Slog

Slog Music

Music, Nightlife,
and Drunks

Thursday, March 15, 2012

Responsible Gun Owner: An Oxymoron? Or Just a Moron?

Posted by on Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 9:40 AM

Christ:

A 3-year-old boy fatally shot himself with a gun he found in a car while his family stopped for gas early Wednesday in Tacoma, police said. It was western Washington's third recent shooting by a child.... The Tacoma-area family had stopped for gas about 12:30 a.m. The father put his pistol under the seat and got out to pump gas while the mother went inside the convenience store, Benjamin said. They left their son and their infant daughter in the car. The boy climbed out of his child seat, found the gun and shot himself in the head.

 

Comments (89) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
The_Shaved_Bear 1
This would not have happened if the daughter was carrying a gun.
Posted by The_Shaved_Bear on March 15, 2012 at 9:47 AM · Report this
2
That would be a gun owner who's not responsible. If he'd had a lock on his gun, or kept the gun in a safe in the car (I think they have those), then he'd be responsible and his life would be very different today.

I don't know what will be the legal consequences but, at the very least, this is a heavy weight they'll carry for the rest of their lives, because of something silly.
Posted by floater on March 15, 2012 at 9:48 AM · Report this
3
How does a small child have the strength to pull the trigger? This guy must be totally paranoid to keep his gun so handy and ready to fire.
Posted by Mr. J on March 15, 2012 at 9:54 AM · Report this
Anthony Hecht 4
@2 - Apparently, the legal consequences will be nothing-it's being ruled an accident and no charges are expected. Washington doesn't have a law about restricting children's access to firearms. Sickening.
Posted by Anthony Hecht on March 15, 2012 at 9:55 AM · Report this
5
So was the gun just sitting out in the open until they stopped for gas? And why the fuck was the gun loaded? UGH
Posted by Lumpmoose on March 15, 2012 at 9:55 AM · Report this
Geraldo Riviera 6
Unless on a trip....3 year olds should be in bed at 12:30 am. I'll go with irresponsible.
Posted by Geraldo Riviera on March 15, 2012 at 9:58 AM · Report this
7
Terrible.

According to the ÇDC 20% of practicing gun owners inflict lethal wounds on themselves or loved ones.

What.a.Bunch.of.Fucking.MORONS.......
Posted by the 20% on March 15, 2012 at 10:02 AM · Report this
seatackled 8
I guess I can kind of understand what the guy was thinking--maybe you don't want to show up at a gas station at midnight with a gun, though that raises the point about where he was carrying it--was it "open-carry"? Of course, the NRA response will be simply that he wasn't observing all the rules, so lock and load, but people can't ever be 100% by-the-book on everything forever.
Posted by seatackled on March 15, 2012 at 10:02 AM · Report this
despicable me 9
NEVER underestimate what a 3 year old will do out of curiousity.

Rest In Peace, little guy.
Posted by despicable me on March 15, 2012 at 10:04 AM · Report this
10
@5 because and unloaded gun is just an expensive and hard to clean club.

I'm guessing that he dad felt carrying his gun on his person while gassing up at 12:30 in Tacoma might be provocative or draw unwanted attention from law enforcement.

Obviously there's a segment of society who feel that any criticism of their right to keep and bear arms is the first step along the path to socialist storm troopers coming into their homes in the middle of the night to take their weapons. There's no reasoning with those people, so I've given up trying.

The cost for their particular civil liberty fetish is the occasional dead child; I'm done caring.
Posted by JAT on March 15, 2012 at 10:04 AM · Report this
bugwitch 11
So, what would responsible gun ownership been in this situation? My guess, judging by the comments, it would include having no bullets in the gun and/or it would have some sort of locking mechanism or be in a lock box(?). Am I correct? If that's the case, then would that not negate the whole idea that a gun is supposed to be used for defense in, presumably, unexpected circumstances? The amount of time required to disable the lock and then add bullets would probably be a considerable duration, unless the owner is an experienced marksman.

So, with the above being said, and assuming it is true, doesn't that make the entire idea of "responsible gun ownership for means of personal protection" unreasonable. And by guns, I am speaking of handguns in this case.

I don't mind guns when used responsibly, but this just has me wondering if there is any sort of real-life example where one could actually be "responsible" and fit the definition of defense which the Gun-Owner-Fan-Club touts as being necessary. I have been pondering getting a handgun myself to keep in my bedroom at night and also for fun shootings at the range. I'm pretty sure I don't have to worry about my cats getting to the gun and shooting me...unless they get tired of their cat food and want something meatier...
Posted by bugwitch on March 15, 2012 at 10:05 AM · Report this
12
10

dead children are a tragedy.

unless their mother is exercising her choice.

to kill them.

then its A-OK.

Posted by the souls of 938,000 babies murdered this year on March 15, 2012 at 10:08 AM · Report this
13
I remember picking up the gun in my parent's nightstand. The curiosity was overwhelming. It's amazing I lived. Funny getting angry at dead parents.
Posted by ejamadoodle on March 15, 2012 at 10:09 AM · Report this
Vince 14
A cautionary tale for irresponsible parents? There was an infant girl on the news whose parents had given her those powerful magnets to play with and she swallowed over thirty of them. It almost killed her. So you hope that other parents hear these things and do not repeat these mistakes. But no, this is not the first time we hear these things. The story just keeps repeating. It is a dangerous world and children are always the victim.
Posted by Vince on March 15, 2012 at 10:09 AM · Report this
Foghorn Leghorn 15
So what was that in the Morning News about no children being shot yesterday? Or was that 12:30 this morning?
Posted by Foghorn Leghorn on March 15, 2012 at 10:10 AM · Report this
16
Very sad story. Also, angering. People are stupid; this can result in tragedy for themselves and others. I'm a responsible gun owner. They're locked in a safe in my closet when I'm not firing them. Only I know where the keys are. They are not for protection- I just enjoy target shooting.
Posted by throxus on March 15, 2012 at 10:11 AM · Report this
17
7 hey we see what you did there- if gun owners were as dangerous irresponsible and selfish as homosexuals there would be 16,000,000 fatalities from gun accidents.
instead of 1500.
Posted by relativity on March 15, 2012 at 10:14 AM · Report this
Phoebe in Wallingford 18
I thought one could load a gun in only a second or two, clicking the chamber in or something like that?
Surely that's plenty of time to load if clear and present danger arises.
Posted by Phoebe in Wallingford on March 15, 2012 at 10:15 AM · Report this
19
@10: That misses the point. Why do you need a club for a late night drive in the first place?

Dad sounds like he's got some undiagnosed issues with paranoia.
Posted by suddenlyorcas on March 15, 2012 at 10:16 AM · Report this
20
I don't know if I can say anything useful about this, as a rural person living in a country with fairly reasonable gun laws. And in a town that hasn't had a murder since the 1940s.

Everyone I know, almost, owns guns. I was brought up in a home with guns. Guns fill the freezer with meat, and shoot the coyotes that are after the chickens. I could get access to a rifle or a shotgun in five minutes, but I haven't the foggiest notion where I'd find a handgun - I think I knew one person who had one, once.

As for what would constitute responsible in this instance - where is he going with his small children that is so dangerous that he feels he must have a loaded firearm at hand? The gun should not have been loaded, or should have been locked up, or both.
Posted by agony on March 15, 2012 at 10:19 AM · Report this
npage148 21
@13. Luckily my dad was good about gun safety. Everyone was ALWAYS locked in a safe with the key on his keychain (always on him). The only thing out was a pellet gun that was near impossible for a kid of pump. My wife's stepdad on the other hand. Loaded handguns scattered across the house in random drawers. Rifles with ammo out in the open together. Nothing locked, nothing secured. Luckily she was an only child, not sure a son would have survived in the house.

Everyone's a responsible gun owner until something like this happens
Posted by npage148 on March 15, 2012 at 10:20 AM · Report this
NaFun 22
@4 - I'm pretty sure hearing a gunshot and coming back to your car to find your 3 year old child bleeding from a gunshot wound to the head that was THEIR OWN FAULT is punishment enough, Anthony.
Posted by NaFun http://www.dancesafe.org on March 15, 2012 at 10:22 AM · Report this
23
@11, "So, what would responsible gun ownership been in this situation?...Am I correct?"

No, you are not correct. Responsible gun ownership at that point would have been to keep the gun ON YOUR PERSON, so you know exactly where it is and who has access to it at every single moment (no one but you). If you fear (as @10), that "carrying [a] gun on [your] person while gassing up at 12:30 in Tacoma might be provocative or draw unwanted attention from law enforcement", then either conceal it or don't carry it at all: part of "responsibly" carrying the gun openly is dealing with the unwanted attention and provocation that results.

@22, I disagree. It's negligent homicide, and should be treated as such.
Posted by Ancient Sumerian on March 15, 2012 at 10:31 AM · Report this
24
I am absolutely in favor of people's right to carry handguns for their own protection.

I also firmly believe that these people should be charged with murder. There is absolutely no excuse for giving your child access to a loaded unlocked gun.
Posted by smoakes on March 15, 2012 at 10:41 AM · Report this
spamky 25
How was a 3-year old able to get himself out of his car seat? I don't have kids but I don't remember my sisters being capable of doing this when I was younger
Posted by spamky on March 15, 2012 at 10:42 AM · Report this
26
@12 - those aren't children, they're blastulas. Fuck off!
@19 - I agree with you completely (any missing of the point was entirely rhetorical).
Posted by JAT on March 15, 2012 at 10:42 AM · Report this
hans millionaire 27
@23 agree completely. If you want to carry a gun, carry it! dont leave it where your kids can access it :(
Posted by hans millionaire on March 15, 2012 at 10:49 AM · Report this
Posted by Urgutha Forka on March 15, 2012 at 10:57 AM · Report this
29
@11
@23
I agree with @23.

The problem with a situation like this is that there were a series of decisions already made that should have been made differently PRIOR to arriving at the gas station with a loaded gun and two children.

"Responsible" in the "what should be done in this scenario" sense is wrong.
Responsible means NOT being in a situation such as that in the first place.
Responsible gun owner.
Responsible parent.
Responsible.
Posted by fairly.unbalanced on March 15, 2012 at 10:59 AM · Report this
ROAG 30
second amendment spokesman Workman in Seattle Times: "We have all sorts of drunk driving laws in this state, and it doesn't stop people from driving drunk".
Therefore: get rid of drunk driving laws?
Posted by ROAG on March 15, 2012 at 11:12 AM · Report this
31
Aren't there laws in Washington against child endangerment? Certainly charges could be filed for endangering a child by leaving him alone in a car with a loaded gun.

Any idiot can have a kid.....
Posted by Barbara on March 15, 2012 at 11:13 AM · Report this
keshmeshi 32
@11,

The guy had a concealed carry permit. He could have stuck it under his jacket. Or, for the benefit of the rest of humanity, down the front of his pants.
Posted by keshmeshi on March 15, 2012 at 11:13 AM · Report this
33
23 has it right, 11. Responsible would be keeping it on your person and under your control. If you don't want to do that, at the least put it in the glove box and lock the box.

Of course, the gun does him no good left in the car. Might as well just leave it at home in that case.

What irks me is that so many have such a knee-jerk reaction to such a tragedy and call to ban firearms, to hold the parents responsible, etc. Yet the same people who would condemn the firearm owners would console a parent whose child wandered into the back yard and drowned in a swimming pool.

According to the CDC ( http://webappa.cdc.gov/cgi-bin/broker.ex… ) children from 1-12 are over 14 times more likely to die from drowning than firearms. This does not diminish the tragedy of the 3 year old's death, but should put it in perspective - a device that isn't even meant to have some efficacy at killing is responsible for more deaths than a device which is generally meant to have that efficacy.

This is a tragedy, but seeing it made into political hash to push an agenda to curtail our civil rights just makes it worse. While the natural urge is to "do something", I think the resources, both financial and in political capital, that would be spent pursuing this political dead-end could be better allocated elsewhere. The parents are likely already blaming themselves, much as any parent whose child's accident resulted in their death would feel (whether it be by poisoning, drowning, falling, suffocating, or shooting themselves). Show some compassion, eh?
More...
Posted by Tawnos on March 15, 2012 at 11:14 AM · Report this
Theodore Gorath 34
The real question is, did the gun owner also own a pitbull? Because that would be REALLY irresponsible.
Posted by Theodore Gorath on March 15, 2012 at 11:33 AM · Report this
35
@20: From what I understand, he's going to America, and that's a good enough reason to be armed in the middle of the night.

The murder rate there is 10 times as high as in Canada, after all. And being in the general proximity of a gas station or convenience store in the middle of the night is pretty much dangerous anywhere.
Posted by gromm on March 15, 2012 at 11:36 AM · Report this
SiSiSodaPop in Vegas 36
Responsible in this situation would have been to have the gun unloaded and in a locked compartment, i.e. the glove box...with the magazine in a separate place away from the gun. Or for the parent to have a license to carry a concealed weapon and keep the gun on his person at all times where the child could not access it.
Posted by SiSiSodaPop in Vegas on March 15, 2012 at 11:39 AM · Report this
37
@15: This story was already posted in the Wednesday morning news, and I think maybe again after that.
Posted by Ben on March 15, 2012 at 11:40 AM · Report this
38
Guns are only supposed to be used for two things: Hunting and blowing off steam at a shooting range. They may be useful in war but war sucks so that's off the list, and even if you have a gun on you when a situation arises so that you may use that gun in self-defense in a way that doesn't endanger the public, you're just as likely to be shot by the gun as you are to shoot your attacker, so guns don't work for self-defense other then in NRA member's masturbatory fantasies.
Posted by Friendstastegood on March 15, 2012 at 11:42 AM · Report this
Lance Thrustwell 39
There is such a thing as responsible gun ownership. This clearly wasn't it. But unless he's some sort of monster, there's no need for further punishment of this guy beyond perhaps revoking his gun license. If he loved his son the way I do mine, he's in Hell right now, already. And he may never come all the way back.
Posted by Lance Thrustwell on March 15, 2012 at 11:43 AM · Report this
thatsnotright 40
@11 cat shoots owner with 9MM. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,1500…
Posted by thatsnotright on March 15, 2012 at 11:47 AM · Report this
bugwitch 41
@40 Well shit...

@ Whoever replied to my comment...
What I was getting at was the idea that handguns are to be used for personal protection. Presumably these protection moments occur unexpectedly, so if someone keeps their gun locked and/or unloaded, does that not make the whole thing pointless?

I used to live in Lakewood...I can understand the desire to carry a gun at 12:30 in the morning.
Posted by bugwitch on March 15, 2012 at 11:58 AM · Report this
ItsAllOverNow 42
The title of this post sucks. I'm all for tightening up gun control laws and I think that in almost all cases carrying concealed weapons is irresponsible. But there are a lot of people who own rifles/shotguns exclusively for hunting and who always keep them locked in a safe. These people are not morons.

@11 While I don't think anyone needs a handgun for home protection, these hand-print activated gun safes are pretty ideal for someone who wants to keep a handgun at home for protection and be as smart as possible about it. http://www.gunvault.com/
Posted by ItsAllOverNow http://nowaybro.blogspot.com/ on March 15, 2012 at 12:11 PM · Report this
Dingo 43
It's amazing how people in places with strict gun laws don't need guns to "protect" themselves while shopping.
Posted by Dingo on March 15, 2012 at 12:18 PM · Report this
Daddy Love 44
The father who took the gun out of his lap and stuffed it under the seat will suffer no legal consequences. That's the opposite of responsible.
Posted by Daddy Love on March 15, 2012 at 12:24 PM · Report this
45
I've recently started caring less about this sort of thing when I realized that these people are reducing the chance of individuals like them existing in the next generation.
Posted by Jason Petersen http://fixedpoints.net on March 15, 2012 at 12:32 PM · Report this
46
@35 - Really? "Being in the general proximity of a gas station" in the middle of the night anywhere is dangerous?

I guess I've been doing it wrong.

I would wager that 99.999% of the time, it's perfectly safe to purchase gas at night.
Posted by Mike in Olympia on March 15, 2012 at 12:37 PM · Report this
Urgutha Forka 47
Dan started this troll thread on purpose.

I predict his next post will be about fat, homophobic, pit bulls.
Posted by Urgutha Forka on March 15, 2012 at 12:42 PM · Report this
48
It couldn't have been a very dangerous location if both parents left two very young children alone in the car (which is a pretty silly thing to do, even without a gun under the seat).
Posted by northcoastcat on March 15, 2012 at 12:45 PM · Report this
49
The station where they stopped must not have been that dangerous or they wouldn't have left two very young children alone in the car, which in itself is pretty silly, even without the gun.
Posted by northcoastcat on March 15, 2012 at 12:49 PM · Report this
keshmeshi 50
@39,

What if someone totally unrelated to that asshole was killed by his gun? Like if the toddler shot off the gun and the bullet hit and killed some individual in another car? Does he get to escape punishment then?

The argument that the guy should escape punishment for negligent homicide because he's torn up over the loss of the victim presumes that the victim is his property to dispose of as he sees fit. Where is the justice for his child? Why does the death of his child not merit the same punishment as if a stranger had been killed?

And what if he doesn't give a shit? What if he's a sociopath? Can we punish him?
Posted by keshmeshi on March 15, 2012 at 12:54 PM · Report this
Kevin_BGFH 51
@11, "So, what would responsible gun ownership been in this situation?...Am I correct?"

If your three-year-old son is able to get your gun and shoot his head off, I'd call that a prima facia case of not being a responsible gun owner. The legal burden of proof is on the father to show he wasn't being irresponsible.
Posted by Kevin_BGFH http://biggayfrathouse.typepad.com/blog/ on March 15, 2012 at 1:09 PM · Report this
52
This wasn't a father, it was the mother's boyfriend. Not his kid; he didn't care.
Posted by sarah70 on March 15, 2012 at 1:17 PM · Report this
53
Yet another senseless gun death: cue the gun nuts!
Posted by judybrowni on March 15, 2012 at 1:19 PM · Report this
Will in Seattle 54
Darwin. FTW.
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on March 15, 2012 at 1:57 PM · Report this
debug 55
This is why we need to ban children in cars. If it weren't for cars children in fatal accidents while in a car would be reduced to zero!

cue the auto nuts!
Posted by debug on March 15, 2012 at 2:06 PM · Report this
56
Responsible Car Owner: An Oxymoron? Or Just a Moron?

Drunk Driving Killed 225 People In Washington State In 2008
Posted by hifiandrew on March 15, 2012 at 2:31 PM · Report this
OutInBumF 57
Handguns can only legally be transported (car, person, etc) with a concealed weapons permit, so we assume he had said permit. Nothing in these permits says you must carry the weapon on your person.
People who carry handguns are looking for trouble, and when you look for trouble it finds you. There is only one reason to own a handgun- to kill another human being.
I was raised with responsible gun ownership drummed in from age 4. This guy was NOT a responsible gun owner.
Posted by OutInBumF on March 15, 2012 at 2:37 PM · Report this
nwspirit 58
"Barring some seismic re-alignment in this country, the gun control debate is all but settled-- and [the NRA and their allies] won. The occasional horrific massacre [or "tragic accident"] is just the price everyone else has to pay. Over and over again, apparently."

Adapted from "This Modern World," re: assassination attempt on Gabby Giffords.
http://thismodernworld.com/wp-content/up…
Posted by nwspirit on March 15, 2012 at 3:11 PM · Report this
Simple 59
#52 I hadn't picked up on that. WOW this story just got twice as sad.
Posted by Simple on March 15, 2012 at 3:17 PM · Report this
Fifty-Two-Eighty 60
@58 wins the thread. (This is exactly why I mostly don't even bother commenting about this any more.)
Posted by Fifty-Two-Eighty http://www.nra.org on March 15, 2012 at 3:28 PM · Report this
61
Can we have a little compassion for these parents. They both made terrible mistakes, and they and their chidlren have paid the ultimate price. Believe it or not, most human beigns make a serious error in judgment at least once in their lives. It is often simpe luck that prevents someoe form being seriously injured or killed as a reusltof our mistakes. These parents had no business leaving loaded guns in the car with their children. This does not mean they do not sympathy in their time fo great anguish
Posted by susan rosenthal on March 15, 2012 at 3:31 PM · Report this
BEG 62
@11 One parent stay in the car with the kids at all times. Have dad pump gas while mom waits, have dad wait while mom goes into store. That's about the only way to work it out :-P

What a tragedy. And it *should* be ruled negligent homicide, and would be in several states, I think.
Posted by BEG http://twitter.com/#!/browneyedgirl65 on March 15, 2012 at 4:01 PM · Report this
63
@61, other people asking for compassion for the parents:

No, we can't have compassion for the parents. You know why? Because they still have another child that they can be negligent with. If this was their only child, and they were both incapable of reproducing, then I might consider compassion.
Posted by Sathya on March 15, 2012 at 4:04 PM · Report this
64
@61 Fuck the parents. Their surviving child should be taken away for the child's own safety and the parents should be rotting in prison. If the prisons are too crowded they can let out a couple harmless potheads.
Posted by redwulf25_ci on March 15, 2012 at 4:10 PM · Report this
65
@5

Why would anyone have a gun that is not loaded and ready to fire at a moment's notice, what would be the point of it?
Posted by Mattyx on March 15, 2012 at 4:17 PM · Report this
66
There are responsible gun owners out there. I know some of them. But the funny thing is, I don't usually see them balk at stricter gun control laws because said laws tend to consist of things they're all already doing.
Posted by laurelgardner http://www.etsy.com/shop.php?user_id=5877570 on March 15, 2012 at 4:28 PM · Report this
67
@65 - Intimidation, actually, can be an excellent way to protect yourself and you don't need a loaded gun for that. Or even a real one; blank shooters will do. Also, some people only want the extra protection in their homes, which can be legitimate if you're afraid of a home invasion by a stalker or violent ex. Out in public, you're safer against those things.

Posted by laurelgardner http://www.etsy.com/shop.php?user_id=5877570 on March 15, 2012 at 4:31 PM · Report this
68
@65 It magically makes your penis feel larger.
Posted by Dr. Gnu on March 15, 2012 at 4:34 PM · Report this
69
agree w/ 5280.

@58 wins the whole issue--the NRA's money trumps, and we pay, over and over again, in senseless tragedies. so fucked up.
Posted by gracey on March 15, 2012 at 4:46 PM · Report this
70
@65 - thing is, though, he *didn't* have the gun. It was in the car. So it would have been exactly as much good to him unloaded, or locked in the trunk, or in the glove box, or ...

The idea that this neighbourhood is too dangerous to be in without a loaded and ready to fire gun, yet not dangerous enough to take the gun with you when going into the place where the money and goods are kept, and not too dangerous to leave small children unattended in a car - what universe has a place like that?

As I said earlier, almost everyone I know has firearms. There are lots of responsible gun owners around. This guy is as guilty of - what would it be? criminal negligence causing death? - as he would be if he was drunk driving and killed the kid that way. He had good choices available to him, and took the stupid deadly one.
Posted by agony on March 15, 2012 at 5:28 PM · Report this
71
I don't get it. It's such a dangerous trip he has to take a loaded firearm, but can leave the kids in the car alone.

Oh and the kid was strapped piss poorly into his car seat if he could get out like that.
Posted by wendykh on March 15, 2012 at 9:16 PM · Report this
72
Sorry for the death of this innocent child. Parents need to THINK and act accordingly. If you are so afraid to be out and about without a gun....perhaps you should leave your children home with a responsible adult. These parents won't have that concern any longer, unless they actually want to see their infant daughter reach adulthood. If my post comes across as a wee bit snarky, maybe that is because I am having a hard time understanding how the father(gun-owner) was pumping gas (so, presumably somewhat close to the car) and failed to notice his 3 yr. old free himself from his car seat, climb into the front seat, go searching for the gun & take the safety off....resulting in his accidental death.

(Apologies in advance, if others have already beaten this dead horse; I was too pissed off to read the comments before typing.)
Posted by TampaDink on March 15, 2012 at 10:45 PM · Report this
73
@#58 "Barring some seismic re-alignment in this country, the gun control debate is all but settled...

I thought that the same was true about reproductive rights. Based on recent legislation throughout the country, I have doubts about anything we thought was settled.

Having now read through all of the posts here, learning that the gun owner was not the child's father, I stand more steadfast in my subtle concerns posted above.

Children, guns, cars....just because you CAN have them doesn't mean that you SHOULD.
Posted by TampaDink on March 16, 2012 at 12:17 AM · Report this
74
@66(laurelgardner) put it best here, I think. There is such a thing as a responsible firearm owner, but they tend not to balk at restrictions on firearms because mostly they consist of things s/he is already doing.

Just as responsible drivers are basically already doing what laws on e.g. wearing seatbelts tell other drivers to do.

If you want to own a gun, you should (by the conservative's very ethical/moral code) take the consequences. Some of which should include mandatory safe practices, intended to protect other people from accidents that careless use causes. If you don't, then you deserve the hell you get. Which is why, even though I understand this guy may be in hell over what he did, still I think he deserves to be punished. A life was lost, and even though bad luck played a major role (the child might have played with something else rather than with the gun), he had safer choices he didn't make.
Posted by ankylosaur on March 16, 2012 at 1:48 AM · Report this
What Now? 75
In a matter of years, handheld laser guns will be a reality. (Military contractors have been developing laser weapons for a while. So have techno geeks.) They won't need ammo, only an electrical charge. They'll be Star Trek phasers, essentially.

Should these laser guns be legal too? You know, because of the Second Amendment? And hunting? And "protection"?

Maybe just for the responsible laser gun owners?

And of course there will be safety measures. So 3-year olds will never blast their heads off with them.
Posted by What Now? http://voterocky.org on March 16, 2012 at 3:17 AM · Report this
76
Like @20,

I grew up in a rural area that had families that had to hunt deer to have a plentiful winter's larder. We also had a lot of hunters from outside the area come in to hunt. Anyone that sees the result of what a firearm is designed to do won't just pick one up without knowing how to do so safely. In my case seeing a small garage filled (the entire perimeter filled, and the back half completely loaded) with hanging deer carcases taught me that lesson.

Everyone in town knew not to wear brown or green clothing, even in the center of town, during hunting season. It makes me wonder if that was why scouting jackets were a bright red (1970s and 80s). Hunting accidents were a real threat that no one dismissed, but no one would've considered banning hunting either.

Peace.
Posted by Married in MA on March 16, 2012 at 5:14 AM · Report this
77
He was a responsible gun owner like Santorum is a human being.

I would never leave a loaded firearm sitting about, I would never leave one around children. Of course, I am not a moron.

If California can take away children of parents who are using medical marijuana, Washington should be able to take away the remaining children in this family.
Posted by Kylere on March 16, 2012 at 5:58 AM · Report this
geoz 78
With the recent debate of allowing concealed weapons onto college campuses, the gun nuts are all about making this legal. They always claim that those who carry are sooooo responsible. And when one of these things happen, it is always an exception... always something that couldn't happen to THEM. I am really not opposed to those who wish to have guns. But don't carry them around, keep them locked away until the hunting season or whatever. The self-righteousness of the crowd who say more guns is equal to less crime... it is unconvincing to say the least.
Posted by geoz on March 16, 2012 at 7:50 AM · Report this
79
When the member of another tribe behaves badly it is indicative of the way those people are. They're all like that really, not just the few who get caught.

When a member of our tribe behaves badly they are one of a small minority of bad apples that we are trying hard to identify and either remove or reform. The actions of these few bad apples is no reflection on the vast majority of us, who are nothing like that and are deeply ashamed of those who got caught.

It doesn't matter which tribe it is - drivers, teachers, lawyers, politicians, bicyclists, gun owners, environmentalists, conservatives, etc. If it's one of THEM, they are ALL like that. If it's one of US, it a case of a few bad apples.
Posted by Charlie Mas on March 16, 2012 at 9:39 AM · Report this
venomlash 80
@75: Show me a man who thinks that handheld laser cannons will be a reality soon, and I'll show you a man unfamiliar with the energy requirements of a high-powered laser.
Posted by venomlash on March 16, 2012 at 12:17 PM · Report this
shurenka 81
I don't think the man was entirely at fault. The safety should have been on, but if a gun is for self-defense then it must be loaded and easy to access (in a safe? c'mon). Although the glove compartment is a much safer bet, obviously, than under the seat.

If the child were slightly older, I expect they would/should have told them to be careful of the gun, never touch it, etc. But they probably did not expect a three year old to find and then play with it and have the strength to pull the trigger. (It is hard to accidentally pull the trigger on a gun unless you mean to.) Yes, it was negligence, but it was fundamentally an accident. I don't think the parents deserve to be prosecuted. They have already paid the highest price a parent could.
Posted by shurenka on March 16, 2012 at 1:50 PM · Report this
82
@75, perhaps you'll be convinced by this article by Gary Brecher, the infamous War Nerd, on the reasons why laser and other ray guns, despite always being heralded as 'the next big thing', are actually taking such a long time to materialize as real weapons.

I'm not saying the technology won't be developed some day that makes hand-held laser guns a reality, but I am saying you're ignoring some pretty big design problems (including energy consumption, as venomlash said above, plus air and water in abundance as we have on our planet) if you think it's an easy problem that has almost been solved.
Posted by ankylosaur on March 16, 2012 at 2:01 PM · Report this
What Now? 83
@80, 82

Yes, because the history of battery technology is NOT one of decreasing size and increasing capacity.

In any case you miss the point:

Technological "advances" will continue to produce faster, easier, more effective ways of making other people die.

Are we to believe that the Founding Fathers intended for citizens to have the right to bear those arms?

Also, I can't find a definitive answer to this: Can someone fill me in as to whether it is legal for private citizens in the US to bear such arms as grenades, fully automatic rifles, bazookas, surface to air missiles, etc.?
Posted by What Now? http://voterocky.org on March 16, 2012 at 4:14 PM · Report this
Cascadian Bacon 84
Dan...really...blaming all gun owners because some idiots kid died due to his negligence is like blaming all homosexuals for when a boy gets molested by his uncle. It simple isn't true and you really should know better. I respect your civil rights, hell I even fight for them, I wish you would respect mine. After all firearms ownership is a civil right, as both decided by the supreme court and enumerated in the Bill of Rights.

@83

Private citizens are allowed to own machine guns, bazookas (not much ammo left for those) and grenades. However these are all classified as Class 3 weapons and destructive devices and require a ATF permit along with an extensive background check. The owner must also pay a $200 tax per item, in the case of a bazooka or rpg the owner would have to pay a separate tax for the launcher then a $200 tax on each round of ammunition. Fun fact: The Waco raid was due to a failure tax on a presumed machine-gun, turned out not to exist. You can also own these weapons if you have a class 3 dealer or a title 2 manufacture permit which is extremely hard to get, you need to hire a lawyer to get through all the regulations. there are also exemptions for law enforcement, but in that case the weapon is usually property of the department.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Fi…

State laws vary on ownership of title 2 weapons, In WA you can have sound suppressors but cannot own short barreled (under 16 in) rifles or shotguns under 18 inches, fully automatic weapons (machine guns) and destructive devices (grenade launchers, explosives, etc) are also banned. But is Arizona anything goes. Fun fact: a crime has never been committed with a legally owned class 3 weapon. Manufacture of new machine-guns for civilian ownership has been prohibited since 1986, all it has don't is served to make guns expensive with no corresponding drop in crime, as none of these weapons has ever been used in a crime.

Also I think the founding fathers, being firearms enthusiast who fought a revolution against tyranny, would look a modern weapon like an AR15 and say "I wish we would have had a few wagon loads of these at bunker hill."

More...
Posted by Cascadian Bacon on March 17, 2012 at 1:49 PM · Report this
85
There is definitely such a thing as a responsible gun owner, I know this because I live in Sweden, and we have the most guns per capita of any nation on earth. Three-year-olds never shoot their heads off here though, the only shootings we have here where actual people get shot involve police and/or serialkillers (and the odd hunting accident).
Posted by Friendstastegood on March 18, 2012 at 3:18 AM · Report this
86
@84 - A pedophile and a homosexual are in no way the same thing.

You're welcome to own as many guns in a well regulated militia as you like.

Good point, "Fun fact: a crime has never been committed with a legally owned class 3 weapon." It suggests to me that if we extend the same requirements to all weapons we might have a similar rate of all weapons being used in crimes.
Posted by MikeB on March 18, 2012 at 6:51 AM · Report this
Mahtli69 87
Where kids are concerned, swimming pools make guns look like feather pillows.
Posted by Mahtli69 on March 18, 2012 at 5:45 PM · Report this
venomlash 88
@83: Trends don't usually continue indefinitely. We're already running into a wall as far as batteries go due to the physical problem of instability. You'll notice that lithium ion batteries are prone to explosion in a way the old alkaline cells aren't.
Posted by venomlash on March 18, 2012 at 9:08 PM · Report this
89
@#3 the thumb is. That's why accidental child gun deaths are usually so young. They pick it up, and the only may they can pull the trigger is with the thumb, ie barrel towards them.
Posted by Zhukov on March 19, 2012 at 1:03 PM · Report this

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

Want great deals and a chance to win tickets to the best shows in Seattle? Join The Stranger Presents email list!


All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy