Angry 4-year-old blasts babysitter with shotgun

[Anoobie Knewberton 47]

Just goes to show that you can never be too careful w/ firearms around children.

<broken link removed>


Cops: Angry 4-year-old blasts babysitter with shotgun
Buzz up!Like this story? Share it with Yahoo! Buzz
Police say a 4-year-old boy shot his babysitter Sunday because the 17-year-old stepped on his foot.

The Columbus Dispatch reports that the boy "retrieved a shell from a drawer in a back bedroom, grabbed a 20-gauge single-shot shotgun from a closet and loaded the weapon ... returned to the living room, and in front of another 17-year-old boy and other children, shot [Nathan] Beavers."

Beavers was treated for wounds from the birdshot, the paper says. The blast also injured another Jackson County, Ohio, teen, according to the Associated Press.

The shooter, who we're not identifying because of his age, isn't facing any charges.

"He knew it was wrong. He'd seen guns loaded and shot before, but he's never seen the carnage it makes when it hits. He knows it now," his father tells WBNS-TV.

Update at 11:30 a.m. ET: mschievous wrote in the comments section: "what's next - 4 year olds taking handguns to pre-school?" Well, last April, we told you about a 7-year-old who brought two loaded handguns to school. Read more here.

Read More

 

[Weebs]

Wow...

Ammo in a safe spot. Guns in a safe spot. NEVER UNDERESTIMATE YOUR CHILDREN.

I'm willing to bet the parents will face charges.

 

[BKMDNO]

The parents should be charged. One, they had a firearm and ammunition readably available to the 4 year old. Second, they apparently did not teach the child any respect towards the use of a firearm or respect for others. They probably will face a substantial civil penalty as well.

 

[dolooper]

Wow...

Ammo in a safe spot. Guns in a safe spot. NEVER UNDERESTIMATE YOUR CHILDREN.

I'm willing to bet the parents will face charges.

I'm not sure which part of storing the gun in a closet or storing the ammo in a drawer constitutes a safe spot, but I suspect you're right about charges, or at least liability on a civil level.

 

[Rix]

No kids......

 

[Doc In UPlace]

I don't mean any offense by this, it looks like a post that someone who has not had kids might write.

4-year old people do not have the mental capacity to understand fatal or serious injuries or crime. This is why the child was not charged. For this same reason there are distinctions made in the law for intent and capacity to appreciate the wrongfullness of an act.

...Second, they apparently did not teach the child any respect towards the use of a firearm or respect for others.

Apparently the kid got the idea that shooting people was OK. I wonder what TV shows he'd been watching in the last year or so?

 

[shooter]

That's terrible. One more reason why people should need to get a license to have children. Obviously any parent who leaves a weapon and ammunition in an area accesible to children is not ready to take on the responsibilities of being a parent. I can only wonder how many other areas they "fail" at being a parent. Like Doc said, what type of movies does this 4 year old get to watch. I know some parents use their T.V. as a babysitter, but hopefully they're not letting it run on 'R' rated material. You don't see Dora shooting Boots!

 

[JumpWing]

4-yr-olds do not have the mental capacity to appreciate the damage a firearm can do. After a year or so, this incident will be a distant memory for that kid because little 4-yo minds don't process experiences the same way teens or adults do.

This mess falls squarely in the lap of the "parents." I know how clever and determined small children can be but if you--as a firearm owning ADULT--can't be more clever and more determined than a 4-yo then maybe you shouldn't have had children to begin with.

 

[OFADAN]

Tragic...absolutely tragic on many dimensions. So much for the parents adequately securing their firearm(s). It is episodes like this that infuriates those who don't like firearms...which only fuels their hue and cry demanding ALL guns ALWAYS be unloaded, locked, and put away - even those dedicated for home defense...or they demand worse; completely outlaw all firearms "for the sake of the children".

On another note...glad to hear Nathan is recovering from the birdshot wounds. I'm not wanting to sidetrack this thread (so please start another thread if you want to continue this discussion)...but there is a lesson here for those who advocate birdshot for home defense. If Nathan had been hit with buckshot it would have been a totally different outcome. He is very fortunate it was only birdshot. He'll be "a hurt'n" for awhile but he is alive.

 

[Weathermaker]

In California, the parents would be charged, as any weapon that is not securely locked up and is subsequently improperly used by others is a felony.

As a matter of fact, to be in complete compliance with the law, any container, such as a gun safe, that is used to secure weapons has to be California Department of Justice approved.

 

[ZeroRing]

That's terrible. One more reason why people should need to get a license to have children.

Please tell me you aren't serious about that comment.

I agree with the belief that some people have absolutely NO business having kids but the LAST thing I want to do is give the government the right to choose who "they" believe are worthy of "breeding future party members". :nuts: