OT - Baton Rouge 10 year old boy shoots home invader

ProShooter · Jul 20, 2009

imported post

A few things wrong with this story in my opinion, but luckily it ended well. - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhB0G-k3Y2k

Do you think that our law, 18.2-56.2 is outdated, considering the times we live in? I welcome your thoughts.

§ 18.2-56.2. Allowing access to firearms by children; penalty

A. It shall be unlawful for any person to recklessly leave a loaded, unsecured firearm in such a manner as to endanger the life or limb of any child under the age of fourteen. Any person violating the provisions of this subsection shall be guilty of a Class 3 misdemeanor.

B. It shall be unlawful for any person knowingly to authorize a child under the age of twelve to use a firearm except when the child is under the supervision of an adult. Any person violating this subsection shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. For purposes of this subsection, "adult" shall mean a parent, guardian, person standing in loco parentis to the child or a person twenty-one years or over who has the permission of the parent, guardian, or person standing in loco parentis to supervise the child in the use of a firearm.

Thundar · Jul 20, 2009

imported post

ProShooter wrote:

A few things wrong with this story in my opinion, but luckily it ended well. - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhB0G-k3Y2k

Do you think that our law, 18.2-56.2 is outdated, considering the times we live in? I welcome your thoughts.

§ 18.2-56.2. Allowing access to firearms by children; penalty

A. It shall be unlawful for any person to recklessly leave a loaded, unsecured firearm in such a manner as to endanger the life or limb of any child under the age of fourteen. Any person violating the provisions of this subsection shall be guilty of a Class 3 misdemeanor.

B. It shall be unlawful for any person knowingly to authorize a child under the age of twelve to use a firearm except when the child is under the supervision of an adult. Any person violating this subsection shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. For purposes of this subsection, "adult" shall mean a parent, guardian, person standing in loco parentis to the child or a person twenty-one years or over who has the permission of the parent, guardian, or person standing in loco parentis to supervise the child in the use of a firearm.

I am still trying to figure out how your ten year old shooting a home invader is against the law in Virginia.

If you leave an unloaded gun in the gun cabinet and your son loads the gun after you leave, not even a class 3 misdemeanor.

Besides, this is small potatoes when you consider the possible consequences of a home invasion with your 10 year home alone.

Citizen · Jul 20, 2009

imported post

"Your Honor, I'd rather spend a year in jail than attend my son's funeral because he was unable to defend himself."

ProShooter · Jul 20, 2009

imported post

Thundar wrote:

I am still trying to figure out how your ten year old shooting a home invader is against the law in Virginia.

If you leave an unloaded gun in the gun cabinet and your son loads the gun after you leave, not even a class 3 misdemeanor.

My understanding from the story is that the 10 year old went and found the gun in the closet and it was already loaded and unsecured.

Grapeshot · Jul 20, 2009

imported post

Doctrine of lesser evil.

Yata hey

GWRedDragon · Jul 20, 2009

imported post

The kid shot him in the lip? That's a pretty good shot for a 10 year old!

10 year olds can be dangerous criminals, why can't they also be taught to defend themselves properly? I think that with proper training from an early age a child could be responsible enough...but it really depends on both the child and the parent. The vast majority probably aren't, and thus we have laws like this. Simply leaving a loaded gun around unsecured without serious amounts of training of the kid is a recipe for disaster.

When I was little if I pointed a toy gun at my dad, he reprimanded me for it. Still, I don't think we went to the range and discussed things enough that I would have been safe with gun access at that age.

ProShooter · Jul 20, 2009

imported post

GWRedDragon wrote:

Simply leaving a loaded gun around unsecured without serious amounts of training of the kid is a recipe for disaster.

That's thethought I had as well. Often times students in my class question the ages noted in the statute. That's why I was asking what everyone here thought. Are the ages in the statute too high, too low or just right?

I'm also concerned that a parent left a 10 year old in charge of an 8 year old.

Grapeshot · Jul 20, 2009

imported post

I for one do not like such laws. Requirements that infringe on how I raise my family.

I understand the arguments from "if it saves just one child" to "do you think a XX year old is mature enough?" The law only comes into play when something happens - good or bad. Nobody is going door to door to check ........ yet.

So how does this law substitute for common sense on the parents part? Who is protected and who is punished?

Safety is a tyrant's creed.

Yata hey

MSC 45ACP · Jul 20, 2009

imported post

Its sad to see the state put an age on perceived ability and maturity. My 10 year old son is capable of loading, unloading and troubleshooting malfunctions on my AK (WASR 10/63, actually).We don't leave him home alone or let him handle a pistol, but he's perfectly capable of shooting a rifle and using archery equipment.

He can also load and shoota crossbow. We have a home defense plan in place if the zombies come. My children can take care of themselves in the event something happens to me, their mother or both of us.

My son is neverleft "in charge", but he can sure handle the AK while backing up his 18 year old sister with her .45 cal Glock when a couple guys come to the door riding bicycles, wearing ties and talking about "The Rest of the Story" or zombies crash through the garage door at 0300.

Grapeshot · Jul 20, 2009

imported post

Will be be required to lock up the vehicle keys, knives, medicine cabinets, gas cans, matches and power tools too? Then what about the abundant amount of water found in homes?

I know those things don't scare people as much.

Yata hey

hsmith · Jul 20, 2009

imported post

Hell, when I was 8 20 years ago I was sent out into the fieldwith a $30,000 tractor to rake hay on my own, driving on theroad and all.

It's a different time now, esp with how parents raise their kids

TFred · Jul 20, 2009

imported post

What we have here is no different than voting, driving, or even drinking. The "nanny" government has to play to the lowest common denominator of the population.

As noted, in farm country, there are plenty of 14 year old kids who can drive better than some 18 year old "city kids", simply because they've been driving the lawn mower, tractor or farm truck since they could reach the pedals.

The drinking age was 18, but since some folks couldn't handle the responsibility at that age, it was raised to 21, with no regard for individual capability, home training or temperamant.

I don't see this as any different. Some kids get good home training, and can safely and skillfully handle firearms well before 18, or 21. Other people can't handle them at any age.

TFred

Neplusultra · Jul 20, 2009

imported post

hsmith wrote:

Hell, when I was 8 20 years ago I was sent out into the fieldwith a $30,000 tractor to rake hay on my own, driving on theroad and all.

It's a different time now, esp with how parents raise their kids

They had tractors 820 years ago??

riverrat10k · Jul 21, 2009

imported post

Was trying out my new gun at the range the other day.

A guy was in there with, I assume, his daughter. She looked to be about 6. She was and excellent shot with her pink .22 rifle. Her dad(?) was even better with his various handguns.

darthmord · Jul 21, 2009

imported post

Neplusultra wrote:

hsmith wrote:

Hell, when I was 8 20 years ago I was sent out into the fieldwith a $30,000 tractor to rake hay on my own, driving on theroad and all.

It's a different time now, esp with how parents raise their kids

Click to expand...

They had tractors 820 years ago??

Explains why he's older than dirt, doesn't it?

Marco · Jul 21, 2009

imported post

A recognized principle of english common law

TITLE LXII
CRIMINAL CODE

CHAPTER 627
JUSTIFICATION

Section 627:3 627:3 Harms. –
I. Conduct which the actor believes to be necessary to avoid harm to himself or another is justifiable if the desirability and urgency of avoiding such harm outweigh, according to ordinary standards of reasonableness, the harm sought to be prevented by the statute defining the offense charged. The desirability and urgency of such conduct may not rest upon considerations pertaining to the morality and advisability of such statute, either in its general or particular application.
II. When the actor was reckless or negligent in bringing about the circumstances requiring a choice of harms or in appraising the necessity of his conduct, the justification provided in paragraph I does not apply in a prosecution for any offense for which recklessness or negligence, as the case may be, suffices to establish criminal liability.
Source. 1971, 518:1, eff. Nov. 1, 1973.

virginiatuck · Jul 21, 2009

imported post

§ 18.2-56.2 is fine the way it is. If anyone thinks differently they can raise their own kids differently.

The problem of a 10 yr. old in charge of an 8 yr. old is very complicated, both in the root problem and any potential solution one would propose. This case, if anything, supports the premise that a 10 yr. old can take care of an 8 yr. old for a short period of time. We don't have all the details; it's not like the kid was left in charge for the weekend, right? Again, if you think differently then raise your children differently.

Grapeshot · Jul 21, 2009

imported post

Just for a moment, take the gun out of the equation in the OP.

What's left?

Ans: A successful home invasion!
_________________________________________________

Teach 'em to ride, shoot straight and tell the truth.

Yata hey

Machoduck · Jul 21, 2009

imported post

Grapeshot, you beat me to the punch on the law of lesser evil, totally beat me with "take the gun out", but I still have one left.

The key word, IMHO, in 18.2-56.2 is "recklessly". What recklessly means can be argued until the cows come home.

MD

nova · Jul 21, 2009

imported post

Citizen wrote:

"Your Honor, I'd rather spend a year in jail than attend my son's funeral because he was unable to defend himself."

I don't have a son but I agree 100%.

OT - Baton Rouge 10 year old boy shoots home invader

Regular Member

Regular Member

Founder's Club Member

Regular Member

Legendary Warrior

Regular Member

Regular Member

Legendary Warrior

Regular Member

Legendary Warrior

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Legendary Warrior

Regular Member

Regular Member