Thursday, September 12, 2013

Minneapolis Teen Charged with Felony in Shooting of 2-month-old Nephew

A 17-year-old charged with a felony in the accidental shooting of his 2-month-old nephew had reloaded the gun after his brother removed the bullets, according to charges filed Wednesday in Hennepin County District Court.
James Devone Early faces a single count of reckless discharge of a firearm, a felony, five days after his nephew was shot in the neck in a north Minneapolis home. Early turned himself in to police Tuesday.
The child, Isaac Lorenzo Early Jr., was wounded Thursday night in a duplex unit in the 2400 block of Emerson Avenue N. On Wednesday, he remained in critical but stable condition at Hennepin County Medical Center with a bullet lodged in his neck.
James Early, who is being held at the Juvenile Detention Center, is being charged as an adult.
“What is a 17-year-old, or anyone, doing running around with a gun in front of a 2-month-old?” Hennepin County Attorney Mike Freeman said Wednesday. “This is unnecessary, ludicrous, irresponsible and it’s got to stop.”
Naturally the adult owner of the gun walks. That's a second tragedy in this story.
What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.

10 comments:

  1. "However, according to the complaint, Isaac Early Sr. confessed that his brother had come to the house that day carrying a loaded .38-caliber handgun. Early told police that he didn’t want a gun around the baby, so he took it away and removed the bullets."

    There doesn't appear to be any adult "owner" on the now missing revolver. The 17 year old shooter showed up with it and the baby's father took it away from him and unloaded it. The shooter somehow got it back and had a negligent discharge. Then they went through their "don't snitch" battle drill to give the kid time to ditch the gun.
    It will be interesting to see if they try to charge the baby's father with violating the safe storage law even though it wasn't his gun and the time he possessed it was very short.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What do you mean no adult owner? Are 17-year-olds legally allowed to own guns in Minnesota?

      Delete
    2. "624.713 CERTAIN PERSONS NOT TO POSSESS FIREARMS.
      Subdivision 1.Ineligible persons. The following persons shall not be entitled to possess a pistol or semiautomatic military-style assault weapon or, except for clause (1), any other firearm:
      (1) a person under the age of 18 years except that a person under 18 may carry or possess a pistol or semiautomatic military-style assault weapon (i) in the actual presence or under the direct supervision of the person's parent or guardian, (ii) for the purpose of military drill under the auspices of a legally recognized military organization and under competent supervision, (iii) for the purpose of instruction, competition, or target practice on a firing range approved by the chief of police or county sheriff in whose jurisdiction the range is located and under direct supervision; or (iv) if the person has successfully completed a course designed to teach marksmanship and safety with a pistol or semiautomatic military-style assault weapon and approved by the commissioner of natural resources;"
      https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=624.713

      With his comments about gun safety, it's sort of doubtful he took the gun safety course. And of course there's carrying without a permit. Though what they are saying now is "what gun"?

      Delete
    3. From that little blurb we know nothing. Maybe it was his dad's gun that he stole, or maybe it belonged to some stranger he stole it from. Could also be something he bought from an adult criminal who stole it/bought it. Good luck tracing it to that person.

      Delete
    4. You make a good argument for the safe storage laws we recently discussed. Fewer guns would get stolen if you so-called responsible gun owners were constrained by law to be more responsible.

      Delete
    5. Ah, yes. Shift the subject when shown that you may be wrong and there may be no adult owner at fault here.

      Delete
    6. "You make a good argument for the safe storage laws we recently discussed."

      Mike, I made the comment regarding safe storage because there is a safe storage law in place here. Currently no one has any idea where the gun is, much less who the owner is.
      Even the baby's father might get into some trouble for taking the gun away since according to Minnesota court records, he seems to have several felony convictions, which would make him possessing a gun a bad thing.

      Delete
  2. When they stop treating these incidents as accidents and prosecute as negligence, maybe the resulting number of people going to jail, will have a positive effect on making others think when handling a gun.

    ReplyDelete