You can have my Uzi when you pry it from my cute widdle fingers...

originally posted by: Restricted
The kid wanted to shoot the weapon.

Prove it. I can't picture a 9 year old girl saying to her parents "That Uzi looks like fun. I wanna shoot it".

Even if she did, which I highly doubt, the parents should have said no.

Your lack of empathy for the child is disturbing.

originally posted by: Taupin Desciple

originally posted by: Restricted
The kid wanted to shoot the weapon.

Prove it.

If she didn't want to she wouldn't have been there.

What a stupid statement.

originally posted by: roadgravel
Revolvers aren't known for jamming.

True, but I want more than 5 or 6 chances to hit my target.
I fear we are losing sight of the issue. The op is clearly anti-gun, made an ignorant remark,and I tried to expose his ignorance.
Had he bad mouthed, sig sauer, s&w, kimber, remington, colt, or browning I would have taken up for them too.
Instead we're having a pissing contest about our favorite guns.
Divide and conquer, we make it too easy for them

The shooting range owner, in his statement, said it was something high up on the girl's bucket list. Sounded like she wanted to shoot. Also sounds overboard.

originally posted by: Restricted

originally posted by: Taupin Desciple

originally posted by: Restricted
The kid wanted to shoot the weapon.

Prove it.

If she didn't want to she wouldn't have been there.

What a stupid statement.

You're absolutely right. She planned the trip, drove her parents to the range and told the instructor that she wants to learn how to shoot an Uzi. The parents had no say in any of it.

Just how stupid are you? Keep talking and show us please. Troll.

a reply to: Taupin Desciple

See RoadGravel's post.

Sit and spin.

a reply to: Riffrafter

I mean, what are the pro-gun arguments? "Well, she shouldn't have had an UZI but a Glock is OK"....or how about a Desert Eagle .50 Cal?

Absolutely no one is making that argument.

And the parents belong in jail. Not for murder, but for endangering the welfare of an entire species. Not for years, but at least for a few months. They earned that.

They did nothing illegal. What they did do is fail in their judgement. They were tourists in Nevada thinking they would do touristy things. They thought it would be cool to head to the range and put a machine pistol in the hands of their 9 year old. The instructor(and I use that term loosely) should have known better than to allow this to happen. It was HIS lack of judgement that ended his life.

I have to agree. Ultimately it comes down to the man in control of the range.

a reply to: Riffrafter

I would agree blame must be shared by the child's parents and the so-called instructor. My child fire a live automatic weapon? Never, as visions of her tiny fingers blown off at the muzzle would prevent such irresponsible asininity. Apparently what we see on the tube, in the theater these days sucks down what little common sense people in general had accumulated. Used to be a time it seemed when certain ... activities and knowledge ... were specific to the domain of professions requiring their mastery in order to perfect, excel and/or survive. Nowadays, literally ever Jack and Jill carries around intimate knowledge once considered esoterica, and if they have not learned it from video games or movies, google helps them look like old pros. Darwin award indeed.

When parents make asinine decisions it's up to the range instructor to say "NO".

originally posted by: Riffrafter
Saw this CBS headline and was speechless.

"Gun Debate Grows After 9-Year-Old Accidentally Kills Shooting Instructor"

There's actually a debate about this?!?

At what point does the pro-gun lobby/militia stand back and say - "We've lost our collective mind"

BTW - I am not anti-gun or anti 2nd amendment. I am anti-stupidity, anti-closed mindedness, and anti-common sense.

Here's a link to one of the stories...

Gun Debate grow after 9 year old...

There don't need to be a debate, this isn't about gun rights or gun control. This is about common sense and bad decisions while parenting.

From the story:

People on both sides of the gun debate are all asking the same question: why was a nine-year-old, who had limited training and experience, allowed to shoot an automatic weapon?

People who want to turn this into a debate for either side is wrong. If anything should happen the BUSINESSES that rent these firearms should have a minimum age rule for who they allow on the range.

Nine year olds are NOT too young to learn firearm safety or even shoot a firearm if you have the RIGHT firearm for their size, age & experience.

This is the same as taking a 16 year old who has never driven before. When you teach them do you use a Ford Escort that they can control and learn properly how to drive or do you stick them in a Lamborghini with 750 HP?

Wife's brother died a few years ago because when he wanted a motorcycle he bought a Kawasaki GPZ1000RX Ninja
that had been modified for racing.....He lost control of it and hit a tree and died. Way too much bike and power for a new rider.

No child needs to learn to shoot an Uzi. There are plenty of other firearms that make more sense.

That's really the end of the story. Do children need to learn to shoot Uzi? No.

Have you watched the uncut sheriffs video? I am looking for it now.....but I would say this instructor screwed up bad he was the professional and he did not maintain control. He is standing to the left side of a right handed shooter, has her fire a single shot minimal recoil, good job here we go full auto he should know that this gun will walk on one her with each shot up and to the left (because she is right handed) he remains on her left and above her and the gun walks right into him. He should have moved behind her and controlled the walk, although she fire before she is told as well. Gun tourism is a big business and shooting weapons civs don't have access to is the main draw. Unfortunately many of these ranges have minimal education requirements, no course prior to shooting just a quick run down of how things work and away you go.



Sheriff Video

a reply to: Riffrafter

There is a debate because you're idea the government can do a better job of parenting than actual parents is just plain wrong. There should be no debate because parents are still a step up from the stupidity of government every single time. In this case, the shooter killed the instructor on accident, compared to the US government and governments around the world doing it on purpose on a daily basis. So despite the outrageous stupidity displayed, its still a notch up from government-level stupidity.

The government itself actually kills people on PURPOSE with firearms on a daily basis. So I would demand if you take away any guns it needs to be from the ones using them to regularly kill people in cold blood instead of the ones less abusive of their power.

originally posted by: Restricted
When parents make asinine decisions it's up to the range instructor to say "NO".

Except they accepted kids 8 years and up. They want money. The range doesn't care. I believe they decided 5 foot tall is what it takes for a kid to be able to handle it now.

I went to a pro race track with Formula 1 cars and they wouldn't let my nine year old drive one. Wonder why?

When I was nine I learned how to handle a bb gun, then upgraded to a pellet gun; when I was older, wiser and strong enough I learned how to handle a single shot 20 gauge, and so on.

The was just plain parental ignorance at the highest level.

originally posted by: Taupin Desciple

originally posted by: Restricted

originally posted by: Taupin Desciple

originally posted by: Restricted
The kid wanted to shoot the weapon.

Prove it.

If she didn't want to she wouldn't have been there.

What a stupid statement.

You're absolutely right. She planned the trip, drove her parents to the range and told the instructor that she wants to learn how to shoot an Uzi. The parents had no say in any of it.

Just how stupid are you? Keep talking and show us please. Troll.

Uh, even if she didn't want to shoot she might have been there.
I remember going lots of places with my parents when I was younger that I didn't want to go to.

originally posted by: Restricted
a reply to: Taupin Desciple

See RoadGravel's post.

Sit and spin.

Plausible deniability. It takes a real piece of s**t and I wouldn't put it past someone in that part of the country to pawn off his lack of judgement on a little girl. That should be obvious because neither himself, the instructor or the parents had the guts or intelligence to tell a 9 year old girl no.

Seems to me that the MSM is conveniently omitting the fact that this wasn't some place people send their kids to learn to shoot.

Am I the only one that finds it rather suspicious that they keep referring to a 'Gun range' and 'shooting instructors'?

This took place at a tourist trap that would likely do whatever it takes to get one more paying customer.

It's great that a 9-year-old is learning to fire Uzis. Someday they may need to return fire against a classmate shooting up their school.