Tyler tot shoots self

[MoJo]

Another tragic story of unsecured guns and kids. Sad, I hope he makes it.

http://www.beaumontenterprise.com/news/ ... 014170.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[MasterOfNone]

Authorities say the boy's mother was the only other person home at the time. She is not facing charges.

I sure hope this changes after 7 days.

[Keith B]

Authorities say the boy's mother was the only other person home at the time. She is not facing charges.

I sure hope this changes after 7 days.

Why? Sounds like an accident. Gun was cased and on a shelf. Kid got it out of the case. While maybe not as secure as a safe would be, it does sound like they attempted to keep it out of the reach of the kids, especially a 2-year old. Wasn't like they had it laying open on the table.

[WildBill]

Authorities say the boy's mother was the only other person home at the time. She is not facing charges.

I sure hope this changes after 7 days.

Why? Sounds like an accident. Gun was cased and on a shelf. Kid got it out of the case. While maybe not as secure as a safe would be, it does sound like they attempted to keep it out of the reach of the kids, especially a 2-year old. Wasn't like they had it laying open on the table.

Also, we do not know if the mother was even aware of the gun. It could belong to someone else who lives in the house.

[MasterOfNone]

Why? Sounds like an accident. Gun was cased and on a shelf. Kid got it out of the case. While maybe not as secure as a safe would be, it does sound like they attempted to keep it out of the reach of the kids, especially a 2-year old. Wasn't like they had it laying open on the table.

Just being in a case does not make the gun secure. If a 2-year-old can get to the case and open it, it was definitely not secure.

Also, we do not know if the mother was even aware of the gun. It could belong to someone else who lives in the house.

Very true, WildBill. I initially misread into it that she was the only other person living in the home. (Funny what anger does to our perception.) If the person who left the gun there knew that the child would be there, it is a clear example of PC 46.13.

[Keith B]

I never said it made it safe, and don't disagree that they should have had it more secure. However, there are a lot of variables at play here and just saying that you hope the woman is charged without better background is an unfair statement.

[MasterOfNone]

I never said it made it safe, and don't disagree that they should have had it more secure. However, there are a lot of variables at play here and just saying that you hope the woman is charged without better background is an unfair statement.

I'll clarify. If the person who left the gun there knew that the child would be there (as I corrected myself above), that person should be charged because:

(b) A person commits an offense if a child gains access to a readily dischargeable firearm and the person with criminal negligence:
(1) failed to secure the firearm; or
(2) left the firearm in a place to which the person knew or should have known the child would gain access.

With the term "secure" defined as:

(3) "Secure" means to take steps that a reasonable person would take to prevent the access to a readily dischargeable firearm by a child, including but not limited to placing a firearm in a locked container or temporarily rendering the firearm inoperable by a trigger lock or other means

Since the child gained access and the person failed to secure it, it is an offense.

[Dragonfighter]

And what punishment would you impose that could possibly exceed what she is suffering now?

[MasterOfNone]

And what punishment would you impose that could possibly exceed what she is suffering now?

Perhaps the punishment that is indicated by the law.

[MoJo]

And what punishment would you impose that could possibly exceed what she is suffering now?

Perhaps the punishment that is indicated by the law.

So she is charged with a class A misdemeanor and has to pay a fine and possibly spend time in jail or on probation. If the woman knew the gun was there she's suffering way more punishment than a fine and jail time will provide. If she didn't know then the person who left the gun accessible should be the one charged. What if the gun was left there by the child's father? You want to throw him in jail too? There are times, and this is one of them, that blindly following the word of the law tramples all over the spirit of the law. Justice without compassion is simply vengeance.

edit. The gun bleongs to the child's grandfather.

http://www.aolnews.com/2011/02/15/texas ... ndpas-gun/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[WildBill]

The gun belongs to the child's grandfather.

The child was expected to survive.

Very good news.

http://www.aolnews.com/2011/02/15/texas ... ndpas-gun/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As for punishment, putting the father/mother/grandfather in jail would leave the child without parents for some time. In the meantime, the child would probably be put into "the system" and raised by foster parents. Then after they got out of jail, there would be numerous evaluations and court hearings concerning custody. IMO, there was no malice on the part any of the guardians of this boy, so prosecuting them would be punishing an innocent child.

[MasterOfNone]

And what punishment would you impose that could possibly exceed what she is suffering now?

Perhaps the punishment that is indicated by the law.

So she is charged with a class A misdemeanor and has to pay a fine and possibly spend time in jail or on probation. If the woman knew the gun was there she's suffering way more punishment than a fine and jail time will provide. If she didn't know then the person who left the gun accessible should be the one charged. What if the gun was left there by the child's father? You want to throw him in jail too? There are times, and this is one of them, that blindly following the word of the law tramples all over the spirit of the law. Justice without compassion is simply vengeance.

edit. The gun bleongs to the child's grandfather.

http://www.aolnews.com/2011/02/15/texas ... ndpas-gun/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Is this any different that saying that if I drive drunk and kill my wife, I shouldn't be charged because I would have suffered enough? Or if I'm dealing drugs and get shot in a deal that goes bad, being shot would be enough punishment?

[Keith B]

And what punishment would you impose that could possibly exceed what she is suffering now?

Perhaps the punishment that is indicated by the law.

So she is charged with a class A misdemeanor and has to pay a fine and possibly spend time in jail or on probation. If the woman knew the gun was there she's suffering way more punishment than a fine and jail time will provide. If she didn't know then the person who left the gun accessible should be the one charged. What if the gun was left there by the child's father? You want to throw him in jail too? There are times, and this is one of them, that blindly following the word of the law tramples all over the spirit of the law. Justice without compassion is simply vengeance.

edit. The gun bleongs to the child's grandfather.

http://www.aolnews.com/2011/02/15/texas ... ndpas-gun/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Is this any different that saying that if I drive drunk and kill my wife, I shouldn't be charged because I would have suffered enough? Or if I'm dealing drugs and get shot in a deal that goes bad, being shot would be enough punishment?

Totally different type scenario and unrealistic comparisons. In those types, YOU are the one that made the choice to drink and drive or sell drugs. In this case, the Mother was not the one that was handling the handgun. And, who's to say she knew the gun was there? Maybe the Grandfather had laid it down after being out shooting, not thinking about the fact the child would climb up there and be able to get it out. Negligent? Yes, but in this case, there are a lot of factors that you don't know that play into this. Bottom line, if an investigation is conducted and there was gross negligence, then yes, maybe there should be charges filed against an adult. However, without all the facts, you are just yelling 'Git a rope' and looking to lynch someone because a child was injured. Get all the facts first, THEN make a call.

[MasterOfNone]

Totally different type scenario and unrealistic comparisons. In those types, YOU are the one that made the choice to drink and drive or sell drugs. In this case, the Mother was not the one that was handling the handgun. And, who's to say she knew the gun was there? Maybe the Grandfather had laid it down after being out shooting, not thinking about the fact the child would climb up there and be able to get it out. Negligent? Yes, but in this case, there are a lot of factors that you don't know that play into this. Bottom line, if an investigation is conducted and there was gross negligence, then yes, maybe there should be charges filed against an adult. However, without all the facts, you are just yelling 'Git a rope' and looking to lynch someone because a child was injured. Get all the facts first, THEN make a call.

I clarified myself earlier to say (emphasis added this time):

I'll clarify. If the person who left the gun there knew that the child would be there (as I corrected myself above), that person should be charged

This is the whole purpose of 46.13.

[Keith B]

Totally different type scenario and unrealistic comparisons. In those types, YOU are the one that made the choice to drink and drive or sell drugs. In this case, the Mother was not the one that was handling the handgun. And, who's to say she knew the gun was there? Maybe the Grandfather had laid it down after being out shooting, not thinking about the fact the child would climb up there and be able to get it out. Negligent? Yes, but in this case, there are a lot of factors that you don't know that play into this. Bottom line, if an investigation is conducted and there was gross negligence, then yes, maybe there should be charges filed against an adult. However, without all the facts, you are just yelling 'Git a rope' and looking to lynch someone because a child was injured. Get all the facts first, THEN make a call.

I clarified myself earlier to say (emphasis added this time):

I'll clarify. If the person who left the gun there knew that the child would be there (as I corrected myself above), that person should be charged

This is the whole purpose of 46.13.

Still, your comparison of the scenarios are not even on the same track as this issue. Now, if you said 'What if I left the car running and a 2 year old standing behind the wheel and walked off and he put it in gear and hurt himself or someone else', or 'I left my stash of barbiturates on the counter in front of the kid and he put them in his mouth', then we would be talking negligence on your part and would be a relevant comparison.

Now, I don't disagree that if it was left out there it was negligence. However, throwing the book at someone who makes a terrible mistake, especially when it involves a family member, is not always the right thing to do. Adding insult to injury may do more harm than good in teaching a lesson. I still believe this decision should be left up to those in the know and that have the evidence in front of them, and not by anyone on an Internet forum who has a very small knowledge of the actual event.