Welcome Guest
( Log In | Register )
The time is now 12:36 pm
You last visited August 6, 2020, 11:13 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Chicago police commander charged with aggravated battery, misconduct


Entry #15,548


Comment by Lucky Loser - August 28, 2014, 1:17 pm
Man, this is straight out of the movies...GANGSTA STYLE! Chase down your fleeing suspect, detain them, and shove the gun in their mouth!. They mostly did this, though, when they were trying to get the guy to talk/cooperate. Great scare tactic considering the city he's fighting crime in but, still not right. Cuff him and stuff him once he's caught. He doesn't get a pass, though, 'cause this could've very easily turned fatal had the gun went off...and the gun had no business being there in the first place. This providing the allegations are accurate.

Off-topic time...and you knew it was coming. You know me by now. Gotta work on this nine-year-old shooting deal and I'll be perfectly reasonable. First of all, I have no issue with a young person being properly trained to handle and fire a weapon...be it for protection or hunting purposes. However, the idea of putting an UZI, a weapon that even SOME GROWN MEN HAVE ISSUES HANDLING, into ANY nine-year-old's hands is almost unfathomable. No gender bias here but, it's known that females are inherently weaker than their male counterparts.

I'd like to know who she was going to protect with an UZI. What lion, tiger, bear, elephant, moose, BIGFOOT, Rhino, etc. was she going to kill due to pursuit be them? Moreso, which small army was she planning to mow down in war? Was she in ROTC and planning to enter the armed forces and wanted to already be trained with such a weapon? She'd still need to be trained on the 'official' weapon used by them, though. There's a reason, folks, why all the armed forces have an AGE LIMIT for enlisting and being able to HANDLE THESE WEAPONS.

I see this whole trajedy as a result of the father, a serious pro-gun/pro amendments activist that hates any idea of reasonable gun palcement. He wanted to stick his chest out and let his gonads hang by encouraging his little girl to 'try' and man handle something that he himself would need PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE in doing. The trainer...he was just doing his job and is the one that put the weapon in her hands but, it was the dad/parents that more than likely pushed the idea. My reasoning is such that a nine-yearl-old simply cannot walk up to a firearms trainer and request to be trained on and handle such a weapon. There must authorization and consent from an 'eligible' person.

Personally, I feel it's a two-way wrong. The parents went too far with the whole gun deal, and, the trainer should've used better judgement and declined. But, I see where this could've resulted in some 'political push-back' in that the dad/parents would've bumped heads with the instructor on his decision. Then, there may have been a gender discrimination issue becasue she was a female. All these are reasons for the instructor to both fear and ignore his better judgement...with his own people.

So, what's wrong with teaching the girl how to handle a single action rifle? This is a weapon that she'd obviously be able to actually use to accomplish something worth while...like nailing a deer, rabbit, squirrel, etc. This would be something for dad to be proud of as he'd be able to show her how to properly clean the kill and then hand it to momma for cooking. Who knows? Maybe she did know how to handle a lower-powered rifle but, judging from the looks in that clip, she didn't. Her stance, and all, was very wrong in the sense of controlling such a weapon

Now, this trainer leaves behind his own child and wife. I'd be willing to bet everything I have that the instructor's child hadn't handled such a weapon. In 2008, an 8-year-old boy shot himself with the same type weapon. Who wants to take their 3-4 year old out and train to shoot? Hell, I was about nine or ten when I got a .177 pellet rifle and was taught to handle it. I shot birds, rabbits and snakes with it..it was of good use. This, my friends, is CONSERVATIVE. LIBERAL is putting way too much deadly weapon in a childs's hands...and there's a rsh of going around.

Liberal is 'GUNS EVERYWHERE' as in Georgia...NOTHING CONSERVATIVE about that. All types of weapons around little children just becasue you want to prove a point that doesn't even exist. Liberal has taken a turn in case you haven't noticed. Republicans are more Liberal than they even know...in all the wrong areas,

You must be a Lottery Post member to post comments to a Blog.

Register for a FREE membership, or if you're already a member please Log In.