Discussion: The Second Amendment V

[DeadPresident]

Wait wait wait, so you're saying it's legal in the first place to allow a child whose age is still in single figures to operate a full automatic weapon? Under supervision or not that level of stupidity is alarming.

 

[Feenix]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...nds-9-year-old-an-uzi-now-hes-dead/?tid=hp_mm

Because teaching a child to shoot an automatic weapon is necessary?

Wait for it. The NRA will be advocating for children to have guns so they can defend themselves against potential school shooters.

 

[Destructus86]

Wait wait wait, so you're saying it's legal in the first place to allow a child whose age is still in single figures to operate a full automatic weapon? Under supervision or not that level of stupidity is alarming.

Very much so. But the NRA will defend it with their lives...because the NRA don't actually care about lives...they care about their so called "freedom" regardless of how many people die so they can have their little hobby.

 

[Destructus86]

I know this probably isn't feasible without the vocal group of gun nuts losing their minds but I would like to see all sales have to go through a dealer so the proper process is verified and followed as well as all guns registered to an owner so they can be traced. If a weapon you are responsible for is used in a crime you should be held somewhat responsible. I know that will never happen but I think that would go a long way in deterring the sale of guns willy nilly

Smart guns are the weapon to go. There would be virtually no more accident shootings and no more mentally ill people grabbing their parents gun to go shoot up a mall or theater. Or at least almost none...especially if you combine smart guns with stronger gun restrictions and regulations.

but once again...no one wants a solution because they want their little hobby regardless of how many die for them to keep it.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

Very much so. But the NRA will defend it with their lives...because the NRA don't actually care about lives...they care about their so called "freedom" regardless of how many people die so they can have their little hobby.

How is it the NRA's fault here? The accident took place on a range that is regulated by the government since it has automatic weapons and was the first accident at the range in 14 years of operation. This wasn't some incident that took place in a home or on the street. I say they just need to review their policies on who can fire automatics at the range and improve safety protocols.

 

[Destructus86]

How is it the NRA's fault here? The accident took place on a range that is regulated by the government since it has automatic weapons and was the first accident at the range in 14 years of operation. This wasn't some incident that took place in a home or on the street. I say they just need to review their policies on who can fire automatics at the range and improve safety protocols.

there is NO NEED to own or fire automatic weapons.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

there is NO NEED to own or fire automatic weapons.

There's no need for the average person to go skydiving, yet people still do it. Just like that, firing automatic weapons is an activity that some people do in a typically very controlled environment and under close supervision by the operators/owners of the guns and range. This is just a case of where a little more common sense from the range supervisor should have been used in letting an inexperienced 9-year old fire a full-auto SMG. It would have actually been safer to let her use a MG on a bipod/tripod mount (since it has less chance to run away due to the weight and restrictions caused by mount and gun) than a handheld gun not meant for someone small in stature to control.

 

[DeadPresident]

How is it the NRA's fault here? The accident took place on a range that is regulated by the government since it has automatic weapons and was the first accident at the range in 14 years of operation. This wasn't some incident that took place in a home or on the street. I say they just need to review their policies on who can fire automatics at the range and improve safety protocols.

You have to admit though that "Don't let a 9 year old fire an Uzi" doesn't exactly sound like it should be a "safety protocol" as much as very, very basic logic? Not even considering the moral and ethical questions coming with surrounding a child that young with relatively pervasive and violent discourse that may surround the firearm environment.

I mean I'm all for indoctrinating one's children to defend their belongings from the invading immigrant hordes with gunfire from as young as possible, but 9 years old...it shouldn't be surprising there's this isolated incident where somebody avoidably lost their life.

 

[SV Fan]

I say they just need to review their policies on who can fire automatics at the range and improve safety protocols.

How dare you try regulate 9 year olds 2nd amendment rights. First we regulate 9 year olds that will lead to the slippery slope of regulating 10 year olds.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

How dare you try regulate 9 year olds 2nd amendment rights. First we regulate 9 year olds that will lead to the slippery slope of regulating 10 year olds.

This isn't even about the 2nd Amendment so cut it out. This is more about safety at a place of business that allows people to fire guns under supervision than any type of gun ownership issues. The range owns the guns and should have had tighter parameters for who is allowed to shoot their guns. There are plenty of ranges with automatic weapons that place pretty strict rules for customers operating on their premises. That's why you don't see many accidents in the news more often at these types of places. A little more common sense from the range supervisor and the parents would have prevented this.

 

[mrvlknight21]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...nds-9-year-old-an-uzi-now-hes-dead/?tid=hp_mm

there is NO NEED to own or fire automatic weapons.

There's no need for the average person to go skydiving, yet people still do it. Just like that, firing automatic weapons is an activity that some people do in a typically very controlled environment and under close supervision by the operators/owners of the guns and range. This is just a case of where a little more common sense from the range supervisor should have been used in letting an inexperienced 9-year old fire a full-auto SMG. It would have actually been safer to let her use a MG on a bipod/tripod mount (since it has less chance to run away due to the weight and restrictions caused by mount and gun) than a handheld gun not meant for someone small in stature to control.

You have to admit though that "Don't let a 9 year old fire an Uzi" doesn't exactly sound like it should be a "safety protocol" as much as very, very basic logic? Not even considering the moral and ethical questions coming with surrounding a child that young with relatively pervasive and violent discourse that may surround the firearm environment.

I mean I'm all for indoctrinating one's children to defend their belongings from the invading immigrant hordes with gunfire from as young as possible, but 9 years old...it shouldn't be surprising there's this isolated incident where somebody avoidably lost their life.

This isn't even about the 2nd Amendment so cut it out. This is more about safety at a place of business that allows people to fire guns under supervision than any type of gun ownership issues. The range owns the guns and should have had tighter parameters for who is allowed to shoot their guns. There are plenty of ranges with automatic weapons that place pretty strict rules for customers operating on their premises. That's why you don't see many accidents in the news more often at these types of places. A little more common sense from the range supervisor and the parents would have prevented this.

While I would not let my children (both under 9 years old right now) fire any sort of automatic firearm under any form of supervision, I wanted to approach this from a different angle.

Ok, so the parents were clearly ok with their 9 year old daughter firing this Uzi and apparently the range, with the experienced instructors was as ok with this as well. I do not want to speak ill of the dead, but an incredibly simple safety idea would be to only load 3-4 rounds, for a quick full auto burst, to give this child (or perhaps the parents) that thrill, with a little less chance of something going wrong. The gun would have likely run empty before the recoil took it out at such an angle to come near the instructor.

It is hard for me to tell how many shots are fired, for various reasons, but I am guessing it was at least 5 before the now famous video cuts out (before the instructor is hit). But again, assuming everyone involved is ok with all other aspects of this girl shooting the Uzi on full auto, this step may have prevented this death. But, as always, hindsight is 20/20

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

This is what happens to people who open carry toy guns in Ohio:

http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=29629407&postcount=437

 

[The Overlord]

There's no need for the average person to go skydiving, yet people still do it. Just like that, firing automatic weapons is an activity that some people do in a typically very controlled environment and under close supervision by the operators/owners of the guns and range. This is just a case of where a little more common sense from the range supervisor should have been used in letting an inexperienced 9-year old fire a full-auto SMG. It would have actually been safer to let her use a MG on a bipod/tripod mount (since it has less chance to run away due to the weight and restrictions caused by mount and gun) than a handheld gun not meant for someone small in stature to control.

We don't allow children under 16 to drive cars, so why should we allow children to handle fire arms?

 

[wiegeabo]

We don't allow children under 16 to drive cars, so why should we allow children to handle fire arms?

Actually, we don't allow children to drive on public roads under 16.

Except they can get permits at 15.

And, in California at least, they can get an exemption that lets them get a license as young as 14 and a half.

And on private property, there is no age restriction (again, at least in California).

It comes down to the parents and the trust and training they put into the child.


My sister and I have been firing guns since we were each around 9 years old. We were also properly trained and taught weapon respect, and had an adult with us every time. But, we were also only allowed to fire a .22 rifle until we were older and could handle recoil.

 

[dnno1]

Actually, you have to be at least 15.5 years old to get a drivers permit, 16 to get a restricted license, and 18 to get a full license in California.

 

[SV Fan]

We don't allow children under 16 to drive cars, so why should we allow children to handle fire arms?

Because the founding fathers didn't come up with any rules about cars in the Constitution and because the founding father had great foresight to see 230+ years into the future and cars weren't a big part of what makes America be America so you can change the rules as you see fit.

Guns on the other hand, it's our god given right to give 9 year olds uzis, so says the founding fathers who knew full well that writing a pro militia amendment was all about getting those uzis in people's hands while they go shot happy at gun ranges that serve burgers.

 

[Thundercrack85]

Honestly, I couldn't believe this story when I read it.

Then I saw it.

That girl is going to have some serious trauma because of her stupid parents and that instructor.

What sane person gives a 9 year old girl a ****ing Uzi?

In any other country you would have your children taken away. I hope these parents are being watched.

I think we reached a new level of crazy when I read that article where the guy criticized the instructor, and then said she should have started with a shotgun.

Here's a crazy thought: how about just no deadly weapons for little kids?

 

[hippie_hunter]

there is NO NEED to own or fire automatic weapons.

That really is the problem with the current gun rights movement. I argue with my gun nut friends all the damn time in how we need to change our viewpoint on how we are somehow entitled to automatics under the Second Amendment (which we're not) and how they act like they NEED them like a crack addict needs a fix. To which my friend told me that I have no place to determine what a person needs.

We need a new perspective that isn't as alienating, one that actually have factual basis, and from the perspective of property rights, not some non-existent God given right to an AR-15.

 

[warhorse78]

Actually, we don't allow children to drive on public roads under 16.

Except they can get permits at 15.

And, in California at least, they can get an exemption that lets them get a license as young as 14 and a half.

And on private property, there is no age restriction (again, at least in California).

It comes down to the parents and the trust and training they put into the child.


My sister and I have been firing guns since we were each around 9 years old. We were also properly trained and taught weapon respect, and had an adult with us every time. But, we were also only allowed to fire a .22 rifle until we were older and could handle recoil.

This! I was driving cars, three wheelers, motorcycle and golf carts since I was 7, because it was on private property. I've been handling guns as well since I was 7. But with that in mind, yes, I think the whole situation with this little girl was the result of moronic adults.

 

[warhorse78]

Honestly, I couldn't believe this story when I read it.

Then I saw it.

That girl is going to have some serious trauma because of her stupid parents and that instructor.

What sane person gives a 9 year old girl a ****ing Uzi?

In any other country you would have your children taken away. I hope these parents are being watched.

I think we reached a new level of crazy when I read that article where the guy criticized the instructor, and then said she should have started with a shotgun.

Here's a crazy thought: how about just no deadly weapons for little kids?

This is false. I lost the count of how many videos I have seen where the middl east is teching kids to shoot weapons of all sorts, including automatics.

 

[Thundercrack85]

Okay. Countries in the developed world.

Better?

 

[Webfoot Hero]

That really is the problem with the current gun rights movement. I argue with my gun nut friends all the damn time in how we need to change our viewpoint on how we are somehow entitled to automatics under the Second Amendment (which we're not) and how they act like they NEED them like a crack addict needs a fix. To which my friend told me that I have no place to determine what a person needs.

We need a new perspective that isn't as alienating, one that actually have factual basis, and from the perspective of property rights, not some non-existent God given right to an AR-15.

Who feels they're entitled to automatics? Most gun owners already know they can't really get automatics and have no purpose except for a bit of a thrill at full-auto ranges. Fully automatic weapons are highly regulated by the government through licensing and background checks and most aren't available due to the cost and limited numbers around. The case with the 9-year old girl, to me, has nothing to do with 2nd Amendment rights and gun ownership since at the place where the incident occurred, they basically were renting them (which is the case at just about every full-auto range) from the range to shoot at targets there and no where else. This is more of a case of poor rules set by the range owners and lack of good judgement by the parents and range supervisor. I don't get the calls for more gun control after this case when private gun ownership is not really an issue here.

This editorial points out some basics that should have occurred at this particular range with regards to full-autos and a novice shooter.

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2014/08/27/fully-automatic-firearms-safety-tragedy-arizona/

 

[The Overlord]

This! I was driving cars, three wheelers, motorcycle and golf carts since I was 7, because it was on private property. I've been handling guns as well since I was 7. But with that in mind, yes, I think the whole situation with this little girl was the result of moronic adults.

It seems very irresponsible to allow a 7 year old to drive a car or handle a gun, whether on private property or not. If an adult gave a kid a beer on private property, would people think that was okay?

Children do not get the same exact rights as adults for a reason, we don't give kids things they can't handle because they are not developed enough, even if it is done on property property. Children are not mini adults. Sure maybe a few kids could handle some of this stuff, but where do we draw line for kids in general?

There is a thin line between promoting freedom and just being irresponsible and letting kids handle cars or fire arms is irresponsible and reckless and I have seen a lot of horror stories where it leads to tragic consequences.

 

[hippie_hunter]

Who feels they're entitled to automatics? Most gun owners already know they can't really get automatics and have no purpose except for a bit of a thrill at full-auto ranges. Fully automatic weapons are highly regulated by the government through licensing and background checks and most aren't available due to the cost and limited numbers around. The case with the 9-year old girl, to me, has nothing to do with 2nd Amendment rights and gun ownership since at the place where the incident occurred, they basically were renting them (which is the case at just about every full-auto range) from the range to shoot at targets there and no where else. This is more of a case of poor rules set by the range owners and lack of good judgement by the parents and range supervisor. I don't get the calls for more gun control after this case when private gun ownership is not really an issue here.

This editorial points out some basics that should have occurred at this particular range with regards to full-autos and a novice shooter.

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2014/08/27/fully-automatic-firearms-safety-tragedy-arizona/

My gun nut friends are so separated from reality that they genuinely believe that they are entitled to automatics if they wanted them and think that even the most minor of regulations is a massive infringement on their rights. They think that the Second Amendment is greater than all other rights and that it is the main basis of protection of all their other rights. And then of course when their other rights are being infringed such as freedom of press and speech, they do not care, just as long as their guns aren't being touched. They believe in lies and stupidity. I am speaking this not from what I read or hear on some biased news source or some crazy progressive friend, this is from personal experience of how utterly deluded the gun rights movement has become.

And here's the thing, I'm not arguing in favor of more gun control. I firmly believe that any responsible law abiding citizen should own what they want without the government infringing upon their God given property rights. What I am arguing is that we desperately need a change in tactics. Because at the rate we are going, it's all going to come crashing down on us eventually. We are going to alienate the average person so much to the point where they're going to see authoritarians like Michael Bloomberg as sane and rational alternatives when they're not. We're going to drive them right into Bloomberg's arms.

To sum it up, we need to stop acting like petulant children and become smarter.

 

[chamber-music]

Continuing details of the Uzi girl who shot her instructor
Uzi 'too much' for girl who accidentally shot instructor, report says

The mother of a 9-year-old girl who accidentally killed her gun instructor while learning to fire an Uzi told sheriff's deputies that the weapon was "too much for her" daughter and that it hurt the girl's shoulder, according to a report released Tuesday by the Mohave County Sheriff's Office.

The girl’s father told a deputy that he, his wife and three children arrived at Last Stop in White Hills, Ariz., around 9:45 a.m. Aug. 25 and took a ride in a monster truck before being brought to the establishment’s Burgers and Bullets shooting range, the report said.

According to the report: The father said he shot the gun first. Then, instructor Charles Vacca began showing the girl how to fire the Uzi. After she fired off “a couple of rounds,” her father said, he suddenly heard several rounds fire and saw her drop the gun. She was holding her shoulder, so the family thought she was injured and crowded around her without realizing Vacca had been hit, he said.

The girl’s mother told a deputy that her daughter said the Mini-Uzi “was too much for her and it hurt her shoulder,” according to the report.

Another gun instructor told a deputy he saw the recoil put the Uzi into the path of Vacca’s head. He saw Vacca fall, noticed heavy bleeding from Vacca’s head and hurried to apply pressure to the wound and call 911, the report said. The father said that’s when he realized Vacca had been hit.

The parents said they quickly brought their children into the establishment’s restaurant so the kids would not see what had happened.

The emergency call came in at 10:02 a.m., according to the report. Vacca died at a Las Vegas hospital that night.

Last week, asked why a 9-year-old had access to the automatic weapon, range operator Sam Scarmardo told local television station KTNV that Bullets and Burgers allows children 8 and older to shoot firearms. “We instruct kids as young as 5 in .22 rifles,” he said. “They’re under the supervision of their parents and of our professional range masters.”

The Mohave County Sheriff’s Office has said it will not file charges.

From the LA Times