kids shooting kids

[Matt Dillon]

That's just common sense. It should be a requirement punishable by law if not followed. You don't leave poisonous chemicals, loaded nail guns, lighter fluid and matches, and other dangerous stuff around where kids can get at it.

Some ppl are too fucking stupid to own guns. Or matches.

Oh! But I thought I was on ignore! 'Sup?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Kids shooting other kids is a byproduct of our terrible weak gun laws. We value guns more than human lives. That is who we are. We have buried 1300 kids a year since forever and many more injured. But at least we have guns.

Disagreed, but yours is exactly the attitude I've been discussing with TOW.

Please describe to me why you think a harsher penalty should be placed on person responsible for leaving an accessible firearm than a person who left a car running with kids in it on a pier? Next to power cutting tools? An axe? Kitchen knife?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Oh! But I thought I was on ignore! 'Sup?

Isn't it pudding time, Old Timer?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

We have many such laws already on the books, and have had for decades. If you display a weapon while robbing a bank or liquor store, your sentence is going to be harsher than somehow who merely presents a robbery note. I haven't noticed any gun fans crying about *that.*

I think there's a difference between an intentional act and negligence regardless of means. There's a harsher penalty for a person who intentionally plows into a crowd versus accidentally/negligently doing so. There's a harsher penalty for DUI, an intentional act. There's no greater Federal restrictions being offered by the Democratic Party to ban or restrict cars or booze with greater laws than exist now. Why are guns treated differently by them?