Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: ‘We do not need a militia of toddlers': If Iowa law passes, children can use handguns [View all]debunction.junction
(127 posts)73. Boy, I wish you could!
Too bad there is not a test to prove the parent is responsible before putting them in charge of teaching the child to be responsible.
I get your point totally. For me, the benefits don't come close to balancing the risks. I respect your opinion, so we can just agree to disagree.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
134 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
‘We do not need a militia of toddlers': If Iowa law passes, children can use handguns [View all]
jpak
Feb 2016
OP
Or it's a cry for help. "Stop me, it's clear I'm demented , delusional, and desperately in need of
mpcamb
Feb 2016
#121
There should be some penalty for introducing laws that fly in the face of reason.
mpcamb
Feb 2016
#124
This will give new meaning to names like "Billy the Kid" and "Pretty Boy Floyd."
KansDem
Feb 2016
#6
We're probably not going to agree in the end, but I would suggest that not all children are...
xocet
Feb 2016
#71
You are apparently unfamiliar with the colloquialisms of the English language and their meaning...
Human101948
Feb 2016
#34
You are apparently unfamiliar with the colloquialisms of the English language and their meaning...
Human101948
Feb 2016
#35
Except a DU gun thread is impossible without endless speculation on my genitalia
hack89
Feb 2016
#39
It's just a law allowing a parent to supervise a child shooting a handgun at a range.
NutmegYankee
Feb 2016
#100
That might have been true years ago, when guns were treated as serious objects.
Paladin
Feb 2016
#55
Accidental deaths with firearms has been falling since the 50's, while gun ownership
AtheistCrusader
Feb 2016
#58
But they are not substantiated by raw data that the US DoJ has been collecting for 60 years.
AtheistCrusader
Feb 2016
#79
So, you are saying that a 5-year-old can appreciate the risks that he or she is being asked to take?
xocet
Feb 2016
#63
An extreme position taken to logical conclusion exposing the nonsense of the position. nt
Bernardo de La Paz
Feb 2016
#56
So you oppose strict liability for the parents of a minor with a pistol, you must belong to the NRA.
happyslug
Feb 2016
#94
I am sorry. I didn't realize I replied to you. I thought I replied to the thread.
trillion
Feb 2016
#109
Oh, that's all right then. As we all know, all gun regulations are always followed to the letter.
scarletwoman
Feb 2016
#99
See, to me it takes some kind of a sick mind to want to teach a child how to shoot a pistol.
scarletwoman
Feb 2016
#122
She has a defensible position and thus NOT an "offensive and bigoted thing to say"
happyslug
Feb 2016
#131
Ok, but none of that is legal, and this proposed law wouldn't make it legal.
AtheistCrusader
Feb 2016
#114
Isn't possession of a gun with parental supervision normal in most of the country?
aikoaiko
Feb 2016
#103