Another Child’s Unnecessary Death Shows Need for Tight Gun Control
Some of you may recall that right before New Year’s, I wrote about a very said incident where an 11 year old boy died when he was playing with a handgun that he had been given for Christmas. Sadly, KTVU reports that in East Palo Alto California a 12 year old playing with a loaded rifle shot and killed a 2 year old when the weapon discharged, shooting the 2 year old in the chest. The 2 year old had been visiting with his mother.
The police arrived “they found a group of nine people standing in front of the home among them a woman weeping and holding a two-year-old boy who was bloodied and not breathing.” where were the parents? Why was the rifle not kept in a place where a kid could not access it to play with and kill someone.
What made me fume when I saw this article was that the parents knew that the 12 year old had gained access to the weapon before. The parents need to be prosecuted for the death of that child either criminally or civilly.
I could show hundreds of statistics on why tough gun control laws should be strictly enforced, but the best argument is that one child’s death is too many.
Perhaps you could explain the specific regulation that you believe would have prevented the death in this case. Should not criminial negligence — an already extant regulation — be sufficient to address situations where the negilgent behaviour of an adult ultimately leads to the death of a child, or do you believe that a law specifically addressing firearms is somehow needed in these situations and, if so, why would an additional firearm-specific regulation be required when, in similar circumstances where a firearm was not involved, criminal negligence itself be sufficient?
Dimensio
January 11, 2009 at 3:28 pm
I personally would like one addressed to parents who do not take appropriate precautions with guns around children. Criminal negligence laws, to the extent that they exist, are not uniform and vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. One law holding all parents and other adults who own guns to jeep them safe from children.
Criminal negligence is usually a less severe sentence. i would like a stiff sentence for this because it is so totally avoidable.
Catherine
January 11, 2009 at 3:48 pm
” One law holding all parents and other adults who own guns to jeep them safe from children.”
Would this law require parents to take “reasonable precautions” (which, in a court, will be interpreted to mean precautions that would be apparent to a “reasonable” individual based upon the specific circumstances of the individual household), or would you prefer to see specific requirements codified into law. If you would prefer the latter, what specific requirements would you recommend?
“Criminal negligence is usually a less severe sentence. i would like a stiff sentence for this because it is so totally avoidable.”
Many deaths resulting from negligence are arguably “totally avoidable”. I would not oppose holding individuals responsible, via more stringent criminal penalties, for any death resulting from their negligence regardless of the ultimate cause of death.
Dimensio
January 12, 2009 at 1:22 am