Let's see: an 8-year-old boy shootin' an Uzi submachine gun at a gun show while his dad reached for a camera. What could go wrong?
Here's a tragic story about how a boy fatally shot himself in the head while trying out a weapon of war:
The machine gun shoot drew hundreds of people from as far away as Maine and Virginia. An advertisement said it would include machine gun demonstrations and rentals and free handgun lessons.
"It's all legal & fun — No permits or licenses required!!!!" reads the ad, posted on the club's Web site. "You will be accompanied to the firing line with a Certified Instructor to guide you. But You Are In Control — "FULL AUTO ROCK & ROLL," the ad said. [...]
Christopher, a third-grader, was attending the show with his father and sixth-grade brother, Colin. Christopher had fired handguns and rifles before, but Sunday was his first time firing an automatic weapon, said his father, Charles Bizilj.
Bizilj told the Boston Globe he was about 10 feet behind his son and reaching for his camera when the weapon fired. He said his family avoided the larger weapons, but he let his son try the Uzi because it's a small weapon with little recoil.
"This accident was truly a mystery to me," said Bizilj, director of emergency medicine at Johnson Memorial Hospital in Stafford, Conn. "This is a horrible event, a horrible travesty, and I really don't know why it happened."
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-boy-shoots-himself,0,7568246.story
Any child can shoot an Uzi, once properly instructed. In this case, the adults misfired and failed to properly instruct and assist the boy. I'm sure they are keenly aware of this now.
In this case the deadly agent was not the gun or the child's inexperience; rather, the relaxed attitude of the adults present.
Guns, like fist-sized rocks and stout sticks, are deadly. People not paying attention are deadlier.
Negligence, plain and simple. Good thing the kid didn't accidentally kill somebody else, too. That coulda gone way worse than one death.
@ Anthony - not darwin award. One of the requirement of darwin awards is that the candidate has to be 'capeable of sound judgement' which essentially means no kids or serious mental handicaps.
see:
http://www.darwinawards.com/rules/rules4.html
I don't blame the father in this case; his only crime was assuming the instructor was competent.
*should be "show" right?
mistake on the tribune, i think they now officially owe me a Ferrari.
That is nice to know. *LOL*
First guns are killing machine, especially auto' things like Uzi. So what the hell this things are ramping all around in this country ? Fucking stupid amendement I know. A think oldest than any living body at the moment. Totaly stupid.
Second, how can somebody put a so deadly thing in his own baby boy hands ? From my point of view it's complete madness.
Here, if someone would just put the thing in the hands of a boy, even empty of any ammo, people would get crazy at this person, he would be put in jail and his childs would be put away from him.
US people should understand than from certain points of view they are just as barbarian as afghan talibans.
Hope your country will step down one day, gently.
Too many morbid posts from Alex, seriously now. I come here for neat and whimsy, not tragic accidents. Not impressed.
You americans crack me up. :-D
If I ever have children they will be taught what to do if they find a firearm, and how to safely handle a rifle. But an uzi? I don't effing think so.
Small weapon means more recoil, not less. Recoil is in inverse proportion to weight. M16 and friends are about the easiest to handle common select fire weapon.
I am opposed to coddling children, but that was stupid. Bear in mind in another eight years that child could have been legally handling a 1,000,000 joule projectile.
It ain't true. Its murder rate is over twice that of, for example, England. A while ago I looked out the murder by gun rate and that was even higher, comparitively.
Please - if you're going to defend the indefensible at least play fair and don't make up the data.
The Uzi is notorious for pulling up and to the left, which means if you're a little boy it'll line itself up for your little head.
The dad should be charged as should the sponser of this little side show.
/likes guns, owns guns, shoots guns
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/may/13/ukcrime.boris
"In fact, the most recent crime survey by the Metropolitan police showed that knife crime has actually dropped by 15.7% over the past two years, from 12,122 to 10,220 incidents.
Nevertheless, that still amounts to a knife-related incident every 52 minutes. Knife crimes were also four times more prevalent than gun crimes; and the risk of serious injury was more than double than that for gun crime – statistics that will give the London mayor and his newly appointed knife tsar, Ray Lewis, pause for thought. "
A knife czar?
Dead is dead, whatever the cause.
Both countries enforce large black markets, which is the underlying source of much of their crime.
8 year old allowed into swimming pool and drown...
Ban swimming pools.
etc.
etc.
ad nauseum
Dangerous activities warrant supervision, duh.
But the Range Marshal should have their head handed to them on a platter for allowing anyone, adult or a kid to fire without them standing there to control the weapon.
I'm having a hard time with not seeing this story, or the one about the guy being dragged behind a truck on the national news right before an election -
I've fired a Samopol (Czech hybridized semi-automatic) and that kicked a bit first time, but I got used to it - but damn was i focussed while learning how to use it... that this kid's dad is a doctor ("Director of Emergecy medecine"?!) and doesn't have the sense to understand the immediate potential of such a device - that's the scariest part
As seen from this side of the Ocean, it is very sad to see the decline of what once was the most powerful and respected country in the world - but it is sadder still to see how enthusiastically its people is raving about their own derangement.
But that aside is there no form of regulation?
Fully Auto is illegal surely?
And as for allowing an 8 year old access to military grade automatic weapons, you can't get a beer 'til 21 but can spray away with an uzi at eight?
How anyone can accept this situation as normal only denotes how warped the norm is in the US.
Although the range master there did specifically warn us about the uzi.
Yes, but if, say, you ban guns, and then have some rise in knife crime, you have not really accomplished as much as claimed.
This is a very sad story, and one that could have easily been avoided with simple safety precautions.
If this happened in your country, I wouldn't make sweeping generalizations. I know that they're lots of fun to make, and you all probably enjoy pissing off people anonymously, but it gets a little tiring somehow.
Sheesh.
Operating fully automatic weapons? Not in my state, gun nuts.
I'm always rather puzzled by people who deny anyone else the right to criticise them. They're often the same sort who don't like people telling their kids off, claiming that it's their job to do it while failing to actually do so.
Personally, if someone sees my kids doing something wrong they're welcome to tell them off and I'll generally support them, too.
second?gun nutts huh?yes i am a gun nutt,i do not agree with turning a 8 yr old loose with with a full auto but i teach shooting sports to kids i am certifed in several areas and being taught to right way stuff like this does not happen.plus the kids i teach act alot better than your liberial kids i am sure
next for whoever said guns are only made for killing?target shooting is a hobby that outdates most other sports.maybe you should try it,its alot of fun.
"gun fairs" hahaha!
Such a nice family day out...
You zany Americans.
That is a very disturbing line of thinking. If we start throwing out parts of the Bill of Rights because we find them uncomfortable or distasteful, where we do stop?
No doubt these very same people have no qualms about criticizing and generalizing the culture, customs, government, and religion of other countries. Silly double standards.
American culture is based on violence and it is a gun culture sadly. Little children or kids shooting guns is indicative of a greater problem in our society. I don't care how it's done, on a range or on the streets.
I can't believe the stupidity of anyone that would let children handle guns, why not give them crack cocaine and a pipe too, perhaps they don't because that would be irresponsible and dangerous.
Stop telling completely BS already.
BTW, butting into people's lives as far as parenting is concerned is a good way to get hurt. Kids with issues usually have parents with issues (hell, they might even have a gun!).
Furthermore, Even the best parents can have kids that act up. As in the case with this gun-related incident, when you are seeing a kid throw a tantrum at the store you are seeing a microcosm of that family's life (this gun incident is a microcosm of American life) and may or may not be indicative of thief lives as a whole. The bottom line is, you don’t know the history and you don’t know what the situation is. For you, a stranger who is completely ignorant and uninformed as to what is going on, to start handing out criticism or advise is unhelpful and completely out of line in my opinion. Yeah, there are just poorly raised children out there, but do you REALLY think that your two cents is going to change that? Don’t be so naïve. The solution is much, MUCH more complex than that. Kind of like the solution that Americans should just "ban guns" is too simplistic for that problem.
Despite what most foreigners seem to think of gun owners in the USA. The majority of us owners are very responsible with our weapons.
OH and in case you've missed it. Just a couple of months ago the US Supreme court ruled that the 2nd amendment did protect our right to own firearms.
I allways wanted a Mil Mi-24 "Hind" gunship...
ButI also think it's a VERY good idea for the law not to allow me to have one, or any other nutcase like me.
When are you ppl gonna allow live handgranates in kindergarten?
not even being that sarcastic there, to me its about the same thing as kids on gunfairs...
Were either of my two to do anything when I'm not there I'd be glad if another adult dealt with it. I'm not always there, I don't follow my kids around slavishly, they're given considerable freedom but are expected to behave properly.
Your view is that no one should ever deal with a problem because they don't "own" it. Daft, in my view. What if I see one kid beating up another? You want me to walk past? If one of mine's getting thumped I'd like someone nearby to at least break it up.
2) Most guns are made for killing people, which I am typically against. Do you go moose hunting with an uzi?
http://your4state.com/content/fulltext/?cid=36661
...or maybe we should just accept that the price of freedom is that accidents happen, and that when each of us steps off the curb, we're not guaranteed to make it to the other side of the street?
Has anyone here read the book Freakonomics? One of the main themes of the book is that we perceive relative dangers without full perspective. The example from the book says that if you have a swimming pool and a handgun, the swimming pool is 100 times more likely to kill your child, yet society clearly doesn't prioritize according to the facts.
This, of course, isn't to say that society should ban swimming pools, or that handguns be available to every man, woman, and child. Rather, we need to understand the relative costs associated with everything and separate emotion from understanding.
Society's misunderstanding of the relative dangers of swimming pools and handguns is a testament to the fragility of freedom. The fact that accidents such as this one, however extremely graphic, seemingly unnecessary, and tragically preventable, automatically sway public opinion toward the banning of guns, and therefore the restriction of libertarian freedom, is the real tragedy.
Swimming pools are useful, and besides, they quite possibly save a considerable number of lives in a year through healthy exercise.
Privately held machine guns serve no useful purpose.
Privately held machines guns don't have as much utility for their risk as other, less dangerous guns (which I why I don't have a problem with the strict laws against them), but they do have some utility.
Maybe when the carnage will be over, real grownups without boom/bang fetishes will be able to repopulate your otherwise interesting piece of land.
That said, as long as the Second Amendment stands, I support it entirely. Frankly, I don't care if firearms are banned or not, but people trying to circumvent the Constitution through dubious "interpretations" really piss me off. As someone posted above, if you can circumvent one Amendment, what stops you from circumventing more at a whim? Like it or not, the Second Amendment says I can go out and buy a gun, and if you want to remove that right from me, you need to amend the Constitution. Period.
BTW, stop blaming the dad in this case. Read more articles than the one Neatorama posted (which is heavily biased): there was a instructor present.
The stupidest idea was to have live ammo at a gun show, and to allow anyone without a licence to fire that gun.
This was at a Licensed shooting Range. With a Range master present but not doing his job in this case.
Without knowing how many shooting lanes were open at one time I can't completely blame the Range Master. But there should have been some one at each lane responsible for that particular lane.
The Range Master is the Boss of all lanes then there should be a manager at each lane. Especially when its an Open to the Public shoot.
I don't know about you but if I was going to loan a piece of equipment, worth 1000s of dollars, of any type to someone I didn't know. I would be standing there making sure they used it properly and safely.
Notice in the article that none of the people that where supposed to be in charge of the show were talking. The gun ranges Insurance company & Lawyers told them to keep their mouths shut except to official investigation personnel.
You can Bet there is a Lawyer along with the anti-gun crowd bitting at the bit on this one.
I'm afraid you misunderstood the statistic. You're absolutely right that more guns would mean more deaths. However, it's not about "more people die from swimming pools because there are more swimming pools out there." The point is how risky it is for a family to own either one based on how likely each is to be dangerous. On average, it's always 100 times safer to own a handgun.
I hate to say it, but the parent would be considered the most ignorant for putting his child in harm's way like that.
Shame on him, thinking it was cool to see his 8 year old shoot an Uzi!!!
this story brings a tear to my eye, for the kid, for the family and most of all for all the gun owners who are responsible with their weapons....
That having been said, this is not the fault of the gun, or the gun's availability, or even dare I say the gun's presence in the hand of a child (which I can't find any justification for, either). It is the responsibility of the adults present, who should have known better.
For example, you can die a painful death if you choose to drink drain cleaner. Yet drain cleaner is perfectly legal and available almost anywhere. But it comes with a warning on it, which very small children would not be able to read, just see the pretty colors. Therefore, it's up to the ADULT to keep the drain cleaner away from children, not up to lawmakers to make drain cleaner unavailable for everyone because it's possible to die from drinking it.
If people want to play with guns, have a swim, cross the road, climb a mountain, smoke cigarettes or dance with the devil in the pale moonlight then that is up to them. I think that's called "choice".
My honest (but entirely biased by media) opinion is that the US is a truly f*cked up place. Sadly my own dear UK is well & truly on the same path. Guns are not the cause of this. Are there not plenty of countries out there (eg Switzerland) where it is customary for every household to own a gun?
It's not the gun that scares me but the idiot holding it. If people want to go to gun shows, shooting ranges or the like then good luck to them and I will steer well clear.
More gun control? Yes.
Ban guns completely? Cannot see a valid argument for it.
To all those...
"You'd all be speaking German right now - I didn't see you complaining when we bailed you out with our guns in the two world wars"
...posters. ahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!
I think we can draw a line between gun laws for civilians and gun laws for the military!
I don't think anyone is seriously suggesting sending the troops off to Iraq with a few sticks, a handful of rocks and a toothpick.
By the way - most of us are of course thankful for your part in those wars, however I doubt your soldiers died fighting in them so that idiots like you could then rub the fact in the faces of your so-called "friends".
Morons like you give your country a bad name.
Your state already has some of the most draconian gun regs in the nation. Doesn't this show that they don't work?
"Operating fully automatic weapons? Not in my state, gun nuts."
I wouldn't set foot in your socialist, gunophobic "utopia" if you paid me.
I was going to dig up a load of articles that stated more or less:
"Switzerland has one of the highest gun ownership rates in the world, coupled with one of the lowest rates of gun-related deaths." (look - I can quote wikipedia!)
But it turns out that recently this has changed:
"in 2005, 48 people were murdered by gunfire in Switzerland - about the same number as in England and Wales, which have a population seven times as large. According to the International Action Network on Small Arms, an anti-gun organisation based in the UK, 6.2 people died of bullet wounds in Switzerland in 2005 per 100,000 of population, second only to the US figure of 9.42"
So I guess it comes down to:
1) Do you believe the mere presence of a gun caused these murders? Or rather - would the absence of a gun have prevented these murders?
2) Does it matter anyway? If a man runs down his wife in a car do we ban all cars? If a youth stabs another do we ban all knives?
Hang ON - what the f*ck am I talking about? Of COURSE we ban knives, or at least carrying them in public.
I apologise - I was about to indulge in reductio ad absurdum but now I've changed my mind.
Guns were designed for killing and if you f*ck about with them someone will get hurt.
Geeez you f*cking yank gunnuts are CRAZY
My argument was to be that violence in western society is a far more complex thing to understand.
I was then going to blame TV and quote the examples of Bhutan and St Helena,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_radio/3812275.stm
but these have been debunked.
So why the hell are we all running around killing each other?
Turns out we're not - the glass is half-full after all:
http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/pinker07/pinker07_index.html
I'm going to stop watching the news and spamming forums with off-topic rants.
I'm off to buy a gun and watch some wrestling.
Quite the luck of the draw.
1. We already had the discussion about what the differences were going to be between the two continents. I recollect, a bit more than 200 years ago. I don't think you want to rehash it, now or ever.
2. You know nothing about firearms, or anyone you self-righteously call a "gun nut". Yet, you come here and about spewing your foolishness as though you were some kind of expert on society, firearms, or law.
3. You display an amazing amount of arrogance, but I don't find that surprising at all.
4. The second amendment is not about hunting, it's about independence. That is also something most of you know nothing about.
5. Where I live, there are few organized police departments. Both places. Alaska requires no permit to carry a firearm, concealed or in the open. People here understand that criminals, thieves, and murders do not care about laws. Laws are to address crimes. When you take a harmless act, having a gun, and elevate it to a crime to prevent crime, you sink to the lowest level of stupidity.
6. If you're happy living where you are at the whim and mercy of any hood who decides he doesn't care about the law, more power to you. Really, that's your right. You do not have a right to extend that to where I live.
7. "Repeal the second amendment"? Sure, go ahead if you can. It won't make a lick of difference. The right preceded the constitution, and the supreme court and the writers of the Bill of Rights said so. So what? An illegal law is no more to be obeyed than an illegal order.
8. There are, read this well and I will write slowly, eighty million firearms owners in the United States. Eighty million people armed and safe, but for the rare exceptions.
9. We own, some debate over the number, between 250 and 750 MILLION firearms.
10. Guns were made to fire a bullet out the end of the barrel. Hammers were built to pound nails. Either can be used to kill people. Only an idiot would bring a hammer to a gun fight. Only a suicidal idiot would bring a knife to a gun fight. I'll take my chances with a gun.
11. I am a former law enforcement officer. Returned to college at 30 to pursue a graduate degree in physical therapy. I'd place my qualifications and intelligence against any of you morons, in any debate anywhere, anytime. And I'd beat you like a drum in front of any audience.
12. Emotional, knee jerk, and irrational arguments might appeal to people who have little self control or brains. It's better for the world that you people don't like or own guns. Leave those of us with some brains and self control alone. We're not like you, obviously.
Thank you for concisely stating the background that I relied on in making my earlier post (Oct. 28, 12:16 am).
It is not the gun, or the fact that it kills easily, that is at issue. The issue is personal responsibility. This sense of civic duty prevents gun owners from shooting their neighbors in precisely the same way that it prevents Little League players from attacking each other with baseball bats.
@those commenters who are unfamiliar with the handling and operation of firearms, why aren't you frothing at your mouths about bows, arrows and atlatls? Or steak knives?
A question for those who do not live in America but excoriate our freedom to own and use firearms: What is the murder weapon of choice in your country? Why haven't you done something about that weapon, like making them go away by passing a law?
"SEOUL, Oct. 21 (UPI) -- Six people were killed in a Seoul fire allegedly set by a man on a knifing rampage, police said."
Zany Koreans, they should ban fire and knives. This one man's behavior is indicative of the thoughts and beliefs of an entire nation of over 49 million. They are all fire and knife nuts over there because they don't make laws to ban that which can possibly kill them if in the wrong hands. I can't believe how stupid they ALL are. Once you put fire or a knife in a Korean's hand, they just start killing indiscriminately and uncontrollably. Unbelievable.
I think I've made my point quite well. My logic is flawless, really. In fact, I think you could apply this line of reasoning to guns as well and it would sound completely sane. No, really.
Do you really feel safer having them? rather than protecting yourselves you're more likely to put yourself in danger as the burglar (or whatever) is going to assume you've got a gun and take one himself, he's got the element of surprise on you and will likely shoot first.
As I live in England I'm very very unlikely to be a victim of gun crime or a gun accident. Nearly everyone that is killed by guns here are involved in the shady underground criminal business and unfortunately the odd innocent person gets caught in the crossfire.
Actually, let me retract my statement of badassness, it was a bit premature. I just got all pumped about this story.
Now what would've been badass if the zombie kid turned to the crowd with the trigger pegged, mowing down people and it caused this huge panic and everyone was grabbing whatever guns were available and returned fire... smoke, explosion, mayhem, people getting trampled... kickass!
If people want to see a real reduction in crimes and murders in the United States then they should be pushing to have harsher sentences on gang members and related crime. But that will never happen, because the police and politicians don't have the balls to actually confront the problems. Instead they place the blame on a inanimate object, and try to take away good innocent peoples only line of defense against the scum of society.
Bottom line guns defend innocent people who have the guts to own and properly use them.
Maybe one day you anti-gun people will be getting robbed at knife point and one of us good hearted legal gun owners will be there to defend you ungreatful innocent bast@rds. Or perhaps you would just rather wait till the police get there pick up your pieces.
People keep saying how robbers and thieves will have the upper hand in a armed conflict. I beg to differ. As a armed Licensed Concealed weapons carrier you have the element of surprise. Just give the perp your money and Put a couple bullets in his back when he runs off.
There will always be people getting murdered. It's been that way forever and always will be. I personally would rather take a quick shot to the vitals than be hacked up with a knife or have my head crushed with a hammer.
You people across the pond I understand. You have always been a bunch of spineless sheeple and I expect such. Your government has stripped you of the right to defend yourselves, but you Americans on here saying how guns are evil need to be banned seriously need to go learn some appreciation for the effort our fore fathers put into our Constitution.
What happened to that kid was an absolute trajedy and is fully the fault of the people operating the shooting range. There should definitely be a age requirement to shoot fully automatic weapons.