# Gun Control; Toddlers Shooting People **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 18, 2017, 6:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-control-toddlers-shooting-people/801962 "2017-11-18T06:28:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2017, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-control-toddlers-shooting-people/801962/81 "2017-11-20T15:20:36Z")
> [@Evan\_Drake](#): > > These are inapposite _diversions_: the OP deals with toddlers shooting **others** — not the myriad dangers of toddlerhood. > Toddlers rarely use household items to poison their enemies. Or even their friends. Toddlers rarely shoot other people. Toddlers shooting guns simply isn’t a widespread problem. Its all differing degrees of rare events. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2017, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-control-toddlers-shooting-people/801962/82 "2017-11-20T15:25:14Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > You can’t actually think that **Manda Jo** was suggesting that all child poisonings are caused by laxatives, can you? It was Her example. Not mine. She was certainly implying that childhood poisonings are rare, more rare than kids getting accidentally shot. Poisonings are several orders of magnitude more common that accidental shootings. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2017, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-control-toddlers-shooting-people/801962/83 "2017-11-20T15:31:06Z")
> [@MandaJo](#): > > This is going off the rails. > > The original statement was that we manage to keep poisons away from kids, why not guns? Perhaps you only think its going off the rails because you are having trouble getting people to agree that 90\<35. > [@](#): > > I think at most we can say that at least 35 people a year die at the hands of toddlers holding guns. There are likely cases that don’t make the news, or were missed. Death is a pretty significant event. Getting shot to death is something we keep track of. Or at least the CDC does. Very few gunshot deaths slip through the cracks. > [@](#): > > So yeah, I think the statement “We do a better job keeping toddlers safe from poisons than we do from guns” is a pretty reasonable claim. I disagree. More kids get poisoned than shot. A LOT more. The fact that the poison isn’t lethal enough to satisfy you isn’t really the issue. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2017, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-control-toddlers-shooting-people/801962/84 "2017-11-20T15:34:08Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > There’s nothing about that in the cited article, but even if this were somewhat true, so what? Other countries have gang problems without the corresponding gun carnage. Here’s what the cited article does say – the well-established fact that a gun in the home is an intrinsic hazard and that the societal danger is proportional to their numbers: Yes, but these are not toddler. > [@](#): > > The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends doctors ask parents whether they keep a gun in the home, and Nelson agreed that pediatricians “do need to try to engage those gun owners.” … But, Wesson said, “The more guns there are, the more people die of gunshot injuries.” > So you claim that excessive gun violence is due to gangs even though other countries also have gangs. And [over here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=20610765&postcount=68), this other guy claims excessive gun violence is due to crazy people even though other countries also have crazy people. Well, which is it, gangs or crazy people, or are you guys just scrambling for excuses? And why don’t these same things cause anywhere even close to the same level of gun violence in other countries? > > It’s almost amusing in a tragic kind of way to watch this silly mad scramble to find _ **any** _ excuse to account for all the gun violence _ **except the guns themselves** _ and their abundance and ease of access – any excuse except acknowledging that it’s a problem having too many people with too easy access to too many guns. And these teenagers are STILL not toddlers. If you want to have a more general gun debate we can but I thought we were trying to use the emotional wedge of toddlers killing and getting killed to tell gun owners that they like dead kids. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2017, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-control-toddlers-shooting-people/801962/85 "2017-11-20T15:36:41Z")
> [@China\_Guy](#): > > Right. Not sure where you stand, but I am sick of hearing about “tragedies” where kids get a gun in the house and shoot someone by “accident.”. Yes, these are both accidents and tragedies. What get’s me is that at least in news headlines the parents do not seem to be punished (beyond losing the victim of course). I’m too lazy to look but I do remember multiple “this was a tragedy, parents already lost the victim, it does no good to add further punishment.” > > I don’t know, maybe some deterrence if you said negligent parents went to jail? First of all parents DO go to jail for negligent homicide. This is the case in almost every state. Second of all, how would more jail time ever serve as a deterrent if a dead son or daughter does not? But go ahead, throw the book at them. I’m sure they feel they deserve it. > [@](#): > > I don’t think that the government should tell you how to store your firearm. That said, if there is an accident, as a responsible gun owner you are then responsible and liable for civil and criminal proceedings. You already are. ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2017, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-control-toddlers-shooting-people/801962/86 "2017-11-20T16:23:41Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > “Per gun”? What’s the point of that? Guns don’t kill people - people kill people (or so I am assured). “Per capita” is a more accurate measure. The USA ranks 94th in murder rates per capita … but note that’s the highest among first world nations and only Russia is higher among second world nations … the micro-nations in Europe don’t have murders … again sourcing from Wikipedia [“List of countries by intentional homicide rate”](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate) … that’s _very_ good considering the gun ownership rate in the USA is double the next highest rate, triple the rate among first world nations … [“Estimated number of guns per capita by country”](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country) … I think I have Benjamin Disraeli spinning in his grave at about 186,000 rotations per second by now … ---
**Author:** ![DrCube](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a3d4f5/32.png) [@DrCube](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrCube)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2017, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-control-toddlers-shooting-people/801962/87 "2017-11-20T17:02:27Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > So, you would be okay with similar licensing requirements for a gun as for a driver? Absolutely! 9 weeks of training is offered to 15 year olds in every high school, license is valid in every state, only requires an eye exam and a $20 fee every four-plus years to renew. And, best part, owning and operating on private property requires no license or registration at all. Excellent suggestion. ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2017, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-control-toddlers-shooting-people/801962/88 "2017-11-20T17:33:27Z")
> [@DrCube](#): > > Absolutely! 9 weeks of training is offered to 15 year olds in every high school, license is valid in every state, only requires an eye exam and a $20 fee every four-plus years to renew. And, best part, owning and operating on private property requires no license or registration at all. Excellent suggestion. The NRA offers a wide variety of insurance plans to go with your gun … ---
**Author:** ![StrTrkr777](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/fbc32d/32.png) [@StrTrkr777](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/StrTrkr777)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2017, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-control-toddlers-shooting-people/801962/89 "2017-11-20T17:46:29Z")
The problem with having the same requirements as we do for driving is that the requirements for driving is vastly different depending on the areas. There is no standard driver education in the state of GA. They used to have driving classes, but the high school I went to quit more than 30 yrs ago and neither of my daughters schools offered driving classes either. My oldest seemed to handle driving with me fairly well so we skipped official training and I just taught her. She read the driver manual before taking the test and passed it (she is good at testing) and could drive with an adult over 21 in the car. They did not even have to be good at driving themselves. When she took the test, I had not known to go over backing into a spot, so she ran over the cones, and did ok with parallel parking and driving for 15 mins around a set path near the testing facility. At that point, she passed and was licensed and could have driven on the interstate or anywhere. Sure I had to attest that she had experience driving at night, on the interstate and in the rain, but you know some parents lie. As for insurance, GA (and many other states) just require basic liability (so if you hit somone, it pays for their damage), but it is fairly limited. If you do not pay for higher levels of coverage and someone is severly injured, it would not pay much. You would have to sue. But there are other states that do not require car insurance (apparently there are still 3 that do not require any manadatory insurance). And even when it is required, there are plenty of people that drive uninsured (I won’t get into how many uninsured hit someone and flee to avoid getting caught). So it is entirely possible for people that choose to not follow the laws to get a car, not have insurance or even a license and to possibly kill someone in an accident. Even somone following the laws, can get a license with little skill needed, little training needed, basic insurance less than $50 a month can hit someone and flee the scene and then what? Let’s say we enact something to require all new guns can only be sold to people that have taken a gun safety course, and have some level of insurance and all gun purchasers must have a license. The problem most gun enthusiasts have is, sure they will follow the rules, but criminals don’t. The people that would comply with those rules are not the ones that are shooting people. If a person is of a mind to commit murder, they will not bother with background checks and licenses and such, they will find a way to get the gun. If they cannot get the gun, then they will find a way to kill in another manner. So the arguement is ok, but if you would follow the rules and you have no issue with a past event that would disqualify you, then why are they so concerned about the guns being registered? Registration only helps in tracking down a person after the fact. And how are you going to go about registering guns that are already sold? Will the government figure out a way to tax those guns yearly (as they do registered cars)? Will politicians decide to use the information go make other policies? In general, we Americans are often suspicious of our politicians and really want them to stay out of our personal lives. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2017, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-control-toddlers-shooting-people/801962/90 "2017-11-20T18:22:40Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > “Per gun”? What’s the point of that? Guns don’t kill people - people kill people (or so I am assured). “Per capita” is a more accurate measure. Perhaps **watchwolf49** will address your questions as well. I was simply trying to resolve **Evan Drake** ’s confusion. Personally, I’m not convinced it’s a terrible metric, or that "per capita is “more accurate”. For example, [IIHS presents fatal vehicle accident numbers](http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/general-statistics/fatalityfacts/state-by-state-overview) not only “per capita” but also as “Deaths per 100 million vehicle miles traveled”. Presumably they’re doing that to take into account that some populations do a lot more driving than others, when trying to compare between those populations. It also doesn’t strike me as an entirely unreasonable approach to take when comparing populations that own a relatively lot of guns vs those that own comparatively few. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 10:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-control-toddlers-shooting-people/801962/91 "2017-11-21T10:09:58Z")
> [@StrTrkr777](#): > > The problem most gun enthusiasts have is, sure they will follow the rules, but criminals don’t. The people that would comply with those rules are not the ones that are shooting people. If a person is of a mind to commit murder, they will not bother with background checks and licenses and such, they will find a way to get the gun. If they cannot get the gun, then they will find a way to kill in another manner. …another manner which will likely be far less quick and efficient and at shorter range, greatly reducing the casualty count. Kind of hard to stab people from a hotel room window 500 feet away. > [@](#): > > So the arguement is ok, but if you would follow the rules and you have no issue with a past event that would disqualify you, then why are they so concerned about the guns being registered? Registration only helps in tracking down a person after the fact. And how are you going to go about registering guns that are already sold? Will the government figure out a way to tax those guns yearly (as they do registered cars)? Will politicians decide to use the information go make other policies? > > In general, we Americans are often suspicious of our politicians and really want them to stay out of our personal lives. But, again, you can make the same argument about cars - people drive without licenses and/or without insurance and drive unroadworthy cars and break motoring laws in a hundred different other ways, and yet we still have the laws and the tests and the enforcement because overall it makes things a lot safer. If you required classes and licenses and registration, you’d see a notable drop in gun-related dumbassery. It won’t stop completely - because the dumbasses ye shall always have with ye - and it won’t stop people deliberately acting outside the law, but it would certainly greatly improve the rate of responsible gun use, which is a clear benefit. The question of how we get from where we are now to such a hypothetical system is a difficult one (particularly as so many “law-abiding” gun owners have indicated a likelihood of a spike in “boating accidents” should gun registration occur) but is tangential to the point under discussion. > [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > Perhaps **watchwolf49** will address your questions as well. I was simply trying to resolve **Evan Drake** ’s confusion. No, I got that. I was commenting on the metric, not having a go at you. > [@](#): > > Personally, I’m not convinced it’s a terrible metric, or that "per capita is “more accurate”. For example, [IIHS presents fatal vehicle accident numbers](http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/general-statistics/fatalityfacts/state-by-state-overview) not only “per capita” but also as “Deaths per 100 million vehicle miles traveled”. Presumably they’re doing that to take into account that some populations do a lot more driving than others, when trying to compare between those populations. It also doesn’t strike me as an entirely unreasonable approach to take when comparing populations that own a relatively lot of guns vs those that own comparatively few. It’s not without its uses but given the unevenness of gun ownership (many people have none, many people have dozens) and given that, by and large, guns are only used one at a time, it doesn’t tell us much about the effect of guns on gun death rates. A crazy person with a hundred guns still only has two hands; the fact that he has another 98 guns at home doesn’t significantly increase the risk he poses per se. ---
**Author:** ![up\_the\_junction](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/f1d935/32.png) [@up\_the\_junction](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/up_the_junction)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 10:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-control-toddlers-shooting-people/801962/92 "2017-11-21T10:46:57Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > A crazy person with a hundred guns still only has two hands; the fact that he has another 98 guns at home doesn’t significantly increase the risk he poses per se. Except anyone with a 100 guns is already somewhere on spectrum that starts at weird guy _collector_ and ends at mass killer. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 11:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-control-toddlers-shooting-people/801962/93 "2017-11-21T11:28:55Z")
> [@up\_the\_junction](#): > > Except anyone with a 100 guns is already somewhere on spectrum that starts at weird guy _collector_ and ends at mass killer. Yes (-ish) but my increasingly academic point is that above a certain (relatively small) number of guns the number of people he’ll kill if he snaps is not going to increase if the number of guns he owns increases, whereas it will affect the “deaths per gun” statistic. ---
**Author:** ![Lamoral](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lamoral/32/16078_2.png) [@Lamoral](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamoral)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 12:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-control-toddlers-shooting-people/801962/94 "2017-11-21T12:02:19Z")
> [@up\_the\_junction](#): > > Except anyone with a 100 guns is already somewhere on spectrum that starts at weird guy _collector_ and ends at mass killer. I think most people with literally 100 guns are too financially well-off to want to pull a mass shooting. (The Vegas guy notwithstanding.) Typical profile seems to be a maladjusted young man with shoddy life prospects and interpersonal problems that would preclude the kind of income required to obtain a huge gun collection. I know a few guys who have, maybe not 100, but at least several dozen guns. They’re either rich game hunters, or military vets interested in the guns for historical value. I think the “one guy with lots of guns” issue is sort of a red herring. Really the issue is that anyone with no felony record can legally buy a gun and ammunition, and kill dozens of people the next day. That’s the issue with mass shootings, anyway, which are but one component of America’s gun homicide problem. (The other - on the street-crime level - can be remedied with stricter sentences for violent offenders or felons in possesion of a firearm, coupled with massive reform of drug policy. The latter could be tough, but the former is an easy sell, especially to conservatives.) By the way - please tell me your username comes from the Squeeze song. Classic! ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-control-toddlers-shooting-people/801962/95 "2017-11-21T14:16:22Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > Yes (-ish) but my increasingly academic point is that above a certain (relatively small) number of guns the number of people he’ll kill if he snaps is not going to increase if the number of guns he owns increases, whereas it will affect the “deaths per gun” statistic. I agree. I’ve long complained about the use of the “guns per 100 people” stat for similar reasons. I think “% of households with guns” is far more informative. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-control-toddlers-shooting-people/801962/96 "2017-11-21T14:23:46Z")
> [@Sanity\_Challenged](#): > > 51 shootings per year is 1 out of every 233,660 toddlers, when 1 out of every 606 toddlers per year is a victim of a poison exposure. ([Poison Stats](https://www.poison.org/poison-statistics-national), [Population Stats](https://www.census.gov/data/datasets/2016/demo/popest/nation-detail.html)) Seems fairly obvious we need to find a way to make poison bottles out of guns. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 2:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-control-toddlers-shooting-people/801962/97 "2017-11-21T14:46:12Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > I agree. I’ve long complained about the use of the “guns per 100 people” stat for similar reasons. I think “% of households with guns” is far more informative. I agree. We are being very agreeable today. ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-control-toddlers-shooting-people/801962/98 "2017-11-21T16:17:57Z")
Then I guess it’s up to me to disagree … again … I think both of us are relying to heavily on just one statistic, as though this one statistic paints the complete picture … You still have to make the case why we should take guns away from law-abiding citizens … by analogy, why should we take driver’s licenses away from law-abiding citizens … do we take the license because someone _might_ drive their car through a crowd of young children? … that happens, and it’s a tragedy, but getting rid of _all_ cars is a senseless notion, such a tiny fraction of cars kill innocent pedestrians … I believe it’s the same with guns, only a tiny fraction of people use guns to kill or maim … why should the vast majority of gun-owners be punished because they _might_ go off on a killing or maiming spree … We can only punish people after the fact … if you want to take Brenda away from me, you have to prove in a court of law I’m not entitled to have her under my pillow … good luck … [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-control-toddlers-shooting-people/801962.md?page=4)