Plan B Forum

A five-year-old boy who was playing with a .22 calibre rifle he'd been given as a gift accidentally shot and killed his two-year-old sister in their Kentucky home, officials say.

The shooting happened on Tuesday in rural Cumberland county and the little girl was rushed to a hospital where she was pronounced dead, the state police said.

Cumberland County Coroner Gary White identified the girl as Caroline Starks and said the children's mother was cleaning the house at the time and had stepped outside onto the porch.

"She said no more than three minutes had went by and she actually heard the rifle go off. She ran back in and found the little girl," White told WKYT news.

The rifle had been given to the boy last year and was kept in the corner of a room. The parents didn't realise a shell had been left in it.

"It's a Crickett," he told the Lexington Herald-Leader. "It's a little rifle for a kid. ...The little boy's used to shooting the little gun."

An autopsy was set to be conducted on Wednesday, but White said he expects the shooting will be ruled accidental.

"Just one of those crazy accidents," White said.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/crazy-accid ... z2S4yvXGbx

Sean wrote:Absolutely fucking mental! What kind of twunt gives a five year old a working gun?
Saying that, what kind of fucktard thinks it's reasonable to manufacture a working gun for a child that age?

dales wrote: ALWAYS ASSUME A FIREARM IS LOADED EVEN WHEN YOU KNOW IT ISN'T. CHECK IT AGAIN TO MAKE SURE!

Liberty1 wrote:Freedom isn't free folks. As much of a tragedy as this is, and any of the other gun tragedies over the years, nothing really needs to be done, because nothing can be done.

Mountain Village Girl, 5, Fatally Shot by Brother
April 30, 2013|By Chris Klint | Channel 2 News

ANCHORAGE, Alaska — A 5-year-old Mountain Village girl died Monday afternoon in a shooting by her older brother, according to Alaska State Troopers.

A Tuesday AST dispatch says troopers from St. Mary's responded at about 2:20 p.m. Monday to the shooting.

“Investigation revealed that an 8-year-old boy was playing with a Ruger 10/22 (rifle) that he had used the day before to go hunting, when he shot his 5-year-old sister, killing her,” troopers wrote.

AST spokesperson Megan Peters says troopers can’t or won’t release many details about the shooting, which remains under investigation. She says the boy was unsupervised at the time of the incident.

“The boy was home, his 5-year-old sister came home and within the span of 15 minutes she was dead,” Peters said.

While troopers have notified the state Office of Children’s Services and the district attorney’s office, there isn’t any immediate word on actions taken by those agencies.

“It's too early to know whether charges are warranted against anybody,” Peters said.

Peters emphasizes that much of what troopers know about the shooting is preliminary, and asks the public not to rush to judgment on the case.

“There's no easy answer to it, and obviously no one thinks it's going to happen,” Peters said. “It's a very good opportunity to realize how much can go wrong in a very short time.”

The girl’s body will undergo an autopsy at the state medical examiner’s office.

Rick wrote:Only honest God fearing folk have children that accidently shoot their siblings.

We never hear about the children of career criminals shooting each other accidently, they must be doing something right.

I think we should all learn a lesson from this...

What exactly about "freedom" obligates a moronic parent to give their 5 year old child a gun and allow him to play with it unsupervised?
I see poisoning is well up their on your list of fatal accidents. A parent who left poisonous substances around anywhere a child of 5 could pick them up and use them to kill himself or others would have been criminally charged. Any reason why the parent in this case should not be?

Oh for Christ's sake - the "we can't do anything" line is such a total bullshit cop out. I don't know about the rest of you poor little bleating lambs, but I've never been one to sit around and whine that it was all out if my control or abilities. Nothing is impossible. Everything can be changed.

Nothing really needs to be done? Would you still be thinking (and I use the word in it's loosest sense) the same thing if this was a member of your own family?
You seem to believe (and please correct me if I've misunderstood you) that a dead child is a small price to pay for your precious freedoms...

Wow. I'm only surprised you didn't mention 'making omelettes' and 'breaking eggs'...
That is the kind of utterly moronic comment that convinces me that people like you should never, ever be allowed near a firearm... or a child for that matter!
Nothing really needs to be done? Would you still be thinking (and I use the word in it's loosest sense) the same thing if this was a member of your own family?
You seem to believe (and please correct me if I've misunderstood you) that a dead child is a small price to pay for your precious freedoms...

A crazy who wouldn't have had access to a gun if he mommy didn't maintain a small armoury in her home unsecured. If she had been the only victim my response would have been "serves her right" and if she hadn't been killed she should have been tried for multiple counts of murder, because her irresponsibility makes her responsible as her son for those deaths. If not more, because she was in her right mind and he was not.

There is no rational reason why anyone needs that kind of firepower, and if she had owned only one gun that held a max of 10 bullets, the history of Sandy Hook would have played out much differently, if at all.

Liberty1 wrote:First, what law would you pass that would have prevented this, certainly the US POTUS and congress have no clue.

Second, who are you to define how much firepower anyone should have.

10 bullets is a totally stupid argument. This was a gun free zone, he had relatively, all day.

Do you know anything at all about guns?