That may be the case, but who takes solace in destroying other people's lives to make theirs better?
Statists.
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
That may be the case, but who takes solace in destroying other people's lives to make theirs better?
So you don't think that the "experts" who were running this event share any responsibility? I have a hard time agreeing there.
So you don't think that the "experts" who were running this event share any responsibility? I have a hard time agreeing there.
Where did I say that? I've just made 4 posts to this thread saying I believe whomever tied the safety down was screwed in the eyes of the law. Further the 'instructor' & RSO should be worried as well.
I was just getting irritated as some posters to the thread are having a hard time with the idea that anyone other then the parent was at fault for this cluster F.
That may be the case, but who takes solace in destroying other people's lives to make theirs better?
there is more than enough blame to go around here, but the question is does it rise to the level of negligence?
Poor judgement... you bet! Starting with Dad.
I mean come on a bleeping Uzi! They are not known for being an easy weapon to handle, even in the hands of an adult with basic knowledge of firearms.
That's not the case at all. The "experts" do share some of the responsibility, but it pales in comparison to the responsibility of the parent to know what their child is capable of.
Statists.
How is a parent who is (clearly) not a firearms expert supposed to know what their kid can or can't do when there are "experts" standing there saying that everything is cool?
Sure you know better, but you have some firearms experience. Can the same thing be said about this father who was essentially being misled by someone who claimed to be an expert?
These "experts," who should have known better, were in charge of the weapon and the firing line. They screwed the pooch on this one and IMHO they should be held responsible.
How is a parent who is (clearly) not a firearms expert supposed to know what their kid can or can't do when there are "experts" standing there saying that everything is cool?
How is a parent who is (clearly) not a firearms expert supposed to know what their kid can or can't do when there are "experts" standing there saying that everything is cool?
Sure you know better, but you have some firearms experience. Can the same thing be said about this father who was essentially being misled by someone who claimed to be an expert?
These "experts," who should have known better, were in charge of the weapon and the firing line. They screwed the pooch on this one and IMHO they should be held responsible.
What parent without experience with a specific firearm has any business in deciding if their child can handle that firearm? The parent should not be allowed to abdicate that responsibility.
How is a parent who is (clearly) not a firearms expert supposed to know what their kid can or can't do when there are "experts" standing there saying that everything is cool?
Sure you know better, but you have some firearms experience. Can the same thing be said about this father who was essentially being misled by someone who claimed to be an expert?
These "experts," who should have known better, were in charge of the weapon and the firing line. They screwed the pooch on this one and IMHO they should be held responsible.
What parent without experience with a specific firearm has any business in deciding if their child can handle that firearm? The parent should not be allowed to abdicate that responsibility.
Any good parent in that situation would have said "Sorry, I don't know enough about this to make a qualified judgement on it. Until I do, I can't let my child participate." I also do not believe the whole "everything's cool" arguement considdering every waiver for any firearms range/course/show I've ever attended has explicitly pointed out that all these activities contain an inherent danger.
I'm not saying that the organizers of the event weren't at fault at all, but the one person who is most responsible for this death is the one person who was most responsible for this child, the father.
Coupla points:
The father isn't the plaintif - the estate of the kid is.
That's an important distiction because the list of who's negligent here includes AT LEAST:
1 The father
2 Whomever tied down the safety
3 The RSO
4 Potentially the RSO's supervisor
The kid can't sue the father - parental immunity. That leaves everyone else. #2 is in this without question. #2 will be coughing up big bucks. Numbers 3 & 4 have the potential to get hit under simple negligence.
YES, the father has the brunt of the responsiblity, but HIS bad actions do NOT preven the estate of the child from recovering against the other bad actions because he's severable from the child.
Fair? Maybe not.
And who is the beneficiary of the estate of the child?
No offense and I can see where you're coming from, but come on now...
First of all, the father was a "regular" in the firearms scene. Second, it does not take a rocket-scientist or even someone vaguely familiar or not at all with firearms to see that a submachine gun the size of a poundcake is potentially dangerous for an 8-year old. this again takes some of the onus off the parents for the ultimate responsibility for this negligent homicide...
If I'm standing next to a Tomahawk missile with my kid - even though I'm no rocket scientist, I'm not going to strap his ass on and let him go for a ride, (unless he's really pissed me off that day)....
And if it was my missile I'd never let you do so, regardless of how pissed off you were.
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?
Of course - the father is a tool. No argument there. Still - if someone gets hurt with one of my guns it's my fault. If some toolbag father tells me that it's perfectly fine for his young kid to fire my weapon I know better than to just take his word for it. As a responsible gun owner, it's on me to take the appropriate safety precautions whenever anyone handles my guns. To me this is the definition of personal responsibility.
put it this way - the kid with the toolbag father would still be alive today if the "expert" who owned the Uzi had taken some basic safety precautions.
I personally would never let my kids fire a Micro Uzi, or any fully auto at that age. The father if I remember the initial interviews correctly, seemed to have a limited knowledge of the weapon. A quote something along the lines of "...we chose the Uzi because it was smaller and had less recoil and stayed away from the larger guns." seems to stick in my mind.
That said, if you bring your child to the Ferris wheel, and let him ride, it's not your responsibility to make sure the safety features have been overridden, and the guy/ child working the ride is properly trained. You make an assumption that the ride is properly cared for and go forward.
While in this case the father seems to play a more active part than in my Ferris wheel story, the people running the event should and are responsible for allowing a 15 year old to be in charge of a fully auto weapon, and having a weapon with a safety intentionally overridden. If these two facts turn out to be true I have no problem with a civil suit against the organizer, the father, etc. The 15 year old is the only one who shouldn't nailed to the cross. The manufacturer is also blameless as the gun was supplied with an intentionally disabled safety.
If the proper safety precautions were followed, a tragedy might have been prevented. To an anti trying to make more of this I would reply that there are currently sufficient safety protocols in place. In this instance they were not followed and a tragedy resulted.
Again, my opinion is based on taking several items as fact. I reserve the right to change my opinion as more info becomes available.