NRA: Two-Year-Old Gun Victim Should Have Been Armed


The tragic death of a two-year old Kentucky girl who was shot and killed by her five-year old brother outside their Burkesville home last week could have been easily prevented, according to the NRA.

“It is undeniably heartbreaking that this young girl was killed at the hands of a close family member,” NRA Spokesperson Michael Schott told a crowd outside the Burkesville Sheriff’s office, where a demonstration had gathered to protest tighter gun restrictions.  “But we at the NRA believe that if little Caroline had also been armed, she might have defended herself against her older brother.”

Schott paused to wipe away a tear.  “At the very least, it would have given her the chance to fight back,” he added, to cheers from the crowd.  “As it is, her brother walked away completely unharmed.  To our knowledge, he hasn’t even been grounded.  What kind of justice is that?”

The NRA also released a statement claiming that the incident, “serves to underscore the truth inherent in our previous stance on firearm ownership:  In essence, the only thing that stops a five-year old with a gun, is a two-year old with a gun.”

Many Burkesville residents have acknowledged that children in the tightly-knit Kentucky community are regularly exposed to guns from a young age.  Still, some local parents are coming forward to assert that they themselves would never leave a child of five unattended with a firearm, even a weapon such as the one used in this case, which was marketed as “My First Rifle” and therefore targeted, so to speak, at young children.

Lashing back at mounting criticism of a culture which permits or even encourages gun ownership at a young age, other NRA officials have been quick to point out that there is a reason there is no minimum age in Kentucky for the possession shotguns or rifles—and that to change that law would be unconstitutional.

“The right to bear arms does not discriminate against age in this state,” Michael Schott told reporters.  “In fact, in many cultures across the world, a ‘well-armed militia’ by necessity includes children.  Are we really going to sit back and let other countries arm their children, while we foolishly keep guns out of the hands of our own?”

Other gun-rights advocates have pointed out that children are already restricted from countless rights and privileges until they reach a certain age.  “Little kids can’t drive a car, they can’t drink, they can’t vote,” said Kentucky resident and NRA member Keith Frum.  “They can barely have any fun at all.  The least we can do is let them operate firearms.  Let’s throw them a bone here.”

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
This article was written by on at . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS feed. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site. Tags:

Comments Closed

Comments are closed