Tucker6900
Regular Member
This should be a tragic reminder to all of us on the responsibility that comes with gun ownership.
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Tragic Death of 3 year old due to neglectful gun owner......
- Thread starter Tucker6900
- Start date
This should be a tragic reminder to all of us on the responsibility that comes with gun ownership.
marshaul
Campaign Veteran
Dumb people get their kids killed sometimes. Nothing new. It's tragic, but it would be equally so if he left the engine running and the kid drove down a hill and into a tree (also happens sometimes).
Last edited:
MSG Laigaie
Campaign Veteran
http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Boy-3-kills-himself-with-gun-found-in-familys-car-142616396.html
The third kid killed in the last two weeks in Washington state. The first kid was arrested along with the Mom and boyfriend. The second one was a LEO that left a weapon in the glove box. Now this guy leaving a weapon under the front seat.
The third kid killed in the last two weeks in Washington state. The first kid was arrested along with the Mom and boyfriend. The second one was a LEO that left a weapon in the glove box. Now this guy leaving a weapon under the front seat.
Since SOMEONE is to blame, can we not hold the government sponsor accountable?
Tucker6900
Regular Member
It goes to show that our government give some LEO too much credit. That LEO was just as neglectful as the last story's father. He should be charged the same.
END_THE_FED
Regular Member
To be fair, you are assuming he violated 9.41.050. We do not have (at least from this story) enough information to make that determination. The law does not state you can not "leave the pistol unattended in a vehicle" it states that if the CPL holder is not in the vehicle then the pistol must be locked within the vehicle. If the doors of the car were locked then there was no violation.
Ruby
Regular Member
What a tragic story. Another young child dead because of parental negligence. Tragic for the parents as well. How do you live with the knowledge that you accidentally killed your own child?!? The little boy obviously saw his dad put it under the seat. Why not just lock it in the glove compartment and take the key with you? I didn't think you were supposed to leave children unattended in a car in this state anyway. If the father had taught his son from the time he could walk and talk to not touch guns, chances are the child would still be alive. Parents need to teach their children about guns whether or not they own any; this will go a long way to keeping children safe around all guns, not just the ones they may own.
entirely correct. i was about to point this out and you beat me to it.
1245A Defender
Regular Member
well,,,!!!!
You both are free to read 9.41.050 in the purest, mindless, word parsing, of thoughtless, negligent, laywers!!! yea, I am dissing you both!
My CPL empowers me to place my loaded gun in the lap of a kid in my car, cover it with a towel,
then lock the kid, the gun, and the towel, in the car!!
Now we see that i am not unlawfull,,, Its that darned KID thats breaking the law!!! He doesnt have a CPL!!!
That kid needs to be taught a lesson!!!
You both are free to read 9.41.050 in the purest, mindless, word parsing, of thoughtless, negligent, laywers!!! yea, I am dissing you both!
My CPL empowers me to place my loaded gun in the lap of a kid in my car, cover it with a towel,
then lock the kid, the gun, and the towel, in the car!!
Now we see that i am not unlawfull,,, Its that darned KID thats breaking the law!!! He doesnt have a CPL!!!
That kid needs to be taught a lesson!!!
the law is what it is.
contrary to the jack mccoy'ism we see here and elsewhere, what the guy did when he left the gun in his car (assuming it was locked) was not violative of the criminal law IN WA
in many other states, it would be violative.
nobody here is defending what he did. but there is a contrast between saying he acted immorally and irresponsibly and saying he broke the law
there are a metric buttload of things people can do that are immoral, irresponsible, and disgustingly awful but are NOT illegal
1245A Defender
Regular Member
well,,,
No I dont think "the law is ""JUST"" what it is!!
050 says what it says,,, but a court will judge legeslative intent.
Try this case.
I use my CPL to put me and my loaded gun in my car,
I let my adult friend get in the car, without a CPL.
We go to the gas station,
I put my gun on the dashboard, I cover it with a towel.
Its a warm day and the windows are down,
I get out to pump the gas, I am now violating 050,, then remember the important words of 050, so
I lean in the open window and tell my friend to LOCK the doors,
now,,,
I am complying with 9.41.050
BTW A judge, A cop, and a prosecuter are all watching me...
can I be charged? can I be convicted?
Yes... Yes I can...
keep in mind,,, (4) says ,, nothing in this section permitts firearms to those that are not permitted to have them...
No I dont think "the law is ""JUST"" what it is!!
050 says what it says,,, but a court will judge legeslative intent.
Try this case.
I use my CPL to put me and my loaded gun in my car,
I let my adult friend get in the car, without a CPL.
We go to the gas station,
I put my gun on the dashboard, I cover it with a towel.
Its a warm day and the windows are down,
I get out to pump the gas, I am now violating 050,, then remember the important words of 050, so
I lean in the open window and tell my friend to LOCK the doors,
now,,,
I am complying with 9.41.050
BTW A judge, A cop, and a prosecuter are all watching me...
can I be charged? can I be convicted?
Yes... Yes I can...
keep in mind,,, (4) says ,, nothing in this section permitts firearms to those that are not permitted to have them...
Last edited:
ccwinstructor
Centurion
The parents are already punished enough by the death of their son
Tragic accidents occur. More young children die from neglectful use of 5 gallon buckets than from guns. These rare tragic incidents are used by the MSM to destroy our freedoms. That is the real story here. This is a clear case of political pedophilia.
When was the last time you heard a national news story about a child drowning in a five gallon bucket?
Tragic accidents occur. More young children die from neglectful use of 5 gallon buckets than from guns. These rare tragic incidents are used by the MSM to destroy our freedoms. That is the real story here. This is a clear case of political pedophilia.
When was the last time you heard a national news story about a child drowning in a five gallon bucket?
marshaul
Campaign Veteran
Please stick to facts which are true. There are enough of them to make our case without resorting to falsehoods.
Beretta92FSLady
Regular Member
I suppose the question could be asked: Did you lock the car door when you exited the vehicle? This section does not speak to whether the vehicle must be without occupants once the licensee exits the vehicle without the firearm.
The man will not be found guilty of a crime, IMO, not even negligence, and he shouldn't, at least, from the articles that I have reade. The man placed the handgun under the drivers seat, the two children were locked in their car seats, it was not unreasonable for him to conclude that the handgun was safely stowed, and that the children wouldn't gain access to it.
"(2)(a) A person shall not carry or place a loaded pistol in any vehicle unless the person has a license to carry a concealed pistol and: (i) The pistol is on the licensee's person, (ii) the licensee is within the vehicle at all times that the pistol is there, or (iii) the licensee is away from the vehicle and the pistol is locked within the vehicle and concealed from view from outside the vehicle."
Tucker6900
Regular Member
I dont necessarily think that firearm laws should apply in this situation. Yes, a firearm was the end cause of death, but the true crime is child endangerment/neglect. I dont think the parents should be charged with any firearm law, but should be prosecuted for the endangerment of the child.
I believe that losing a child for whatever reason is tragic, and any parent will be grieving for a long time, but in this situation, this man was the primary cause of his childs death. He left his children alone in a car in the middle of the night with a loaded gun. That is the information that should be used for prosecution. Not firearm laws.
Last edited:
ccwinstructor
Centurion
Children under 5 Fatal gun accidents 20 or less, 5 gallon buckets, about 40
Here are a couple of links to back up my assertion that negligent use of 5 gallon buckets kill more young children than negligent use of firearms do:
http://gunsafe.org/position statements/Guns and crime.htm
The above gives the latest accidental death number for children under 5 as 17.
http://www.ci.pasadena.ca.us/Fire/Swimming_Pool_Safety/
The above lists the number of children drowned in five gallon buckets as "approximately 40". I think we can safely assume that the vast majority of them are under the age of five.
So, why did you think I was lying?
Here are a couple of links to back up my assertion that negligent use of 5 gallon buckets kill more young children than negligent use of firearms do:
http://gunsafe.org/position statements/Guns and crime.htm
The above gives the latest accidental death number for children under 5 as 17.
http://www.ci.pasadena.ca.us/Fire/Swimming_Pool_Safety/
The above lists the number of children drowned in five gallon buckets as "approximately 40". I think we can safely assume that the vast majority of them are under the age of five.
So, why did you think I was lying?
Last edited:
marshaul
Campaign Veteran
I don't think you're lying, I think you're (probably) mistaken. Although upon further research it seems the numbers are closer than I was aware.
The CDC claims 17 per year, accidental, age 0-5:
CDC said:
As for drowning, it seems that the "30-50" deaths per year figure comes from this study, which claims 160 drownings between the years 1984-1989. 160 drownings / 5 years = 32 drownings per year.
On the other hand, it seems like the issue has improved in years since (maybe due to awareness of the possibility).
According to this 2004 fact sheet -- which incidentally still claims the "30 per year" figure, no doubt a reflection of the tendency of such things to exaggerate their own importance -- the tally since 1984 is only 327. 327 drownings / 20 years = 16.35 drownings / year.
I'm not going to quote other sources for firearms deaths due to suspected bias there as well, but suffice it to say that the CDC is the lowest number for children in that age range.
And that's forgetting the fact that the drowning-in-buckets risks decreases to almost nothing once a child is about 8 or so (my guess, because nobody bothers to keep statistics for that), whereas, even if you carefully discount homicides and whatnot, there are still unintentional firearm deaths that occur, well, even into adulthood. The risk is always present.
Let's face it: guns are dangerous. That's kind of the point.
Anyway, it's difficult to agree that either risk is more significant than the other. I think it's more accurate to say that they are both near the noise floor.
Last edited:
ccwinstructor
Centurion
I agree, both are extremely low. That is the point
Yes, both are down in the noise level. Virtually all accidental firearms deaths are reported and noted, because of their shock value. It is not nearly as certain that death due to 5 gallon buckets are so rigorously reported.
The point is to show how incredibly safe firearms are, that they, because they are treated with care, are no more (probably less) of a danger to young children than five gallon buckets are. Certainly swimming pools are a far greater danger of accidental death to all children than firearms are.
Yes, both are down in the noise level. Virtually all accidental firearms deaths are reported and noted, because of their shock value. It is not nearly as certain that death due to 5 gallon buckets are so rigorously reported.
The point is to show how incredibly safe firearms are, that they, because they are treated with care, are no more (probably less) of a danger to young children than five gallon buckets are. Certainly swimming pools are a far greater danger of accidental death to all children than firearms are.