolvers incorporate a hammer block safety which is
automatic. Prevents the revolver from being fired unless the trigger is
pulled, i.e. it won't discharge if dropped on the floor striking the hammer.

On 01/19/2015 05:31 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Monday, January 19, 2015 at 8:26:14 AM UTC-5, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 1/18/2015 7:17 PM, wrote:
Idaho:

2-year old boy kills mother in Idaho Wal-Mart.

Reaches in her purse and shoots her with her own gun.

When interviewed, he said he was opposed to restrictions on carry
permits.

Lesson: Don't shop at Wal-Mart.

Other lesson: Get a holster, and keep closer
watch over your kids.

-

The odds of that happening are staggering. Kid has to get into zipped
closed compartment of bag, take out gun, gun has no safety or safety is
off, gun winds up pointed at mom not into empty space, hit is lethal, etc.
It was certainly a very bad idea to have the gun where the kid could get to
it, but she was very unlucky too. I guess the only good thing here was
that at least it didn't kill the kid, a bystander, etc.


I wonder what the statistics on kids knocking over bottles in store,
folks slipping in the mess, and dying?

And, as Stormin' said, get a holster. Lucky she didn't reach in
to her purse looking for her keys and shoot herself. And, they
have awesome purses for concealed carry too.

"Todd" wrote in message
...
And, as Stormin' said, get a holster. Lucky she didn't reach in
to her purse looking for her keys and shoot herself. And, they
have awesome purses for concealed carry too.

That was an almost new purse designed for cancealed carry.

I am thinking that her husban got her that for Christmas,but could be wrong
about that part.

On Mon, 19 Jan 2015 18:13:34 -0800, Todd wrote:

And, as Stormin' said, get a holster. Lucky she didn't reach in
to her purse looking for her keys and shoot herself. And, they
have awesome purses for concealed carry too.

Flashbang Holster:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77TGGEYhPnM

On Mon, 19 Jan 2015 19:20:03 -0600, Unquestionably Confused
wrote:

On 1/19/2015 1:36 PM, Oren wrote:
On Mon, 19 Jan 2015 14:24:43 -0500, wrote:

Revolvers have no safety.

And you know this how?

Sounds like you are clueless of revolvers and a few other things.



He's not the only one...


True.

Who said that it was a revolver?


Not me

Revolvers do not have manual safeties in the sense of something that can
switched on/off, unlike most semi-automatic pistols.

Most modern revolvers incorporate a hammer block safety which is
automatic. Prevents the revolver from being fired unless the trigger is
pulled, i.e. it won't discharge if dropped on the floor striking the hammer.


I cocked a double-action (unloaded of course), dropped on the floor
and the hammer never dropped. Like you say; the trigger has to held
back (second action).

Single action revolvers need the hammer cocked, trigger pulled. It
will fire.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolver#Single-action

On 1/19/2015 8:31 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Monday, January 19, 2015 at 8:26:14 AM UTC-5, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 1/18/2015 7:17 PM, wrote:
Idaho:

2-year old boy kills mother in Idaho Wal-Mart.

Reaches in her purse and shoots her with her own gun.

When interviewed, he said he was opposed to restrictions on carry
permits.

Lesson: Don't shop at Wal-Mart.

Other lesson: Get a holster, and keep closer
watch over your kids.

-

The odds of that happening are staggering. Kid has to get into zipped
closed compartment of bag, take out gun, gun has no safety or safety is
off, gun winds up pointed at mom not into empty space, hit is lethal, etc.
It was certainly a very bad idea to have the gun where the kid could get to
it, but she was very unlucky too. I guess the only good thing here was
that at least it didn't kill the kid, a bystander, etc.


From that I'd be lead to suspect you of having no experience with
two-year-olds. For future reference, the little beasts are capable of
getting into anything and screwing with anything found anywhere. Mere
zippers and safeties are no hindrance. The kid has probably had lots of
exposure already to the fun bang-bang toys the big kids love so much.

On 1/19/2015 1:46 PM, Malcom "Mal" Reynolds wrote:
In article ,
wrote:

Idaho:

2-year old boy kills mother in Idaho Wal-Mart.

Reaches in her purse and shoots her with her own gun.

When interviewed, he said he was opposed to restrictions on carry
permits.

Lesson: Don't shop at Wal-Mart.

another one? twice in seven weeks defies the odds


That's right it is against the odds. _Today's_ kiddy shooter is a
five-year-old in Missouri who shot his little brother to death with the fun
toy his grandpa let him have access to.

On Tuesday, January 20, 2015 at 5:44:06 PM UTC-5, BenignBodger wrote:
On 1/19/2015 8:31 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Monday, January 19, 2015 at 8:26:14 AM UTC-5, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 1/18/2015 7:17 PM, wrote:
Idaho:

2-year old boy kills mother in Idaho Wal-Mart.

Reaches in her purse and shoots her with her own gun.

When interviewed, he said he was opposed to restrictions on carry
permits.

Lesson: Don't shop at Wal-Mart.

Other lesson: Get a holster, and keep closer
watch over your kids.

-

The odds of that happening are staggering. Kid has to get into zipped
closed compartment of bag, take out gun, gun has no safety or safety is
off, gun winds up pointed at mom not into empty space, hit is lethal, etc.
It was certainly a very bad idea to have the gun where the kid could get to
it, but she was very unlucky too. I guess the only good thing here was
that at least it didn't kill the kid, a bystander, etc.


From that I'd be lead to suspect you of having no experience with
two-year-olds. For future reference, the little beasts are capable of
getting into anything and screwing with anything found anywhere. Mere
zippers and safeties are no hindrance. The kid has probably had lots of
exposure already to the fun bang-bang toys the big kids love so much.

And I'd suspect you have no experience with probability analysis.

In article ,
trader_4 wrote:

On Tuesday, January 20, 2015 at 5:44:06 PM UTC-5, BenignBodger wrote:
On 1/19/2015 8:31 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Monday, January 19, 2015 at 8:26:14 AM UTC-5, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 1/18/2015 7:17 PM, wrote:
Idaho:

2-year old boy kills mother in Idaho Wal-Mart.

Reaches in her purse and shoots her with her own gun.

When interviewed, he said he was opposed to restrictions on carry
permits.

Lesson: Don't shop at Wal-Mart.

Other lesson: Get a holster, and keep closer
watch over your kids.

-

The odds of that happening are staggering. Kid has to get into zipped
closed compartment of bag, take out gun, gun has no safety or safety is
off, gun winds up pointed at mom not into empty space, hit is lethal,
etc.
It was certainly a very bad idea to have the gun where the kid could get
to
it, but she was very unlucky too. I guess the only good thing here was
that at least it didn't kill the kid, a bystander, etc.


From that I'd be lead to suspect you of having no experience with
two-year-olds. For future reference, the little beasts are capable of
getting into anything and screwing with anything found anywhere. Mere
zippers and safeties are no hindrance. The kid has probably had lots of
exposure already to the fun bang-bang toys the big kids love so much.

And I'd suspect you have no experience with probability analysis.

exactly what is the point of having concealed carry and not carrying it?

On Tuesday, January 20, 2015 at 11:41:04 PM UTC-5, Malcom Mal Reynolds wrote:
In article ,
trader_4 wrote:

On Tuesday, January 20, 2015 at 5:44:06 PM UTC-5, BenignBodger wrote:
On 1/19/2015 8:31 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Monday, January 19, 2015 at 8:26:14 AM UTC-5, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 1/18/2015 7:17 PM, wrote:
Idaho:

2-year old boy kills mother in Idaho Wal-Mart.

Reaches in her purse and shoots her with her own gun.

When interviewed, he said he was opposed to restrictions on carry
permits.

Lesson: Don't shop at Wal-Mart.

Other lesson: Get a holster, and keep closer
watch over your kids.

-

The odds of that happening are staggering. Kid has to get into zipped
closed compartment of bag, take out gun, gun has no safety or safety is
off, gun winds up pointed at mom not into empty space, hit is lethal,
etc.
It was certainly a very bad idea to have the gun where the kid could get
to
it, but she was very unlucky too. I guess the only good thing here was
that at least it didn't kill the kid, a bystander, etc.


From that I'd be lead to suspect you of having no experience with
two-year-olds. For future reference, the little beasts are capable of
getting into anything and screwing with anything found anywhere. Mere
zippers and safeties are no hindrance. The kid has probably had lots of
exposure already to the fun bang-bang toys the big kids love so much.

And I'd suspect you have no experience with probability analysis.

exactly what is the point of having concealed carry and not carrying it?

What's the point to your point, idiot?

In article ,
trader_4 wrote:

On Tuesday, January 20, 2015 at 11:41:04 PM UTC-5, Malcom Mal Reynolds wrote:
In article ,
trader_4 wrote:

On Tuesday, January 20, 2015 at 5:44:06 PM UTC-5, BenignBodger wrote:
On 1/19/2015 8:31 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Monday, January 19, 2015 at 8:26:14 AM UTC-5, Stormin Mormon
wrote:
On 1/18/2015 7:17 PM, wrote:
Idaho:

2-year old boy kills mother in Idaho Wal-Mart.

Reaches in her purse and shoots her with her own gun.

When interviewed, he said he was opposed to restrictions on carry
permits.

Lesson: Don't shop at Wal-Mart.

Other lesson: Get a holster, and keep closer
watch over your kids.

-

The odds of that happening are staggering. Kid has to get into
zipped
closed compartment of bag, take out gun, gun has no safety or safety
is
off, gun winds up pointed at mom not into empty space, hit is lethal,
etc.
It was certainly a very bad idea to have the gun where the kid could
get
to
it, but she was very unlucky too. I guess the only good thing here
was
that at least it didn't kill the kid, a bystander, etc.


From that I'd be lead to suspect you of having no experience with
two-year-olds. For future reference, the little beasts are capable of
getting into anything and screwing with anything found anywhere. Mere
zippers and safeties are no hindrance. The kid has probably had lots of
exposure already to the fun bang-bang toys the big kids love so much.

And I'd suspect you have no experience with probability analysis.

exactly what is the point of having concealed carry and not carrying it?

What's the point to your point, idiot?

oh goody, your back for another lesson

"BenignBodger" wrote in message
...

stuff snipped5

That's right it is against the odds. _Today's_ kiddy shooter is a
five-year-old in Missouri who shot his little brother to death with the
fun
toy his grandpa let him have access to.

I think it's fascinating that another poster here is so *sure* of himself
(and so ignorant) that he's willing to call someone an idiot about not
knowing probabilities of child gun injuries. He clearly doesn't seem to
have a inkling about the REAL number of kids who are killed and injured by
guns a year. Too much Fox Faux News watching, I guess. Even the very
conservative NY Daily News knows the sad truth about the *real*
probabilities:

http://www.nydailynews.com/life-styl...icle-1.1592703

The grim findings by Yale University researchers, published today in the
journal Pediatrics, estimate that firearm injuries sent 7,391 children to
the emergency room in 2009 — about 20 per day. Of these, 6% go on to die
from their injuries . . . Other data reported by the American Academy of
Pediatrics estimates over 3,000 additional children die from their injuries
before reaching the ER, putting the total number hurt or killed each year
above 10,000.

So approximately 2 kids are killed (or horribly maimed) a day from gun
injuries. Those statistics don't even include the poor little kid who has
to grow up knowing he killed his own mother. That's an unimaginable burden,
IMHO. Makes you wonder who the real idiots are that don't understand
probabilities?
I own quite a few guns but I wouldn't if there were kids in my house.
Ironically, most times I've had to use a gun to avoid being assaulted the
gun could have easily been unloaded. Only once was someone stupid enough to
advance against a pistol pointed at him and I had to fire into the ground to
convince him to retreat. Now I own a Taster and am much more likely to grab
that then a handgun.

--

Bobby G.

On Sun, 25 Jan 2015 22:06:23 -0500, "Robert Green"
wrote:

above 10,000.

So approximately 2 kids are killed (or horribly maimed) a day from gun
injuries. Those statistics don't even include the poor little kid who has
to grow up knowing he killed his own mother. That's an unimaginable burden,
IMHO. Makes you wonder who the real idiots are that don't understand
probabilities?
I own quite a few guns but I wouldn't if there were kids in my house.
Ironically, most times I've had to use a gun to avoid being assaulted the
gun could have easily been unloaded. Only once was someone stupid enough to
advance against a pistol pointed at him and I had to fire into the ground to
convince him to retreat. Now I own a Taster and am much more likely to grab
that then a handgun.



What I dont understand is why is this even posted to alt.home.repair? I
come to this group to read about home repair, and dont object to auto
repair, computer or electonic repair topics, or even a little silliness.
But this thread has no connection to this newsgroup at all.

Point made!

On Sunday, January 25, 2015 at 10:19:24 PM UTC-5, Robert Green wrote:
"BenignBodger" wrote in message
...

stuff snipped5

That's right it is against the odds. _Today's_ kiddy shooter is a
five-year-old in Missouri who shot his little brother to death with the
fun
toy his grandpa let him have access to.

I think it's fascinating that another poster here is so *sure* of himself
(and so ignorant) that he's willing to call someone an idiot about not
knowing probabilities of child gun injuries.

There you go again, either incapable of simple comprehension or lying.
I never said any such thing. I called a certain poster an idiot for
posting this:

"exactly what is the point of having concealed carry and not carrying it?"

He posted that in reponse to my post where I said that the odds of
what happened in Walmart with the two year old were staggering.

My exact retort was:

"What's the point to your point, idiot?"

And I stand by that, as his comment has no relation to what I said and the
poster is a well known village idiot troll.



He clearly doesn't seem to
have a inkling about the REAL number of kids who are killed and injured by
guns a year. Too much Fox Faux News watching, I guess. Even the very
conservative NY Daily News knows the sad truth about the *real*
probabilities:

http://www.nydailynews.com/life-styl...icle-1.1592703

The grim findings by Yale University researchers, published today in the
journal Pediatrics, estimate that firearm injuries sent 7,391 children to
the emergency room in 2009 -- about 20 per day. Of these, 6% go on to die
from their injuries . . . Other data reported by the American Academy of
Pediatrics estimates over 3,000 additional children die from their injuries
before reaching the ER, putting the total number hurt or killed each year
above 10,000.

So approximately 2 kids are killed (or horribly maimed) a day from gun
injuries.


Your problem is you want to swallow lib nonsense that is pretty much
fabricated. We have a two year old here. That Yale study included kids
and "adolescents" together. Apparently adolescents includes 19 year
old gangbangers. You think 17, 18, 19 year old gangbangers should be
conflated with a two year old? So there goes that "study".

Here from your beloved Washington Post, which is no friend of gun owners:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/p...-we-dont-know/

"And we know that 102 people killed in these accidental gun deaths in 2011 were younger than 18, according to Vernick, with half of these children younger than age 13."

So, you have 50 kids younger than 13 in a country of 300 million. That's
already extrmely small odds. Take it down to the 2 year old toddler, and
it's more like one or two in 300 million and it's *exactly* what I said,
ie staggering odds. To put it in perspective, the odds of winning the
Powerball lottery are 2X better. Capiche?

For further confirmation:

"Citing CDC statistics, ABC reports that 98 "kids under age 18" died from accidental shootings in 2010".


Those statistics don't even include the poor little kid who has
to grow up knowing he killed his own mother. That's an unimaginable burden,
IMHO. Makes you wonder who the real idiots are that don't understand
probabilities?

I don't have to wonder. I know it's you. Either you don't understand
statistics or you deliberately choose to lie and misrepresent, take
your pick.


I own quite a few guns but I wouldn't if there were kids in my house.

Typical hypocritical lib. You come in here at every opportunity, lying
about guns like a typical anti-gun nut. But then it turns out it's
perfectly OK for you to not only have a gun, but to have a carry permit.
It's just the rest of us that shouldn't.



Ironically, most times I've had to use a gun to avoid being assaulted the
gun could have easily been unloaded. Only once was someone stupid enough to
advance against a pistol pointed at him and I had to fire into the ground to
convince him to retreat. Now I own a Taster and am much more likely to grab
that then a handgun.

--

Bobby G.


What does the taster do? Offer free samples of food to the perp
in lieu of shooting you? Idiot.

In article ,
trader_4 wrote:

On Sunday, January 25, 2015 at 10:19:24 PM UTC-5, Robert Green wrote:
"BenignBodger" wrote in message
...

stuff snipped5

That's right it is against the odds. _Today's_ kiddy shooter is a
five-year-old in Missouri who shot his little brother to death with the
fun
toy his grandpa let him have access to.

I think it's fascinating that another poster here is so *sure* of himself
(and so ignorant) that he's willing to call someone an idiot about not
knowing probabilities of child gun injuries.

There you go again, either incapable of simple comprehension or lying.
I never said any such thing. I called a certain poster an idiot for
posting this:

"exactly what is the point of having concealed carry and not carrying it?"

He posted that in reponse to my post where I said that the odds of
what happened in Walmart with the two year old were staggering.

My exact retort was:

"What's the point to your point, idiot?"

And I stand by that, as his comment has no relation to what I said and the
poster is a well known village idiot troll.

of course you were unable to answer my question





He clearly doesn't seem to
have a inkling about the REAL number of kids who are killed and injured by
guns a year. Too much Fox Faux News watching, I guess. Even the very
conservative NY Daily News knows the sad truth about the *real*
probabilities:

http://www.nydailynews.com/life-styl...-u-s-kids-year
ly-study-article-1.1592703

The grim findings by Yale University researchers, published today in the
journal Pediatrics, estimate that firearm injuries sent 7,391 children to
the emergency room in 2009 -- about 20 per day. Of these, 6% go on to die
from their injuries . . . Other data reported by the American Academy of
Pediatrics estimates over 3,000 additional children die from their injuries
before reaching the ER, putting the total number hurt or killed each year
above 10,000.

So approximately 2 kids are killed (or horribly maimed) a day from gun
injuries.


Your problem is you want to swallow lib nonsense that is pretty much
fabricated. We have a two year old here. That Yale study included kids
and "adolescents" together. Apparently adolescents includes 19 year
old gangbangers. You think 17, 18, 19 year old gangbangers should be
conflated with a two year old? So there goes that "study".

Here from your beloved Washington Post, which is no friend of gun owners:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/p...-often-do-chil
dren-in-the-u-s-unintentionally-shoot-and-kill-people-we-dont-know/

"And we know that 102 people killed in these accidental gun deaths in 2011
were younger than 18, according to Vernick, with half of these children
younger than age 13."

So, you have 50 kids younger than 13 in a country of 300 million. That's
already extrmely small odds. Take it down to the 2 year old toddler, and
it's more like one or two in 300 million and it's *exactly* what I said,
ie staggering odds. To put it in perspective, the odds of winning the
Powerball lottery are 2X better. Capiche?

For further confirmation:

"Citing CDC statistics, ABC reports that 98 "kids under age 18" died from
accidental shootings in 2010".


Those statistics don't even include the poor little kid who has
to grow up knowing he killed his own mother. That's an unimaginable
burden,
IMHO. Makes you wonder who the real idiots are that don't understand
probabilities?

I don't have to wonder. I know it's you. Either you don't understand
statistics or you deliberately choose to lie and misrepresent, take
your pick.


I own quite a few guns but I wouldn't if there were kids in my house.

Typical hypocritical lib. You come in here at every opportunity, lying
about guns like a typical anti-gun nut. But then it turns out it's
perfectly OK for you to not only have a gun, but to have a carry permit.
It's just the rest of us that shouldn't.



Ironically, most times I've had to use a gun to avoid being assaulted the
gun could have easily been unloaded. Only once was someone stupid enough
to
advance against a pistol pointed at him and I had to fire into the ground
to
convince him to retreat. Now I own a Taster and am much more likely to
grab
that then a handgun.

--

Bobby G.


What does the taster do? Offer free samples of food to the perp
in lieu of shooting you? Idiot.