At least she wasn't smoking

[Matthias]

I don't have a source, but I'm pretty sure that in most shootings a gun is involved

You can be as cutesy as you want but neither of those statistics were about shootings.

One was about homicides. The other was about suicides.

You can do both with other things, but they're harder and less likely to create a situation that can't be fixed at a hospital.

As I said, first responsible choice: have guns or children, not both.
Second (less) responsible choice: have both, lock up one.
Third (least) responsible choice: have both unlocked and then make fun of someone else for endangering their child.

[dream_017]

I don't have a source, but I'm pretty sure that in most shootings a gun is involved

You can be as cutesy as you want but neither of those statistics were about shootings.

One was about homicides. The other was about suicides.

You can do both with other things, but they're harder and less likely to create a situation that can't be fixed at a hospital.

As I said, first responsible choice: have guns or children, not both.
Second (less) responsible choice: have both, lock up one.
Third (least) responsible choice: have both unlocked and then make fun of someone else for endangering their child.

Nowhere did my statistic say it was a reflection of your stats about homicide and suicide. Just that shootings usually involve guns. I didn't look at the stats but does it show how many cases had a gun in the home prior to the decision? There are a ton of factors that go into these decisions.

[Matthias]

I don't have a source, but I'm pretty sure that in most shootings a gun is involved

You can be as cutesy as you want but neither of those statistics were about shootings.

One was about homicides. The other was about suicides.

You can do both with other things, but they're harder and less likely to create a situation that can't be fixed at a hospital.

As I said, first responsible choice: have guns or children, not both.
Second (less) responsible choice: have both, lock up one.
Third (least) responsible choice: have both unlocked and then make fun of someone else for endangering their child.

Nowhere did my statistic say it was a reflection of your stats about homicide and suicide. Just that shootings usually involve guns. I didn't look at the stats but does it show how many cases had a gun in the home prior to the decision? There are a ton of factors that go into these decisions.

Since it's so tough to read two sentences, I'll bold part of one of them.

Studies have also shown that homes in which a suicide occurred were three to five times more likely to have a gun present than households that did not experience a suicide, even after accounting for other risk factors.

And no, you didn't say it was a reflection of your stats. You just made some off-color joke on an issue that is deadly serious to me. If you don't understand why, then you really should read what I said.

[Omaha Red Sox]

At least she didn't kill her child.

Parents should really examine whether they want their children or their guns in their house. Having both is dangerous.

Are you serious?

Ummmm..... yeah.

In homes with guns, a member of the household is almost three times as likely to be the victim of a homicide compared to gun-free homes.

(source)

Studies have also shown that homes in which a suicide occurred were three to five times more likely to have a gun present than households that did not experience a suicide, even after accounting for other risk factors.

(source)

I have a brother who has struggled with issues of depression and twice in his life my dad has come downstairs in the morning to find my brother holding a fully loaded double-barreled shotgun going back and forth whether he should pull the trigger. So don't give me any internet crap like or or .

First of all, you posted an article about a gun accident, not a suicide. Second of all, there are 250+ million gun owners in America. The firearm accident death rate is at an all-time low, 0.2 per 100,000. Meaning, the odds of a child dying in a firearm related accident are a million to one.

A few other points for you to consider:

Guns are used approximately 2.5 million times a year in self-defense. Meaning, guns are used more than 80 times more often to protect a citizen's life than to take a citizen's life. Even if you believe these numbers are inflated, the Clinton administration admitted it was at least 1.5 millions instances per year.

Counties that have passed concealed carry laws reduced their rate of murder by 8.5%, rape by 5%, aggravated assault by 7%, and robbery by 3%.

Twice as many children are killing playing football than are murdered by guns. In a 3 year period 45 kids were killed playing football, compared to 22 in that same period. So let's ban football too.

In the 1990s the number of guns in the US increased by approximately 40 million, while the murder rate decreased approximately 40%. Accidental gun deaths in the home decreased 40% as well.

Even the Clinton administration admitted that guns are more likely to save a life than take one.

More importantly, most home gun accident victims were the victims of guns not from their home, but from an intruder bringing their own gun to commit a crime.

In 1982, Kennesaw, GA passed a law requiring heads of households to keep at least one firearm in the house. The residential burglary rate subsequently dropped 89%.

A Justice Department study found that 3/5 of felons polled agreed that "a criminal is not going to mess around with a victim he knows is armed with a gun". 74% of felons polled agreed that "one reason burglars avoid houses when people are at home is that they fear being shot during the crime". And 57% of felons polled agreed that "criminals are more worried about meeting an armed victim than they are about running into the police".

Despite the low number of gun accidents among children (compared to other accidents like auto, fire, drowning, etc.), most of these fatalitites are not truly "accidents". Many are are actually suicides or extreme cases of child abuse.

If you have a child, you should not have guns. If you absolutely must have both, the guns should be locked in a storage closet that they cannot access. If you cannot do either of these things, then the last thing you should do is make fun of some women who is breast-feeding her infant in her car.

Nice to see we agree on something. I am a father and own guns. These guns are always locked up. I'm sorry to hear about your brother's battles with depression. You didn't tell us how he got the gun, not that it matters. My father has been a lifetime member of the NRA, but has never owned a gun. He got us guns when we were kids, but I got a gun before that on my own. It was easy. It's way easy to get a gun. A depressed teenager doesn't need a gun in the house to kill themselves. It's plenty easy to go get their own.

Suggesting that law abiding citizens should give up their Constitutional right to own a gun because of a fraction of a percent of irresponsible gun owners is preposterous to say the least. You think criminals will follow these laws? No. Why? Because they're criminals. If you were to ban firearms like you're basically suggesting in some form, law abiding citizens would give them up and the criminals would still have them. History has shown this doesn't work. It has a negative effect. Check the criminal rates for DC and Arlington, VA. Drastically different gun laws, drastically different crime rates. Accidents happen, just like in a car, on a football field, at the lake, walking down stairs. Taking away a citizen's rights because of a fear you have of an improbably accident is paranoia, not rational thinking.

EDIT - I mistyped. My father bought us our own rifles before I ever obtained one on my own. I bought a 9mm handgun from a friend of a friend for $200 when I was 16. I bought my first rifle, a 22mag, when I was 13 I believe.

[Matthias]

Taking away a citizen's rights because of a fear you have of an improbably accident is paranoia, not rational thinking.

Tell me about it.

Well, obviously we don't have to point out how irresponsible this is. She basically admitted that she didn't think it was and will likely do it again. Can you imagine the carnage if she were to get in an accident and that airbag went off with that bag in her lap against it? I don't want to the think about.

[dream_017]

And no, you didn't say it was a reflection of your stats. You just made some off-color joke on an issue that is deadly serious to me. If you don't understand why, then you really should read what I said.

What joke. It doesn't come as a surprise to me that households with guns have a higher suicide or homicide rate, and I'm guess it doesn't come to a surprise to most people. I did read your situation and it is not for me to comment on because I'd like to stick around

[Omaha Red Sox]

Taking away a citizen's rights because of a fear you have of an improbably accident is paranoia, not rational thinking.

Tell me about it.

Well, obviously we don't have to point out how irresponsible this is. She basically admitted that she didn't think it was and will likely do it again. Can you imagine the carnage if she were to get in an accident and that airbag went off with that bag in her lap against it? I don't want to the think about.

Point please?

I didn't refer to taking away her rights or anything. Driving with a child on her lap is against the law. Owning a gun isn't. If this point were a dart board, you missed.

[Omaha Red Sox]

I can't believe this conversation went this way. Ridiculous. How did we go from a mother who drives with a breastfeeding baby on her lap to an accidental discharge from a firearm? Matthias, I think you're really reaching for a fight here. If you wanted to discuss gun rights why didn't you open your own thread on the topic instead of basically hijacking this one?

[Matthias]

I can't believe this conversation went this way. Ridiculous. How did we go from a mother who drives with a breastfeeding baby on her lap to an accidental discharge from a firearm? Matthias, I think you're really reaching for a fight here. If you wanted to discuss gun rights why didn't you open your own thread on the topic instead of basically hijacking this one?

Because I didn't want to discuss gun rights and it's not what the discussion is about. The discussion was about behavior that was reckless and endangering the lives of children. You're the only one who even tried to make it a rights issue; I was always talking about behavior and being responsible.

[Omaha Red Sox]

I can't believe this conversation went this way. Ridiculous. How did we go from a mother who drives with a breastfeeding baby on her lap to an accidental discharge from a firearm? Matthias, I think you're really reaching for a fight here. If you wanted to discuss gun rights why didn't you open your own thread on the topic instead of basically hijacking this one?

Because I didn't want to discuss gun rights and it's not what the discussion is about. The discussion was about behavior that was reckless and endangering the lives of children. You're the only one who even tried to make it a rights issue; I was always talking about behavior and being responsible.

No, you said guns or kids, you shouldn't have both.