Mother: 4-year-old accidentally shot father with handgun

Family tragedy
Mother: 4-year-old accidentally shot father with handgun

By J.M. BROWN/Times-Herald staff writer
Article Launched: 05/13/2007 08:22:43 AM PDT


Vallejo police officer Brent Garrick comforts Carol Sparks outside her Georgia Street home Saturday after she reported that her 4-year-old son accidentally shot her husband, Brian Sparks. The man, who was the boy's father, died at the scene. (J.L. Sousa/Times-Herald) Vallejo police are investigating a report that a 4-year-old boy accidentally fatally shot his father in the head with a handgun Saturday.

Police took the boy into protective custody after the 4:35 p.m. shooting in the 2900 block of Georgia Street, where a neighbor said the couple kept several guns.

Detectives detained the mother, Carol Sparks, for questioning and later released the boy to other relatives, police spokesman Lt. Rick Nichelman said.

Carol Sparks called 9-1-1 saying her son had accidently shot the father, but detectives were not immediately able to confirm exactly what happened, Nichelman said.

"We've ruled nothing out," Nichelman said. "We're interviewing them in more depth."

more...
http://timesheraldonline.com/ci_5888332

I have a large collection of firearms, and 2 kids. I have no trouble keeping them both safe.

Who in their right mind lets a 4 year old have access to ANYTHING dangerous, is beyond me.

the dad and blamed the kid!!!

shouldn't be hard to check them both for powder residue on their hands

rolling around the floor, knocking over lamps, turning over tables, smashing glasses, until finally, with both there hands wrapped around the weapon, it went off. The bullet ricocheted off the kitchen chandelier, through the wall into the dads, head.

Yeah, that's how it happened. and it all started over there not being any apple juice left.

If only the dad had one of his many guns handy (yes, he
was a "gun collector"), he could have stopped that nasty
four year old!

(Do I really need a sarcasm tag?)

More guns = more death, no matter how much the gun
industry's unpaid volunteer lobbyists deny it.

Tesha

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

...

The dad was shot in the head by a 4 year old. Either Daddy was laying on the Ground or the kid has remarkable poise and aim to be able to hold a gun steady enough to point and shoot upward to deliver a fatal blow to the head.

The kid wouldn't be tried. No punishment and mother and child would still live happily ever after.

> It's a possibility.

The first thing Mr. Tesha said was "I hope they tested the
kid for gun shot residue" and I finished his thought saying
"and the mom, too".

Given just the facts presented in the original posting, it's
entirely within the realm of possibility that mom did it.

Tesha

Not in the least.

How many times do people have to be told: You don't keep friggin' loaded guns in a house with children!

As a gun owner, I find this appalling. Sure, my kids are 13 & 14, and have been raised around guns, but even they know that you treat every gun as if it is loaded, even if you just unloaded it yourself. I double and triple check any of my guns to make sure they aren't loaded before I hand them to someone else to look at.

:popcorn: waiting on the gun grabbers to weigh in....

when your angry spouse owns her own?

I have loaded guns in every room in the house and my wife has hers. She has one in the family room and one on her nightstand. We're not dead yet!:-)

The fact that you're not dead yet does not act to disprove
that "it happens all the time".

Tesha

Many, many years ago, when I was a kid babysitting for a neighbor I walked past the master bedroom and there was a pistol out on the bed. I don't know if it was loaded. I just closed the door and kept the kids with me. I didn't babysit there after that.

I grew up in house with guns, and they were always locked up -- unloaded, ammo locked up separately. So something like what I saw shook me up.

nt

he could have shot the toddler and prevented this tragedy.

:eyes:

beyond words.

It can't be an idiotic post; it's the *VERY STRATEGY* that
the gun nutters offer for keeping us safe. The poster was
simply pointing out (in an ironic mode) that the idea that
more guns will keep us safer *IS TOTALLY IDIOTIC*, especially
in a domestic-violence setting.

Sorry that went over your head...

Tesha

It's just that gun grabbers lack the ability to reason. Just keep making idiotic statements.

to test for powder residue.

from a work-related injury eight years ago, which is about when the couple moved into the Georgia Street house. The couple seemed happy and the boy was just "a normal kid," Peterson said.

Carol Sparks had stayed home to care for her husband and son after leaving her job at Yardbirds hardware store, which closed last year...

They get a house, he gets disabled, and the wife "leaves" her job? Unless the husband got a big disability settlement, I imagine money must be tight, especially since the husband wasn't caring for the child himself. Maybe things weren't quite that "happy."

:shrug:
rocknation

I don't believe in coincidences.

Accidents happen. What's a few dead people compared to the right to keep and bear arms?

Cause whenever they ban them, and all the law abiding people turn them in, somehow Criminals DON"T and they know it, so the murder and rape rates SKYROCKET...

THAT is fact.....

The genie is long out of the bottle, the attempts to put it back, only cause much more problems.

Sadly, I missed my ration this morning, but afternoon will do.

Cause whenever they ban them, and all the law abiding people turn them in, somehow Criminals DON"T and they know it, so the murder and rape rates SKYROCKET...
THAT is fact.....

That actually has been demonstrated over and over again to be a lie, but hey, repeat it if you like. I'm sure *you* don't know it's a lie.

I'd parse the lie, but any decent rational person can do that for him/herself, I'm quite sure, so no need for my services here.

Yeh, ban cars. Ban playgrounds. Ban parents. No children should ever die? That's part of life.

Oh, that's not in the constitution, is it?

Easy access to guns kills thousands every year, costs billions and lowers everyones quality of life.

trying to take mine away. As long as we understand each other, everything will be okay.
Okay?

Sorry, some won't see reality.

you weren't obsessively fixated on guns. You want to take my guns away, be my guest, gun-grabber. You will fail.
And when the jackboots come for you, I won't give a shit, I will laugh as they haul your sorry chickenshit coward ass off to the gulag. Not really, I'll do whatever I can to stop them. And I won't even ask for your thanks.

A TWENTY YEAR LOW!

because guns makes killing easy.

:rofl:

Not by me. But, by another relative who was 15. It wasn't an accident. The gun was "legal" the person who did the shooting was not a criminal. If the guns had not been available at the time the killing wouldn't have occurred.

The great myth of the gun-freaks is that "criminals" are doing all the killing.

you said:
"Not by me. But, by another relative who was 15. It wasn't an accident. The gun was "legal" the person who did the shooting was not a criminal. If the guns had not been available at the time the killing wouldn't have occurred.

The great myth of the gun-freaks is that "criminals" are doing all the killing."

If it wasn't an accident, the YES, the shooter was a criminal. He picked up a gun and shot your father in cold blood, if it wasn't an accident. That, my friend, makes the shooter a criminal.

My father was a drunk and a very violent man who frequently threatened to kill the family. In court, it was considered "justified manslaughter".

The person in question thought that he was protecting the family. My father may have, being drunk, picked up one of his own guns and carried through his threats. If no guns had been present, the chances of everyone surviving would have been almost certain.

That shines a totally different light on the subject than just saying "someone shot and killed my father, but they weren't a criminal."

Makes all the difference in the world, doesn't it? And quite honestly, if someone was drunk, violent and threating to kill me and my family and I didn't have a gun handy, they'd get their throat cut or their head bashed in with a baseball bat or frying pan. So yeah, someone STILL would have died that night, and it wouldn't have been me.

Again, not to minimize your loss, but life & death situations usually call for some drastic measures.

Peace to you, Tierra_y_Libertad....

The police could have been called (again). The family could have fled..there was time. Help could have been summoned from the neighbors. Etc.

Hindsight is, of course, 20x20. But, I really doubt, that if the guns had not been available, we would have stood there waiting to be killed by an enraged drunk. It had happened before, too many times, without the finality of death.

I don't "blame" the person for doing what he did. But, he/we, could have done things differently.

And, peace to you.

what could have been done, or should have been done, is always easier when you have time to think about it.

Sometimes, you don't have time to think, all you can do is react to the moment. The fact that you had been through the drunken abuse and threats before had a fear instilled in you, and your family, already. Although you state that "It had happened before, too many times, without the finality of death.", what assurance do you have that it wouldn't have ended differently on this night? How many times did Scott Petersen beat Lacy... before he finally killed her. How many times has a parent beat their child before they finally killed him/her? It was someone's turn to die that night. Luckily for you, it wasn't yours.

Peace

Ghost

Only justifiable homicide.

If no guns had been present, the chances of everyone surviving would have been almost certain.

In almost every firearm homicide. Not much more needs to be said.

Knife fights can be deadly. And you CAN bash someone's brains out with a frying pan.

That lunatic who ran over the policeman with a car probably could have just stunned him and done the same internal damage.

I read about the drunk who was killed and I find myself thinking that when it comes to being abused, the death of the abuser may seem like the only viable solution. Even if it doesn't seem that way to an outsider.

If you know that your husband would hunt you down and kill you if you left him, how many options do you really have? It's not the sort of thing that the FBI offers witness protection for...

have them.

Especially if somebody shoots a mass murderer with their family in their sights.

that it is necessary. I know a lot of people on this board disagree with this, and disagree with the death penalty also. What can I say, I'm a gun totin', non pacifist, death penalty supporting Liberal. When it comes down to Fight or Flight instincts, my instinct is to fight to live. They've been tested, they work...

I always invite pacifists to stand behind me and my gun, if it ever comes down to it, and I'll protect them too. I won't belittle them, because honestly, we need more of them in the world, but we also need people like us, who are ready and willing to stand up to the criminals and try to put and end to them.

is incompatible with my opinions about self-defense and the defense of others, in real-time. The thing that amazes me is that some DUers -appear- to believe it would be preferable to sit back and be executed by some psychopath than to defend themselves. I just don't understand that mindset.

or a stigma from being beat (they called it "spanked") into submission. "Oh, here comes the evil man, maybe if I cower down, he'll pick on someone else and leave me alone". I don't get it either.

As for the death penalty, I'm all for it, man. I think there ought to be televised executions. Picture this: Scumbag robs the corner store, killing the cashier and a customer (for $28 and a 12 pack of beer). Cop catches you. You confess because, well, the evidence is 100% air tight. You were caught red handed and confessed. Sentenced, right now, to death. Walk scumbag out on the courthouse steps, TV cameras rolling, and pop a cap in his temple. Look in the camera and say "this is what WILL happen to you if you murder someone. Now, will the family and/or friends of this piece of shit please come get his body off of the courthouse steps within the next hour, or we'll chunk him in a paupers grave."

Some people aren't fit for society. Charles Manson, Jeffrey Dahmer, Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy, Wayne Williams, The Green River Killer, ... and the list goes on. Why the hell should our tax dollars pay to feed and house these rejects when we have veterans and families living on the streets and under bridges? Guarantee these sick freaks 3 hots and a cot for the rest of their lives? Give me a break!

Violent crime is going to continue until we become very aggressive in our laws dealing with violence. As long as we mollycoddle our violent criminals, the more violent they get.

These are just my opinions on the matter, anyone is free to think and feel differently.

which was what I suppose almost everybody would see as a "cut and dried" case...but a lot of convictions were considered just that way and later found out to be not so. I do agree that there are some humans who need killin'.
Not for revenge, just that they aren't useful in whatever grand scheme as might exist. Heinlein touched on the dilemma in _Stranger in a Strange Land_ which you may know of.

I lived in Florida for 20 years while they used "old Sparky" for executions...and they used it often. I kept a sort of diary which unfortunately got lost when I moved away...but I recall enough of it to say with accuracy the death penalty is not a deterrent. In fact, the murder rate actually -increased- after an execution. I don't pretend to explain this phenomenon, just observed it.

Nobody I know wants to mollycoddle criminals but the system we use now doesn't seem to have much effect...maybe there's another way?

> Especially if somebody shoots a mass murderer with their family in their sights.

Did you notice your scenario required a gun to get rolling?

Or was "sights" just an accidental metaphor on your part?
Then again, most mass murders in America are done with
a gun...

Tesha

????

your dad with, if he couldn't get a gun. :sarcasm:

n/t

I can check her story with 2 simple tests. One on her and one on the child.

Murder 1, premeditated, that sort of thing. :sarcasm: off

The NRA has consistently opposed any trigger locks for guns. We child-proof bottle caps, but not guns.

It's been in place for more than 10 years. Every firearm sold in the state has to include a trigger lock that is approved by the state for use with the particular make and model of firearm. I have a large Ziplock bag full of ones that I was required to buy, before I spent about $3,000 on a real safe and made myself exempt from mandatory trigger locks.

The best trigger lock in the world is useless if it isn't used, and no mechanical safety device is a substitute for the one between your ears. Assuming the 4-year-old really did the shooting (of which I am very skeptical), anyone dumb enough to leave a loaded handgun where a child can get it is probably dumb enough not to bother securing the weapon when it is not in use.

California also has a law that makes it a felony for a gun owner to, through negligence, allow anyone under 16 to get posession of your gun, if an injury or death results.

ETA I would favor two changes to the law, that would IMO be likely to reduce the number of accidental shootings and stolen firearms:

- Gun safety education in schools. We teach driver training, drug abuse resistance, and the hazards of sex. Why not guns too? It would involve only mock firearms, and students could of course be opted out for personal objections.

- Tax incentives to get more people to buy robust gun storage devices. If my safe had cost me a few hundred dollars less, I probably would have bought it months or a year earlier.

from someone else...

let's say mom didn't like dad anymore...and she figures out a way to con the 4 year old into shooting the dad...
crazier things have happened...

If they were improperly stored firearms, that is truly a tragedy and one that could have been avoided, as common sense dictates guns should be stored under lock and key.

We wouldn't need schools, books, or things like gun safety education.

Every gun sold in California (where this incident occurred) has a trigger lock included, but you can't force people not to be stupid.

I'm exempt from the trigger lock requirement because I own a state-approved safe. It's a much better storage solution.

If you don't trust yourself with guns, don't buy one. But don't assume that everyone else has the same anger management problems you do.

Remember NRA guru Bob Barr accidently shooting a gun off at a fundraiser? That's typical.

Odd, you should desparage my physically defending myself while you seem so eager to use a gun to defend youself. Bad memories?

I remember that remark having something to do with what you thought was an appropriate treatment for gun owners in general. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Odd, you should desparage my physically defending myself while you seem so eager to use a gun to defend youself. Bad memories?

billbuckhead, please show where I have ever said that I personally am eager to defend myself with a gun.

I have stated many times that I am willing to use one in defense of my home, particularly in the event of a breakdown of order pursuant to a natural disaster such as an earthquake.

But I have also said on many occasions that I do not carry a firearm around with me. I've also said, dozens of times at least, that using a firearm in self-defense is the last thing a thoughtful person would want to do.

BTW, I've never hit anyone except in self defense. i think you're projecting again

I hope this does not come out wrong but anyone dumb enough to leave a loaded gun out in the open where a 4 year old can pick it up and shoot them in the head deserves it.

I have several Guns and Rifles and a 4 year old daughter, the guns and rifles are kept locked-up and unloaded in a big safe and the ammo for them are kept in a smaller safe. Both of my children know that they are never to handle a firearm even if they think it's unloaded and to come and get an adult if they find a firearm outside even if they think it's a toy.

What about the kid?

Good chance he'll remember it and bear that horrible burden the rest of his life.

The fathers actions and lack of responsibility would not merit a deat sentence in any court of law. The father did not deserve the death penalty, and the child did not deserve to be the executioner.

This is alot of things, all of them terrible, but justice isnt on of them.

Then get back to me on that.

this isnt it.

Its tragic.

feel free to disagree.

match up to the evidence--in other words the police--i think---are looking into the wife as the shooter.