Child Must Have Thought a Gun Was a Wii Remote, Mother Says

[Ninonybox_v1legacy]

if children are the future where clearly fucked.

 

[Calderon0311]

Kotaku has been reporting this for a bit, and that picture is from the evidence collected. The original gun is at the time, the wii gun is at the bottom. The father, (or someone from the family), purchsced the black wii gun from Ebay, and it's apparently a original-knockoff. (Ie, a counterfeit of a counterfeit.)

Wii guns that are sold with the Nintendo's licencing are usually brightly colored and look toyish for the reason that US law requires toy guns to be easily identifiable. (though caps or colors)

This one though, looks very close to a real gun, and it's easy to see how the child got the two confused... Which puts even more question on the parents on why they woulding think about this fact first.

 

[paragon1]

Wow, way to break every gun safety rule in the book people. Way to go.

 

[Lord Monocle Von Banworthy]

Okay I'm going to act like a bastard here, I feel sorry for the family, but honestly as a rare duck, a gun owner from childhood, and a gamer, I'm going to be blunt.

Fucking Idiots. That's it. They Are FUCKING IDIOTS. The Parents are FUCKING MORONS! Here is the rules of gun safety I learnt as a 5 year old.

1) Treat Every Firearm as if loaded, even when proven otherwise (that means don't point it at shit you moron)
2) Only aim at something you intend to shoot
3) When not using the firearm secure it safely in a locked gun cabinet of some kind, separate from the ammunition. YOU NEVER LEAVE THEM LOADED.

It's fucking simple, those are the core rules of gun safety, anyone who doesn't follow them in their own home is a fucking moron, I'm not blaming the kid, I'm blaming the stupid parents, you don't leave guns laying around you moronic twits, ever, you don't leave them loaded, ever, you don't let little kids touch them EVER.

The man should be locked away for life. fucking twit.

THANK YOU! IM NOT ALONE!!

How many more vulnerable people will have to die before gun controls will be tightened or even completely revoked? Speaking as a Brit, I just don't understand why this has been allowed to go on for so long. Blame may not lie with the parents, regardless of all the speculation on this thread, but with a government and a society that is too attatched to an old and outdated ideal about personal defence. Until more people in America wake up to why this problem exists, there will continue to be horrific and tragic accidents like this every day.

well since we are on the topic of generalizations. lets ban soccer while were at it since it seem that everytime there is a soccer match it britan there seems to be a riot.

Fine. It was a generalisation. But, whereas the problems behind rioting in football stadiums has been partially solved (tackling the social problems behind hooliganism, modification of policing policies, etc.), the gun problem in America has stagnated. Roughly 12000 people every year in America are killed by people with privately owned guns, working out to a little over 30 people every day. Hmm. Maybe I'm not generalising.

And really, where do you expect these people to be killed? Yes, some will be in tough inner-city districts, and yes, some will be isolated incidents with obscure details. But some will always happen in quiet little suburban neighbourhoods with tragic outcomes such as this. But what the fuck do I know? Very little evidently, but if you believe that it is a worthwhile trade-off to lose thousands of lives every year in return for the unrestricted right to own and carry a 9-millimetre semiautomatic handgun or an assault rifle, then I pity you and your backwards culture and train of thought. Oh, and tkioz, I hear that if you repeat your advice enough, then it will bring back the victims.

you are apparently unfamiliar with concealed carry laws as well purchasing laws of handguns. you cannot purchase pistols like your buying cookies. a 3 day waiting period is mandatory as well as local police and FBI background checks. not only that but you also have to register said firearms into ATF and HLS databases to be logged. your claim that thousands of lives lost to these firearms, did you take into account how many of those were illegal and smuggled. please also note the fully automatic weapons are extremely difficult to obtain, requiring permits that need to be updated yearly as well as more intensive background check required for hand guns.

hey, i also here if you get into more people faces and say shit to people like that last line, it makes you seem like less intolerant.

now i do respect your opinion in this matter as it is delicate, at least it was well put.

I think you're extrapolating rules of your state as indicative of the whole. I used to be a Tennessean with 10 guns and I never waited a mandatory three days for any of them, nor are any registered. Background checks are instant in many states. The only time I ever failed to walk out of a gun store with the gun I wanted the first day was a time I wanted a different grip and had to wait for the store to order one with the option I wanted. I'm on your side here, but whenever either side of a debate puts forth inaccurate information it just leaves holes for the other side to exploit in future arguments.

And yes, anti-gun people conveniently forget that fully automatic weapons have been severely restricted since 1934. What they call "assault rifles" as we all know are called that based on purely cosmetic features that have no bearing on the machine's function.

Im another European, what i can't understand is why sensible Gun ownerships laws like in thebackupfreaks state aren't copied across the board by every other state in the US like yours in Tennesse? Surely it would be to everyone's benefit if people across the board were checked up on or given at least some rudimentary lessons in gun ownership before walking out of the store with a weapon?

Read again. I didn't say there was no background check. I said the checks were instant. They scan your fingerprints and electronically submit your identification to the FBI instantly and get a result back. If you are a convicted felon, have been adjudicated mental defective, or are under a restraining order, you will not be sold a firearm.

That lets you buy a gun that you must transport unloaded if outside of your home. As in, gun in the trunk, ammunition in the glove compartment of the car. You may not carry that gun in a usable state without a Carry Permit.

A Carry Permit requires you to take a six hour safety course and go to a range where you must qualify with a handgun. You have to prove to the instructor's satisfaction that you can hit what you're aiming at reliably. Then you take the certificate of completion to the Department of Safety and pay an additional fee to get a Permit, which you will receive by post after yet more background checking. Interestingly enough in Tennessee it is a Carry Permit, not a Concealed Carry Permit, so anywhere you can carry a concealed weapon you can carry one openly. There's a whole laundry list of places you can't carry, too, including places where alcohol is served, on state or federal property, near schools, and anywhere the owners have posted a sign stating that patrons may not come armed. Mass shootings in the United States almost without exception take place in these "gun-free" zones, and I'll let you make of that what you wish.

So, yeah, even in TN we do have all those things. The only thing I would change to be more like other states would be to require additional safety courses every couple of years and to require people to qualify with the weapon they're going to carry. For example I qualified for my permit with a .22lr match pistol but my daily carry gun was a Walther PPK in .380.

Thank you for the explanation. Sorry for not replying back to you sooner, i've been away with work.

Where i am from and where you are from are completely different in terms of our attitudes and accessabilities to firearms. Hence my curiosity, Michael Moore's bowling for columbine gave the impression that some states in the US had a fairly blasse' attitude to weapons which i would personally find pretty alarming. I know he is an exhaggerater of the highest degree, but still there is no smoke without fire i think.

I own a shotgun, and im a reservist with the army so i have a very healthy respect for weapons, and when i read about things like the above topic and how careless people are with weapons... well ... i just can't figure it out is all, you know? Handguns are illegal here, in terms of personal and home protection the best you can do is a shotgun, which to my mind is more than enough. We have little to no incidents of this nature (the thread topic) because people are largely unarmed (getting a gun is a pain in the arse, a Hurley/baseball bat is generally enough because most of our criminals aren't armed with guns, and shotguns are too cumbersome for small kids to screw around with) and the people who are armed aren't morons who leave a loaded weapon with the safety off on a table low enough for a child to pick up.

Every weapon is registered, so any discharge from that weapon can be traced back to it and although all this extra safety and security and big brother tracking aspect is a pain in the arse, im glad of it. It means more idiots are disuaded from impulse buying a gun and those that do persevere that far are forcibly educated enough to be responsible with it.

That said we aren't a gun saturated society, and ye are. Ours are two completely different sets of circumstances, and i won't presume to lecture you because i don't know how it is where you are from, but as you said yourself more safety courses would be a good thing, and people doing a course on the specific weapon they intend to carry would be another, so how come the NRA or the federal governement doesn't push this kind of attitude more? its not restricting people's rights by any means its just making them responsible. Another poster on here said how he was able to pick and choose different firearms and leave the same day with it! That just seems incredible to me, you know? I don't mind people being armed, i'd just want them competent with what they buy before they take it home.

I'm going to respond pretty much at random before it's time to go to bed here in Japan, so forgive me if I missed anything or PM me if you want to stop bumping the thread or ask anything really specific.

While we're having fun with the issue and nobody's locking the thread, I'll tell you one secret about your weapon registration: No, discharge from the gun can't be traced to it. Shotguns give no useful ballistic evidence. You can't trace shot back to the gun that fired it.

Also related, over 50% of illegal handguns seized in Washington DC each year (possibly the city with the toughest gun ban in the US) are homemade. Yep. A gun is nothing but a tube when you get right down to it, and any half-assed machinist can make one, of admittedly atrocious quality. Good luck putting a lid on that.

I've chosen a gun and gone home with it that day due to the instant background checks. A gun is an expensive machine and Americans are not rich people, so I promise that they are seldom impulse purchases.

Something about this reminds me of my last shopping trip for guns. I went to a gun shop the day the Brady Bill expired and it was most entertaining. I watched a doctor come in on his lunch break still wearing scrubs and a stethoscope to buy an AR-15 and a few extended magazines for his Glock. You would have thought it was Christmas Eve. I suspect the scene was much the same the day Obama's election was announced, but I was out of the country by then.

Oh, and finally, the NRA is just a lobbying group with no powers at all. The federal government can't do anything in violation of the 2nd amendment, which really ties its hands. Take a look at the recent Supreme Court decision that gave Washington DC residents back their legal handguns for proof of that.

If you get a chance read the article I linked IronMal to above in this thread or I'll PM it to you. It's really interesting to see the effect gun control has on murder rates worldwide and historically, and gives you a chance to distance yourself from the emotional reaction singular anecdotes like the OP's can give you.

 

[paragon1]

I don't even have a kid, but if I sure as hell am not going to leave my gun in a high traffic area, LOADED.

FFS some people need a serious lesson in personal responsibility.

Mistaking a gun for a Wii controller? Wouldn't that mean she'd have shot the TV?

I think what we have here is a case of the parents lying their asses off to cover for doing something stupid.

 

[Valksy]

Even if the parents themselves did not shoot the three year old (and that was the first thing that went through my mind) then they are directly responsible for her death by virtue of negligence and should be jailed for it.

The thing is - if the kid had picked up the gun and shot the TV then I might have seem some credence. It doesn't answer the question of why she aimed it at herself. Those parents killed their child, simple as that.

 

[GrinningManiac]

A child has shot herself : VIDEO GAMES
A man died of HIV in Africa : VIDEO GAMES
Afghanistan is the result of well over two hundered years of idiotic European intrusion : VIDEO GAMES
My kid got a B in maths! : VIDEO GAMES
Suicide Bombers : VIDEO GAMES
The Assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand : VIDEO GAMES

FOX : blaming everything on something else without evidence since 1776...BECAUSE OF VIDEO GAMES

 

[cheese_wizington]

At least Fox News hasn't jumped on the, "ZOMG VIDEO GAMES BE KELLIN ARE CHELLDRIN" bandwagon.

Oh wait

 

[SnipErlite]

Here's a question... If she thought it was a wii-mote why would she be pointing it at herself and not the TV?

My good sir you have just destroyed the mother's claims entirely, damn good point.


I mean it's a sad day when a child is killed, but come on. Guns do not look like Wiimotes, and why the hell would they leave a loaded gun with a child?! *sigh*.


Apparently 3 year-olds are not allowed to be curious about strange objects left on a table...

 

[GamingAwesome1]

A.) Very retarded parent you have to be to leave a gun around a young child.
B.) Very poor claim on the parents part trying to tie the incident to video games

See below for explanation to B:

Here's a question... If she thought it was a wii-mote why would she be pointing it at herself and not the TV?

My good sir you have just destroyed the mother's claims entirely, damn good point.


I mean it's a sad day when a child is killed, but come on. Guns do not look like Wiimotes, and why the hell would they leave a loaded gun with a child?! *sigh*.


Apparently 3 year-olds are not allowed to be curious about strange objects left on a table...

 

[Raptorace18]

A message to the mother and any others it concerns.

Five words.YOU ARE A LOUSY PARENT!

WHY, if there was a gun in the house did you not take the time to properly educate your child?

WHY, if there was a gun in the house was it not in a regulation storage safe?

WHY, if you were in the house and knew the gun and your child were out at the same time did you not remove the gun at once?

WHY, out of all possible explanations did you assume that the wii zapper was to blame and not simple curiosity i.e 'what happens if i pull on this..'

WHY, did you even have a gun in the same house as a small child?

WHY, haven't you admitted that there were things you, THE FUCKING PARENT, could have do to prevent this disaster?

STOP CONFUSING BAD PARENTING FOR THE INFLUENCE OF VIDEO GAMES ! IT IS A GROSS INJUSTICE AND ONE I AM FUCKING SICK OF!

 

[MurderousToaster]

Remember.

Safety goes on when not in use

 

[ShinningDesertEagle]

How about not leaving a loaded weapon in the accessible reach of a child? I hope the dumbass mother is being brought on charges for child endangerment. Or at least getting her licenses to carry a weapon revoked.

Those who cannot treat guns with respect should not be aloud to own them.

 

[asdasdasdasda]

At least Fox News hasn't jumped on the, "ZOMG VIDEO GAMES BE KELLIN ARE CHELLDRIN" bandwagon.

Oh wait

Ahh reading comprehension.

 

[Caiti Voltaire]

Ah, negligence is always an easy thing for people to justify. It's a pity the little one has to be the victim of such obvious parental neglect, though. And of course - it's never the parent's fault that a loaded gun - with the safety off, obviously - was just left lying around.

The whole thing just reminds me why I'm unfond of countries with unrestrictive gun laws - it means the idiots get them.

 

[FallenJellyDoughnut]

What sort of retard leaves a gun just lying on the table, fully loaded, without safety on WITH A THREE YEAR OLD IN THE HOUSE?!

 

[mr-fix_it]

pfft the girl should of shot her mother, that would teach her.

that is just one step below the argument "I'm for death penalty so they learn till next time".
But this is the internet, not a place for logic so you are right!

 

[UntrodTripod]

Quick question: why has no one asked the parents what the gun was doing there in the first place? Think about this logically now. The only reason to load a handgun in the first place is if you expect to use it. What were they expecting to use it for, exactly? Why was it on a table in their living room? Did they think they would need to have a loaded gun without a safety sometime in the near future? If they did, why were they letting their kid be in the room at the time? Wouldn't you think that if they suspected that a gunfight was imminent they would move the kid to somewhere where she might not get hit by bullets?

As far as I can see it, there are only a few reasons why you would have a handgun sitting around in your living room.
1. You're cleaning the gun. Now, as anyone who has ever cleaned a handgun would know, you have to take the damn thing apart to clean it. If, upon putting it back together, you happen to be enough of a stupid bastard to put a loaded mag into the gun afterwords you still have to chamber the round. And if you do that...well...you're entirely too stupid and ignorant of gun safety to know how to clean it in the first place.
2. You just bought the gun illegally and set it down on the table because...you're an idiot. Only a fool would sell a gun with ammunition in it, but there you are.
3. You have an unsafety-ed, loaded handgun with a chambered round sitting on your living room table because you expect to need it at a moment's notice.
4. You're just stupid and like to have your guns around. Because you're stupid. And have some kind of weird gun fetish.

I realize there are other "possibilities", but honestly they're even less likely than the situations I've presented. You maybe have noticed that I only have presented options where the gun has a round already chambered and the safety is off. This is simply because I find it vastly unlikely that the 3-year-old would be able to chamber a round, turn off the safety and then pull the trigger while the gun is aimed at herself. These are not intuitive movements and they require a lot more strength and dexterity than your average 3-year-old possesses.

Let's examine the situations above. The first one, as I said, is just too unlikely to be possible. The second one is, I suppose, somewhat likely and ties in neatly with the third option. The fourth option is the one people seem to have latched onto, but consider this: I realize that it's extremely tempting to write off wrongful deaths as people just being "stupid". It's easier to consider people to be dumb instead of evil because it exonerates them of a lot of wrongdoing. I would prefer to do that as well, but it leaves a lot of unanswered questions. It is perhaps a more fruitful use of our time to consider why the gun was there in the first place and whose finger was actually on the trigger. I hadn't said it up to this point (and I don't know if anyone else has), but I find it far more likely that someone else's finger was on the trigger.

I guess the question is: do you find it more likely that
a. a toddler managed to shoot herself?
or
b. one of her dumbass parents, while dicking around with their gun (for whatever reason, be it a domestic dispute or some kind of criminal activity gone wrong), accidentally shot their child?

Don't let even the death of a child prevent you from seeing the reality of the situation.


______________________________________________________________

Aside: When I was in high school, there was a horrible car wreck involving four kids (two brothers and their best friends) crashing into a telephone pole which caused the driver to walk away mostly unscathed (physically, I mean. That stupid bastard is still on antidepressants) and the three passengers to be decapitated and mangled beyond recognition. An unbiased observer would have taken away from this situation "oh, they crashed because of stupid boyhood bravado. He was trying to get air over a specific hill (a common passtime for stupid car-owning miscreants in my town) and lost control of the car. I hope people can learn from his mistake." What ended up happening was that my entire state changed their entire licensing laws to restrict the number of people you could have in your car until you had your full license.

I guess what I'm saying is that by saying "LOLOL STUPID PEOPLE SHOULDN'T HAVE KIDS LOLOLOLOL" or "OMG GUNS ARE SO DANGEROUS WE SHOULD BAN THEM" you're missing the larger issue. Entirely.

 

[Quaxar]

The Assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand : VIDEO GAMES

No sir, that was clearly the fault of <url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Archduke_Franz_Ferdinand_of_Austria#Shooting>sandwiches. Quick, someone inform FOX!