7-year-old child finds gun in Tucson home, shoots 3-year-old cbs5az.com/story/34091844/tpd-child-injured-in-accidental-shooting-on-southwest-side?autostart=true …
Do you guys have a law in the USA that requires weapons in the home to be under lock and key? We do in Australia and I think it’s an excellent idea.
There is no such law nationally. Our “armed society” crowd would fight it as hard as they’d fight a threat to their breathing.
Praying for all involved…
It doesn’t infringe on the right to bear arms in any way though. Another way is for better safety features on weapons, as some safeties are very poor that a 7 year old could easily figure them out.
Thank you for reading
Praying for these children & family.
That’s why you lock the gun away, keep the safety on, and store the ammo separately - it’s so simple. People who can’t do this shouldn’t be allowed to have guns.
Even the most avid gun owner teaches their children guns are for adults and should never be used without supervision at such a young age.
Praying for these boys.
Well, apparently not.
This is awful.
Look, I don’t own a gun. I have no need for one. But I grew up in a family of police officers, and I remember how they handled their guns. Anyone carrying a gun coming into someone’s house would unload the gun and put it in a locked drawer. Ammunition went into a separate locked drawer. At family gatherings (Sunday dinners at my grandfather’s house were always crowded), there might be a dozen guns in the drawer.
I cannot fathom the mindset of anyone who leaves a gun, especially a loaded gun, where a child could find it. Such a person is directly responsible for any deaths that result. I hope there’s a law under which they can be prosecuted. Whoever left that gun lying around might as well have shot the 3-year old himself.
I am pro-2nd-Amendment, a gun owner, and a some-time gun carrier (concealed). But I strongly favor legislation that would make gun owners criminally liable for unsecured weapons that make it into the hands of children, with these kinds of results.
The USA has too many guns. Too many innocent people are being wounded or killed with guns.
Oh, but therein lies the rub!
If they do that, they can’t use the weapon in a hurry if a masked attacker comes though the window, or the forces of tyranny march up the street!
See the problem?
I know this will come as a shock, but not everybody can afford to live in a monochromatic, gated community complete with armed security. Some people actually live in places where crime is a thing, and where home invasions are a thing. For these people, an available and accessible firearm is a prudent tool with which to protect themselves and their families.
I’m not sure I understand the mentality that would justify a long prison sentence for some parents who’ve just suffered the tragic, accidental death of a child.
I would think having a child killed with your firearm would be more punishment than a court could impose.
I hesitated even reading this post because these situations seem to automatically trigger rote and often non-logical anti-gun rhetoric. Usually by non gun people, which seems to me along the same line of logic as an atheist complaining that Catholics pray or receive the Eucharist at Mass…
Guns were around my and my friends households as youth. We were taught not to touch them without an adult present, and to handle them appropriately when old enough. If you want to minimize gun related accidents, which statistically are minimal, then pushing for shooting programs in every junior high and high school and archery programs in elementary schools would go a long way. They teach children respect for dangerous things and safe handling of weapons.
Of course in today’s political climate, solutions to issues aren’t particularly looked upon favorably.:eek:
If the purpose of such a law would be to add extra incentive for parents to be careful with their firearms, I don’t think it serves that purpose. If the prospect of losing your child is not incentive enough, what good would the prospect of nebulous prison time do? And it is nebulous in the mind of the careless parent. The reason they are careless in the fisrt place is that they don’t think the worst will happen to them. So penalties that kick in only after the worst happens are ineffective as deterrents.
What might help is penalties for being careless that kick in before the worst happens. Unfortunately we rarely know when a parent has been careless in this manner until the worst happens. I am not advocating random searches to look for unsecured weapons. But suppose there is weapons discharge that did not hurt anyone. Or an instance of a child found with a loaded weapon, even if that weapon had not yet been discharged. That would be an opportunity to apply such a penalty in a way that might serve as a deterrent.
They can prevent him from ever owning a gun again. That would be an appropriate punishment.
I don’t inhabit a gated community. But I don’t live on a battlefield, either, and refuse to live life as though I were on one.
The battlefield is no place for children. Being armed may address some dangers. But it creates others, and that should be acknowledged.