Judge: Jurors can see video of boy's Uzi death

Charles Bizilj was not charged because he was a layman and based his decision to allow his sons to fire the gun on information from others who should have known it was too dangerous, prosecutors have said.

Read more: http://www.sentinelandenterprise.com/breakingnews/ci_16800046#ixzz17X53tJd5

Un-frigging-believable...So based upon this if I allow my kids to jump off a cliff because someone told me they could fly, I'd be covered? WTF is wrong with society?
 
Un-frigging-believable...So based upon this if I allow my kids to jump off a cliff because someone told me they could fly, I'd be covered? WTF is wrong with society?

The "culture of irresponsibility" has come home to roost.
 
So the father, who is a doctor, doesn't get charged because he's to stupid to know his young kid can't handle a machine pistol?? Wow! The stories I read when this first happened stated the father insisted the kid take the pistol? I guess the staff should have bodily thrown him out. Then he'd be sewing for discrimination. I guess the kid would still be with us but if this logic is used any accident that happened anywhere would result in a negligence lawsuit because someone somewhere should have known better?
 
read the other posts on this. The 15 yo wouldn't give the kid the gun until the father bullied him to do it.

Which wouldn't have happened if he'd put an adult at that position rather than a kid who could be bullied!

The 15-year-old kid was not qualified to be in the position that they put him in.

Fleury, et al, have some responsibility here.
 
I've known some 15 year olds that are more mature and qualified than some adults. I have also seen adults intimidated by other adults and in some cases teenagers. The father wanted his son to shoot it so he should certainly be held responsible as much if not more than anyone else.

Which wouldn't have happened if he'd put an adult at that position rather than a kid who could be bullied!

The 15-year-old kid was not qualified to be in the position that they put him in.

Fleury, et al, have some responsibility here.
 
Well the blame should land on the father, it was ultimately his decision to bring his sons to the show.



Maybe we should hold the car manufacturer responsible also. they couldnt get there unless they drove, how about the goverment they built the roads and maintain them.
 
So the genius who put a 15-year-old on the line as an "instructor" gets off with no punishment?

We get it, you're an instructor. We get it, you feel all instructors should live up to some magical and unset standard. You're obviously letting this bias you against who is ultimately responsible here.
 
We get it, you're an instructor.
You just don't get it. If you are going to organize such an event, you have to do so with reasonable care. Putting someone who is not qualified to instruct shooters in that position is not reasonable care. Putting a 15-year-old kid in that position is not reasonable care.

We get it, you feel all instructors should live up to some magical and unset standard.
Huh? The kid wasn't an instructor. Becoming a certified instructor or certified range safety officer is not a magical standard, nor is it an unset one. You, too, can become one quite easily: http://www.nrahq.org/education/training/instructor.asp

Instructors at such events need to use reasonable care. Giving that 8-year-old kid a Micro Uzi was not reasonable, it was reckless. I don't blame the 15-year-old kid for giving in to the bully -- he was a kid.
You're obviously letting this bias you against who is ultimately responsible here.
You are obviously unable to realize that more than one person is at fault here. Fleury, et al, made a serious mistake, one that contributed to the boy's death. Yes, the father's behavior contributed as well, but that doesn't absolve Fleury from exercising reasonable caution when running such an event.

You claim to be big on personal responsibility but you refuse to hold Fleury responsible for his reckless actions. Even fellow gun owners can screw up. Fleury screwed up. Face it.
 
Last edited:
The 15 YO kid is the son of one of the CT guys who brought the hardware. Fleury wasn't on the line and may not have known the kid was acting as an RO - the Spfld. paper said he was selling tickets and collecting waivers at the gate. So Dr. B. and everyone else signed a waiver.
The three "furnishing a machine gun to a minor" charges on top of the involuntary manslaughter charge are BS. That event had been going on for six or seven years, and it was heavily advertised on the radio and newspaper, including a prominent line about "no age limit - bring your kids." If it was illegal there should have been charges brought the first year. Local and MA state police were on scene every year. Somebody's lawyer must have taken a look at it before they started. Hundreds of kids had fired MG's in the years before this tragedy.
 
I can't say I've read everything there is to know about this, but this does seem like a very sad case where people are looking for someone to blame. No doubt the father is devastated. The organizers must be as well. Nobody involved can feel anything other than sadness and regret over the boy's death. It's terrible. But that doesn't mean that justice is served by finger pointing, jail time, or cash settlements. Not every tragedy has a villain.
 
The 15 YO kid is the son of one of the CT guys who brought the hardware. Fleury wasn't on the line and may not have known the kid was acting as an RO - the Spfld. paper said he was selling tickets and collecting waivers at the gate.
As the organizer of this event that doesn't absolve him of his responsibility to ensure adequate supervision of the line.

So Dr. B. and everyone else signed a waiver.
Which may be useful during the civil trial that will follow, but this is a criminal trial.

The three "furnishing a machine gun to a minor" charges on top of the involuntary manslaughter charge are BS.
No argument there.

That event had been going on for six or seven years, and it was heavily advertised on the radio and newspaper, including a prominent line about "no age limit - bring your kids."
And that advertising also said that everyone would be accompanied to the firing line by a "certified instructor."
 
Does anyone know of any instructors who've changed their policies based on this event? Watching this guy get thrown to the wolves scares the hell out of me...
 
Back
Top Bottom