Sunday, 4 January 2015

The only thing that can stop a 2-year-old with a gun in a Walmart is...waitaminnit WTF?

quote [ ...the boy unzipped the special gun compartment in the woman?s purse where the weapon was kept while she was looking at clothing. Terry Rutledge said his 29-year-old daughter-in-law did not put the weapon ?loosely into her purse.? ]

Tagged this one politics because who are we kidding? Apart from the obvious sadness for everyone affected by this idiotic tragedy I don't even know where to start with the sheer volume of heartbreaking stupidity cataloged in this article.
[SFW] [politics] [+10 WTF]
[by dolemite@4:56amGMT]


sanepride said @ 4:53pm GMT on 4th Jan [Score:3 Insightful]
Among all of the discussion since this incident occurred last week, this rather harsh judgment of the mother is worth noting, mainly for the attention it's garnered.

People can debate till they're blue in the face over whether she was truly 'irresponsible', but in the end the result speaks for itself. As for the entire concept of 'conceal carry', and its apparent 'normalcy' throughout large swaths of the US, I remain at a loss to comprehend exactly why law-abiding citizens feel a need to have a lethal weapon with them at all times, as if they live in Mogadishu. The 'normalcy' of this phenomenon bespeaks a disturbing cultural pathology. There is a kind of paranoid insanity in the very idea that whenever you leave the house you need to have the power to snuff out a human life at a moment's notice. It's the casual treatment of this power that led directly to this otherwise intelligent, educated woman's tragic demise.
ENZ said @ 7:16pm GMT on 4th Jan
It's because of the explosive rise in how much media people are exposed to. National crime statistics clearly show a decline in muggings, assaults, and rape across the board over the past 50 years. The 24 hour news cycle started the trend of bombarding the public with more and more information, but the internet really took it to ridiculous extremes. Every bad thing that happens gains widespread attention and lingers for weeks, where as before you might have read a paragraph in the news paper or caught a two minute blurb on the evening news, if you heard it at all. So there's this false perception that the world is going to hell, so you better protect yourself. And of course, the gun companies are more than happy to aggressively fan those flames to push their wares.
OutdoorRudy said @ 6:55am GMT on 7th Jan
That article makes a great point. Nice find.
Bleb said[2] @ 5:23am GMT on 4th Jan [Score:2]
dolemite said @ 5:58am GMT on 4th Jan
thanks for that, compared to the article it was a refreshing burst of intelligence and good taste
shiftace said[1] @ 5:21am GMT on 4th Jan [Score:1 Informative]
If only she had more guns and maybe one of here guns also had another gun.
arrowhen said @ 5:38am GMT on 4th Jan [Score:1 Funsightful]
Obviously the kid wasn't black or they'd be trying him as an adult.
Clancy Wiggum said @ 1:09pm GMT on 4th Jan
Yeah, right, pops. No jury in the world is going to convict a baby. Well, maybe Texas.
lilmookieesquire said @ 6:20pm GMT on 4th Jan
He's two. Clearly this was premeditated.
ComposerNate said @ 9:06am GMT on 5th Jan
Two year revenge plot.
shiftace said @ 9:18pm GMT on 4th Jan
Carl Newton Mahan was convicted of a murder he committed when he was 6. Gedhun Choekyi Nyima the Panchen Lama of Tibetan Buddhism was 6 when he became the worlds youngest political prisoner in 1989.
cb361 said @ 10:55pm GMT on 4th Jan [Score:1 Informative]
We know there from history there was a 4-year-old general at Waterloo. A headmaster in China who was 3.
lilmookieesquire said @ 6:19pm GMT on 4th Jan
Fox News: "Is it in their nature? Black Child behind bars shoots own mother, shows no remorse."
dolemite said @ 5:56am GMT on 4th Jan
this article is giving me second thoughts about installing a zipper on my gunsafe
shiftace said @ 6:30am GMT on 4th Jan
Gun safe? How are you going to get to your gunz in SHFT situation? What happens if you panic and can't remember the combo or you can't find the key. Pro Tip- It is best to keep your gunz lying around all throughout your house. Make sure to keep them loaded and chambered. You also want to make sure the safety is off or have it removed because sometime you may have to shoot aimlessly into complete darkness. Trust me. When you are shooting aimlessly into complete darkness you don't want to be fumbling around trying to see if the safety is on or off.
ENZ said @ 5:58am GMT on 4th Jan
"Officers viewed surveillance video provided by the store to determine what happened, Miller said."

Well... what fucking happened? I assume the kid thought mommy was hiding a toy in her purse or something. But to wait for her to be distracted, know of the hidden compartment, be able to unzip it without her noticing, pull the gun out, hold the damn thing upwards, and pull the trigger seems like it should be way too complicated series of actions, both in terms of motor skills and cunning, for a 2 year old to be able to do.

All in all, the article focused way too much on trying to assure the reader that the mother wasn't an idiot, and it's perfectly normal for people to carry handguns where she's from.
arrowhen said @ 6:10am GMT on 4th Jan [Score:2]
Have you ever MET a two year old? Your standard two year old is pretty much a seething vortex of potential catastrophe, possessing approximately the same capacity for trouble as a troop of drunken howler monkeys crossed with a pack of especially foolish puppies.
pleaides said @ 6:30am GMT on 4th Jan
I am wise in the ways of toddlers, and I'm not at all surprised that this young fella did what he did. My son is dangerous enough near anything in the kitchen to kill a dozen people and some wildlife. Also, they're especially worrisome around anything that they have been told not to touch under any circumstances. The fact that the lady who died was apparently a 'responsible gun owner' should make it clear that there is really no such thing.
MadMarchHarris said @ 6:59am GMT on 4th Jan
That's a load of bullshit. There is totally such a thing as responsible gun ownership. Accidents happen whether you're responsible or not.
King Of The Hill said @ 7:39am GMT on 4th Jan [Score:2 Insightful]
Only in this case, she wasn't in immediate physical control of her weapon with children around. Cardinal rule... Sorry.

Purses that have carry pockets are great and all, but are not ideal if you are going to have your purse in a shopping cart with a toddler.

lalanda said @ 8:17am GMT on 4th Jan [Score:1 Insightful]
King, I feel for you. You have a clear understanding of what responsible gun ownership entails and if everyone followed what you preach then we would have few gun problems.

But the vast majority don't and they won't. They are why I believe guns shouldn't be legal in this country. I'd be ok to amend the law to only you have guns.
cb361 said @ 12:38pm GMT on 4th Jan
Fascist! Why should responsible Americans like KoTH, who wouldn't dream of leaving a gun lying around or picking a fight with a black teenager be barred from owning guns, just because lots of other people will?
lilmookieesquire said @ 6:30pm GMT on 4th Jan
Knew you'd come around to the logical conclusion one day.
King Of The Hill said @ 12:24am GMT on 7th Jan
The problem is one of entitlement. We see entitlement issues everywhere in our society and also with gun ownership.

If you mandate training, they will push back.
Even with mandated training, they simply wallow through it in order to get their purchase.

I've fired guns since I was about 12 years old or so. "Owned" my first one when I was 16 which was my father's first .22 bolt action he bought in the 1940's. I grew up around them, never feared them, was taught how dangerous they were and was constantly reminded of how fucked my world would be if I ever handled one I wasn't allowed to or in a way I shouldn't.

That said, back then my family's gun safe was what was also referred to as little KOTH's closet. Different times then as well. There were still shooting clubs in high schools, Boy Scouts were still shooting, and if you were in CAP/ROTC chances are you got range time at the local reserve armory shooting what were .22 caliber Ar-15's.

Today, none of that common sense or discipline exists seemingly... Or perhaps 24/7 media and internet expose more of the accidents/darwin awards out there that we never heard of 30 years ago.

I ask my self when I wade into these responsible gun owner debates if I truly am one. Have I done everything I could do to ensure or minimize the potential for accidents, access? etc... My answer usually is yes. Yes, compared to the stupid bitch who just died at Walmart. Yes, compared to my brother who commonly states his deadbolt on his front door is his gun safe (WTF).

I've served my country all while carrying live ammunition in a war zone. I've gone through the required training to carry concealed, not once - but three times for the three states I've cared to carry in. I went through a competition and tactical training class back in 2012 just to see if I wanted to get into competitive timed shooting but also to see how well I could maintain control of my firearm and combat muscle memory under stressful conditions. All well worth it and not unaffordable. Every firearm I have is secured when not on my immediate body. They never sit loaded in the open, on top of the fridge or under a pillow. Never. It isn't fucking hard.

So articles like this one causes me to shake my head as these fools, these so called responsible gun owners are the ones that will ultimately limit or take away my current legal right to own a wide variety of firearms.

These fucks who describe themselves as responsible rarely ever have a gun safe, sleep with the gun at their bedside at the ready instead of having an alarm system. They are the same ones that drive around with one in the glove box and report it stolen when the vehicle is broken into (like my neighbor did). They will spend $1500 dollars on a gun they will hardly put any range time in on but not buy the safe, or invest in said range time or extra training....

I can go on and on...

So I appreciate the vote of confidence. I do. I just can't say I have much confidence in the other so called "responsible gun owners" out there. I have no problem with mandated and refresher training. What I would love to see is draconian penalties applied when one has a mishap with a firearm, when one has one stolen, yet it was in the car, or no gun vault to be found. I'd love for the owner of the firearm that "accidentally" killed their own child to be sent up the river for a good long time.

Of course, I think we need draconian penalties on repeat DUI offenders too, but we live in a nation of 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th chances and so on.

So for now, I'll enjoy my small collection of firearms and visits to the range until such a time that I can no longer legally do so because of morons.
ENZ said @ 1:59pm GMT on 4th Jan
Was it in the cart? That's a very important detail I feel the article should have given.
sanepride said @ 4:57pm GMT on 4th Jan
Carrying a loaded firearm in public for any reason is not ideal.
Everyone is focused on how 'normal' this is in that part of the country. Why should it be 'normal'? What are all these people afraid of?
lethalflatulence said @ 8:37pm GMT on 5th Jan
There are legitimate reasons for that. My neighbors are meth heads, and they are an actual threat to me. Probably crazy/desperate enough to try breaking into my house again if they think no one's home.
lilmookieesquire said @ 6:24pm GMT on 4th Jan
You're actually a person I trust with a gun.

In the future they'll be talking about how crazy it is to give a 16 year old a multi ton explosion powered vehicle that they can drive anywhere into anything at unregulated speeds*. (*depending on the governor)
Dalillama said @ 9:30am GMT on 4th Jan [Score:1 Underrated]
Which is why a responsible gun owner doesn't walk around carrying a loaded gun in public. So these kind of 'accidents' can't happen.
pleaides said @ 11:03am GMT on 4th Jan [Score:1 Underrated]
Accidents happen a lot less when there aren't guns around. Simple fact
MadMarchHarris said @ 2:03pm GMT on 4th Jan
I totally agree that gun accidents happen less frequently when guns aren't involved.

Less, sarcastically, I don't think that regular citizens should be carrying guns around specifically because of stuff like this. Very little good comes from people having guns "just because". However, I think find it pretty insulting to parlay that into saying all gun owners are irresponsible.
insanemonkey said @ 2:07pm GMT on 4th Jan
You know what they say, guns don't kill people, unless they're being used for their intended purpose.
rylex said @ 11:42pm GMT on 4th Jan
Guns don't kill people. It's the bullets.

Clearly we need more regulation on the ammo. Like that one joke Chris Rock used to tell about how the murder rate would drop if a single bullet cost 1,000$.
Dienes said @ 2:05pm GMT on 4th Jan
Sorry to say this but: There has yet to be, from any field, a method that reliably teaches children not to touch/play with a gun. I know you've done the hard work of telling them not to touch it, but the data, from behavior analysis through psychology through education literature, shows that they can and will, usually in under a minute, upon seeing a gun.

I don't care how much you told them. Telling doesn't work, otherwise no one would get in trouble ever. This isn't my opinion on guns. This is after an extensive review of the literature, and the data is saying your kid will fuck with your gun given even the smallest opportunity.
ENZ said @ 8:32pm GMT on 4th Jan
How about shooting the kid with a paintball gun and then saying "now imagine how much a real gun would hurt"?
lilmookieesquire said @ 6:21pm GMT on 4th Jan
I spent a lot of time near power outlets as a kid.
ENZ said @ 2:02pm GMT on 4th Jan
Honestly, no, I haven't. I've been around babies, and kids who are just entering kindergarten/preschool, but I don't believe I've been around any 2 year olds.
papango said @ 6:27am GMT on 4th Jan
Two-year-olds are a lot more sophisticated than they get credit for. Especially if something is 'forbidden'.
HoZay said @ 1:04pm GMT on 4th Jan
They will totally open locked doors and run straight for a busy street.
lilmookieesquire said @ 6:17pm GMT on 4th Jan
The phrase "Terrible twos" didn't invent itself.
gendo666 said[2] @ 6:52am GMT on 4th Jan
As a Canadian I'll say "Thanks Obama"
gendo666 said @ 6:57am GMT on 4th Jan
sorry. bad taste.
cb361 said[1] @ 1:24pm GMT on 4th Jan
This is typical behavior from the anti-gunrights crowd. A woman has just lost her life here, killed with the gun she bought for protection, and you're making jokes about it. You think it's funny. Funny?

It's called "Irony". Jeez, buy a dictionary.
Kama-Kiri said @ 12:06pm GMT on 4th Jan
Can someone comment on the fact that there's no mention in that article about the weapon having a safety, about whether the safety was engaged, and how a 2 year old managed to disengage the safety and successfully aim and fire the weapon with deadly result?

In a two year old's hands, the gun would seem enormous and heavy, not like a toy gun even if the kid was familiar with toy guns. Was in an unusually small weapon? Plus toy guns don't have safety switches, there's no way he could have learnt to operate that mechanism.
Dienes said @ 2:06pm GMT on 4th Jan [Score:1 Good]
If it was a Glock it wouldn't have a safety, aside from having a harder to squeeze trigger. At least that is my understanding.
cdwilli1 said @ 9:46pm GMT on 4th Jan
Assuming it was a Glock, which is a reasonable assumption (they are popular and easy to care for and are used by most law enforcement in the US for that reason): the Glock does not have a safety per se - the trigger is not too heavy - certainly a 2 year old could pull it even if it needed two hands. What I can't understand is that it was being carried with a round in the chamber. To load a round in to the chamber is quite difficult - pull back the slide hard and fast then release. From experience I know it is possible to pull the slide back too slowly and the bullet will end up sticking out of the eject mechanism essentially jamming the gun until released.

I can only assume, therefore, that the owner had put a bullet in to the chamber and thus pulling the trigger was the only step left. I can't see a reason to carry a gun in that condition as it is not safe. Of course it does take a second (and makes noise) to load a bullet in to the chamber before firing so perhaps the owner was worried about the delay and audible warning in an emergency.

Terrible for all concerned.
mechavolt said @ 4:58pm GMT on 5th Jan
Typically you lock the slide back before inserting a magazine, then release the slide. The only people who load a gun like you're describing are actors.
cdwilli1 said @ 9:59pm GMT on 5th Jan
Nope - it is how I use my Glock. Do not need to move the slide to insert magazine in the Glock.
mechavolt said @ 1:04am GMT on 6th Jan
Of course you don't need to lock back the slide to insert a magazine. But if you want a round chambered at all times, it's the easiest way.
HoZay said @ 4:23am GMT on 6th Jan
Then the two-year-old should have been tied up.
mechavolt said @ 12:50pm GMT on 6th Jan
I'm pointing out to a gun owner that he uses his gun in a silly way, please don't change the subject.
HoZay said @ 1:57pm GMT on 6th Jan
Sorry, thought you were recommending.
Kama-Kiri said @ 1:41pm GMT on 6th Jan
Is it safe / standard practice to carry a Glock or similar weapon with a bullet in the chamber?

I mean, couldn't pressure in the wrong place or angle on the bag have rubbed against the trigger causing the gun to fire?

It seems incredibly dangerous to me ... but then again, I'm Canadian.
King Of The Hill said @ 1:57am GMT on 9th Jan
Generally yes it is for most modern firearms.

There are some older designs that I wouldn't. Those older designs are still sold as new new today though.

Modern designs like the Glock use an integrated trigger safety. Springfield takes that same design and adds an additional back strap safety. These are automatic safeties that "arm" the gun as long as the finger is on the trigger and in the case of SpringField, the hand is firmly on the grip. Practice proper trigger discipline and you shouldn't ever have a discharge you don't want.

These safeties came about as a manual safety like found on older designs often interfered with the firing of the gun in time of need. Think law enforcement use, self defense. Personally I think the newer safeties are far safer as they are always "on" versus a user needing to set them.

Finally, a round in the chamber is of no concern as long as the firearm is in a proper holster. These holsters protect the trigger well from intrusion as well even protect the backstrap safeties if the holster is specifically designed for that gun. Holsters come in all forms. Most people think they are only hip worn, but you can have one designed for purse use ( A CCW pocket in a purse is not a holster), pocket carry, coat, etc,

I never carry without a round in the chamber. That by definition makes the gun a door stop and not available for use when needed. There are people that think "oh it only takes a second for you to rack the slide" and that assumes you have that second after accessing the firearm, keeping eyes on your attacker, and having both hands free to perform such action. Carrying with a round in the chamber is perfectly safe if you follow best practices. This walmart shopper did not and I hate her.
King Of The Hill said @ 2:13am GMT on 9th Jan
See my response to another in your thread below.

THere is nothing wrong with carrying with one in the chamber with a modern firearm. The Glock safety is proven and requires full positive contact with the trigger to effectively discharge.

What went wrong as usual is the fucking owner. Carrying in a purse designed for CCW... But what went wrong? It was in a pocket designed for carrying the gun there. There are indeed purses designed with integrated holsters. I imagine she was too cheap to get one. It may have or not made a difference.

The core of what was wrong is that she did not have that purse under her immediate physical control and therefore her firearm wasn't either. Placing the purse in the top of the cart where the toddler was most likely riding was a recipe for disaster.

So... She was fucking stupid. Did a round being chambers contribute to her death? Yes. If it wasn't chambered she'd probably be alive. Perhaps she should have made that allowance knowingly allowing her purse to be effectively unattended by her even though it was merely a foot or two away from her. If the gun was in a holster would it have prevented her death? Maybe. We don't know how the toddler handled the gun, but I'm assuming he didn't pick it up and point it... He was in the pocket fumbling around for either the gun or what he could find in there and touched the trigger just right - probably firing right through the purse into her. A holster that securely fit the gun would also have protected the trigger well... and she might still be alive but never know he was rooting around in there.

She presents a great lesson to all and I promise you ever CCW instructor in the nation teaching class this weekend is going to be referencing her stupidity.
HoZay said @ 3:12am GMT on 9th Jan
But that's what's wrong with carrying with one in the chamber - people are stupid.
papango said @ 6:09pm GMT on 4th Jan
He didn't need to 'learnt to operate the mechanism'. This wasn't a calculated murder. He was playing with the gun and it fired and hit his mother. I'm sure this woman and her son have been shopping with the gun in her purse many times and nothing has happened, I"m sure other toddlers have picked up guns and no-one has died. This time, things went wrong.
Dienes said @ 10:24pm GMT on 4th Jan
The downside of having a tool designed and built to make killing as easy as 'point-and-shoot' is that pretty much anyone can point and shoot.
cb361 said[2] @ 1:04pm GMT on 4th Jan
I thought up a joke yesterday. While I consider myself a humorous person, this is only the second "conventional" joke that I remember making up.

For the record, the first (many years ago) was:

Patient: Doctor, doctor! I keep thinking that I'm Shane MacGowan!
Doctor: Well so can anyone.

Which probably shows that I am more suited to observational comedy...

Anyway, my new joke:

Have you heard about the new Atheist casino? Every game let's you "Play God"!

You see here that I have not just created a new joke, I have created a whole new genre: Atheist Jokes, which educate people to their their vile, Godless behavior in a light hearted way

Unfortunately I can only think of one other Atheist Joke.

Did you hear about the Atheist who rejected the love of Jesus Christ, our Savior? He died and went to hell to be tortured by Satan for eternity.

So, it's kind of a meta-Atheist joke.

ENZ said @ 2:05pm GMT on 4th Jan
At any rate, I really hope this kid has a loving and understanding father and next of kin. He's really going to need a lot of therapy growing up, if he has to live with assholes who keep telling him "you're the bastard who murdered your mother" the poor lad is going to grow up to be suicidal or a serial killer or something.
sanepride said @ 8:59pm GMT on 4th Jan
Good thing he'll grow up in a society that encourages the unfettered possession of firearms. If indeed he ends up suicidal or a serial killer or something he'll be well-equipped.
the circus said @ 1:17am GMT on 5th Jan
This is exactly the sort of thing I think about when people say guns don't kill people, people kill people. There are lots of stupid people.
Onix said @ 1:27am GMT on 5th Jan
This has given me second thoughts about getting a gun, really. People say that guns are carried by idiots and shot by the devil, which means that not too many people check them when they put them in a bag and bad luck, and children/morons/accidents happen.

Post a comment
[note: if you are replying to a specific comment, then click the reply link on that comment instead]

You must be logged in to comment on posts.

Posts of Import
SE v2 Closed BETA
First Post
Subscriptions and Things

Karma Rankings