Cleveland baby shot dead by 3-year-old who found ‘untended’ handgun: chief
Source: New York Daily News
A 1-year-old Cleveland boy died on Sunday from a gunshot to the face, authorities said.
Investigators suspect another child, a 3-year-old, fired the fatal round after discovering a handgun inside a house in the citys East Side, ABC 5 reported.
Its a sad day for Cleveland, police Chief Calvin Williams told reporters outside the house. A 1-year-old child lost their life today.
Cops are still trying to figure out how the 3-year-old got ahold of a handgun, but the deadly weapon was apparently untended, Williams said
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/cleveland-baby-shot-dead-3-year-old-chief-article-1.2182702
Warpy
(111,245 posts)and another dead child.
We've heard this before. In fact, we're hearing it nearly every day now.
Vinca
(50,261 posts)Someone could go into a hospital nursery and take out the newborns and the "liberty lovers" would still be demanding their second amendment rights to be armed 100% of the time with no oversight. And the GOP would be backing them up in order to get the NRA dollars.
Archae
(46,318 posts)Still not clear why the shooter shot the driver of the car that killed the toddler.
Pooka Fey
(3,496 posts)as if random 3 year old boys just teleport themselves in to shoot other random infants who happen to be present.
What a sick society that tries to hide the fact that family members routinely shoot each other in today's America.
NOT AN ACCIDENT if there is a loaded gun in the house (or in your purse) accessible to kids.
OhioChick
(23,218 posts)CLEVELAND, Ohio -- The mother of a 1-year-old boy fatally shot by a 3-year-old relative had her back turned on the children when the gun went off, Cleveland police said.
Braylon Robinson was shot inside his East 63rd Street home on Sunday afternoon.
Police said the boy's mother was in a room with her son and two relatives, ages 1 and 3, when the incident happened. The mother's back was turned when the 3-year-old boy picked up a handgun, which then went off, according to investigators.
Only Braylon was injured, police said. He died while being treated at MetroHealth Medical Center.
http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2015/04/cleveland_police_release_more.html#incart_m-rpt-1
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)hatrack
(59,583 posts).
Coventina
(27,101 posts)Guns don't kill babies!!
Scary babies get themselves killed!!
(I shouldn't need this, but just in case....)
Little Tich
(6,171 posts)Coventina
(27,101 posts)And, leaving BOTH children unattended so that such an incidence can happen.
Those "parents" have ruined that toddler's life. Not to mention sacrificing the baby.
But, if criticizing me helps, I don't mind.
samsingh
(17,595 posts)and denial continues to allow these tragedies to occur. I guess at some point, when there is enough gun related death and destruction, people will understand that guns need to be respected and there need to be controls in place - and you don't romanticize guns and make them the symbol of the country.
gun manufacturers love it, the nra love It, and die hard gun lovers get all tingly over it.
the rest of us cry over the innocents being slaughtered.
Judi Lynn
(160,516 posts)UpInArms
(51,280 posts)no mention of where their "tender" was
ManiacJoe
(10,136 posts)Amishman
(5,555 posts)If we want to save lives without getting into a pissing match, there should be a public service campaign promoting awareness of existing child access firearm laws and penalties.
Another good idea would be to subsidize purchase of secure storage containers. Perhaps a tax credit? Or maybe a program to distribute low end security containers through local police depts if the gun owner signs a pledge to keep their guns locked up when not in their immediate possession.
We also need a nationwide child access law. (looked it up right now, most states have these laws but nothing is federal).
Devoid of more aggressive riders, I would hope congress could pass a simple bill requiring guns to be locked up if there are children in the home. Heck, make the tax credit for storage containers part of the same bill. We might save a few children, and gun nuts won't complain because they get a $100 tax credit for buying a gun safe.
flamin lib
(14,559 posts)I say put the gun owner in jail for about 20 years if the gun was not in a safe or on his/her person.
Amishman
(5,555 posts)If they really are that inexpensive, then I really like the idea of a program to provide them for free if the owner signs a pledge to keep their pistol locked up when its not with them. $2900 to help secure 100 households? sounds like a great use of funds. Heck, eve if only half of them really use the lockbox, its still a great benefit.
Yes, i know $29 means that the gun owner can easily afford them. But how many of us can admit to putting off buying a replacement smoke detector or a spare fire extinguisher? And how many of us would have gladly gone to the local fire dept for a free one? People are lazy and procrastinate, but also love free stuff. Make it easy for them to be safer. Scaring them at the same time by promoting knowledge of the penalties of unsafe storage would add a little extra persuasion.
edit: I do believe the parent should face negligent homicide charges. I am more focusing on what can be done to stop these things from happening as often.
samsingh
(17,595 posts)another innocent for you.
valerief
(53,235 posts)to Americans. Well, the very wealthy Americans, and they're all that matter.
Sancho
(9,067 posts)People Control, Not Gun Control
This is my generic response to gun threads where people are shot and killed by the dumb or criminal possession of guns. For the record, I grew up in the South and on military bases. I was taught about firearms as a child, and I grew up hunting, was a member of the NRA, and I still own guns. In the 70s, I dropped out of the NRA because they become more radical and less interested in safety and training. Some personal experiences where people I know were involved in shootings caused me to realize that anyone could obtain and posses a gun no matter how illogical it was for them to have a gun. Also, easy access to more powerful guns, guns in the hands of children, and guns that werent secured are out of control in our society. As such, heres what I now think ought to be the requirements to possess a gun. Im not debating the legal language, I just think its the reasonable way to stop the shootings. Notice, none of this restricts the type of guns sold. This is aimed at the people who shoot others, because its clear that they should never have had a gun.
1.) Anyone in possession of a gun (whether they own it or not) should have a regularly renewed license. If you want to call it a permit, certificate, or something else that's fine.
2.) To get a license, you should have a background check, and be examined by a professional for emotional and mental stability appropriate for gun possession. It might be appropriate to require that examination to be accompanied by references from family, friends, employers, etc. This check is not to subject you to a mental health diagnosis, just check on your superficial and apparent gun-worthyness.
3.) To get the license, you should be required to take a safety course and pass a test appropriate to the type of gun you want to use.
4.) To get a license, you should be over 21. Under 21, you could only use a gun under direct supervision of a licensed person and after obtaining a learners license. Your license might be restricted if you have children or criminals or other unsafe people living in your home. (If you want to argue 18 or 25 or some other age, fine. 21 makes sense to me.)
5.) If you possess a gun, you would have to carry a liability insurance policy specifically for gun ownership - and likely you would have to provide proof of appropriate storage, security, and whatever statistical reasons that emerge that would drive the costs and ability to get insurance.
6.) You could not purchase a gun or ammunition without a license, and purchases would have a waiting period.
7.) If you possess a gun without a license, you go to jail, the gun is impounded, and a judge will have to let you go (just like a DUI).
8.) No one should carry an unsecured gun (except in a locked case, unloaded) when outside of home. Guns should be secure when transporting to a shooting event without demonstrating a special need. Their license should indicate training and special carry circumstances beyond recreational shooting (security guard, etc.). If you are carrying your gun while under the influence of drugs or alcohol, you lose your gun and license.
9.) If you buy, sell, give away, or inherit a gun, your license information should be recorded.
10.) If you accidentally discharge your gun, commit a crime, get referred by a mental health professional, are served a restraining order, etc., you should lose your license and guns until reinstated by a serious relicensing process.
Most of you know that a license is no big deal. Besides a drivers license you need a license to fish, operate a boat, or many other activities. I realize these differ by state, but that is not a reason to let anyone without a bit of sense pack a semiautomatic weapon in public, on the roads, and in schools. I think we need to make it much harder for some people to have guns.
ileus
(15,396 posts)In a proper holster...or locked up.
IveWornAHundredPants
(237 posts)LiberalElite
(14,691 posts)Monk06
(7,675 posts)everyone off the hook. It is a disgrace when a three year old can pick up a gun, have a vague idea how to hold it and shoot a baby with it all because of a culture that loves guns more than children.
Luckily this little guy will have no memory of it when he grows up, hopefully.