HarleyRider

All day I can't seem to get over how sad this makes me feel. Yes, there were ALOT of irresponsible adults at fault here (including the father), but to turn to grab a camera and look back and see your son's head shot open...and it's just over. I can't imagine the grief.

Damn them for putting that poor little boy in a situation he couldn't handle that took away all he ever could have been.

Tragic.

__________________
Bob Melvin is an idiot. Period.

conraddobler

It's a tragic accident.

I am conflicted here, I'm hesitant to blame the dad since I'm sure he had no idea this could happen.

I don't think I'd ever be willing to let my kid try that but still I wouldn't have thought this would be the result, just that it's a bit out there to have an 8 year old fire an Uzi.

The gun instructor, oh man..... wow.

__________________
At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide.

~Abraham Lincoln Lyceum Address

82CardsGrad

Hey... to each his own... I'm a father of 3 kids and I can assure that NONE of my kids would ever be allowed to mess with ANY gun at the age of 8, let alone an Uzi...
To me - the father illustrates STUPIDITY and carelessness. Why should he have trusted anyone else with regard to his 8 year old shooting an Uzi?? That's insane...
Yes, the instructor should have known better. But it starts with the father, who somehow thought it would be all hunky-dory watching his 8 year old shoot an Uzi... IMO, a father who deems it appropriate to watch his 8 year old shoot an Uzi is unfit to be a father...
Amazing...

__________________
:82:

carrrnuttt

I'm a father of 3 boys myself. I also have a 9-yr-old, whom I'll NEVER leave to handle any automatic weapon by himself. BUT, my experience with them (my boys and the weapons) qualifies this decision for me.

The thing is, our society is full of people who think it's easy to point any gun and fire. Television and movies ensure that this fallacy stays in our minds. I don't know what the father's experience with Uzi's is, but considering what he did, I don't think it's that much. At least it wasn't enough. I highly doubt the father was looking to put his child in harm's way at any point. With that being said, the weapons instructor, or anyone carrying such an important title around is legally EXPECTED to know these things. The father isn't. It's likely the father thought it'd be cool, and that it's just like what you see on TV, and he'd have a cool picture to show off for the rest of his days.

The bottomline is, there was only one person who was REQUIRED to know all aspects of gun safety - which includes who's capable of shooting what - that day. The father might be an idiot, but it was the instructor who was being incompetent and negligent for allowing the idiot father to get as far as he did.

__________________

82CardsGrad

So again I state... if any father though it might be "cool" to watch his 8 year old son shoot off an Uzi, that father is unfit to be a parent...
If any father thought it might be "cool" because of what he saw on TV, that father is unfit to be a parent...

IMO - the father is indeed "required" to understand that an 8 year old shooting an Uzi just might lead to something BAD! If the father can't comprehend this, he is unfit to be a father... And ironically, he is now NOT a father because of no other moronic person but himself!!! Unless this father turns out to be in some way mentally handicapped, he was unfit to be a father, and now is not a father...

__________________
:82:

conraddobler

I agree totally and while I don't know the facts, ie was the father told to help him steady the gun?

Did the boy shoot faster than anyone expected?

There are a lot of possibilities here that we don't know but the fact remains that I can't believe the dad had an inkling it would result in this.

In hindsight it sounds stupid to put a kid behind one of these and I wouldn't have simply out of a sense of taste in that 8 year olds shouldn't be firing automatic weapons but that's a personal preference.

The dad probably thought it was akin to a Nascar simulator and safe otherwise why would they be holding the demonstration?

I've fired guns all my life and wouldn't have thought this would be the result but earlier on this thread several people who've fired them have said they can see this happening, again it's about experience which I'm guessing the father had none of.

I mean how many people have fired one of these off anyhow? I'm guessing not many and from a danger perspective a gun under proper conditions is not unsafe, this one for an 8 year old was, the father would not have had enough knowledge to know that.

It's a shame that someone wasn't aware enough of the danger to stop this.

__________________
At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide.

~Abraham Lincoln Lyceum Address

carrrnuttt

Well duh. So is sending a 16-yr-old out in a 3,000lb+ car. My point is, the father is likely a by-product of an entertainment industry that trivializes shooting as an activity. I mean, we have people who shoot Uzi's one-handed in films, for crying out loud (try it - you'll see what I mean). I also remember in "True Lies," Jamie Lee Curtis taking out several bad guys by DROPPING the Uzi she had in her hand. I mean, how much easier can it get?

What I am getting at is, the father likely realized it was dangerous, but he was never given the proper knowledge to realize just HOW dangerous, which was the instructor's responsibility.

Why do you think range masters carry loaded sidearms on them on the range? They have to assume that everyone is an idiot, and that someone, somewhere, will do something so stupid or psychotic, that shooting them would be the only recourse left.

__________________

82CardsGrad

We're done here dude... equating allowing a 16 year old to drive with a father allowing an 8 year old to shoot an Uzi is beyong my comprehension and my ability to further debate...

Cheers...

__________________
:82:

Dback Jon

Father's comment

__________________



R.I.P Tim Minnick

The KING of Cards

Dback Jon

Range officer, trustee, and life-member of the Westfield Sportman's Club, Francis Mitchell, said, "I'm in shock over it." An ad for the show on the club's Web site for the machine gun shoot read, "It's all legal & fun -- No permits or licenses required!!!!" (

__________________



R.I.P Tim Minnick

The KING of Cards

carrrnuttt

Wow. Talk about a fairly slow grasp on things. I don't mean to be condescending, but you're so wrapped up in your point of view, you're failing to grasp the logic involved here.


Okay:

• Firing an Uzi is dangerous.
• Driving a car is dangerous.
• A 16-yr-old driving a car is even more dangerous.
• And even MORE dangerous than that, is an 8-yr-old firing an Uzi.
• Many fathers across the country allow their 16-yr-olds to enter a dangerous situation on a daily basis by allowing said kids to drive by themselves (in the states that they can).
• The fathers that do so, allow it based on their weighing of the risks involved, versus what they perceive as their children's capabilities.
• Now, the father that allowed his 8-yr-old to handle an Uzi, ALSO went through the same evaluation process in his mind, I am sure. Unless we find that he's completely retarded.

The point is, he made the final evaluation based on what HE knows and perceived, which was obviously not enough. Remember my point about Hollywood showing Uzi's being shot one-handed? While completely possible, good luck keeping the bullets within a grouping within 20 feet of each other. You will also have to start with the Uzi pointing DOWN, in order for it to end up pointing forward by the time the mag runs out.

It was the proprietor of the place who supplied the weapon in the first place, and the instructor, who we can only assume has experience with the weapon they have the audacity to give access to, to educate their customers on what the said weapon is or is not capable of.

This is why I have no problem blaming fathers of dead children who died driving say, a Viper he gave the kid access to. Considering an adult can barely control one, much less a kid. It's their responsibility to know, since it's more likely their car that they bought or rented.

But if my theoretical scenario occured on an instructional track, such as the Bondurant school out here in Phoenix, and an instructor simply watched and smiled as an amateur father tossed his son into the said Viper, wouldn't the instructor be culpable?

It would be different if the Uzi was owned by the father himself, but from everything I am reading, it wasn't, so the people who supplied the weapon were responsible for spelling out the dangers of this particular weapon.

__________________

Brian in Mesa

__________________
"If Chuck is Solo, Larkin is his Fett!" - Morgan

nidan

Yep, lets not blame the NRA and their constant drumbeat of guns, guns more guns, any guns, gun anywhere.

No much simpler to blame Hollywood and far less risk of any sensible restrictions. Yep its all Hollywood's fault

__________________


DogTv

Brian in Mesa

It's not the NRA's fault. They stand for responsible gun ownership and use.

This was obviously not responsible.

The dad is to blame. He was supposed to protect his son.

__________________
"If Chuck is Solo, Larkin is his Fett!" - Morgan

SuperSpck

There's no excuse.