The Facebook page run by Jamie Gilt, Jamie Gilt for Gunsense, is currently suffering an extreme case of “irony poisoning.” Jamie Gilt has recently survived being shot in the back with her own gun…. by her 4-year-old son.
Here is one of her asinine posts:
How hard is it to resist asking if her son asked her for permission before he used a gun that was left where he got his hands on it? See, he shot her in the back, through her seat, while he was riding in the back seat of the truck she was driving to pick up a horse from a relative. He was not in his booster seat when the responding deputy got to the vehicle, and there was somehow a loaded gun within reach of this preschooler.
According to The Daily Mail:
Her four-year-old son picked up a loaded .45 semi-automatic handgun from the back seat, pointed it towards his mother and pulled the trigger. The powerful round went through the front seat and passed through Gilt’s body .
Gilt flagged down a passing Sheriff’s deputy and told him that she had been shot.
Deputies recovered a .45 semi-automatic handgun from the floor of the truck. They are satisfied that the round was fired from inside the vehicle.
A quick perusal of her page reveals that she is a conspiracy theorist type that thinks Obama is out to take her guns and that any gun laws are far too many: why hamper the freedoms of “law-abiding” citizens like her?
Child endangerment is illegal, and this seems to fit that bill perfectly — she was just plain lucky her kid didn’t shoot himself: so much for her being law-abiding. Then again, toddler shootings are just not uncommon in the USA, and I mean toddlers shooting other people and toddlers getting shot.
Well… now, in hindsight, the laws that she may be charged under, for allowing an innocent child to have to deal with the consequences of an action he was far too young to understand, might just illustrate to her WHAT we were trying to protect children and their parents from. Laws aren’t to restrict your freedumbs, Little Miss Gunlover, they are in place to try to stop any future parent slayings by vulnerable children because their parents are too stupid to keep guns away from toddlers.
This, though, is the biggest irony on the page at this point. Did her right to own a gun really trump her sons right to be in the safest possible environment? It sure seems that her unfettered gun ownership protected neither her nor her son. Maybe now she will realize, we are not afraid of her gun, we are afraid of her stupidity (and people like her) with guns.
Maybe ammosexuals, who are in fear of their “rights” being taken away, should stop proving EXACTLY why they shouldn’t be allowed to own them.
Featured image via Facebook