5-year-old Kentucky boy fatally shoots 2-year-old sister

  • Thread starter Thread starter CatholicGeek1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
CatholicGeek1 said:
If you let a kid have a loaded gun alone, you are an idiot. If they kill someone with it, you are responsible and should go to jail, preferably for a very long time, not necessarily just for punishment either, but to protect other children and innocents from you.
Click to expand...
I have to agree with you on this one, at least that she was criminally negligent. I am not sure jail time, especially extended time, is appropriate for a one time offense by someone who does not possess a danger to society.
 
Does anyone know what the gun laws are in Kentucky regarding securing firearms from children? I was just wondering if the parents broke a particular gun law by giving their 5 yr old possession of a gun to begin with, or if it was just purely negligence on the mother’s part.

I believe in my state, a homeowner with a gun is required to keep it locked up unloaded in a separate safe from the ammo. And the ammo has to be locked too. Even if you don’t have children, just in case a child visits your house. I don’t know if there is a particular law about having to be a certain age to learn to shoot a gun though.
 
polki said:
I believe in my state, a homeowner with a gun is required to keep it locked up unloaded in a separate safe from the ammo. And the ammo has to be locked too. .
Click to expand...
What Nazi state do you live in?
 
KY is very pro gun. We are a Right to Hunt state, meaning it is very difficult to limit gun ownership. That being said, anyone convicted of a felony, domestic violence, gun related or weapon offense is banned from gun ownership. We do allow concealed weapons on college campuses with the proper permit, but no other schools. Businesses can allow or not allow on their property. All schools have metal detectors as well as hospitals, courthouses, etc. No age limit on owning, but there is on buying.
 
10gr8kids said:
There are people who willfully abuse their children and the states goal is always reunification. I agree that this Mother made a terrible mistake, and she will pay for it the rest of her life. I don’t think breaking apart this family would be in the best interest of the 5yr old boy. If we were all honest with ourselves, I would doubt any parent couldn’t think of a time when they’ve made a mistake and where not thankful because something bad could have happened. But for the Grace of God go I.
Click to expand...
Some mistakes are worse than others. This is simply not a situation that could happen in most homes. Most parents would never let a 5 year old have a gun unsupervised. And while reunification may always be a goal, that does not mean that it always happens.

Would breaking the family apart be rough on the child. Of course. Would it be better for him in the long term to not be raised by such negligent parents, I think that is likely.
 
pnewton said:
I have to agree with you on this one, at least that she was criminally negligent. I am not sure jail time, especially extended time, is appropriate for a one time offense by someone who does not possess a danger to society.
Click to expand...
They let an unsupervised five year old have a loaded gun, I would say that is a danger to society.
 
CatholicGeek1 said:
Some mistakes are worse than others. This is simply not a situation that could happen in most homes. Most parents would never let a 5 year old have a gun unsupervised. And while reunification may always be a goal, that does not mean that it always happens.

Would breaking the family apart be rough on the child. Of course. Would it be better for him in the long term to not be raised by such negligent parents, I think that is likely.
Click to expand...
Going through classes to become foster parents we learned that even children who have been sexually abused by their fathers could be reunited if the father did all he was ordered to by the court. I’m sure the laws vary from state to state and some judges are more lenient than others. I was appalled to learn this, and as foster parents you are expected to work towards reunification. This is one reason we have chosen to put off being foster parents at this time. For us to take a child into our home and care for them would mean loving them with our whole being. I don’t know if I would be able to do that and honestly help certain parents in the smallest way to reunite with their children.

All of that said, for me it would much easier to help this woman than someone who has physically or sexually abused their child, or even someone who has allowed that to happen on a regular basis. You seem to have much compassion for people, should we have less compassion for this woman who made a terrible mistake. Also, have these parents made a habit out of putting their children in danger, or was it truly one horrible mistake. This would be an important fact on deciding if the child should be removed from the home. IMO
 
10gr8kids said:
Going through classes to become foster parents we learned that even children who have been sexually abused by their fathers could be reunited if the father did all he was ordered to by the court. I’m sure the laws vary from state to state and some judges are more lenient than others. I was appalled to learn this, and as foster parents you are expected to work towards reunification.
Click to expand...
I don’t know what state you are in but we learned the same thing in our MAPP classes so I am sure it’s not an isolated situation. Even parents that have beaten children to death are allowed to keep their other children. 🤷
 
10gr8kids said:
Going through classes to become foster parents we learned that even children who have been sexually abused by their fathers could be reunited if the father did all he was ordered to by the court. I’m sure the laws vary from state to state and some judges are more lenient than others. I was appalled to learn this, and as foster parents you are expected to work towards reunification. This is one reason we have chosen to put off being foster parents at this time. For us to take a child into our home and care for them would mean loving them with our whole being. I don’t know if I would be able to do that and honestly help certain parents in the smallest way to reunite with their children.

All of that said, for me it would much easier to help this woman than someone who has physically or sexually abused their child, or even someone who has allowed that to happen on a regular basis. You seem to have much compassion for people, should we have less compassion for this woman who made a terrible mistake. Also, have these parents made a habit out of putting their children in danger, or was it truly one horrible mistake. This would be an important fact on deciding if the child should be removed from the home. IMO
Click to expand...
I do have compassion for her. I also have compassion for her child that was killed by negligence and for her other child that will have to live with that for the rest of his life.

Just because the law works for reunification does not make it right, and therefore, I do not think is an argument for not taking this child out of the house.

While I think we should all have compassion and forgiveness, that does not mean that people should not be punished when they have done something wrong. I think this is more than a mistake. This is negligence.
 
who gives a FIVE year old a gun? And who lets it BE LOADED when its given to the child? This tragedy could have been prevented. Guns are NOT a TOY! They are weapons and should not be given to little kids as gifts. They are used for self defense and hunting, they should not be played with like a toy gun from a toy store.
 
10gr8kids said:
Going through classes to become foster parents we learned that even children who have been sexually abused by their fathers could be reunited if the father did all he was ordered to by the court. I’m sure the laws vary from state to state and some judges are more lenient than others. I was appalled to learn this, and as foster parents you are expected to work towards reunification. This is one reason we have chosen to put off being foster parents at this time. For us to take a child into our home and care for them would mean loving them with our whole being. I don’t know if I would be able to do that and honestly help certain parents in the smallest way to reunite with their children.

All of that said, for me it would much easier to help this woman than someone who has physically or sexually abused their child, or even someone who has allowed that to happen on a regular basis. You seem to have much compassion for people, should we have less compassion for this woman who made a terrible mistake. Also, have these parents made a habit out of putting their children in danger, or was it truly one horrible mistake. This would be an important fact on deciding if the child should be removed from the home. IMO
Click to expand...
SamH said:
I don’t know what state you are in but we learned the same thing in our MAPP classes so I am sure it’s not an isolated situation. Even parents that have beaten children to death are allowed to keep their other children. 🤷
Click to expand...
My dad was a police officer and my parents were foster parents for years, both through Catholic Charities and the state. I had one foster brother that was sexually abused by his adoptive parents, so he was taken back into foster care while the adoptive parents were being tried. They were convicted, given time served, counceling, and reunited with the boy. This was in the 1980’s and I had so hoped things were different now. I guess it will never change.

As for this case, these parents will NEVER forgive themselves and will inflict a greater degree of punishment on themselves. So will the little boy. I know some people don’t get how parents would think it’s ok to give a rifle to a 5 yr old child. I also can’t see ever doing it, but for many families it is a tradition. It has happened for generations. It will continue for many more generations. People here hunt. Many of us live out in the woods and law enforcement takes 30 minutes or more to get to us. We do have wild animals (coyotes, wild boars, etc). There are neighbor disputes that can turn ugly. Some drug deals occur because it is so far out. Not all of us live in good neighborhoods. I don’t know if any of this applies to the family in this article, but it needs to be stated that many people DO live like that. I noticed some posters saying that it is no longer the 1800’s when people did live out in the woods. Some of us still do.
 
SamH said:
More to this story.

I own a Cricket Rifle and I taught my sons to shoot it at a very young age. A 5 year old can’t cock the weapon - at least neither of my sons could at that age.

Basically the same as leaving an unbuckled 5 year old in a running car or handing a 5 year old a loaded and cocked gun… Oh…
Click to expand...
I agree, I have a Crickett as well, it was passed on to me by a co-worker whose boys are now High School\College aged. I have to load and cock it for my 6 year old. It’s light enough for her to hold and aim ( which is why I got it), but it has to be prepped for her to fire.

The parent’s fault is leaving a **loaded and cocked **firearm around the house, not with owning a Crickett

My firearms (including the Crickett) are kept stored in a gun safe with the actions open (except for the flintlocks 😛 )
 
7armyrugrats said:
My dad was a police officer and my parents were foster parents for years, both through Catholic Charities and the state. I had one foster brother that was sexually abused by his adoptive parents, so he was taken back into foster care while the adoptive parents were being tried. They were convicted, given time served, counceling, and reunited with the boy. This was in the 1980’s and I had so hoped things were different now. I guess it will never change.

As for this case, these parents will NEVER forgive themselves and will inflict a greater degree of punishment on themselves. So will the little boy. I know some people don’t get how parents would think it’s ok to give a rifle to a 5 yr old child. I also can’t see ever doing it, but for many families it is a tradition. It has happened for generations. It will continue for many more generations. People here hunt. Many of us live out in the woods and law enforcement takes 30 minutes or more to get to us. We do have wild animals (coyotes, wild boars, etc). There are neighbor disputes that can turn ugly. Some drug deals occur because it is so far out. Not all of us live in good neighborhoods. I don’t know if any of this applies to the family in this article, but it needs to be stated that many people DO live like that. I noticed some posters saying that it is no longer the 1800’s when people did live out in the woods. Some of us still do.
Click to expand...
I don’t care where you live. There is no reason for a five year old to have a gun. If it is a tradition it needs to change. There is even less reason for said five year old to be alone with said gun while it is loaded.

I hope the parents regret what happened, though I think given their actions that they will see it more as an accident than something that was completely preventable and entirely their fault.
 
Brendan said:
I agree, I have a Crickett as well, it was passed on to me by a co-worker whose boys are now High School\College aged. I have to load and cock it for my 6 year old. It’s light enough for her to hold and aim ( which is why I got it), but it has to be prepped for her to fire.
**
The parent’s fault is leaving a loaded and cocked firearm around the house, not with owning a Crickett**

My firearms (including the Crickett) are kept stored in a gun safe with the actions open (except for the flintlocks 😛 )
Click to expand...
I agree, but I still think five is too young for guns no matter what type.
 
CatholicGeek1 said:
I don’t care where you live. There is no reason for a five year old to have a gun. If it is a tradition it needs to change. There is even less reason for said five year old to be alone with said gun while it is loaded.

I hope the parents regret what happened, though I think given their actions that they will see it more as an accident than something that was completely preventable and entirely their fault.
Click to expand...
Many other traditions all over the world need to change too. But we can’t dictate that and good luck convincing families their traditions are no good. They will easily find something they don’t like about things you do that can be dangerous as well. As common as this is, the fact that rarely do people hear about it, makes me think it isn’t as dangerous as you are making it out to be. What if mom went inside for a minute and 2yr old got injured or killed playing in the yard? That happens all the time. It’s a tragedy either way.

As for the posters that say their kids can’t cock a Cricket, good. I’m glad. But I have seen my neighbor’s 4 yr old load, cock and fire his like a pro! He’s a good shot too. His 7 yr old sister can’t though. Neither can my kids. I still don’t trust myself having one at home, but our 11 yr old is getting a pellet gun for her birthday.
 
7armyrugrats said:
Many other traditions all over the world need to change too. But we can’t dictate that and good luck convincing families their traditions are no good. They will easily find something they don’t like about things you do that can be dangerous as well. As common as this is, the fact that rarely do people hear about it, makes me think it isn’t as dangerous as you are making it out to be. What if mom went inside for a minute and 2yr old got injured or killed playing in the yard? That happens all the time. It’s a tragedy either way.

As for the posters that say their kids can’t cock a Cricket, good. I’m glad. But I have seen my neighbor’s 4 yr old load, cock and fire his like a pro! He’s a good shot too. His 7 yr old sister can’t though. Neither can my kids. I still don’t trust myself having one at home, but our 11 yr old is getting a pellet gun for her birthday.
Click to expand...
Yes, there are many traditions that need to change. The fact that some are unwilling to change them does not make them right.

This is not the same thing as someone leaving a child in the backyard for a minute. In most places, the backyard of your home is a relatively safe place. You have a reasonable expectation that a child will be safe there for a minute or two. Even if it is not the best idea in the world.

A loaded gun in the hand of a child is not a safe situation and you do not have a reasonable expectation that nothing bad will happen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top