The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    To register, turn off your VPN; you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

  • Hi Guest - Did you know?
    Hot Topics is a Safe for Work (SFW) forum.

Girl accidentally shoots her shooting instructor

Perseids said:
I would posit that the transition from a hunting weapon emphasis to a power emphasis occurred gradually as WWII was progressively glorified in cinema. Later, the merger of patriotism with militarism gave even more emphasis on the idolization of the warrior caste.

Video games, in a naked grab for fleeting attention spans, became more violent and murderous for the adrenaline addictions fix.

This all happened concurrent with the rise of the me generations, when child psychology whored itself to the god of self-fulfillment. Mix in an unduly prominent ego with a fixation for absolute power and you get automatic weaponry on the light end of the spectrum and batshit crazy fucks killing entire classrooms and theaters on the dark end of the scale.

Yeah, I would posit that. $100 donation to a peace organization wagers that her parents also drove one of the big-assed SUVs that project power much more aggressively than they do safety or utility. And yeah, that's profiling. Who the fuck lets a little girl "play" with an instrument of death like a machine gun. WHO?
Click to expand...

I can see that. I'll throw in instant gratification as a big element, too: we understood as kids that you ascended through a series of levels of responsibility to get to various serious things, but today's kids don't share that, at least in general. Heck, even Victor Borge once commented that students "these days" want to jump right in and be able to play Mozart, without having to spend the time to gain the skills necessary -- and that was twenty-five years ago!

And there's still that undercurrent in American society that gives us not just violent criminals but violent cops, far more than in Europe.
 
xbuzzerx said:
Gun fanatics. And I'd put them in the lineup far before I'd put this down as just an extension of parents giving in and buying their kids iPhones. Maybe her parents were dropouts.
Click to expand...

These are not mutually exclusive.

This incident shows just exactly what is lacking for us to be able to have a much more libertarian society: a serious attitude of responsibility. No parent who doesn't stop and realize that there's something wrong with putting one of the world's deadliest personal weapons into the hands of a nine-year-old is ready for any more freedom than he/she already has.
 
Kahaih said:
Negligent homicide?
Manslaughter?
Negligent manslaughter?
Criminally negligent homicide?
Criminally negligent manslaughter?
. . . .

It all depends on the laws and legal definitions of the local jurisdiction.

If the local law says it was ok for a child to be handling the gun, then the 'instructor' is likely to be held accountable for his own death – no charges filed.

However, if the instructor's next of kin/family, or the girl's family can prove that the 'instructor' was not sufficiently trained or unable to be trained, mentally and/or physically, they may be able to have charges brought against the business/company that put the 'instructor' and the girl in harm's way.

It's almost certain that charges of some sort will be filed as someone will have to be held accountable financially – 'someone' usually means someone's insurance carrier/company.
Click to expand...

I say they were negligent just because they used no restraining loop. As for the instructor, if he had any training or certification, it sure wasn't in evidence.
 
xbuzzerx said:
Give me a break. It's clear that as far as some people are concerned, we're never going to address the real problem. The real problem is what the hell was a 9 year old doing with a combat uzi, how was such a scenario even remotely conceivable, let alone legal. But since our country has a religious fixation with gun ownership, we cannot blame that. We have to blame EVERYTHING else. Let's check out the instructor's teaching style and credentials, let's character assassinate the parents who we know virtually nothing about, let's blame it on an amorphous entire generation of attitudes you claim that younger generations have and purportedly older generations didn't.
Click to expand...

False dichotomy. You state a question, "what the hell was a 9 year old doing with a combat uzi,", and then dismiss approaches to answering that very question.

Gun ownership isn't even related to the problem: the girl didn't own it, the parents didn't own it. So the problem is, in fact, with the instructor and the parents. It is only secondarily connected with the law -- which may once again have to step in because people aren't bothering to take responsibility for themselves.
 
They love their guns.
 
Kulindahr said:
These are not mutually exclusive.

This incident shows just exactly what is lacking for us to be able to have a much more libertarian society: a serious attitude of responsibility. No parent who doesn't stop and realize that there's something wrong with putting one of the world's deadliest personal weapons into the hands of a nine-year-old is ready for any more freedom than he/she already has.
Click to expand...

You don't make laws around the assumption of everyone behaving responsibly. You make laws presuming that people on the whole are going to do the minimum possible to stay out of legal trouble. Or will do the maximum they are able to (and perhaps always a smidge over) within the bounds of the law. Whichever way you like to look at it.

If it was perfectly legal for this 9 year old to use a combat uzi regardless of the qualifications for the teacher or instructor or facility she was doing it with then yes, gun laws and the looseness of them are still a big part of this problem.
 
Kulindahr said:
False dichotomy. You state a question, "what the hell was a 9 year old doing with a combat uzi,", and then dismiss approaches to answering that very question.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry that I don't buy into your notion that a shooting instructor giving kids a weight test before training them with an automatic combat weapon is a reasonable approach to answering that question.
 
gsdx said:
But wouldn't it be the parents who decide upon the weapon? I can't imagine the instructor suggesting it.
Click to expand...

Missed the question, sorry about that.

Answer is no - the parents shouldn't/wouldn't decide on their lonesome. You need two people to do anything in such instructor/student relationships - both the instructor has to agree and the parents of a minor have to agree or else the child doesn't hold a weapon. Either could (and should) have said No.The kid doesn't have much to do with it, really, besides what most kids do, which is make their wishes known. Both parents and instructor, to me, are considered culpable in this matter.

Adults know guns have the ability to fire bullets and are thus dangerous, but that's the extent most people know since most people don't use them. Despite that, the great bulk of people still recognize that an uzi is different from a hunting rifle. So the parents (and the instructor as well, by the looks of it) either didn't do the research or did the research and didn't care. When someone is planning on handling a weapon research is mandatory. When dealing with children I don't consider willful ignorance about the situations an adult puts them in as a valid reasoning process for "I had nothing to do with it."

Conclusion - no, the instructor doesn't hold all the blame by far.
 
luckynumbah7 said:
Missed the question, sorry about that.

Answer is no - the parents shouldn't/wouldn't decide on their lonesome. You need two people to do anything in such instructor/student relationships - both the instructor has to agree and the parents of a minor have to agree or else the child doesn't hold a weapon. Either could (and should) have said No.The kid doesn't have much to do with it, really, besides what most kids do, which is make their wishes known. Both parents and instructor, to me, are considered culpable in this matter.

Adults know guns have the ability to fire bullets and are thus dangerous, but that's the extent most people know since most people don't use them. Despite that, the great bulk of people still recognize that an uzi is different from a hunting rifle. So the parents (and the instructor as well, by the looks of it) either didn't do the research or did the research and didn't care. When someone is planning on handling a weapon research is mandatory. When dealing with children I don't consider willful ignorance about the situations an adult puts them in as a valid reasoning process for "I had nothing to do with it."

Conclusion - no, the instructor doesn't hold all the blame by far.
Click to expand...

tis sum tiny corna usa ya tinkin?

anyway UZI MACHINE GUN ans 9 yr old ins 1 a most stoopid rich lands planet of evarthang
_back ta real world_

haaaaa
 
xbuzzerx said:
You don't make laws around the assumption of everyone behaving responsibly. You make laws presuming that people on the whole are going to do the minimum possible to stay out of legal trouble. Or will do the maximum they are able to (and perhaps always a smidge over) within the bounds of the law. Whichever way you like to look at it.

If it was perfectly legal for this 9 year old to use a combat uzi regardless of the qualifications for the teacher or instructor or facility she was doing it with then yes, gun laws and the looseness of them are still a big part of this problem.
Click to expand...

They used to make laws built on the belief that citizens in at least this democracy would behave sensibly and responsibly; that's is no longer safe.
 
xbuzzerx said:
I'm sorry that I don't buy into your notion that a shooting instructor giving kids a weight test before training them with an automatic combat weapon is a reasonable approach to answering that question.
Click to expand...

It's a necessary piece of the puzzle: probably no one weighing less than 120 pounds should fire any such weapon except on single shot setting.
 
sure a neva gonna bes a " children" army ins usa but kinda a usa ans oda nice lands make a thangs fa um fa export

thankyou
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top