Family Blames Gun Show For Boy's Death

IMO the father is the sole person to blame.


I don't know what sort of firearms experience the father had, but I doubt that he was an expert on Uzis. If the "experts" were saying (or at least implying) that it was safe for an 8 year old to handle an Uzi, it seems reasonable to expect a noob to believe them.

The whole thing sucks, but the "experts" running this thing should never have let this happen.... The father certainly shares some responsibility but so do the people running the event. Arguably they hold most of the responsibility.

(As for the ammo manufactures, etc. I guess that's just their lawyer looking for some settlement money.)
 
Is that an actual fact or rumor? As it would change a lot

Even if that part is a rumor, the part about loading up a full mag and handing it to an 8 year old is undisputed and just as negligent.
 
Considering he gave his 8 year old son a loaded micro uzi and let him shoot it, maybe he should be.

Besides the terrible tragedy of the child's death...marriages rarely survive in the face of the death of a child. The dad may end up there or lost in some other way. One terrible decision [sad2]
They will blame everyone else for awhile as a means of denial.
 
Personal responsibility all around on this one. It is the fathers fault straight up, along with the discretion of who ever handed the boy the gun. Ultimately the father is to blame though.

I feel bad for the family but don't think they should be entitled to any money for what happened.
 
Here's the best analogy I can think of. Up until last year, I owned some sort of boat for the last 20 consecutive years. When my wife got deployed for a year, the boat just sat in the slip and I eventually sold it. We have a four year old who listens pretty well for her age, but she's still 4. I knew that I couldn't singlehand the boat and watch her at the same time, and my brother was still living in Japan at the time.
There was no law stating that other than the captain you need at least one adult over 18 to watch any children under age five, but I knew that when I was in the middle of docking or any other situation requiring 100% of my attention, something really bad could easily happen if she got hurt or fell overboard . If God forbid something did happen, should I sue the yacht club for unsafe slips, and the boat manufacturer for gunwhales that were too low? No. I chose to do the right thing and not put her in a dangerous situation that could easily get bad really fast. I didn't want to let the boat sit and rot, so I ended up selling it and still miss it to this day.
This was primarily the father's fault, but no punishment will be greater than what he has already received. I would not wish that on anyone. Any further action is nothing but misplaced anger. The show is at fault for letting a father do something really stupid, so there is fault to go around, but the main person responsible for a child's safety is his parent.
 
The father and whoever put a 15-y/o kid in charge of a firing line should be sharing a jail cell. It wasn't just a stupid move, it was reckless in the extreme. It endangered everyone there, not just the kid who died.

We're either responsible people who admit when one of our own does something awful or we're excuse makers. Just because it happened at a local gun club and no one wants to see us all penalized for someone else's actions doesn't mean we should be letting the people who are responsible for the incident off the hook.

The kind of thinking that lets the people directly involved in this incident (and I'm talking about the people who were involved in giving the kid the weapon and putting the 15-y/o CHILD in charge of a firing line) off the hook because "accidents happen" is precisely the same kind of thinking that lets Judges justify letting violent felons off with a slap on the wrist.

Basic safety rules were ignored, common sense was ignored and an 8-y/o is dead because of it.

As for the lawsuit, I'm fine with going after the people responsible, as long as they are ok with putting Daddy behind bars for reckless endangerment of a child.
 
The father and whoever put a 15-y/o kid in charge of a firing line should be sharing a jail cell. It wasn't just a stupid move, it was reckless in the extreme. It endangered everyone there, not just the kid who died.

We're either responsible people who admit when one of our own does something awful or we're excuse makers. Just because it happened at a local gun club and no one wants to see us all penalized for someone else's actions doesn't mean we should be letting the people who are responsible for the incident off the hook.

The kind of thinking that lets the people directly involved in this incident (and I'm talking about the people who were involved in giving the kid the weapon and putting the 15-y/o CHILD in charge of a firing line) off the hook because "accidents happen" is precisely the same kind of thinking that lets Judges justify letting violent felons off with a slap on the wrist.

Basic safety rules were ignored, common sense was ignored and an 8-y/o is dead because of it.

As for the lawsuit, I'm fine with going after the people responsible, as long as they are ok with putting Daddy behind bars for reckless endangerment of a child.


THIS.

The people running this event put all responsible gun owners at risk by putting us all in a negative light at a time when we're already fighting from a weak position. It's simply inexcusable.
 
Slightly off topic... but not necessarily.

My 16 year old son shoots everything I own. He has taken all the same courses I have and takes safety as seriously as I do. Some of you have met him, shot with him, and know what I'm talking about.

The other night he said to me "Dad, can I get an airsoft gun" to which I replied "NO!". He looked at me funny and said, "But, Dad, I have an FID card and regularly shoot 9mm and .45 caliber pistols. We're talking an airsoft gun here".

Then I explained the difference. It was not the airsoft gun per se that was the problem, but the environment in which they were used. I watch our neighbor's kids shooting at one another all the time without goggles. It is a tragedy waiting to happen. I've mentioned it to my neighbor but his just laughs it off.

I explained that safety goes way beyond the equipment. When we shoot at the range there are clear, time tested rules that everyone follows. God help the hapless shooter that does something improper. We are self regulating and every shooter acts like a range officer. Most are not shy about pointing out problems and issues. Problem is that airsoft games just do not have the same level of safety or scrutiny. And therein lies the problem. It is not the machine you hold in your hand, it is the environment and safety attitude of those you are with.

We need to take responsibility for our kids. We need to set limits. We know our children better than anyone else. And as good parents we do the best we can. And sometimes the best thing we can do for our kids is to say "NO!".

Best,

Rich
 
Here's the best analogy I can think of. Up until last year, I owned some sort of boat for the last 20 consecutive years. When my wife got deployed for a year, the boat just sat in the slip and I eventually sold it. We have a four year old who listens pretty well for her age, but she's still 4. I knew that I couldn't singlehand the boat and watch her at the same time, and my brother was still living in Japan at the time.
There was no law stating that other than the captain you need at least one adult over 18 to watch any children under age five, but I knew that when I was in the middle of docking or any other situation requiring 100% of my attention, something really bad could easily happen if she got hurt or fell overboard . If God forbid something did happen, should I sue the yacht club for unsafe slips, and the boat manufacturer for gunwhales that were too low? No. I chose to do the right thing and not put her in a dangerous situation that could easily get bad really fast. I didn't want to let the boat sit and rot, so I ended up selling it and still miss it to this day.
This was primarily the father's fault, but no punishment will be greater than what he has already received. I would not wish that on anyone. Any further action is nothing but misplaced anger. The show is at fault for letting a father do something really stupid, so there is fault to go around, but the main person responsible for a child's safety is his parent.


The difference is that you're a qualified boater and you know better.

Should we expect some guy off the street who's showing up for a fun shoot to know better than the "experts" (cops in this case) who were running the thing?
 
I know we were discussing it here right after the accident happened, but didn't the father already blow his chances at a lawsuit by admitting he was at fault in the immedite aftermath of the incident?

IMO the father is the primary one responsible for this, though the organizers of the event had a hand (much smaller than the father's) in what happened. That's not to say that the others responsible shouldn't be held liable for their involvement, but the father should have absolutely no legal grounds to seek damages. To sue the gun or ammunition manufacturers for the incident are proof beyond a reasonible doubt that the father is just looking to cash in on his own mistake. This scumbag has decided to turn his son's death (which he admitted fault in) into a payday.
 
Opinion

We all have our opinions. Quite frankly, since an 8 year old is not well versed enough to understand all the possible dangers of the world I would place BLAME #1 on his parents...BOTH of them. BLAME #2 goes to whoever was immediately supervising him and BLAME #3 goes to whoever is supposed to be overseeing the line.

Placing blame beyond the people directly involved, that could have directly prevented this horrendous event, and onto the club, gun owner and the actual gun or manufacturer is as illogical and irresponsible as handing the 8 year old a micro-uzi in the first place.

May he rest in peace the poor little guy, and his family find peace without hurting others in their quest for retribution.
 
Even if that part is a rumor, the part about loading up a full mag and handing it to an 8 year old is undisputed and just as negligent.

Actually, intentionally disabling a safety feature designed to prevent exactly the harm that occurred would be pretty much the definition of negligence and proximate causation. It might even be criminally reckless. Again, assuming the bit of information that the backstrap safety was rubber-banded down is true. I agree letting him make his first try with a full mag is a risk, but we don't even know how many rounds were fired before he was hit.
 
What's going to screw the club is the rubber band on the grip safety. That's a slam dunk in a civil liability suit. It's akin to removing hand-guards on a production line. It's also going to keep the gun mnfg safe from liability as the user defeated the mechanical safety feature.

They'll argue assumption of risk on the part of the parent, but if plaintiff can prove a 'defective product' it's strict liability.

The smoking gun in this one (sorry for the bad pun) is the rubber band. Whoever did that is about to get spanked very hard by the civil case.
 
Interesting.
I think it comes down to: when you put to much stupid in one space, someone gets hurt

Absolutely. I believe there was someone on this board who had a run-in with the father and his then toddler son at a pellet rifle gallery at a gun show. the person whom I spoke to, (NRA Instructor/RSO et al), said that the son was resistant to shoot and was prodded into doing so. I have spent countless hours shooting countless CIII weapons. My 21st Birthday present to myself was a Powder Springs MAC-10 for example. I have had trigger time on everything from MAC-10's to MP5's - Browning .50's and beyond. The only gun I have ever fired in my life that made me very nervous was a Micro Uzi. If I owned one, I would not hand that gun to even an experienced CIII shooter - ever. The fact that this gun was handed to an 8-year old boy shows a complete loss of gray matter in all involved. Like I said, the only gift out of this whole thing was that the boy shot himself and did not let loose 32rds into a packed firing line...

+1

At least the father didn't say "Hold my beer and watch this..."

He may as well have....At the end of the day, this dumbass killed his son...
 
That's a terrible pun[wink]

I heard that other children did shoot the uzi... true, not true? I don't know.

Risk implies that the harm will come only sometimes. If on average 4 kids shoot it fine for every one that gets hurt, that's a 20% risk. Not odds I'd put on a kid. How about 1:10? 1:50? You might be able to get to "pretty much no chance of harm" but that would require NOT disabling the safety device that prevents weak-grip shooting.
 
why?, if a bunch of children shot the uzi without incident, then it could be proven that a reasonable person would think that it was safe for a child to shoot

If it weren't for the rubber band. The rubber band around the safety is the key to the civil case. You've mechanically defeated a safety feature.

They're screwed.
 
Back
Top Bottom