An 11-year-old boy from Spotsylvania County, Va., is in juvenile lockup after allegedly shooting a neighbor's dog because it barked too much, according to police.
The Spotsylvania County Sheriff's Office and Animal Control went to a house in the 13000 block of Mullins Court on Monday in response to reports that a dog had been shot. When they arrived, they found Molly, a German shepherd mix, lying on the porch. She had been shot in the neck.
Police canvassed the neighborhood looking for anyone who might have seen what happened. A short while later, the boy's mother called police to say she found a .22 caliber rifle in her son's possession and that he admitted to her that he shot the dog, according to the police report. He also confessed to stealing the gun from a neighbor, the report said. He was arrested and taken to juvenile detention.
The boy, who is not being identified, faces animal cruelty charges and several weapons charges. He could spend the next 10 years in juvenile detention.
You know what I say? Investigate the neighbor. If that gun hadn't been stored securely, which obviously it hadn't, the owner should be arrested along with the boy. Once that's done, we should investigate the boy's parents to try and determine where in the world he learned the ever-more-common lesson that "the gun is the answer." It wouldn't surprise me if there's a bit of the old shared responsibility within the family.
What's your opinion? How could an 11-year-old steal a neighbor's gun without at least some lapse in security on the neighbor's part?
Where do you think 11-year-olds learn about guns and shooting things that bother you? Is that from rap music or is that from daddy and his attitudes, generally speaking I mean?
Please leave a comment.
"the owner should be arrested along with the boy"
ReplyDeleteAnd charged with what?
Last time I checked, being the victim of a crime was not illegal.
And charged with what?
ReplyDeleteLast time I checked, being the victim of a crime was not illegal.
And that's the problem--not enough "blame the victim" laws. Women who wear short skirts, and get raped, should be charged with "inciting rape." People who's email gets hacked, and used to send SPAM to everyone on their address book, should be charged for "facilitating SPAM."
No more free lunches.
There was an incident in Ohio a couple months back where a 15 year old girl sneaked out of her parents house to meet a friend only to be abducted and raped in a nearby park.
ReplyDeleteUnder your theory, the girl should be arrested. Had she not been there she would not have been raped. She was presenting an easy target for the rapist. Further. Her father didn't take the necessary security to stop her from sneaking out without his knowledge. He could have purchased better locks and an alarm system. Also, he didn't report her missing to the police. Clearly he should be arrested for the crime as well.
-NOT JADE GOLD
So we should arrest someone who had his property STOLEN.
ReplyDeleteNot just no, but HELL NO.
This obviuosly touches a nerve in the gunloon world because it demonstates--pretty clearly--the gun owner was not storing his weapon properly.
ReplyDeleteLet's remember: this is one of the ways criminals (the reason the gunloons tell us is why we need more guns) get guns. Careless gunowners
--JadeGold
This seems sensible:
ReplyDelete"Store guns so they are not accessible to unauthorized persons.
Many factors must be considered when deciding where and how to store guns. A person's particular situation will be a major part of the consideration. Dozens of gun storage devices, as well as locking devices that attach directly to the gun, are available. However, mechanical locking devices, like the mechanical safeties built into guns, can fail and should not be used as a substitute for safe gun handling and the observance of all gun safety rules. "
Is that from rap music or is that from daddy and his attitudes, generally speaking I mean?
ReplyDeleteYou seem to have real issues with kids being raised in the gun culture. When my oldest turns 6 next month, he'll graduate from the Crosman pellet gun he's had since he was 4, to his first .22. His little (4-year-old) brother will probably be upset to still be limited to pellet guns, but he's not quite ready for a firearm yet (although he picks up responsibility quickly--I won't be surprised if he's ready by his 5th birthday).
Not a day goes by when I don't warn the boys about the hideous danger posed by those who want to take our guns away, and the moral of every story I tell them is that anyone who wants to take our guns wants to take our freedom, and eventually, our lives. For the problem posed by the existence of such people, I tell them, there's only one solution--well, actually 550 solutions per minute, but you get the idea.
The three of us (and sometimes we talk their mother into joining us) have hours of family fun shooting at targets I make, by printing up pictures of anti-gun politicians like Dick Durbin, Diane Feinstein, Chuck Schumer, Mike Bloomberg, Carolyn McCarthy (the older boy knows all their names by heart), etc. I don't talk to them about Obama. Presidents have too much security--that would be irresponsible for a loving parent.
I say we arrest jade if someone steals his car and kills someone with it, or breaks in, steals a steak knife and later uses it in a robbery.
ReplyDeleteYou OK with that Jadegold?
If no then why not?
"This obviuosly touches a nerve in the gunloon world because it demonstates--pretty clearly--the gun owner was not storing his weapon properly."
ReplyDeleteIf a bank gets robbed, is it because they aren't storing their money properly?
The ironic part is if the gun owner had shot the boy as he was breaking into his house, mikeb would be the first two to complain about the gun owner properly securing his firearm.
ReplyDeleteI think mikeb would side with the criminal and against gun owners, regardless of theoutcome.
"the gun owner was not storing his weapon properly.
ReplyDeletethe gun owner was not storing his weapon properly."
So define "properly"?
--Not Jade Gold
http://gunloon.com
Did anyone notice what I actually said?
ReplyDelete"Investigate the neighbor. If that gun hadn't been stored securely, which obviously it hadn't, the owner should be arrested along with the boy.<
"
I said "Investigate."
The rape comparison, Zorro, is nonsensical. We're talking about the "victim" of a gun theft having been guilty of a crime which made the theft possible. The rape victim wearing a mini-skirt is not committing any crime. Your using that as a comparison is a shabby attempt to paint me as one who blames the victim. It's just wrong.
Zorro, Thanks for sharing with us your definition of a "loving parent." Is that a true story about you and your children or were you just trying to describe what you think my worst example would be, or was it both?
FWM says, "So define "properly"?"
ReplyDeleteIn this case, when an 11-year-old who doesn't even live in the house cannot get his hands on the gun.
Is there no end to the inane comparisons you guys make. Now AztecRed compares guns in the home to money in the bank.
ReplyDelete"The rape victim wearing a mini-skirt is not committing any crime."
ReplyDeleteNeither is the person who has their gun stolen, yet you seem to have no problem making it into a crime.
Zorro's comparison was spot on. If we can make not properly securing a firearm into a crime, we can make not properly securing your body a crime as well.
It's called child endangerment.
ReplyDelete--JadeGold
Oh, I thought everyone would agree with the sensible advice in the first comment I made. After all, it came from here:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nrahq.org/education/guide.asp
Zorro:
If that bit about teaching your boys to shoot at targets with the faces of people whom you don't like is hyperbole it's a pretty sick joke. If it's the truth then you're sick and you're infecting your sons with your illness.
Mikeb says:
ReplyDeleteDid anyone notice what I actually said?
[ . . . ]
I said "Investigate."
You said (my emphasis):
Investigate the neighbor. If that gun hadn't been stored securely, which obviously it hadn't, the owner should be arrested . . .
If the conclusion has already been reached that the gun hadn't been stored "properly," what is there to investigate? You sound like the type who says "Give him a fair trial, and then hang him" (aside, of course, from the fact of your strong position against capital punishment--a position, by the way, that I find to be not without honor).
Besides, though--in Virginia, there is no law requiring someone to store their guns securely. You can argue that their should be (good luck), but your problem here is that the guy you want arrested did not commit a crime. He could have left a dozen "assault weapons" lying around openly in the house, the doors unlocked (or even wide open), with a big sign outside saying "Lots of guns inside, and I'm not home!!!" and it still wouldn't have been a crime.
Hell, even in states that do have "safe storage" laws, I don't know if any such laws can be applied in cases in which the thief was not a resident, and entered the house without the resident's permission.
In other words, just like the hypothetical woman in the short skirt who becomes a rape victim, this is a man who committed no crime, and became a theft victim. The only crimes described here are the theft, and the attack on the dog--both those crimes are alleged to have been committed by our young worthy.
I'll respond to your other question to me in a separate comment, Mikeb.
Mikeb says:
ReplyDeleteZorro, Thanks for sharing with us your definition of a "loving parent." Is that a true story about you and your children or were you just trying to describe what you think my worst example would be, or was it both?
Out of a desire to needle you a bit, I omitted some information that might temper your disapproval of my parenting skills (or might not). I put a lot of effort into making sure that my boys know that death is permanent, that murder is evil, and that violence is a last resort in defending one's life and liberty.
Still, though--they're taught that their freedom was bought with blood, and that there are still likely to be some payments left to be made.
The next generation of guardians of liberty aren't likely to be raised by someone who teaches his kids that governments will respect the people's freedoms just because the people ask nicely.
"It's called child endangerment."
ReplyDeleteDid the gun owner have children?
Zorro:
ReplyDeleteSo you tell them that death is permanent before or after you congratulate them for "killing" the eeeeevul gun confiscators that you put on the targets?
So there's no law requiring that firearms be secured by homeowners in VA? That means it's not the fault of the idiot who leaves a gun lying around for some other nitwit to use?
So the NRA's advice to secure one's weapons is unnecessary? It's always nice to know how "responsible gun owners" really feel.
Actually--my apologies--I appear to have been mistaken about Virginia gun laws re:child access. I still suspect all bets are off when the child breaks into the victim's home, to steal the gun.
ReplyDeletedemocommie, Thanks for making a good point. It seems unconscionable to me that gun owners would excuse the kind of dangerous, lack-of-common-sense behavior that makes stealing guns easy. The fact that there is no law about it has nothing to do with it.
ReplyDeleteMikeb says:
ReplyDeleteThe fact that there is no law about it has nothing to do with it.
Is that a fact, Mikeb? This, coming from the same person who said, about this very incident:
If that gun hadn't been stored securely, which obviously it hadn't, the owner should be arrested along with the boy.
If you want to arrest someone, wouldn't it kinda be best for him to have broken a law? Maybe they do things differently in Italy, but that's kinda how we prefer to do things around here.
By the way, I haven't even touched this part (because I wanted to put protective gloves on first):
Once that's done, we should investigate the boy's parents to try and determine where in the world he learned the ever-more-common lesson that "the gun is the answer."
You want to "investigate" them, for supposedly instilling that nasty-old gun culture in the kid? So you want that to be a crime now, too? Do you want, in other words, for it to be a crime to instill in children values that you find icky?
Anything else, Your Highness?
Zorro:
ReplyDeleteIt's not really a surprise that someone who thinks telling his kids that shooting at targets with the likenesses of folks he disagrees with is a good idea would have a hard time understanding why teaching kids that a gun is an answer to any problem they might have with others might be a little inappropriate.
Democommie says:
ReplyDeleteIt's not really a surprise that someone who thinks telling his kids that shooting at targets with the likenesses of folks he disagrees with is a good idea would have a hard time understanding why teaching kids that a gun is an answer to any problem they might have with others might be a little inappropriate.
Democommie, you don't know whether or not I think it's inappropriate to teach one's children that "a gun is an answer to any problem" (a position, by the way, that I don't hold--guns can be part of the answer to many problems: violent gangbanger thugs, enraged men with baseball bats, out of control governments whose officials forget who serves whom, even car windows you need to break quickly when your car is under water--but not all problems).
The reason you don't know is that I have never said what I think of the appropriateness of imparting such life lessons to one's children. Why haven't I done so? Because it's irrelevant what I think. I don't presume to criminalize teaching one's own children values that I find distasteful. I don't presume to criminalize saying things that I find disgusting. That's why I applaud the ACLU for defending racist bags of hateful pus like Neo-Nazis, and annoying bags of hot air like Rush Limbaugh.
Unlike you, I don't have to agree with a message to be willing to fight for the right to transmit that message.
I'm reluctant to criticize other bloggers for what they write on their own blogs, and I'm even more reluctant to criticize other parents for how they choose to raise their kids, but I find it sad and sick to teach kids to shoot at the images of the "enemies" of freedom. Creating that avatar with a gunsight over Laci's picture is one thing, but teaching this to kids doesn't seem right.
ReplyDeleteDon't misunderstand me, Mikeb--I have no objection to your criticism of what I teach my kids--your criticism is irrelevant to me.
ReplyDeleteMy point was a response to Democommie's comment, that I "have a hard time understanding why teaching kids that a gun is an answer to any problem . . .." Contrary to Democommie's comment, I do think that's the wrong thing to teach kids, but I hadn't bothered saying so, because what I think of it doesn't matter. By the same token, your opinion, Mikeb, is equally irrelevant--I was only criticizing your call to have the parents "investigated"--an indication to me that you would like to criminalize such parenting.
I'm even more reluctant to criticize other parents for how they choose to raise their kids
ReplyDeleteWhat the HELL?!
Seriously MikeB? you just did exactly that in your post!
Zorro:
ReplyDeleteYou wrote:
"The three of us (and sometimes we talk their mother into joining us) have hours of family fun shooting at targets I make, by printing up pictures of anti-gun politicians like Dick Durbin, Diane Feinstein, Chuck Schumer, Mike Bloomberg, Carolyn McCarthy (the older boy knows all their names by heart), etc. I don't talk to them about Obama. Presidents have too much security--that would be irresponsible for a loving parent."
You did not, as far as I can see, retract that statement. So, as far as you're concerned not telling your children much about Obama, because he has "too much security" doesn't strike you as being wrong. You put a picture of Laci in a gunsight up as your gravatar and you think it's appropriate. You brag about raising your boys so they can defend themselves against YOUR enemies. All the while, you're saying that you don't teach your children that a gun is the answer, and then take them out to show them that they can blow away the opposition.
Says Democommie:
ReplyDeleteSo, as far as you're concerned not telling your children much about Obama, because he has "too much security" doesn't strike you as being wrong.
Not at all--getting line-of-sight (with a rifle), within even extreme rifle range (a Canadian sniper in Afghanistan made a kill at a few feet more than a 1 1/2 miles) is just about impossible with the president, and not really any better with the vice president. If you don't believe me--well don't try it anyway--it's a really bad idea.
The avatar isn't really meant to be funny in and of itself--the idea was simply to drive the person who blogs under the "Laci the Dog" name into a spittle-flecked rage (which it appears to have done--I haven't gone to that blog in months, but a friend tells me that an entire blog post was devoted to invective over that). That's what's funny.
You brag about raising your boys so they can defend themselves against YOUR enemies.
The boys and I seem to share the same enemies, and if they are in a position to, in your words, "defend themselves," then those against whom they must mount that defense would certainly seem to be their enemies, as well.
All the while, you're saying that you don't teach your children that a gun is the answer, and then take them out to show them that they can blow away the opposition.
There are certainly many problems to which a gun is not an appropriate answer (barking dogs, for example). Threats to one's life, limb, and/or liberty are an example of a problem to which a gun can provide part of the answer.
The kids are simply too young to teach about improvised explosives. In time, sure--they'll learn that you can buy strong sulfuric acid (battery acid) at auto supply stores. You can get 95%+ pure saltpeter in the form of stump remover. Mix them and collect the condensed vapors, and you have strong nitric acid. Get some 37% formaldehyde from a well-equipped aquarium supply store, and some common household ammonia, mix them, evaporate the liquid off the crystals that form, and you have hexamine. Nitrify that (carefully!) with the nitric acid, and you have RDX--the active ingredient in plastic explosive.
But those lessons are probably 10 years or more down the line--surely you can understand that.
By the way, the other day, it occurred to me to tape fast food restaurant ketchup packets behind the foreheads of the targets--big fun.