As to your question: I'd say many things are wrong with us. We allow the murder of our children who carry their birthright into the future.

Our children are less important to the gunners than they are to the rest of us.

Most states treat 16-18 year olds as adults for most purposes, so calling an 18 year old a “child” seems misleading. 18 year olds can get married, drive, join the military, get sentenced to prison as an adult, etc., etc.

Gunner logic: if I can't refute it I'll deflect, confuse and redefine it out of existence.

For 2011:
CDC reports 1942 deaths for ages 0 - 18 from a reported population of 78,318,855 giving a rate of 2.48 deaths per 100,000.
17 & 18 year olds- 1066
13 - 16 year olds- 650
< 13 year olds- 226


For 2021:
CDC reports 3528 deaths for ages 0 - 18 from a reported population of 77,859,213 giving a rate of 4.53 deaths per 100,000.
17 & 18 year olds- 1785
13 - 16 year olds- 1388
< 13 year olds- 434


My numbers include all intents where a firearm was the cause.
I'm getting an overall those ages an 83% increase in death rate.
https://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/index.html
This is the CDC Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System

Got it, thanks. Have a good weekend.

I simply asked you to tell us more about how 16-18 year old deaths and injuries don't matter.

It's one of the things that gunners do; pick an age, infer that they are somehow adults, from that infer that they are responsible for their injures. After all they must have been in a gang or doing drugs, right?

Gunners never actually SAY these things they just throw it out there with the unspoken inference.

They know they are doing it. It's part of the gun culture. Anything to protect guns and the unfettered access to them.

I see it and everyone reading this thread sees it.

You just built a straw man because you have no answer to the fact that every state thinks 16-18 year olds are adults. You post articles with questionable, if not indefensible, conclusions and then instead of attempting to defend you engage in ad hominem attacks.

You cannot identify a single post of mine where I’ve supported “unfettered access” to firearms, and I imagine you can’t identify a single post of anyone on this forum who has done so. You continuously ascribe positions nobody takes so you can attack them and and it’s pretty disappointing. I expect better of Democrats.

Gunners never do, they just make the inference and let it lie.

They aren't children. "Some" see them as adults. They are responsible. They don't count because the way they live put them in the way of harm. It's the quiet part that I'm saying out-loud that upsets you.

I'm not accusing you personally of this deception, it's something taught by the gun culture. Most people spouting this stuff don't even hear the words. It's just regurgitation of what they've been taught. I can understand what a shock it is to hear it unfiltered.

There is no ad homonym attack here, it isn't you, it's the things you say. I understand how your identity may be so intertwined with gun culture that the difference is hard to see.

The articles and research I post are not questionable or indefensible. They set criteria and report on results and data. That it conflicts with gun culture lore is understandable, after all gun culture has a defined agenda. It seems the only quibble is not the actual reportage but the outcome. Another gun culture tactic is to question the study, not the outcome. It gets to be confusing to thinking people.

While I can't "identify a single post of [yous] where [you've] supported “unfettered access"”
I also can't identify a single post where you support restricted access. Potatos, Potatoes.

There is no straw man here, only an honest look at gun culture and it's insidious grasp on some people that it uses as foot soldiers in this culture war of life vs death and misery all for the profit margins of gun makers.