Re: => 4-year-old boy loads gun, shoots himself <= American Gun MADNESS !!
Bob
wrote:
|>4-year-old boy loads gun, shoots himself
|>YouNewsTVT
|>Story Published: Sep 9, 2008 at 8:21 AM PDT
|>
|>Story Updated: Sep 9, 2008 at 10:55 AM PDT
|>
|>By Associated Press
|>EUGENE, Ore. (AP) - The father of a 4-year-old Cottage Grove boy says his
|>child loaded a bullet into a borrowed gun and accidentally shot himself.
|>
|>In a statement released Monday through Oregon Health & Science University in
|>Portland, Travis Davis said his son, Bryce, is doing remarkably well.
|>
|>Doctors removed the bullet, which had slightly penetrated his skull.
|>
|>Officials report the boy in good condition at Doernbecher Childrens Hospital
|>in Portland.
|>
|>Davis said that doctors believe there will be no permanent effects from the
|>wound, even though it was serious.
|>
|>The gun was unloaded, but the boy found a smaller bullet that was the wrong
|>size, and it still fired when loaded in the gun.
|>
There is a place for trigger locks and safes with a 4 year old
toddler around, even if he found a bullet that did not match the gun.
I could presume he loaded a .22 rimfire into a centerfire and the
firing pin broke the rimfire's primer, as the sizes would match.....
It could be all kinds of combinations too, but we don't need a 4
year old genius gunsmith right now!
_ Prof. Jonez _
> On 15 Sep, 00:26, Bob <r...@armageddon.info> wrote:
>> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 18:58:31 -0600, "Reality_CheckŠ"
>> <Real...@Check.it> wrote:
>>
>>>> 4-year-old boy loads gun, shoots himself
>
>
> but why doesn't anyone want to ban pools?
Many jurisdictions mandate liability insurance for pools, so when
the tragedy does happen, compensation is available to the victims/survivors.
So you support mandatory liability insurance for gun owners?
Scout
"_ Prof. Jonez _" <the...@jonez.net> wrote in message
news:6jabn6F...@mid.individual.net...
> fl_...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On 15 Sep, 00:26, Bob <r...@armageddon.info> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 18:58:31 -0600, "Reality_CheckŠ"
>>> <Real...@Check.it> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> 4-year-old boy loads gun, shoots himself
>>
>>
>> Swimming pool drownings of toddlers outpace gun accidents many-fold,
>> but why doesn't anyone want to ban pools?
>
> Many jurisdictions mandate liability insurance for pools,
Cite.
> so when
> the tragedy does happen, compensation is available to the
> victims/survivors.
Assuming you happen to live in one of those jurisdications, evidence which
has not yet been produced.
> So you support mandatory liability insurance for gun owners?
Sure, I think everyone should carry liability insurance. Whether that should
be something the government can mandate is another issue, but with guns the
cost would be utterly minimal since accidents are quite rare.
_ Prof. Jonez _
>>> On 15 Sep, 00:26, Bob <r...@armageddon.info> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 18:58:31 -0600, "Reality_CheckŠ"
>>>> <Real...@Check.it> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> 4-year-old boy loads gun, shoots himself
>>>
>>>
>>> Swimming pool drownings of toddlers outpace gun accidents many-fold,
>>> but why doesn't anyone want to ban pools?
>>
>> Many jurisdictions mandate liability insurance for pools,
>
> Cite.
Are you so stupid as to be unaware of this?
>
>> so when
>> the tragedy does happen, compensation is available to the
>> victims/survivors.
>
> Assuming you happen to live in one of those jurisdications, evidence
> which has not yet been produced.
Your ignorance doesn't make it untrue.
>
>> So you support mandatory liability insurance for gun owners?
>
> Sure, I think everyone should carry liability insurance.
Good.
Scout
> Scout wrote:
>> "_ Prof. Jonez _" <the...@jonez.net> wrote in message
>>> fl_...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>> On 15 Sep, 00:26, Bob <r...@armageddon.info> wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 18:58:31 -0600, "Reality_CheckŠ"
>>>>> <Real...@Check.it> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> 4-year-old boy loads gun, shoots himself
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Swimming pool drownings of toddlers outpace gun accidents many-fold,
>>>> but why doesn't anyone want to ban pools?
>>>
>>> Many jurisdictions mandate liability insurance for pools,
>>
>> Cite.
>
> Are you so stupid as to be unaware of this?
I take that to mean you can't provide a cite?
>>> so when
>>> the tragedy does happen, compensation is available to the
>>> victims/survivors.
>>
>> Assuming you happen to live in one of those jurisdications, evidence
>> which has not yet been produced.
>
> Your ignorance doesn't make it untrue.
Neither does your assertion meam it is true.
That's why I asked you for a cite, because I don't know that your assertion
is factual.
>>> So you support mandatory liability insurance for gun owners?
>>
>> Sure, I think everyone should carry liability insurance.
>
> Good.
But since you snipped out my other thoughts on this, then I take that to
mean you accept that they shouldn't be mandated by government.
Otherwise you would have addressed the point raised.
_ Prof. Jonez _
> "_ Prof. Jonez _" <the...@jonez.net> wrote in message
>> Scout wrote:
>>> "_ Prof. Jonez _" <the...@jonez.net> wrote in message
>>>> fl_...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>>> On 15 Sep, 00:26, Bob <r...@armageddon.info> wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 18:58:31 -0600, "Reality_CheckŠ"
>>>>>> <Real...@Check.it> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 4-year-old boy loads gun, shoots himself
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Swimming pool drownings of toddlers outpace gun accidents
>>>>> many-fold, but why doesn't anyone want to ban pools?
>>>>
>>>> Many jurisdictions mandate liability insurance for pools,
>>>
>>> Cite.
>>
>> Are you so stupid as to be unaware of this?
>
> I take that to mean you can't provide a cite?
You're stupidity is showing again.
>
>
>>>> so when
>>>> the tragedy does happen, compensation is available to the
>>>> victims/survivors.
>>>
>>> Assuming you happen to live in one of those jurisdications, evidence
>>> which has not yet been produced.
>>
>> Your ignorance doesn't make it untrue.
>
> Neither does your assertion meam it is true.
So will the sun rise in the east tomorrow without a "cite", eh numbnuts?
>
> That's why I asked you for a cite, because I don't know that your
> assertion is factual.
There are myriad things you don't know. Not surprising that
you're such a demonstrable ignoramus.
>
>>>> So you support mandatory liability insurance for gun owners?
>>>
>>> Sure, I think everyone should carry liability insurance.
>>
>> Good.
>
> But since you snipped out my other thoughts on this, then I take that
> to mean you accept that they shouldn't be mandated by government.
Yet you support mandatory auto insurance.
Scout
> Scout wrote:
>> "_ Prof. Jonez _" <the...@jonez.net> wrote in message
>>> Scout wrote:
>>>> "_ Prof. Jonez _" <the...@jonez.net> wrote in message
>>>>> fl_...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>>>> On 15 Sep, 00:26, Bob <r...@armageddon.info> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 18:58:31 -0600, "Reality_CheckŠ"
>>>>>>> <Real...@Check.it> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 4-year-old boy loads gun, shoots himself
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Swimming pool drownings of toddlers outpace gun accidents
>>>>>> many-fold, but why doesn't anyone want to ban pools?
>>>>>
>>>>> Many jurisdictions mandate liability insurance for pools,
>>>>
>>>> Cite.
>>>
>>> Are you so stupid as to be unaware of this?
>>
>> I take that to mean you can't provide a cite?
>
> You're stupidity is showing again.
Really? Then you are going to present a cite?
When exactly should I expect to see you do so then?
If you're not then your attempted insult fails.
>>>>> so when
>>>>> the tragedy does happen, compensation is available to the
>>>>> victims/survivors.
>>>>
>>>> Assuming you happen to live in one of those jurisdications, evidence
>>>> which has not yet been produced.
>>>
>>> Your ignorance doesn't make it untrue.
>>
>> Neither does your assertion meam it is true.
>
> So will the sun rise in the east tomorrow without a "cite", eh numbnuts?
but if you said it was going to rise in the west, then would that make your
claim true simply because you said it?
If the sun rises in the east, or west, or north, or whatever, then you
should be able to produce a cite to back that up. So it is with your
assertion about liability insurance for pools. You claim it is manditory in
many jurisdications, and if true then you should be able to produce cite(s)
that show that claim to be true. I'm not making any judgement on whether the
claim is true or false at this point, I'm simply asking that you support it
with evidence.
If you can't, then I can either attempt to find out for myself or simply
dismiss your assertions as unsupported, and thus without creditance.
>> That's why I asked you for a cite, because I don't know that your
>> assertion is factual.
>
> There are myriad things you don't know.
Absolutely.
> Not surprising that
> you're such a demonstrable ignoramus.
I never claimed to know absolutely everything about everything, though you
seem to imply that everyone should. I do know a lot about many subjects,
some about a whole lot more, and a little bit about a vast array of
subjects. Whether I know more or less that someone else depends on the
subjects being discussed. I don't claim to be an expert on the laws of every
jurisdication in the nation, or even most of them, or even many of them. You
seem to claim you do know them, at least in this area. If so, then you
should be able to back up your knowledge with real data....or you don't know
as much as you claim. If you can't back up your claim then your claimed
knowledge is less creditable and it becomes a matter of whether I deem your
honesty and creditability adequate to support your assertion. Based on past
experience I find both to be inadequate in my opinion.
>>>>> So you support mandatory liability insurance for gun owners?
>>>>
>>>> Sure, I think everyone should carry liability insurance.
>>>
>>> Good.
>>
>> But since you snipped out my other thoughts on this, then I take that
>> to mean you accept that they shouldn't be mandated by government.
>
> Yet you support mandatory auto insurance.
Really? Where exactly have I ever said that?
Oh, and auto insurance is NOT mandatory everywhere, not even if we limit it
to just the USA.
_ Prof. Jonez _
> "_ Prof. Jonez _" <the...@jonez.net> wrote in message
>> Scout wrote:
>>> "_ Prof. Jonez _" <the...@jonez.net> wrote in message
>>>> Scout wrote:
>>>>> "_ Prof. Jonez _" <the...@jonez.net> wrote in message
>>>>>> fl_...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On 15 Sep, 00:26, Bob <r...@armageddon.info> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 18:58:31 -0600, "Reality_CheckŠ"
>>>>>>>> <Real...@Check.it> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 4-year-old boy loads gun, shoots himself
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Swimming pool drownings of toddlers outpace gun accidents
>>>>>>> many-fold, but why doesn't anyone want to ban pools?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Many jurisdictions mandate liability insurance for pools,
>>>>>
>>>>> Cite.
>>>>
>>>> Are you so stupid as to be unaware of this?
>>>
>>> I take that to mean you can't provide a cite?
>>
>
> Really?
Really.
> Then you are going to present a cite?
Your stupidity is showing again.
> When exactly should I expect to see you do so then?
>
> If you're not then your attempted insult fails.
You're wrong yet again.
>
>
>>>>>> so when
>>>>>> the tragedy does happen, compensation is available to the
>>>>>> victims/survivors.
>>>>>
>>>>> Assuming you happen to live in one of those jurisdications,
>>>>> evidence which has not yet been produced.
>>>>
>>>> Your ignorance doesn't make it untrue.
>>>
>>> Neither does your assertion meam it is true.
>>
>> So will the sun rise in the east tomorrow without a "cite", eh
>> numbnuts?
>
> but if you said it was going to rise in the west, then would that
> make your claim true simply because you said it?
No one claimed the sun would rise in the west you stammering imbecile.
Alex Cunningham
> "Scout" <4g...@earthlink.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote
> But since you snipped out my other thoughts on this, then I take that to
> mean you accept that they shouldn't be mandated by government.
>
> Otherwise you would have addressed the point raised.
>
>
Could you not see the way he sucked you in to what you thought was going to
be a meaningful discussion?
Two posts in and he was insulting you and doing some rather creative
snipping. He has absolutely no interest in taking part in any discussion in
a sincere manner. He/She/It is only interested in spewing forth bile
particularly on anyone who they see as vulnerable.
There are a few others who haunt these groups who act in a similar manner.
Reality_Check, klunk, and Carl Nisarel spring readily to mind. All you do
when you engage them in any way is to feed their insatiable appetite to be
acknowledged and they then can anonymously spew forth their vitriol.
There is only one successful method of stopping them and that is to ignore
them completely. Even if they start a thread in what appears to be an honest
exchange of knowledge and ideas within two or three posts they will revert
to type, guaranteed. Plonk the twats and be done with them.
--
Cheers!
Alex.C
There are twelve million sheep in Ontario.
Problem is nine million of them think they are people.
10x
In Canada liability insurance for gun owners is available for less
that $7.00 per year.
Gun ranges in Canada where a significant number of guns are used have
one of the lowest accident rates of any activity in Canada.
Bob
|>
|>>So you support mandatory liability insurance for gun owners?
|>
|>In Canada liability insurance for gun owners is available for less
|>that $7.00 per year.
|>Gun ranges in Canada where a significant number of guns are used have
|>one of the lowest accident rates of any activity in Canada.
It costs me $100 a year as a member, and that (unlike indoor range
complexes) just covers the 100 yard use...and AD/ND possibilities.
This range is for any caliber handgun, but .22 only rifles, which
fits my agenda. along with swap meets and stuff....they tried to close the
range www.pacificshooters.com this year with the biggest fairy tale lie in
the history of bullshit....they literally compared a .45 ACP to a Nuclear
ICBM....must be the UN "small" arms relativity.....
They are trying to phase out all ranges so it becomes impossible to
renew the FAC/PAL status....all the ranges in BC were shut down under
totally laughable bullshit that makes Vancouver BC look like the biggest
fairy tale land on the planet....right next to the mythical English gods,
like the heavily armed warrior William Shakespear....
A lot of ppl have their own indoor range, no road problem getting
there, but a bit too pricy compared to schools like police and armored car
carriers.....
Scout
> Scout wrote:
>> "_ Prof. Jonez _" <the...@jonez.net> wrote in message
>>> Scout wrote:
>>>> "_ Prof. Jonez _" <the...@jonez.net> wrote in message
>>>>> Scout wrote:
>>>>>> "_ Prof. Jonez _" <the...@jonez.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>> fl_...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 15 Sep, 00:26, Bob <r...@armageddon.info> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 18:58:31 -0600, "Reality_CheckŠ"
>>>>>>>>> <Real...@Check.it> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 4-year-old boy loads gun, shoots himself
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Swimming pool drownings of toddlers outpace gun accidents
>>>>>>>> many-fold, but why doesn't anyone want to ban pools?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Many jurisdictions mandate liability insurance for pools,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cite.
>>>>>
>>>>> Are you so stupid as to be unaware of this?
>>>>
>>>> I take that to mean you can't provide a cite?
>>>
>>> Your stupidity is showing again.
>>
>> Really?
>
> Really.
>
>> Then you are going to present a cite?
>
> Your stupidity is showing again.
I accept that you are unable to support your assertions and thus they have
no creditability.
_ Prof. Jonez _
Good.
Now seek help.
_ Prof. Jonez _
> Dr. Jon-Pierre Pigglesworth <gree...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:tguvc4ppgaiktg60u...@4ax.com:
>
> My insurance covers me in a legal shoot in my home.
So if you're not at fault, your insurance "covers you" eh?
You really are dumber than a box of hammers, aren't you boy?
_ Prof. Jonez _
> "Dr. Jon-Pierre Pigglesworth" <gree...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:8b40d4120d8gtrk66...@4ax.com...
>> thinks he's discovered gold.
>
> Hardly, I call on people to cite stuff when I either know it to be
> untrue,
So you're claiming it's untrue?
> suspect it is untrue, or its status is unknown to me
It's your ignorance, you wallow in it.
_ Prof. Jonez _
>> On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 14:30:24 -0400, "Scout"
>> <4g...@earthlink.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "_ Prof. Jonez _" <the...@jonez.net> wrote in message
>>> news:6jabn6F...@mid.individual.net...
>>>> fl_...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>>> On 15 Sep, 00:26, Bob <r...@armageddon.info> wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 18:58:31 -0600, "Reality_CheckŠ"
>>>>>> <Real...@Check.it> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 4-year-old boy loads gun, shoots himself
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Swimming pool drownings of toddlers outpace gun accidents
>>>>> many-fold, but why doesn't anyone want to ban pools?
>>>>
>>>> Many jurisdictions mandate liability insurance for pools,
>>>
>>> Cite.
>>
>>
>> and North Miami, FL require pool owners to carry liability insurance.
>> You can do the rest of the homework yourself.
>
> 2 is hardly MANY.
Cite!
>
>>
>>>
>>>> so when
>>>> the tragedy does happen, compensation is available to the
>>>> victims/survivors.
>>>
>>> Assuming you happen to live in one of those jurisdications,
>>> evidence which has not yet been produced.
>>>
>>>> So you support mandatory liability insurance for gun owners?
>>>
>>> Sure, I think everyone should carry liability insurance. Whether
>>> that should
>>> be something the government can mandate is another issue, but with
>>> guns the
>>> cost would be utterly minimal since accidents are quite rare.
>>>
>>
>>
>> right on!
Ivan Elias
That's how it works.
> I am really are dumber than a box of hammers, aren't you boy?
^^^^
I corrected your grammatical error.
Damn yer dumb, Poofter.
_ Prof. Jonez _
> _ Prof. Jonez _ wrote:
>> RD (The Sandman) wrote:
>>
>>> Dr. Jon-Pierre Pigglesworth <gree...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>>> news:tguvc4ppgaiktg60u...@4ax.com:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 12:20:25 -0600, "_ Prof. Jonez _"
>>>> <the...@jonez.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> fl_...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 15 Sep, 00:26, Bob <r...@armageddon.info> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 18:58:31 -0600, "Reality_CheckŠ"
>>>>>>> <Real...@Check.it> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 4-year-old boy loads gun, shoots himself
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Swimming pool drownings of toddlers outpace gun accidents
>>>>>> many-fold, but why doesn't anyone want to ban pools?
>>>>>
>>>>> Many jurisdictions mandate liability insurance for pools, so when
>>>>> the tragedy does happen, compensation is available to the
>>>>> victims/survivors.
>>>>>
>>>>> So you support mandatory liability insurance for gun owners?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not a bad idea at all. Never even thought of that.
>>>
>>> My insurance covers me in a legal shoot in my home.
>>
>>
>> So if you're not at fault, your insurance "covers you" eh?
>
>
> That's how it works.
Gaaaawd damn boy, you are one pig-ignorant imbecile.
Ivan Elias
If you had the brains of a gnat(which you don't), you would understand
how insurance works.
YOU still don't understand how his insurance works for him, when he is
NOT at Fault!
Way to go, POOFTER!
Thomas T. Veldhouse
> fl_...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On 15 Sep, 00:26, Bob <r...@armageddon.info> wrote:
>>> <Real...@Check.it> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> 4-year-old boy loads gun, shoots himself
>>
>>
>> Swimming pool drownings of toddlers outpace gun accidents many-fold,
>> but why doesn't anyone want to ban pools?
>
> Many jurisdictions mandate liability insurance for pools, so when
> the tragedy does happen, compensation is available to the victims/survivors.
>
> So you support mandatory liability insurance for gun owners?
>
Almost certainly, in both cases, it is covered by home owners insurance. It
is just a matter of whether local laws require a rider to insure against
accidents from any particular potential hazzard. A gun is no different than a
pool in this reguard. Where I live, one must put up a 6' fence around the
pool if it is inground or have stairs that can be raised for large enough
above ground pools. Also, where I live, there is a requirement that all guns
be responsibly stored, in particular, if there are kids or other potential
accident victims in or with access to the house, that the gun be locked up
securely, either in a safe or with a trigger lock [or both!]. Some owners
take it a step further and put the lock through the bore as well (I think
this is more likely to erode parts of a gun over time; which is why I think it
is not as commonly used.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Religion is a crutch, but that's okay... humanity is a cripple.