• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Mother accidentally shoots and kill teenage daughter

DrewPaul

DrewPaul

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
10,680
Reaction score
3,685
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
DrewPaul said:
www.foxnews.com

Tennessee mother accidentally shot, killed teen daughter while rummaging in purse for keys: police

A Tennessee mother told Nashville police that she accidently shot her 13-year-old daughter when her pistol discharged in her purse while she was searching for her keys.
www.foxnews.com www.foxnews.com

My heart goes out to the mother because I'm positive it was an accident. However, charges should be brought because it was gross negligence with a lethal weapon.
Click to expand...
Negligence requires that someone ignored an obvious risk or acted with disregard for the safety of others.
If you're the DA, do you think you can prove either?
 
Lycanthrope said:
Would mandatory training help mitigate the frequency of these types of accidents?
Click to expand...
As a typical year sees around 500 accidental firearms deaths - unlikely.
It -would- violate the constitution, however.
 
Mungo Jerry said:
Negligence requires that someone ignored an obvious risk or acted with disregard for the safety of others.
If you're the DA, do you think you can prove either?
Click to expand...
Granted, it wouldn’t be easy, but if you manage to discharge a firearm while rummaging through your purse for keys then the safety was off and that’s negligent.
 
All firearms being carried should be in a holster that prevents the trigger from being accidentally actuated. A pocket holster velcroed to the inside of her purse would have prevented the tragedy. Now, she will have to live with the knowledge that she killed her daughter.

www.recoilweb.com

Best Pocket Pistol Holsters [2023 Buyer's Guide]

Pocket carry is easy, simple, and comfy! A holster will make it safe to carry & fast to draw. Here are the Best Pocket Pistol Holsters
www.recoilweb.com www.recoilweb.com
 
Mungo Jerry said:
Negligence requires that someone ignored an obvious risk or acted with disregard for the safety of others.
If you're the DA, do you think you can prove either?
Click to expand...
It depends on all the facts of the case. If it was loose in her pocketbook, with a round in the chamber and the safety off I would argue its negligence. I think the point here is the message. The right to own a gun doesn't absolve one of the responsibility. The DA could offer a plea deal for a year probation and 200 hours community service. If I were the mom that would be the least of my concerns.
 
Lycanthrope said:
How does firearm safety training infringe on the right to own a firearm?
Click to expand...
USSC, in Bruen:

When the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct.
To justify its regulation, the government may not simply posit that the regulation promotes an important interest. Rather, the government must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Only if a firearm regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition may a court conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s “unqualified command.”

Can you demonstrate the legal requirement to go though training to own a firearm "is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation"?
That is, can you show such a requirement exist on the late 18th century?
 
Mungo Jerry said:
USSC, in Bruen:

When the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct.
To justify its regulation, the government may not simply posit that the regulation promotes an important interest. Rather, the government must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Only if a firearm regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition may a court conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s “unqualified command.”

Can you demonstrate the legal requirement to go though training to own a firearm "is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation"?
That is, can you show such a requirement exist on the late 18th century?
Click to expand...
That's not what I asked you.

Does firearm safety instruction infringe on the 2A?
 
At least the child was shot and killed in the greatest country on earth that has the most sacred document in history, "The 2A" and not killed in some shithole like Somalia or Iceland.
This is America after all. If your loved ones are killed with a firearm, You can be proud that they died in the USA.
 
Lycanthrope said:
That's not what I asked you
Click to expand...
You said "mandatory training"- a legal requirement necessary to own a firearm.
Yes - such a requirement violates the 2nd.


 
HenryChinaski said:
At least the child was shot and killed in the greatest country on earth that has the most sacred document in history, "The 2A" and not killed in some shithole like Somalia or Iceland.
This is America after all. If your loved ones are killed with a firearm, You can be proud that they died in the USA.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:
 
DrewPaul said:
It depends on all the facts of the case.
Click to expand...
And you do not know the facts of the case - thus you cannot make the determination that charges "should" be brought.
They COULD be brought, which is not the same thing.


 
Mungo Jerry said:
And you do not know the facts of the case - thus you cannot make the determination that charges "should" be brought.
They COULD be brought, which is not the same thing.
Click to expand...
I can offer an opinion if its okay with you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom