Friday, March 30, 2012

No Jail Time for Dad Found Guilty of Child Endangerment


Edward O’Rourke, whose son used a gun he found in his father’s bedroom to accidentally kill his 12-year-old friend in December 2010, pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor Thursday and will serve no jail time.

Edward O’Rourke, 58, pleaded guilty in Saratoga Springs City Court to child endangerment. To the dismay of Naumkin’s parents, Judge Jeffrey Wait sentenced O’Rourke to no jail time or probation, but banned him from owning firearms and required him to submit a DNA sample to the state’s database.

A misdemeanor conviction can carry up to a year in jail or up to 3 years of probation.

O’Rourke’s son, then 12, killed Nicholas Naumkin on Dec. 22, 2010, while the boys were alone in the O’Rourke family’s home on Birchwood Drive. Edward O’Rourke kept the 9mm pistol in an unlocked drawer, according to prosecutors.
Disarming guys like this is the most important thing. Jail time serves no purpose other than to satisfy the revenge fantasies of the victim's family.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

14 comments:

  1. The ban on gun ownership works for me. Good call Mike.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is there anyone that is an acceptable gun owner, in your view, Flying Junior?

      Delete
  2. The dead kid's parents don't get their fantasies, if they have such, but your fantasies about disarmament are satisfied? Hey, we're all good here.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The solution is simple. Every child in every grade of every school should have a one hour basic safety class every year -- preferably at the beginning of the school year. The class should teach children about the dangers of drowning, fire, and guns. I include drowning and fire because those two items cause way more deaths to children than firearms and both are almost entirely preventable.

    The safety class doesn't have to be complicated. Just show children age appropriate examples of those accident categories and tell them how to avoid them.

    In my community they come close. There is a program called "safety town" that children can attend during the summer before kindergarten. It teaches children about crossing streets, common poisons in the home, and I think they even touch on guns. They also introduce children to policemen, firemen, and the 911 calling system. But this comes up short because they don't talk about drowning or fires, it is voluntary, and it never happens again as the children get older.

    With accidents being the leading cause of death to children, I can't believe we don't do this as a nation. There is no reason not to do it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "The dead kid's parents don't get their fantasies, if they have such, but your fantasies about disarmament are satisfied? Hey, we're all good here."

    Does that comment even mean anything? Seriously, what ARE you whining about?

    "I include drowning and fire because those two items cause way more deaths to children than firearms and both are almost entirely preventable."

    An hour a year? That's so generous of you. In an hour you probably can teach a child how to fieldstrip his piece and reassemble; teaching kids to swim--lots more than an hour. Teaching people to drive a car takes a bit longer than an hour. Teaching people how to NOT have babies or get STD's before they graduate HS (or get into HS) will take a few hours. But, yeah, I can, like, totally see how kids can learn all they need to know about firearms in an hour, once a year. Better hope the kid who lives in a houseful of teh gunz is "present" that day.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mikeb said that this sentence won't satisfy any revenge fantasies that the family of the deceased may hold. My observation is that Mike gets his fantasy of disarming someone fulfilled, though. That wasn't whining, and if you had the reading comprehension that you pretend to possess, you'd understand the point.

      Delete
    2. So, does that mean you object to his being disarmed?

      Delete
    3. Not really, no. Putting the man in prison might have given some small measure of comfort to the child's parents, but that doesn't appear to be your concern. So long as he's disarmed, your area of concern is addressed.

      Delete
    4. democommie,

      In terms of the safety training that I proposed, an hour is plenty. My intent is not to try and train children how to swim, use matches and candles safely, or use firearms safely. My intent is to teach children how to identify the most common causes and to simply avoid them.

      Show children puddles, ponds, pools, streams, rivers and lakes. Show them that they should not even play near them (much less in them) without a responsible guardian within arm's reach. Show them matches, lighters, candles, stoves, fireplaces, and space heaters. Teach them not to play with those items. Finally, teach them how to identify firearms. Then teach them not to touch them without first talking to their parents.

      The safety/teaching part would not take much more than 15 minutes. The rest of the time would be making the danger real to the children and impressing upon them the gravity of mistakes.

      As for children who miss the "safety assembly", there could be two makeup sessions for any children who missed the first one.

      This is so simple and would probably save hundreds of lives every year. And the cost is almost nil ... just a one hour assembly in every school every year. No one has to invest a bunch of time or money.

      Make fun of it if you want. At least I am trying to be constructive.

      Delete
    5. The reason that's not my concern, Greg, is because prison is not for comforting the family of victims. It's for dangerous people to render them harmless, at least for a while.

      Delete
    6. Prisons exist for many reasons. Some of us still recognize the basic urge for revenge and understand that prison serves to channel that desire into managable forms.

      Delete
  5. "The dead kid's parents don't get their fantasies, if they have such, but your fantasies about disarmament are satisfied? Hey, we're all good here."

    This is not causing a problem for my reading comprehension, genius. The problem lies in your ability to write a clear sentence that's addressed to someone. When there are multiple parties to a conversation and you're not replying to something someone actually, said AND you don't address your comment to anyone, you're gonna be asked wtf you're talking about, comprende?

    It's not my fault that a college graduate AND English teacher doesn't understand how his native language works. And, sorry, but it is whining when you don't bother to try to figure out what the criticism is about before dashing off another whining reply. Tsk,tsk,tsk.

    "Not really, no. Putting the man in prison might have given some small measure of comfort to the child's parents, but that doesn't appear to be your concern."

    Putting the dad in prison, rather than the kid who killed their son? According to news reports the pistol and the magazine were stored separately (but not locked up). I have no idea how many weapons the father will have to surrender. Assuming he was a LAGO before, it makes Cap'n Crunch's and your own insistence on children being taught to handle teh gunz properly, weak. If the current LAGO's aren't teaching their OWN kids how to properly handle firearms I don't have much faith in them ramping up their efforts.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Given the change in moderation policy, Democommie, I'm avoiding speaking to you whenever possible. You may presume that my comments are addressed to everyone, unless otherwise indicated.

      Delete