Reply #55: and you're pretending

[iverglas]

But all you have to do is change the added emphasis to make it appear that the DA was at least leaning toward not saying the gun was stored in a negligent manner: ...

... that "negligent" as it may be relevant in Pennsylvania criminal law has anything to do with what I'm saying.

If Pennsylvania law does not make it a crime to kill someone, then someone who killed someone else would not have committed a crime. Tautology, anyone?

You are forgetting the discussion is hypothetical. For all we know, the gun may have been stored in the attic.

Alrighty then. And is there an attic known to humanity that, if it is not securely locked, is inaccessible to your average 14-year-old-boy on the prowl for interesting shit in someone else's house generally, or for firearms (that he undoubtedly knew were there somewhere, in this case -- the male head of household was a bigtime shooter of guns and shooter off of his mouth on the subject of guns) specifically?

(Note that we still do not know that it was the neighbour kid who gained access to the firearm on his own; it may have been the household kid -- and all the same comments apply in that case.)

And if the firearm had been in a securely locked attic, do you imagine that the prosecutor would have said It was not locked away?