Guns don’t kill people, people kill people. Sometimes those people are children. But it’s still not the guns fault, obviously. The same thing would have happened if the nine year old child, who had no ill intentions, had a knife instead. Everyone knows it’s just as easy to accidentally stab someone to death as it is to pull a trigger. Happens every day in the EU, I assure you. So many accidentially fatal stabbings by children over the years.
Short of someone outright giving the child the gun, that’s the only option left. If a 9 year old can get to a gun, it’s improperly stored no matter where it is.
Just another murderer armed by just another legal gun owner. It's only noteworthy here because of the extremely young age of the murderer, not because "responsible gun owners" seldom arm people who shouldn't have guns.
The incident is not the first involving a young child and a gun in recent months. In Virginia, the mother of a 6-year-old who police say intentionally shot his first-grade teacher pleaded guilty to child neglect on Tuesday.
In July, a 17-year-old boy was arrested and charged with murder after shooting a 14-year-old to death in East Harlem.
Gun violence remains a leading cause of death among Americans. In 2023, more than 26,000 people have died from gunshot wounds, according to the Gun Violence Archive.
Bunnies aren’t just cute like everyone supposes. They got them hoppy legs and twitchy little noses, and what’s with all the carrots? What do they need such good eyesight for anyway?
"Yeah, dude, I gotta own a gun to protect myself in case aliens attack! Don't worry, nothing bad will happen, it won't be normalized in our society or something!"
"how the children obtained guns"? The article gives no indication that there were multiple guns. Your editorializing makes it sound like they were playing with guns and shooting at each other.
The story is bad enough as it is without you lying about it.
The line you quoted as "editorializing" ("how the children obtained guns") is literally a line pulled directly from the article subheader. In other words, there's no editorialization from OP. Like, you do realize that... right? By your replies, I can't tell if you're just trolling hard or that oblivious.
If you'd kept up with the thread, you would know you're like the third person to point that out. It is editorializing; I just didn't recognize the correct source.