North Carolina: Two year-old girl finds loaded gun, shoots herself dead

Fayetteville, North Carolina police say they are investigating a shooting in which a two year-old girl was killed early Saturday morning. According to the police, the little girl found the gun and shot herself.

Police said the victim was discovered after they responded to a shooting call around 12:39 a.m.

Image: Virtus Online

Image: Virtus Online

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

According to WGHP,  No one else at the house was injured.

Which is a relief that the household full of people did not pick up guns, strewn about and just start firing randomly for no reason. What I’m saying here is, get a gun safe. There is no mention of arrests or accountability but we can assume that since ‘guns don’t kill people’, then it must be the party who owns the gun that should be held responsible. And apparently toddlers are more dangerous than guns because lately they’ve been shooting themselves frequently, and it always comes down to irresponsible gun ownership.

The little girl was taken to the hospital where she died from her injuries.

Watch courtesy of WRAL:

H/T: Good guy with a gun @ComgenKDT who you can follow on Twitter here. 

  • tiredoftea

    Cue the NRA apologists any time now.

    • mrsgunka

      Guns don’t kill people, children with guns do.

      • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

        apparently, and with greater frequency all the time.

        • mrsgunka

          More guns = more dead children. Don’t see this going down very fast with the NRA Lobby.

    • Joseph Miller

      I’m not an NRA apologist by any stretch but a realist. The parents left a gun where this little girl could find it, so the blame is on them, not the inanimate object (the gun.) A tragedy, without question. Cause for getting rid of gun ownership, not at all. Cause for promoting responsible ownership of guns, absolutely.

  • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

    Not an accident, an accident happens by chance or that is without apparent or deliberate cause. When you leave firearms unsecured this is always foreseeable. Sensless, irresponsible and criminal are all words that apply.

    • tiredoftea

      I am sickened every time I read about these tragedies. How incredibly ignorant can these people be to not protect their young children? What excuse will her parents have to evade their responsibility to their daughter?

      Is the unyielding and militant view of the 2nd Amendment worth more than this young girl’s life? What has the world lost now that she is gone?

      • mrsgunka

        They’re against abortion but leave their guns laying around to kill that baby out of the womb. Guess life isn’t valuable after they are born.

        • tiredoftea

          Abortion, education, health care and help for the poor, indigent and unemployed. These “Christians” make me so happy that I am not one! They are pathetic excuses for human beings.

          • Worship Dancer

            just so you know he was a CONVICTED FELON SO NOT ABLE TO LEGALLY OWN A
            GUN. do you REALLY think he went to a gun store and applied for a gun
            permit to LEGALLY purchase the gun. i’ll give you the answer NO HE DID
            NOT. HE BOUGHT IT ILLEGALLY OFF THE STREETS. all the guns laws in the
            UNIVERSE would NOT HAVE STOPPED THIS CRIMINAL FROM ILLEGALLY PURCHASING A
            GUN.
            so you are against LEGAL gun owners who are RESPONSIBLE from having weapons to PROTECT THEIR FAMILIES INCLUDING THEIR CHILDREN but it’s OK to go have indiscriminate sex and MURDER the BABY as late as the moment before the BABY draws its first breath? and you call US pathetic excuses. well i am VERY sorry for you. i am not the one who has to answer to a VERY REAL GOD for the sin of MURDER. unlike people who are THRILLED TO MURDER INNOCENT BABIES.

          • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

            You need to back off and make your postings civil or you will be asked to leave.

          • Worship Dancer

            perhaps you should same the same to others.

        • Worship Dancer

          so what part of the article says the CONVICTED FELON WHO WAS NOT LEGALLY ABLE TO OWN A WEAPON a Christian?

      • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

        Or just flat out lazy and foolish. Neither of which is acceptable as a parent or a gun owner.

        • Worship Dancer

          well it’s NOT like he was LEGALLY able to own a gun so what would make you think he would be a responsible parent?

          • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

            There is no indication of who even owned the gun in question much less whether the owner has a criminal background – did you read the article?

          • tiredoftea

            Carla, no he didn’t. Like the others, he just rants his gun fetish rant without regard to facts. These articles really do bring them out, don’t they?

          • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

            holy crap, do you feel like you’ve had a work out?

          • tiredoftea

            Yeah, but it’s more about the typing than any intellectual stimulation! They use the same rants, same delusions, same rationalizations, same frenzy for the absolute as when they are in church. Fundamentalists are like that, black and white, no room for disagreement and certainly they can never be wrong!

          • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

            amen brother.

          • Worship Dancer

            yes actually i DID. did YOU?

            http://www.wral.com/girl-2-die

            SECOND PARAGRAPH – just to make it easy for you to find.

            According to police, Melvin Andre Clark Jr., 19, was charged with
            involuntary manslaughter and possession of a firearm by a convicted
            felon.

          • Worship Dancer

            yes actually i DID. did YOU?

            http://www.wral.com/girl-2-dies-after-being-shot-inside-fayetteville-home/13017263/

            SECOND PARAGRAPH – just to make it easy for you to find.

            According to police, Melvin Andre Clark Jr., 19, was charged with
            involuntary manslaughter and possession of a firearm by a convicted
            felon.

      • Joseph Miller

        The gun didn’t get up on its own and kill this little girl- her parents left a gun in a place where she could find it. *Their* fault, not the gun’s. It’s an inanimate object, incapable of feelings, thought or intentional action. It must be placed in the hands of someone who is capable of using it for it to perform its function.

        • tiredoftea

          That’s the same old, tired and very insulting gun lobby line. Don’t even go there that this would have happened, could have happened had the adults not have had this needless object in their homes.

          • Joseph Miller

            Needless object according to whose standards? Yours? It isn’t *YOUR* place to decide what *anyone* needs, whether it’s a gun or anything else.

          • Worship Dancer

            same old tired anti-Constitution anti-gun rant. don’t even go there. it’s NOT like the CRIMINAL could LEGALLY own a weapon. so let me guess, you would pee on yourself to “defend yourself” from an assault?

          • tiredoftea

            How closely related are your parents, exactly?

        • Lynn Fletcher

          And obviously a 2 year old is perfectly capable of using it.

          • Alan Cricket

            I thought it was a handgun not a machine gun??????

        • mrsgunka

          Guns have one function…..to kill. Only species to use guns are humans. It puts them at the top of the food chain. Gives them a feeling of superiority or in the wrong hands a murderer. Hunters don’t need automatic weapons. Want to legally kill someone, join the Army. Openly displaying a gun on your body is a form of intimidation to others and fear of their mental process.

          • Ken Soderstrom

            Killing is one of many things you can do with a gun. What does this have to do w/ “automatic weapons”?

          • tiredoftea

            Killing is a gun’s purpose. Target shooting is a derivation to practice killing and collecting guns is the only benign purpose I know of.

      • Ken Soderstrom

        What does this have to do with the Second Amendment?

        • tiredoftea

          Everything when there has been a single minded and dangerous focus by the NRA and easy issue right wing populists on unfettered and unrestricted gun ownership. This latest tragedy of a child killing itself with a handy gun/rifle/weapon is the result. The parents and NRA are equally responsible for this incident.

          • Ken Soderstrom

            What do “right wing populists” and NRA have to do with the Second Amendment.

            The right to bear arms “shall not be infringed”. This isn’t a “right wing” or NRA position. It is the Bill of Rights.

          • tiredoftea

            Here’s the entire text for you:

            “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.”

            You go and try to understand the difference between your posting and the actual text. If you can’t see how a fanatical, single issue pressure group and an entire extreme fringe of right wing fanatics has wrongly and unduly influenced how guns are viewed in this country, then there’s no hope for you and little hope for the child in your profile.

          • Ken Soderstrom

            Hey, thanks for posting the 2A. The proper meaning of “well-regulated” (properly functioning) has now been clearly defined by SCOTUS in Heller. They also covered the definition of militia (essentially every American) but this was unnecessary given it was already clearly defined by US Code (10 USC 311).

            Do you know why Americans focus on the 2A? It is because it is a sentinel. As long as it stands the Constitution and BoR will also. It is the first domino.

            Maybe after guncontrol extremists solve the problem of Chicago thugs killing kids in drug deal crossfires we’ll take your claims of safety concerns seriously. Until then, get busy solving real problems.

          • tiredoftea

            Well, thanks for making my point! Heller was another leap from a seriously flawed conservative court that is overly influenced by these types of issues from 30 years of the NRA and its ilk peddling gun lies to anyone and everyone who would listen.

            Do you know why most of us have problems with your argument? It’s false! There are no reasonable people who understand the 2nd Amendment protecting citizens from its own government, which is the implication of your outrageous statement! There are no “dominos”!

            You want to know what really protects this country and its Constitution? The vote of an informed citizenry, not wannabe self styled patriots running around with guns.

            Should you ever read about the formation of the entire Bill of Rights, its history and antecedents rather than the lies and distortions of you friends at the 2nd Amendment foundation or wherever you spend your time, you would understand the context.

            But, no worries. You go and give the comfort of how your 2nd Amendment rights are totally absolute to the parent of a dead child like the ones in this article, or parents of whichever mass murder comes around next. Your comfort will be welcome, no doubt.

          • Ken Soderstrom

            You’re welcome! I know it is hard to have lost the argument, but Heller was decided half a decade ago now. Its past time for you to stop whining and turn your attention to issues that you may actually influence.

            If stopping mass murders becomes your new issue you can solve that problem overnight by eliminating “Gun Free Zones”. They are the only places mass shootings occur.

            You’re welcome again!

          • tiredoftea

            Yes, when fringies loss the discussion, they resort to insult. And, more lies and red herrings.

            Mass murders couldn’t happen with the frequency they do without your complicity in perpetuating the lies of the gun lobby. You just keep going to those gun rallies, sport.

            I’m posting this link to actual facts, not because you’ll pay attention and learn but for anyone who stumbles on this tread and truly wants to understand how deluded and dangerous you and you gun fetishist buddies are:

            http://www.motherjones.com/special-reports/2012/12/guns-in-america-mass-shootings

            Got a gun safe, BTW?

          • Ken Soderstrom

            What is a “fringies loss”?

            If gun control stopped murder they wouldn’t have any in Russia or Mexico. More people are murdered with guns in those countries than are in the US.

            You have swallowed propaganda (like that MoJo piece) and make yourself a fool by regurgitating it here.

            Gun control is a failed political philosophy. It makes citizens defenseless. Defenselessness increases violence. To dispute this you must first explain violence in “Gun Free” cities like Chicago and DC, but you can’t.

          • tiredoftea

            Right, because the U.S. is the world’s largest gun exporter, you idiot. Gun control is not a “political philosophy” but a policy and the facts that MoJo has assembled comes from research, only you are too foolish to read it and learn, or read it and disagree and point out any errors. But, no, that requires work and it’s so much better to remain ignorant. Like your proud re-assertion of D.C. and Chicago. Prior work has shown that surrounding state with lax gun laws, and gun shows are popular with criminals who bring their guns back into those, and other cities. You’re not a gun dealer, are you?

            Citizens are not defenseless, we have laws, police and courts. Not things that you seem to respect, but that’s why you and your extreme right wing buddies are dangerous.

          • Ken Soderstrom

            Gosh! This “idiot” knows that Russia doesn’t import US small arms. Despite Hillary’s lie that 90% of Mexican crime guns come from the US – and DOJ’s “Fast & Furious” attempt to provide supporting evidence, only 17% come from US. Most come from corrupt Mexican law enforcement and military.

            Laws, police and courts don’t stop assaults. Bullets can. And yes, I am dangerous. Every human is.

          • tiredoftea

            Wow! You just keep that delusion going. WND, Drudge and all the other fringe sites will continue to keep you well informed. go back to them, they welcome you.

          • Ken Soderstrom

            Which delusion are you referring to? That “Drudge Report” is a “fringe” site?

          • Worship Dancer

            WRONG. this guy was a CONVICTED FELON. there are ALREADY LAWS ON THE BOOKS which prevent this guy from obtaining a gun LEGALLY. i doubt that he went to a gun store to purchase this weapon.

      • Worship Dancer

        just so you know he was a CONVICTED FELON SO NOT ABLE TO LEGALLY OWN A GUN. do you REALLY think he went to a gun store and applied for a gun permit to LEGALLY purchase the gun. i’ll give you the answer NO HE DID NOT. HE BOUGHT IT ILLEGALLY OFF THE STREETS. all the guns laws in the UNIVERSE would NOT HAVE STOPPED THIS CRIMINAL FROM ILLEGALLY PURCHASING A GUN.

    • K-Rob

      During the Casey Anthony trial, when the verdict came back not guilty, my dad and I got into an argument because he felt the jury was absolutely wrong in their verdict and he said Jose Baez was a douche for thinking anyone would believe Caylee Anthony ‘accidentally’ made her way to the pool and drowned. I asked him why he thought nobody would believe that when it happens all of the time, hell, that’s one of the main reasons why she got a not guilty verdict; when the jury considered the fact that the medical examiner could not definitively rule Caylee Anthony’s death as a homicide and you can’t convict someone of murder when no murder is known for sure to have occurred then considered the fact that children have been known to drown unattended in pools it created too much reasonable doubt to convict her.

      He told me, “Because, Krystal, when you’re a parent and you’re child dies or gets seriously hurt, there is no such thing as ‘accidents’, it is always some degree of neglect.”

      I don’t know that I fully agree with this but I see his point. I would agree to about 90% of “accidents” are more a case of the parent not being rigid in restricting or monitoring their child’s actions. In the case of this little girl here, though, to use the word ‘accident’ seems highly inappropriate.

      • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

        Your Dad sounds like a smart and caring man. And you’re right, no one can safeguard their child from every contingency. Accidents do happen – I’ve spent my share in plenty of ER’s with stitches and broken bones. This should have been called unintentional, it doesn’t make it any less horrific but it also doesn’t imply the parents are blameless. Anyone that lives with a toddler, knows they can defy the laws of physics. We babyproof our homes, we put our children in car seats and we use child proof caps on medicine bottles. Properly securing a firearm should’ve been a no-brainer.

        • http://aimaiameye.blogspot.com/ Aimai

          Actually: they don’t “defy the laws of physics.” They may challenge your notions of time, space, and difficulty but they don’t do anything that anyone couldn’t predict they would do. Negligence refers to a situation when common sense precautions and foresight could have protected someone or something from an avoidable harm. Pools exist and toddlers drown in them whether that results from the culpable negligence of the parent turns on a lot of other issues like whether you knew the pool was there, whether you knew your child could access it, whether you knew your child was unattended, etc..etc…etc…

        • K-Rob

          Amen to that! For the record, morally speaking, I do not agree with the Casey Anthony verdict. Legally speaking, the verdict was correct. However, I think it’s a chicken shit move from Baez to exploit the technicality of homicide not being able to be definitively ruled as the cause of death. I also place most blame for Casey’s freedom right now on the DA, as they really should have put other lessor charges on the table for the jury to choose from. Which, each of them said they would have done. Thank God Juan Martinez covered every possible angle in the Jodi Arias trial to ensure she got a conviction.

          • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

            Agreed. I think she’s responsible for her child’s death but the state did not prove it’s case. I think they overcharged her.

          • K-Rob

            Oh, they totally overcharged her! So many people get riled up over the verdict and I understand why but they lay the blame on the wrong people when they fault the jury. The jury was just doing their job. Honestly, it was shocking to see they followed directions. I commend them because I don’t know that I would have been able to rule with only the legal aspect in mind. For me, I feel Caylee died by ‘accident’ but I feel she died by the hands of her mother when mommy was attempting to ‘knock her out’ for the night so she could go party without worrying about little Caylee waking up and venturing out of her bed and getting hurt in some way. Obviously, ‘accident’ isn’t the best word as it’s clearly the negligence and mistreatment of a child when you try to chloroform them. Still, this is the only scenario that makes sense and fits the evidence. What I don’t understand is why the DA didn’t, at the very least, charge her with concealing a dead body, moving and disrupting the deceased, or any other charge dealing with messing with the body of a deceased person because I don’t know the wording of these types of charges but I know they carry some decent jail sentences.

          • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

            I agree, I don’t know if the pressure of the media or public outrage forced the charge but regardless it was their responsibility to charge her appropriately and get a conviction. Since the Zimmerman trial I’ve seen several articles on how poorly worded many of these criminal laws are. Maybe that has something to do with the crazy things we’ve been seeing.

          • K-Rob

            I was waiting for the pressure from the public to cause the jury to fold and convict her. Refusing to buckle under that was admirable but they paid for it in death threats from the public who got themselves WAY too involved. Same thing for the Arias case and Zimmerman. The public is getting more and more out of control over cases that are important, definitely, but not so much that it warrants someone who doesn’t even personally know the victim to threaten death or serious bodily injury upon a stranger. I think having the media air these cases live on national TV does more damage than good for our justice system. There’s no reason why they can’t air the recording AFTER the verdict is in. I’ve suggested this and people tell me they wouldn’t like that because it’s like watching a movie knowing the ending. Problem is, this isn’t a movie, it’s someone’s life and it’s incredibly difficult to maintain that person’s rights with as media coverage as we have in the courts now. Especially, if the jury isn’t sequestered.

            Wow, I veered way off topic didn’t I? I apologize.

          • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

            I agree the jury did an incredible job and they certainly did not deserve what they got in return for it. It is a fine line to straddle to allow the “public” right to know without perverting the system. No worries about about off-topic, we started at the right place. :-)

    • Mark Dorn

      100% agree with you

    • Ken Soderstrom

      Yes. When guns are “strewn around” people are likely to “pick them up” and “start firing randomly”. Particularly toddlers who are still awake at 1 am.

      These things always happen. When will we come to our senses and restrict the fundamental rights of responsible people as a result?

    • Worship Dancer

      well since the gun owner was identified as a CONVICTED FELON it’s highly UNLIKELY he would be responsible with his weapon.

  • mrsgunka

    This is so sick! When are these people going to be responsible to their children.

  • Linda1961

    Horrible.

    • mrsgunka

      It’s alright Linda…..she isn’t in utero.

      • Linda1961

        Yes, they don’t care about the children after they are born.

    • Alan Cricket

      So far your are the only one that got it right.

  • Republicans_are_Evil

    If there were any justice, the two year old would have shot the owner of the gun, and not herself.

    • Ken Soderstrom

      Yes. The loss of a child isn’t punishment enough.

      • http://aimaiameye.blogspot.com/ Aimai

        That’s some kind of chutzpah, like the man who kills his parents and throws himself on the mercy of the court because he is an orphan. They were responsible. This was not an accident and their suffering does not excuse it.

        • Ken Soderstrom

          Chutzpah is suggesting that this parent killed his own child.

          • http://aimaiameye.blogspot.com/ Aimai

            No. Sorry. Wrong again.

          • Ken Soderstrom

            Brilliant retort.

      • Republicans_are_Evil

        You are correct, the loss of the child is not NEARLY enough. Claiming it is enough shows you do not think the crime is significant, that the life of that child is less important than that of an adult.

        • Ken Soderstrom

          You gun control extremists over-estimate your influence. Compared to losing a child, no retribution you or anyone else can impose will compare. There’s nothing more you can do to this person. Killing him would likely be merciful.

          I don’t imagine this will prevent you from trying. Gun owners should be persecuted. Make an example of him.

          • Republicans_are_Evil

            I am not a gun control extremist. You bear false witness against me. Shame on you for your evil and sinful right wing ways. If killing a child is punishment enough, then no responsible parent would risk owning a gun. The owner of this gun is a murderer and deserves to spend a long time in prison. Your willingness to abandon the law because the life of the child is insignificant to you is disgusting to me.

          • Ken Soderstrom

            Hmm, now I’m evil, sinful and “right wing”?

            But I also “bear false witness” by calling a gun control extremist a gun control extremist.

            Looks like I’m doing something right.

          • Republicans_are_Evil

            You are not God. You do not know if I am a gun control extremist or not. Shame on you for playing God and bearing false witness. You must be a right winger, because you use sin like a right winger does.

          • Ken Soderstrom

            Whew! Thanks for clarifying. I can now continue to avoid thinking of myself as God.

            If only I could stop being evil maybe I’d have a chance at godliness?

            Does “sin” have a manual? If so I’ll read it so I can “use sin” more appropriately.

          • Republicans_are_Evil

            You have no chance at Godliness under any circumstances. You just need to learn right from wrong before you harm someone.

  • gailillly

    First of all it was 12:39 in the morning, WTF was the 2 yr. old doing up roaming around the house and where were the parents. BOY THEY OUGHT TO FEEL REAL PROUD OF THEMSELVES. YOU MIND AS WELL SAY THAT THEY KILLED THEIR DAUGHTER BECAUSE THEY DID OUT OF NO RESPECT FOR THE DAM GUN AND THEIR STUPIDITY AND IGNORANCE HAVING A LOANDED GUN IN THE HOUSE WITHIN A 2 YRS. OLD REACH. REAL STUPID IGNORANT REDNECKS.

    • Republicans_are_Evil

      I think murder in the second degree would be an appropriate charge for the gun owner and/or parents. BOTH parents.

  • Jim Floyd

    The person that owns a firearm should be held accountable to store it safely to keep it out of the hands of children.

  • Mark Dorn

    Here is a case of guns do not kill people….irresponsible people that feel they need to have guns and not smart enough to keep them out of the reach of children … well they kill people. What a shame and they probably have been running their mouths off about gun control. That is a household that should never be allowed to own guns again.

    • Jim Wetherell

      If the owner got 20 years for involuntary manslaughter , well, maybe , just maybe, some people would reassess their need for a weapon, just so they could leave it around and look cool.

  • juicyfruityyy

    How many have to die before they enforce rules and laws on gun control? And stop letting the unelected NRA dictate, what will and will not be done.

  • tiredoftea

    So am I. I didn’t blame “the inanimate object (the gun.)” which is the usual red herring of the gun lobby. Yes, it’s the adults, whomever they are, who deserve the blame. As does the NRA for spreading the lies of household safety in homes with guns. This tragedy is also laid at their feet. Another in our country where a young person died, or many young people have died.

    Responsible gun ownership? Possible for some, not for all and certainly not for households who believe the myth that they are defending themselves with these objects. Unrestricted gun rights is a blight on our civilization and we have the proof of thousands of needless deaths every year. I hold the NRA responsible for every one of them.

    • Joseph Miller

      True enough, not everyone who owns a gun has the sense to. However, it isn’t your place to make decisions like that for anyone else. Don’t like guns? Fine. Go to the U.K., Australia or any other country that bans private ownership.

  • tiredoftea

    Sorry, but my disagreement about gun ownership is all the more reason to stay here and fight the stupidity of our national addiction. The reality is that too many innocent people die from irresponsible gun use, lax laws, no tracking and the deliberate mass murders that result from easy access to these dangerous objects.

    There’s ample reason to restrict gun ownership and it’s an uphill battle to dispel the myths of personal safety that the NRA spouts.

    I’m staying, and if you don’t like my opinion, try Russia, Iran, Syria or any other country that brooks no disagreement in its citizens.

    • Shawn Birkholz

      Sir … you said it in your own reply to Mr. Miller. You said ” … too many innocent people die from irresponsible gun use …” So how is “irresponsible use” the fault of the gun or the gun law? It is the human’s fault … not the guns.

      Do we ban cars because they cause death when an “irresponsible” person gets behind the wheel, drives drunk, and causes an accident resulting in the death of an individual? No we don’t … I bet if we did the research close to the same number of people die on our roads from car accidents as die from guns.

      As you also stated we need better enforcement of the existing laws. What we do not need IMHO are more laws, fewer laws, new laws, or no laws.

      NRA or not we currently all have a right under our Constitution, Federal, and State laws to own guns if we are RESPONSIBLE and are not in a prohibited group. If you don’t like guns then don’t buy one but don’t tread on my right to own one if I want to.

    • Alan Cricket

      Easy Access, aparently you have never tried to legally buy a handgun.

  • Jim Wetherell

    guns DDO kill people, without the gun, she would be alive. Now before someone goes ballistic, think about the last time some 2 year old stabbed herself to death, or beat her brother to death with a base ball bat?

    • Ken Soderstrom

      Or tripped and fell, choked on food, drowned in a pool, died in a car accident. Maybe if we never let toddlers do anything or go anywhere they’d be safe?

      • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

        Tripping, falling, choking on food are actual accidents. Cars and pools are heavily regulated and deaths by the causes have dropped every year. An irresponsible gun owner (probably a parent) allowed their weapon to fall into the hands of a toddler. So yes, when people are irresponsible with guns the chance of a death are far greater than with the other items mentioned. Lack of and poor regulation of gun ownership has created a situation where unintentional child shootings are on target to triple this year compared to 2011.

        This culture of it’s my right to be a gun owner above all else, including reasonable attempts to keep children and the public at large safe – has placed guns into the hands of many that shouldn’t be owner’s.

        • Ken Soderstrom

          Yes. An accident with a gun is not an “accident”. For some reason.

          • Jim Wetherell

            So letting kids play with loaded guns makes the result an accident? Now that is as ridiculous as letting them play in the middle of the X-way and calling the resulting death an accident. Ken , I think you are smart enough to acknowledge that kids should not have guns.

          • Ken Soderstrom

            Are you suggesting the parents intended for this tragedy to happen? If not, it was an accident, and like most accidents was the result of irresponsible behavior.

            I know you really, really want to attribute some property of evil to an inanimate object, but you can’t. Guns aren’t the problem. Irresponsible people are.

          • Judith_Priest

            As my old Daddy would have said, “I know you didn’t MEAN to do it. But you needed to mean to NOT do it! Of COURSE you didn’t PLAN to wreck it. You need to become the kind of person who plans NOT to wreck things!”

            It was irresponsible. If the family had been the gunless lily-livered Liberals you all love to hate so much – like MY family – this little girl would be skipping around this morning, chattering and giggling and playing with her toys.

          • Ken Soderstrom

            If we don’t get out of bed, nothing bad will ever happen to us.

          • Jim Wetherell

            Ken, we agree , irresponsibility on the part of owner/parent caused this ‘accident”. Our difference exists in what is society’s obligation in protecting the rest of society for “irresponsible” owners. I think what we have done in the realm of drunk driving could serve as a blueprint.
            I have 5 handguns, 3 long guns and for the last 55 years I have listened to every sound bite excuse from the gun lobby and have come to realize just how ridiculous they are. Like this one: An armed society is a polite society. We would like to think so, but here in Michigan, we have had road rage shootouts by people with CCWs, culminating last month in two guys killing each other in a shootout.
            The other big saying is : When guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns. Well DUH, no crap, this is by self definition , correct. But it misses the point, guns will NEVER be outlawed irregardless of what the paranoid anti government gun nuts babble about.

          • http://aimaiameye.blogspot.com/ Aimai

            Would you say the same if someone bought a trained fighting pitbull and left it alone with their toddler? If not, why not? What about guns makes them so sacred that you can’t even bring yourself to acknowledge the obvious harms that the presence of guns causes to families and communities?

          • Ken Soderstrom

            Guns are used for good much more often than they are used for bad. There are between 800,000 and 3,000,000 defensive uses of guns by Americans every year.

            There is a good reason the Second Amendment exists. We need weapons for self-defense.

          • http://aimaiameye.blogspot.com/ Aimai

            Pix or it didn’t happen. What is the derivation of that statistic? Its completely made up and you would know that if you weren’t so motivated to imagine this stuff is true. There are only 3 hundred million people in this country-3 million “defensive incidents” would be a huge number (and, of course, quite far off from your also imaginary 800,000)–are these actual shootings or just firing in the air? Because if so we’d hear a lot more about the damage of falling bullets and of injured or dead robbers.

          • Ken Soderstrom

            Its from the CDC study initiated by Obama’s executive order. It was published in June. You can (and should) read it yourself. Here is a digest: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/082113-668335-cdc-gun-violence-study-goes-against-media-narrative.htm

          • http://aimaiameye.blogspot.com/ Aimai

            Oh, no. You aren’t claiming to have read the entire 120 page roundup of the research, are you? You are going with the investors.com short version which is highly flawed and deceptive and, of course, just an even shorter version of things you already believe to be true.

            1) The President had to issue an executive order and the CDC had to “farm” the study out to another division because under NRA lobbyists and a frightened congress the CDC was forbidden to collect statistics on gun violence and mortality and morbidity. Just like the Tobacco companies tried to prevent us from knowing how toxic cigarettes are.

            2) The hard and fast numbers the investors site quotes, which you also quote, are from a 1995 study–not actually a new study–and none of us have any way of knowing how accurate it is or how it was performed. But here’s a hint: just because investors.com cites something with some names and a number doesn’t make it the gold standard in research.

            3) The NYT recently published an actual study on gun deaths in this country and discovered what most of us already know: there is no single reporting standard for what constitutes an accident or a homicide, different regions and even counties process information on gun injuries/deaths differently–so much so that its almost impossible to compare state level statistics on the topic unless you know the underlying reporting standards. This goes double and triple for something as spongy as the notion that there are legitimate “defensive” uses of guns.

            4) I don’t say that because I am opposed to gun ownership at all. Thats your bugbear, not mine. But because I’m a fucking trained social scientist and I know how to read a report on an issue of social importance. You think that the category “defensive use” of a gun is a real thing but its not, actually. Two robbers who shoot each other dividing up the spoils of their robbery are, technically, both firing defensively–are those included in your good and necessary uses of guns? Meanwhile, in Florida, the same Prosecutor who prosecuted Zimmerman also locked up an elderly white male veteran, and a young black woman, both for firing a gun in the presence of children at an unarmed person–both the man and the woman argued that they were using the gun “defensively” but both ended up with 20 year sentences.

            My point here is that you think you are arguing from facts and from a dispassionate interest in protecting gun owners but you are just a tool for corporate interests. They know that fewer and fewer people in this country hunt or need to own guns for work. The only way they can increase sales is by saturating the market selling weapons to criminals (on the one hand) and to paranoid hysterics cowering in their suburban castles, on the other.

            Meanwhile: children and neighbors have zero control over the number and type of guns that their parents and friends are toting, losing, forgetting, and generally leaving around to enable angry, drunk, careless or suicidal people to end someone’s life. Those are the real statistics. The more guns in your comunity or your home the greater your risk and the risk to your loved ones.

          • Ken Soderstrom

            Here you will find the estimates of up to 3,000,000 defensive uses of guns every year: http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=18319&page=R1.

            It is the CDC study mandated by executive order.

          • 1EdMeadows83

            Kenny Boy, I think that’s what we reasonable people have been saying throughout this thread. Whoever owned the gun and left it where a two year old could pick it up is responsible. We’re not trying to give the lie to that old saw, “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people”. We’re simply suggesting that gun owners need to be responsible for their lethal weapons such as guns, knives, hammers, cars, etc.

          • Ken Soderstrom

            No argument there, Ed.

            As long as you don’t misappropriate this for pushing gun control, I have no problem.

            We should all encourage safe gun handling – and safe everything handling.

          • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

            It’s not an accident because all reasonable people agree, that is foreseeable that this could and would happen if the firearm is not properly secured.
            You put your car in park, you engage the E brake – you don’t leave it running and let you toddler play in the car unrestrained.

        • Alan Cricket

          So who get’s to decide which of the Bill of Rights applies to whom?
          Everyone wants the 1st Amendment to apply to everyone but they only want the 2nd Admendment to be applied to certain memebers of “We The People”

          • http://aimaiameye.blogspot.com/ Aimai

            I just want it to apply to a well regulated militia. I’m happy to discuss how the second amendment would apply to the police, miltary, or national guard.

          • Ken Soderstrom

            A “well-regulated militia” is a group of citizens with effective arms. The misinterpretation of both “well-regulated” and “militia” were laid to rest by the Heller decision. See pg 22, “Prefatory Clause”: http://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/07-290.pdf

          • Adolph Schumer

            How can you discuss it since it doesn’t apply to those groups? 2nd Amendment 1787 – Nation Guard didn’t exist till the early 1900s. There should be a waiting period before uneducated liberals are allowed to spew lies

          • http://aimaiameye.blogspot.com/ Aimai

            Thats the debate, you poor simp. At the time of the Constitution and the Amendments the definition of the arms bearing citizen was a person who was in a “well regulated militia.” People have argued that with the formation of the National Guard the rights appurtaining to the well regulated militia would transfer to the NG, and not be held by individual citizens. its an actual legal argument. It has not prevailed, but it was the alternate interpretation of the Second Amendment prior to the Supreme Court case which upheld the broader and, to my mind, nonsensical interpretation which leaves out the “well regulated militia” part of the amendment.

          • Alan Cricket

            In the language of the day, well regulated meant well trained. Militia is the people, not the police, military or National Guard.

          • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

            and the 1st amendment has it’s own set of limitations. You can’t yell fire, you can’t threaten to kill the President, you can’t slander or libel someone, etc…

        • Adolph Schumer

          Cars and pools kill MORE people than guns every year. Where is your regulation???

          • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

            Cars are the most regulated item in the consumer market, I’ve already posted information on this subject on this page.

          • 1EdMeadows83

            Adolf, are you including wars and terrorism in your flawed logic? Syrians and Somalis might beg to differ.

      • 1EdMeadows83

        Yeah Kenny, I agree. We should keep food away from two year olds, don’t let them near pools unattended and keep them from driving automobiles until they';re at least 5.

        • Ken Soderstrom

          Now you’re being consistent at least. Progress is promising. Maybe next you’ll learn to accept that everything we do is dangerous, and that life isn’t fair.

          • 1EdMeadows83

            “life isn’t fair” Such logic! Did you think that one up all by yourself?

          • Ken Soderstrom

            For non-slow people the fact that “life is not fair” is self-evident.

            For the slow you must have to reason it out.

            However you arrive at the realization its good. It can prevent embarrassing whining.

    • Shawn Birkholz

      Sir … we all have our opinions but mine differs from yours … to me the issue is a cause and effect one. The ADULT owners of the gun failed to keep the guns stored in a safe location away from little hands. Therefore the CAUSE … The toddler picked it up and shot herself … therefore the EFFECT. I myself own multiple guns but they are safely stored away.

      If the police and DA do the right thing then the owner of the gun should be charged because in NC there is a statute (N.C.G.S 14-316) that states “a guardian or parent of a child under the age of 12 may not allow such child to have possession, custody, or the use of any gun, pistol, or dangerous firearm, except under the parent’s or guardian’s DIRECT supervision. In Cumberland County, where Fayetteville, resides an Air rifle, air pistol, and BB gun all falls under this prohibition.” I am sorry for their loss but bottom line it is their fault their daughter is dead. Not their daughter’s and definitely not the gun’s.

      Now to your comment about the last time a 2 year old stabbed herself with a knife or beat her brother to death with a baseball bat … In my opinion poor analogies. First of all, for whatever reason, we don’t usually leave knifes laying around … they are almost always in the kitchen “put up where they belong.” And when is the last time you have seen a 2 year old that could pickup and carry an average sized baseball bat let alone be able to swing it over their head with enough force to hurt someone?

  • candor

    North Carolina has laws against child abuse, right?

    • 1EdMeadows83

      candor, I’m not sure. North Carolina is a Southern state so all bets are off down there.

      • Ken Soderstrom

        Spoken like a true snob elitist out of touch with mainstreet America: “North Carolina is a Southern state so all bets are off down there”

      • Jay Hanig

        I hold your state in similar regard. I note that nobody from the South ever moves north to retire… something about quality of life. We have it and you don’t. Bless your heart.

  • mrsgunka

    Few people buy a rare antique vase or an oil painting with the idea of using it to protect themselves or killing an intruder. They may not need them but it has a value to collect them. My husband was a gun collector and an avid hunter. He also taught over 6000 students hunter safety/education. The first thing he told them, was anytime you pick up a gun, you better be ready to shoot it. Guns kill! Keep guns locked so there can be no accidents. Guns do not kill without ammunition unless the body is used as a weapon. All of his guns were kept in a locked safe. Ammunition contained in a separate place. We had 4 children and we took no chances. Since his illness,we have no guns in the house.

    • http://comgen.blogspot.com/ ComGen

      Boils down to something very simple, a gun safe will cost a fraction of what your firearm(s) and ammo did…..have kids ? buy one! No excuse even a simple $10-$25 lock box will suffice.

  • Richard Unger

    This happens seldom enough that it makes national news when it happens. Years ago the svchools taought people how to handle shoot and store guns. Most households in America have guns and EVERY American should know how to sotre and handle them.

    • http://aimaiameye.blogspot.com/ Aimai

      Thats false. Most households in America do not have guns. A shrinking number of households own a larger and larger share of guns. Thanks to disposable income and mass paranoia among gun fanciers people own many more guns than they can manage and “accidental” and negligent deaths and suicides are the result. I have no need to be trained how to shoot and store a gun because I don’t own one. My children were not at risk from guns because no one we knew owned or kept guns in their homes. If you have friends who own guns you might want to ask them whether they know what they are doing but the rest of us, in the gun free parts of America, are not at risk except when our neighbors are popping off like lunatics at their phantom enemies, and then no amount of training in school is going to fix that.

      • Adolph Schumer

        Who are you to judge since you don’t own a gun or know how to use one? Why are your gun free paradises so violent? Where are these gun owners that are popping off phantom enemies? If you could handle a gun as well as you lie you would be the next John Wayne

  • Tracey Bates

    Please tell me how a 2 year old child, in a responsible home, “finds” a weapon in the first place…I think I already answered my own question.

  • Ken Soderstrom

    But God forbid we teach safe handling in school or cooperate with NRA’s Eddie Eagle program.

    • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

      I’m sure that would have been helpful to this 2 year old. God forbid we should require that the parent know something about the proper gun use or mandatory purchase/proof of a safe of trigger lock.

      • Ken Soderstrom

        God forbid we expect and require Americans to behave responsibly.

        • http://aimaiameye.blogspot.com/ Aimai

          So are you advocating something like mandatory Driver’s Ed and insurance for gun owners? Because thats what we have when we actually take seriously “requiring” Americans to behave responsibly.

          • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

            Absolutely.

          • Ken Soderstrom

            We can do this right after we require permits for free speech or practice of religion.

            In the meantime we can implement mandatory gun safety education in grade schools and marksmanship training in high school.

          • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

            practicing free speech and religion does not physically harm another person, and it too is not without certain limitations.

    • hollyh58

      oh, yeah, what a great idea. Give every school kid a gun and teach them to handle it. You are aware that recently an armed guard at a HS had his gun accidentally go off, injuring a student, right? You do know that Columbine HS had armed guards, right? You do know that Fort Hood was surrounded by weapons, right? Can anyone actually think any more?

      • Ken Soderstrom

        Irrational fear leads to hyperbole. Gun safety education isn’t “giving every school kid a gun”. It is this: [NRA link removed by Anomaly]

        Columbine had a deputy on lunch break. Ft. Hood was as much a “Gun Free Zone” as is every public elementary school in the country, as was Navy Yard. It doesn’t make much sense to disarm trained soldiers on base, does it?

    • Frankie Lynn Staton

      I’m very sorry for the Baby……….We all seem to have forgotten about her.

  • Ken Soderstrom

    But at the same time a mere picture of a gun in a school results in suspension. If these people were truly interested in “gun safety” they’d promote it being taught in school. NRA has an excellent Eddie Eagle education program.

    But the goal is not safety. They need these types of tragedies to push the political goal of disarming Americans. So they “brainwash” and promote ignorance.

    When marksmanship was taught in public school were accidents as common?

    • http://aimaiameye.blogspot.com/ Aimai

      When was marksmanship taught in public schools? I’m 53 and I don’t remember that period at all. Meanwhile, accidents are common in places where a large number of people own guns–are you saying that those people didn’t have any training for owning those guns? Why is that the fault of public schools and not of the gun owners? Don’t you people have the slightest sense of personal responsibility?

      • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

        thank you. I’m 52 and grew up in a rural farming community, gun nothing was offered in school.

        • http://aimaiameye.blogspot.com/ Aimai

          Hi Carla! I couldn’t agree with all your posts more. We have to keep pushing back against this nonsense. Only when the voices of responsible parents and citizens are heard will we be able to help prevent these totally unnecessary deaths.

          • Ken Soderstrom

            I’ve tried posting some links to grade school firearms education, but they don’t seem to pass moderator muster. You all will have to Google for yourselves.

  • hollyh58

    The gun owners damn well better be charged with negligent homicide or whatever it’s called these days. If you have guns and you have children, you keep those guns locked up. Just like you keep poisons locked up and/or out of reach. You know, better yet, let’s start teaching kids how to handle a gun the minute they slink from the womb. That’ll prevent another tragedy like this. NOT!

    • Ken Soderstrom

      People who drive cars with kids as passengers damn well better not get in a wreck. Better yet, when you have kids don’t drive because it might be dangerous. Whatever you do don’t say anything to kids about dangerous cars, or educate them about how they might protect themselves if an accident happens. That is absurd.

      • http://aimaiameye.blogspot.com/ Aimai

        Do you even read what you write before you hit publish? This argument is so patently wrong that you sound like a toddler yourself. If your “argument” is that parents driving with their child are taking an impermissible risk with that child you need to rethink it. We do not permit people to drive anyone, let alone a helpless child, if they haven’t passed stringent driver’s ed/lisencing and/or are driving a car which has not passed inspection. In addition, when children are in the mix the government mandates safety standards for the transportation of children including mandating special seats, restraints, and best practices to limit the harm that can come to them in the event of a car crash.

        Thanks to Second Amendment hysterics like you we are not permitted to institute any one of these sensible, harm limiting, precautions when it comes to gun ownership. People are not periodically re-evaluated for eyesight/skill/mental acumen, people do not have to submit their guns for inspection or prove that they can store them responsibly, etc..etc..etc…

        • llfrance79

          Aimai – your own argument is full of holes! Did YOU read it before you hit publish? “We do not permit people to drive anyone, let alone a helpless child, if
          they haven’t passed stringent driver’s ed/lisencing and/or are driving a
          car which has not passed inspection. In addition, when children are in
          the mix the government mandates safety standards for the transportation
          of children including mandating special seats, restraints, and best
          practices to limit the harm that can come to them in the event of a car
          crash.”

          1) Not all drivers are required to complete Driver’s Education.

          2) While it is expected that all drivers are licensed, the fact is that there are thousands of drivers on our roads every day who are either unlicensed or whose licenses have been suspended (http://abcnews.go.com/Travel/story?id=118913).

          3) Not all states require car inspections.

          4) While the use of seat belts is mandatory, there are still many who don’t buckle up. Even more so, there are many who fail to properly restrain their children – even to the point of not using required child safety seats. There are now even laws preventing children under a certain age and/or weight from sitting in the front seat of a vehicle, and yet how often do you see violations of this? I know I see this more often than anyone should (which is never!).

          5) You mention “best practices” and yet how often do we read of parents getting behind the wheel of their car, with their children also in the car, and they are drunk or high?

          We can have as many restrictions as you can think of and yet people will STILL ignore them!

          The tragedy in this is that someone chose to leave a loaded gun where it was accessible to a toddler and that toddler is dead. Those adults/parents who are responsible will forever have to live with the consequences of their (in)actions.

          • hollyh58

            However, there are laws regulating the aforementioned. All 50 states require seat belts and child restraints for children under 40 lbs. And, as was mentioned, most states don’t allow children under the age of 12 to sit in the front seat or for children in restraint seats to be placed in the front where the air bag will suffocate the child in the case of an accident. To get a driver’s license you must pass a test. A written test and an actual driving test. If you are in an accident and your child is injured or killed because said child was not properly restrained, you’re held accountable. There are no such laws where guns are concerned. You don’t have to prove you can operate a firearm before purchasing one. You can have a criminal record (violent one) or be declared mentally incompetent by a physician and still be allowed to have a firearm. You can be under investigation by CPS for being negligent and still be allowed to have a gun or guns in the house. All but gun “accidents” through negligence are punishable except for gun “accidents.”

          • Adolph Schumer

            Since this is an absolute and total LIE “You can have a criminal record (violent one) or be declared mentally incompetent by a physician and still be allowed to have a firearm” I assume you are either a liar or just do not know what you are talking about.

          • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

            You may want to read the criteria for passing a background check.

          • Ken Soderstrom

            In states that require firearm registration, felons are exempt due to the right to not self-incriminate.

            You also might do a search for firearms in prisons. Yep. They’re there too. Regulations are futile. Education may not be.

          • 1EdMeadows83

            Adolf, your fifth grade teacher let you down last year. She should have told you that for people to be liars they must have told lies.

          • Alan Batterman

            I think he meant CAR.

          • hollyh58

            I live in Seattle, Washington. A couple years ago a man walked into a local coffee shop and shot five people at point blank range, killing all of them. He had a history of mental illness and his family had contacted authorities saying they feared he was going to hurt someone. He had been declared to have mental illness by a doctor and was prescribed medication. He, however, was legally able to purchase a gun. This was on the news. George Zimmerman, who shot an innocent teenager, had a history of domestic violence, yet he was able to own several guns. The young man who shot 26 first-graders in Newtown, Connecticut, had a history of mental illness and autism. Yet he lived in a home that had what could be considered an arsenal. These are facts and I suggest you read up on them.

          • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

            We may not be able to fully enforce these driving related laws – their existence and practice has greatly reduced the number of auto related deaths.- In fact it’s a regulation success story. So why shouldn’t we strive to make gun owner’s more responsible?

          • Adolph Schumer

            A success? That tens of thousands more people die in cars than with guns? Was your success to kill more people with cars? More people die from hammers than ALL rifles combined. 24,000 anti-liberty and anti-gun laws and not one can be shown to of saved a single life.

          • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

            Deaths by vehicles have dropped every year for the last 30. Your comparison is invalid, it does not take into consideration the are 143,781,202 vehicles on the road X the number of times they’re driven daily. If you wanted to compare the number of times a vehicle was used and death occurred and the compare that to guns…

          • 1EdMeadows83

            So Adolf, by your logic if we give people free access to guns that will cut down the deaths by automobiles and hammers. Now that’s something to consider.

          • Ken Soderstrom

            The invention of airbags is most responsible for reduced traffic fatalities. But if we just banned cars there would be zero.

          • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

            Never at any point did I mention banning anything. The fact is vehicles are hugely regulated along with their use, this along with changes in drunk driving laws has greatly reduced our chances of dying in a car wreck.

            Like most others on this site, we are looking for a way to ensure that those purchasing guns are doing so legally and that they will be used responsibly. I don’t know whether that means licensing, testing, registration, whatever but it seems beyond the pale that we will put a gun in someones hand for a few hundred bucks and a clean criminal record. Some type of qualification should apply.

            Would this fix everything, no of course not. Just like drivers, we still have those that don’t follow the rules and regulations, drive drunk without insurance and so on – it doesn’t mean we just throw up our hands and say “oh well, guess we’ll just let everyone figure it out on the road”.

          • Adolph Schumer

            Don’t confuse Aimai with facts. She did the best she could with google on her Obama phone

          • 1EdMeadows83

            Ohhh Adolf, that’s really clever! Did you have help with that riposte?

          • 1EdMeadows83

            So, by extension, you agree that all guns should be registered and gun owners should be licensed to own a gun. Hmm, makes sense to me!

        • Ken Soderstrom

          So “patently wrong” you can’t even say how? Wow.

          Harm-inducing is promoting making weapons taboo in an armed nation with a Second Amendment right to bear arms.

          As long as the right to bear arms remains, it is irresponsible to encourage ignorance of safe firearm use and handling – which is exactly what your “sensible” regulations are intended to accomplish.

          What we really need are training opportunities and improved access to shooting ranges. Pushing the misunderstanding of firearms in-terms of some strange anthropomorphic force is what leads to accidents and tragedies.

          There are much more common sources of tragedies that are much more deserving of your attention. The fact you perseverate on armed citizens means you are less concerned with safety, and more interested in the political goal of disarming Americans. We’ve had enough of this. You are failing since “shall issue” carry started decreasing violent crime. If you want a “Gun Free” paradise, move to Chicago.

          • XLancer

            Adam Lanza’s mom took him to the shooting range…

          • Ken Soderstrom

            She should have taken and admitted him to the psychiatric hospital instead.

          • XLancer

            If she’d known, and had that option, yes. How many others are in a similar situation, though? And, how do we know whom they are?

          • http://aimaiameye.blogspot.com/ Aimai

            No one is stopping you or anyone else from taking or giving gun prep lessons. Your victim mentality is showing in everything you write. Chicago is not a gun free paradise, obviously. In fact it is the last stage in what happens when a society gives up the monopoly on the use of force and the monopoly on justice.

          • Ken Soderstrom

            Chicago is the logical conclusion of the gun control policies you promote.

      • 1EdMeadows83

        Ken, you are correct. Your entire statement is absurd.

        • Ken Soderstrom

          The citizen disarmament set are typically this insightful.

      • Susan Weber

        If a parent knowingly drives recklessly and ends up in a car accident which kills his child, he will be prosecuted. Leaving a gun loaded and available to a child is reckless endangerment and falls under the same kind of penalty. If you are driving properly and there is an accident with no fault of your own, then you have no responsibility. You can’t make this comparison as superficially as you are. These parents are responsible for their child’s death in this case because it wasn’t locked up. Period. End of story.

        • Ken Soderstrom

          Why don’t we push for better safety training? Or will punishing parents of dead children better accomplish your goal?

          • Susan Weber

            I am a parent and I believe we need to take responsibility with firearms. I think there needs to be consequences when we leave deadly weapons around our house. I am not saying the parents need to be locked up for years but negligence is present here.

          • Ken Soderstrom

            Unfortunately there are consequences for creating dangerous situations. In what way does punishment prevent them? Doesn’t it make more sense to educate people about how they can avoid creating these situations to begin with?

            Of course in this case the gun was illegally in the possession of a felon who clearly doesn’t respond to education.

            Maybe we can make progress in not releasing dangerous repeat felons? This would minimize cases like that of this unfortunate 2 year old.

            Incarceration of dangerous felons saves lives.

          • Susan Weber

            That is a good point Ken, but there has to be some repercusions for reckless behavior. For example, having the weapon taken away and serving community service. I am not saying they should be incarcerated, but this is serious. In Germany, where I live, you are obligated under law to lock your weapons up.

          • Ken Soderstrom

            In NC it is unlawful to allow a minor to gain access to a loaded firearm. Maybe someday our felons on parole will be as well-behaved as those in Germany?

      • Elizabeth

        As others have brought out, guns are meant for killing, cars generally not. Your arguments are getting old, we don’t buy it, we aren’t as stupid as you want to make us out to be, that’s getting stale also.

        • Ken Soderstrom

          Guns are designed to put little holes in things at a distance. There are all sorts of reasons that this is helpful. Killing thugs is only one of them.

        • Jay Hanig

          Sure you are. If that’s the only reason you can imagine to own a gun, you personify the concept. The police carry them to protect themselves. I do the same. That is not the same as carrying one to kill others. Just the sight of one can make many people back off. It isn’t often necessary to shoot somebody. It’s enough that you could if you had to. Most cops carry a gun every day of their working lives without shooting anybody. Were their guns defective? Were their guns ineffective? Or did you just stick your foot in your mouth?

          • Elizabeth

            I might be stupid but not as dumb as you are if you think most of us will buy into the idea that people carry guns just to scare of other people. I know cops, have cops in my family and they have guns for protecting themselves against miscreants which means shooting them if they need to, not too many beat the bad guys up with the damn gun…how’s ‘your’ foot tasting??

          • Jay Hanig

            Perhaps you’ve more insight than I originally gave you credit for having. I don’t know how my foot tastes nor am I inclined to sniff it considering where I’ve buried it recently. Sorry if I bruised you.

            “The idea that people carry guns just to scare off other people”: those are your words; not mine. I never suggested any such thing.

            As you said, the police carry guns to protect themselves; as do I. Most cops never shoot anybody in their entire careers (neither have I) and yet the gun performs its function daily without incident. To protect; not to kill as you insisted in your earlier screechings.

            I understand you don’t buy it. You appear to lack the mental horsepower. though I’m sure opinions vary.

          • Elizabeth

            There you go , you were doing pretty goo till the end and then you have to go and insult, why don’t we just leave it at ‘opinions vary’ and not have you worry about my mental horsepower, okay? Don’t know why people always have to think when someone has a different opinion that they lack in mental clarity. Have a good day!

  • http://aimaiameye.blogspot.com/ Aimai

    This continued reference to the gun as being “at fault” or “not at fault” is just bizarre. The gun has no rights and has no feelings. Society, however, might choose to protect itself from an apparently infinitely large number of people too stupid to know how to own and store a gun. Your gun/car comparison is, of course, absurd. We don’t “ban cars” and no one is talking about banning guns–but we do lisence car owners and tax them for the cost of their owning and operating their vehicles, we ask them to carry insurance to pay for their potential negligent behavior, and we arrest them when they drink and drive. If half of that were true for gun owners most of us would be satisfied.

    The problem we have in this country are the many people who want to own and display their guns as mere status symbols and fetish items. If you need a tool you respect the tool. If you are treating it like a symbol, like expensive sneakers or a sports logo, you are going to end up displaying it rather than using it appropriately. Were the parents of this child in imminent danger of home invasion or did they just think they were? Were they living in a war zone or did they just think they were? If they needed that gun to be available instantly why were they not in the same room with the gun when their toddler got ahold of it? It should be obvious that the family that owned the gun were, definitionally, not responsible gun owners but there’s no bright line between them and every other gun owner in this country who owns the gun because they want to display their love of the second amendment rather than there actual need for the gun.

    And now they have cost another child her life.

  • http://aimaiameye.blogspot.com/ Aimai

    By definition it was needless since the only time it was used was to negligently kill their own child. If they were living in a war zone or in danger of a home invasion the gun would already have been used in self defense and there would be a record of that. But there isn’t. They bought the gun, didn’t store it properly, and cost their own child her life. As a parent I’m disgusted with them. And with the people making excuses for them.

  • Larry StCroix

    Private gun ownership is NOT banned in Australia. Certain automatic and semiautomatic weapons and accessories are banned & may no longer be imported. There is a nationwide firearms registration system. You need a separate permit which is like a photo ID of the owner for each gun There is a twenty-eight-day waiting period & safety training is required. Can’t remember exact regs but storage is covered. Limits on the amount of ammo you can buy include needing to produce your permit.

    UK regulations are completely different, but private gun ownership certainly is not banned there either. I recall .22 rifles are treated with more respect than here in US for the distance the bullet can travel and that you would be unlikely to get a permit for one if you lived in a metro area apartment.

    Sweeping statements are usually more effective if they have at least some element of truth in them

  • Ken Soderstrom

    Nothing will stop tragedies. Kids die in accidents. Adults die in accidents. They always have and always will. There is nothing anyone can do to stop it.

    In the case of guns, attempts to demonize them and to decrease opportunities for using them which is required for learning safe handling have increased the likelihood of their misuse. I suspect this is a goal of gun control extremists. They miss no opportunity to dance in the blood of victims.

  • http://aimaiameye.blogspot.com/ Aimai

    No, they aren’t bad analogies at all. I have two children and I can assure you that there are many knives and dangerous things in every person’s house and they have to be monitored quite vigilantly or your child can, in fact, injure herself or other children. However both knives and baseball bats are difficult for a child to use, while a gun is easy. I have bleach, alcohol, medicine and fruit juice in my house and did when I had small children. Luckily! I paid attention to the differences between these liquids and stored them accordingly. Apparently these gun owning parents didn’t–hence the tragedy.

  • Claudia Collette Scarbrough

    This is unbelievably sad. I have grandchildren one and three years old. Losing them for any reason is a torment to think about, but to lose them because someone was careless makes my stomach hurt to think about. The family must be devastated.

    Keeping guns from children is not antigun or unpatriot. We can talk about gun safety without the crazies accusing us of heresy.

    • Ken Soderstrom

      Agreed. The only way to handle guns safely is to practice with them. We need to expand opportunities for this to occur – more public ranges and maybe government-sponsored training and instruction.

      Safety and marksmanship training in school would help immensely.

      Because of our Second Amendment we are an armed nation. It is important that we don’t try to ignore this fact and make firearms some strange and magical thing that are irresistible to children.

      • 1EdMeadows83

        So Kenny, you believe if the two year old had had more “practice” handling guns she might not have killed herself? I’ll have to think about that one.

        • Ken Soderstrom

          Ed, it must be very hard for you being so slow. I’m sorry.

          Most two year olds are probably not capable of being trained to use firearms safely. Their parents, on the other hand, will benefit, and for the good of all should have plenty of opportunities and encouragement.

        • Jay Hanig

          Perhaps if the parent had had more practice and education concerning the weapon this tragedy might not have occurred.

      • Elizabeth

        Thought you folks were for ‘smaller, less intrusive government’? Now you want to make it government sponsored and in schools, hey we pay enough school taxes, they are dropping art and music in a lot of schools and you want shooting ranges in schools? Any idea what kind of insurance the schools would have to carry for that?? Ah yes, SMALLER GOVERNMENT!!!

        • Ken Soderstrom

          Sure, I’m for smaller government. A government that can give 1.3B of its taxpayers’ money to an enemy is too big.

          But government does have a responsibility to provide for “the general welfare”. Because our system of government insures that its citizens are armed, it only makes sense that government needs to provide for and promote education and training opportunities. Otherwise it is not providing for the “general welfare” within a system that the Constitution has created.

          Feel better now?

  • http://leftsideannie.wordpress.com/ Leftside_Annie

    So, Wayne La Pierre – who the hell is the “good guy with the gun” in THIS scenario…?

    • Adolph Schumer

      Who is the good guy when someone kills someone with a car, or hammer or their fists? Moron! Nothing like exploiting a tragedy to push your anti-American crap.

      • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

        Is someone out there promoting that we need more cars and hammers to protect ourselves, smartypants.

      • 1EdMeadows83

        Adolf, you misunderstand. We’re not “anti-American”. We’re pro-American. we’re trying to keep Americans alive!

      • Susan Weber

        Adolph, promoting responsible gun ownership is American. Ignoring the growing problem of children dying from irresponsible gun owners is not helpful. We need to examine problems in order to find solutions. You need to calm down. No one wants to take your guns away.

        • Jay Hanig

          Au contraire. There are many who want to take them away. They generally vote Democratic and are concentrated in urban areas.

          • Elizabeth

            No we may not be able to take your guns away, you folks will all die out by your own guns…Darwin strikes again!

          • Jay Hanig

            Let’s just see how natural selection plays out. I’m willing to wait to see. BTW, if things don’t work out so well for you, can I have your color TV?

          • Jerry Tilley

            Mighty racist of you there, Jaybo…nice work.

          • Susan Weber

            Stop listening to NRA propaganda and the right wing propaganda machine like FOX and Rush. I am a liberal and the majority of people I know support the 2nd ammendment but want reasonable background checks and bans on guns with the capacity to shoot more rounds than 10 bullets. That is different from taking away guns. If they live in urban areas, btw, they are probably better educated, as are most liberals.

          • Susan J. Elliott

            I support a person’s 2nd amendment rights. The fact that I can do that AND support restrictions and background checks shows I am a thinking person who can see the grey and not just black and white. Unfortunately many gun owners don’t get it and they are armed to the teeth. If the government wanted your guns, it would have them already. We are not trying to disarm you, we are trying to develop and enforce stricter regulations to keep tragedies from happening. Even you idiots shooting yourselves (which many of you are wont to do) is something we’d like to protect you from. I don’t want your guns or to take them away. I want senseless tragedies to stop happening and for the NRA and Fox News to stop spewing propaganda and getting gun owners in a tizzy. But gun owners do not seem bright enough to stay out of a tizzy and that is frightening.

          • Jay Hanig

            If you were truly educated, you would know that “ammendment” should be capitalized and spelled with only one “m” when directly referring to one of the amendments to the Constitution. As for reasonable background checks, what’s reasonable about registering honest citizens but letting criminals off the hook completely? You do understand that criminals overwhelmingly don’t purchase their guns trough the retail outlets that would be subject to NICS? Doubt my word? Would you take that of the US Department of Justice? http://bjs.gov/content/pub/ascii/fuo.txt

            As for your limited magazine capacities, what is reasonable about requiring an ineffective measure? Here: watch the first seven seconds of this video for an education in how effective the limit is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GsmUzSBaUQ . The marksman unloads eighteen rounds in seven seconds, using only six rounds in each magazine. He looks as if he could keep it up for a good while if required. Slow motion reveals he reloads in slightly less than a second!

            So while it doesn’t make you any safer, it ties the hands of anybody trying to protect themselves. If that weren’t true, why did the police squeal so loudly at NY’s new magazine law applying to them? I need high capacity magazines for the same reason they do: to protect myself from multiple assailants. Better to have ammo I don’t need than need ammo I don’t have.

        • Susan J. Elliott

          They don’t understand that which is why most gun owners scare me. They’re too stupid to figure out that if they are legal and responsible gun owners, they should be joining the fight to make certain guns less accessible and certain types of ammo completely inaccessible. The fact that the people with guns are idiots makes for a scary world.

    • Ken Soderstrom

      I’m one.

      • Elizabeth

        Says you!

        • Ken Soderstrom

          Brilliant!

  • http://leftsideannie.wordpress.com/ Leftside_Annie

    I hardly think WE are the ones being irrational, Ken. What country do you live in that requires every citizen to be armed to the teeth and ready to shoot anyone who looks cross-eyed at you? It certainly is NOT America. You love guns so much? Go to Somalia. Or join the Army.

    • Adolph Schumer

      You violent libtards are truly nuts!!!! Are you all ready to shoot anyone who looks cross-eyed at you? I’m glad you don’t own guns or you would go on killing sprees like your other libtard heroes. Why don’t you post your home address and put a large gun free sign outside your house? Or are you a hypocrite?

    • Ken Soderstrom

      Who do you imagine is responsible for defending you?

  • Larry StCroix

    So, guns don’t kill people. Irresponsible people who own guns don’t kill children either. It’s all a horrible accident. OK

    A drunk driver who is involved in a fatal accident is responsible for his actions & can be charged with negligent homicide.

    I believe the owner of any gun involved in an unintentional death by shooting, should face negligent homicide charges. If he/she loaned it to another person who’s carelessness contributed to an unintentional death by shooting there should be accessory charges. A shooting involving a child which includes a child shooting an adult, should warrant additional charges, maybe child endangerment.

    • Jay Hanig

      Apples and oranges. If you charge the driver only when he’s drunk and causes injury, you should only charge the gun owner when he’s also drunk and causes injury.

    • Elizabeth

      That’s why I think people should have to carry insurance on their firearms same as with a car, then when it’s your fault for the ‘accident’ due to whatever, your insurance pays. Of course the pro-gun people will object to this because then their guns will have to be registered and it should be for every firearm they own and the more dangerous the gun the higher the insurance on it. Because your insurance on a Ferrari is going to be higher than on a Prius…see how that works, Now let’s watch your heads explode folks…..haha!

  • AmIJustAPessimistOrWhat?

    Interesting two raw food believers in a country town got LONG jail sentences for feeding their baby raw only raw food causing the baby to die. Is this any different?

    • Elizabeth

      No not really, same as those people who deny their children medical care for religious reasons. Irresponsibility is irresponsibility.

      • AmIJustAPessimistOrWhat?

        Elizabeth … you say “Irresponsibility is irresponsibility”. On average 72 children a year shoot themselves, it’s a hard fact. That means it is irresponsible to leave guns where children get at them. Did you ever notice that aspirin bottles have had child proof tops for years? Now you are trying to say it is NOT irresponsible to leave a gun where a child can get at it, I guess because a gun is like god to you. You are just like those people you call irresponsible. I would never put a child a risk, not for a diet, not for religion, and certainly not because I’m morally opposed to childproof tops on medicine bottles. You’re a kook!

        • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

          that is not at all what she said.

          • Elizabeth

            Thank you Carla, maybe he misunderstood me. I’m VERY much against having guns were children can get a hold of them. It’s this entire gun culture thing in our country that I find disturbing anyway. I’m not totally against guns, but I do think they should be registered and I think people should have to carry insurance on each and everyone they own, and the more high powered the gun the more insurance coverage. I think that kind of thing would be a controlling factor, but that’s not going to happen in our culture, very sad really. By the way I’ve been called worse things than a kook…lol

          • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

            Oh it happens all the time, people either read just a portion of the thread or out of order, myself included. Actually both of you (and myself) are just looking for a way to make gun owner’s more responsible. I have no issue with gun ownership in the abstract, but clearly relying on individuals to accept personal responsibility is not working.

            Ownership should be more like the CCW laws, and the background questions need to tweaked, testing, and registration should be no big deal for those that claim to be responsible gun owners. And you’re right, kook it pretty tame! :-0

          • Elizabeth

            Here we’ve been talking this morning about this 4 year old and this evening there has been another shooting in a school. The craziness of this is getting out of hand. Years ago there was a guy on the radio who used to say “an armed society is a polite society” Just can’t stand all this politeness. It’s not just who get’s to keep arms and such, it’s the mentality that we are promulgating that says “got a problem, solve it with a gun” It’s giving permission to the crazed, ill, those harboring a grudge (as in the old guy who shot two senior citizens who had talked his girlfriend into leaving him), anyone who can’t figure out how to settle their differences in a peaceful way or just learn that sometimes you just have to accept and move on.

          • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

            You’re completely right.

  • Tracy Smith

    Darwin would be proud of these idiots culling the herd, too bad it’s the baby that got it. WE NEED MORE GUNS – GUNS FOR EVERYONE!!! Even little girls and boys should shoot themselves :)!!!

    • Adolph Schumer

      Amazing how warm and caring you libtards are.

      • diamondmask

        You’re right. I wish the owners of the gun had shot themselves. Idiots. I hope they go to prison. It’s good to know you lovers of gun porn show your compassion by keeping guns available to any cretin with money and a heart beat to get one. Add this poor child to your win column.

        • K-Rob

          Gun porn?! Funny. Except, it’s not. How is this child’s unfortunate demise the fault of gun suppliers? There was a child recently who choked on a piece of beef jerky and died…..should we fault the company making the jerky or go one further and fault the farmers who own the cows? No. We fault the parents of the child who let their child eat the jerky unsupervised. Add your comment to your lose column.

          • Susan Weber

            K-Rob, I agree that the gun suppliers have nothing to do with this child’s death. The parents are to blame. I live in Germany where you have to be registered in a hunting club and trained to own a gun. The gun must also be in locked storage at hom. I do think training is important and the US needs more restrictions and training. The gun happy mentality in the US causes people to be careless.

          • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

            That sounds like a sound and reasonable policy, one I could wholly embrace.

          • Elizabeth

            The gun nuts over here are neither sound or reasonable, they are irrational and arrogant, both conditions that can’t lead to anything good. We must have patience till they have dug that hole so deep for themselves that they can’t get out!

          • K-Rob

            I, like Carla, also like that policy and would embrace it. I am not a gun owner, myself. I have young children in the home who are way too clever and crafty for any comfort as it is, having a gun in the home in a safe only the president himself can open would mean no sleep for me until either the gun or my rugbrats were gone. Because, somehow, at some point, my son would find a way in that safe. He’s only two but, don’t let the toddler-ness of his age fool you, he is a critical thinker and those are the scariest toddlers EVER.

          • Elton Trudeau

            is beef jerky designed for the sole purpose to kill someone? Guns are.

          • Jay Hanig

            So that’s why the police carry them? So they can kill citizens?

        • Ken Soderstrom

          It seems that gun control extremists are generally violent people who wish harm on others. Maybe it is a good thing they are opposed to weapons and remain defenseless. I just wish they wouldn’t assume the rest of us share their violent streak.

          • XLancer

            Ignoring for the moment your baseless “extremist” charge, you obviously fail to recognize ironic satire when you see it. If it’s we who are sick and tired of this and other kinds of needless, preventable death by firearms who “wish harm on others,” why is it your ilk who continue to inflict it?

          • Ken Soderstrom

            Suggesting that “[wishing] the owners of the gun had shot themselves” is appropriate “ironic satire” is extremist. You are guilty as charged.

          • XLancer

            You are neither qualified to nor capable of judging. Anything.

          • Ken Soderstrom

            I had originally only described as extremist the person you are defending. However you have clearly also earned the title. Gun control extremist ~> XLancer.

          • XLancer

            We may now add “earned” to the list of words Ken does not understand. This list heretofore included “extremist,” “control,” “defenseless,” “violent” and “rational thought.”

          • Ken Soderstrom

            Give the gun control extremist all the consideration he is due.

          • Jay Hanig

            I have inflicted harm on no one. Thanks to my possession of a gun, no one has inflicted harm on me, though two tried.

          • Susan J. Elliott

            Do you think that people without guns are routinely harmed? They are not.

        • bob

          Did you read the story, This wasn’t a law abiding gun owner. Convicted felon he had the gun illegally.

      • 1EdMeadows83

        When did “Libtard” become a word? It’s no more a word than Repubturd is a word. It just portrays ignorance.

        • Susan J. Elliott

          I’m actually thinking of getting a bumper sticker that reads “Proud Libtard” I think it’s kinda cute. I love my liberal bias. It means I have a working brain and I use it.

  • Ken Soderstrom

    Yep. Until you succeed in revoking the right to bear arms there’s nothing you can do to stop it. The good news is armed citizens are associated with increased security and decreased violent crime. This is why violence has decreased 40% while “shall issue” concealed carry has become common. Places where violence remains a problem are largely “Gun Free” cities like Chicago and DC. Maybe you would be happier there?

  • 1EdMeadows83

    Adolf, wipe the foam from your lips and try, really try to face reality. I know it’s difficult but you should try. It’s not healthy to become so hysterical. It’s not your “Libtards” who profess violence, it’s you “Gunturds” Our violence is limited to words and speech. It’s you guys who want to pick up a gun at the slightest provocation. for instance, when you exhaust all your “logical” arguments, and then, after you calm down, you leave your guns lying around for two year olds to pick up.

    • Ken Soderstrom

      Who wants to “pick up a gun at the slightest provocation”? Your imagination is getting the best of you.

      Carrying a firearm makes one very careful to avoid conflict. You should try it.

      • 1EdMeadows83

        Yeah Kenny. Every time I go out packing heat I try to be very careful to avoid conflict. Your logic may have been pertinent in the old West back in the 1800s but, whether or not you’ve noticed, things have changed, except, possibly, in the Wayne LaPierre camp.

        • Ken Soderstrom

          The “Old West” was less violent by all measures than is today’s “Gun Free” Chicago. But you promote the policies that created the situation in Chicago?

          I know you don’t pick-up on information quickly, but violent crime has decreased 40% over peak levels in the late-80s/early-90s. This decreased violent crime is associated with expansion of “shall-issue” concealed carry now in 46 of the 50 states. Places where violence remains a problem or has increased are those that have remained “Gun Free”.

          So why do you promote increased violent crime?

  • XLancer

    How about, Adolph, you post *your* address and put a large sign in front of your home reading, “A virtual arsenal inside, and none of them are secured”? Then go out of town for a couple of days and see how many of your beloved guns are there when you get back?

    (You know who’d have ’em, don’t you? The people you got them to protect yourself from.)

  • RobertX

    What’s a few more dead children compared to our God-given right to arm ourselves to the teeth?

    • Elizabeth

      I wouldn’t doubt if some NRA loving Far Right Wing religious nut would have this picture and think it’s okay!!

  • Alan Batterman

    High-priced gun safes are not necessary. Just make guns with an electronic, rather than mechanical, trigger. And they would be self-locking. To unlock, a four digit code would have to be punched in. If the trigger is not pulled for 15 minutes, it would automatically lock. This would prevent children, if they find the gun, from discharging it. And if someone stole the gun, it would be useless to him.

    • Jay Hanig

      When the police have these on their service weapons, I will too.

    • Ken Soderstrom

      Yes. If I ever need the gun I carry for self-defense I’ll just ask for a “time out” to punch in the code.

    • Sean Sorrentino

      What color is the sky in your world, Alan? I’m supposed to code my gun while drawing it from its holster? Or is your real point that it would be better that I was unable to defend myself? Is that because you don’t care if I live or die?

      • Jerry Tilley

        I know I’m kind of leaning toward the latter after reading your innane comments on here.

    • joelferguson

      Impractical for self defense purposes. If there was a small child around, better safe handling measures should have been taken, like, not loading the weapon with one in the chamber. I doubt a two year old would have the strength to rack the slide and chamber a round.

  • Chris Ellis

    This is a tragic story of irresponsibility on the part of the parents. They are guilty of a Class 1 Misdemeanor and should be charged accordingly. Any punishment they receive will be nothing compared to the burden they have to live with knowing that their negligence led to the death of their child.

    That being said, any passage of more restrictive laws will do nothing to prevent more tragedies. They are only a burden to the responsible and law abiding.

  • Ken Soderstrom

    Well, as many expected it turns-out that the gun owner in this case was a paroled felon. Maybe we should ban felons from possessing firearms?

    http://www.wral.com/girl-2-dies-after-being-shot-inside-fayetteville-home/13017263/

  • Sean Sorrentino

    Once again all the “Liberals” and “Progressives” want to abuse gun owners over the death of a child.

    Let’s see what we can find out. Father’s name is Melvin Andre Clark, Jr. 19 years old.
    http://www.wral.com/girl-2-dies-after-being-shot-inside-fayetteville-home/13017263/

    Helpfully, the NC Department of Correction posts criminal records online.
    http://webapps6.doc.state.nc.us/opi/viewoffender.do?method=view&offenderID=1297741&searchLastName=Clark&searchFirstName=Melvin&listurl=pagelistoffendersearchresults&listpage=1

    Look at all those felonies. And not one day in prison. So he’s free to get a gun illegally, leave it loaded and under a couch, and let his daughter kill herself with it.
    Yeah, it’s the fault of all those stupid gun owners. Sure.

    • Ken Soderstrom

      Hey! Maybe we should just keep dangerous felons in prison?

      That way they won’t leave illegal guns laying around.

    • Ken Soderstrom

      Gosh. It looks like the “NRA = murder” set has lost interest.

      Maybe one of these years they can pin a gun accident or mass-murder on a ordinary gun owner instead of a felon or schizophrenic Democrat?

      Probably not though.

      • Tiffani Jones

        This case isn’t the same type of argument. This is a gun bought on the streets by a criminal. Most people aren’t against handguns or rifles or shotguns. We are against the types of weapons that can easily plow down a large number of people in a very small amount of time. Also, dumbass drunks with guns also kill innocent people. Don’t try denying that.

    • Tiffani Jones

      I can assure you that felon with a firearm is an automatic 5 years in federal prison.

  • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

    Information regarding the gun owner was not available at the time this was posted, and the link you provided was not one used in the above article. We always appreciate a reader alerting us to changes but please stop berating others that posted prior to this knowledge being available.

  • 1LEO

    How dare that terrible gun sneak its way into a convicted felons home and bring such tragedy. Wow, 19 year felon with a gun. 19. Which means he “purchased” the pistol legally? Right? Hum.

  • Susan J. Elliott

    Guns don’t kill two year olds. Two year olds bring it on themselves.

  • Carol Dijkhuyzen

    Courtesy of gun loving NRA..killing sprees.Stop the NRA.

    • Ken Soderstrom

      NRA does not support “Gun Free Zones” that create opportunities for “killing sprees”. You do that. Who should we stop?

      • Susan Weber

        Ken, did you realize that they have done studies where armed and trained civilians were tested on their reaction time when they were confronted with a gunman? None of them were able to react quick enough in the test to have prevented the gunman from shooting them. To think that we need an armed populus is unrealistic. Secondly, if everyone is walking around with guns and someone is shot, then the police will have a hard time discerning who is the suspect and who are the civilians. The police are against open carry for this reason.

        • Ken Soderstrom

          Yes. I’m aware of that media farce. Put a bunch of unsuspecting Navy SEALS in oversized clinging shirts covering their weapons surprised by an assailant who knows which one is armed, and you’ll have the same outcome.

          Firearms are used by Americans 800,000 to 3,000,000 times every year for self-defense. Like most tools they are misused. Like most tools they are more useful than they are misused.

    • Johnston Babcock

      The NRA neither condones or commits killing sprees. There is a law in NC that requires firearms to be secured from children. If law enforcement determines that there was negligence, then the owner will be charged under NC law.
      What this incident has to do with the NRA is beyond me.
      BTW thank you Susan Weber for more fun facts spin doctored by the Violence Policy Center.
      That is the same stupid trash I used to bear growing up; “never try to use a weapon against a criminal because he/she will take it away from you and use it against you!”
      Hogwash, tell that to the homeowner last week that was shot and killed by a burglar while he was calling 911. You hoplophobes just don’t get it.

  • Ken Soderstrom

    Either that or paroled felons.

  • Jay Hanig

    My goodness… the race card. Is that supposed to shut me up? You guys make me laugh.

    • Jerry Tilley

      No, seeing as you are a racist and conservative ( I realize using both words is redundant but I digress) I know that nohing short of an atomic bomb will ever get you guys to stop talking.

      But seriously, when you use the word ‘urban’, we all know what you mean.

  • Jay Hanig

    You tar the world with a wide brush, Susan. It is your position that the military and police are idiots, yet you are content to depend on them for protection. Ironic, if nothing else.

  • Jay Hanig

    Of course you are. We know how much you value life. Particularly someone else’s.

  • Jay Hanig

    BWAHAHAHAHA! Do you really think so?

  • Ken Leo Heintzman

    Responsibility and accountability should be placed on the owners of the weapons. Knives, guns, crossbows, bow-and-arrows, swords, anything that can kill you. I, myself, wouldn’t own a firearm, just because, I’d be scared for my own life. I would assume this firearm was purchased with the serials scratched off.
    I am not familiar with how to go about buying a firearm, but, is there not a psychological evaluation that is required before you purchase one? Sure, i know that that isn’t going to be the end all and be all of owning a registered firearm.

  • dmsloma

    Ken there is not psychological evaluations, before buying guns, this is the problem!

  • Ken Soderstrom

    Are there other rights that you would like to be subject to the prior restraint of psychiatric evaluations or just the one to bear arms?

    But I do agree that the policy of deinstitutionalization has been a failure and we need to return to a system for dealing with mental illness that works.

  • Ken Soderstrom

    Yep. More clear violent tendencies from a gun control extremist. It is OK that you don’t trust yourself to be armed. You need to learn not to assume that the rest of us are like you.

  • David Fredrickson Jr.

    If you are worried about the serial numbers; Don’t buy from the crack dealer down the block, buy from a FFL. Fucking dumbest thing I have ever read

  • Tiffani Jones

    Why is this baby awake and near a loaded gun at 12:30 IN THE FRICKIING MORNING?

  • Tiffani Jones

    I missed the part of the story that stated one or more of the people in the house was a felon

  • Tiffani Jones

    There is an inaccuracy in this story. This story says 12:39am, but the news story says 12:30pm, which is a major difference. You ought to change that.

  • David Hedricks

    And this was the guns fault? No. Whomever left it unattended and available for the child to find is at fault, not the gun. Lock ’em up if you have children.

  • Jae Ashley Stewart

    It’s the parents’ fault, not the gun’s fault.