Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Niles, Illinois Teen Shoots Sister Accidentally

The Chicago Tribune reports on another accidental shooting.

No charges are expected to be filed against the Niles teen who accidentally shot his sister in the face Sunday with a gun he took from his father's business more than a week ago, authorities said.

"Was anything done with criminal intent? We didn't see that," said Sgt. Tom Davis. "There's nothing to charge the parents with because they didn't do anything, and the boy — he didn't do it with intent to hurt his sister."

The girl was expected to be released Monday night from Advocate Lutheran General Hospital in Park Ridge, Davis said.

Authorities said the 13-year-old boy and his 8-year-old sister were playing with a toy gun in the basement of their house in the 8600 block of North Oketo Avenue about 3:40 p.m. Sunday.

"The girl was pretending to shoot him with a cap gun," and then the boy pulled a semiautomatic pistol from his pocket and shot her, Davis said.

The parents told police they had no knowledge a gun was in the house, Davis said, adding it was later learned the boy took the gun without anyone's knowledge from his father's Chicago business on Jan. 16. The gun was properly registered, police said.

It's certainly comforting to know that no charges will be brought against the father. We wouldn't want gun owners held responsible for the misdeeds of others, right? After all, the gun was properly registered.

Sarcasm aside, I find it absolutely unacceptable that gun owners can get away with things like this. If a man cannot control the guns in his possession, he should not be allowed to own them. If a man who owns guns has not taught his 13-year-old the difference between a real one and a fake one, that man should not be allowed to own guns.

If these qualities are too difficult to screen beforehand, fine, we wouldn't want to violate anyone's privacy or rights. But, once someone shows such appalling irresponsibility, he should become disqualified.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

15 comments:

  1. I thought handguns were banned in Chicago?

    To be honest, i'm more interested in why the father was allowed to have a handgun to begin with. What makes him and his business so special that he gets to exercise more of his rights than the little people?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I thought registration ended all gun problems?

    ReplyDelete
  3. "I thought handguns were banned in Chicago?"

    This appears to be a recurring problem with gunloons--if the NRA says it, they believe it.

    Guns have never banned in Chicago. Are there restrictions? You bet. But banned? No.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Guns have never banned in Chicago. Are there restrictions? You bet. But banned? No.

    Apparently someone doesn't know what the terms "handgun" and "ban" actually mean.

    Someone send this man a dictionary!

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Guns have never banned in Chicago. Are there restrictions? You bet. But banned? No."

    This appears to be classic JadeGold.

    Chicago handgun ownership was "frozen" in 1982 -- residents who had registered their guns prior could keep them. But if you first try to own a handgun in Chicago now, you can't -- and it has been that way for 28 years.

    http://www.encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/557.html

    It's not just the NRA who calls that a handgun ban -- here's WLS-TV, Chicago's ABC affiiate:

    "Daley: Chicago handgun ban saves lives"

    http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=7232368

    The Jadegold trick here is to quibble with the term "ban" since it's not a 100% "complete" ban (there are still some legal guns that were registered over 28 years ago), even though much of the media even calls it a "ban."

    ReplyDelete
  6. Well Jade is the same idiot who tried to insist that we could not carry guns at the NRA convention, even after I told him I was there and carrying the whole time.

    This is the same idiot who told me that D.C's gun ban was in fact NOT a ban.

    Here he is claiming something patently false as usual "handheld weapons have never been restricted"

    http://www.delawareliberal.net/2008/08/13/alabama-democratic-party-chairman-shot/#comment-49498

    Apparently he has different definitions of "handheld weapons" and "restricted" than the rest of the thinking population.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Myth, Urban Legend, never happened.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Thank you :-) you should look at that emo boy style on this blog:
    http://emo--boys.blogspot.com

    ReplyDelete
  9. FishyJay, Thanks for that very interesting info about Chicago. But, aren't there the usual armed guards and private security people? Considering them, in addition to all the old guns from 30 years ago -- remember all the talk about how long guns last that they don't rust away but last nearly forever -- maybe "ban" is not the right word to be using.

    ReplyDelete
  10. The word "ban" has a specific meaning in the English language. FJ is the one who is quibbling and seeking to redefine "ban" as 'restrictions I don't like.'

    --JadeGold

    ReplyDelete
  11. Restrictions... bans... call it whatever you want for the next few months. I'm pretty sure after McDonald we won't have to call it either.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Mikeb: "But, aren't there the usual armed guards and private security people?"

    When guns are banned except for "armed guards and private security people," that will be a "gun ban."

    Mikeb: in addition to all the old guns from 30 years ago -- remember all the talk about how long guns last that they don't rust away but last nearly forever -- maybe "ban" is not the right word to be using.

    As I posted, it's not just gunowners who call it a ban -- the news media usually calls it a ban, too.

    For 28 years, no ordinary resident of Chicago has been able to legally aquire a handgun. For everyone who has wanted to do so for 28 years, it has been a ban.

    ReplyDelete
  13. FJ, I think JadeGold made a good point. "Ban" is misleading when you talk about Chicago. It sounds like there are none.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Jadegold did nothing of the sort. Chicago has a handgun ban, plain & simple.

    ReplyDelete
  15. JadeGold must be hoping for Japan to come up.

    Everybody, pro- and anti-, talks about Japan's handgun ban. But Japan actually issues about 50 (non-LE) handgun ownership permits. With about half our population, that's like only 100 people with handgun ownership permits in the entire US. Everyone would call that a "ban," and everyone does. But if someone says that here, JadeGold can say AH-HA!

    ReplyDelete