Facebook Picture Of Baby With Hands On Rifle Causes Stir

reply to post by HomerinNC


No offense Homer, but to say it's because it's in CT is really offensive, it's not the reason so many people are upset about it. While there may be no danger to anyone with an open and unloaded weapon it's irresponsible to let the baby have it unattended in it's possession, there's a million other things that could go wrong and hurt the child with a huge bit of metal like that..

Personally I just find it tasteless, but, I understand the concern for the child's safety on other levels besides the fact that it's a gun, it's a LARGE bit of heavy metal that could end up falling or moving and hurting the child..

In fact, most of our news stations glossed over the fact it was a gun, and focused on the safety aspect of letting a child that age even sit unattended with something that heavy and large..

When I learned about gun safety I was told to treat every weapon as if it is loaded but what this meant is to always be aware of where it is pointed. It isn't pointed at the baby. The baby doesn't have access to it unattended. I see this as an innocent picture and don't see the owner as being unaware of safety precautions.

reply to post by vkey08


thats what my news source reported:

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.

Can only go by whats reported

I don't blame the baby for owning a firearm, with all the pedos out there, I say good job babeh!

reply to post by HomerinNC


Most people here in CT could have cared less about it, it got maybe 30 seconds on the news up in Hartford..

reply to post by kx12x

Honestly, one of the most important rules in gun safety is trigger control. Everyone who responsibly handles guns understands this rule, respects this rule, and lives by this rule (among others).

Simply put, by putting the baby within arms reach of the trigger (as you can clearly see in the photo), the man who took this picture is plain-and-simple violating the trigger control rule.

Sure, within the context of having the bolt open, chamber empty, magazine empty, barrel pointed away from people, even if the baby did hit the trigger absolutely nothing would have happened.

That being said, the sacred rules of gun safety really should not be violated because that's how accidents happen.

Should anything happen to this guy? Unfortunately for this guy, that's up to the local Child Protective Services. If you give those people an inch, they'll take a mile.

Remember the first thing I said is people become retarded when it comes to guns.

Yes everyone when coming into contact with a gun should treat it like it is loaded. The next logical step would to verify if it is loaded and clear it, then verify again. Once the weapon is cleared safe they can go on to whatever steps they need to and in any instance where the weapon leaves their sight they should clear it safe again. It isn't rocket science by any means however, some people go full on retard with guns and lose their common sense in which case I am glad they only remember to treat it as if it is loaded.

You never point a gun at a person except in self defense or military police duty you follow range rules and everything will be fine. We follow certain rules like keeping weapons pointed up and down range so others feel safe because there may be a retard who didn't clear his weapon.

Oh man I can't believe I am explaining this. Whatever all of this will blow over soon enough.

captaintyinknots

semperfortis
Well for what it is worth

I've been a Military and Law Enforcement Firearms Instructor for well over 27 years having taught on the Federal, State, County and Local level and I see nothing wrong with this picture

Just my 2 cents

So, as someone I respect and someone with intimate knowledge of weapons training: Have you ever taught someone that it is ok to treat a weapon as though it isnt loaded?

This is downright silly, its a lot worse what happened to that teen girl that got frostbite on her feet because of some dumb person who was blindly following rules without having some logical thinking behind, and no one cares beyond reading the news and saying oh poor girl and "idiots are in control"

Have you ever thought about the possibility that that sacred golden rule doesn't even apply here? the gun is inoperable by the baby, it is not loaded, he is not strong enough to cause any damage or knows how, come on man, stop living so much by the sacred rules and start taking choices based on the specific case and situation.

Given that you consider a rule something that can and must not be broken, if you were trapped under a tree and the only way to save you from a bear that is coming at you is for a kid near you to grab a gun and shoot the bear down down. Would you die because it is not ok to let a kid shoot without going through a lot of training first? of would you care more about your life that the golden sacred unbreakable rule?

And yes it is the same, if you think i'm drawing an extreme case just to defend my point, then you're even worse, taking a total black vs white approach to this, no matter what the circumstances are.

Point is, the baby could not do any harm with an unloaded gun, which he is unable to operate or know how, regardless of any golden rule meant for older/stronger people.

captaintyinknots
reply to post by SonoftheSun

 

Not my opinion. The opinion of every firearm trainer in america. But hey, its all good.

I wouldn't know. Never had a firearm trainer but then again, I'm in Canada. My trainers were my grandfather and uncles. What they've taught me is to never point a gun at anyone, loaded or not. And to be careful when handling weapons.

I don't own guns. I don't hunt. I'm neither a pro gun owner or against them.

What we have here is a picture that is in bad taste for some and cute for others. That is just a matter of opinion. As I said, the mistake this guy did was to post it on the internet. THAT was dumb. But then again, this is just my opinion though.

So yes, it's all good.

I tend to avoid the gun threads because it's too much like taking religion or politics. Blech. Chaos, conflict. Just blech.

Here's the thing that I think people aren't getting. (And when I say people, I mean everyone who is not a "gun person").

This is the man's hobby and business, clearly a large part of his life. And he wants to share it with the child. If he owned a sporting goods store, we might have seen this darling baby with a baseball bat, golf club, or hockey stick (all of which are images easily found on Google). And the comments there would have been "Oh, cute little upcoming Yankees fan, the next golf pro, hockey fan, etc." Those objects can all harm people too!

This fellow's kid is clearly being raised up around guns, and that will probably prevent her from become one of those children who accidentally shoot themselves. Why? Because I am pretty sure that she will be brought up learning gun safety. And i think that's amazingly responsible. A kid who has his or her curiosity satisfied no longer finds the object so irresistible.

Also, I think all of the uproar is kind of moot, because the kid physically could not do anything with this firearm except maybe push it onto the floor off her carrier. And, being clearly unloaded, there would be no potential for accidental discharge.

I'm planning my daughter's first trip to the range soon (airsoft) and you better believe I'll be taking pics! BUT, I won't be posting them on the internet. Too many crazies out there, lol.

It ain't no different than the father that sets his kid on a motorcycle or quad or race car or behind the controls of an airplane and snaps a pic. Would I do it probably not, is it bad taste thats debatable but mainly just opinion. What I have always done with my kids is put the unloaded firearm in their hands and teach them how to respect it, show them that real life is not like the movies. Take the mystery out of the guns and the gun cabinet and they really lose interest quickly unless it's time to go out shooting with Dad. But have to say I have never put a gun in a kids hands that young mainly due to not wanting drool all over them and I would imagine the whole lead dust thing not to mention the lubricant probably wouldn't be a desirable smell when handed back to mom.

captaintyinknots
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?

How was it "irresponsible"?

What was the kid going to do, load aim and shoot the thing?

Common man, use your head.

Bassago
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.

I was 7, but had been hunting since I could walk.

Thanks dad, and granddad, you guys taught this country boy the right way to live!!!!!

captaintyinknots

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.

Thanks for making irrational blanket statements about all of us that arent offended by this. I have been handling weapons since birth, I have never had 1 single accident with one because I was taught how to handle them safely and correctly.

Without a bullet it is a paperweight.

[SNIP]

reply to post by Grimpachi

go full on retard

LOL, sorry I couldnt help it.

reply to post by HomerinNC


i say screw 'em. nothing wrong with the image. nothing wrong with getting your kids acquainted with guns. I have, and they know how to not kill themselves with one.

bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by HomerinNC

 

i say screw 'em. nothing wrong with the image. nothing wrong with getting your kids acquainted with guns. I have, and they know how to not kill themselves with one.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I suggest a few people here read this and take it to heart.

oblvion

bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by HomerinNC

 

i say screw 'em. nothing wrong with the image. nothing wrong with getting your kids acquainted with guns. I have, and they know how to not kill themselves with one.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I suggest a few people here read this and take it to heart.

Ive always supported the 2nd amendment. But when my kids were far younger i didn't have guns in the house. With the youngest, he was too snoopy and curious. The older one....wouldn't have been an issue.

When the youngest started showing interest, i knew I had to provide leadership for him for his own safety. I grew up with guns, living a country life. So i got my rifles from where I had them stored (moms house, in a locked location, trigger locked and stored for safekeeping) to started teaching my son about shooting.

He is an outstanding marksman now. We hunt together. He knows gun safety. His love of firearms is a big force in his life, with him taking welding classes and prep classes for entering an engineering program. He wants to be a gun craftsman/manufacturer.

LOL, if you ever need to know anything, he's the one i would ask. Seriously. No matter what the arm is, he will know what it is and the history of it. Excepting custom builds, obviously. He is what you would actually call "a gun nut", in the same way you'd call The Worlds Most Interesting Man a "cigar nut"

InverseLookingGlass
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.

If the 2nd has been that important why havent a million of you marched on DC with your AR 15 yet?

Washington and patriots took arms as far less tyrany than you have today.

Untill you American grow a spine and stand up to you gov the 2nd is like all your other "rights" just words on a bit of paper your goverment ignores.

O and before some red neck dimwitt chimes in and makes asumptions based on my country.

Im all for the right to bare arms

BUT

Guns shouldnt be viewed so flipantly or worshiped.

They should be treated like any other dangrous tool, with respect

And the attitude is that except in hunting guns should NOT be the go too solution for ones problems unless its life or death and theres no other option.