Home Main Category General Firearms

Another kid killed by a gun laying around

samzheresamzhere BannedPosts: 10,923 Senior Member
Another sad and useless event, a 6yr old boy shoots his 4yr brother in the head, killing him. Here's the link to the story, but it's the same old thing:

http://www.click2houston.com/news/deputies-boy-4-shot-and-killed-while-kids-playing-with-gun/29923552

I'm certain that the members here practice safe gun rules in their own homes, so I'm not talking to you. I'm asking you, as you meet pals here and there, folks who say they own guns, to make some sort of effort to ensure that these friends know the risks and practice good gun safety in their homes. You cannot unring a bell.

It's kind of odd... as I kid I knew my parents had loaded handguns (we're from Kentucky after all) and that in my Dad's nightstand, a cocked and locked 1911, and in my Mom's nightstand on the other side, a loaded .38 snubby.

And at no time would I ever go into my parents' bedroom to prowl around. I'd no sooner take out a gun (where I knew they were kept) than I would riffle through my Mom's purse or my Dad's wallet for spending money.

But not all kids are raised that way. And it's incumbent upon parents to ensure that any guns are either locked away or otherwise inaccessible.

I'm shaking my head at the stupidity and senseless loss. This little boy will bear that memory all his life. And it's the parents' fault.
«1

Replies

  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,490 Senior Member
    The gun didn't kill the kid, nor did it just go off. It had to be manipulated by the other child. Your thread title is incorrect. It would be most helpful if you used a thread title that was descriptive of the actual incident. I was expecting a thread where a gun just went off while laying around. Such was not the case here.
    Overkill is underrated.
  • DoctorWhoDoctorWho Senior Member Posts: 9,496 Senior Member
    A 2 y/o, a 4 y/o, and a 6 y/o, and they can't figure out who the shooter was ?
    No GSR test ? Hands wrapped ? OK, to preserve GSR evidence...

    ....

    As long as people / sock drawer gun owners treat firearms like dog poo and leave them laying about and bother not to educate and train their children how to act around firearms, this will continue to be the end result.....

    I realize many folks were brought up properly around firearms, and never transgressed with them ala Eddie Eagle program, however sadly many single moms never heard of Eddie Eagle and related firearms safety training.
    "There is some evil in all of us, Doctor, even you, the Valeyard is an amalgamation of the darker sides of your nature, somewhere between your twelfth and final incarnation, and I may say, you do not improve with age. Founding member of the G&A forum since 1996
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,428 Senior Member
    Mama's a nicotine addict- - - - - -taking that smoke was obviously more important than the safety of three kids. Of course, in her viewpoint, the smoke WAS that important!
    Jerry
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 11,628 Senior Member
    Not sure why a gunshot residue test is necessary in this situation. Not like anyone is going to be charged.
    Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
  • zorbazorba Senior Member Posts: 23,400 Senior Member
    samzhere wrote: »
    It's kind of odd... as I kid I knew my parents had loaded handguns (we're from Kentucky after all) and that in my Dad's nightstand, a cocked and locked 1911, and in my Mom's nightstand on the other side, a loaded .38 snubby.
    I don't get it either - I knew exactly where Dad's loaded .357 magnum was kept, and his loaded Enfield. It wouldn't have crossed my mind to mess with either - but my parents were from Kentucky like yours. My friends growing up were the same.
    -Zorba, "The Veiled Male"

    "If you get it and didn't work for it, someone else worked for it and didn't get it..."
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    We taught our daughters early about firearm safety and had no safety issues with a loaded handgun often in plain view in just a holster or a pistol rug around. However, when other kids were coming over/strangers/company, you bet it was put away, out of sight and not readily accessible.

    If not for the cigarette break it would have been something else with such carelessness by the mother. She is gonna spend the rest of her days tormenting herself over this tragic event and what purpose would charges serve, if any.

    What can any of us say to change things besides promoting safety...nothing, you can't call back a bullet regardless of what circumstances it was fired under. Very sad Lose Lose situation all the way around.
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 27,291 Senior Member
    Here's the leading causes of death in children 0-19 years of age. Looks like some others outrank firearms; unintentional firearms deaths are pretty low, and would be lower still if parents did their job.


    http://www.childdeathreview.org/nationalchildmortalitydata.htm

    Selected Causes of Death, Ages 0-19, per 100,000 Population (2010)
    Cause Number of Deaths Mortality Rate
    Natural 31,171 37.4
    Perinatal Conditions 12,093 14.5
    Congenital Anomalies 6,114 7.3
    Neoplasms 2,160 2.6
    Respiratory Disease 1,314 1.6
    Circulatory Disease 1,477 1.8
    Nervous System Disease 1,418 1.7
    SIDS 2,063 2.5
    Unintentional Injury 8,684 10.4
    Motor Vehicle 4,419 5.3
    Drowning 1,027 1.2
    Fire/Burn 365 0.4
    Poisoning 838 1.0
    Suffocation/Strangulation 1,176 1.4
    Firearm 134 0.2
    Homicide 2,808 3.4
    Firearm 1,790 2.1
    Suicide 1,933 2.3
    Firearm 749 0.9
    Suffocation/Strangulation 926 1.1
    Poisoning 121 0.1
      I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer”
    ― Douglas Adams
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    Some of those homicide stats reflect Gang Bangers involved in shootouts/bad drug deals so.......................the accidental rate is very low.
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 22,387 Senior Member
    The gun didn't kill the kid, nor did it just go off. It had to be manipulated by the other child. Your thread title is incorrect. It would be most helpful if you used a thread title that was descriptive of the actual incident. I was expecting a thread where a gun just went off while laying around. Such was not the case here.

    I think what Sam's trying to say here is that grown ups should be more responsible with guns, which I agree with. But where I disagree with him is that I don't believe that we should have to tell another adult to be careful. They should be able to realize that guns are dangerous in the wrong hands, just as an automobile. No the gun itself is not inherently dangerous by itself, but the gun owner is responsible for the gun's actions. And any idiot that thinks a gun lying around within reach of small children is ok, is not a responsible adult. He/she needs to be in an institution. You can tell such an irresponsible adult to keep guns out of the reach of irresponsible people until you're blue in the face, but if the one you're telling it to is also irresponsible, you're wasting your breath.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,428 Senior Member
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    These gangs, as long as they are offing each other, should be kept well supplied with ammo...

    Some of the Nashville SWAT team officers who used to attend my night school auto body classes called those crimes "Misdemeanor Murder" or "Public Service Homicide". One scumbag offs another one, and saves society the expense of an arrest, a trial, and a short prison sentence. Rinse and repeat- - - - -!
    Jerry
  • HvyMaxHvyMax Senior Member Posts: 1,786 Senior Member
    Definitely a case of irresponsible gun owner of the day. No level of training makes leaving a gun where a 2-4 and 6 year old can get it a safe thing. Just like poisons, cleaning supplies and expensive electronics guns should always be secured where the kids can't get them. My kids were at least 12 and long established shooters and hunters before getting access to the HD collection.
    Wal Mart where the discriminating white trash shop.
    Paddle faster!!! I hear banjos.
    Reason for editing: correcting my auto correct
  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    The gun didn't kill the kid, nor did it just go off. It had to be manipulated by the other child. Your thread title is incorrect. It would be most helpful if you used a thread title that was descriptive of the actual incident. I was expecting a thread where a gun just went off while laying around. Such was not the case here.

    Well, you're right. I'll try to do better in the future, oh mighty minion-eyed watcher. The gun however was indeed just lying around, accessible to the kid. Sorry you wasted time clicking on the thread and wasted even more time posting your prescient commentary.
  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    snake284 wrote: »
    I think what Sam's trying to say here is that grown ups should be more responsible with guns, which I agree with. But where I disagree with him is that I don't believe that we should have to tell another adult to be careful. etc.

    snake, I totally understand your objection. My point is that we're generally known by those around us as "gun nuts" (joking!) and truthfully, as gun-knowledgeable people. And sometimes it may present itself as an opportunity to help educate the idiocy a bit, maybe spread a little light among the gentiles, as it were. And if our knowledge of guns helps even one fool prevent such a terrible tragedy, it's a plus. That's all I was saying. Otherwise I totally agree with you, dude.
  • FisheadgibFisheadgib Senior Member Posts: 5,797 Senior Member
    samzhere wrote: »
    The guy however was indeed just lying around, accessible to the kid. Sorry you wasted time clicking on the thread and wasted even more time posting your prescient commentary.



    So the guy was lying around and the kid found a gun and shot him?
    snake284 wrote: »
    For my point of view, cpj is a lot like me
    .
  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    Very true, and they count everyone under 18 as a child though we know better... These gangs, as long as they are offing each other, should be kept well supplied with ammo...

    Oh, absolutely. The "children" killed with guns stats often involve gang members age 13-15 or so, and clearly not appropriate to be included among the same groupings as the story I posted. That often annoys me, too.
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 22,387 Senior Member
    Gene L wrote: »
    Not sure why a gunshot residue test is necessary in this situation. Not like anyone is going to be charged.

    Yes, I agree. In fact, it's probably better to leave that alone. It makes no difference, it's not a criminal case. They're dealing with kids. And not reform school fodder. These are innocent kids and does it really make any difference which one pulled the trigger? It is classified as an accident. Maybe it's not an accident since the parent allowed it to happen, but which kid ultimately did the trigger pulling makes not one bit of difference. And if they're small enough that they don't realize, it's probably better not to saddle one of them with the guilt. The real guilt lies with the adult involved.

    Now if this were dealing with a kid that was 12-14 and up, then they probably had some idea of the danger involved. But not a 6 year old. No way.

    Of course there is the possibility that the parent shot the kid and blamed it on the others thinking that was no harm since they probably won't punish the young kids. Maybe that's why they're going at this like a possible homicide.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,490 Senior Member
    Fisheadgib wrote: »
    So the guy was lying around and the kid found a gun and shot him?
    Careful, you'll be hit by Sam's double-standard. Then he'll probably proposition you to be his submissive...
    Overkill is underrated.
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,490 Senior Member
    samzhere wrote: »
    Well, you're right. I'll try to do better in the future, oh mighty minion-eyed watcher. The gun however was indeed just lying around, accessible to the kid. Sorry you wasted time clicking on the thread and wasted even more time posting your prescient commentary.
    I see you don't like it when folks apply your own standards to you. If this had been a news report you'd be accusing the reporter and copy editor of anti-gun bias in the titling of the article.

    You do it? You get snarky.
    Overkill is underrated.
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 22,387 Senior Member
    samzhere wrote: »
    snake, I totally understand your objection. My point is that we're generally known by those around us as "gun nuts" (joking!) and truthfully, as gun-knowledgeable people. And sometimes it may present itself as an opportunity to help educate the idiocy a bit, maybe spread a little light among the gentiles, as it were. And if our knowledge of guns helps even one fool prevent such a terrible tragedy, it's a plus. That's all I was saying. Otherwise I totally agree with you, dude.
    Sorry Sam, I used you as a sacrificial lamb to get my point across. And I also see your point. When dealing with this crap there's a lot of angles to consider. I see where you're coming from. We gun nuts have to be careful of our wording when dealing with antis and/or just plane non gun people or they'll turn it on us and make us look like part of the problem to the uninformed public. And that's who we need to win over. We aren't going to win over the antis, that's for sure.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    samzhere wrote: »
    Well, you're right. I'll try to do better in the future, oh mighty minion-eyed watcher. The gun however was indeed just lying around, accessible to the kid. Sorry you wasted time clicking on the thread and wasted even more time posting your prescient commentary.

    Hey Sam, you used "Laying Around" in the thread title and "Lying Around" in a reply. What's up with that?

    Dylan sang...Lay Lady Lay In A Big Brass Bed........or should that be Lay Lady Lie or I Got Laid or..............Lye , naw that's caustic...................:tooth::rotflmao: :rotflmao:

    Oh, had to Google this one..................

    pre·scient
    ˈpreSH(ē)ənt/
    adjective
    adjective: prescient

    having or showing knowledge of events before they take place.
    "a prescient warning"
    synonyms: prophetic, predictive, visionary; More


    This one Bill O'r uses on Fox News a lot...............

    snark·y
    ˈsnärkē/
    adjective
    North Americaninformal
    adjective: snarky; comparative adjective: snarkier; superlative adjective: snarkiest

    (of a person, words, or a mood) sharply critical; cutting; snide.
    "the kid who makes snarky remarks in class"
    cranky; irritable.
    "Bobby's always a bit snarky before his nap"
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • zorbazorba Senior Member Posts: 23,400 Senior Member
    Teach wrote: »
    Some of the Nashville SWAT team officers who used to attend my night school auto body classes called those crimes "Misdemeanor Murder" or "Public Service Homicide". One scumbag offs another one, and saves society the expense of an arrest, a trial, and a short prison sentence. Rinse and repeat- - - - -!
    Jerry
    "Public Service Homicide" - like!

    Why aren't these little punks being treated as "Domestic Terrorists"?
    -Zorba, "The Veiled Male"

    "If you get it and didn't work for it, someone else worked for it and didn't get it..."
  • NNNN Senior Member Posts: 24,635 Senior Member
    What is going on? We got a forum full of grammar police.
    Shut up-----KAREN; OK Cynthia
  • tubabucknuttubabucknut Banned Posts: 3,520 Senior Member
    NN wrote: »
    What is going on? We got a forum full of grammar police.
    I think it is just a little turnabout, and fair play sort of thing. I saw what Bream did when he first posted. The touch goes to Bream, En Garde.
  • NNNN Senior Member Posts: 24,635 Senior Member
    I think it is just a little turnabout, and fair play sort of thing. I saw what Bream did when he first posted. The touch goes to Bream, En Garde.
    I suppose, I did have to look up a word before I saw that Chief had posted a definition of it, so I'd understand the thread.
    I think I joined up in '06 or so and it has been going on since and probably before that.
    Shut up-----KAREN; OK Cynthia
  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    snake284 wrote: »
    Sorry Sam, I used you as a sacrificial lamb to get my point across. And I also see your point. When dealing with this crap there's a lot of angles to consider. I see where you're coming from. We gun nuts have to be careful of our wording when dealing with antis and/or just plane non gun people or they'll turn it on us and make us look like part of the problem to the uninformed public. And that's who we need to win over. We aren't going to win over the antis, that's for sure.

    Agreed, essentially the same point I was aiming for but didn't explain it that well. Sometimes we have to chip away at the gun ignorance and take small victories where they arise.
  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    I see you don't like it when folks apply your own standards to you. If this had been a news report you'd be accusing the reporter and copy editor of anti-gun bias in the titling of the article.

    You do it? You get snarky.

    I once more bow to your superior knowledge and language skills, Oh Wondrous Wizened Minion.

    And you gotta turn the mirror back onto yourself, actually. If you criticize and nitpick at me, it's not snarky. If I try to defend myself, it's snarky. Don't ya see, it works both ways? Duh.

    And actually, no, I wouldn't have thought a thing about such a headline. Headlines are written by as separate editor who often blows the assignment, often to comic results. There are plenty of funny examples.

    I just got finished responding to someone else in the Clubhouse section who found fault with the wording of my posting. I recommended that a special fund be set up to reward such diligence, those quasi-moderators and faithful Sam Watchers to spend countless hours sifting through my postings to ferret out errors. It's really a thankless task and one that few others here commit themselves to. You're to be lauded for your efforts, bringing these errors to the attention of the other members. Congrats!
  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    Big Chief wrote: »
    Hey Sam, you used "Laying Around" in the thread title and "Lying Around" in a reply. What's up with that?
    etc

    I'm an English major and have written for most of my life and I still get "lay" and "lie" wrong when talking about an inanimate object vs a human or animal.

    For a long time I got "complement" and "compliment" crossed up, as well as "historical" and "historic", and so it continues.
  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    zorba wrote: »
    "Public Service Homicide" - like!

    I liked that phrase too. I'll have to remember that one.
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,490 Senior Member
    samzhere wrote: »
    I once more bow to your superior knowledge and language skills, Oh Wondrous Wizened Minion.

    And you gotta turn the mirror back onto yourself, actually. If you criticize and nitpick at me, it's not snarky. If I try to defend myself, it's snarky. Don't ya see, it works both ways? Duh.

    And actually, no, I wouldn't have thought a thing about such a headline. Headlines are written by as separate editor who often blows the assignment, often to comic results. There are plenty of funny examples.

    I just got finished responding to someone else in the Clubhouse section who found fault with the wording of my posting. I recommended that a special fund be set up to reward such diligence, those quasi-moderators and faithful Sam Watchers to spend countless hours sifting through my postings to ferret out errors. It's really a thankless task and one that few others here commit themselves to. You're to be lauded for your efforts, bringing these errors to the attention of the other members. Congrats!
    Would you like to borrow a pry bar, sir? It may be useful to remove those nails holding you upon your cross.
    Overkill is underrated.
  • LMLarsenLMLarsen Senior Member Posts: 8,337 Senior Member
    :rotflmao::beer:
    “A gun is a tool, no better or no worse than any other tool: an axe, a shovel or anything. A gun is as good or as bad as the man using it. Remember that.”

    NRA Endowment Member
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.

Advertisement