IKEA apologises for child shooting a gun

Nothing about 2000 accidental deaths of children in terms of actual statistics. Try again.

Here's what they have to say about unintentional deaths (what we are actually talking about)

just doing a little math, that means that of those 114 deaths, 48 were of 0-14 year olds, hardly 2000 a year.

 

If someone doesn’t want to read my posts because of length, it’s not a concern to me. Those that do likely have similar experiences and may themselves share among a community of those that have sharded values.
I acknowlege I can be a bit long in content but prefer sharing a bit of the experience and reasoning behind my opinions as opposed to posting bumper sticker length comments that only serve as ideological slogans of the indoctrinated.
Those like you will accept nothing of my posts anyway, preferring a simple biased narrative projecting the thinking of those that support firearms ownership, individual liberty over collective conformity, and knowledge over irrational fear as lacking stubstance in thought.
Let’s face it, you have little interest in my opinions, experience, or message whether brief or not, no interest in whether anyone reads my posts or not but responded with your message as a left hand means of disparaging the post as your motive and note something I didn’t know; you speak for 90% of those participating in this forum. OK, then.

 

"My experience says..." is the lifeblood of the indoctrinated mind you...

 

The citation does not speak of what is being claimed by yourself. The only time the two thousand figure is mentioned, is when it refers to the year specifically, not the number of casualties or injuries that are had during the year.

Beyond that matter, the citation admits that it is actually counting those who are legally recognized as adults, as being children. Legally anyone over the age of eighteen cannot be counted or considered as a child or minor, and instead must be counted as an adult. This is intellectual dishonesty on the part of the American Academy of Pediatrics.

 

I thought afterwards that you lot were jumping in instead of looking at what I was replying to. The post I was replying to was "incidents like this" in other words injuries not deaths and I underestimated

 

What part of "incidents like this" make it difficult to understand I was talking about injuries as well as deaths? I can get the others not picking up on that but I was replying directly to you

 

Did you read the OP?
Try that. Then explain how your source proves your bogus 2000 "incidents like this" claim.

 

The deaths alone should not be counted. Gunshot injury carries a life time legacy, often crippling

 

There were no injuries.

 

Homes where teenagers are not allowed to drive are safer than homes where teens are allowed to drive. More teens commit suicide by means other than firearms than with firearms. Homes with suicidal teens are safer when there are no ropes, cords, belts and bed sheets.

Funny how the AAP doesn't mention that.

 

Talk about a politically biased, cooked number poster!

Up to 21? So, it includes hyperviolent gang members as "children"?? Spare me.

 

I find this interesting. Can you dispute the "the safest home for children and teens is one without guns"? I look forward to your data

 

Still young still dying or injured

 

By the looks of things, you KNOW you can't prove your claim.
No one is surprised.

 

Yeah, I can dispute it. I lived it. You want "data"? Well, sorry, but I'm not a slave to cooked numbers and twisted statistics, and I have better things to do with my life than spend hours perusing "data". I prefer to rely upon experience and the "data" of my peers who all prove the assertion that a gun in the home makes kids less safe is toasted bovine excrement.

I grew up in a home with guns. I was taught, when young, how to safely coexist with them, how to be responsible with them, and to respect them. Every single one of my peers who lived in similar circumstances had the same experience, and they grew up to pass those traditions of personal responsibility on to their children, who likewise grew up safe and secure... and independent.

 

Yes the "My experience is more important that that of millions of other people " shtick. That is what statistics is an evaluation of how often in the crapshoot of life you will have to dodge something to get lucky

You got lucky

Stop insisting everyone else in the world will get lucky too

 

Sorry, but I feel zero empathy for a violent gang member who is injured or killed while engaged in a brutal and predatory lifestyle, no matter what their age.

There was an incident recently where a 16 year old gang member engaged in the group rape and brutalization of an innocent girl. He then was stupid enough to throw a couple of rounds at the cops that tried to arrest him and got terminated for his stupidity. That there is a "child" dying from a gunshot wound that makes me cheer it as an act bettering the human species as a whole.

 

Once again, EVERY SINGLE ONE of my peers had similar experiences... and that is the truth for "millions of other people" as well, despite your shrieks of denial. More than one of us went on to survive encounters where having a gun was the difference between life and death or worse.

Stop insisting everyone else in the world be forced to live their lives as you dictate. You not only reject responsibility for your own security, and that of your family, but demand everyone else embrace your same status as a sheep trying to pretend there aren't wolves in the world.

I was going to say "I didn't get lucky" except I realize I did; but not in the way you claim. I got lucky to be born in a nation that respects my fundamental rights, among people who recognize the advantages of those rights and exercise them proudly.

 

Not all of them are "violent gang memebers"

In fact in categorising them as such you are falling into a logical fallacy. Ad Hominem if you will. But 'tis is extraneous even without the inclusion of young adults America has more child deaths from firearms than about 22 other industrialised nations combined

 

And they all got lucky

Does not mean that every one will

It is what we call a "small sample size"

BTW easy to make stuff up and post it. How do I know what you are saying is true? How do you verify it?

 

Either way, to include individuals older than 18 as "children" is dishonest, and a blatant attempt to skew the numbers to fit the agenda.

Sorry, but I find something published by the Huffington Post to be far from credible.

 

The pictures do say "and young adults"

Please feel free to post validated data

 

That's your opinion, and one I place no value upon.

Ah, yes; the usual fallback position. "What you are saying is inconvenient to my views, so I don't believe it."

Whatever. It wouldn't matter if I posted every last detail of my life, with footnotes and official documentation; you'd still reject anything and everything I had to say. So forgive me if I just don't bother.

 

No what I am saying is that, unlike research , which you seem to unable to refute, I cannot verify your stories

However I am more than happy to counter withstories of the not so lucky

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opini...make-parents-feel-safe-having-guns-ncna883611

Gun safety programs are no assurance that children will not handle guns and may give the parents a false sense of security