"This obviously is nothing more than a tragic accident." No, FUCK YOU it's not.

[Robb]

PORTLAND, Ind. (WISH) - A 4-year-old is fighting for her life after she was accidentally shot in the head Sunday night.

Jay County Capt. Patrick Wells says the child's 8-year-old brother was aiming for a target with a .22 caliber rifle when the little girl ran through the line of fire.

"This obviously is nothing more than a tragic accident,” he said. “This is a perfect example of what can happen if you take your eyes off for second."

(snip)

No criminal charges will be filed.

Read More: http://www.wishtv.com/dpp/news/local/east_central/4-year-old-accidentally-shot-in-head

[geckosfeet]

1. What is it then?

It is tragic. It was an accident.

That said, letting an 8 year old shoot unsupervised (assuming he was unsupervised) and letting a 4 year old play in the vicinity is moronic beyond belief.

This must constitute some form of parental negligence at the very least.

on edit: ... and by (un)supervised I mean a parent standing next to the child with the firearm, ready to grab it if anything even looks like it is going south.

[truebluegreen]

7. Negligence. Not a simple accident.

The responsible party wasn't being responsible.

[Angelonthesidelines]

25. Hear here

There are no gun accidents.

Incidents are ALWAYS negligence.

[MineralMan]

2. Insufficient supervision, it seems.

We had a similar case just this week near here. This time, it was a 5-year-old who shot his older sister with a .22 that was lying around. She'll live, and that's good. Poor supervision and a firearm negligently left where a 5-year-old could access it. Accident? Well, yes, the shooting was an accident, but a completely preventable one. Negligence is in play, as it often is.

In another Minnesota story, another grandparent ran over a 2-year old child over the weekend, killing the child. Accident? Of course, but inadequate supervision of the 2-year-old played an important role there, too.

Accidents don't rule out negligence. In fact, most accidents involve some sort of negligence. The woman in Minneapolis who was killed by a falling tree recently should probably have found a route for her run in windy weather after a storm that didn't pass through a grove of trees. I don't trust trees in high winds after a rainstorm. Not one bit. It was a tragic accident, but could have been avoided. Trees fall in the wind after a heavy rainstorm. All the time.

Things can be accidents, and still be someone's fault for not paying attention. They're still tragic, but still accidents.

[billh58]

3. Another responsible

gun owner is allowed to skate for being irresponsible and incredibly stupid. There should be mandatory minimum sentencing laws for this level of intentional disregard for safety and lack of common sense.

[X_Digger]

4. You mean like the mandatory minimum sentence in the Marissa Alexander case?

Talk about intentional disregard for safety and lack of common sense..

Oh wait, it's a *good* thing when applied to cases you agree with, and a *bad* thing when applied to cases you disagree with.

[billh58]

5. When I give you

permission to speak for me, you'll know.

There should be mandatory minimum sentencing for intentional disregard for basic firearm safety and a total lack of common sense regarding the use of lethal weapons -- period. This of course would follow a fair trial, but ALL weapons "accidents" should be treated as possible crimes of negligence and prosecuted as such.

Now quote me some mind-numbing statistics and hyperbole about how safe gunz are, and only a good guy with a gun can stop a bad guy with a gun.

[X_Digger]

6. When I need permission to speak to you, I'll leave DU. ;)

There should be mandatory minimum sentencing for intentional disregard for basic firearm safety and a total lack of common sense regarding the use of lethal weapons -- period.

So, you agree with the Marissa Alexander verdict? Color me surprised.

[billh58]

9. Yes I do.

Firing warning shots in a home is just as irresponsible as allowing an 8 year-old to shoot his sister.

And I did not say that you need permission "to speak to" me, but when you presume to put words in my mouth and assume what I might say, it is my right to call bullshit on you Bubba.

[Logical]

19. You think accidental shootings should have no punishment? n-t

[X_Digger]

22. Of course not, but I also don't believe in this mandatory minimum bullshit, either.

That's one reason we have a large percentage of a generation of young black men locked away in prison, for being addicted to crack cocaine.

[Logical]

28. I 100% agree with you. Judges even hate it. The damn drug wars of the 80s caused that shit. n-t

[gollygee]

8. This is not a perfect example of what can happen when you take your eyes off your kids

Sharpie marker on the wall - maybe, if you leave a Sharpie out.

But a gun? It is a much bigger deal to leave a gun out arounds kids than a Sharpie marker. Someone had a gun within reach of that 8-year-old, and an 8-year-old in a house with guns is old enough to have been given some education about not touching them.

[Igel]

10. I think the problem was the little girl.

Let's look at what the article says.

The boy was aiming at a target. The backboard looks to have been there a while. New target. Probably not the first time he's fired the .22. He may have had some safety training. In any event, there's nothing to say that he wasn't being reasonably responsible.

Parents were at a bonfire nearby. Probably getting towards dark. If the boy had fired a shot already, the parents would know what he was doing. IIf not, they still probably knew what he was doing.

The 4-year-old ... It's harder to train a 4-year-old who's running to respect boundaries. Perhaps they assumed she'd know it was dangerous to run in front of somebody who's firing a gun. Dunno. But they took their eyes off of her and she ran in front of the boy.

Don't know much more. Was she entrusted in the 8-year-old's care? Had she been sitting at the bonfire and wandered off? Was she supposed to be playing in one area and decided she was lonely there, or it was too small an area? Ultimately, it's still the parents' responsibility. But I might cut the boy some slack.

Should the boy have seen her coming? Ideally. But if you're aiming, you are looking through a scope or focusing intently on what's ahead of you, lining up the shot. You're likely going to have one eye closed, reducing vision on one side even more.

He should have looked around to see if all was clear. But if he saw the girl playing 30 feet away, off to one side, I'm not sure he'd have told her to get away ("You're not my boss!&quot or stopped until she was clearly not going to get nearer. I've shot with people off to either side at closer distances than 30 ft. But they were adults and I knew they weren't going to run into my line of fire.

[gollygee]

11. An 8-year-old is shooting a gun without parental supervision while a 4-year-old is running around

and it's the 4-year-old's fault she got shot?

If you have a gun in your house, you lock it up until you're able to supervise properly. If you give it to an 8-year-old while you're sitting around a bonfire and your 4-year-old is running around, it isn't just an accident, it's negligence.

[Lizzie Poppet]

13. From the article, there WAS parental supervision. It just broke down at the worst possible time.

Obviously, the parental supervision wasn't close enough in this case, but it's not as if the kids were left alone with firearms or suchlike.

[LanternWaste]

17. +1.

+1.

Blaming a four year for getting shot may be the most idiotic thing I've read this week (but to be fair, it's only Monday).

[Downwinder]

12. When my brother was shooting, same ages,

I knew to stay well behind him. Any time guns were out it was serious business. No time for horseplay.

[Nye Bevan]

15. Manslaughter charges should be almost automatic in a situation like this.

You leave a gun where a kid can get to it, or you allow a kid to use a gun, and someone gets killed, it is your stupid fault.

[SCVDem]

16. I still remember the call from Edson Range, Camp Pendleton

Ready on the left!

Ready on the right!

All ready on the firing line!

Weapons are free to fire!


So much for civilian gun control. All talk and bullshit! Have another beer and scream Yahoo!

[heaven05]

18. so

the gun idiots, not responsible owner, idiots can sleep at night, rationalizations like this help them to feel better. What a fucking joke amerikkkan gun idiots are. I feel so bad for that little girl. The eight year old will suffer behind this one also. Alll because gun safety was not strictly observed.

[TNNurse]

20. So, is negligence a crime?

I am pretty sure that it is and this is negligence. If the boy was target shooting, he should have been supervised. It there was another child around nearby, that child should have been supervised. The fact that the child was able to run into the line of fire proves someone was not paying attention. If that person thought either child was old enough to not need supervision, they are not only wrong and ignorant, they are criminally responsible.

[NutmegYankee]

26. Negligence resulting in a death usually is.

The parent should be charged.

[JohnnyRingo]

21. I disagree.

It sounds like a tragic accident. Sending someone to prison solves nothing but sate your overwrought sense of justice.

I can speak with first hand knowledge that a person involved in a firearms accident has to live with it for the rest of their life, whether it was through their own careless negligence or not. There was no apparent criminal intent here.

I suspect that those who want charges pressed are the ones who unrealistically want all the guns thrown in the ocean forever. I understand the concern, but should someone go to prison for hitting a child that runs out in front of their car? They are after all, responsible for the safe control of their vehicle. Going further, should the parents of that child face criminal charges?

Apparently, you think someone has to pay for every unfortunate accident, and you're asking that a family be broken up and sent to prison over this.

[pintobean]

27. Not every unfortunate accident, just when they involve guns.

It's a crusade. Actual concern for the family doesn't enter the equation.

[JohnnyRingo]

32. Apparently, no laws were broken.

"No charges filed", so it really doesn't matter that opinions here vary. I'm sure everyone from the county DA to the city law director looked at this accident before coming to that decision.

Not every tree on the grassy knoll has a conspirator hiding behind it.

I'm still not clear on who is supposed to be charged in this accident anyway. Should it be the mom, dad, gun dealer, or perhaps the manufacturer. If the answer is one or both parents, I wonder what the goal is besides revenge against gun owners regardless of consequences. I think if they were my neighbors, I'd offer a covered dish to the grieving family instead of my middle finger as the OP suggests.

[ileus]

23. What a tragic accident, T&P for the family.

When at the range with little ones you can't, no not ever, take your eyes off them, and never should anyone advance beyond the shooting bench/line. I have to admit I didn't start the kids shooting until they were 6 & 8 years of age.

Safety first and you'll never have to deal with a situation like this with your family.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

29. I think you have the admission the wrong way round.

If you're ashamed of anything, it should be putting guns in the hands of children, not waiting until they reach the mature old age of 6 to do so.

[Angelonthesidelines]

24. In the last decade

More Americans died from a gunshot by a single digit aged child than died form terrorists attacks.

With friends like the NRA, who needs Al-Qaeda?

[wercal]

30. Around here, I'm known as a..ahem...gun humper

So I have to think about this based on my own experience.

Would I let my 8 year old shoot unsupervised? At that age, the most I was able to use unsupervised was a bb gun.

Add to that, a bonfire, with 4 year olds running around....even an adult shouldn't be shooting if kids are running around.

One more curiosity...that plywood board and target look a little high in the air, for the flat lands of corn country Indiana. When that 8 year old fires, his bullet could travel for thousands of feet. They should have a back stop.

So these people are morons.

Should they be charged? I know of a case where dad's cigarette lit the house and his son was killed - no charges. The reason? What good will it do, other than fill another bed in the prison. Its always a tough decision whether or not to charge a parent who gets his/her child killed through negligence...and often they aren't charged. This case - pretty moronic, and perhaps worthy of a charge...but remember the 8 y/o who just accidentally killed his sister could bear the brunt of the punishment, if he suddenly becomes parentless.

[kestrel91316]

31. It's not an accident - it's criminally negligent homicide.

[SCVDem]

33. Someone would be in jail

if they had a small amount of cannabis, wouldn't they?

Especially if they were of color!

Our legal system sucks!