While playing around with guns, a 17-year-old boy allegedly shot a 14-year-old boy on Wednesday, according to the Marion County Sheriff's Office.
The 14-year-old was taken to a nearby hospital, where he was pronounced dead.
The teen told deputies he and the 14-year-old were "playing around" with guns.
The older teen "stated the victim was pointing a .20 gauge shotgun at him" at which time the older teen "picked up a 9mm handgun, pointed it at the victim and accidentally fired the gun," the Sheriff's Office said in a statement.
The 17-year-old was charged with manslaughter and transported to the Marion County Juvenile Detention Facility.
"accidentally " fired the gun?
ReplyDeleteFrom the article:
ReplyDeleteThe older teen "stated the victim was pointing a .20 gauge shotgun at him" . . .
Wow--"a .20 gauge shotgun"? That would have a bore of about 2.85" in diameter--I'd probably be pretty nervous, too, if someone were to point such a cannon at me.
What are you saying, Kurt. Don't be shy. You think it was justified?
DeleteThe article is far too thin on details for me to render judgment on that question, and if the author's reference to "a .20 gauge shotgun" is any indication, none of the details that are in the article are to be trusted.
DeleteIf forced to leap to a judgment without adequate information (something that I, unlike you, hate to do), I'd be very skeptical about any claim of self-defense on the shooter's part--and actually, I'm not even positive that he's even really asserting self-defense.
Are you really discounting the whole thing because they wrote .20 instead of 20?
DeleteNeed I insist for an answer about teens having to unsupervised access to guns? I know what you think, right?
Are you really discounting the whole thing because they wrote .20 instead of 20?
DeleteThat throws the bore diameter off by a factor of more than four and a half, and the weight of the ball fitting the bore by a factor of 100--not really a small error. Now that the "reporter" has so vividly illustrated his/her cluelessness, should I simply trust him/her to have gotten everything else right?
Need I insist for an answer about teens having to unsupervised access to guns?
You can "insist" on whatever the hell you want. Compelling me will be a rather more difficult.
I know what you think, right?
If you believe that, then why would you also "insist" that I tell you? You've got mad skills for mind reading, remember?
Besides, your initial question to me wasn't about their access to guns, but whether or not the shooting was justified--two completely different questions, and I think I answered the first one.
Kurt's responses prove why we cannot rely on gun loons care for safety, or common sense gun safety. So they must be forced by law to ensure society is safe from them.
Delete"I think I answered the first one."
DeleteWhy are you hemming and hawing about the second one?
Having had a gun pointed at me once, a .357, it doesn't matter what caliber the gun is, the business end looks pretty damn big!
ReplyDeleteMike G.
What about a 17-year-old and a 14-year-old having access to guns while unsupervised? Is that no problem for you gun-rights folks?
ReplyDeleteIf he had gotten drunk and got the alcohol from his parents, the parents would be charged.
ReplyDelete