Etcetera

Guns And Third Graders Just Don't Mix, Do They?

MayorBob.

Posted to Etcetera on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 01:06:16 PM EST (promoted by port1080). RSS.

Depending on your basic point of view there are two ways of looking at what happened this past weekend in Westfield, Massachusetts.  Someone died at the Westfield Sportsman's Club (site currently suspended) while firing an automatic weapon.  Either a terrible accident occurred or it was the predictable outcome of putting deadly weapons in the hands of those who shouldn't handle them.  According to club officials, everything was under control and the shooter was accompanied to the firing line by a licensed instructor.  But, the unfortunate outcome was that an eight-year-old boy is dead and everyone wants to know why.

Christopher Bizilj of Ashton, Connecticut is the eight-year-old who died.  His father, Dr. Charles Bizilj, had given the okay for Chris to test fire the UZI at the Machine Gun Shoot and Firearms Expo, sponsored by the club.  Dr. Bizilj said he chose a Micro UZI for his son to shoot because it had less of a recoil than other guns available to shoot.  Then as Dr. Bizilj got ready to shoot a picture of Chris firing the UZI, the gun recoiled with tragic consequences for the boy.  Francis Mitchell, a club trustee, said the incident was an accident which shouldn't have happened.  Mitchell said:

"We did our jobs.  We run a safe club. Everyone here is in a state of shock."
That opinion is not held universally among all club members.  Bob Greenleaf has been a member for 44 years.  A couple of years ago he resigned from the board of directors over the manner in which the Expo had been run.  He is especially aghast at what happened to Christopher, "to let an 8-year-old boy fire an Uzi is the height of stupidity."  Indeed, for all the talk of safety and how careful they were in monitoring the shoot, Christopher is still dead and the promotional materials for the Expo made it seem a little more of a carefree activity.  Flyers promoting the event stated:
It's all legal & fun - No permits or licenses required! Full Auto Rock & Roll. You will be accompanied to the firing line with a certified instructor to guide you."
The Hampden County District Attorney and the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives are investigating the incident.  Questions continue to roil about why anyone as young as eight was allowed to handle a weapon which can discharge 600 rounds a minute on full automatic.  Officer Joseph Lech, range master for the Springfield Police Department, said all guns recoil when being fired.  According to Lech, this recoil action is intensified with an automatic weapon like an UZI, "it will go back and up, back and up, back and up, back and up."  Lech also speculated that Christopher might have been stunned by the continuous recoil and forgot to take his finger off the trigger.  Police are also investigating whether the club's show has ever been licensed to hold the machine gun firing.  In spite of continuing claims from club officials that "control of safety is our number one priority" and all the steps and instructors on hands, there might be some drastic changes made to future shows.  State Representative Michael Costello (D - Newburyport) plans to introduce legislation which would preclude anyone under the age of 21 from firing an automatic weapon at any show held in the state:
"This isn't a knee-jerk reaction; it's a common sense reaction.  We should take swift action to provide some reasonable restrictions on this type of unreasonable practice. It's almost indescribable that within a year of leaving a booster seat, an 8-year-old can be holding a submachine gun."

Tags: edited by Port1080, written by MayorBob, gun show, machine gun, children, death, accident, Massachusetts (all tags)

This story: 29 comments (0 from subqueue)
Post a Comment
1

Problem solved

Steve Urkel.

Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 01:14:13 PM EST

5.00 (funny, brilliant, funny)

The government should require all Micro UZI's have a label saying "For ages 9 and up".

2

dumb, dumb, dumb

DEMachina.

Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 04:17:12 PM EST

5.00 (astute, interesting)

I'm really not sure why anyone thought this was a good idea.  I'm all about gun ownership rights and definitely believe kids should be taught how to handle guns responsibly, but this is not such a situation.  I've fired the full-size version of an Uzi (which is 3 pounds heavier) and after maybe 4 rounds it would rise a good 45 degrees from parallel to the floor.

I do agree with the legislator they quote: "If we don't teach kids how to use dangerous things they will find them and use them the wrong way. No amount of legislation will stop accidents from happening."  That said, I think there's a difference between teaching kids, say, how to make sure a weapon is unloaded and how to shoot the things.

This was a stupid idea and a terrible thing to happen, but I don't really know as legislation can fix it.

Q: What do you think of western civilization? Gandhi: I think it would be a good idea.

9

^ 2

Gun safety

delete me.

Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 06:52:58 PM EST

5.00 (astute)

I seriously believe that gun safety needs to be taught to all (American) children, even/especially if you're against guns. It might not be so important if your children are never going to come across firearms, but if your kid's best friend is Officer Friendly's son, teaching him that guns aren't toys and shouldn't be used without strict supervision would be of great benefit not only to your child, but other children as well. Just in case Officer Friendly's son thinks guns are cool, and that your kid needs to see his dad's service pistol while he doesn't know they're playing with it.

I don't have a gun safety story (other than to say I was able to fire a .22 when I was 6 or 7 without shooting myself in the face), but fire safety education is along the same idea. Preventing my sister and her friends from playing with matches underneath the back end of a car probably saved someone their Mustang.

- derumi (del-me)
"Bobby Fischer? Man, that guy is crazy!" - Mike Tyson

10

^ 2

Re: dumb, dumb, dumb

JimmyHavok.

Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 08:24:57 PM EST

5.00 (funny)

"If we don't teach kids how to use dangerous things they will find them and use them the wrong way."

Yeah, the kids in my neighborhood are always getting into the machine guns.  Kids!  What can you do?

7

^ 2

Re: dumb, dumb, dumb

rumata.

Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 06:19:59 PM EST

4.00 (interesting)

I've fired the full-size version of an Uzi (which is 3 pounds heavier) and after maybe 4 rounds it would rise a good 45 degrees from parallel to the floor.

That surprises me. In my experience you can easily stay on target with an UZI while firing bursts.
OTOH my sample size is small (fired one magazine for some qualification thing during military service), and at the time I was already used to the way more hefty G3 and MG-3.
Anyhow, the UZI was set to auto, but it was possible to squeeze of single shots, which is what I did (going for maximum points). Until halfway through the instructor stopped me and told me I'd have to fire bursts to qualify. So from then on I fired bursts of 2-3. Looking at the pattern afterwards I still had mostly tens, but a few eights and nines as well, range was probably somewhere between 10m and 20m.

The information in the articles is a pretty thin, I couldn't even find how many shots were fired. It sounds like the accident might have been caused by a combination of an over-exited kid (started shooting before dad had focused his camera) and possibly a careless instructor (didn't hold the gun, which apparently they did for other kids).

Bottom line: guns are dangerous devices (duh, their main purpose is to kill things), but they can be used in a very safe way by people who are properly trained. And it is a lot of fun to fire a gun (pretty much the only enjoyable thing during military service).

Cheers,
Michael

5

Re: Guns And Third Graders Just Don't Mix, Do They

gerrymander.

Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 05:22:15 PM EST

5.00 (astute, interesting)

State Representative Michael Costello (D - Newburyport) plans to introduce legislation which would preclude anyone under the age of 21 from firing an automatic weapon at any show held in the state:

    "This isn't a knee-jerk reaction; it's a common sense reaction.

I beg to differ. The common sense reaction is "let's not give firearms to 8-year-olds." Requiring a law limit civilian firearm use to 21-year-olds -- three years older than military enlistees -- is very much a knee-jerk reaction.

There is certainly an age under which children have not developed the capacity to exercise proper firearm safety, and eight is surely under that. Having said that, however, legally-mandated abstinence from firearms is like teaching only sex abstinence programs or zero-tolerance alcohol programs; it does not allow for good habits to be developed under the practiced eyes of adults.

6

^ 5

Re: Guns And Third Graders Just Don't Mix, Do They

thefadd.

Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 05:49:55 PM EST

none

is like teaching only sex abstinence programs or zero-tolerance alcohol programs; it does not allow for good habits to be developed under the practiced eyes of adults

I don't know that I'd have put it quite that way :-) but 21 is patently ridiculous. What is the basis for using 21 as a cut off point for that, let alone anything else? It's worse than knee jerk--it's capriciously arbitrary.

It is easy to buy small plaster models of what you think life is like.

28

^ 6

Re: Guns And Third Graders Just Don't Mix, Do They

abcdef.

Thu Oct 30, 2008 at 10:40:03 PM EST

4.66 (wide, intriguing, astute)

What is the basis for using 21 as a cut off point for that

Because it's a good idea to give kids fully automatic weapons and alcohol at the same time?

I don't get it, either.

29

^ 28

Re: Guns And Third Graders Just Don't Mix, Do They

pO157.

Fri Oct 31, 2008 at 06:36:05 AM EST

5.00 (jingoistic)

My state makes an exception to the 21 year old rule if a person has an honorable discharge from the guard or active military. While I think its a step in the right direction, it's rather odd to believe that you can be a 17 year old on active duty and be fully qualified to use those weapons, but once you step off base on leave you are prohibited by some random state law from doing so in a recreational manner. And how many 19 year olds have an honorable discharge? Isn't the first obligation generally 8 years?

The biggest problem I have with gun regulations is that people (or hysterical retards) who don't understand them seem to be the ones making regulation, which is why they seldom make sense.

Note: The above comes from somebody who really doesn't know much either.

Spread it on!

8

^ 5

Re: Guns And Third Graders Just Don't Mix, Do They

pO157.

Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 06:46:03 PM EST

none

Pre-requisite note: My mind is rather addled by Canadian Beer, so keep that in mind.

The whole situation is rather sad. On one hand, I can understand wanting to expose your child to firearms in a safe, controlled environment. On the other hand, what in the name of Kardinal Offishall was the parent in question thinking? Handing an 8 year old a loaded Uzi, even under the direction of an instruction is dangerous. That uzi is so dangerous. Even if you got the weapon secured and everything locked like a two-three zone, it's possible for there to be some recoil. Would an 8 year old be able to handle that? Doubtful. That uzi (could be) so dangerous (for an 8 year old).

On the other hand, these knee-jerk firearms restriction laws are equally dangerous. The state rep is trying to be the big dog in his political subdivision getting the electorate to purr 2 weeks from now. It's quite disgusting that he'd use that tragedy for his own gain.

So what's the answer? More responsibility and reminding ourselves that shit happens. Look, in my wife's family (like in other rural American clans) it's quite common to get a varying degree of firepower at pre-designated age increments. For example, a 22 or a shotgun, I forget which (see note above re: Beer, Canadian) at age 12. At age 8? A BB GUN! Not a fucking play date with an Uzi. That is uber uncool. Give the kid what they can handle safely. Hell, in boyscouts I was allowed to shoot .22s starting at age 14, and that's probably about right, if not a bit overly cautious. And what was the NRA instructor thinking by allowing the 8 year old to fire one? I hope he gets his instructor rating revoked, to the fullest extent that a voluntary organization of geographically dispersed people sharing common interests can revoke a certificate.

In conclusion: Shit happens. No disrespect, but this took stupid to another level, so cut the check. No new laws, just more common sense.

Spread it on!

11

Common Sense

port1080.

Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 08:39:59 PM EST

5.00 (astute)

I'll just weigh in with mostly an "I concur" in regards to what everyone else has posted.  I grew up around guns, in a rural area.  My grandfather was ex-military (Marines, WWII), and he hunted (as did my father until he had to stop due to post-polio disease, but that's another story).  So, growing up my grandfather went to great lengths to both expose me to guns and to hunting, and also to train me in gun safety.  Additionally, living in a rural area I had opportunities to take more "official" gun training, through Boy Scouts and also through a gun safety class that one of my middle school teachers taught (after class, in the public school - no kidding).  

I probably shot my first gun around 8 or 9, but it was a .22 squirrel rifle (my grandfather didn't believe in BB guns - he argued that a gun was a tool, not a toy, and that since BB guns couldn't be used for anything other than target shooting or getting into trouble, they blurred the line too much) that didn't have any kick at all.  By the time I got my hunting license (which you can at the age of 12 in Pennsylvania) I had moved up to shotguns & deer rifle, but still with safety always the number one concern.  Next to safety was, again, that notion that a gun isn't a toy, but a tool.  Hunting was for food as much (or more than) for sport.  Target practice was important in the same sense that training to use any tool properly is, but it wasn't something to be done just for the sake of it.

Because of that background I've always felt a little out of either mainstream position when it comes to guns.  I'm a strong defender of second amendment rights, but it bothers me quite a bit to see the way that a lot of NRA nuts fetishize their weapons (sometimes seems like they might be compensating for other deficiencies...) and treat them and/or use them like toys.  They should be looked at like power tools - something that's dangerous, but useful & needs to be treated with respect.  Treating them with respect does not mean having demonstrations where eight year olds go around shooting Uzis.

Ce n'est pas une pipe. C'est une signature.

15

^ 11

Re: Common Sense

delete me.

Thu Oct 30, 2008 at 01:06:57 AM EST

5.00 (funny)

I'm a strong defender of second amendment rights, but it bothers me quite a bit to see the way that a lot of NRA nuts fetishize their weapons (sometimes seems like they might be compensating for other deficiencies...) and treat them and/or use them like toys.

Yeah, that's one of the reasons I don't have an NRA membership. I'm uncomfortable with the idea of belonging to the same club as lunatics like Ted Nugent and Michael Moore.

- derumi (del-me)
"Bobby Fischer? Man, that guy is crazy!" - Mike Tyson

12

^ 11

Re: Common Sense

pO157.

Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 08:52:32 PM EST

none

I'm a strong defender of second amendment rights, but it bothers me quite a bit to see the way that a lot of NRA nuts fetishize their weapons (sometimes seems like they might be compensating for other deficiencies...) and treat them and/or use them like toys.  They should be looked at like power tools - something that's dangerous, but useful & needs to be treated with respect.

What is up with that? Similar to my recent comment on the Bob Barr/Mossburg thread, one of the best things the NRA could do is keep the loon fringe off the TV. Perhaps if they were viewed by America as the Dale Gribbles of the nation they would be respected more. Of course, it's not right that people are prejudiced in that way against NRA members, but the some gun owners don't help the situation by overcompensating, as you point out.

Spread it on!

13

^ 12

Here's hoping for a post edit function.

pO157.

Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 08:54:02 PM EST

none

Perhaps if they were viewed by America as the Dale Gribbles of the nation they would be respected more.

Should read as:

Perhaps if they were notviewed by America as the Dale Gribbles of the nation they would be respected more.

The Times regrets the error.

Spread it on!

14

^ 11

Mine aren't tools

T Slothrop.

Thu Oct 30, 2008 at 12:14:08 AM EST

none

Disclaimer: I agree that  there is no sane reason for ever placing an automatic weapon in the hands of any eight-year-old.

However at the same time I think

Target practice was important in the same sense that training to use any tool properly is, but it wasn't something to be done just for the sake of it.

may be going a bit too far in demonizing recreational shooters. I'm not "training" for anything when I shoot:

I don't hunt. [I am extremely uncomfortable with the whole idea of blood "sport" even if one eats everything one kills. I do understand that hunting is an integral part of population management for some species, but it's going to have to be done by someone other than me.]

I am not a law enforcement officer nor am I in the military.

I'm not even particularly interested in using guns as self defense tools outside of my home. (I do have a concealed carry permit, but I very, very rarely actually make use of it.)

The only thing I guess I'm ever "training" for is the (vanishingly small in my neighborhood) chance of a random home invasion.

So, yeah my guns are adult toys, mostly. I like target shooting for its own sake. I find the mindset I have to achieve to be successful at the range to be very zen-like and relaxing - a great stress reliever. I enjoy all my guns but I don't see them as fetish objects. I do have complete and utter respect for their destructive power and as a result I'm positively anal about safety, but I cannot see them as mere tools.

{Insert amusing quotation here}

18

^ 14

Re: Mine aren't tools

port1080.

Thu Oct 30, 2008 at 07:48:05 AM EST

none

So, yeah my guns are adult toys, mostly. I like target shooting for its own sake. I find the mindset I have to achieve to be successful at the range to be very zen-like and relaxing - a great stress reliever. I enjoy all my guns but I don't see them as fetish objects. I do have complete and utter respect for their destructive power and as a result I'm positively anal about safety, but I cannot see them as mere tools.

Well, I don't have a huge problem with that mindset, although it's not my own.  If all recreational shooters had that mentality, it wouldn't even be an issue to me - but I've known enough guys who claimed to be acting that way (safely, responsible, etc.), and perhaps even thought they were, but who ultimately were unsafe with their guns because they treated them & thought of them as toys instead of weapons.  I feel like I know you well enough from here & Plastic to know that you wouldn't make that mistake, but there are enough folks like that out there that I find it to be bothersome.

Ce n'est pas une pipe. C'est une signature.

23

^ 18

Re: Mine aren't tools

T Slothrop.

Thu Oct 30, 2008 at 02:41:08 PM EST

5.00 (interesting)

I've known enough guys who claimed to be acting that way (safely, responsible, etc.), and perhaps even thought they were, but who ultimately were unsafe with their guns because they treated them & thought of them as toys instead of weapons.

I don't disagree. Especially in rural areas, these kinds of nose pickers are all too common. Hell they even document their idiocy.

One of the ways I keep my skill set and vigilance sharp is by doing a significant portion of my shooting at a public indoor range. Although I have plenty of land and have even created a safe backstop area on my mother's farm, I still head for the indoor range at least every couple of months. The safety officers there won't let anyone get away with unsafe practices, and it serves as a  good reality check for me.

(And thanks for the kind words, as well.)

My take on gun control is completely at odds with both NRA and the anti-gun crowd. I think the paradigm for gun ownership should be modeled after our current driver's license system. I think everyone who wants to own a firearm of any type should have to take instruction, pass a real background check, and pass both written and practical tests - similar to how most states administer their concealed carry permits now. I think that license should be good for a period of say five years, after which one would have to be tested again to renew.

Now, once a person has jumped through all those hoops, I don't think there should be any restrictions as far as number of firearms owned, type, ammunition, whatever. You just walk into your local firearms emporium, show them your license, and walk out with whatever you want, as often as you want. I don't even see a problem with full auto weapons as long as one has more extensive training (think of it like an "endorsement" on a commercial driver's license).

On the flipside then I would make possession of any firearm without a license a serious felony with a mandatory 5 or 10 year sentence and I would say that  any time a gun is used or even possessed during the commission of a crime, then that crime should carry a mandatory life sentence.

{Insert amusing quotation here}

24

^ 23

Re: Mine aren't tools

delete me.

Thu Oct 30, 2008 at 03:10:27 PM EST

none

Does that include traffic infractions? ... and wow, it would suck to accidentally poach something out of season.

- derumi (del-me)
"Bobby Fischer? Man, that guy is crazy!" - Mike Tyson

26

^ 24

Re: Mine aren't tools

T Slothrop.

Thu Oct 30, 2008 at 03:20:27 PM EST

none

Oh come on, it wasn't a freaking position paper. :) I didn't run a formal logic check on it.

No I didn't mean traffic infractions or petty misdemeanors like game law violations. What I meant was more like if you are carrying a gun during the commission of a serious crime against another person, mandatory sentencing should apply even if you never actually pulled the gun and fired. Most states have provisions like that already, it's just not life.

{Insert amusing quotation here}

27

^ 23

Re: Mine aren't tools

JimmyHavok.

Thu Oct 30, 2008 at 05:22:04 PM EST

none

I share your position on gun licensing and training.  The only problem I see with your proposal is the time limit.  It could make a person into a criminal simply because they didn't renew their license.  I'd prefer to make it a purchase license, so you'd have to keep it up to date to get a new gun, but you wouldn't become a criminal today simply because you had a gun that was legal yesterday in your house.

16

^ 11

Re: Common Sense

JimmyHavok.

Thu Oct 30, 2008 at 02:08:43 AM EST

none

I wish the rural kids I met in Alaska had gotten the training you got.  Unfortunately they all seemed to treat a gun like it was a toy.  I went on a picnic with a bunch of them, and when I went to set up a target, one of the kids shot past me at the target as I walked back.

In another incident, three of the kids started shooting at a squirrel in a tree, and kept shooting at it as it jumped to another tree and ran down it into a group of other campers.

I considered it a miracle that none of them had shot anyone by accident.

19

^ 16

Re: Common Sense

port1080.

Thu Oct 30, 2008 at 07:49:04 AM EST

none

I went on a picnic with a bunch of them, and when I went to set up a target, one of the kids shot past me at the target as I walked back.

That would've gotten my ass beat.  Grandpa was old-school like that.

Ce n'est pas une pipe. C'est une signature.

21

^ 19

Re: Common Sense

pO157.

Thu Oct 30, 2008 at 08:50:59 AM EST

5.00 (astute)

Grandpa was old-school like that.

Ain't no school like the old-school.

Spread it on!

22

^ 19

Re: Common Sense

JimmyHavok.

Thu Oct 30, 2008 at 01:43:56 PM EST

none

I didn't let it pass.  I said, "If you point your gun at me again, I'll shoot you."

I have to admit that he was smart enough to apologize.

25

^ 22

Re: Common Sense

delete me.

Thu Oct 30, 2008 at 03:12:45 PM EST

none

I had to say that once, on the firing line during basic training. Range officer gave the other kid a reaming.

- derumi (del-me)
"Bobby Fischer? Man, that guy is crazy!" - Mike Tyson

17

^ 11

Re: Common Sense

thefadd.

Thu Oct 30, 2008 at 02:44:30 AM EST

none

Power tools are totally fetishized.

It is easy to buy small plaster models of what you think life is like.

20

Don't shoot the messenger

Lou.

Thu Oct 30, 2008 at 07:58:08 AM EST

5.00 (funny)

I saw a bumper sticker once that read, "When guns are outlawed, only the children of outlaws will be accidentally  killed by guns"

No, I didn't like it either.  However, I report...you decide.

It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine

3

What's Tasteless Here?

MayorBob.

Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 04:21:55 PM EST

none

Is it a cartoon in the Boston paper or the anguished rhetoric over what right the cartoonist had to use a tragedy to make a point.  For my money, the tasteless aspect of this is that an eight-year-old kid was allowed to handle, much less shoot, an UZI.  If I were his father, I'm not sure how I could live with myself knowing I had, in essence, played a part in his death.  Or is the tasteless part the incomprehensible double back flips in logic that says you can place weapons like UZIs in virtually anyone's hands, see a worst case scenario play out, and still contend that "we did everything we did and providing safety was our number one priority?"  Or is the tasteless part played out by the tool who stage managed the expo -- a police chief -- who contends the expo was "a safe environment for people to see and fire some of the guns that they've seen in the movies, or on the History Channel, or other events that involve firearms?"

Illegitimi non carborundum.

4

^ 3

Re: What's Tasteless Here?

thefadd.

Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 05:21:36 PM EST

none

on the History Channel, or other events that involve firearms

I apologize but combining your tasteless thread with all the recent headlines about the assassination "attempt" on Obama, all I can think about is a display wherein you can fondle and fire the models of firearm used for infamous assassinations.

It is easy to buy small plaster models of what you think life is like.

This story: 29 comments (0 from subqueue)
Post a Comment