Not.

Some asshole who should go to jail was negligent. There is no other way that a four-year-old gains access to a gun. None. Ever.

whereas responsbile gun owners they had secured their weapons.

Incidents be called for what they really are. There is nothing "accidental" about a child being able to get ahold of a firearm. If we are going to throw pregnant women in jail for this:

http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/arrested-having-miscarriage-7-appalling-instances-where-pregnant-women-were

Then the owner of this firearm should be sitting in a cell right now


SMH

and because of that adult's careless act, a child was killed by an unlocked weapon.

Until we stop this convenient fiction that children "accidentally shoot themselves" and instead place the responsibility entirely on the reckless actions of a criminally negligent adult, we'll continue to hear of these entirely avoidable murders.

Twenty years for manslaughter would be too little for this criminal. Unfortunately, what we'll hear instead will be bullshit excuses of how they will "suffer the rest of their life" for what they did, but never a word about the punishment they richly deserve and the deterrent value inherent in their long-term incarceration.

"Child didn't "accidentally" shoot himself..."

He did in fact, accidentally shoot himself. I have a difficult time understanding why so many people are adamant in their refusal to use a word which is both accurate and representative of what occurred...

"an undesirable or unfortunate happening that occurs unintentionally and usually results in harm, injury, damage, or loss; casualty; mishap"

It was undesirable. It was unintentional. It resulted in harm. Check, check and check.

There is no safe way for a 4-year old child to safely operate a gun. You like the word 'accident' because it implies that nobody is to blame, it was just fate, nobody could have seen it coming etc. etc. etc.

Well since you like dictionary definitions so much, why don't you grab a legal dictionary and look up the term 'strict liability.' Sooner or later we are going to change the laws so that the careless individuals who allow children to 'accidentally' kill themselves and each other with guns serve a full term for manslaughter. Fuck your denial of responsibility.

Rest in peace,little Bryson.

When self-styled 'responsible gun owners' are staring down life or half-life terms for their irresponsibility we'll start to see progress.

...the dealers who sold the gun, the manufacturer, and Wayne LaPierre for safety violations.

Which led to the child's death.

If there was supposed to be some sort of child-safety feature that failed, that would be on the manufacturer as well.

Wayne LaPierre and his followers are just dicks. Much as I'd like to, I don't see any path to culpability in this case.

The dealer(s) who sold the gun are most likely dicks, too, but not sure how they would be culpable in this case. Unless the person they sold it to was someone who isn't legally allowed to buy a gun and they had that knowledge.

Our 2d A. rights are intact. That's what matters.

A four year old should know how to handle a Freedom Assurance Device! What if there were a home invasion or a sudden duck appearance?

And this is where requiring insurance would have helped. If you were obligated (on penalty of losing your coverage and your guns) to lock your guns away from kids or lose them and/or your coverage, maybe this kid's idiot family would have done so.

I'm a gun owner because I love to hunt. I always add that in these threads. And I have zero tolerance for the NRA/RKBA assholes including those on DU. I outshoot most of you, but I don't consider a gun to be necessary to anyone's freedom, and very very rarely to be helpful to anyone's safety. Most civilian guns are far more dangerous to children and the innocent than can be justified by bullshit about self defense. And most people who believe they could defend themselves with their guns against an armed assailant are dreaming or blustering.

As the responsible owner of several firearms, I concur 100% with what rjsquirrel says.

I welcome tighter restrictions on purchasing, transporting and storing firearms.

And the gun nuts on DU can kiss my ass.

My farming/hunter father-in-law was absolutely sure that when we were visitng the guns were locked up in a gun safe. When we would arrive he'd even have us double check the lock on the safe to make sure all was good. It is very simple to do. But sadly there are too many idiots with guns out there.

was having trouble getting her new "powder blue" .380 to fire, the one he got her for Christmas.

He worked for another department, was apparently experienced with guns. He fixed it.

She was taken to the emergency room and died.

Her services are today.

Everyone "entitled" to own a gun is not responsible enough to own a gun. I don't know how you cull the idiots from the pack if they pass a background check which is why I'm for strict regulations on the type of guns that can be sold and the number of bullets that can be fired without reloading. Whoever left the gun where that little kid could get it needs to go to jail.

Would have made a difference in this instance. The owner of the gun could be charged with a crime, as with almost all such shootings, but prosecutors almost never indict because they figure that the parent/custodian of the child has suffered enough emotional harm.

Let them suffer in a prison cell. The little kid will never have the opportunity for either happiness or suffering.

I'm just saying that the laws are already on the books but the responsible adult is almost never prosecuted.

There are truly circumstances when prosecution and punishment serves as a deterrent to a larger segment of society, and the death of a child through negligence by his caretakers is one of them.

Adults can be prosecuted for making a firearm accessible to a child, a misdemeanor charge.

In the statement released Thursday, family members said they hoped Bryson's death would be a reminder to families with firearms in the home.

.... about guns in the home and educating on the dangers of guns in the homeand/ or safe storage.

Sick effs.


http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-law-physicians-guns-counseling-20150423-story.html

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/03/18/bill-would-prohibit-doctors-asking-about-guns/

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/08/doctors-cant-ask-about-guns/375566/

(links to these too numerous to post them all)

CDC data from 2013

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_02.pdf

from table 10, Number of Deaths, "Non-transport Accidents":

children age 14 and under:

accidental discharge of firearms: 69
accidental drowning: 625

CDC data from 2013

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_02.pdf

from table 10, Number of Deaths, "Non-transport Accidents":

children age 14 and under:

accidental discharge of firearms: 69
accidental drowning: 625

There is no amount of accidental deaths that are OK.

If pediatricians can discuss gun safety with parents and save even ONE child it is a success.

clearly, you seem to believe ignorance is bliss ... I believe the more information parents are supplied the better.

Your answers are tired and do not make sense given the topic at hand.

Perhaps you would like to explain how discussing guns and gun safety harm or do not protect children.


http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/05/11/children-protection-gun-violence/2079177/

Nearly 800 children under 14 were killed in gun accidents from 1999 to 2010, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Nearly one in five injury-related deaths in children and adolescents involve firearms.

Children are NOT to be considered collateral damage.

6000+ children died due to accidental drowning.

should physicians be warning of the threat of backyard pools ?

If saving one childs life justifies any restriction, should children be banned from riding in cars because thousands die every year in accidents?

They also ask about the age of ones residence, the presence of stairs .... pets. don't put babies to sleep on their tummy's .... but don't educate parents about the dangers of guns in the home .... don't offer safer solutions.

This is tiresome .... you obviously value things other than the lives of children ... it speaks volumes about you.

I get it gunz ...and more gunz .... don't educate parents about the dangers ... think about the guns. I feel sorry for you and everyone around you.

but they might be surprised how much more risky backyard pools and riding in cars is.

Goodbye.

...sez Wayne LaPeeError.

Oh. wait.....he got one--that's why he's DEAD.

(sorry to be sarcastic about such a horrible tragedy, but if we don't ridicule the enablers of these tragedies, we give them more credence. This child's blood is on Wayne LaPee's hands, and the hands of every NRA stooge who follows him.)

and that is why all 4 year olds should have loaded guns.

Little Bryson was one of FOUR children who died as the result of "accidental" shootings in Harris County just last year.

You can google any date of the year and see this happen to small children in the US.

Some in the news today:
http://fox6now.com/2016/01/22/officials-five-year-old-boy-shot-and-killed-in-beloit/

http://www.kmov.com/story/30939963/boy-11-shot-and-killed-in-alton

Grandma accidentally shoots and kills her sleeping 3 yo grandson
http://www.newswest9.com/story/31035334/new-details-in-childs-shooting-death-released-during-grandmothers-bond-hearing
(this woman was black so she got arrested for this "accident&quot

A firearm can't save lives if it's out of the owners reach.


Safety first, letting any untrained user gain possession never.

Gun owners should store a gun in their kids’ room, according to a ‘Home Defense Concepts’ seminar offered at the National Rifle Association’s Annual Meeting, comments that came just days after the fatal shooting of a two-year-old at the hands of her five-year-old brother.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/05/04/1964091/nra-guns-kids-room/

Unless your kids are old enough and well trained. That would be up to you as a parent, you know them best.


Myself I don't trust criminals that much so I have 3 safes, and a DVR system along with a BGSD.

What's a DVR system and a BGSD? (I have a Comcast DVR but I suspect that's not what you are referring to.)

would be a better headline IMO.

This is a clear example of the existence of a gun leading to an innocent child losing his life.

from what turned out to be a 4 year old

I haven't posted this in a while, but it's time to remind people what we need for real 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 70’s, 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 weren’t secured are out of control in our society. As such, here’s what I now think ought to be the requirements to possess a gun. I’m not debating the legal language, I just think it’s 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 it’s 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 learner’s 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 driver’s 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.

but I'm not an NRA fucktard or an ammosexual.

I agree. The President's plan to augment the staff of the ATF will do exactly that. An additional change to the extremely common practice of plea bargaining away charges like straw purchasing, transferring to a prohibited person, felon in possession and negligence related crimes needs to stop.

#7 Won't work since being a criminal with a gun is already illegal and you can't require a criminal to register as that qualifies as self-incrimination.

#5 Would result in the NRA making a ton of money since they're the shark in the pond of firearm insurers.

Those rules that require a license to exercise a right would set a dangerous precedent for other rights that have come under attack such as voting.

Is silly, as has been shown many times here, will do nothing to prevent deaths, will cover a miniscule number of shootings and is simply an effort to make guns unaffordable for some.

Number 2 - will taxpayer money cover the cost of each and every examination? What is "your superficial and apparent gun-worthiness"? I have an idea - how about each and every person that wants to vote undergo an examination and take a test that ensures they are qualified to vote?

Number 4 - so people with kids can't own guns? Sounds arbitrary/unconstitutional.

Number 6 - a waiting period for ammunition - what's the purpose of that requirement?

Number 7 - we already have laws that make it illegal for certain individuals -- like felons -- to own guns and almost never enforce those laws. How about we make illegal possession of firearms a mandatory 20 year prison sentence, regardless of whether you committed any other crime at the time? That would send a lot of people to prison.

Number 8 - what is "unsecured"? I assume you aren't talking about concealed carry since that is legal almost everywhere and has the support of a large number of US citizens.

Number 9 - this is essentially a national registry requirement that will have little support.

Regarding your closing statement, a hunting/fishing license is "no big deal" - I can go to any local outdoors store or Wal-Mart and purchase a license in 5 minutes. Even a drivers license is "no big deal" - show up, take an eye exam, take a 20 question written exam and then take a driving test and you are good to go. I'm not even sure you have to show proof of insurance to get a driver's license. But what you propose above is WAY more onerous. And ultimately many of these recommendations are (1) never going to be enacted into law and (2) exactly the reason that gun-controllers make zero headway.

Auto insurance statistics and research over the years have made many safety changes to the auto industry and road rules.

The same would happen with gun ownership.

You made the exact analogy for "gun ownership" with "eye exams". If you want to drive, the DMV makes you take a seeing test, but doesn't diagnose anything. If you can't see the road, the DMV won't give you a license and sends you to get corrected. If you apply for a gun license and fill out an application or interview with common questions and can't answer them - then you have to be cleared by a professional. The local state office won't diagnose you, but they have a right to common answers and a background check.

The problem with current laws is that there is no mechanism to enforce the law. The license provides that tool. If you simply produced your license to hunt, buy a gun, buy ammo, go the shooting range, etc., then you are good to go. If you don't have a license then you don't have easy access to guns. Most criminals today can easily get guns and ammo without any check.

If you don't know how to safely secure your gun for transport, you need to take a few classes.

There is NO national registry proposed by a license!! That's what you have now with point-of-sale checks. In this case, you were cleared for a license by your state. After that, you have access to guns as long as you have a valid license. No one is recording anything EXCEPT that you have a license. You want to catch criminals - then you have to have a way to catch them. Requiring a license for transactions is the way.

Watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=4&v=YN6rjamk0Q0


Links:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/03/us/how-mass-shooters-got-their-guns.html?_r=0
http://www.newsweek.com/2015/07/24/bullet-initiative-354203.html
http://www.thetrace.org/2015/07/background-check-vermont-gun-range/
http://www.salon.com/2015/06/12/this_is_the_nras_worst_nightmare_the_new_gun_safety_study_that_gun_nuts_dont_want_you_to_hear_about/
http://everytown.org
http://www.loc.gov/law/help/firearms-control/australia.php

and how many relatives of these accident victims become pro-gun control?

Data: Gunshots kill average of 27 Harris County kids annually

By Cindy George

Updated 2:13 pm, Friday, January 22, 2016

4-year-old Harris County boy died Thursday from a firearm wound — the second leading cause of injury death for children in Harris County.

Of the 1,074 minors who died in Harris County from 2011 to 2014, about 1 in 8 was killed by a gun, a fraction exceeded only by motor vehicle crashes, according to data from the Harris County Institute of Forensic Sciences.

That's an average of 27 child fatalities by guns every year. Among those for 2016 is Bryson Hernandez, who shot himself in the head at his grandparents' Cypress-area home early Tuesday in an incident described by authorities as accidental.

In addition to Bryson's death, two other children have been unintentionally injured by firearms already in 2016: a toddler shot himself in the hand and a 15-year-old was killed last weekend by an older brother.

More:
http://www.chron.com/houston/article/Data-Gunshots-kill-average-of-27-Harris-County-6777024.php

According to Think Progress.org.

7,000 go to the ER with injuries
3,000 are killed.