8 year old Mass. boy dies after accidentally shooting himself

[RTRD]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081027/ap_on_re_us/boy_shoots_himself

WESTFIELD, Mass. – An 8-year-old boy has died after accidentally shooting himself in the head while firing an Uzi submachine gun under adult supervision in western Massachusetts.

Police Lt. Lawrence Valliere says the boy lost control of the weapon while firing it Sunday at the Machine Gun Shoot and Firearms Expo at the Westfield Sportsman's Club. Police say the force of the weapon made it "travel up and back" to the boy's head.

The victim was taken to Baystate Medical Center where he died.

His name was not immediately released.

Law enforcement officials say although the incident appears to be an accident, police and the Hampden District Attorney's office are investigating.

Efforts to reach officials with the private club were not immediately successful.


I am sure this kids mom is just thrilled this morning.

Fuck some people are truly, truly stupid. What a shame.

 

[capncrunch]

Horrible tragedy for the boy's parents.

I wonder how the NRA is going to spin this one.

 

[capncrunch]

Morons should not have access to an Uzi. WTF???

 

[S.C. Joe]

Isn't there some type of age one needs to be at that club in order to fire a machine gun

 

[Aardvark154]

There is an intensive investigation going on as to what happened. Apparently several errors were made. Having an eight year old shoot under the proper supervision needn’t have resulted in his death. However, seemingly the proper supervision wasn't there, at the very least attention to muzzle climb.

 

[Aardvark154]

Isn't there some type of age one needs to be at that club in order to fire a machine gun

Massachusetts has extremely restrictive firearms laws! Minors (under 18) have to have permission from a parent or legal guardian and be under the supervision of a certified and licensed firearms instructor to shoot firearms at public events such as Sunday’s.

 

[Aardvark154]

If your not over 18, you should not be allowed to fire a gun.

Morons... hope they learn a goooood lesson.

Poor kid.. his parents failed him .. the should have the rest of their kids taken away and sent to be cared by some of their smart relatives .. if they have any.

Actually his father is quite well educated, and they observed several other minors firing weapons before they decided that he could handle the Uzi.

That said I don't know what happened. I'm not sure I would allow an eight year old to fire a fully automatic weapon that wasn't on a tripod. But I'm not about to "jump aboard the parents" who are going though a terrible time without mean spirited comments.

 

[a 1 player]

sad indeed.

 

[lim3kandi3]

The father must feel terrible!

He is never going to be able to get passed this.

very sad.

 

[CUTTERBUCK]

That too!!! ( but isn't there something about their "Right to Bear Arms" or some such bullshit?)

That's one reason America is for Americans. Maybe one day America will enter the 20th century, Hmm, on second thoughts, probably not.

 

[S.C. Joe]

Banning all under 18 years old is taking it too far but allowing an 8 year old little boy to fire a maching gun is flat out wrong.

I like to see the father charge with a crime but likely he will not. Sure he must feel bad but a boy is dead and whos to blame, the little boy, un un.

It be a sad joke if the father lands up suing the club for his boy's death and wins.

Edit...not saying the father should go to prison for a long time but a minor crime agaisnt the safety of a child seems right to me. Guess the mother still could sue, they likely have 2-3 years to file the suit, would not be a bit surprise if they do land up suing and winning out of court, the club insurance might offer a small sum to settle the case.

 

[Aardvark154]

Banning all under 18 years old is taking it too far but allowing an 8 year old little boy to fire a maching gun is flat out wrong.

The father gave permision after they looked at several weapons being fired. There was a firearms instructor right there, in charge of the boy.

I wasn't there, so I don't know what went wrong. However, obviously something did!

 

[serviceman]

I see mention about the American right to bear arms, but what keeps getting forgotten is that when that law was passed, the state-of-the-art weapon was a musket, not an Uzi. The founding fathers thought it was OK for everyone to have a gun that could inaccurately fire a lead ball about 100 yards, and not fire another lead ball for at least 30 seconds while the gun was reloaded. The right to bear arms was not intended for fully automatic modern weapons. The right to bear arms is about as relevant as laws that require you to walk in front of your horseless carriage waiving a flag.

 

[baci2004]

I see mention about the American right to bear arms, but what keeps getting forgotten is that when that law was passed, the state-of-the-art weapon was a musket, not an Uzi. The founding fathers thought it was OK for everyone to have a gun that could inaccurately fire a lead ball about 100 yards, and not fire another lead ball for at least 30 seconds while the gun was reloaded. The right to bear arms was not intended for fully automatic modern weapons. The right to bear arms is about as relevant as laws that require you to walk in front of your horseless carriage waiving a flag.

Clearly you have no understanding of the second amendment.

 

[alexmst]

On the news clips those child soldiers in Africa fire AK-47's all the time. You can see the recoil knock them back a foot. Still, they may be 8-13 but they had some minor degree of training I would guess. Anyone who wants to fire a semi-automatic or automatic firearm regardless of age needs some training to do it safely without injury to themselves or others. I needed training - I remember when I was 18 at the Florida range I was about to shoot a semi auto pistol. The pro came by and said "If you hold it like that you're going to get a nasty cut on your hand when the slide comes back and gets you between your thumb and index finger". Apparantly a lot of newbie shooters make that mistake of holding the grip too high so that the semi-auto action will cut them.

Anyway I am pro easy access to guns by law-abiding people - the criminals have them regardless of the laws, so why shouldn't ordinary folk? That said, I would not let an 8-year old child under my care fire a fully automatic submachine gun. Sure, kids can be taught to fire guns (though I'd say 8 is too young), but an Uzi or Mac-10 has no purpose other than to be a spray and pray people stopper. Better to teach the kid to aim and shoot on the 'one bullet per target' idea I would think with a bolt action rifle.

Outdoor target practice with a Remington 700P would be instructive and fun for a younger shooter. Kids like shooting cans off of walls, etc. Difficult for him to hurt himself with a 700P (certainly couldn't shoot himself in the head), and he would actually learn something (how to aim and shoot).

 

[serviceman]

Clearly you have no understanding of the second amendment.

Then enlighten us, please. I know the basics of the 2nd amendment, and only the basics, because I'M A CANADIAN. I'm sure I know more about US laws than most americans know about Canadian law. I do know for sure that the right to bear arms was to ensure a strong militia, and I say again, irrelevant in modern times.

 

[Aardvark154]

Then enlighten us, please. I know the basics of the 2nd amendment, and only the basics, because I'M A CANADIAN. I'm sure I know more about US laws than most americans know about Canadian law. I do know for sure that the right to bear arms was to ensure a strong militia, and I say again, irrelevant in modern times.

However, your belief conflicts with what the U.S. Supreme Court has held:

That the Second Amendment confers an idividual right.

 

[baci2004]

I know the basics of the 2nd amendment, and only the basics, because I'M A CANADIAN.

Actually you are an ignorant Canadian by your own admission. You claim you only know the basics yet you vehemently criticize it.

I do know for sure that the right to bear arms was to ensure a strong militia, and I say again, irrelevant in modern times.

Without using Wiki....
The right to bear arms is too ensure a strong militia(the citizenry) so they could overthrow a tyrannical government.

 

[serviceman]

Actually you are an ignorant Canadian by your own admission. You claim you only know the basics yet you vehemently criticize it. [/B]

I don't need to know the details, all I need to know is that the general public is allowed to carry deadly weapons and that conflicts with my basic sense of morality.

overthrow a tyrannical government.[/B]

So why don't they?

 

[anon1]

So why don't they?

They will.....next tuesday.