I'm worried about this boy. Child crisis-actors often have troubled adolescences.

In another article on this, they do mention the boy is 1 of 5 siblings living in the single-wide. If you've never been inside one, a single-wide might be considered suitable lodging for 2 adults and maybe 1 kid. Anything more and you are going to see the rats start to eat each other.

It also mentioned that the girl was heard by several adult witnesses as saying she was going to get one of the puppies seconds before the boy shot her.

The gun debate ended when it was OK for little children to be gunned down at Sandy Hook.

Heck, even Chris Christie won't take credit for New Jersey's stricter gun laws for curbing gun violence in his state.

Synopsys: It's insulting and demeaning to a American to be told they can't own a gun.

Any Americans who think differently had better get themselves back on-message.

Don't worry. Sheriff Bud McCoig is hoping that "this don't ever happen again".

He's hoping really, really hard...he might even pray on the matter.

So problem solved. All you gun-control zealots just back off.

When I read the original and got to this (God help me) I laughed.
This is all so fucking depressing.
Also the phrase "show me your puppies"

I like to think I can see humour in adversity - but really I'm probably just sick.

I was going to ask why a seven year old is getting breast augmentation but thought better of it.

It was premature thelarche.

If only the 8-year-old girl had a gun.

Seriously, this is what the NRA's argument boils down to.

Also, if they don't charge the father at least with some form of negligence or being an accessory than this is even more fucked-up.

The behavior of individuals is very, VERY difficult for govt. to effectively regulate. That's just it.

There is simply no law, short of having found some reason to have prevented the gun's purchase in the first place, that could have prevented this. People do stupid shit with anything they get in to their hands. For god's sake, people stick lightbulbs up their ass, and it's not something that one guy did once...

To tell you the truth, i work in the field of govt regulation of licensed businesses, so my take on this may just be my seeing everything as a nail for the hammer i use all day.

That being said, the behavior of licensed businesses is easier to regulate than that of individuals. IT IS NOT PERFECT. If it was, the complaint unit i work in would be doing something else. What it is is better than nothing, pretty much.

1)Titles for ownership 2)mandatory liability insurance at the time of purchase, just like a car.

Those things can be done at state level, and fed level action is a dream of a joke, and have a number of virtues. Consider and discuss.

yup nothing the father could have done to stop it... except something like ...I dunno.. a locked gun cabinet or trigger lock. Hell keeping ammunition locked up if not the gun.
of course as we are constantly told by gun lobbyists "Now is not the time to consider gun control/ reform. it is a time to grieve." or some shit like that.

No, I said no LAW could do it. I also said that individuals are difficult to regulate that way. What part do you take exception to except that you don't think it should be that way?

By your logic, no law prevents anything, or at least, won't prevent everything that is against said law.

Big "duh" there, or we wouldn't need a justice system.

You work in regulation. Why have any? Someone is just going to violate it, so why bother/

and by the way, when I had a rifle, i kept it, the bolt, and the bullets in 3 different places. I know it can be done, it's just that laws can't make people do it. If you think it can, go measure the speed of cars on the highway(probaly your own too) and go sit in with the IRS for an hour.

FOR FUCKS SAKE, i work with consumer protection laws, AND CONSUMERS OFTEN REFUSE TO OBEY THE LAWS THAT THEY DEMANDED FOR THEIR OWN PROTECTION.

You think a trigger lock requirement could have prevented this? I do not. All it would have done would be to punish someone, which may be a desirable outcome for this situation, but it would not have prevented it.

Seriously, though. We need all the help we can get. We don't even need to look elsewhere.

But doesn't that violate FREEDOM!!!! ?

Show me a well-regulated militia, THEN we can have a serious discussion. ;)

You mean the National Guard?

I'd say the police, but that is stretching the definition of "well."

National guard perhaps?

That would be a sort of "logical" conclusion, but even gun advocates don't consider the National Guard as part of the well-regulated militia. And going by the constitution, calling them a militia is a stretch since they are government funded.

So we have all these gangs posting outside racist farmer ranches and military facilities.

I have advocated loudly and publicly a regulatory scheme for guns that is the same as cars.

People flip out, as apparently guns are VERY VERY different from cars. They cite the 2nd amendment. Funny thing is, cars and transport in general are not actually mentioned in the constitution at all, and are thus far less regulated by it than guns. That's why all motor vehicle regulation short of the manufacture is done at a state level.

There was a HUGE debate during the writing of the constitution about whether there should be a bill of rights at all, and nay sayers pointing out that rights the govt grants in writing like that, it can take away.

All this said, action on a state level is where it is at with this subject.

Ask them if they support yelling "fire" in a crowded theater. If not, then ask if that's an unreasonable regulation on the 1st Amendment.

If they're really right-wingers, ask them about voter ID laws. If they're cool with those, then that's the perfect time to call them out on (over) regulating a Constitutional right (as there's so little to no evidence of rampant fraud) that I'd say is far more fundamental than owning a gun.

Ask people about anything and they will give the right answer. Watch what they do and you will see something else.

I don't actually care what people say if you ask them. They asked people right after Obama was elected if they would be willing to pay more in taxes to fund universal health care. 75% or respondents said they would. How'd that work out?

My sister,during NY's budget bad times, told me that she would be happy to send the state $50 if they needed it, but asking us to get new license plates was just too much. She never did send an extra dime, nor get he new plates, and I told her she was full of shit at the time.

It's funny to hear citizens talk about the effect of laws. It's like they think that they control the behavior of others more effectively that it does their own...they don't.

As for what SHOULD happen, to paraphrase an old quote, Should in to one hand and shit in to the other; tell me which one fills up first.