12 year old daughter of gun nut shoots him, kills herself

[BlueWaveNeverEnd]

Girl, 12, who shot her father before killing herself in botched murder pact with friend after they 'plotted to kill their families and pets then run away together' is pictured for the first time posing with guns alongside her armed dad



A spokeswoman was unable to give details of the sentence handed to the girl, because of Texas state law protecting the identity of juveniles charged with a crime.

They added: 'The charge was not dismissed. The allegations were fully prosecuted with a final disposition of the case occurring on March 14, 2023.'

A lawyer for the surviving girl did not respond to a DailyMail.com request for comment.

Brown died two days after shooting herself in the head, with police confirming that she had been planning to drive 230 miles to pick up her pal before driving to Georgia.

A dispatch call from the night of the incident reveals that Brown took off on foot down the driveway, making it just a few hundred yards before shooting herself in the head.

The emergency services worker can be heard saying 'the daughter just shot him' in the master bedroom, after saying 'nothing', and it was understood she had been getting ready for bed.

Officers later discovered the schoolgirl lying on the dirt road, with a handgun underneath her body.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12227155/Girl-12-shot-dad-murder-pact-pictured-time.html

[Sancho]

1. People Control, Not Gun Control

This is my generic response to gun threads where people are shot and killed by the dumb or criminal possession of guns. For the record, I grew up in the South and on military bases. I was taught about firearms as a child, and I grew up hunting, was a member of the NRA, and I still own guns. In the 70’s, I dropped out of the NRA because they become more radical and less interested in safety and training. Some personal experiences where people I know were involved in shootings caused me to realize that anyone could obtain and posses a gun no matter how illogical it was for them to have a gun. Also, easy access to more powerful guns, guns in the hands of children, and guns that weren’t secured are out of control in our society. As such, here’s what I now think ought to be the requirements to possess a gun. I’m not debating the legal language, I just think it’s the reasonable way to stop the shootings. Notice, none of this restricts the type of guns sold. This is aimed at the people who shoot others, because it’s clear that they should never have had a gun.

1.) Anyone in possession of a gun (whether they own it or not) should have a regularly renewed license. If you want to call it a permit, certificate, or something else that's fine.
2.) To get a license, you should have a background check, and be examined by a professional for emotional and mental stability appropriate for gun possession. It might be appropriate to require that examination to be accompanied by references from family, friends, employers, etc. This check is not to subject you to a mental health diagnosis, just check on your superficial and apparent gun-worthyness.
3.) To get the license, you should be required to take a safety course and pass a test appropriate to the type of gun you want to use.
4.) To get a license, you should be over 21. Under 21, you could only use a gun under direct supervision of a licensed person and after obtaining a learner’s license. Your license might be restricted if you have children or criminals or other unsafe people living in your home. (If you want to argue 18 or 25 or some other age, fine. 21 makes sense to me.)
5.) If you possess a gun, you would have to carry a liability insurance policy specifically for gun ownership - and likely you would have to provide proof of appropriate storage, security, and whatever statistical reasons that emerge that would drive the costs and ability to get insurance.
6.) You could not purchase a gun or ammunition without a license, and purchases would have a waiting period.
7.) If you possess a gun without a license, you go to jail, the gun is impounded, and a judge will have to let you go (just like a DUI).
8.) No one should carry an unsecured gun (except in a locked case, unloaded) when outside of home. Guns should be secure when transporting to a shooting event without demonstrating a special need. Their license should indicate training and special carry circumstances beyond recreational shooting (security guard, etc.). If you are carrying your gun while under the influence of drugs or alcohol, you lose your gun and license.
9.) If you buy, sell, give away, or inherit a gun, your license information should be recorded.
10.) If you accidentally discharge your gun, commit a crime, get referred by a mental health professional, are served a restraining order, etc., you should lose your license and guns until reinstated by a serious relicensing process.

Most of you know that a license is no big deal. Besides a driver’s license you need a license to fish, operate a boat, or many other activities. I realize these differ by state, but that is not a reason to let anyone without a bit of sense pack a semiautomatic weapon in public, on the roads, and in schools. I think we need to make it much harder for some people to have guns.

[Blues Heron]

6. IF you have to do all that - just get rid of them - keep it simple - no guns period

[Bernardo de La Paz]

10. "no guns period" is the most complicated, least simple way to go. . . . nt

[Blues Heron]

14. not compared to the blizzard of regulations, licenses, exceptions, IDs, backgrounds, etc

that people control requires. If they are that dangerous, no one should have them.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

18. Total ban more complicated in imposition and implementation. It's ridiculous. Please don't

Please don't waste our time proposing insane unworkable totalitarian totalist ideas that are dead on arrival. It would be as effective as Alcohol Prohibition, the War on Drugs, and Just Say No. It would cost many times more in lives and militarization of police and enforcement at all levels. Not to mention that it would never pass any legislative body in the US except for small powerless municipalities.

Removing even a significant fraction of 300 million guns from the Molon Labe crowd would lead to great cost in lives of law enforcement officers tasked with doing it, at least those who didn't resign rather than accept such an order.

Do you volunteer to lead gun seizure teams from the front every day for years?

[Blues Heron]

21. LOL!

too funny. .

[3Hotdogs]

32. Just Say No sucked. I don't know how many times a girl would just say no

when I asked her out.

[shrike3]

33. Civilized people draw lines, set limits.

They don't throw up their hands and say, "Oh, this is just too hard. We have to just do nothing at all because it's just so hard."

[Bernardo de La Paz]

42. Of course. See my post #12 which applauds post #1. . . nt

[ZonkerHarris]

53. Prohibition is a failed public policy. That just creates a black market.

[Sancho]

15. There is nothing about a license that prevents ....

.... getting rid of guns.

Try getting rid of automobiles, plastic, and hamburger while you are at it.

[Blues Heron]

16. They just got rid of plastic straws- which are tubes like guns, in MD

piece of cake, everybody complied. Now you cant get a plastic straw for love or money. There are a few criminal rebels that keep personal plastic straws handy for that late night milkshake that is so thick it will collapse a paper straw though. I think they wash them after each use, lovingly oiling them up, much like a typical humper.

[shrike3]

34. Automobiles, plastic and hamburger were not designed to kill something.

False equivalency.

[Sancho]

38. No one is saying to NOT get rid of guns...that is the false equivalency...

...the license is a legal tool that makes it harder for dangerous people to easily possess guns.

The fact that people assume that it's "one or the other" is a lack of logic or understanding.

If there is a "ban on guns" (all guns? some types of guns? etc.?) that's fine with me.

Every state has a bunch of licenses: fishing, hunting, driving, buying stuff, even scuba diving. Licenses are legal. There are gun licenses in some states (like carry permits).

All I'm suggesting is that focusing on "getting rid of guns" is not working. Allowing dangerous people to easily possess guns has almost no restrictions.

There is nothing new on my list to prevent dangerous people from possessing guns. All of the parts have been tried or enacted in different places.

[shrike3]

39. The false equivalency I mentioned is one I hear all the time.

From gun owners, usually. "Why not get rid of cars? Why not get rid of swimming pools?" Neither of which, unlike the gun, was designed specifically to kill someone or something. Hence the false equivalency. I have heard it for years, hence my lack of patience with those kinds of comparisons.

I said nothing about not getting rid of guns. I'm actually fine with that as well.

[Sancho]

40. It is not a false equivalency to compare "getting rid of guns" to "getting rid of other things"...

..as you know, many guns are not created to "kill someone". Some are...but they are a product that is constantly changing and hard to define. "Getting rid of guns" is just as difficulty as getting rid of any product - and it is notably more difficult because of the 2nd amendment. Just like vaping has replaced smoking tobacco - "getting rid of something" usually means the "something" changes enough to avoid the attempt to get rid of it. Sometimes products improve, but sometimes they simply change.

No license is 100% foolproof of course, but we don't let 12 year olds drink and drive "easily". On the other hand, clearly dangerous people have easy access to guns.

It is possible to create a license so that every time someone wanted to buy a bullet, transport a gun, go hunting, or keep a gun at a home, or purchase a gun - you have to produce a valid license.

Obtaining a license is where the screening for dangerous people would help - not a perfect solution - but it would help. I believe that would be something that some states could achieve while "getting rid of guns" would be more difficult.

[shrike3]

41. The gun itself was invented to kill someone.

That is the only reason the gun is in this world. That's why I say it's a false equivalency to compare it to cars, swimming pools, etc.

Now, as far as the rest of your post, we are on the same page when it comes to a lot of things. Licensing, etc., are fine options, IMO. Problem is, red states, like the one I'm in, are going in the opposite direction. We already have permit-less carry where I live, and the trend here seems to be, more guns, not less, will solve all our problems. Which is more frustrating than I can express.

[Diamond_Dog]

45. The problem is,

ANY restriction at all is seen by the right wing crowd as “infringement on my Constitutional right to bear arms”.

Licenses, insurance requirements, bans on certain types of guns, a psychiatric exam …. They will argue until the end of time that all those things infringe on their right to own a gun.

[Sancho]

47. Read The Second Amendment: A Biography by Michael Waldman

In The Second Amendment: A Biography, Michael Waldman shows that our view of the amendment is set, at each stage, not by a pristine constitutional text, but by the push and pull, the rough and tumble of political advocacy and public agitation.

Widely acclaimed at the time of its publication, the life story of the most controversial, volatile, misunderstood provision of the Bill of Rights.

At a time of increasing gun violence in America, Waldman’s book provoked a wide range of discussion. This book looks at history to provide some surprising, illuminating answers.

The Amendment was written to calm public fear that the new national government would crush the state militias made up of all (white) adult men—who were required to own a gun to serve. Waldman recounts the raucous public debate that has surrounded the amendment from its inception to the present. As the country spread to the Western frontier, violence spread too. But through it all, gun control was abundant. In the twentieth century, with Prohibition and gangsterism, the first federal control laws were passed. In all four separate times the Supreme Court ruled against a constitutional right to own a gun.

The present debate picked up in the 1970s—part of a backlash to the liberal 1960s and a resurgence of libertarianism. A newly radicalized NRA entered the campaign to oppose gun control and elevate the status of an obscure constitutional provision. In 2008, in a case that reached the Court after a focused drive by conservative lawyers, the US Supreme Court ruled for the first time that the Constitution protects an individual right to gun ownership. Famous for his theory of “originalism,” Justice Antonin Scalia twisted it in this instance to base his argument on contemporary conditions.

Some states and jurisdictions can easily pass laws - just like driving is not identical in all states - but consensus happens over time with insurance, court rulings, etc. There will not be a national consensus, but licenses already exist and are legal.

[marble falls]

8. GUN CONTROL. Got rid of my firearms after I realized this nation could not handle owning weapons.

[shrike3]

35. They really can't.

[2naSalit]

11. +1

[Bernardo de La Paz]

12. It's time to put more "regulated" back into the "well-regulated militia" and you point the way. nt

[treestar]

36. none of that would have prevented this

[malaise]

2. She was probably abused as well n/t

[BeerBarrelPolka]

3. The

The father was not killed. He was shot in the abdomen and survived.

[BlueWaveNeverEnd]

5. ooops. thx... correcting

[betsuni]

4. Maybe like the "Heavenly Creatures" movie of a similar event.

[intheflow]

25. I thought the same thing.

[Sky Jewels]

49. Yes!

My first thought too.

[CurtEastPoint]

7. I wonder if midget dick tat boy is still smiling. And her t shirt.. 'up to no good.' Nice.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

9. It's a Harry Potter shirt.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

13. Something severely fouled up in his parenting to drive her to shoot him. Abuse?

[malaise]

17. My first thought after looking at her

The article is confusing because she can’t be charged if she killed herself.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

20. Best guess is father got charged, but because of minor involved, names can't be released lest ID

Father is most likely person charged. Could be firearms offense or child abuse.

If it is the former, then it is a crime of his alone and his name would ordinarily be released.

If it is the latter, then there was a minor victim. Could be other children in the family who might be victims too.

If the latter, then some places have laws protecting minors by not revealing even adult family perpetrator names, so that the child victims can't be identified.

But there is the photo.

[Lars39]

27. The friend she plotted with was charged

[Bernardo de La Paz]

43. Thanks. Slipped my mind as a possibility. . . . nt

[bucolic_frolic]

19. The age of responsibility

What is the age of responsibility with guns?

[TeamProg]

22. Groomed to kill. nt

[mwb970]

23. What can I say?

This story has an inevitability to it that was apparently missed by all involved. Something about loving guns messes with people's heads. Or maybe messed-up people love guns? Anyway, the result is generally tragic.

[allegorical oracle]

24. The T-shirt she's wearing in the photo says, "I Solemnly Swear that I am up to No Good." A bit

prophetic.

[BlackSkimmer]

29. That's from the Harry Potter books.

Maybe not prophetic, but certainly sad.

[617Blue]

26. Texas? Is that a foreign country?

[Sky Jewels]

50. Some want it too be. They want Texas to SECDEE!

[617Blue]

54. LOL be my guest!

[Aristus]

55. "Hole on a sec here, Mervis. Sumthin' rawng here. Cain't figger it out..."

[NowISeetheLight]

57. Absolutely

You already have your own power grid…. Nothing keeping you here.

[intheflow]

28. This is a confusing excerpt.

Where you snipped from about the girl being charged is about the other girl in the plot, not the one who killed herself. Such a senseless tragedy all around.

[BlackSkimmer]

30. This is old news, from last September.

But hey, when the Daily Mail writes about it, someone is sure to pick it up here.

[Recycle_Guru]

31. no problem. gun fascination amd gun violence should ne posted here

it is an epidemic and scourge on our nation.

We are swimming in guns. We are drowning in gun violence.

Australia knew what to do and did it. New Zealand knew what to do and did it.

We are held hostage but a purposeful misreading of seconf Amendment and out children die.

[Chainfire]

37. Why we talk about it, 20 million new guns will be sold in the US this year.

Not to mention ammunition and accessories. (about $500.00 average per gun) There is too much money to be made to worry about the cost in lives. The industry isn't about to submit to sane regulations.

When we were not outraged enough to institute serious gun controls after an elementary school was shot up, we should have known what to expect going forward. Civilized nations have figured out how to reduce gun violence.

[Wounded Bear]

44. The down side to teaching your kids to gun...

[purr-rat beauty]

46. I wrote about poem about this

one less human under the sun
due to the existence of a gun

[Grey]

48. Something is "not right" about this story.

"The emergency services worker can be heard saying 'the daughter just shot him' in the master bedroom, after saying 'nothing', and it was understood she had been getting ready for bed." Why was she in the master bedroom? Getting ready for bed? Why would she need to "get ready for bed" with her father present? This just stinks.
Then everyone here just goes off on the gun thing, missing what I think is the real story.

[pfitz59]

51. I'm sure there's a whole lot more

to the story

[Hassin Bin Sober]

52. An armed society is a polite society. Pew pew pew

[SYFROYH]

56. What a sad, sad case.

There is probably a whole lot to this story we don't know, but locking up the guns would have changed the ending.