Trick or Treat - With a 9mm!

[JustThisGuy]

"Trick-or-Treater, 10, pulls Gun"

"A 10-year-old Aiken trick-or-treater pulled a gun on a woman who jokingly said she would take his candy on Halloween. ...

One 10-year-old in the group of about 10 juveniles responded with “no you’re not …” and then pointed a 9 mm handgun at her. ...

The boy’s brother, also 10, told authorities he also had a gun."

http://chronicle.augusta.com/latest-...n?v=1320149088

The boys were arrested and later turned over to their parents at the police station. The boys had gotten the guns from their grandfather without his permission.

At least the boy had the sense to remove the magazine (yeah, the reporter calls it a clip again) before taking the gun. He had a loaded clip.. er, magazine in his pocket.

Well now, how many bad things can you count here???
1) Two 10 year-old boys allowed access to unsecured weapons.
2) Boy thought it was OK to point a real handgun at lady.
3) Boys were turned over to parents with no charges against anyone (parents, grandfather, children) after pointing a gun at an innocent person.
4) Police taking no concrete action to see that offenders (grandfather & maybe parents) were punished for allowing two 10-year old kids access to loaded guns.

Maybe I'm insane, but I thought it was a crime to point a handgun at a person. I used to believe that it was also a crime to do so while under-age. Apparently the police do not think this is a chargeable offense. (Maybe the victim has to be dead for the law to kick in. I'm just guessing.)

Why isn't the NRA at the forefront of denouncing the criminal use of guns? Our case would be much stronger if we were seen as being strongly for what is right instead of perceived as wanting to have everyone "Just look away... Move along please. Nothing to see here."

The idea that the public will somehow not notice that guns are used for crimes is compellingly stupid. The anti-gun lobby proves that. Because of the NRA's single focus (more rights for gun-owners), with no perceived balance on wrongful use of guns, I believe that it weakens our case. Just my opinion.
Just my opinion.

[MLeake]

Concrete action?

Do the kids live with the grandparents? Did the grandfather have any reason to believe the kids would take the guns from wherever he had them?

If not, then I can't see the point in prosecuting the grandparents. (And, quite frankly, when I was a kid, guns were routinely stored in glass cabinets, not safes... we weren't so litigious in the 70's; nor did people seem to think they had a God-given right to never have anything bad happen.)

Can you really make a case for mens rea with 10 year olds?

What exactly do you propose?

[JustThisGuy]

1) I propose that adults with guns in the home keep them secured from all unauthorized users.
2) I propose that the parents be questioned to discover if they knew the children had possession of the guns. (When I was 10, my Mom fidgeted over my costume so much she most certainly would have found a handgun.)
3) I propose that the children get something more than "sent home with their parents" with no further punishment. At least they should have to appear before a magistrate. What they did was a chargeable crime. They have to get to know that in no uncertain terms. (Unauthorized access of a firearm by a minor and pointing a real gun at a person).
4) I propose that schools teach the four rules of gun safety to all grades first through twelfth.
5) I propose that the gun community try to get the message out that guns are not evil. Ignorance of guns is evil. Guns are a fact of reality. Instead of trying to ban them from legal, rightful gun owners, how about teaching children about gun safety and how to behave around guns. Whether in the presence of a legitimate gun owner or a gang-banger, kids need to know this. Where is the gun-rights community on this? Where is the NRA on this? We're pretty good at litigating, but not at teaching. We should be leading on this so that 10 year-olds don't think it's OK to take grandpa's gun, or for that matter even pick it up without his permission.

I think it is a miracle that nobody was hurt or killed here. There were plenty of chances for that.
A) Two 10 year-old boys playing with loaded guns (we know that at least one was loaded)
B) Two 10 year-old boys going out Trick-or-Treating with handguns and at least one loaded magazine.
C) One 10 year-old boy brandishing a real gun and pointing it at an innocent woman.

That's three pretty close calls to injury or death of one or more children and adults.

I'm not suggesting "the pen" for these kids (or even the grandfather), but this deserves more than "Hey, kid don't do that."

And regardless of a glass case, the case should be locked. The only way into a glass case without a key is by breaking the glass and I'm guessing that the grandfather would notice that. The article said they took the guns without the grandfather's knowledge. That implies that they were readily accessible (hidden in a closet, etc.) That is not secure storage. Yeah, I think the grandfather should be charged as I would expect to be if I had unsecure guns that children or even burglars could access.

If the woman had been injured would the grandfather be charged? Would he lose his gun rights? You bet he would. The crime is the same. The risk is the same. Only luck intervened in everyone's favor here to prevent an injury or death.

Do you think that "the kids would be sent home with their parents" if the gun was loaded and he had pulled the trigger? The difference between what happened and that are at best only two degrees of separation (gun unloaded who knows if he pulled the trigger, the article doesn't say). I imagine that if this had happened to your mother/wife/sister/daughter in all intellectual honesty you could be feeling differently.

[SwampYankee]

Yes, when people overreact to incidents involving guns and turn informal proposals into new laws, we're all better off. Who doesn't need more laws?

1) I propose that adults with guns in the home keep them secured from all unauthorized users.

Already law in Rhode Island and my two neighboring states. I would wager it is law in most states.

2) I propose that the parents be questioned to discover if they knew the children had possession of the guns. (When I was 10, my Mom fidgeted over my costume so much she most certainly would have found a handgun.)

It is the job of the police and the district prosecutors to decide how to proceed. Regardless of the laws in place that may make parents culpable, law enforcement is notorious for selective enforcement. Laws are pointless if they are not enforced.

3) I propose that the children get something more than "sent home with their parents" with no further punishment. At least they should have to appear before a magistrate. What they did was a chargeable crime. They have to get to know that in no uncertain terms. (Unauthorized access of a firearm by a minor and pointing a real gun at a person).

Once again, see above.

4) I propose that schools teach the four rules of gun safety to all grades first through twelfth.

My kids get gun safety once a week every year.

5) I propose that the gun community try to get the message out that guns are not evil. Ignorance of guns is evil. Guns are a fact of reality. Instead of trying to ban them from legal, rightful gun owners, how about teaching children about gun safety and how to behave around guns. Whether in the presence of a legitimate gun owner or a gang-banger, kids need to know this. Where is the gun-rights community on this? Where is the NRA on this? We're pretty good at litigating, but not at teaching. We should be leading on this so that 10 year-olds don't think it's OK to take grandpa's gun, or for that matter even pick it up without his permission.

Kids that don't go to school, can't read or are mentally unstable will be unaffected by your educational campaign. Gun safety is great, but how about we figure out how to teach math first? We've had an enormous anti-drug and alcohol campaign in America for the past 20 years. How well has that worked?

[Patriot86]

Lack or parental supervision is going to be the death knell of this next generation. I am only 25 but my wife teaches young kids, every year they are more and more disrespectful to any sort authority. Both of us worry about what is going to happen when the 4-8 year olds of today are 18 or 21.


This is why you see younger and younger kids committing more serious crimes. They start young, at age 8 or 10 with no consequences to their actions. Then they get old enough to enter family or juvenile court and start to do tiny little stints, have to do programs or go to counseling. By the time they reach an age where they can be tried as an adult they have spent years getting away with many things short of murder, so when they do commit an armed robbery, murder or other violent crime in their mid to late teen's they are so used to a slap on the wrist that real punishment comes as a shock.

Some offenders even make it into their 20's before facing real time, getting slapped on the wrist for things in adult court. The whole way our justice system is structured encourages criminals to escalate the severity of their activities.


All I can say is when I have kids by that age they will know you don't point a gun at anyone.

[hogdogs]

At 10-12 years old, I went trick or trating as a "hunter" complete with blaze orange, license on my back and my Mossberg bolt action .410...

Folks didn't even have to quiz me for gun safety by this point.
A simple... "You kids be careful and look before you cross the roads..." was plenty.

Brent

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Originally Posted by JustThisGuy

Why isn't the NRA at the forefront of denouncing the criminal use of guns?

Exactly what do you want the NRA to do that it is not already doing in order to be at the "forefront" of denouncing the criminal use of guns. The NRA has repeatedly stated that laws should focus on criminal use and holding people responsible for their criminal use, not on burdening law-abiding citizens with regulation. This strikes me as sensible given that way less than 0.1% of firearms are ever used in a crime of any kind.

Where is the NRA on this? We're pretty good at litigating, but not at teaching.

You're aware of the Eddie Eagle program right? I'm still unclear exactly what it is you want the NRA to do here?

You seem to be concerned that people somehow don't know or realize that it is not OK for 10yr olds to wander around with handguns unsupervised and point them at people. Generally, my experience has been that the households where that type of thing happens are probably already violating both the laws of man and the laws of common sense on a fairly regular basis.

1) I propose that adults with guns in the home keep them secured from all unauthorized users.

The problem with making this proposal law is that it doesn't really stop the problem children; because they weren't living in households that followed the law to begin with. At the same time, it can create burdens for people who wish to keep a firearm readily accessible for self-defense and it removes choice from families about how to deal with firearms and children (lock them away from children/educate the children/combination of both depending on ages).

If we are going to legislate based on what the stupidest people in society occasionally do, we are going to be drowned in legislation - and the lack of personal responsibility will ultimately just encourage even more ill-thought behavior.

[Uncle Buck]

I dressed up as a cowboy this year. (Wig, hat and six-guns)

I am sure those boys and their parents will be visited by the folks from Department of family and children's welfare.

Lock'em up? And what does that do for the kids? They will learn how cool it is to steal a car. Where they should have hidden the guns. Learned what they should have told the police.

You guy would be amazed at what is discussed in a juvenile detention facility. When I worked in a detention facility, we usually could tell which kids would be OK and which we would see again.

I think the police made the right decision and I hope both Grandpa and mom and dad get involved and explain why this was not a good idea.

[MLeake]

JustThisGuy, I would suggest that your attitude is part of our national problem.

Should the parents treat this seriously? Yes.

Should law enforcement take stronger action should either boy continue any similar pattern of behavior? Yes.

Should we want legislation forcing people to treat their firearms as though the firearms are vicious dogs? Definitely not.

Tell you what, a 4 year old in the Orlando area ran over and killed his mother a week or two ago; she'd left him in the car (I believe while securing another child), and when she walked around behind the car the kid hit the gear shift and the car backed over her. She died later, in the hospital.

Why don't we make a law banning cars that can be put into gear by a 4 year old?

Actually, it seems like more than once a week I read a news article about a kid taking a car for a joyride. An untrained driver in a 3000lb car or 6000lb truck could kill a lot of people. We should pass a law requiring people to secure their car keys, so their kids or grandkids (or the kids or grandkids of their guests) can't find the keys on a counter-top or wall hook and take the car for an unauthorized spin.

While we are at it, we should definitely legislate a requirement to keep power tools, chainsaws, etc secured. Some kid might find a chainsaw, and decide it would be fun to imitate Leatherface...

Sarcasm aside, JustThisGuy, you want to criminalize what used to be, and in my opinion should still be, normal behavior. I think that's exactly the kind of attitude that has caused us problems for the last several decades, and I could not disagree with you more.

And, in all seriousness, cars and power tools, and for that matter hammers, wrenches, baseball bats, and the butcher and steak knife sets on nearly every kitchen counter in the US, are all potentially lethal items. I don't see you (or anybody with a lick of sense) proposing that we legislate the securing of such items, or the forbidding of kids to have access to tools or kitchen utensils.

We have enough crimes on the books. Pointing a firearm at a person is already a crime.

And I don't need you telling me how to secure my firearms.

[JustThisGuy]

MLeake you make some compelling arguments.

"Lock'em up? And what does that do for the kids? They will learn how cool it is to steal a car. Where they should have hidden the guns. Learned what they should have told the police."

Oh dear, nowhere did I suggest the kids should be locked up. I suggested that they should have to appear in order for them to understand the seriousness of the crime he committed.

I started this thread to get discussion going on this. This was a serious offense, I've seen no one address that.

As for the NRA, what would I like them to do? I'd like them to get better at public relations on positive issues related to guns. Eddie Eagle is a start, but it's woefully ineffective. Ask almost anyone anywhere what Eddie Eagle is, and you will get a blank stare. Ask almost anyone if their kids know the four rules of gun safety and you will get a blank stare. We can do more. We should do more to promote a positive view of guns and gun users and specific calls for enforcement against gun wielding criminals (I'm talking about friend of the Court briefs in such cases) and cooperating with Local Law Enforcement to have an NRA sponsored Law Enforcement gun-safety show & tell for each year's students would go a long way towards changing the overwhelmingly negative perception of the NRA among the vast American public.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Originally Posted by JustThisGuy

As for the NRA, what would I like them to do? I'd like them to get better at public relations on positive issues related to guns.

I think we all agree on that; but the actual specifics of how they get better seem to be the sticky part.

Eddie Eagle is a start, but it's woefully ineffective. Ask almost anyone anywhere what Eddie Eagle is, and you will get a blank stare. Ask almost anyone if their kids know the four rules of gun safety and you will get a blank stare.

You know, knowledge is kind of like water. You can hand out all the free bottled water you want; but when you start holding people down and forcing them to drink it, they stop looking on you quite as charitably. It is shamelessly easy to learn about the Eddie Eagle program or the four rules. It took me 0.31 seconds to find it on Google; but I had to look first and the people who want to look aren't the problem.

The NRA can't force schools to adopt Eddie Eagle. That is up the parents in each school district.

We can do more. We should do more to promote a positive view of guns and gun users and specific calls for enforcement against gun wielding criminals (I'm talking about friend of the Court briefs in such cases)

First, the court has to give leave to file amicus briefs. Second, I'm kind of puzzled on this one. Can you give me an example of where you think the NRA should have filed an amicus brief to argue for stronger enforcement of the law in a criminal case.

and cooperating with Local Law Enforcement to have an NRA sponsored Law Enforcement gun-safety show & tell for each year's students would go a long way towards changing the overwhelmingly negative perception of the NRA among the vast American public.

So you think that the NRA is the stumbling block in cooperating with local law enforcement to teach gun safety to school children? I'm thinking that is probably not the case. I am guessing the resistance is more likely on the school board or LE end.

And I'm not sure why you feel the public has an "overwhelmingly negative perception of the NRA?" According to this July 6, 2011 poll by Rasmussen Reports, 54% of those polled viewed the NRA favorably, making the NRA about 12% more popular than the National Education Association.

And again, it is the whole "lead a horse to water" thing. Many of the people who dislike the NRA couldn't comment intelligently on what the NRA actually does to save their life. If all you know about an organization is what you pick up through random osmosis, then shifting your perception of it is a pretty tedious task.

[Double Naught Spy]

I dressed up as a cowboy this year. (Wig, hat and six-guns)

Careful Uncle Buck! Don't you know that real guns should never be worn as part of a costume or theatrics and that carrying a gun is to be taken seriously? http://thefiringline.com/forums/show...hlight=costume

JustThisGuy, all I can think of to say to you is to chill out. You are so worked up over this that you are making conflicting suggestions. The NRA isn't the be all to end all when it comes to gun issues and the notion of having the NRA working toward stiffer penalties for gun crimes isn't going to be beneficial at all to promoting firearms in a positive manner.

Your proposals are nice, but instead of telling the choir what you think, why don't you go out into the community and actually try putting your words into effect?

As for the NRA, what would I like them to do? I'd like them to get better at public relations on positive issues related to guns.

Great, how much money have you donated to this very cause to make it happen because if the NRA moves in the direction you see as being prudent, it will take away resources that the NRA uses to fight for our rights. I am sure you don't want us to lose ground in that area, so I assume you are making a large donation to fund a better outreach program, right?

[maestro pistolero]

All seriousness aside, the lesson here is never, ever mess with a ten-year-old's Halloween candy.

[youngunz4life]

HOLY COW

makes you wonder if the little 'felons' will graduate to killin their buddy over 20bucks and a pack of cigs in 5-10yrs like you see on some of these shows!

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Don't really need an illogical attack on the NRA?

Anything else going on in this thread?

Glenn

[hogdogs]

All seriousness aside, the lesson here is never, ever mess with a ten-year-old's Halloween candy.

Everyone in my neighborhood always knew I would go further than most in defense of my goodie sack!
I worked hard for that stuff!

Brent

[C0untZer0]

In Illinois the first time this happens it is a Class C misdemeanor and grandpa would be paying a minimum mandatory $1,000 fine.

[TexasFats]

In the area where I grew up, neither I nor any of my little friends would touch our father's/grandpa's/uncle's guns without proper permission and supervision. We were not that stupid, nor did we want to experience the consequences. Let's just say that those consequences would have been a terrible pain in the rear plus other unpleasant experiences. Some of those men still owned razor straps. We knew better than to do that! And, none of those guns were locked up. We just knew that messing with them would result in severe consequences!!!!