toddler, 2, killed by brother

[MichaelHarris]

BOISE, Idaho (AP) — The fatal shooting last week of a 2-year-old toddler by his 3-year-old brother doesn't merit criminal charges, a southern Idaho prosecutor said Thursday.Brandon Herrera died early Oct. 14 at a Boise hospital after being shot with a six-cylinder, .22 caliber revolver inside his family's home in Rupert, a small sugar beet farming town about 165 miles east of Idaho's capital city.

Rupert Police Department officials concluded during a week long investigation that the 3-year-old boy found his grandfather's loaded revolver in an unsecured gun safe located inside the family's home. http://www.idahopress.com/news/state/no-charges-after-id-toddler-killed-by-brother/article_5306c95d-d4db-555f-8d0c-3ba42330ed9c.html

Want to know why they didn't prosecute the gun owner? Because the children had been asked not to enter the room where the guns were located. So someone asked a 2 year old and a 3 year old not to enter the gun room. Also, the gun owner didn't think a 2 or 3 year old could open the door of the safe.

[appleannie1]

1. The fastest way to make them curious is to tell a child "do not go in that room"

[slackmaster]

14. Most inexperienced parents believe that their children are above average

And would never disobey them.

[Hoyt]

20. And many gun owners think they are responsible right up until . . . . .

[ileus]

2. I keep my six cilinders under the hood.

However.com I know my kids can't open either of my safes...they don't know the combinations and If they're unlocked I'm standing there removing something.


This is a horrible thing for any parent...my kids didn't even know I owned guns until they were 4 and 6.

[GreenPartyVoter]

3. More likely they feel the family has suffered enough for their poor choices.

[Arkansas Granny]

4. I understand it was an accident, but I don't understand why charges aren't filed.

As far as I'm concerned, this was negligence that led to the death of a child. If you have guns and children in the same household, you have to SAFELY secure the weapons so children do not have access to them. Doing anything less is irresponsible.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

5. Why?

The point of criminal charges are to penalize the guilty. By charging the parents and putting them in jail, the one you ultimately punish is the surviving child who will now grow up without his parents.

The parents suffered enough. Time in jail wont change any of that. There is nobody to whom they owe some kind of debt. Their mistake is something with which they will live for the rest of their lives. The state need not get involved.

[valerief]

6. The parents haven't suffered enough. They killed their damn kid. nt

[SteveM]

12. More parental "suffering:" See to it immediately, Valerief. Quickly.

[libinnyandia]

15. Why punish the parents?

Nobody ever thinks that their firearms could kill their children. They would never conceive of that happening to them. However they might conceive being punished for a gun accident. If only one child is saved by prosecuting the gun owner, it would be worth it.

[Euromutt]

16. That makes no sense whatsoever

Why would anyone "conceive being punished for a gun accident" if they never "think that their firearms could kill their children"? Why worry about being punished for something that you think will never happen?

We live in a country with a comparatively massive incarceration rate, and with a number of states that actually apply the death penalty. Yet none of this seems to deter crime. Why? Because increasing the severity of punishment is no deterrent to someone who thinks they're not going to get caught, and that's every rational person who commits a crime.

Additionally, I have a major philosophical objection to punishment for the sake of deterring others, which is that you're in effect advocating punishing a person for offenses that have not yet been committed by other people. That's fundamentally unjust.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

19. yes, and all drivers involved in car accidents should be incarcerated.

yeah, thats the ticket ;)

we should all live in fear of punishment if we have any kind of accident.

The great unwashed must perform perfectly in all duties to their overlords.

[pipoman]

23. Once again this most idiotic idea has surfaced in the gungeon..

"If only one child is saved..."

[We_Have_A_Problem]

36. I agree....

The "if only one child is saved" argument is pretty damned idiotic.

[Atypical Liberal]

35. If the possibility of the DEATH OF YOUR CHILD won't dissuade you, no law will n/t

[Tuesday Afternoon]

18. your compassion is palpable . . .

I love how you voice your respect for the death of a child.

damn kid. indeed.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

30. COMPASSION?

Two are dead!

How about some compassion and justice for them?

[Tuesday Afternoon]

31. exactly --

don't even start it. damn kid. my sweet ass. that really showed compassion for that poor child. justice is for crimes not accidents. The legal system will do its job.

damn kid!!! :wtf:

now go on with you and heap salt on the parents wounds because you are so compassionate.

a two y/o is dead . . .where are you getting that 2 are dead?

[We_Have_A_Problem]

38. Two?

Are we reading the same article?

[Atypical Liberal]

34. Are you a parent?

Can you think of any punishment that would make you suffer more than knowing that you caused the death of your own child?

[Arkansas Granny]

8. If someone left a window open in a 10th story apartment and their toddler

climbed out and fell to his death, do you think we should just give them a pass, too. Or how about if the baby gets into some toxic chemical under the sink, or drowns in the bathtub while the caregiver goes to get a towel out of the dryer, or . . . . Well, you get the idea. Do we give everyone a pass because they feel bad about an accidental death?

[We_Have_A_Problem]

9. Yes and we typically do.

More accurately, we don't so much give them a pass as we realize making them face criminal charges serves no real purpose. It is rare that a parent will be charged after such an event.

There is a massive difference between crime and horrific accidents.

[ileus]

10. I rremember the first time my 3yo son fell into the pool.

I was on the other side cleaning and by the time I got there he was just coming up....I pulled him out (It was early April and I was cleaning it) and his first words were "You're right Daddy I did drown!"

I must admit it didn't really scare me for the first few minutes until it sunk in what had happened. Things can happen quick in life...

[fightthegoodfightnow]

28. Exactly

I agree completely.

But it's clear some in this forum think having a gun is like having a magical wand that solves every problem and creates none.

Ironically some of these NRA members say gun education is important but not important enough to be accountable or responsible for.

[petronius]

32. When a parent loses a child because the parent made a stupid error, I'm loathe

to prosecute unless it's clear the error was an act of willful negligence. If they legitimately believed they'd created a safe situation, but were surprised by a child's dexterity quickness, or curiosity, I see no reason to punish them farther. Whether it's thinking that the latch on the 'poison' cabinet was secure enough, of that the window was too high for the child to reach, or that the kid couldn't slip under water that fast, or the detachable toy accessory was too big to swallow, or no one could possibly forget a kid in the backseat, or whatever...

If it's a tragic accident, why compound the suffering with a prosecution? It's not about the parent feeling bad, it's more about the spirit of the law, IMO.

[DrDan]

17. "The state need not get involved" - a child is dead because of a parent's negligence

Un-be-lievable. Their negligence killed a child!

[We_Have_A_Problem]

21. Yep - their negligence led to the accident.

What benefit is there to the state getting involved? Seriously. They have another child who would become a ward of the state upon the parent's incarceration. Is that beneficial? Never mind the costs the state itself would incur in both the prosecution and the jail term.

It was an accident - not a crime. You need to understand the difference.

Besides shooting, I also ride a motorcycle. If someone hits me in a genuine traffic accident (no drugs or alcohol involved, just the normal shit that most people call a fender-bender) and kills me, that person is not charged with murder or manslaughter. They are simply charged with whatever applies in the accident - failure to maintain control or some such. That's all they would have received had they hit another car. Why should the charges be different for the same act when the only real difference was what kind of vehicle they hit? There was no malicious intent - it was merely a lack of attention.

If the kid had decided it was a good idea to drink Drano and died, would you suggest charging the parents with murder? Of course not. Nobody does. Why? Because there is no malicious intent - it was simply an accident.

The fact that there is a gun involved appears to make you blind to the realities of the situation. All you see is the gun and to you, that means someone must be legally eviscerated.

[DrDan]

22. as is typical - the personal insults start

CRIMINAL negligence.

Just like this one - http://www.dailytownsman.com/article/20110621/CRANBROOK0101/306219996/-1/CRANBROOK/charges-laid-in-jaffray-shooting-incident

Accidents can have consequences when negligence is involved.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

33. What personal insult?

I see no insult in my post. Perhaps you have some different understanding of English and could identify the insult?

[Cirque du So-What]

26. You caught that too, huh?

Just another facet of the 'big, bad gubmint' sentiment that forms a malodorous fog 'round here.

[Euromutt]

43. Well, if that's the way you want to play it...

Then I have to ask when it became generally accepted progressive doctrine that the appropriate response to any and all socio-economic issues is to put more people in prison for longer periods of time. After all, that's how Nixon's "War on Drugs" eradicated drug use in the United States before the end of Reagan's first term, right? And the "Crack wars" and meth epidemic never happened, right? Right? And the main reason we continue to have a problem with the black population is that we've only got 10% of the men in prison; if only we could crank up that percentage, the inner cities would sort themselves out in months!

Yep, incarceration is the answer to all of society's ills, yes sirree.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

29. Not Guilty?!!??

Give me a break.

[pipoman]

24. Few people in these parts believe

pool owners should be criminally prosecuted when a child drowns in the pool, even though 10 times the number of children drown in backyard pools than are killed in firearms accidents. In fact few believe there should be code requirements making a 4 sided self locking fence mandatory around backyard pools..hypocrisy..

[valerief]

7. Guns don't kill people. Toddlers kill people. nt

[jmg257]

11. Some people are too ignorant to handle dangerous things like

raising kids.

These people learned that the hard way. We can hope others learn from their unfortunate lesson before a tragedy takes place.

[slackmaster]

13. Leaving children that age unattended for any amount of time is irresponsible

So is leaving an unsecured firearm where the children could get to it.

Unrec for lack of relevance to the Guns forum. This is just a current events story.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

27. Not Relevant?

Two dead due to GUN safety and it's not relevant to the GUN forum?

[We_Have_A_Problem]

37. Where did you get two from?

Article mentions only one.


Could you at least make the lies not SO transparent?

[slackmaster]

41. "Discussion of gun-related public policy issues or the use of firearms for self-defense...

...belong in the Guns Forum."

From tacked post at the top of the forum.

I see no public policy or self-defense issue brought up in the OP.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

25. Sad

Another gun 'accident' that kills and no one is accountable.

[Atypical Liberal]

39. What could be done?

What could be done?

Do you put the grandfather and mother in jail so that the surviving child has no parents? Does this serve justice? Maybe we crush them with huge fines so that the surviving child can't go to college. Does this serve justice?

Parents are negligent and cause the deaths of their children all the time. They leave toilet seats up and their kids drown in the toilet. They have buckets around that kids fall into and drown. I clearly remember, and I could not have been more than 2 years old, my mother was giving me a bath in the bathtub and the phone rang. I was sitting in shallow bath water. She went to answer it and I fell backwards and was lying down in the water as it covered my face. Fortunately she came back right away and pulled me out of the water before I drowned. Children have fallen out of open windows or off of balconies. Children have drunk poisons or stuck kitchen knives into electrical outlets.

All of these things happen because of parental negligence.

There is no punishment you can bestow that will cause them suffering more than they already experience, and there is no redemption to be found, either.

[slackmaster]

42. Basic gun safety should be taught in public schools.

Some people need to be explicitly taught not to leave guns lying around where children can get them.

[gejohnston]

40. most likely because

Idaho does not have a safe storage law? In Florida they would be charged with a misdemeanor.

Oh yeah, your tag line:

"The brave ones shot bullets; the crazy ones were shooting film"--Joseph Longo, founder of the International Combat Camera Association

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0281581/plotsummary
http://www.airspacemag.com/military-aviation/alone.html
http://www.combatcamera.org/
http://www.charleston.af.mil/library/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=6831
http://www.theworldatwar.info/uscombatcameramen.html