A 3-year-old boy is dead after shooting himself in the head early Saturday afternoon, authorities said.
The boy was visiting a relative at a home in the 1500 block of Derby Lane, about four miles southeast of Guthrie. He found a loaded handgun in a bedroom, Logan County sheriff's Capt. Richard Stephens said.I don't care if you divide the number of accidental shootings by all the guns in the whole world, they're still too many. I say this because they are PREVENTABLE.
Stephens said the call came in just after noon. He said criminal charges will not be filed.
The first thing that needs to change is the nonchalance with which we treat so-called gun accidents. Then we need to adopt a one-strike-you're-out policy so at least we'll cut down on the repeat offenders. And finally, we need proper gun control laws, a comprehensive system which is long overdue.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
Leaving a firearm within access to a minor is a Felony in Oklahoma.
ReplyDeleteThe person responsible will likely face other felonious charges in addition to such.
They ought to be punished to the full extent of the law.
You keep calling for gun control, but notice how your wishes aren't being met? This raises two questions:
ReplyDelete1. When will you give up?
2. What would be enough for you? In other words, is there a point at which you would say that we have enough gun control?
Greggy: The question is yours to answer. How many dead children are you willing to accept in support of your fetish?
ReplyDeleteAre you really willing to tell the parents of a child lost at Newtown that it's ok because you need a gun to feel better about your inadequacies and insecurities?
I wasn't there. What is more, I support allowing teachers with licenses to carry. Your side wants those same teachers only to have their bodies to act as human shields. With that blood on your hands, when will you stop disarming good citizens?
DeleteGreg, grammar school teachers in CT don't want to carry guns in the classroom. What's wrong with you?
DeleteYou, on the other hand, want maniacs like Adam boy to have access to guns.
"The question is yours to answer. How many dead children are you willing to accept in support of your fetish?"
DeleteHow many free criminal are you willing to accept to keep your fourth amendment rights?
Loaded question, right?
Mikeb, you've asked them? How about this: Ask teachers--in Connecticut and elsewhere--if they prefer to be unarmed or would rather have those teachers who are willing to be trained allowed to have effective means of stopping an attack.
DeleteI don't want maniacs to have guns. You haven't shown me anything that will keep them from getting firearms, short of a comprehensive--and impossible--ban.
I read that there were no charges filed against the gun owner in this case, either. Just another tragic "accident."
ReplyDeleteIf the gun owner had been a drunk driver? And that 3-year-old was killed in an accident? The driver would be in jail.
A nice start would be to start prosecuting irresponsible gun owners who leave loaded firearms lying around where toddlers can find them.
Yes.
DeleteAs I mentioned earlier, Oklahoma is a State where the owner of the weapon may have been punished even if there was no tragedy. In that State, leaving a firearm in a place or manner accessible to a minor may incur multiple felony charges. Since the child is dead, the owner may also be charged with Depraved Heart Second Degree Murder, which would imprison him/her for decades.
DeleteDo you imply by such, that there exists a legitimate purpose for the possession of weapons by a mere civilians? By doing so you join the collective idiocy of the pro-gun nation (America).
DeleteAgain, Greggy, you avoid the question. How many dead first-graders are too much for you? Give us a number if it exists.
ReplyDeleteOf course, your response is that of Larry Pratt's--almost verbatim.
And what of children? Are we seriously--in the US--going to subject kids to learning in a environment that resembles a prison camp? And when a kid gets shot by a teacher, either by accident or not, or when a teacher leaves a gun around to be discovered by small children--what will be your response? Arm the kiddies? Of course it will.
Because you've failed socially and professionally, you need a gunto buy you the respect you can't earn.
For a little shit who picks a name for himself that's made for a comic book, you pretend to know a lot about others.
DeleteGoldilocks, you didn't answer my question, but I'll answer yours. We've been down that road before. Rights aren't dependent on numbers. Numbers may define the utility of a right, but the right is prior and superior. (I don't expect you to understand what those terms mean.) In addition, you want to punish millions of gun owners because of a small number of bad acts. Your response is not proportional.
Regarding armed teachers, why don't you explain to us how those teachers in Newtown being unarmed was so much better for all concerned.
It seems that you refer to yourself a "Greg Camp". Where did you pick that name from?
DeleteI must have chosen my parents well, since they gave it to me, Chickadee.
DeleteBS, Greggy, rights are--in fact--partially based on numbers. For example--take the 1A. The 1A guarantees that one can insult, even offend other with speech. It does not, of course, allow your speech to harm others (shouting 'fire' in a theater)or libeling someone.
ReplyDeleteSimilarly, the 2A in no way allows anyone to harm others illegally as you advocate.
Arming teachers is ridiculous; it invites more senseless tragedy. The better answer is always prevention. Prevent weapons from getting into the hands of those who shouldn't have them. Your solution is to give everyone guns and hope for the best.
I have never advocated harming others illegally, and I challenge you to back up your accusations with proof or to shut up.
DeleteI do note that you've yet to answer my questions. To repeat:
1. When will you give up gun control as hopeless?
2. What would be enough gun control for you, if you ever could get something passed?
3. How is an unarmed teacher better than an armed one? Do you prefer the teacher to sacrifice herself, rather than to defend herself and her students?
Its funny that a bunch of people who don't know this family can place so many judgements. Its disgusting. Accidents happen (although this could be classified as the most horrific kind of accident) and I assure all you naive people that that is what happened. These people are devastated! Their lives are changed forever. Have any of you lost a kid? I have! This family has suffered more than this tragedy over the past few years so at least pretend to have a heart.
ReplyDeleteJust because some of us are talking about gun owners being held accountable for their actions does not mean we are heartless to the tragedy.
DeleteI'm in favor of holding people responsible for their actions that harm others. What I don't support is anticipatory punishment. You want to take away rights before anything bad is done.
DeleteDo you not understand how that person feels as the gun owner? That person will hold that incident over themselves for the rest of their life. As far as legal actions go, there doesn't need to be ANY action taken on behalf of the gun owners. The whole point is that you don't know how the accident occurred or where the kid found the gun or any of that. There was a mistake made. You make them and I make them. It was NO ONE'S intention for the baby to find that. Making dumb comments about how these people should be punished is naive because I guarantee no one on here knows these people. And not only that, but if these parents saw what people were saying it would devastate them more. That's it. Talk about gun control in a situation where an adult pulls a trigger and kills a child. That's fine. But not this one!
ReplyDeleteI can't believe you're serious. Whenever a kid gets his hands on a gun, some adult should be immediately locked up. If we took these incidents more seriously than we do, than you do, and recognized them for the gross negligence they are, fewer kids would get shot.
Delete