Friday, August 3, 2012

Accidental Shooting of Minnesota 2-year-old - No Charges

Sgt. Paul Paulos said paramedics were initially called to the 1300 block of Beech Street on reports of a child who fell and hurt himself. When emergency responders arrived, they saw the child had been shot. 

Officers determined a 9 millimeter handgun had been fired in the house, Paulos said. 

A 16-year-old girl was at the home along with three other boys, ages 10, 9 and 7. All were relatives of the victim, who has been identified as Jacob Xiong. 

Paulos said Xiong's parents weren't home at the time of the shooting, but they are cooperating with the investigation. 

Paulos said the boy is in serious but stable condition. He said no one is under arrest and officers aren't looking for suspects.
What's your opinion? Isn't that a little apathetic?  Shouldn't we be outraged at this?  Shouldn't someone be held responsible for the improper storage of the gun, or something? Why are kid shootings so acceptable?

Please leave a comment.


  1. I would expect that further investigation will be forthcoming; Minnesota does have at least some gun laws relating to child safety that should be applicable in this case.

  2. Some good those laws did. Nothing short of a complete handgun ban will prevent these kid shootings. Yet the NRA and its minions will continue to oppose any ban.

    1. You're wrong. Even a complete ban on guns would not eliminate 100% of the kid shootings. But, we're not pushing for a complete ban, so what the fuck are you talking about?

    2. You may not have the guts to push for a ban, but some of us do. The UK did it, and so can we.

    3. Anonymous, you've heard of the U.S. Constitution, perhaps? I have no doubt that these control advocates want a ban, but that's off the table--at least for now. Those of us who support gun rights are working to make sure that a ban is impossible, period.

    4. I am a professor of law, so yes. I'm also aware of my guarantee of the right to pursue life, liberty and property. I am unwilling to sacrifice my life and liberty for your desire to feel more secure by having a handgun.

    5. So, professor, do tell us how my handguns are causing you to sacrifice anything. But since you mentioned a right to liberty and property, how am I not covered under those?

    6. Sorry Anonymous Law Professor, I misunderstood your earlier comment. I thought you were one of them accusing me of secretly wanting a gun ban. Instead, now I understand you're one of us, but more extreme than I am.

      My understanding of the UK situation is that it's more like a "may issue" for gun ownership than it is a total ban on civilian gun ownership. I would like something like that here in the US. It could be incorporated into the licensing and registration programs. And it would not prevent the people who have legitimate need of being armed from owning and using guns.

    7. Mikeb, we've explained this to you before. The U.K. has a ban on handguns. Long guns are may issue for owning. Self-defense is also frowned upon, but that's another debate.

      What we see here is that Anonymous is giving us the straightforward position of gun control. It's refreshing. Misguided, impossible, and a violation of rights, but refreshing.

  3. As long as the victims and shooters are black or brown, no one will ever hear of this outside of your pathetic blog.

    Truth hurts, huh?