![]() |
![]() |
|
|||||||
| Home | Forums | Gallery | Webcams | Blogs | YouTube Channel | Classifieds | Register | FAQ | Members List | Donate | Today's Posts | Search |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#29 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Center Harbor
Posts: 1,191
Thanks: 210
Thanked 460 Times in 263 Posts
|
Quote:
Second, I agree that people who do NOT support that right will use incidents like this to try to restrict or remove that right. We in turn should fight that effort and focus the discussion in directions that make sense. The intended function of a chainsaw is to cut wood and brush. The intended function of a gun is to damage or kill people or animals. A policeman, soldier, or citizen that carries a gun with them or keeps one in their home expects the gun to function this way. It is a deadly weapon and a machine gun more so than most. I believe that, as Don pointed out in a earlier post, if there are precautions taken to limit recoil and loading only one bullet when training people to use these guns, at a minimum these precautions should have been in place for a show where inexperienced people could use these weapons. Further, how could a father be expected to truly understand the risk posed by these type of weapons? Consent is supposed to be informed, i.e. knowledgeable. Was the father a weapons expert? We require seat belts and safety equipment on amusement park rides which function as entertainment. How much more should we require for a use of a deadly weapon in a public show? It seems to me that the show operators and the father showed lack of responsibility and callous disregard toward the potential danger of these weapons, especially in a child's weaker and inexperienced hands. Guns should be respected and feared for the function that they serve. The operators of the show and the father did neither. And a tragedy resulted. |
|
|
|
|
| Bookmarks |
|
|