How young is too young for a kid to own a gun? Twelve? Seven? How about Five? Is five too young?
Not according to certain gun cultures in this country.
Five is just a dandy age for a kid to own a rifle. The age of scant reasoning ability or sense of responsibility. The age when a lot of kids are still wetting their beds and sucking their thumbs.
But hey! This is America! And the gummint has no right to tell us parents what age we can put a 22-caliber Little Cricket single-shot rifle in little Johnny or Janie's hands.
And for poor little two-year old Caroline Starks: Sh*t Happens!
5-year-old Kentucky boy fatally shoots 2-year-old sister
From Leigh Remizowski
CNN updated 10:55 AM EDT, Wed May 1, 2013
"(CNN) -- A Kentucky mother stepped outside of her home just for a few minutes, but it was long enough for her 5-year-old son to accidentally shoot his 2-year-old sister with the .22-caliber rifle he got for his birthday, state officials said.
Little Caroline Starks died Tuesday in Burkesville, in southern Kentucky, according to Cumberland County Coroner Gary White.
"The little Crickett rifle is a single-shot rifle and it has a child safety," White said of the weapon. "It's just a tragic situation." Kids and guns: 'These are not isolated tragedies' Starks' autopsy is scheduled for Wednesday, but the shooting has been ruled accidental, according to Kentucky State Police Public Affairs officer Billy Gregory."
Ruled an accident, eh? I'd rule it negligent homicide and punish the stupid parent(s) who put a weapon in the hands of a child. But then I'd be labeled an anti-Second Amendment maniac. And the parents who gave a baby a weapon to play with--a weapon that killed his sibling--would be praised for their love of freedoms! and liberty! and their right to bear arms.
And the right to bury their baby girl.
UPDATE I
Here's How the Rifle That Just Killed a 2-Year-Old Girl Is Marketed for Kids
By Mark Follman on Wed. May 1, 2013 3:10 PM PDT
"Clearly the issue of parental responsibility is at the center of this tragedy.
But against the backdrop of the Newtown massacre and ongoing national debate over regulating firearms, it also points back to the big business of guns—including how the industry profits from products aimed at children.
The Pennsylvania-based maker of Crickett rifles, Keystone Sporting Arms, markets its guns with the slogan "My First Rifle." They are available with different barrel and stock designs, including some made in hot pink to appeal to young girls.
Business has boomed since the company's inception in 1996, according to its website. In its first year, it had four employees and produced 4,000 rifles for kids; by 2008 it had greatly expanded its operations, with 70 employees and an output of 60,000 rifles a year.
KSA's site states that its goal is "to instill gun safety in the minds of youth shooters and encourage them to gain the knowledge and respect that hunting and shooting activities require and deserve."
But a visit to the "kids corner" page reveals a gallery of photos that some people might find unsettling:"
Stupid American Gun Culture: Every pre-schooler has the 2nd Amendment right to play with a lethal weapon--and kill his siblings!
Capt. Fogg over at The Swash Zone has a post up on this horrid tragedy.
UPDATE II:
The great Charlie Pierce:
"Nobody in this story is ever going to be the same.
I can't imagine the trauma the family's going through. The little girl is dead and the little boy is going to carry this moment to his grave.
Luckily, though, there was a local official to explain it all to the visiting media. "It's a normal way of life. I mean, folks - and it's not just rural Kentucky, it's rural America. I mean folks hunting and fishing, it's sports shooting - it's just a way of life. You know, you begin at an early age, learning to use and respect a gun," said Joe Phelps, Cumberland County Judge Executive, whose position has been described as similar to that of a local mayor.
Stop.
No.
Also, too: goddammit. Up with this, I no longer have to put. If your "way of life" involves handing deadly weapons to five-year olds, your way of life is completely screwed up and you should change it immediately because it is stupid and wrong. (And, again, also, too: goddammit, "learning to use and respect a gun" means at least knowing that the fking thing is loaded when it's sitting in the corner of the parlor like it's a damn umbrella stand or something, and we should talk about hat part, too.)
It is not in any way "normal" to hand a kindergartner a firearm. If a mother from the inner-city of, say, Philadelphia did that, and the kid subsequently shot his sister to death, Fox News never would stop yelling about the crisis in African American communities and the Culture Of Death, and rap music, too.
If your culture is telling you that children who have only recently emerged from toddlerhood should have their own guns, then your culture is deadly and dangerous and that should concern you, too.
If your culture demands that, in the face of a general national outrage over the killing of other children, your politics work to loosen the gun laws you have, as they apparently did in Kentucky, then your culture is making your politics stupid and wrong and you should change them, too. I do not have to understand these people any more, and it is way too early in the day to be drinking this much."
43 comments:
Just some more NRA - Gun Manufacturers' collateral damage. They got their money so they don't give a shit.
forget the 'nucks. i'm tuning in the broonz and leafs.
But who can resist the Green Men?!
There is no sense to be made from the yahoos who believe owning guns is a sacrament from God.
//is a sacrament from God. //
naw, it was on one of them tablet things that Charlton Heston gave to the NRA.
A five year old owns a gun? Good grief!
I grew up around guns -- very rural here back in those days with a plethora of rabid animals running around.
But even my parents, who also grew up with guns in their households, didn't allow me any access to any firearm until I was 8 years old -- and even then under supervision (target practice in our own back yard). And ammo was kept locked up, too. Thus, no loaded gun was ever lying around for me to get my hands on.
the parents who gave a baby a weapon to play with--a weapon that killed his sibling
A gun is not a TOY!
In fact, when I was growing up and had toy guns -- those were the days of TV shows such as Gunsmoke, I wasn't allowed to point even a TOY GUN at a living creature. Neither was I allowed to drive the tractor around.
Owning a firearm is a right all responsible people who have attained the level of being able to reason have.
There are reasons 12 and 15 year olds can't drive, or drink legally. For just a couple examples.
Those parents ought to be charged with willful negligence resulting in homicide as you said Shaw.
There are TOO many of these "accidental tragedies" !! The parents absolutely must be charged and this family can go first as an example of what will happen to you if you don't start acting responsible! Someone said today you can't legislate irresponsible behavior...OH YES YOU CAN!!
Maybe you can't legislate responsibility, but you can punish irresponsibility.
Guns dont' kill people...
babies with guns do.
This tragedy--and I'm sure it's not the first--is the natural progression of a "Don't Tread On Me" 2nd Amendment gun mentality.
I'm pretty sure the parents of these unfortunate children believed they were acting like patriotic Americans in giving lethal weapons to a child who probably doesn't even know how to read.
That poor kid will live with the horrid memory of having killed his sister because of the monumental stupidity of his parents and our gun culture.
Responsible gun ownership is not the problem. Stupid people and criminals are Shaw.
A few days ago I'm sure this police officer felt he was a responsible owner.
"Deputy Fanning and a relative went into a bedroom to look at some of the lawman's guns, said Tennessee Bureau of Investigation spokeswoman Kristin Helm.
Later, Josephine Fanning and the boy -- who was the deputy's 4-year-old nephew -- walked into the room.
At some point, the boy picked up a loaded pistol from a bed, Helm said. It was the deputy's personal weapon, not his service pistol, she said.
With a single shot, Fanning's wife was dead."
These incidents will happen in direct proportion to the number of guns out there.
Your task, RN, is to demonstrate the benefits of this arsenal. Good luck.
Guns in the Home and Risk of a Violent Death in the Home: Findings from a National Study
http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/...
Guns, Fear, the Constitution, and the Public's Health
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/1...
Firearms in US homes as a risk factor for unintentional gunshot fatality
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pu...
Mike302000.blogsopt.com
Posts everyday on gun incidents
Eye opening read
RN -- "Responsible gun ownership is not the problem."
No one is saying this. The object is to keep guns out of the hands of irresponsible people, just like the purpose of driver licenses is to keep cars out of the hands of irresponsible drivers. Training and proof that you are a responsible driver is required. Nothing less should be required for gun ownership and use also.
When I was growing up in "the gun culture," I didn't know a single household who suffered the kind of tragedy described in the body of this blog post. Almost every household with which I had any association had firearms -- most often, for hunting purposes. Yes, we ate venison, quail, rabbit, etc. Oh, and we owned guns for killing varmints that frequented the chicken house and the garden.
The situation in my husband's family was a big different: the males in the family participated in skeet and trap tournaments. There was a bit of hunting involved too, but not nearly as often there in Southern California as here in what was then rural Northern Virginia.
We also saw death up close and personal; that is, when we shot an animal, we saw it die. Death was nothing like what we saw portrayed on the TV screen or in the cartoons.
Why do most people today own firearms? I'm guessing here: for personal protection. If my guess is correct, I wonder if that factor plays in.
AOW, your description of how you grew up in rural Virginia with guns is one of responsible gun culture.
I don't know how we can reverse or cut down on the senseless "accidental" deaths involving young children who get their hands on loaded guns that adults leave unsecured around the house.
I remember when drinking and driving was part of our culture. I remember when it was considered hilarious or macho for a guy to get into his car, while "smashed" and drive. And I personally know of families devastated by drunk drivers.
At some point we decided the carnage from driving while drunk for teens and adults was too awful to accept as part of our culture, so we made it shameful and stupid for people to get behind the wheel of a vehicle while drunk, and we came up with all sorts of solutions so that no teen or adult needed to drive while drunk.
I don't see why we can't tackle the problem of gun carnage as well.
I don't like the term "gun culture" because it's prejudicial. I prefer to call it American Culture, because that's what it has been since we were colonies. People don't seem to realize that Englishmen also had the right to keep and bear arms ( as long as they were Protestants) and the Kings word, his very authority was indeed a "sacrament from God."
Our love of weapons and cars and boats and snowmobiles has nothing to do with being idiotic enough to leave rat poison, Anti-freeze, matches, knives and of course loaded weapons where kids can get to them. Trust me, a disgustingly large number of children die from that same brainless kind of parenting -- drowning in swimming pools and falling out of boats is common here where parents are distracted for a moment and nobody thinks to make them wear a goddamn life jacket.
It's criminal negligence, it's unforgivable, but it can be hard for courts to prosecute a parent who has just learned how Job felt. What more can one do?
Of course educating people about safety is a strong first step. I belong to a group that teaches boating safety and more kids die in and because of boats here than guns, but teaching gun safety somehow isn't supported by many Americans who prefer to cover their ears and eyes and make noise so they don't hear you and somehow think they're helping. Or they blame ignorant, negligent parenting on the NRA .
We don't need any more strawmen or phobic nonsense or smug utopian daydreaming. It's not helping.
If we can convince Americans that drinking and driving isn't going to be forgiven any more, we can can make an impression on at least some people that not securing dangerous items in the household is criminal behavior. Indeed securing firearms is the law in many States. I don't know about Kentucky.
It's sad that once upon a time, the NRA was all about safety -- long ago before they became an extremist, anti-civilization militia. They used to and still do offer classes and training programs.
Do NRA haters bear some responsibility for pushing the NRA out of the process of teaching gun safety to adults and children? I think so and it's too bad there's no one to replace them and it's too bad that the attitude toward safety has begun to smell of Denialism and has focused on magically making the guns go away and the calling of names rather than showing people how to keep and bear them safely. It certainly can be done and usually is done.
It takes only one incident in our current climate to smear 100 million people for the stupidity of one and for the media, it's profitable to do so.
Bottom line is not to send for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for you and me, for little kids and adults, for the NRA and the rest of us. We all could do more.
Dealing with human beings, is there responsible ownership of a deadly weapon? There are 30,000 deaths by gunshot every year in America. That proves there is no such thing as responsible gun ownership, unless of course, you accept that level of death to insure your (nonresistant) right. The 2nd amendment is clear, the right pertains to those who form a militia as defined by 18th century language.
"I don't like the term "gun culture" because it's prejudicial. I prefer to call it American Culture, because that's what it has been since we were colonies."
Call it whatever you want, but gun use today in no way reflects gun use in 18th century America.
American culture IS gun culture. The US has more gun ownership than in any other place in the world and the US has the most deaths by firearms than any other civilized nation. We are, without question a gun culture.
Shaw, I am not sure of you saw this from the WaPo about 5 weeks ago...
http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-03-29/opinions/38124057_1_white-men-mental-health-issues-mass-shootings
I did not see blame in the article so much as a recitation of facts.
I have seen numerous bloggers and pundits dismiss this article, while simultaneously accepting the fact that a clear majority of mass killings are done by whites.
i have also not seen anyone answer the question that essentially asks, "If we could identify a group mostly associated with mass gun violence, shouldn't we address that demographic?"
Many here, and AOW and RN are among them, rightly argue for responsible gun ownership and training. But in today's political climate, how do we get there? Do we just hope for the best?
In the recent debate over congressional action, one could argue, as has been done, that Sen Baucas was only representing the people of Montana when he voted no on background checks.
But how then do those same people, accepting the principle of voting your states desires, defend Sen. Ayotte whose state clearly supported this bill?
Action has, in my opinion, devolved exactly into what GOP Sen Toomey described. Because a certain segment of the electorate hates him so much, if President Obama is for it, I'm against it.
Sad but true...
Who is the NRA?
Capt. Fogg,
I used the term "gun culture" as a shortcut.
Shaw,
There are certainly many manifestations of irresponsible parenting -- in my view, anyway.
Lately, I've been having fits about another matter entirely: that of so many CHILDREN glued to their devices (Iphones). And their parents seem to think that this level of involvement with technology is "cool" -- or something.
I see children sitting in rooms and not even speaking to each other. They're all playing with their electronic devices. Can these children differentiate between the real world and the virtual world?
AOW, last weekend, I was waiting in line on the sidewalk with my grandson to get into Regina's Pizzeria. In front of us was a nice family of mother, father, and child, who was probably around 2 or 3. As we waited in line I watched as the little on played on an electronic device and while the parents spoke with each other.
I told my grandson over pizza that the parents missed an opportunity to engage the little boy. The little one could have looked around the neighborhood, perhaps asked about the buildings, fire escapes, any number of things that a small boy would wonder about--or he could have interacted with me and my grandson. Instead he played some cartoon game on the device and was unaware of his surroundings.
I've walked past many restaurants in this neighborhood, where there are candlelit tables in the window and where I see the young woman and young man texting on their devices instead of gazing into each other's eyes.
This is what that generation believes is more interesting: stuff on the internet and not stuff happening in front of their eyes.
I don't get it. And I'm not sure it's good, but I'm sure there's nothing I can do to change what is going on.
Dave, in addition to what you wrote, sadly, about who the mass shooters are and people ignoring those facts, there something else going on in the blogs sphere: Mocking Boston, its law enforcement personnel, and the citizens of Boston themselves.
I have read these comments that mock the people who suffered a terrorist attack on their city. These same people are second-guessing how the whole ordeal was handled, and they take joy in thinking that Bostonians "cowered" under the lock down.
It's astounding that certain rightwing bloggers and commenters hate their fellow Americans (because they live in a traditionally liberal state and city?) with a vengeance that is matched only by America's enemies--the jihadists!
These commenters and bloggers actually hate liberals more than they love America.
It is stomacho-turning, and it grieves me to think that these so-called Americans would give aid and comfort to those who would do America harm--and surely they do when they mock what Boston and its citizens suffered.
We have sunk that low.
Not surprising, after the baby boomers screwed everything up, that young people just avoid politics. At their peril.
Shaw,
I've walked past many restaurants in this neighborhood, where there are candlelit tables in the window and where I see the young woman and young man texting on their devices instead of gazing into each other's eyes.
YE, GODS!
I don't get out much (You know why), so I've never seen that.
Dave,
I don't know how to straighten out the matter of gun safety. All I can comment on is that, "back in the day," we learned about gun safety early on.
I well recall my father and mother saying, "Never pick up a gun in anger. Remember, what you do with that gun is permanent."
I have twice aimed a firearm at human beings. I did not have to fire the weapon either time, but each time, BEFORE I went for the gun, I asked myself, "Can I pull the trigger if I have to?" The first time, the intruders left; the second time is too detailed to go into -- other to say that had I not been well versed in handling a firearm, I could have shot a friend (dressed in a black sweatsuit and rummaging through my shed, which, at that time, contained $100,000 of uninsured automotive tools). My intent in the first instance was to make the intruders leave; they did. My intent the second time was to hold "the thief" until the police arrived.
I was 12 years old in the first instance and home alone for the first time in my life -- out on 45 deserted acres and far from law enforcement. I was in my 40's in the second instance with the weapon in one hand and the telephone in the other.
A gun is a serious business.
Dave,
It's astounding that certain rightwing bloggers and commenters hate their fellow Americans (because they live in a traditionally liberal state and city?) with a vengeance that is matched only by America's enemies--the jihadists!
These commenters and bloggers actually hate liberals more than they love America.
I see that all the time. I don't get it!
I've very politically conservative. No doubt about it. But hating other people, well, that's something that I just don't do. I might hate the views of other people, but that is a different matter entirely, IMO.
I've seen people mock Boston as we've discussed here at Shaw's site.
I've also seen some Bostonians (not Shaw) mock The South with stereotyping.
I'm sorry to say that, IMO, some Northerners would likely mock a Southern city were a terror attack to occur there.
Regional warfare?
We are one helluva divided nation. Sheesh.
Anonymous:
"Dealing with human beings, is there responsible ownership of a deadly weapon?"
of course. Do you own a car? Want to have it taken away because of all the drunk drivers?
counting the murders, the gang crimes, the suicides, the hunting accidents and all that isn't evidence for your claim but if your not honest enough or smart enough to see that, then why bother? Some people shouldn't have guns or matches but that doesn't mean I can't or the cop on the corner can't be responsible. Virtually all gun owners are.
Anonymous:
"Call it whatever you want, but gun use today in no way reflects gun use in 18th century America."
What about the 19th, the 17th. Are all these windy words supposed to be an argument? People still hunt, still shoot targets, still want to be protected in their homes. and don't give me that pathetic link where some bozo wets his pants every time there's a "gun incident" It's never been safer to live in America. There have never been more guns and the crime rate for firearms has been decreasing since your mama last changed your diapers
This is a huge goddamn country and someone gets raped, murdered, run over by an SUV, has a heart attack and goes berserk after listening to bozos who think a padded cell isn't safe enough. Look, some kid gets sexually assaulted more frequently than some kid gets shot by a sibling. Are you going to argue that no one can use a penis responsibly?
Try to be honest, or at least logically consistent, won't you?
TSA,
Yes, being until recently a rural and frontier country, guns have been part of our history. Bing until recently a virtual fascist slave state, South Africa also has a huge gun violence problem. Switzerland also has an active gun culture and there is a machine gun in almost every home while hunting and competitive shooting are the most popular mens' sports.
So what. We also have more cars and a lot of car accidents. We're a rich country and we can afford more toys than anyone else.
I've never seen such a misuse of statistics!
Look, I also learned gun safety at an early age. I've also lived way out in the country and the arguments of urban troglodytes reflect a mentality I cannot understand and yes we are a very, very divided country where people make a living promoting division. I'm sick of the fear, the fear mongering, the exaggeration, the hyperbole and the rickety arguments that hinge on amateur and sometimes dishonest statistics. Enough.
A Land Without Guns: How Japan Has Virtually Eliminated Shooting Deaths
In part by forbidding almost all forms of firearm ownership, Japan has as few as two gun-related homicides a year.
The US has tens of thousands of gun deaths because there are hundreds of thousands of guns in circulation.
It's as simple as that.
No. We are not Japan and we do not share their culture.
But the plain and simple fact is that the more guns, the more gun deaths, happy hunters and responsible gun owners notwithstanding.
Tens of thousands of gun deaths a year. That's our destiny. And we Americans choose it over anything else.
Hope it doesn't happen to anyone you love.
" Are you going to argue that no one can use a penis responsibly?"
Responsible penis use! Now there is a cause for the right wing to get behind.
LMAO!!!
And yes Jerry there are those who are saying this behind their carefully masked words. Not here perhaps, but some are saying it nonetheless.
I forgot CPT. Fogg is the only one who is correct. Your name truly reflects the egotistical fogg you live in.
Fogg,
Your acceptance of violence is a real reflection of typical American. Your unwillingness to try and stop that violence is defeatist and un-American. Live with the violence you seem to like so much and cannot do anything about, I will keep trying to stop the violence, even in the smallest way.
Ones fears are normally unconscious genetic variations -
below a surface of focus. A huge septic system combinations a septic summer and a draining
system.
my web page :: borelioza
A couple of several benefits having the service to the
software.
Also visit my weblog :: candida
Thank you for your interesting and informative blog. I have enjoyed reading it and appreciate the work you have put into it. Here is some relevant information for you to review .
Toy Machine Guns
Post a Comment