Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: wayne says "the obvious solution - we must arm our two year olds to protect themselves"

Posted 10 years ago on May 2, 2013, 10:30 p.m. EST by bensdad (8977)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Five-year-old boy shot two-year-old sister with kids' gun The Sparks family home in Cumberland County, Kentucky 1 May 2013 A county judge said he would expect every home in the area has a gun

A five-year-old boy who shot dead his two-year-old sister in the US state of Kentucky used a gun marketed for children, authorities have said.

Kristian Sparks was given the .22-calibre rifle, called a Crickett, as a gift.

The Cumberland County coroner said a bullet had been left in the gun ahead of Tuesday's shooting.

Caroline's death has been ruled accidental, and it is not clear whether any charges will be filed.

She was shot in the chest as Kristian's mother went outside to feed their dogs, authorities said. The gun was apparently stored in a corner of the family's mobile home.

Officials and residents in the rural Kentucky county said it was common for children to begin shooting guns at a young age.

"It's a normal way of life, and it's not just rural Kentucky, it's rural America - hunting and shooting and sport fishing," said Cumberland County Judge John Phelps.

"There's probably not a household in this county that doesn't have a gun."

Kristian's rifle was manufactured by Keystone Sporting Arms, which has a "kid's corner" on its website featuring images of children at shooting ranges and on bird and deer hunts.

The guns are sold in pink, blue and other colors and designs.
Do you remebder when a "child's gun" was a cap gun or water pistol?

The 17-year-old company states its mission is to nurture gun safety among young shooters and displays testimonials from parents who say they are grateful to be able to go shooting with their children.

In the last three days at least three young boys have shot their sisters in the US, says Daily Kos writer David Waldman, who tracks accidental shootings.

In addition the Sparks case,
a five-year-old girl was shot and killed by her eight-year-old brother in western Alaska on Tuesday,
while a seven-year-old boy shot his sister, nine, in the leg in Auburn, Washington on Thursday.

Kentucky state lawmaker & nra tool Robert Damron said:
"Why single out firearms?
Why not talk about all the other things that endanger children, too?"

check out the new nra president: DAILY KOS: It looks like the NRA has no intention of toning down the batshit crazy, and calls for "responsible NRA leadership" just got shot in the thigh and left to bleed out behind the ol' shed. The new NRA president (the job rotates every two years, presumably because maintaining such a high level of indignant batshit crazy is a high-effort job) is current NRA vice president Jim Porter, who ascends to the job because apparently every last member of the NRA leadership is entirely off their rockers. Let's meet Jim, shall we? "The NRA was started 1871 right here in New York state. It was started by some Yankee generals who didn't like the way my Southern boys had the ability to shoot in what we call the 'War of Northern Aggression.' Now y'all might call it the Civil War, but we call it the 'War of Northern Aggression' down south."



Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 10 years ago

war of northern aggression??? fuck it rewrite history any way you want to.

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 10 years ago

a titbit of history - session started BEFORE Linclon became president
the south fired the first shots

[-] 0 points by justiceforzim (-17) 10 years ago

You need to google it. Southerners have called it that since that war began.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8708) 10 years ago

Well, Y'all can call a chicken a one eyed cow if it makes ya feel any better.

Problem is that Southern whites are cowards. You want to scapegoat the powerless for your fall in power and status 'cause you're too chicken-shit to face the powerful - those who are really responsible - the big corporations and banks who have their hands around your throats - keep you trapped in poverty and endless self-recrimination.

Stop crying over history that can't be changed, no matter how much of a hissy-fit you throw, and show the guts to face your real enemy!

You're an international laughing stock, and everybody knows it but you. Stuck, stuck, stuck in the past, like little boys who can't stop crying over their lost marbles.

Rebel my ass. It's just pathetic.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 10 years ago

How many societies, anywhere in the world, celebrate & immerse their entire lives in a treasonous LOST war ? They can't admit the treason
They can't admit they lost
They can't admit their ancestors were traitors They can't admit that ALL Americans are equal
They can't see the absurdity of waving the losing confederate flag

rebel - NO ------- traitor - YES

[-] 0 points by GypsyKing (8708) 10 years ago

The truely crazy thing is that it just hurts them more than anybody. I really hope a new generation of people in The South will finally reject this insane attempt to have a better past. You'd think they really believe that they can somehow turn back the clock and make history different than it was, and this denial of reality (as well as a refusal to confront their real problems) prevents them from embracing any new or positive vision to improve their lives or the world they live in. It's really a kind of collective psychosis.

It would be as if the French simply refused to accept that Napolion lost, and were determined to endlessly relive and reinact all of his campaigns, and thought they could somehow contain everyone else in the world in their land of make believe!

No people with any real self-respect could live their lives out in such a state of futility.

It's just sad, mostly for them, but also for us all as a nation.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 10 years ago

This is a reprehensible question - but was Lincoln wrong?

I suspect that if he had let the confederate traitors have their way - to leave the union, and then freed the northern slaves - southern slaves would have flooded north ( just like with today's technology - we cant stop the drugs flowing north )
the southern economy would have collapsed
within 10 years they would be begging to get back into the USA.