Facebook Picture Of Baby With Hands On Rifle Causes Stir

*sigh* more people whining about a baby pic....

A Connecticut gun shop owner is taking heat for posting a photo of a 6-month-old holding a rifle on the Internet.
Mike Majewski, owner of Woodbridge Firearms Trading Post LLC, on Tuesday defended his right to post the photo of the baby -- one hand on the barrel, one hand on the scope -- on his business Facebook page.
"I thought it was a cute picture, so I put it up," he said.

The photo was meant just for the gun community, but went viral, Majewski said.

That set off a firestorm of comments from as far away as the Netherlands and media requests from as far away as Australia.

So yeah, wow. People flipping out about a baby pic of this guys infant putting their hands on a firearm. The posing wasnt even deliberate!!

Duffy was looking at a bolt action rifle and, wanting to show a friend how light it was, rested the gun on the carrier so he could get his cellphone to take a photo of himself holding the weapon with one hand, Majewski said.
As Duffy grabbed for his phone, the little girl woke up, touched the weapon, and smiled, prompting her father to snap the photo, Majewski said.

And some of the facebook libtards were downright nasty in their comments:

"I've just being (sic) reading about the baby pic i really hope that the father would go to jail and your store would be shut down thank goodness that here in the Netherlands we have no such stores as your disgusting store," one wrote.

Honestly, I dont see one thing wrong with the pic, so as far as I am concerned, the anti gun tards can go STUFF IT

The reason everyone's flipping out is because the picture was taken inside a gun shop in: you guessed: CONNECTICUT!!

Some Facebook posts blasted the photo because it was taken in Connecticut, where 20 children and six women were fatally shot at Sandy Hook Elementary School in December 2012, according to the WTNH report. The gun shop is 22 miles from the old Sandy Hook school, which has been razed.

I guess more people need to jump on the Sandy Hook bandwagon.
That said, dont get me wrong, I feel horrible about what happened there, but everytime posts a gun pic like theis the first thing they scream is SANDY HOOK!!! I'm sorry, thats just wrong IMHO

What say you fellow ATSers?
Story

And here's the pic that EVERYONE is flipping out about:


PS: you can see the firearm is safe - Bolt is in the open position,. showing an EMPTY CHAMBER

reply to post by HomerinNC


People become retarded when it comes to guns sometimes. Honestly I don't see anything wrong with the picture.

Oh well the whole thing will die out pretty soon because people have attention spans of goldfish as well.

reply to post by HomerinNC


I guess the baby will get schooled early on the most important words in the US constitution, the sacrosanct 2nd amendment. Maybe some of that other supporting mumbo-jumbo too.

If you have lethal force, with sufficient discharge efficiency, you have true freedom. I could go on, but I'm tearing up.

I am pro gun, but are we really trying to defend someone who is so irresponsible with their weapon as to leave it within arms reach of an infant?

I mean really?

Start 'em young eh?

reply to post by captaintyinknots


Care to elaborate on the dangers?

I guess it's heavy maybe? Sharp edges? Small parts that could be chocking hazards?

He was looking at the rifle in a shop, unloaded, action open.

About as dangerous as a broom.

thisguyrighthere
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

Care to elaborate on the dangers?

I guess it's heavy maybe? Sharp edges? Small parts that could be chocking hazards?

He was looking at the rifle in a shop, unloaded, action open.

About as dangerous as a broom.

So, in your opinion, it is perfectly responsible to leave a weapon, loaded or not, in reach of an infant?

Theres a general rule that goes with handling weapons: Treat EVERY gun as though it were loaded.

You can try and defend him if you want, this is still irresponsible. And, frankly, irresponsible gun owners are a BIG part of the issue.

Nice job changing out the word i used, "irresponsible", to the ever more inflammatory "danger", though. Always helps rational conversation when you change the wording of a statement.

reply to post by HomerinNC


Great picture, nice rifle and even a cute baby. What's not to like?

Must say I'm jealous though, had to wait until I was ten years old before I got my first gun.

reply to post by HomerinNC


Despite popular liberal belief, firearms are in fact inanimate objects.

Some Facebook posts blasted the photo because it was taken in Connecticut, where 20 children and six women were fatally shot at Sandy Hook Elementary School in December 2012, according to the WTNH report. The gun shop is 22 miles from the old Sandy Hook school, which has been razed.

And this picture is relevant to sandy hook, how? And whats the problem with the baby being near it? an unloaded firearm is perfectly safe. If i were the parents of the child, I'd simply tell whoever has a problem with it to go pound sand.

I've just being (sic) reading about the baby pic i really hope that the father would go to jail and your store would be shut down thank goodness that here in the Netherlands we have no such stores as your disgusting store," one wrote.

And that sounds like one incredibly annoying human being. Let's hope they stay in the Netherlands since they obviously don't have a clue what U.S. laws are.

reply to post by captaintyinknots

So, in your opinion, it is perfectly responsible to leave a weapon, loaded or not, in reach of an infant?

He didn't "leave it", his father is standing right there taking the picture. What, do you think the baby took a selfie?

reply to post by captaintyinknots

So, in your opinion, it is perfectly responsible to leave a weapon, loaded or not, in reach of an infant?

Not changing the wording, loaded or not is where there's a huge difference.

As mentioned, the chamber is empty, they took the picture cause they thought it was cute and then posted it.

Posting was the mistake here as people will crucify him for doing so.

A storm in a glass.

kx12x
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

So, in your opinion, it is perfectly responsible to leave a weapon, loaded or not, in reach of an infant?

He didn't "leave it", he is standing right there taking the picture. What, do you think the baby took a selfie?

So its not within arms reach of an infant?

Its funny, so far, the only counters to my statement are semantic based, at best.

kx12x

Despite popular liberal belief, firearms are in fact inanimate objects.

Um.... so are Knives, Hand-Grenades, Samurai swords and Dynamite.
I don't think "liberals", or anyone else, has an issue of whether the gun is alive, conscious or whatever, it's more the danger they pose.

reply to post by captaintyinknots


My god man. It's a metal rod with a wooden handle.

Fine, I'll swap the words back. In what way is it irresponsible?

SonoftheSun
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

So, in your opinion, it is perfectly responsible to leave a weapon, loaded or not, in reach of an infant?

Not changing the wording, loaded or not is where there's a huge difference.

As mentioned, the chamber is empty, they took the picture cause they thought it was cute and then posted it.

Posting was the mistake here as people will crucify him for doing so.

A storm in a glass.

And, once again, the general rule of firearms is to treat EVERY SINGLE ONE as though they are loaded.

I am not going to crucify the person. I have seen plenty that is far worse. At some point, though, the pro-gun crowd (of which I am a part) needs to step up and realize that irresponsible handling of weapons is a BAD THING, and not something to be celebrated, as seems to be the trend.

thisguyrighthere
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

My god man. It's a metal rod with a wooden handle.

Fine, I'll swap the words back. In what way is it irresponsible?

Already explained twice.

reply to post by captaintyinknots


Well lets look at the picture, yes it is within arms reach. It's also unloaded and safe. Where is the problem?

Really, this is going viral. ???? Ive seen other pictures of kids not just holding weapons, but firing AR-15s. Boy im glad no one saw my friends pics.

reply to post by captaintyinknots


Ok then. Please tell us, what could have happened here?

For that little moment the baby had it in front of him while everyone was watching...what could have happened?

kx12x
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

Well lets look at the picture, yes it is within arms reach. It's also unloaded and safe. Where is the problem?

Im not going to explain it again, and it is quite worrisome that so many of you defending this dont know the basics of responsible handling of weapons.