And the winner dies
by windchime (Member) - published: May 20, 2011
Word Count: 682 Word Bytes: 4237 Viewed: 793 times
Category - Opinions
© Copyright by windchime

0.00

(0 votes)

You must login to vote

A little while ago, on the yahoo page, a news blurb appeared briefly, then disappeared rather rapidly. It told of a five-year old shooting his/her four-year old brother, and killing him, in Texas.
This is not news, one can argue, as in Texas, there are probably far more guns than people, and an occurrence like this one might possibly be quite common. And when something is possibly common, then it loses the possibility of being shocking.
I happen to think that a five-year old killing a four-year old is, primarily, shocking. But that’s just me.
I ran this news item by the few people sitting at computer terminals in the back office of the nursing station where I am based.
One of them, a third-year medical student, quipped that he lived in Texas, and that guns are the “culture” there. He was about to continue speaking when I interrupted him, quite passionately, by forbidding him to use the word “culture” next to the word “gun”, as this is obscene.
I went on to explain that “culture” is something that is nurtured, grows, and expands; that “culture”, whether it is bacterial, or arts-related, is a word which is reserved for designating something proliferative, something which enhances life.
Guns do not enhance life.
There are many other word choices for guns: gun habit, gun obsession, gun passion, gun need, gun want, gun addiction, gun worship, you get the idea. Just not “gun culture”, because it is a misappropriation of the word “culture”.
Now, if a five-year old killed a sibling with a rifle, it means this: the rifle was accessible; the rifle was held and pointed at the victim; the rifle was discharged of its ammunition by the pulling of a trigger.
How does a five-year old know to follow these steps to shooting someone?
An adult shot someone, or pointed a rifle at someone, and the child is imitating what the child saw.
If the adult had shot a target object, or an animal, the five-year old would not have chosen a sibling as a target, but a rabbit or a tin can.
Many would say this was a tragic accident.
I will say this was a tragic upbringing of children.
So much for the idealistic part of my opinion.

Now for the realistic part of my opinion.
The NRA and other groups are glued to the Second Amendment which allows Americans the right to keep and bear arms. Now, your Second Amendment, at the time of its adoption into your Constitution, allowed your citizens to keep and bear arms, because this would facilitate the formation of a militia in case the British, or others, attacked your country. The United States would be well able to defend itself if every citizen could keep and bear arms.
Okay, but that was almost 250 years ago. If anybody attacks now, it will be by bombing, and not “arms” as it might have been then. Which means that all citizens bearing arms would be useless, and, for the most part, dead.
Keeping and bearing arms, as it was intended in 1776, is no longer relevant in 2011. But the Second Amendment continues to protect gun owners because the interpretation of said Amendment now extends to guns for fun.
It would be time to amend the Amendment, in a way which restricts its interpretation, rather than expanding on its interpretation.
The American Academy of Pediatrics thinks that no guns in the house is the most reliable way of preventing gun-related injuries in children.
Pediatricians are asking parents if they have guns in their houses. There are State Legislatures at work for laws that would penalize doctors asking this question.
There is the question of violating the doctors‘ First Amendment rights.
Constitutional lawyers seem to be siding with the doctors.
For the moment, there is a little hope for a little more safety.

But then, ideals and realism both notwithstanding, children are continuing to kill children with rifles.

Is this civilized?
Or is it barbaric?

Are Americans civilized or are Americans barbaric?

Choose!

Lucie Adams
May 2011

------
Of all known institutions, I attend only two: church, in my heart, and school, in yours. Both are subject to demolition. - Lucie Adams, 2007
It is only for poetry to know how many stanzas fit into one caress. - Lucie Adams, 2008

Related Items

Claiming acclaim

Glimpses of parenting

Massacre

A spade is a spade

Thinking, again

On wanting and working the want into get

Friend me then friend me not

The verb "to unfriend"

Judgment daze

Of gods and politicians

More by windchime »

Comments

The following comments are for "And the winner dies"
by windchime

taking issue
Lucie, your opinion is an urban one. I will hasten to add that I don't own a gun because I have no use for one and know .. only too well ... that when one owns a gun they have a false sense of security which doesn't accurately reflect their ability to either survive or defend themselves.

I've lived where guns were part of the culture and not in the least bit evil. They were crucial if one wanted to survive as a meat eater and were .. for the most part .. treated with respect ...

I don't believe anyone who lives in an urban setting and has never lived off the land is able to comprehend the idea that guns can be good ... I also believe that trotting out the latest tragedy does nothing to validate a point of view.

Now that I've posted this I'm going back outside to work on my yard and enjoy the beautiful day we've been blessed with.

( Posted by: Pen [Member] On: May 20, 2011 )

guns
very thought provoking lucie. amen!

( Posted by: cmsmuse [Member] On: May 20, 2011 )

Pen...
...you missed the point of my opinion piece.

It discusses rifles and pre-school children.

Not urban dwellers versus rural dwellers.

Perhaps you would like to reread this?

BTW, somewhere in Texas, a five-year old child has killed a four-year old sibling. You call the focus of my piece "trotting out the latest tragedy"???

Ha!

For a woman whose 4 pregnancies resulted in one viable birth, that's amazing!

Just when I thought it couldn't get worse, here you are giving little children the same value as dogshit.

I'm surprised, Pen, but mostly, dismayed.

( Posted by: windchime [Member] On: May 21, 2011 )

second amendment
Lucie,

very thought provoking. However, our second amendment right is not so we can protect ourselves from foreign invaders; our military should do that. It is so we can protect ourselves from our own government.

As for a gun "culture", we used to have responsible people who sold fire arms to other responsible people. Now we have huge gun shows that sell anything to anybody. I am a firm believer in my right to own fire arms. However, in my opinion that right has be bastardized by many groups, NRA among them.

I was a member of a shooting club when I was younger, for about 3 years. We met once a week, at night at an indoor firing range. We always watched a safety film, listened to the instructor reinforce what being responsible means, then we were taught how to shoot at targets, had competitions, won badges and pins....and my father, brothers and I were deemed Life Time members of the NRA.

Fast forward, 1986, NRA sends me mail wanting me to become a member. I wrote back and sent a photo copy of my NRA card, told them I am already a life time member. They wrote back to say that card was no longer honored by NRA....

So now I am glad to have my second amendment right to keep and bear arms, against the NRA if need be.

Now, when children shoot each other it is because their parents are irresponsible idiots, and they should be held accountable for their neglect. Doesn't bring back a dead child, but maybe its about time we ENFORCE accountability and responsibility.

Nice to read your thoughts

BW

( Posted by: BWOz [Member] On: May 21, 2011 )

in reply
Lucie ... perhaps you should focus on what you wrote ...

Quote:

He was about to continue speaking when I interrupted him, quite passionately, by forbidding him to use the word “culture” next to the word “gun”, as this is obscene.

and
Quote:

Guns do not enhance life

I disagree and kept my comment on point .. I could have spiraled off into personal attacks based on my knowledge of you ... but .. hey .. that's your venue and you are welcome to it.

( Posted by: Pen [Member] On: May 21, 2011 )

on guns
Thanks, Brian, for educating me about your Second Amendment.

As for "gun culture", it's still obscene, in this case:

when a 5-year old child holds and points a rifle, and then shoots it, successfully killing a 4-year old child, it is not the product of culture. Why not? Because doing this before learning how to tie a shoelace, is NOT "culture";

when a 4-year old child dies of a rifle-shot wound, inflicted by a 5-year old sibling, it is not the product of "culture". Why not? Because being shot dead before knowing how to do up your buttons, is NOT "culture".

I will always maintain that the word "gun" should never be used next to the word "culture" because it is fundamentally wrong.

I will always interrupt anybody who tries to shove "gun culture" down my throat.

Pen, your comments to me on my opinion piece are a great tribute to you. You can't read and you don't get the point made. And you can't stay away from demeaning remarks such as "trotting out the latest tragedy" when referring to my point. Disagreeing is one thing. Degrading is quite another. Hence, my response to you.

May everybody who reads this thread be in awe and sacred praise of you, Pen, as you have, once again, shown YOUR true colours.

Please do feel free to spiral off into personal attacks based on your knowledge of me.

You attack so well.

You must be awesome with a rifle.

I'm sure you're "rarin' to go", so go at me! Tell all these people here what a monster I am! I'm sure they will agree with you. And bow down to your wisdom.

In the meantime, perhaps you would like to practice commenting on the actual writing of the actual piece.

But then, perhaps not, because it wouldn't be about you anymore. And anything that isn't about you is such an awful bore.

Quite honestly, as a reader, when something here is "over my head", I refrain from commenting on it, mostly because I know that my limited intellect will contribute nothing to the writer.

That's the difference between you and me, Pen. You know everything all the time about everything.

And you are always right.

( Posted by: windchime [Member] On: May 21, 2011 )

Brian...
Enforcing accountability and responsibility...but how?

If you give the death penalty to the parents because their five-year old shot their four-year old dead, then who gets custody of the five-year old?

( Posted by: windchime [Member] On: May 21, 2011 )

Tina
It appears that for you, my opinion piece has achieved its goal, which was to provoke thought.

It also appears that a thought-provoking piece such as this one may have provoked the ire of those who may not be so "thoughtful"...

( Posted by: windchime [Member] On: May 21, 2011 )

November 2008
Picture I took, near Fenway Park of a sign on a storefront:

"WE SELL GUNS!"
"NO ID REQUIRED" "NO BACKGROUND CHECKS" "CRIMINALS & TERRORISTS WELCOME"

with an illustration of 2 rifles.

All in contrasting colours of neon.

This is supposed to be funny?

I guess my sense of humour is lacking...

( Posted by: windchime [Member] On: May 21, 2011 )

on enhancing life
Laugh if you want to but a Feng Shui practitioner once helped an infertile couple "get pregnant".
How?
By advising them to remove the rifle which they were storing under the same bed where they made love.

Guns do not enhance life.

( Posted by: windchime [Member] On: May 21, 2011 )

enforcing accountability
Lucie,

I think the comment about the Fenway Park picture is part of the answer as to how do we enforce responsibiliy and accountability.

The vendor who posted that sign should have been cited and heavily fined (or even given jail time) for intent to aid in a felony, it is a felony for a criminal to own a fire arm. Second, the city should have revoked the business license. Third, the vendor should have been given mandated community service for about a year's time -- during normal business hours to further enforce what being accountable is about.

As for the parents of the children you mentioned, their lack of responsibility could easily be noted as a case of neglect --- I don't know if that happened or not.

There are many examples, here in southern Arizona, where similar events took place. Look at the spastic creep Loughner who shot a congress woman, killed 6 or 7 others and wounded many. Our legal systems says he is innocent until proven guilty....sometime the proof is obvious. But, should he be aloud to plea "innocent" of the charges? In pleading innocent he is automatically given a jury trial, instead of a trial by judge. It sells news papers and keeps the TV talking heads employed.

As for "gun culture", I agree with you that the definition of culture has nothing to do with guns. Culture has more to do with a society's values and interests; this would be art, education, religion, and a lot of stuff tied in. Certainly, our constitutional rights are part of our culture, not our entire culture.

The easy answer is to restrict gun ownership, but where do we draw the line? As a full fledged believer in the second amendment, and a RESPONSIBLE AND ACCOUNTABLE gun owner I am willing to state for any record:

1. Fully automatic weapons are designed for one purpose -- to kill things rapidly. There is no valid reason for their existence outside of military applications.

2. Responsible gun dealers should work endlessly to weed out, by legal methods, those jackasses like you mention posted the stupid add.

3. Finally, guns are responsible for senseless deaths just like automobiles, airplanes, trucks and buses are. If we must have training and a license to pilot those vehicles we should also be mandated to have training and be licensed to pilot our fire arms.

Boy, won't that get me on the NRA's hit list?

Well, very good thought provoking subject, and yes very flamable at the same time. But I also believe in the first amendment of free exercise of religious belief, free speech, and freedom of the press.

There should be some clarification: we all have the right to be idiots -- but not when it has potential to cause harm (or to advertise to sell fire arms to criminals, that is a felony by intent).

BW

( Posted by: BWOz [Member] On: May 21, 2011 )

as a matter of fact
[quote]You must be awesome with a rifle.]/quote]

I'm much better with a bow.

( Posted by: Pen [Member] On: May 21, 2011 )

Brian on guns
Your three points, as you state them, are full of pragmatism and common sense.

So, what do you think of the position of the Constitutional Lawyers as regards to the First Amendment rights of pediatricians?

Are you okay with the First Amendment rights of the pediatricians overriding the Second Amendment rights of gun owners?

Which three States are the ones, again, enacting legislature to forbid pediatricians asking parents if they own guns? I know Florida is one, but I'm not sure about the other two...

( Posted by: windchime [Member] On: May 21, 2011 )

pediatricians
I don't think that pediatricians asking patients (kids) if their parent owns a gun is a free speech issue. From what I've read, and agree with to some degree, it boarders on invasion of privacy in the sense that doctors are probably not fully qualified to counsel people about gun safety. However, doctors do report certain patient information to insurance companies. I think that is the overriding concern, that insurance companies will start hiking up premiums on anyone who ownes a gun.

If that were to happen it still wouldn't keep kids, or anyone, from whatever hazards there are with having guns in the home. It certainly won't prevent any deaths caused by accidental or intended shootings.

It is another way to try to force some responsibility and accountability. But as I wrote earlier, until sensible laws are mandated, like taking safety training, required trigger locks, and licenses, the same issues will be argued over.

And the free market gun trade (including gun shows) should have stricter limitations.

Like I said, I'm no fan of the NRA -- whose used to sponsor programs like I was enrolled in as a kid (I think I was 11 years old). Once NRA changed from a family oriented organization to that of a political action group, that seems to be when common sense on this issued disappeared.

It seems that we are told to believe you either favor guns or you don't --- I believe there are many more responsible, sensible people (gun owners and non gun owners) who could head the debate than what we hear about on the news. Where are those people?

( Posted by: BWOz [Member] On: May 22, 2011 )

Brian
Thank you for your interest in this and your knowledge of the issue, far better than mine, and your willingness to discuss and argue it.

I'm one of those people, Brian, neither favouring nor disfavouring guns (only opposed to the usage of the word "culture"...same as I would be opposed to the use of the expression "my strawberry development in the garden, as strawberries ARE a "culture"...).

I favour both freedom and safety, and have long thought that being unfit to be a parent needs "fixing", in many ways, one of them being gun responsibility.

At five, a child knows and understands very little of the death of a human being and at five, no child should have to answer for the death of another child, younger than himself.

The shooting, whether intentional or accidental, has the same outcome: a four-year old is dead. In a few years, there will be a person who will say "I shot my four-year old brother dead with a rifle, when I was five."

How will that statement be made? With guilt? With pride? With abject sadness? With mocking bravado? There are endless possibilities, as there are endless possibilities in the upbringing of this child.

Having idiots for parents is nobody's fault, but living a scarred life becomes somebody's responsibility.

Will this child become a serial killer? Maybe, maybe not. Will he become a buddhist monk? Who knows? Will there be need for Psychiatry? Possibly.

In the meantime, everything is in place for that child becoming an irresponsible, stupid parent on day.

And this is what I deplore. Generational stupidity, allowed to foment, unchecked and insufficiently legislated...

( Posted by: windchime [Member] On: May 22, 2011 )

as for doctors...
Doctors have long thought, and continue to think, that the more they know about their patients, the better able they are to treat them effectively and efficiently. Knowing about guns in the house is part of that knowledge base.

Parents of children who come to consult with a child having suffered a gun-related injury, well, they're not saying, because they're guilty of being stupid enough to leave the rifle where a child can find asnd use it.

And they don't want to look stupid. And they don't want social services removing their child, if it has happened more than once. And they just want to forget about it.

So they hate beiung asked. To a point where they want the asking to be made illegal.

Doctors know about medicine, not guns. But they also know about ethics. Enough to be allowed to ask, I think.

You can't MRI gun ownership or find it in a blood test...

( Posted by: windchime [Member] On: May 22, 2011 )

Associated thoughts on guns
Hi Lucie.

You wrote a great opinion piece which I disagree with.

First, It is not as common as you think that little children shoot each other with guns. There are 300 million of us here south of you and all kinds of crazy, shocking things happen all the time. Tragedy abounds.

For the record, I am not a member of the NRA,yet. I'm not a member of any other organized group either.

More to the point of gun defense. I believe in (strongly) the second amendment and interpret it to mean self defense of my family, my friends, and my country against all enemies or would be evildoers.

I own at least 10 guns, some of which are handguns(hand cannons) most are for hunting. I can no longer run from would be bad guys, so foul language probably won't stop them. I live out in the country so police response is limited if there is trouble.
My guns are the best possible deterrent (aside from prayer) to shoo away unwanted visitors. There is nothing like a 44 mag Smith@Wesson 8 3/4 in stainless steel barrel pointed at someone who really knows how to use it.

As far as national defense goes, I am of the opinion that countries who would have attacked,bombed us in the past (Soviet Russia, Communist China) would not have done so for two simple reasons. One, they would be destroying their main food source, and two, there are millions and millions of us with guns who are willing to defend our liberty.

Sadly, our nation is now led by a gang of thugs I am much more concerned with. The only reason they don't rule by decree now is those of us who would rebel if they dare try.

Back to your point about how a child could functionally shoot another child or anyone else for that matter, life has been cheapened the past X number of years. Cheapened by what we watch on television, cheapened by whom we associate with, by the drug culture, the alcohol culture and irresponsible parents who either do not teach their children of the lethality of guns or who do not properly store them in their homes. It is always shocking to me to hear of these shootings, but no more so than to hear of people operating automobiles under the influence of alcohol, killing and maiming folks like me, and getting fined a few bucks to go on the road again to kill and maim more innocent folks. Does that make any sense?

Good to read you again, Lucie.

charlie

( Posted by: williamhill [Member] On: May 22, 2011 )

doctors and culture
Lucie,

As for culture, I guess the true definition can be argued. But is it also incorrect to say, for example, a sport is part of a culture? Say hockey, football, baseball, skiing? We refer to our food as part of our culture just as we do art and literature. Since the second amendment is written into our constitution, in that regard one could say that gun ownership is part of our American culture.

As for doctors wanting this information, like I stated earlier they have an obligation to report certain things to authorities and insurance companies, like if a child (or anyone) is treated for excessive wounds, bruises and such. There should be a line of questioning for the purpose of possibly reporting "suspected" abuse, which could be argued surpasses the doctor/patient confindentiality guidelines.

What I've read about the Florida issue is that some doctors argue that merely owning a gun is a potential medical risk. One article states that guns in the home are 43 percent more likely to cause injury or death to family members -- like that is reason enough to be reported BEFORE any injury or death can occur.

Then it leads to other discussion about whether people who are more likely to develop diseases (sickle cell, diabetes, cancer) should be singled out before any such occurrence. True, those medical issues are inherited, nothing that can be avoided if you possess that DNA.

But I've heard of other arguments that people who end up sick due to their own lifestyle choices can be rejected by insurance companies, and some doctors refuse treatment for patients that they believe have developed illness due to lifestyle behaviors.

So, it doesn't leave much wiggle room in the debate. But I still think there are more common sense options that don't involve getting doctors, insurance companies, and political lobbyists involved in what we see as some basic freedoms we enjoy.

I believe, whether I like it or not, that within the next 20 years or so our first and second amendment rights will be whittled down to whatever the government defines as what "freedom" means.

BW

( Posted by: BWOz [Member] On: May 22, 2011 )

Charlie
Like Brian said so well, we are told to believe we either favour guns or don't.

It's neither for me.

I neither favour nor disfavour them.

I do believe that gun ownership stems from necessity (for those who must kill their food), from utility (for those who must defend whom/what they need to defend) and from desire (for those who must shoot)

I am not passing judgement on any of those people for any of their reasons.

I am only saying that guns do not enhance life and are not an item of "culture".

Our society has incorporated guns into "culture" as it is evidenced by museums which display guns for a price of admission, for example, and so, it is easy to argue that yes, guns are part of the "culture".

Maybe for everyone else, but not for me. I find the use of the two words together, objectionable.

It's an opinion. Opinions are made to be argued, and disagreed with.

My only lethal weapon is my car.

But I don't drive drunk, so it's fairly safe, I suppose.

Obtaining a license for parenting might be what's needed, for people who own guns and have small children, and have no common sense.

( Posted by: windchime [Member] On: May 22, 2011 )

Brian
The word "culture" IMO, is a subtitle, as it were, of "civilization". A civilization has its philosophy, its culture, its mores, its politics, its sports, its educational institutions, etc. (the assemblage of what makes up the "civilized" society).

When school kids go out on a field trip, they will either go out on a cultural activity like a play at a theater, or they will go out to a sporting event like a pro soccer game.

So no, I don't think "sport" is part of "culture", not the way I understand it at least.

I worry more about "uncivilized" behaviours within a society that purports to be civilized.

I remember writing an article where civilization/colonization were discussed in a comment thread. I think I've left it here, too...

But that's another thing altogether: are the colonizing peoples more civilized than those they colonize?

Hmmm...

( Posted by: windchime [Member] On: May 22, 2011 )

It would depend
If you believe that God created man/civilization and believe He also created good and evil then there is moral justification to colonize. If one does not believe in manifest destiny then all bets are off.

I do not believe we are able to moralize without spirituality.

Here is where things get really tricky for me.
If I had more faith in my belief, (that God controls and directs my actions and responses) then I am confident He would feed me, clothe me, and provide for all my needs and desires as long as my heart was pure. However, I am lacking that certain amount of faith I so believe in.

When it comes to guns, I was taught at an early age to respect them and handle them carefully. I have a conceal carry permit that is good in 35 states. I took a class and it cost me 300 bucks to prove I was responsible enough to carry a pistol concealed.

When I was 10 years old I threw a 7 ft long hickory spear at my brother striking him just below the left eye socket. He was in the hospital for weeks over our innocent game of cowboys and Indians. Lost a good part of his vision in that eye forever. As he and I stumbled to the house after the incident, we made up a story about him running into a tree. That story stuck for years, at least until my parents could no longer beat my ass. You see, hitting him in the eye was not a bad thing because my intent was not to hurt him. Lying was not a bad thing because the lie kept me from getting nailed. I can claim innocence of one but not the other. Should I blame our colonizing of this country on the incident? Should I have been banned from throwing spears at people I love? No one had to tell me that repeating the spearchucking was wrong. It was obvious. It is the same way with guns or anything else in life. God only knows. I didn't, now I do.

Life is always fatal.

Longwinded me.

charlie.

( Posted by: williamhill [Member] On: May 22, 2011 )

Charlie
Yes, life is a condition with a 100% mortality rate...

If anthropologists way smarter than me can't figure out "civilization" once and for all, then I certainly won't on my own...

The First Peoples, in North America, for example, were seen as "savages" and "barbarians" by those who "colonized" them, and who saw themselves as "civilized".

I'm sure there's lots of room for debate of that...

And one point in that debate might be the arrival of guns with the colonists...Certainly, your Second Amendment doesn't say anything about the right to keep and bear bows and arrows...

The guy in Boston with the gun sign on his storefront, though, is not running an establishment of "culture"...

If all gun owners were like you and Brian, no kids would be killing kids with rifles before the first grade, but how to deal with this?

( Posted by: windchime [Member] On: May 22, 2011 )

Lucie and her six shooter
My dear Lucie, for starters, why would you ban someone from having an opinion when you yourself are sharing one? Telling someone they can't use a particular word is not the making of a proactive conversation. In my opinion, that is. Besides, ain't you never seen a chalk outline? I'd say that qualifies as art.

Way back, 1979 (I think), I had a shotgun pointed at me. I was with my older brother, riding on the handlebars of his bicycle, going to his friend's house when a man pulled up in a station wagon and stopped us, thinking we were riding his son's stolen bike. It was dark and I actually thought he was holding a baseball bat. Were it not for my brother holding the collar of my shirt, I would have run and wouldn't be here now. Once the man realized he'd been mistaken he just go into his car and left. No apology.

Should I go around pointing guns at people becauae of that one incident? Or should I blame the advent of violence kids are exposed to nowadays? You can't round a bend without seeing a billboard for a violent video game or movie. Violence has been glorified and possibly glamorized in some sectors. Parents can only teach and/or shelter kids so much nowadays but there is no escaping its influence. I'd never say the battle is lost though. There is always hope. It's not always as effective as a bullet-proof vest but it's better than complacency.

Funny how Americans can shoot each other but they can't marry people of their gender.

( Posted by: toscano [Member] On: May 22, 2011 )

Francisco
We can marry people of our own gender and we can buy codeine over the counter in a pharmacy, but in my city we can't turn right on a red light...

In any country, though, we can find online info about building a bomb and that fits into the "right to keep and bear arms" as well, doesn't it?

Anybody can use any particular word they want, but if I'm in the room and within hearing range, the words "gun culture", used together, are gonna get objected to. That's how it is.

I know which of my black friends to call nigger to their faces and which not to. Not everything is acceptable to everyone at all times.

"Gun culture" is not acceptable to me, ever, though.

That's how it goes...

So, Francisco, if you're ever without a firearm and you wanna shoot me, you can just yell "gun culture" over and over again and I'm gonna die for sure!

( Posted by: windchime [Member] On: May 22, 2011 )

Bang bang
Gun culture!!!!

Um, did you make it out alive?

( Posted by: toscano [Member] On: May 26, 2011 )

well regulated Militia
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
I believe the framers of the Constitution were only speaking in reference to Militia members, and decided the best way to state that the Government should stay out of these affairs was to expand the right to "the people." It was not to allow every toddler to tote.
Just as free speech rights have been perverted into funeral disruptions by Westboro Baptists, any fine notion may be corrupted. Too often the end result of irresponsibly asserting rights is tragedy. We have rights to protect ourselves, not to attack others.

( Posted by: Poeteye [Member] On: June 7, 2011 )

thank you, Poeteye
for your well-reasoned opinion on this. I agree that not only your Second Amendment has the potential of succumbing to travesty and distortion, but all of your Amendments have this potential.

When this perversion, as you call it, extends to gun stores that sell to children, to psychiatric patients, to any person "unfit to bear arms", of course tragedy will ensue.

I fear that it is more than tragedy, though. I fear it is a "de-civilization".

And this is why I cannot, for the life of me, abide the expression "gun culture".

I live in a city where schools have seen shooting sprees enough to scar victims' survivors for life. One such spree is one too many. Yet, the media continue to show interviews with "officials" who opine that "this is an isolated incident".

A "what"?

I dunno...At televised funeral masses, I've never heard a priest eulogize that anybody has died in an "isolated incident".

Nobody's life is worth that little. Nobody's.

And any incident that has already happened can, and will, be repeated. And it's not an incident to begin with, a "vagueness": it's a senseless massacre.

Funny how "rights" allow for euphemisms and for the pardon of monstrous behaviours.

A five-year-old child is just beginning to count and to read little words. A five-year-old child doesn't know $&*! from his/her right to "bear arms".

Why is it that one can bear arms before the "age of reason"? (once set at seven...)

( Posted by: windchime [Member] On: June 8, 2011 )

The full story
TELFERNER, Texas — A 4-year-old boy is dead after being shot in the stomach by a 5-year-old sibling who was playing with a bolt-action rifle in the family's Texas home, authorities said.
Victoria County authorities said the children's parents were at the home in Telferner in southern Texas when the shooting happened late Wednesday.
Chief Deputy Terry Simons told the Victoria Advocate that investigators are trying to determine why the children were left unsupervised. The parents drove their wounded son to a nearby grocery to meet with paramedics, who then rushed the boy to a hospital.
Telferner is in southern Texas between Houston and Corpus Christi. The boy's parents drove him to the Telferner Grocery and Market to meet with paramedics, who then rushed the boy to Citizens Medical Center in Victoria, the Advocate reported.
Authorities have not released the name and gender of the other sibling.
Information from: The Victoria Advocate, http://www.victoriaadvocate.com

( Posted by: Poeteye [Member] On: June 8, 2011 )

thanks, Poeteye...questions...
for posting the full story of this. It gives more details than the yahoo page did at the time.

What's a "bolt-action rifle"?

What's its primary function?

What aspect of its construction allows it to be successfully discharged by a five-year old, causing a lethal wound to a four-year old?

( Posted by: windchime [Member] On: June 8, 2011 )

Add Your Comment

You Must be a member to post comments and ratings. If you are NOT already a member, signup now it only takes a few seconds!

All Fields are required

Login:
Password: