General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsLawyer: Gun Used By 6 Year Old To Shoot Teacher Was Secured
What kind of Bullshit is that? This must be some talented 6 year old, that he was able to access a secured firearm.
And apparently the kid had problems, and a parent was required to accompany him to school each day. But this week just happened to be the first one where a parent did not bring him to school. What a coincidence.
I hope the parents get charged, but our so-called "justice" system is such a joke, I'm not holding my breath.
https://www.aol.com/news/lawyer-gun-used-child-shot-185837902.html
NORFOLK, Va. (AP) — The family of a 6-year-old boy who shot and wounded his teacher in Virginia said Thursday that the gun he used had been “secured" and that one of his parents usually accompanied him in class but did not the week the shooting occurred.
The family's statement was released by an attorney and did not elaborate further on where the 9mm handgun was kept. The family also was not identified.
“Our family has always been committed to responsible gun ownership and keeping firearms out of the reach of children,” the statement said. “The firearm our son accessed was secured.”
The family also said that the boy “suffers from an acute disability and was under a care plan at the school that included his mother or father attending school with him and accompanying him to class every day.”
The family said the week of the shooting “was the first week when we were not in class with him. We will regret our absence on this day for the rest of our lives.”
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
thucythucy
(9,109 posts)if a six year old was able to gain access to the gun, then it was not "secured."
A violation of 18.2-56.2 is a Class 3 misdemeanor, which in Virginia is punishable by a fine of $500. Under Virginia Code Section 18.2-56.2, it is unlawful for any person to recklessly leave a loaded firearm in a manner that it would endanger the life or limb of any child under the age of 14.
The one area that the law goes further is childcare facilities. Any firearm must be stored, unloaded, in a locked container separate from the ammunition, which must be stored in its own locked container, and the key must be kept in a secure place where the children cannot get to it.
The law does is not specific, regarding the storage of the weapon in a private dwelling!
Girard442
(6,888 posts)...a gun that can be got by a 6-year-old is ipso facto unsecured.
NutmegYankee
(16,479 posts)No safe is ever undefeatable. Many common handgun safes can be pried open. More likely, with a five button combo, the child either witnessed it once or figured it out. Children are very adapt at defeating “child proof” items, as any parent can attest.
thucythucy
(9,109 posts)Also, keeping weapon and ammo secured in separate places?
It still seems weird to me that a "secured" but also obviously loaded weapon ended up in the hands of a six-year old.
Unless you think he was also able to load it by himself?
NutmegYankee
(16,479 posts)and what is required by law are assuredly completely different, not to mention that safe storage options must be practical and affordable for the average family. Middle class families cannot afford many wall safes, nor can they be installed in many rented dwellings. Legally, a gun can be loaded if locked in a safe. No state is going to make a gun law that the gun cannot be loaded or the ammo must be in a separate safe because SCOTUS has already ruled that self defense is protected under the 2nd Amendment.
My point above was that while is a child getting the gun is a disastrous outcome, proving negligence if the gun was in a legally approved safe may be virtually impossible.
thucythucy
(9,109 posts)as more facts are revealed.
NutmegYankee
(16,479 posts)I'm just playing devil's advocate in the off chance that the lawyer isn't bullshitting us.
Sanity Claws
(22,419 posts)all of which point to a very troubled home, parents who did not comply with a care plan, etc.
3Hotdogs
(15,417 posts)
GreenWave
(12,687 posts)Such lying BS.
First the cowards took way too long to explain themselves. Then they get an attorney.
They are not with kid in school. Kid gets access to gun and punishes teacher.
If he has the disability they claim he does, even more reason not to show him how to aim it for a kill shot. He fired one shot right on target.
And why was it loaded?
Parents are still not charged.
AkFemDem
(2,508 posts)They’d be idiots not to get an attorney. They’re in big legal trouble and their child is in legal no-man’s land.
Not defending their crappy “gun security”, but the attorney part makes sense.
Igel
(37,564 posts)A cognitively challenged kid is not the same as one with a physical, medical, emotional or psychological challegenge.
I've had profoundly autistic GT and profoundly smart kids, smart but psychologically or emotionally ... heteronormative ... kids in my classes. They'd be able to crack safes if they wanted. But say the wrong word and they'd fling a desk across the room in rage or do something considered by most to be profoundly disturbing in an unpredictable way.
SYFROYH
(34,214 posts)There was a time when I kept my guns in hard plastic cases with locks on the opening tabs. Airlines considered them secured.
As my kid became an adolescent, I moved up to a stack-on steel cabinet. It meets the California standard for security.
Both measures are defeatable with a circular cutting saw found in many garages.
kacekwl
(9,184 posts)Are they trying to blame whoever took him to school ? Makes no sense at all.
EX500rider
(12,626 posts)
republianmushroom
(22,422 posts)not by mine.
sarisataka
(22,709 posts)"the family's statement was released by an attorney" to say they left the gun sitting on the kitchen table.
I will give such statement all the credence it deserves- none.
I am curious why the parents were not there that day, and why the school did not try to contact them when they were informed the child possibly had a weapon
AkFemDem
(2,508 posts)Letting him go independently the week before, as part of his transition plan.
Meadowoak
(6,606 posts)AkFemDem
(2,508 posts)MyOwnPeace
(17,588 posts)and I'm thinking that the same teacher would have a TON of information regarding the situation - but I'm guessing the "LAW" (police, DA, etc.) and School District (wanting to avoid ANY blame in how/why the kid was in that room if there had been problems, etc.) would prefer we not hear from her.
There is SO much we are not being told about this incident. 
Disaffected
(6,469 posts)If we are going to speculate on the basis of little information, maybe the gun was in an approved locked cabinet and the kid found out where the key was kept. Maybe the kid had seen his father load the weapon before so knew how to do it?
Why not wait until the facts are known before condemning anyone?
NBachers
(19,484 posts)shot his teacher.
Igel
(37,564 posts)What the lawyer is saying is that his clients did due diligence and aren't culpable under the law. True or not? I can judge based on my lack of knowledge and suspicious or just say, "Dunno." You know, going with fact-based reality, I dunno. I can come up with possibilities on the fly but not fact-free definitives.
Perhaps they're throwing their kid "under the bus", knowing that the bus is 300 feet away, on a sunny day, and the driver saw the kid land in the street after being throw by the parents who were standing 10 feet away. No way a DA will charge the kid.
Now, will CPS remove the kid from the home and sent to foster care? That's a question.
But the alternatives?
Parents are removed from the home (and sent to prison) and the kid's sent to foster care.
If it were me, it's a no-brainer. Same outcome for the kid, same loss of kid for the parents. But in one case I'd be in prison, mourning the loss of my kid and wondering about my kid's attempted homicide; in the other case I'd be at home, mourning the loss of my kid and wondering about my kid's attempted suicide. Neither are great, but one's worse.
pinkstarburst
(2,052 posts)No, the gun was not "secured" if a six-year-old was able to access it. That is the exact definition of unsecured. So the parents should face charges. I hope the teacher sues them for everything they have and also sues the school district for failing to conduct a proper search.
And what on earth is up with the parents of a SpEd child needing to attend school with them all day every day? If he had such an "acute disability" that he needed a one on one para with him at all times, the school should have been providing that. If they were saying he needed that level of intervention in order to function, but they wouldn't pay for it, wouldn't or couldn't staff it, and so were having his parents be his para-professional in the classroom, that is not okay.
Unless there is something being left out of the story and child was supposed to be in a restricted SpEd classroom and the only way he was being allowed to try being mainstreamed was if a parent came with as a one on one maybe calling it "volunteering", but I still doubt that is legal.
But I am still voting for these parents being absolute nut jobs. If you know you have an extremely disturbed child at home, a special ed child with such an extreme emotional disability that he cannot get through the school day without one of his parents being there with him ALL DAY, EVERY DAY, what in the HECK are you thinking having a gun in the house?
Grins
(9,476 posts)Obviously not.
And eff off with that “responsible gun ownership” crap.
pinkstarburst
(2,052 posts)something like RAD (reactive attachment disorder) and this was one of those situations where they were adopted overseas as an older child. That can be really hard (if not impossible) to treat. Though it would be all the more reason for the parents to not have a gun in the home if it was the case.
W_HAMILTON
(10,368 posts)Zeitghost
(4,557 posts)The lawyer is crafting the statement to try and keep the parents out of legal trouble. Had the gun been locked up, he would have said so. "Secured" (using a very loose interpretation) could mean hidden in the top drawer of a dresser. Since the relevant statute does not require a lock and only applies to "recklessly" leaving a gun out, they will argue the parents did not break the law.
