I just now saw this from the DNJ:
The 12-year-old girl police say was shot in the head by an 11-year-old boy remains in critical condition at Vanderbilt Children’s Hospital.
Judge Donna Scott Davenport continued a hearing for the boy, who is charged with aggravated assault, that was set for today to allow more time for review.The shooting occurred at a home on Mable Drive in the Lake Forest Estates subdivision shortly before noon on Wednesday. Police said the boy retrieved a loaded .38-caliber pistol from between the mattress and box spring in his parents’ bedroom to show the girl and other children.
What were a girl and “other children” doing over there while the parents weren’t home? Why in the heck didn’t the parents keep the gun locked up??
Parents: supervise your children!! Don’t let them have kids over when you’re not home! Even my 14 year old is not allowed to hang out at another kid’s house if the parents aren’t there. And for God’s sake, LOCK UP YOUR GUNS!!!!
This is pet peeve city over here for me. Whaddaya think, LaVergninians?
Filed under: Editorials, Family, Kids & Pets, In the News, Public Safety |
This is La Vergne, TN 
One more reason why the manufacturing/importing of HANDGUNS needs to be halted immediately.
HANDGUNS were invented with only one single intent in mind —- to kill human beings.
Gun Control Opponents: Use your freakin’ shotguns and rifles to protect your home and property. Lose the HANDGUNS. You don’t “need” them.
A bigger question is why was the child not taught that firearms were not a toy.
I keep mine locked up…except for two. Those are near my bed. I don’t worry about my non-existant children, but common sense says that keeping them secure is important.
My daughter is frantic to find out who the girl is because she too is 12-years old and worries it’s one of her friends. I wonder when we’ll find out the names.
Meanwhile my thoughts and prayers are with both families.
PS – I agree with Ivy and Gunner… why wasn’t the gun locked away. Why is there a loaded gun where a child could reach it. Was the child not taught to stay away from it? Was it just a kid showing off the gun to be cool? God.
I feel that the parents should be charged as well. This also goes back to the times I have said paents need to be more involved in their childrens lives. My 12 yr old nephew is still too inmature to be left home alone. I feel that they should be with an adult until they are at least 16 yrs old. but really what is the right age to leave your child at home alone? Me and my borther were brought up without guns or knives and we have raised the youngen the same way. gun locks are free so if anyone has a gun pick them up at city hall!!
I was left alone when I was ten, but that was long ago in a society far far away. Now a days, it isn’t safe to let them be alone, due to the internet and other lanes open to predators. I am teaching my son to respect weapons of all types be it firearms or knives or his assorted martial arts weapons. When I did have my carry permit, my weapon was either on me or locked away. And that was before I had a child. Under the mattress is so stupid in itself. Even more so since the parent was not around.
The HANDGUN didn’t shoot anyone, the little boy did. IJS, are you saying a shotgun would have done less damage?
I too blame the parents for this. That said, I can now say as a parent that it’s easy to make mistakes, clearly some dumber than others. I won’t be so quick to say throw the parents in jail. I would like to hear their side.
I wish our soceity would decide to once again embrace their families and have one stay-at-home-parent. I’ve noticed an intersting trend with both families and friends. Most of the couples I know who are having their first child, the FATHER is staying home.
Father, mother, whoever. It would be nice to see one parent stay home to take care of their kids. Unfortunately, cable TV, cell phones, and two cars are the new priorities of the American family.
“The HANDGUN didn’t shoot anyone, the little boy did. IJS, are you saying a shotgun would have done less damage?
I too blame the parents for this.”
The PARENTS didn’t shoot anyone, the little boy did. MIL, are you saying a shotgun would have been just as easy for a 12 year old to do the same damage? I’m not saying it’s impossible for the child to do the same thing with a shotgun or rifle, but I’m pretty sure a 12 year old can physically handle an unlocked HANDGUN much easier than he/she could physically handle an unlocked shotgun or rifle.
I still blame the HANDGUN for this.
HANDGUNS can be eliminated.
BAD PARENTS cannot.
Rifles are longer range weapons and have the potential to do more damage than is needed for home defense.
Say your next door neighbor by chance used one, while in defense of his home bullets exited his house and entered your home and injured a member of your family.
Rifles, shotguns and handguns all serve the same purpose.
Blame his child’s parents not the weapon itself.
It’s so easy to “blame the parents”. And I agree the parents should be blamed.
However, I’m not reading any resolution being presented by those of you choosing NOT to blame the HANDGUN.
At least I come here with a proposed resolution to potentially reduce stories like what’s at the top of this page — halt the manufacturing/importing of HANDGUNS immediately.
Once again:
HANDGUNS can be eliminated.
BAD PARENTS cannot.
Because even if you do that, the issue still remains. Handguns are here and they aren’t going anywhere. There are over 65 million handgun owners already in the US. Those would still be around.
I still blame the HANDGUN for this.
HANDGUNS can be eliminated.
Just try it. That’s all I’ll say. Just try it!
Banning firearms is a knee jerk reaction and look how safe other countries have become. England is a fine example.
Uhhh……newsflash…….
No one has said ANYTHING about banning FIREARMS.
Everyone can now put away your broad paint brushes.
The subject is HANDGUNS.
Yes, the 65 million handgun owners would still be around. And over time. they will die off and leave their handguns to their children and grandchildren. Also, some of the 65 millions handguns (est.) will breakdown, get lost, etc. so that number will decrease some as long as the manufacturing/importing is halted.
Conversely, there are an estimated 300 million parents currently in the US. Many are BAD PARENTS. There is nothing we can do to HALT the creation of BAD PARENTS. That number will only continue to increase as time goes on.
I am NOT saying the results of an action like this will happen overnight, but at least it’s DOING SOMETHING TO REDUCE CHILDREN BEING SHOT BY HANDGUNS.
“Blaming the parents” is not DOING anything….it’s just TALK.
Exercising your right to vote and voting for leaders who support the elimination of the manufacturing/importing of HANDGUNS is at least DOING SOMETHING!
Voting for leaders who oppose this would be the equivalent of saying, “go head kids, take this HANDGUN here and pull the trigger to see what happens”.
Do we know if this was a registered firearm? I would never ban a firearm but requiring newly purchased handgun owners to take a safety class would solve a lot of this problem if the gun was bought from a legal gun seller. IJS who supports banning handguns? I would like to know just to make sure I do not vote them into office. How many childer are shot by handguns out of the 65 million per year? I would think it is low.
Maybe we should outlaw automobile’s? How many children are killed by drunk drivers?
“How many childer are shot by handguns out of the 65 million per year?”
Here’s the question that will tell us the true story of where our priorities lie.
Should we as a society accept anything other than “0”? If so, at what number or percentage does it become unnacceptable?
For those of you supporting the continued manufacturing/importing of HANDGUNS: What is your acceptable number (aka “collateral damage”)?
I’ll be patiently awaiting your answers.
For Im Just Sayin; why dont you discuss banning cars, bathtubs and anything else that will protect children. OMG, mabey we should ban you, we would be protecting the world from idiots that believe they know what is best for everyone.
“Should we as a society accept anything other than “0″? If so, at what number or percentage does it become unnacceptable?”
ok, using your logic you do think that we should eliminate all personal vehicles because there is no way to ensure no one is killed in one. What if we do successfully eliminate all child accidental deaths by banning handguns, but reports of rape increase by 10%. Would that be an acceptable change?
According to the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Eight times as many children die from non-gun violent acts than from gun crimes.
Here’s a website that compares the good and bad of guns: http://www.gunsandcrime.org/ While they don’t break it down into handguns, your assertion that this country could ban handguns is incorrect.
You’ve heard the saying that fences are made for keeping honest people honest, and that’s the problem with firearm restrictions. Honest people will follow the law, but people who are by nature criminals don’t care about the law. We can’t stop human beings from crossing from Mexico and Cuba, but we could magically stop handguns from coming into America?
Acceptable numbers will never be achieved, no matter what is done.
If the US suddenly banned handguns, the first thing I’d do, if I were an evil capitalist, would be to move to Mexico and start a gun shop. Luckily, I’m a big pansy liberal, so no worries there. But there would be plenty who would.
I don’t think banning handguns is the answer, I think proper education is key. It was asked in these comments a few times why the parents didn’t teach the kid that a gun was not a toy. i agree with this, but I also realize you can’t always make kids do logical things, them being kids and all. So the best thing to do would have been to educate the kid, and then lock that shit up so they can’t play with it.
Ivy- ” Luckily, I’m a big pansy liberal” you crack me up! I almost shot my sprite out my nose on my work monitor! Ok, well ditto that for me, I agree, banning handguns isn’t going to cure this ailment, education and proper storage is key!
“Bathtubs don’t kill people, people kill people”
“If you outlaw cars, only outlaws will have cars.”
The above NRA-esque brainwashing swill is what you get when a comparison is made between HANDGUNS and cars, bathtubs, etc.
Cars, bathtubs, etc. were not created with the sole intent of killing or injuring another human being.
That comparison is flawed from the get-go.
Still waiting on what the acceptable number is for “collateral damage”……………..
“The above NRA-esque brainwashing swill is what you get when a comparison is made between HANDGUNS and cars, bathtubs, etc.”
No, we compare handguns to these other items because the point is lots of things are dangerous when used outside their original intent, lots of things are way more dangerous than guns (roads, for example)
For example, if cars were only driven by sober people we wouldn’t have drunk drivers killing people. That’s a good thing. Another example, if we didn’t have uneducated kids playing with guns that they shouldn’t be touching, we wouldn’t have stories like this. That would also be a good thing.
You keep saying that the problem is guns are only for killing others, whereas I believe most people posting here who own a gun don’t want to kill anyone, but they want to be able to protect their families. I think others here have made the point that handguns are beneficial over rifles because of the ability to handle them.
“Still waiting on what the acceptable number is for “collateral damage”……………..”
If more lives are saved by handguns than are lost by stupidity, that’s the acceptable number.
“If more lives are saved by handguns than are lost by stupidity, that’s the acceptable number.”
What number? My acceptable number is “0”. What’s yours? Warning: You WILL be held to whatever number you present. I am more that happy to be held to MY presented number.
Still waiting on what the acceptable number is for “collateral damage”……………..
How many times have you fired your HANDGUN in the direction of someone posing a threat to your family?
Would a rifle, shotgun or even a baseball bat not protect your family?
“…we compare handguns to these other items because the point is lots of things are dangerous when used outside their original intent, lots of things are way more dangerous than guns (roads, for example)”
This statement in and of itself makes no sense whatsoever.
The sole “original intent” of the HANDGUN is to kill or injure another human being regardless of whether used in criminal actons or in self-defense.
The sole “original intent” of a motorized vehicle is to transport human beings, etc. from point A to point B faster and with less effort than other less practical alternatives.
Once again, that comparison is flawed from the get-go.
So we can agree that a number that is acceptable will never be reached or even come remotely close. by anyone’s standards.
Any firearm, whether it is a rifle, shotgun, pistol all serve the same purpose.
Yes zero in the only acceptable number, but banning a handgun would be way down my list of items to ban.
Here would be the start of my list
1. Alcohol
3. Cellphone Drivers
4. Merchandise from China
5. and so on…
Zero will never happen, someone is going to die. Thats just reality.
Ok people. I have something to say in all of this.
I am not against anyone being a gun owner. BUT – if you are going to be a gun owner be a RESPONSIBLE gun owner.
The city of La Vergne has been giving out free gun locks for sometime. If there was a gun lock on this .38 this tragedy could of been prevented.
When will (or why hasnt) Tennessee passed a GUN LOCK LAW?!?!?!? An amendment to that GUN LOCK LAW should be if a minor child gets an adults gun then the adult is held RESPONSIBLE!!!!
Where is the responsibilty in this entire situation?
Nuff said. Now, your thoughts?
You want to see something scary about gun locks.
http://www.engadget.com/2007/06/13/the-lockdown-gun-locks-unsafe-at-any-caliber/
Your information on how to pick a cheap gun lock can be found anywhere on the internet if someone looks for it. The video is just one of many out there on the WWW but you are missing my point.
The fact remains that if a gun is locked up properly whether it be in a safe or a better gun lock OR the ammo is kept in a seperate place from the gun itself locked up then the majority of “accidential” gun shootings wouldnt happen.
How many gun accidents happened that we as the general public dont even know about? For the general public knowledge look up how many accidential shootings are known about just to date for 2008.
The best way to stop these senseless gun accidents is RESPONSIBILITY. Again I am not saying you dont have a right to bear arms. BUT if you are going to exercise your right to bear arms you should be RESPONSIBLE in owning a gun.
When adults dont take responsibility in their right to bear arms then what law do we have in the State of Tennessee to hold them accountable for not doing so when a minor child gets their hands on the weapon and uses it?
Look that one up.
IJS:
1. It’s obvious you’ve never touched a shotgun or a rifle because there are very few 12 year olds I’ve ever seen that could not operate the action and trigger on one.
2. You say a handguns SOLE ORIGINAL INTENT is to kill or do harm to another person. Just thought I’d let you know there’s a little event you may have heard of called the Olympics. Shooting has been a sport in the Olympic games since 1896.
3. I wonder how you would feel about gun control if someone had a weapon aimed at your head or someone in your family. You think a bat would be sufficient defense? Bringing a stick to a gun fight…. hmmm.
I’m sure you’re going to take offense to this and ask what my collateral damage number is, but I’m simply pointing out that it’s obvious you fear what you know nothing of. Handguns are preferred for home defense because they’re smaller and easier to handle in close quarters along with a limited projectile range compared to rifles. As was stated above…. taking guns away from law abiding citizens WILL NOT remove them from the people who will then be entering homes at an increased rate with the knowledge that the homeowner will have only a baseball bat for defense.
What happened was a tragedy, and yes I think the owner of the weapon should be held liable for not securing the weapon properly. Banning handguns will only further endanger children in my opinion by creating a safe environment for criminals to do as they please.
One of the same locks are the exact lock the Police dept is giving away. Most gun locks are cheap anyhow.
The gun lock law mandated that a lock be sold with a firearm, but there was another law passed saying that the lock being on the gun when not in use could not be enforced. Thank your congressmen and women for that one.
As far as the law either reckless endangerment or child endangerment law should apply.
That is my exact point.
“The law passed saying that the lock being on the gun when not in use could not be enforced.”
The other side of my point is again the RESPONSIBILITY of the gun owners. Even without a law every gun owner should be 100% responsible for their gun and the actions of it as part of the right in which to own that weapon.
It is a shame that a law has to even be looked at being enacted to make people responsible but society is what it is.
That is why we have so many laws on the books today. Its just a matter of being responsible in all levels of society.
But that is getting off the subject at hand.
If one were to pass a law on gun control one must, of course, consult the 2nd amendment for it is NOT a living document. Then, you should examine what kind of parent is careless enough to let a child handle a gun unsupervised and without the proper education. Frankly, these parents should be held to a higher standard for the simple fact that they have NOT educated their young on how to handle a firearm. They should be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law.
Guns are to be respected, and if more people carried them there would certainly be less crime. Todays media (movies, news, tv, etc…) has given an image that a gun is a toy and that most people just walk off a gun shot. Many of us know that is not the case.
When crimes like this happen one needs to consider what the parents were thinking. In this case, they weren’t and from what I understand they really didn’t care at all. (the perps not the vics). Since the Darwin award cannot possibly go to them (yet) then we need to consider an alternative to hold irresposible parents like these responsible.
When you write a bill or a law to be passed all things need to be considered.
1. The parents of a child must be held resposible and all fines and punishments will double without question.
2. All gun purchases shall include a simple check for children under the age of 18 who currently reside in the establishment the gun will be held.
3. If a child is currently living, or lives there for any amount of time during a physical year, a gun safety class is maditory for botht he parents and the children. If the purchasers refuse then no gun will be sold until the child has legally, and shows proof of, no longer residing at the residence or establishment the gun will be housed.
4. Should a crime be commited by a minor with or without these laws having been in effect at the time of purchase, then see rule one.
5. All guns shall be stored in a place deemed as inaccessable to a minor (a safe, or a case with a combination). If this rule has not been followed during the time of an incident then both the minor and the adults of the residence will be held accountable and charged according to these guidlines.
6. In the event of a minor breaking and entering a home that does not have a minor living there and a gun is taken and a crime commited then the owner of that gun is NOT held accountable. The parents/guardians of the minor who commited the crime will be held accountable as will the minor.
7. No background check of any kind should be required for individuals who do not have children and do not have any prior msidemeanors or felonies. If such requirements cannot be met then a 7 day background check should be enforced. A person who has commited more than 1 violent crime without rehabilitation whould be refused. If rehabilitation is established then the 2nd amendment right shall be available to that individual again. If that individuals breaks the violent crime law again then his/her 2nd amendment right should be revoked in the interest of peace and public safety. (in other words if the person keeps messing up then he should get his cake taken away for good).
8. All firearm safety classes and permit should be updated and retaken in no less than one year after the acquirement of the previous class or permit.
That is about all I can think of at the moment. I’m sure there would be many politcal changes to something like this to benefit someones agenda or bank account. It’s American government system and it’s most corrupt on it’s lowest levels. (at times).
I seriously believe in light of what has happened in the past week in LaVergne that if some one could really outline a detailed bill or law it could pass. The biggest problem in our society today is that left-winged marxists have managed to pass laws (especially on the left coast) to take away power from the parents to raise a child. It a parents sole responsiblity to teach a child manners, respect, responsibilty, etc…, and NOT the governments. Therefore, if we enact laws that give this power back and hold the parents responsible (especially is that person should not have had child in the first place due to their total lack of responsibility to raise one) then maybe, just maybe, we could actually begin making America and America we all love and respect and begin rebuilding what once was so long ago. The government has no business in my house, but enacting certain laws of accountablity and responsibilty is a fine start. Thank you.
“The government has no business in my house, but enacting certain laws of accountablity and responsibilty is a fine start.”
So the government has no business in your house but you believe they should be in gun owners houses.
If the government has no business in your house they no business in mine.
While your at it, be sure to start pining for laws on buying and possessing alcohol in homes.
“1. It’s obvious you’ve never touched a shotgun or a rifle because there are very few 12 year olds I’ve ever seen that could not operate the action and trigger on one.”
NOTE: It was never stated a 12 year old COULD NOT operate a shotgun or rifle. The statement was “…I’m pretty sure a 12 year old can physically handle an unlocked HANDGUN much easier than he/she could physically handle an unlocked shotgun or rifle.” Oh….and FYI…..I just turned around in my chair to make sure my 12 guage Remington was still locked up in it’s case. It was.
2. You say a handguns SOLE ORIGINAL INTENT is to kill or do harm to another person. Just thought I’d let you know there’s a little event you may have heard of called the Olympics. Shooting has been a sport in the Olympic games since 1896.
NOTE: So…what came first? The handgun or the 1896 introduction of shooting in the Olympics? Just because someone decided to create a sport using the tool does not take away the sole original intent for the tool’s creation.
3. I wonder how you would feel about gun control if someone had a weapon aimed at your head or someone in your family. You think a bat would be sufficient defense? Bringing a stick to a gun fight…. hmmm.
NOTE: If there were no guns, there would be no gunfights……yet I’d still have my baseball bat…..hmmmm. Besides, you tout “protection” as your defense for HANDGUN ownership BUT use a “gunfight” in your example? What part of “protecting your family” involves going to a gunfight?
My whole point in my original post of this is simple:
Passing a law that holds the gun owner RESPONSIBLE for the actions of the gun when it gets in the hands of a minor.
I am all for enacting your own personal gun ownership.
But what law does the State of Tennessee have on the books that hold the gun owner accountable for a minor’s actions when that gun is fired?
*sigh* Everyone seems to still miss the point that THE PARENTS should be held accountable, as well as the child, and laws should be enforced to hold people accountable for their actions. Apparently there seems to be a lot of folks can’t handle the blame of their own failures or faults. In turn, removing laws that do allow the government into a home. It should be your resposiblity to take care of you and your own. If you can’t do that, you need to find a “red” country.
Handguns aren’t going anywhere….. deal with it.
I want to know what the heck a handgun was doing being placed in such a careless place as between the matrress and boxspring with children in the house and parent’s obviously not in the house.
I respect people’s right to carry firearms to protect themselves (I myself choose not to) but if you are going to have them at LEAST put them in a safe place especially when there are children in the home and ESPECIALLY when the parent’s are gone.
That neglegence is not only dangerous to their own children but to all other children around ….obviously.
I’ve heard reports since this began that the father said he DID lock the gun up and the son got to it….well….he obviously didn’t lock it up good enough. Has that man never heard of a safe and not giving the combination to the child?