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

[SamH]

There is a difference between accidental deaths in pools or dirt bikes, assuming that proper precautions were taken in those cases, and criminally negligent homicide which is what occurred in this case as not even the most basic of precautions were taken.

Are they less dead? Or did they just die (in your opinion) a more socially acceptable death?

 

[SamH]

While I doubt such statistics exist, I highly highly doubt that there are anywhere near the number of children with guns as there are swimming pools.

Actually there are statistically many times the number of children with a gun in their home than there are children with a pool in their home.

In 1997 alone (the last year for which data are available), 742 children under the age of 10 drowned in the United States last year alone. Approximately 550 of those drownings — about 75 percent of the total — occurred in residential swimming pools. According to the most recent statistics, there are about six million residential pools, meaning that one young child drowns annually for every 11,000 pools.

About 175 children under the age of 10 died in 1998 as a result of guns. About two-thirds of those deaths were homicides. There are an estimated 200 million guns in the United States. Doing the math, there is roughly one child killed by guns for every one million guns.

scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2001/07/27/levittpoolsvsguns/

 

[Brendan]

I am not talking about what is true in your world or mine, what I am talking about is across the US as a whole, I would be willing to be large sums of money that there are more swimming pools than kindergarten age gun owners.

Since in KY, as in every state, minors cannot own firearms at all, you would be correct. There would be hundreds of thousands of pool owners to zero kindergarten firearms owners.

Even the child in question did not own a firearm, he couldn’t…

But he had negligent access to one, much like the dozens of children last year who lost their lives to negligent access to pools.

 

[CatholicGeek1]

I’m sorry, I must of read you wrong. I thought you responded to 7armyrugrats about her giving her child a knife with this…

I did, and that was not pointing fingers, that was stating my opinion. I didn’t say that I thought she should go to jail or lose her kids for it. I didn’t say that she was sinning, or that she was in fact doing anything wrong. I think it is irresponsible, that is my opinion.

 

[CatholicGeek1]

Well, even if you hide the machete in my husband’s town, the kids will get them. They are everywhere. They live in an area where they are needed for work and daily life. I understand you probably can’t comprehend that (I couldn’t until I went the first time), but that’s how it is. So parents take the fascination out of them by exposing the kids to them, teaching safety tips, having them use them as soon as the baby shows interest or can crawl around. Kind of like showing a baby what hot is, or the dangers of running into a street, or any number of things that fascinate children. Not all of us can wrap our kids in bubble wrap and put them in playpens when we aren’t holding them.

I have family in NYC. They send their kids to the store ALONE at 8 yrs old to buy milk or tomatoes or whatever. The kids ride the subway, city bus, walk across the street, all by 10 yrs old. I would never let my kids do that. To me it’s crazy. But if something happened to their child, I would never look at them as horrible parents that should have the other kids removed from their home. It can be viewed as negligent, but I don’t believe it is any more negligent than my kids playing in the woods where there might be a snake. Kids must know their environment and how to safely maneuver through it.

I think it is irresponsible. I do not think it is criminal negligence. What were are talking about in the OP though is an act that I do feel is criminally negligent homicide.

 

[CatholicGeek1]

Are they less dead? Or did they just die (in your opinion) a more socially acceptable death?

First, no death is socially acceptable. However, if someone dies due to a true accident, that is a tragedy. If someone dies due to complete and utter negligence that is criminal.

 

[CatholicGeek1]

Actually there are statistically many times the number of children with a gun** in their home** than there are children with a pool in their home.

In their home, perhaps. That was not what I was saying. I was talking about cases like in the OP where the children have their own gun, and still fewer where they have unsupervised access to said gun.

 

[CatholicGeek1]

Since in KY, as in every state, minors cannot own firearms at all, you would be correct. There would be hundreds of thousands of pool owners to zero kindergarten firearms owners.

Even the child in question did not own a firearm, he couldn’t…

But he had negligent access to one, much like the dozens of children last year who lost their lives to negligent access to pools.

The gun was given to him as a gift, whether he legally owned it or not is irrelevant. In his eyes and the eyes of his parents it was his. He had access to it without supervision. Call me crazy but I think that is a rare situation.

You can do everything right in securing your pool, and a child could still get to it (climbing the fence, etc.) if you do everything right in keeping firearms locked in a safe with a lock that a child can’t open and only have them out under your control, a child will not die from it.

 

[SamH]

In their home, perhaps. That was not what I was saying. I was talking about cases like in the OP where the children have their own gun, and still fewer where they have unsupervised access to said gun.

As pointed out no child owns a gun - it is illegal.

 

[CatholicGeek1]

As pointed out no child owns a gun - it is illegal.

As pointed out, I don’t care about the legal definition of ownership. If it is given to him as a gift, he sees it as his, and he has unsupervised access to it, it is his. Lets not try and defend something that is indefensible with symantics.

 

[10gr8kids]

I think it is irresponsible. I do not think it is criminal negligence. What were are talking about in the OP though is an act that I do feel is criminally negligent homicide.

I agree it was criminally negligent. What we don’t agree on is what is the best interest of the 5yr old child.

 

[pnewton]

They let an unsupervised five year old have a loaded gun, I would say that is a danger to society.

They do not supervise society. If convicted of a felony, even on probation, they will no longer be allowed to own a firearm. Safety issue solved.

You may think justice would best be served by locking the parents aware and raising this child who just killed his sister by the state, but I would be surprised if you could get even one juror out of twelve to agree with you.

 

[KungLao]

I did, and that was not pointing fingers, that was stating my opinion. I didn’t say that I thought she should go to jail or lose her kids for it. I didn’t say that she was sinning, or that she was in fact doing anything wrong. I think it is irresponsible, that is my opinion.

You also called them idiots, and went on a rant about who “needs” guns. The latter is arbitrary point that gets bandied about any time access to firearms comes up.

The root of the issue, as is most of our problems in society (IMO) is lax (or in this case, inattentive) parenting. In this example, it manifested itself in the form of a gunshot. In others, it is an entitled society of youuth, children born out of wedlock, kids dropping out of school, drug use, gang violence, abortion, and child abandonment.

Until lawmakers have the courage to speak out and address that (as Santorum did often in the primaries), nothing will change.

 

[SamH]

As pointed out, I don’t care about the legal definition of ownership. .

Agreed, why let anything like facts get in the way of what you believe?

 

[CatholicGeek1]

You also called them idiots, and went on a rant about who “needs” guns. The latter is arbitrary point that gets bandied about any time access to firearms comes up.

The root of the issue, as is most of our problems in society (IMO) is lax (or in this case, inattentive) parenting. In this example, it manifested itself in the form of a gunshot. In others, it is an entitled society of youuth, children born out of wedlock, kids dropping out of school, drug use, gang violence, abortion, and child abandonment.

Until lawmakers have the courage to speak out and address that (as Santorum did often in the primaries), nothing will change.

I don’t recall making a rant about who needs guns. I do remember calling these parents idiots, because all of the evidence says that they are. Other parenting problems, which I agree are plenty, are not really relevant to this discussion.

 

[CatholicGeek1]

Agreed, why let anything like facts get in the way of what you believe?

It is a distinction without a difference. The point here is that a five year old boy was given a gun as a gift. He had unsupervised access to it, and he shot and killed his two year old sister. If that is not the definition of criminally negligent homicide, I don’t know what is.

 

[KungLao]

I don’t recall making a rant about who needs guns. I do remember calling these parents idiots, because all of the evidence says that they are. Other parenting problems, which I agree are plenty, are not really relevant to this discussion.

Poor parenting certainly is relevant to the discussion; that’s the point.

You also said “Furthermore, there is no legitimate reason that a five year old needs their own gun. If you want to teach them about firearms, fine, I still think that is too young, but reasonable people can disagree on that point, but do it with YOUR gun. No reason the kid should have had his own. Even less reason that he should have been left alone with it. Still less reason he should have been left alone with it loaded.”

So it appears you did make a claim about needs guns.

I wouldn’t personally give my five year alone access to a loaded gun, but since I;ve seen people suspended for calling others idiots, I wouldn’t do that either.

 

[CatholicGeek1]

Poor parenting certainly is relevant to the discussion; that’s the point.

You also said “Furthermore, there is no legitimate reason that a five year old needs their own gun. If you want to teach them about firearms, fine, I still think that is too young, but reasonable people can disagree on that point, but do it with YOUR gun. No reason the kid should have had his own. Even less reason that he should have been left alone with it. Still less reason he should have been left alone with it loaded.”

So it appears you did make a claim about needs guns.

I wouldn’t personally give my five year alone access to a loaded gun, but since I;ve seen people suspended for calling others idiots, I wouldn’t do that either.

First of all, I didn’t call anyone on this board idiots, I called the parents idiots.

Secondly, the implication I took from your comment that I was questioning the need people may have for guns in general. To me this is a different issue from a five year old having their own gun.

Lastly, we are not talking about poor parenting, we are talking about criminally negligent homicide.

 

[SamH]

It is a distinction without a difference. The point here is that a five year old boy was given a gun as a gift. He had unsupervised access to it, and he shot and killed his two year old sister. If that is not the definition of criminally negligent homicide, I don’t know what is.

You got part of that statement right.

 

[Kelfa28]

You don’t give access to a loaded and cocked weapon for anyone to just pick up.

I don’t care if they are 5 or 45 and if it’s a bb gun or a 50 cal. It’s a recipe for disaster.

Furthermore…until a child can absolutely, without a doubt, understand that every weapon you come across is loaded and dangerous and can be rendered safe by said child or said child goes and gets an adult to render the weapon safe then that child should have NO free access to that weapon until they can understand this concept…I don’t care if it’s “their” weapon or not.

When I first became aware of weapon safety…because my husband carried and owns weapons…I wouldn’t touch the weapons until I felt comfortable rendering it safe. It’s a mute point anyway because all of our weapons are locked up, unloaded and with nothing in the chamber anyway.

Those parents made a massive mistake and do not have much by way of common sense when it comes to weapon safety.

I think they should be punished…but they are being punished by the loss of their child.