Three Children Killed, Injured in Separate Shootings Proves Need for Laxer Gun Laws

• I really wish you would get off your ideological high horse. The answer has nothing to do with gun laws, and everything to do with better, earlier gun training when they are in the house, as well as responsible storage of said guns. If you really wanted to increase legislation, I'd say you should seriously consider making a legal difference between rifles and handguns, since children often use, or have need of rifles in country areas. Of course, being city folk, we don't care about THAT .

• Fuck you, Garrison. Three kids are shot and all it means to you is another chance to bash the Second Amendment.  You suck.

• Wonderfully sarcastic and ironic response...but why not firing squad?  What method of punishment would you have in mind?  They all have the same end result. Would I be correct in assuming that this comment construes your opposition to capital punishment as well as second amendment rights? Ya know since these obviously anti-gun op-eds have been running on the RFT blog something has been gnawing at me.  Based on the comments section on these pieces it seems that a lot more of your readers are second amendment supporters than you realize.  I love the RFT and consider myself a social liberal (plus I'm gay), and I think a lot of your readers (many like me) have or are starting to realize that the anti-gun argument just doesn't hold water and enactment of anti-gun policies will do next to nothing to stop the violence we see every night on the news. The logic is harsh Chad but guns are here and they're here to stay.  Deep down inside every anti-gun person knows it.  I'm not making a "if you can't beat us join us argument," but the world you want has not, does not, and will never exist.  Just sayin....

• OK, I'll bite.  All of these instances occurred not because "guns are too easy to get in our 'gun-obsessed culture' ", but because somewhere along the line, AN ADULT was irresponsible with a gun they had not secured.  Do you get it?  It doesn't matter how many times this occurs - it is not appropriate to infringe the rights of responsible people in order to help put a cage around the irresponsible.  Chad, you cannot make things safe for every person by taking away freedoms.  It's terrible, but it's reality.  It's horrid that kids died.  But irresponsible people are always going to make mistakes that might end a kid's life, guns or no guns.  There are always going to be corners and hard edges in the world where people who aren't smart might crack their heads open.  That doesn't mean we should Nerf all the hard edges and corners in the name of safety.  I personally don't want to go through my life seeing soft foam covering everything.  In the same way, I don't wish for my right to protect myself to be taken away because of the actions of irresponsible people.  It's hard to go deep on this issue and still be concise; I'd be glad to talk this over with you sometime over coffee or beers, or a big ol' joint, or a bowl of doughnuts.

• Chad, whenever something like this happens we must always blame the parents and the people who committed the violent acts, never the means utilized to carry out those acts. Just because something has the potential to harm you doesn't mean we should try to regulate it and make it harder to access. That's the same reason why we have no laws against selling cyanide or ammonium nitrate, which could be used as a poison or bomb ingredient, respectively. But they also have many other perfectly legal and socially acceptable uses...just like guns. And that is why you can walk into any store in the country and buy a gallon of cyanide without a problem. Sure, you might say, somebody could use it to poison the water supply and kill a whole bunch of people. But the same could be said about guns. A few handguns in the hands of the wrong person could lead to many dead bodies. But you don't ever see that happen, do you? No you don't. That's why guns are easily accessible. And cyanide. And ammonium nitrate. I choose to live my life in a free country, where I have the freedom to carry a gun to protect myself, even though most people spend their entire life without ever getting one single opportunity to use a handgun to legally defend themselves. That's according to the gun-safety instructors who teach the concealed carry license classes. Also, must real gun aficionados will tell you the same. Also, cops say the same thing.  But what do they know criminals? Nothing, I tell you. So, to summarize my point, don't blame guns for the stupid actions of certain people. "Give me liberty, or give me death." Coincidentally, if we're short on liberty, death seems to be very easy to come by. Dearly yours, -a former intern and fellow smart-ass who enjoys long walks on the beach, candle-lit dinners and feeding the trolls.

• the three year old's parents should be tried for murder! the thirteen year old... well that's just Darwinism at it's finest and the basketball one is just tragic.

• "Tried and executed"? By firing squad I suppose. 

• Wasn't me. But I'll say yes, I'm a "newswriter" and I'm also a blogger paid to write his opinion on matters. In this case, I think it's pretty hard to read of these shootings and question why/how these kids had access to firearms and what it says about our gun-obsessed culture. But wait, that's irresponsible of me. I should be protecting the Second Amendment! Clearly the framers of the Constitution wanted kids to have easy access to guns when they wrote about the need for a regulated militia.

• You are correct, but I guess you really didn't "get it".

• Thanks, Chad.

• Nice try, Murdoch.

• A car is a tool that is intended as transportation, not to intidimate, protect and kill. Guns are tools that unless you carjack someone (or "commandeer" for the demographic who think it fits) will not help you get from point A to point B. Your argument is weak.

• @jdub - haha, I was just thinking the same thing.

• ....or we could hold those who lack common sense in proper storage of their firearms accountable by charging them with murder...which is what happened here in the two accidental discharge incidents.  The murder case is straightforward regardless of whether or not it occurred with a firearm and has less to do with "gun-violence" (I hate that word.  Are we going to begin sub-categorizing every violent crime by instrument?) than with cultural and structural issues present in our society. Once again, this is a perfect opportunity to reiterate the intent behind the second amendment.  As adjudicated in the Heller vs. D.C., the rights of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.  It never mentions that the people who abuse this right or behave negligently shall be excused the consequences of their actions. Firearms are dangerous.  They require proper storage, proper care, and common sense to operate.  Sadly, it is very difficult to regulate common sense.  The response to these tragedies is not to make more restrictive gun laws or less restrictive gun laws but to become more draconian in the punishment and enforcement of existing penal codes already on the books for the numbskulls who left these weapons within reach of children.  Defendants in all 3 cased should be tried for murder and executed.  Nuff said.

• I gotta say it's pretty pathetic when a "newswriter" (I use quotes because this is, after all, Garrison) trolls on his paper's website.

• But, but... Obama took all our guns away, remember?!

• There was a fatal accident on highway 55 this morning. So, what's the solution to this senseless and horrific accident? The answer is clear. More cars!!

• Will it blow up more than the biker gang post?  I didn't know that bikers doubled as internet trolls.

• I predict that this thread will blow up the comments section by this afternoon...ought to be a lively discussion.

TotalComments: 19