Two-Year-Old Second Amendments Himself to Death

Comments

1
Tragic accident? Manslaughter is more like it. Some adult needs to be held accountable for killing that boy. Unacceptable. But we live in a republican world, so I'm sure nothing will come of it.
2
from a strictly darwinistic standpoint, I hope there aren't any more 2 years olds coming from where that one came from.
3
Agree with @1. For every kid who catches an accidental bullet, some negligent adult should be going to jail.
4
The 2nd amendment has been around longer than two years.
5
@4
I think that was just Dan badly phrasing his joke about a 2 year old child dying.
I'm sure that Dan knows that the 2nd Amendment is older than that.
6
@5: If you really think Dan is joking about a kid dying, you're being extraordinarily obtuse.
7
Dan isn't making light of this, you can rest assured. There's just so MUCH wrong with this and yet there's nothing NEW about it. The likes of Ted Nugent wrap themselves in the flag so they can die on the field of Protecting our Amendments but they don't/can't/won't take responsibility when those same amendments are the root cause for a baby dying.
Baby blood on your hands, NRA, Tea Partiers and parents. Go fly your goddamn flag proudly now.
8
A gun didn't kill that two-year-old, that two-year old killed that two-year old with a gun.

See the difference? Me neither.
9
@6
Here's Dan's complete statement on the issue.

"Just another "tragic accident," nothing to be concerned about, plenty more two-year-olds where that one came from."

Perhaps you can point out where the expression of sympathy was?

"plenty more two-year-olds where that one came from"

No. The death of a 2 year old is not funny. There are not "plenty more".
11
Fucking disgusting. Are the gun humpers gonna argue his play group was a regulated militia?

If it had been a stick of dynamite, a glass of Everclear or letting the kid play in traffic adults would go to jail. But something more dangerous? Apparently no problem ...
12
@fairly.unbalanced: You might want to take a supplement to help you with that irony deficiency.

I recommend starting with the classics. Try reading "A Modest Proposal," by Jonathan Swift.
You can find it all over the web, but here's one link:
http://www2.hn.psu.edu/faculty/jmanis/sw…
13
@12
"You might want to take a supplement to help you with that irony deficiency."

Ha! That's really funny. Because "irony" is kind of pronounced like "iron" which is an essential mineral. And iron supplements are available over the counter.

So, how, exactly, is the death of a 2 year old funny to you?
14
@13 Well it certainly is not, per the pro-gun people, anything which ought to be used to craft better safety regulations, or require liability insurance, or enact stricter penalties for the mis-use and abuse of firearms.

So there you go, f.u. One more stupid tragedy that'll be immediately swept under the rug by you and your ilk.

Since no meaningful improvement will come of this all that's left is to be bleakly ironic and we have, again, you and your ilk to thank for that. So go fuck yourself.
15
Very sad. But, just for perspective…
Unintentional deaths, 2010
Motor Vehicle / 37,236
Poisoning / 33,041
Fall / 26,009
Suffocation / 6,165
Drowning / 3,782
Fire / 2,845
Environmental / 1,576
Struck by or against / 788
Firearm / 606
Machinery / 590
Cut/pierce / 105
http://prospect.org/article/hey-bert-thi
16
@fairly.unbalanced, the death of a 2-year-old isn't funny to me. Nor is it to Dan or anyone else. It's tragic. But considering that the gun culture and the gun laws it spawns see no reason to change those laws or to regulate the behavior of gun owners, or to protect 2-year-olds from what to anybody who gave a half-second thought is clearly certain death, it's not a "tragic accident."

This is the worst part of the story--the fact that this child's death isn't going to be followed up on, treated like the preventable tragedy which should never have occurred but for the gross negligence/criminal irresponsibility on behalf of the adults who were supposed to love him and have as their first priority, the job of keeping him safe. The adults who put him in death's path should be charged, at the very least, with manslaughter, if not second degree murder because such an outcome could and should be logically assumed and could have been prevented, thus no accident.

They're not going to be. This case, like all the others involving all the children killed through their gun-loving, gun-owning, irresponsible parents and other adult authority figures, who are themselves just following the party line of the NRA and the politicians who curry favor to them, is going to be dismissed as a "tragic accident." Because what can you do? Certainly not regulate gun ownership-behavior.

That is the attitude behind a (facetious) statement like Just another "tragic accident," nothing to be concerned about, plenty more two-year-olds where that one came from.

Dan is pointing out the supreme tragedy: each 2-year-old victim of gun violence can't be replaced; the gun laws that don't hold adult gun owners accountable for the deaths or injuries children sustain with their weapons treat these children as replaceable; they demean their deaths.

Neither irony nor facetiousness equal "funny joke."
17
@16
"the death of a 2-year-old isn't funny to me."

Yet you defend the jokes about it. You even feel the need to make your own joke about "irony" deficiency.

"Nor is it to Dan or anyone else."

Did Dan express any sympathy towards the death of the 2 year old? No.
Instead, Dan decided to make jokes about it.

So, how, exactly, is the death of a 2 year old funny to you?
18
I'm sorry, fairly.unbalanced; I mistook you for someone who was a bit too earnest and literal-minded, not for the argument-baiting troll you seem to be.

My mistake and a waste of a lot of my time.
19
Yup, Dan and I think it's hilarious that there's a dead 2-year-old.

We're planning on starting careers as stand-up comedians and using this joke in our debut set in the Catskills.

f.u, you are not only a troll who wants to keep his guns unregulated, consequences be damned, you're also a MO-RON.
20
@18
So you can't point out where Dan expressed any sympathy about the death of a 2 year old.
That's okay.
I'm sure there are a lot of people who are too busy to express any sympathy for someone they've never met.

But those other people usually do not take the time to make jokes about the death of that 2 year old.

Buy you're okay with making jokes about the death of a 2 year old because of "irony".
You'll even defend those jokes because of "irony".

No, the death of a 2 year old is not funny. Jokes about it are not "irony".
It is very, very sad.
21
@20, you're unusually stupid today, fairly. New vitamins?
22
@f.u. None of us see your stupid self proposing any sort of positive changes that would in any way decrease negligent firearm deaths.

So you are being useless and obtuse and we're calling you on your bullshit.

Dan, by highlighting negligent firearm deaths, is serving to keep awareness high. MucIt is exactly how gay rights have steadily improved within the past generation. Keeping awareness raised creates change.

But go on trolling and posting your stupid shit even though it serves no purpose. I guess it keeps you from playing in the street or something.
23
Can anyone here point to the place in the law where it says child endangerment laws don't apply to guns? Because I can't find it.
24
Oh lord, the comments in the linked article. One guy asserts that the owner of the gun is likely to have used that gun "dozens" of times to defend home and hearth from "Obama's jackbooted thugs". Okay.
25
Oh, wait, disregard my last comment, I just fell victim to Poe's Law.
26
fairly.unbalanced, you are a disgrace. Commit sudoku.
27
There were attempts in the '80s and '90s to pass laws holding owners absolutely responsible for what happened with their guns, and to require trigger locks.

The NRA disagreed, so guess what happened in most states.
28
@26: I see what you did there.
29
@26
I see that my internet stalker who makes thinly veiled suggestions that I kill myself is still at it.

You believe that stalking someone is a rational response when disagreeing with them.
http://www.thestranger.com/slog/archives…
"I promise to stop stalking you if you leave The SLOG and never return."
30
@29: Ladies and gents, I present fairly.unbalanced, an hero of the whackadoodle know-nothing fringe.
31
venomlash, I personally hope you stalk f.u. right off the internet. It makes for good schadenfreude.
32
Wow, the interplay between nocutename and f.u in this thread is like a "Who's on first" routine around the word "irony", where the latter isn't smart enough to know he's involved.
33
@26/30 Lovely trap, and f.u. fell right in it.

@ f.u. google sudoku, you'll learn something.
34
@15 yes, and if a 2-year-old drowns in your pool or drinks poison on your watch, the DA charges you with manslaughter or reckless endangerment. In this case, however, if the asshole gun owner is charged, the NRA will have a hissy fit and possibly bring in an attorney to represent the gun owner.
35
@30
You believe that stalking someone is a rational response when disagreeing with them.
http://www.thestranger.com/slog/archives…
"I promise to stop stalking you if you leave The SLOG and never return."

I do not believe that stalking is a rational response to any disagreement.

I have an internet stalker.
And my internet stalker likes to make thinly veiled suggestions that I kill myself.
36
@35: Wow. You pasted it twice into the same meaningless reply. That really showed him!
37
The death of a two-year-old is not funny. fairly.unbalanced's mental gymnastics, however, ARE.
38
@37
That is a direct quote from you. With the link to prove it.

You believe that stalking someone is a rational response when disagreeing with them.
http://www.thestranger.com/slog/archives…
"I promise to stop stalking you if you leave The SLOG and never return."

I do not believe that stalking is a rational response to any disagreement.

I have an internet stalker.
And my internet stalker likes to make thinly veiled suggestions that I kill myself.
39
@38: Oh man! You had him on the ropes with the previous two copy/pastes, then you copied and pasted that post?! I don't think anyone could have predicted that move! I'm sure he won't be bothering you ever again. I mean, how can someone possibly come back from something that humiliating?