Tuesday, February 22, 2011

Teenage Negligent Homicide in Houston

These teenagers grew up in one of the most gun friendly places in the country. Yet, when it came to gun safety, they were clueless. Is this an anomaly, do you think? Is this an exception to the rule of demystifying the gun as a safety measure?

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.


  1. Houston is nothing like the rest of Texas. The best way to describe Houston is the Philadelphia of the south with all of Philadelphia's problems including not being very gun friendly.

    And the fact that the teens resorted to a drive-by as a lie tells more about this shooting than the fact that it happened in Texas. It tells me that this shooting is more likely a result of gang culture than gun culture and my guess is that all the teens involved are gangbangers or wannabes.

  2. I don't think education programs work. Younger kids are still curious and older ones think there gonna live forever. The problem with gun-ed is that it sends the wrong message, it legitimizes something that is bad for society.

    All gun safety education should take place in the home, and never as a replacement for safe storage.

  3. @Mikeb, you wrote: " it legitimizes something that is bad for society. "

    How is responsible firearms ownership and safety bad for society?

    Oh, are you suggesting that guns THEMSELVES are bad for society?

    Isn't it irresponsible or criminal use of firearms that's bad for society? Or are you still blaming the inanimate objects for our woes?


  4. Orygunner said, "How is responsible firearms ownership and safety bad for society?"

    If that covered all of you, I wouldn't mind. But the truth is some of you guys have no business owning guns. You know the ones I'm talking about.

  5. @Mikeb, yeah, I know full well, and have met some of the ones you're talking about.

    I've always hated it when a group has to suffer consequences because of the actions of a few. Sometimes that makes sense, such as a sports team all having an extra-long workout because one of their members got caught eating a whole box of Twinkies, but that works differently for a team or a specific group to try and get the rest to motivate the offender of the rules to behave.

    When it happens in a whole society, such as restricting gun ownership with gun laws because a relative few misbehave, it doesn't have the same effect. When it occurs for a large number of people (not a small group or a team), it only serves to infringe on the rights of the many who ARE responsible people, and punishes them with no recourse.

    Most gun control works around trying to restrict access or possession of guns, because someone MIGHT engage in criminal or irresponsible abuse of the right. Instead of holding people responsible for their own actions, it punishes all, trying (pretty unsuccessfully) to prohibit abuse before it occurs.

    How does this tactic belong in a free society?


  6. Orygunner, It's not an accurate description you gave.You said, "Instead of holding people responsible for their own actions,..." That's wrong. It's not instead. We do hold people responsible for their actions, and we do support stiffer sentences for violent offenders, AND IN ADDITION we support the kinds of restrictions that would make it harder for the bad guys to get guns.

    Plus, what you call "infringing" and "punishing" I call inconviencing.