KY accidental shooting

Clearly the parents only care about themselves and not their children. Otherwise they'd have used any of 1000 different methods to prevent this from happening. This is why I believe we need to prosecute these parents for neglect, reckless endangerment or whatever else we can prosecute them for. When idiots like this have to worry about THEMSELVES perhaps they'll do something to keep this from happening. I grew up with guns in the house and my parents never "forgot" to keep them locked up except when we were shooting. Shame that a 5 year old shoots a 2 year old, but seriously, leaving a loaded weapon where a 5 year old can get it? 5 is the bottom end of the age where handling firearms is even appropriate. Prosecute the parents, take the 5 year old away. Do this 10 or 15 times and get the word out and maybe the dumbass parents in the world will think twice and pay attention to firearms safety. This kind of crap just gives responsible parents and gun owners a bad name and one more wedge for the left to use to take our rights from us.
 
stacarter said:
Clearly the parents only care about themselves and not their children. Otherwise they'd have used any of 1000 different methods to prevent this from happening. This is why I believe we need to prosecute these parents for neglect, reckless endangerment or whatever else we can prosecute them for. When idiots like this have to worry about THEMSELVES perhaps they'll do something to keep this from happening. I grew up with guns in the house and my parents never "forgot" to keep them locked up except when we were shooting. Shame that a 5 year old shoots a 2 year old, but seriously, leaving a loaded weapon where a 5 year old can get it? 5 is the bottom end of the age where handling firearms is even appropriate. Prosecute the parents, take the 5 year old away. Do this 10 or 15 times and get the word out and maybe the dumbass parents in the world will think twice and pay attention to firearms safety. This kind of crap just gives responsible parents and gun owners a bad name and one more wedge for the left to use to take our rights from us.
Click to expand...

Dude keep your opinions off my family decisions. My kids started at 2 and my son attended his first NES shoot and shot at age 3.

None of my kids have ever had an ND.

Stop trying to dictate how you think people should live.
 
Last edited:
NewGunGuy said:
As a gun owner we do not need this crap, but as a father of 2 (which I do plan on getting our oldest a rascal) I'm saddened by the stupidity of the parents of these children. I know the whole gun storage law from this state gets knocked around here a lot, but when having kids you do really need to use a little bit more sense to help prevent these accidents. Don't care what you others say or think, but the parents here should be charged with the death of their own child, even though how it's going in this country where you can kill your own child and get away with it!


Charles.
Click to expand...

This.

- - - Updated - - -

Tyke said:
Would a law have PREVENTED this? Or just provide for punishment afterwards?
Click to expand...

Compliance with storage laws absolutely would have prevented this.
 
xtry51 said:
So as long as it saves one child's life we should do it?

Obama is calling, he wants his antigun campaign slogan back.
Click to expand...

sigh... It shouldn't take a LAW to get parents to store their unloaded firearms such that they're inaccessible to children.

However, common sense isn't (common).

Some people need a little help learning simple things. This is why mandatory safety training might not be such a bad thing, and such training ought to include some basics about proper storage. What does Kentucky require as far as safety training is concerned?

Or is that too much of an infringement, for you, too?
 
xtry51 said:
Don't put laws on others because someone is an idiot. That's what liberals do.

Should he have taught his kids better and kept an eye on them, yes. Should there be storage laws or should he be punished? NO.

His kid is dead, that's punishment enough. Don't support nanny state laws because you don't approve of how other people are raising THEIR CHILDREN. Know why? Because there's lots of other people who don't like how you raise yours either.

People need to stop with this law and punishment nonsense.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. My first knee jerk reaction is to think in the same terms as NewGunGuy, but the fact is that this is only being said because it involved a gun. There are MANY stupid things parents do that are actually more harmful to kids long term than just handing them a loaded gun to play with. Many times, I get pissed off seeing mothers with the windows up, driving their car and smoking, all the while with a baby in a car seat, or multiple children in the car breathing second hand smoke. Or how about deep psychological abuse that makes kids grow up damaged so they become the next Lanza, or Aurora shooter? Inmo this stuff is constantly overlooked by the libs because these children are "theirs" so it's the parents business. Why should this be any different, even though it may be wrong? NewGunGuy, think very carefully about your statements and realize that you become part of the problem when you think that way. Laws don't prevent stupidity, no matter what, even though they may act as a reminder to educated, law abiding people who would already most likely have the sense to do the right thing anyway...
 
stacarter said:
Clearly the parents only care about themselves and not their children. Otherwise they'd have used any of 1000 different methods to prevent this from happening. This is why I believe we need to prosecute these parents for neglect, reckless endangerment or whatever else we can prosecute them for. When idiots like this have to worry about THEMSELVES perhaps they'll do something to keep this from happening. I grew up with guns in the house and my parents never "forgot" to keep them locked up except when we were shooting. Shame that a 5 year old shoots a 2 year old, but seriously, leaving a loaded weapon where a 5 year old can get it? 5 is the bottom end of the age where handling firearms is even appropriate. Prosecute the parents, take the 5 year old away. Do this 10 or 15 times and get the word out and maybe the dumbass parents in the world will think twice and pay attention to firearms safety. This kind of crap just gives responsible parents and gun owners a bad name and one more wedge for the left to use to take our rights from us.
Click to expand...

Sure, but what happens to the child that is taken away? He ends up in the foster care system, bouncing from home to home, and maybe if he's lucky makes it though the "system" somewhat normal? Most do not...
 
xtry51 said:
Dude keep your opinions off my family decisions. My kids started at 2 and my son attended his first NES shoot and shot at age 3.

None of my kids have ever had an ND.

Stop trying to dictate how you think people should live.
Click to expand...

I'm certainly not siding with these guys that believe we need more laws to prevent this stuff, but I do believe you are definitely in the fringe area with regard to the ages of those children, given that there have been many studies showing that children can't even reliably be safe to cross the street until they are 8 years old. Obviously there are always exceptions, but in general you are taking some huge safety risks with kids that young, but they are YOUR kids, and that should be YOUR choice to make, which is the whole point.
 
StevieP said:
sigh... It shouldn't take a LAW to get parents to store their unloaded firearms such that they're inaccessible to children.

However, common sense isn't (common).

Some people need a little help learning simple things. This is why mandatory safety training might not be such a bad thing, and such training ought to include some basics about proper storage. What does Kentucky require as far as safety training is concerned?

Or is that too much of an infringement, for you, too?
Click to expand...

Yes it is too much as a matter of fact.
 
At least fifty mothers drove their kids somewhere today and were drunk as a skunk behind the wheel, a hundred more were under the influence of narcotic drugs. Some of those moms crashed their cars and killed their kids too.
 
Finalygotabeltfed said:
At least fifty mothers drove their kids somewhere today and were drunk as a skunk behind the wheel, a hundred more were under the influence of narcotic drugs. Some of those moms crashed their cars and killed their kids too.
Click to expand...
Fell asleep smoking.
Let their kids go swimming, bike riding without a helmet, etc.. and so on...
 
Terminator03 said:
I'm certainly not siding with these guys that believe we need more laws to prevent this stuff, but I do believe you are definitely in the fringe area with regard to the ages of those children, given that there have been many studies showing that children can't even reliably be safe to cross the street until they are 8 years old. Obviously there are always exceptions, but in general you are taking some huge safety risks with kids that young, but they are YOUR kids, and that should be YOUR choice to make, which is the whole point.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying I don't store my firearms, because I do. My children however learn about guns from the earliest age possible.

A gun is no different than a knife in our house. It's a tool and is to be respected. I leave all the knives right on the kitchen counter. I don't lock them up, yet for some reason my kids don't run around the house stabbing each other. I also don't unplug the stove when I'm not using it, and they don't turn it on and touch it all the time.

That said I do keep our guns locked up, but that's my choice and I don't see the need to force other people to raise their kids in the exact manner that I believe is "safe". People are pretty ignorant of history. What do you think the world was like 100years ago when anyone could buy a machine gun and most people certainly did not own safes. Most probably had a shotgun leaned up against the wall in the corner, yet people survived.

There's a lot of nanny state BS. People need to understand that our country is so screwed up because everyone wants their little pet peeve law passed and those things slowly add up to the cluster**** we live under today.

Just. Stop.
 
cekim said:
Fell asleep smoking.
Let their kids go swimming, bike riding without a helmet, etc.. and so on...
Click to expand...

Exactly what I was pointing out on the previous page. This is only being made an example because it involved a GUN. This type of propaganda is infectious though, as evidenced by some of the replies in this thread! I guess it's going to be another "out yourself thread"...
 
xtry51 said:
I'm not saying I don't store my firearms, because I do. My children however learn about guns from the earliest age possible.

A gun is no different than a knife in our house. It's a tool and is to be respected. I leave all the knives right on the kitchen counter. I don't lock them up, yet for some reason my kids don't run around the house stabbing each other. I also don't unplug the stove when I'm not using it, and they don't turn it on and touch it all the time.

That said I do keep our guns locked up, but that's my choice and I don't see the need to force other people to raise their kids in the exact manner that I believe is "safe". People are pretty ignorant of history. What do you think the world was like 100years ago when anyone could buy a machine gun and most people certainly did not own safes. Most probably had a shotgun leaned up against the wall in the corner, yet people survived.

There's a lot of nanny state BS. People need to understand that our country is so screwed up because everyone wants their little pet peeve law passed and those things slowly add up to the cluster**** we live under today.

Just. Stop.
Click to expand...

Very well said, and I'm in 100% agreement! I was merely pointing out the age thing because there are definite stages of development in children that are more of a rule, than exception. In your case, I'm sure as you pointed out that the guns are not entrusted to the care of these children any more than you would give them a kitchen knife to "play with". I do commend you for starting the safety training as young as possible. I only wish I could convince my wife of the importance of properly educating young children about guns because pretending they don't exist IS what ultimately causes bad things to happen more often than a situation where a kid understands the absolute necessity of safe handling.
 
Terminator03 said:
Exactly what I was pointing out on the previous page. This is only being made an example because it involved a GUN. This type of propaganda is infectious though, as evidenced by some of the replies in this thread! I guess it's going to be another "out yourself thread"...
Click to expand...
Indeed, the social programming has been effective.
 
NewGunGuy said:
As a gun owner we do not need this crap, but as a father of 2 (which I do plan on getting our oldest a rascal) I'm saddened by the stupidity of the parents of these children.... the parents here should be charged with the death of their own child...
Click to expand...

I agree that the parents carelessness was overwhelming. But I can't imagine any punishment worse than the what they are now facing: a lifetime without a daughter, knowing they've probably scarred their son for life, because of their recklessness. Not all tragedies need lawful punishment and frankly the 5 year old will probably need them more then ever. Poor kid.
 
Ok, I'll admit that that statement wasn't appropriate and I was wrong. I can admit that. I absolutely believe that you should be able to raise your kids as you want and don't disagree with you if you tell me that at 2 years old your kid could handle a gun. I started when I was 6, I can't imagine if I'd have been able to handle it at 2, but who the hell am I to dictate that to anyone. Thanks for pointing out the fallacy of my statement. (really, no sarcasm there) The more important difference to me is that I doubt you have left your kids unattended with a loaded weapon. That seems to be a common thread here at NES, responsible parents and gun owners, that is what I was trying to speak to more than my own perception of the "appropriate age" (which again, was wrong).

And thanks for engaging in an intelligent debate and neg repping me (my first). I gave you positive rep and thanked you for calling me out. Can't we all just get along?

xtry51 said:
Dude keep your opinions off my family decisions. My kids started at 2 and my son attended his first NES shoot and shot at age 3.

None of my kids have ever had an ND.

Stop trying to dictate how you think people should live.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
shamrockjr said:
I agree that the parents carelessness was overwhelming. But I can't imagine any punishment worse than the what they are now facing: a lifetime without a daughter, knowing they've probably scarred their son for life, because of their recklessness. Not all tragedies need lawful punishment and frankly the 5 year old will probably need them more then ever. Poor kid.
Click to expand...
Another excellent point. I can't believe the posts that were calling for severe punishment for the parent(s). Holy crap, this family will be lucky to survive without divorce and other side effects of this tragedy. Were they irresponsible, yes! But to think they aren't already living with the ultimate punishment possible is ludicrous!
 
Sorry, I just don't buy this. I'll say it again, if they gave one shit about their children they'd have made sure that a 5 year old, a 2 year old and a loaded gun were not in the same location unsupervised. Period. You want sympathy? Look in the dictionary between shit and syphilis. These CHILDREN are the ones being paraded by the anti gunners as tragedies that justify taking away MY right to keep and bear arms. It is hard to argue with the logic that if there had been NO guns in that house, the 5 year old wouldn't have shot the 2 year old. Again, if you don't care enough about your kids to keep them safe, then you should pay a price other than your remorse. Remorse won't keep you from drinking or keeping a job or screwing up your remaining children, being in prison will do that though. These parents were negligent. They neglected to make sure the rifle was locked up. They neglected to put a trigger lock on it (no way you are telling me a kids gun is for self defense). They neglected to keep the ammo locked up. Again, about a 1000 different things they could have done and they neglected to do ANY of them. Criminally. As in criminal neglect. Negligent homicide. Pick something.

I'd ask that if you disagree with me, then do so in writing. I am not being a jerk and I think neg repping me is silly. This isn't me hating liberty, it is me hating stupidity that is costing ME my liberties. The antis love to trot out the accidental shooting stats when they talk about saving the children. Again, maybe the threat to their personal liberty will make them more responsible since they don't care about the welfare of their children.


Terminator03 said:
Another excellent point. I can't believe the posts that were calling for severe punishment for the parent(s). Holy crap, this family will be lucky to survive without divorce and other side effects of this tragedy. Were they irresponsible, yes! But to think they aren't already living with the ultimate punishment possible is ludicrous!
Click to expand...
 
stacarter said:
Sorry, I just don't buy this. I'll say it again, if they gave one shit about their children they'd have made sure that a 5 year old, a 2 year old and a loaded gun were not in the same location unsupervised. Period. You want sympathy? Look in the dictionary between shit and syphilis. These CHILDREN are the ones being paraded by the anti gunners as tragedies that justify taking away MY right to keep and bear arms. It is hard to argue with the logic that if there had been NO guns in that house, the 5 year old wouldn't have shot the 2 year old. Again, if you don't care enough about your kids to keep them safe, then you should pay a price other than your remorse. Remorse won't keep you from drinking or keeping a job or screwing up your remaining children, being in prison will do that though. These parents were negligent. They neglected to make sure the rifle was locked up. They neglected to put a trigger lock on it (no way you are telling me a kids gun is for self defense). They neglected to keep the ammo locked up. Again, about a 1000 different things they could have done and they neglected to do ANY of them. Criminally. As in criminal neglect. Negligent homicide. Pick something.

I'd ask that if you disagree with me, then do so in writing. I am not being a jerk and I think neg repping me is silly. This isn't me hating liberty, it is me hating stupidity that is costing ME my liberties. The antis love to trot out the accidental shooting stats when they talk about saving the children. Again, maybe the threat to their personal liberty will make them more responsible since they don't care about the welfare of their children.
Click to expand...

It's ok to call them negligent for ignoring their children, I just don't carry that further to say the state should be able to punish them further. Fact is they lost a child and are most likely devastated by it. Certainly the sibling is now going to have a tough time. I don't feel as though criminal punishment is going to help the situation. It will hurt the remaining child and jail can never compare to the punishment of going through life knowing you were the partial case of your child's death.

This is a no win situation. Just let them suffer by themselves.
 
stacarter said:
Sorry, I just don't buy this. I'll say it again, if they gave one shit about their children they'd have made sure that a 5 year old, a 2 year old and a loaded gun were not in the same location unsupervised. Period. You want sympathy? Look in the dictionary between shit and syphilis. These CHILDREN are the ones being paraded by the anti gunners as tragedies that justify taking away MY right to keep and bear arms. It is hard to argue with the logic that if there had been NO guns in that house, the 5 year old wouldn't have shot the 2 year old. Again, if you don't care enough about your kids to keep them safe, then you should pay a price other than your remorse. Remorse won't keep you from drinking or keeping a job or screwing up your remaining children, being in prison will do that though. These parents were negligent. They neglected to make sure the rifle was locked up. They neglected to put a trigger lock on it (no way you are telling me a kids gun is for self defense). They neglected to keep the ammo locked up. Again, about a 1000 different things they could have done and they neglected to do ANY of them. Criminally. As in criminal neglect. Negligent homicide. Pick something.

I'd ask that if you disagree with me, then do so in writing. I am not being a jerk and I think neg repping me is silly. This isn't me hating liberty, it is me hating stupidity that is costing ME my liberties. The antis love to trot out the accidental shooting stats when they talk about saving the children. Again, maybe the threat to their personal liberty will make them more responsible since they don't care about the welfare of their children.
Click to expand...

Ok, fair enough, I understand where you are coming from wrt the parent(s), but going with your line of thinking that people need to be punished, what of the 5 year old? Should he be put in jail? If not, then why? After all, he was the one that pulled the trigger right? Sounds kind of silly no?
 
xtry51 said:
It's ok to call them negligent for ignoring their children, I just don't carry that further to say the state should be able to punish them further. Fact is they lost a child and are most likely devastated by it. Certainly the sibling is now going to have a tough time. I don't feel as though criminal punishment is going to help the situation. It will hurt the remaining child and jail can never compare to the punishment of going through life knowing you were the partial case of your child's death.

This is a no win situation. Just let them suffer by themselves.
Click to expand...

^This!
stacarter, Sure, we could throw them in jail, and put the 5 year old in foster care as a disturbed youth that will likely have residual psych issues for the rest of his life, but what will be gained that will benefit society by doing so? Is that going to deter anyone else in the future? Not likely. If that was the case then we would have zero DUI arrests, because after all, we all see what happens when you get pulled over for that - right?
 
Ok, I'll buy these arguments. It is a crappy situation for the 5 year old and for the parents. But what can we do as lawful gun owners to help try to prevent this? Do people not get that a gun can kill you? That they are dangerous if not handled correctly (like knives, cars and stoves). But if you strap your kid into your car incorrectly and get them killed, do you not get prosecuted for negligence?

Or are we saying (because you almost have me changing my mind) that the parents have suffered enough and the price of liberty is the occasional child because some people can't handle the responsibilities that come with liberty? Ok. I'll buy that if that is what is being put forward here. It sucks because intellectually I can get my head around that but most people can't. All they can say is "but banning firearms is for the children".

I am glad I don't have kids. And yes I admit that this certainly colors my opinions differently than someone who does have them. I don't think it precludes me from having an opinion on the topic however.

Terminator03 said:
^This!
stacarter, Sure, we could throw them in jail, and put the 5 year old in foster care as a disturbed youth that will likely have residual psych issues for the rest of his life, but what will be gained that will benefit society by doing so? Is that going to deter anyone else in the future? Not likely. If that was the case then we would have zero DUI arrests, because after all, we all see what happens when you get pulled over for that - right?
Click to expand...
 
I think it just comes down to "accidents happen", regardless of how avoidable we as Monday morning quarterbacks can presume. The fact is that it could have been some other dangerous tool, chemical, swimming pool, car, etc., and that stuff happens dozens of times every day, but we are only discussing this because it involved a firearm. You really can't fix stupid unfortunately, no matter how many 1000's of new laws are added. All the laws do is further impose on the majority of people that already try their best to do the right thing.
 
stacarter said:
Ok, I'll buy these arguments. It is a crappy situation for the 5 year old and for the parents. But what can we do as lawful gun owners to help try to prevent this? Do people not get that a gun can kill you? That they are dangerous if not handled correctly (like knives, cars and stoves). But if you strap your kid into your car incorrectly and get them killed, do you not get prosecuted for negligence?

Or are we saying (because you almost have me changing my mind) that the parents have suffered enough and the price of liberty is the occasional child because some people can't handle the responsibilities that come with liberty? Ok. I'll buy that if that is what is being put forward here. It sucks because intellectually I can get my head around that but most people can't. All they can say is "but banning firearms is for the children".

I am glad I don't have kids. And yes I admit that this certainly colors my opinions differently than someone who does have them. I don't think it precludes me from having an opinion on the topic however.
Click to expand...

That's exactly what we are saying, or at least I am. Laws do not deter stupid behavior, so don't make other people lose choice simply because some are retards.

The best thing you can do to prevent things like this is teach kids safety at an early age and only allow them to hold firearms in a very controlled fashion during younger years. A personal example is my youngest mentioned earlier. He's now almost 6 but still struggles with muzzle control, because like most other kids he gets excited and distracted. He's not allowed to hold even a BB gun without my wife or I being right next to him. He also is not allowed to shoot pistols yet, nor is our 8 year old even though he does exhibit very good muzzle control.
 
djmefitz said:
No but it may have provided guidance to incredibly stupid people
Click to expand...

Do you require guidance to not murder someone? How about for stealing? Speeding? Or the other more than 10,000 laws (more than that) that you in all likelihood do not know more than half of...and thus are not able to be "guided" by?

And, if they are so stupid... how are they to know applicable laws?? You yourself called them incredibly stupid.
 

Similar threads

Salisbury Accidental Shooting
Replies
13
Views
989
Rick O'Shea
Rick O'Shea
"Accidental Discharge" by Cambridge SRO (in bathroom, of course)
2
Replies
35
Views
1K
Matt_SERE
Matt_SERE
Mall of NH shooting
2
Replies
50
Views
2K
hunt4riches
H
Interesting shooting video
Replies
2
Views
173
peterk123
P
NY man dead after accidentally shooting himself in the groin
2
Replies
34
Views
939
Dennis in MA
Dennis in MA
Back
Top Bottom