A 5-year-old boy who was playing with a .22-caliber rifle accidentally shot and killed his 2-year-old sister in Cumberland County on Tuesday afternoon, according to a news release from the state police.
The shooting happened just after 1 p.m. at a home on Lawson's Bottom Road.
The 2-year-old was taken to Cumberland County Hospital, where she was later pronounced dead. An autopsy has been scheduled for Wednesday.
Cumberland County Coroner Gary White identified the girl as Caroline Starks.
He said the children's mother was at home when the shooting occurred, and the gun was a gift the boy received last year.
"It's a Crickett," he said. "It's a little rifle for a kid. ...The little boy's used to shooting the little gun."
White said the gun was kept in a corner, and the family did not realize a shell had been left in it. He said the shooting will be ruled accidental.
"Just one of those crazy accidents," White said.
Yes it's "just one of those crazy accidents" that happen when you buy your five year old a gun and then leave it lying around the house, unattended and loaded.
Who could possibly have seen this coming?
To me this Cricket rifle seems like a bad idea all around.
For one thing it looks like a toy.
But that is almost beside the point, since the real fault for this unfortunate incident lies with the parents who left a loaded weapon in a houseful of children, within easy access.
How THAT is not considered neglect I don't really understand.
Though perhaps if you live in Kentucky, on Lawson's Bottom Road, the parenting standards are somewhat more lax than in other parts of the country.
Update: Well it looks like Alaska has its own version of this tragedy.
At the very least, it's reckless endangerment and yes, the parents should be charged, but you know that's not going to happen because people will say, "they've suffered enough." (Not as much as the toddler did, though.)
ReplyDeleteAnd I have to remark: what a good thing the little girl was ALREADY born. Otherwise the boy might have gotten into trouble.
Yes. If he had shot his pregnant mother in the abdomen, and she had had to have an abortion, I'm certain Rand Paul would have let her and the baby die, and the 5 year old would be locked up for 25 years at least. Priorities, people. Women and 2 year old girls have the right to be shot dead: fetuses and boys with guns are priceless and never accountable for anything.
DeleteParents not intelligent enough to supervise a 5 year old with gun and bullet(s), probably aren't intelligent enough vote for gun control laws. But they can certainly raise the next generation of stupid voters (if the kid(s) survive, of course).
ReplyDeleteIf there's a gun in the house, it will most likely be used on someone in that house. And, why wasn't that gun locked up, and unloaded? Maybe because it was a "little gun," a plaything, a toy, they didn't think that it could kill anyone. The kid is not old enough to buy a gun legally, and he is not old enough to get a gun license, he should get a cute little gun as a gift. This isn't Christmas Story where the mother warned Ralphy, "You'll shoot your eye out with that thing." Guns kill, even cute little "toy" guns. (And don't aim it at your sister, kid).
ReplyDeleteAnd now that poor kid has to grow up knowing he killed his little sister. Wonder if the NRA will fork over the money for one of their poster families to get therapy. Not likely.
DeleteHorrible tragedy? Let's not let emotions enter into this important debate. Kids don't know enough to follow laws, so no laws limiting the 2nd amendment rights of hard working, honest Americans could have prevented the tragic death of this little girl. In short: Shit happens. How should we react to such unforeseen and unpreventable events? Basically (repeat after me) "It’s a mixed reaction ... Something both sides feel strongly about."
ReplyDeletefkna wtf is wrong with these people?!!
Sorry yes it is horrible - and emotion is already entered !
DeleteFirst - PARENTSE CAN FOLLOW LAWS and there should be laws in place to protect the innocent
what part of "well regulated militia" do you not understand ???
was the kid in a militia?
the laws that could be in place would be for the parents to FOLLOW!!! to keep them and their children safe
like how about a law that makes it illegal to buy guns for children !!!! if you are not old enough to drink, drive, vote, etc. - you are NOT old enough to own a gun - we have regulations in place for a reason - because some people are just too stupid for their own good and endanger their children - or should any one at any age be able to drive ??? (why can't they -- oh yeah because CARS CAN KILL PEOPLE !!! well guess what so can guns !)
how does a law keeping the guns out of the hands of children affect your precious little right to own a firearm ???? (and since you want to follow the 2nd amendment - what well- regulated militia do you belong too??? and what regulations do you follow???) you need to be oh so macho and own any gun you want no matter how ridulculous and unnecessary for hunting justifies your stance ??? and means our children have to be endangered every single day ????
I don't think so -- it is in the constitution "well-regulated !!!!!!!"" read over and over and over, get a tutor if you need to until you understand what that terms means
ABSOLUTE GARBAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DeleteThe parents had a RESPONSIBILITY to ensure the weapon was SECURED AWAY FROM CHILDREN. They should be charged with criminal endangerment of a child.
I couldn't disagree with you more. A 4-5 year old is given a gun as a gift. Even if the parents give him instructions, work with him; the shoot-em up shows on TV have more power. A gun is for pointing at someone/something and shooting it. Every kid knows that! Lots of kids play "cowboys and indians" or some derivation thereof. After the gun fight, everybody gets up and goes home. Every kid knows that. So here we have a 5 year old with his own gun; what's he going to do with it?
DeleteThe parents supposedly were teaching him, but they didn't teach him to ALWAYS treat the gun as if it is loaded. They didn't teach him that guns are always locked up unless a parent unlocks the gun safe.
Elizabeth 44
ahhhh....."snark". Look it up. Get a tutor to explain it to you....but first, climb on down off of your high horse and take a couple of deep breaths, it'll help clear your head. You're welcome.
DeleteBut... I don't get it! Bugs Bunny always was OK in the next scene, after Yosemite Sam or Elmer Fudd blasted him with a shotgun or hunting rifle!!!
ReplyDeleteEverytime I read these I am so sickened. For personal reasons as well as the obvious. My husband and I have had huge fights over his insistence at keeping a loaded gun in our home. He lied to me recently when I asked if it was safely stored away, as we had a 5 year old girl in our home whose parents were not watching her carefully. Turned out when I quizzed him again the next day, the gun was in our nightstand, loaded and not under lock and key. I nearly divorced him upon discovering his lie. His defense? "She was raised around guns--she would never touch a gun". And this man, who I love, is a gun safety instructor. I have solved the problem, but his laissez faire attitude and ignorance about children has damaged our marriage beyond repair. And sadly, this is the attitude of too many gun owners. They are so proud at their kids use of weapons at younger and younger ages, be-damned the consequences.
ReplyDeleteHe sounds pretty passive-aggressive to me.
DeleteWhat's it going to take for you to wake up? A bullet between the eyes?
I'm sorry, but you should divorce him, or at the very least never, ever, ever have children with him.
DeleteAnd you should not have any kids visiting your house, at all, period. You know your husband is irresponsible with this deadly weapon. If you have other people's children in your house, that makes you just as irresponsible.
If a child under your roof discovers your husband's gun and kills himself or someone else, you will never forgive yourself.
If anyone comes to visit you and they have children, make an announcement that your husband doesn't believe in securing his loaded gun so the parents need to have their children by their side at all times, no matter what...because your husband is an irresponsible jack ass.
Announce that loudly every fifteen minutes your friends are visiting until they leave.
But, the first thing you should do is to print out this story and staple it all over your house, including right on your husband's face.
My dad was the same way. I told him, when our child was going to have her first visit in his home, that if I found ANY gun laying around or in a drawer, loaded or not, he'd never see her again. Period, end of discussion.
DeleteHe locked them all up, he had one in every room of the house even the ones he did not use. We were raised with guns but when we were little they were locked up. Being inquisitive children we found the key, opened the cabinet and played with the guns. I feel damned lucky neither one of us was killed.
The guns in my home, husband's service revolver and dad's guns, are locked in a fireproof cabinet and the ammo is in another cabinet. The guns are unloaded and if IN ever has a gun turn in, they are going... every fucking one of them and I don't even have to be paid for them.
I don't know what your experience is with recreational shooting, but the rifle used in this tragedy is an air rifle you can buy at Walmart, Dicks, Amazon, and countless websites without a background check or ID . It shoots BB's or pellets, not bullets, and is not subject to the same laws, if any. My kids have them, but they are 12 and 15, never shoot unless they are under adult supervision, and the older one shoots precision (Olympic) air rifle for his high school team . These type of air rifles should never be given to a young child...if they can kill small varmints and game, they can kill small humans. At five years old this kid should have never had anything more dangerous than a Nerf gun. The parents were grossly negligent , but this case has nothing do do with background checks (which I support) or second amendment rights.
ReplyDeleteVirginia Voter
WTF are you talking about? Clearly, this is a firearm.
DeleteIt has to do with both because the NRA is using the background checks to terrify gun owners into arming their kids, their kids' teachers, and anyone else they can convince to buy more guns and thus fill their putrid coffers. THAT's why it matters.
DeleteWRONG, they are .22's and DEADLY. I have no problem with a kid being instructed in the use of a firearm. But t leave it where a kid can get his hands on it is CRIMINAL. As ANYONE who is proficient with firearms knows a gun IS ALWAYS LOADED. ALWAYS.
DeleteBBs and pellets can put out someone's eye. Although marginally better than murder, it's still not a good idea for a 5 year old to make that call.
DeleteThe Cricket rifle is a 22 caliber made by Keystone Company in Pennsylvania. They sell approx 70,000 of these a year. It is a lethal firearm designed to accurately deliver a bullet 1225 feet pr second, with a range of 2000 yards (that's 1.14 miles!) with an impact velocity of 300feet per second.
DeleteThanks Google!
It shouldn't matter whether there was a shell left in it or not. Even empty, the rifle should have been kept in an appropriate storage place OUT of the child's reach. If you're buying your toddler child a gun presumably to teach them about hunting and firearm safety (??? I'm honestly guessing here ???)-- then you should not be leaving it lying around to be mistaken for a toy. Considering it's a rifle specifically for children, even MORE SO! They went to the trouble of buying the fucking thing for their child who probably isn't even in kindergarten yet (in my state they won't let kids in until they're 6), but god forbid they spend $30-$50 extra for a trigger lock. I hope that fucking gun was worth the life of your other child. I also hope that you're both charged with child endangerment.
ReplyDeleteGreat post! And if they bought the kid the gun when he was four, obviously he never got the lesson about never pointing it at a PERSON. Lord. The people who are going to have to die before people decide the NRA is evil is incredible.
DeleteYou can teach a 5 year old a lesson, and 5 minutes later watch him/her do exactly the opposite. 5 year old children do not have good impulse control and they naturally test boundaries.
DeleteSure you should tell a 5 year old never to point a gun at any living person or animal unless he intends to kill him/her/it. But to expect a 5 year old to "learn" that is simply ridiculous.
Will people be as forgiving when a child gets mad at not getting what he or she wants and points, shoots, and kills a patent or a babysitter?
ReplyDeleteI can just see the babaystitter's family up in arms (legally ,morally, or in actual fact).
It's going to happen, hell several teens have offed their parents because they were not allowed to pay video games.
DeleteThis is not a "crazy accident."
ReplyDeleteMy nephew is 5 years old. He is a wonderful little boy, but he is not a great listener. He pushes boundaries and doesn't always make good decisions...because he's 5!!!
If there is a gun in the corner, a five year old boy will pick it up, especially one that "belonged" to him, one his parents had given him with enthusiasm, one they loved to watch him shoot. That five year old boy will pick it up and point it at his sister and pull the trigger. It doesn't matter if his parents told him not to touch the gun and not to point it at anyone.
How stupid are these parents? They are directly responsible for the death of their little girl by their little boy.
This not a "crazy accident." This was child neglect, pure and simple. Those parents should be arrested, I don't care how devastated they are by the death of their daughter. They should lose their rights to own firearms.
Guns should not be marketed to children. A five year old should not be given a gun. A gun should not be stored in a corner. A gun should not be stored anywhere a child can get his little hands on it.
Anyone with a brain in their head should know this.
The kid is five years old. He is not responsible for his behavior. He is five years old and now he has to live the rest of his life knowing he shot and killed his little sister.
Not only that, but that poor little five year old boy has to live with those two people as his parents.
Perhaps if you can't get a license to drive and you can't vote - you can't have a gun !!!
ReplyDeleteor should we just let kids drive cars at any age, or smoke and drink at any age ???
there are laws in place for a reason - some parents are too stupid to know what is best for a young child and some things are just too dangerous for a child to do
this is such a heart breaking incident on so many levels
It happened here in AK yesterday as well:
ReplyDeletehttp://articles.ktuu.com/2013-04-30/alaska-state-troopers_38937579
The NRA, Republicans, Tea Baggers, Fox News, and the Gun industry have BLOOD On Their HANDS! They killid this little girl, and Fucked up this little boy for the rest of his life! His parents, stupid bastards they are, probably thought they were doing the right thing, after all, Fox News was telling them that.
ReplyDeleteThe coroner must be a NRA member with that stupid ruling.
ReplyDeleteWhat has me pissed off the most is that the coroner says that the death of this precious baby is due to "just one of those crazy accidents." This is intended to absolve the parents of any blame, but imo, they are to blame and should be charged with negligent homicide. It is the kind of attitude that this coroner displays that permits some Americans to so easily dismiss the fact that thousands of Americans lose their lives each year to preventable gun deaths.
ReplyDeleteThose folks that allow unfettered access to guns in their homes need to rethink the wisdom of doing such.
DeleteI understand, some people hunt for food; lock your guns up.
I understand, some people shoot guns for recreation; lock your guns up.
I understand some people in some areas of this country have guns for self protection, and if you feel threatened in your own home I guess you can't lock your guns up, but at least put them in a location where they are not available to youngsters, unless you really don't care about your kids. or any of the children that might visit your home.
It's happening right here in Alaska too.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.ktuu.com/news/mountain-village-girl-5-fatally-shot-by-brother-043013,0,4401327.story
“…the gun was a gift the boy received last year.”
ReplyDeleteWhen he was four! Is it OK if I want to pistol-whip some parents?
What you didn't hear what just happened in Mtn Village?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/20130430/5-year-old-shot-killed-8-year-old-brother-remote-alaska
I am a gun owner but certainly not a supporter of the NRA. I strongly support background checks in all cases (the guns I purchased were all obtained after successfully passing a background check). I'm also fine with assault rifle and high capacity bans should they be enacted.
ReplyDeleteMy parents gave me a .22 rifle when I was 13 years old. But my Dad always maintained possession of it and the ammo while not at the gun range. I couldn't just take the gun out in the back yard and play "soldier" with it (or whatever game these kids were playing).
Giving a .22 to a 4 year old is unacceptable parenting in any case, but to allow him to have unsupervised access to the rifle goes beyond any acceptable explanation whatsoever.
And I agree with those that feel at a minimum that the parents should be charged with negligent homicide and/or child abuse (causing the daughter to die at the hands of her brother certainly counts as child abuse in my reasoning).
Well, as awful as these tragedies are, there should be charges filed - against the parents for negligence and for child abuse. No five year-old should have a gun and I'm not too sure about an eight year-old. How absolutely irresponsible of the parents.
ReplyDeleteBeaglemom
This is dim-witted, irresponsible parenting. That poor kid is going to have so many issues growing up.
ReplyDeleteM from MD
Any particular reason why the Alaska article aged the children 3 to 4 years older than they actually were? Hmmmmm....
ReplyDeleteWhile certainly I feel that the parents need to take all responsibility for what occurred I'm not sure that criminal charges would be just in a case like this since no malice was involved. But that is another argument all together. The issue here is not the gun nor even the idiotic actions of the parents. The issue is that because of the negligent actions of a very few ( gun accidents caused by negligence or accidents are few) the government then wants to turn around and limit a pretty clear constitutional right. More children are killed because of backyard pools that are not properly watched/monitered/ safeguarded than die from accidental shooting. More parents murder their children through physical abuse and neglect than are killed in this country by all gun related incidents and yet no one is talking about requiring people to get a background check and license in order to have and raise their own children. And that right it not even plainly stated in the constitution.
ReplyDeleteSo, basically, what you are saying is that those parents' right to have a loaded gun propped up in a corner where an unattended five year old could get it is more important than the life of that two year old. Her right to live is less important than their right to keep their gun anywhere they want.
DeleteYour position is that you don't want any limits at all placed on gun ownership, right?
Since when does there need to be malice for someone to get brought up on criminal charges?
DeleteIf a person runs a red light and kills someone, there isn't malice, but you'd better believe there will be criminal charges. If a parent leaves a baby in a car in 100 degree heat to go shopping, there isn't malice, but that parent will be facing criminal neglect charges, even if the baby doesn't die.
This is a clear case of child neglect. Those children lived in an unsafe environment where their physical safety was not being taken care of by their parents. They said the gun was "stored" in the corner.
They have pretty much shown that they aren't responsible enough to have guns or children.
pretty clear constitutional right, wrong -- WELL REGULATED militia!!!!!!!!
DeleteW E L L R E G U L A T E D M I L I T I A
There I typed it slowly so maybe you can understand it !!!! what militia do you belong to? what militia did that five year old belong too ???
there is NO constitutional right for everyone to own firearms willy nilly with no regulations at all - that is BS made up by the NRA so they can make money
Using that logic -- we have the constitutional right to pursue happiness -- soooooo there should be no guidelines, rules or laws right? well what if what makes one person happy is to beat up everyone they know, steal money, burn down houses ?? laws against these activities are infringing on that person's "constituional right" of pursuit of happiness !
We have laws and regulations about everything - driving, drinking, smoking, owning a dog - that is what it means to live in a society so we can all get along and at least try to keep people safe -- guns need to be WELL regulated, and insured (so any time someone is injured or killed by a gun the gun's owner is held 100% liable !!!!!! (execpt of course if the gun was stolen and it was reported - then the liablilty would 50% since the gun owner still owned the gun and didn't take necessary precautions to prevent it from falling into the hands of a criminal)
Would you feel any differently if your child was over at a friend's house where they kept a loaded gun in the corner and the friend shot and killed your child?
Deletecrazy accident, huh?
ReplyDeleteSorry for your loss, but if you own a gun and want kids, lock up the gun or better yet, use birth control.
I'm sick of this bullshit. I keep legal drugs in a cabinet, it's a habit I picked ut thinking. It's like putting on a seat belt, annoying, yeah, but it's automatic and it saves lives.
Who buys a gun and keeps it "in a corner"? With kids in the house.
No more "Accidental shootings", the parents should pay the price for their stupidity, not their kids.
I think the parents are responsible for the five year old's actions
ReplyDeleteMaybe the five year old didnt mean to shoot his two year old sister.
ReplyDelete