• 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!

One-year-old shot dead by 3-year old in Cleveland home.

ggwilder

New member
Joined
Apr 2, 2015
Messages
44
Reaction score
21
Location
atlanta, georgia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
CLEVELAND (Reuters) - A 3-year-old fatally shot a 1-year-old at a Cleveland house during the weekend, according to police, who said they are seeking to arrest the adult who left the gun in the home.

The victim, identified as Braylon Robinson, was shot in the face on Sunday, police said on Monday.

"The mother was in the room with the children facing away from them when she heard a single gunshot. The mother then observed the victim lying on the floor bleeding," according to a statement released by Cleveland police.

The gun was left in a home where several children were playing, police said. Two other children, relatives of the 1-year-old, who were in the house during the shooting did not sustain any injuries and were released to their mother.

The gun has been confiscated and police are trying to track down its ownership. No arrests were made as of Monday morning.

"A 3-year-old can't be held accountable for a tragedy like this," Cleveland Police Chief Calvin Williams said at news conference. "People will be held accountable for this tragedy."

(Reporting by Jon Herskovitz in Austin, Texas, and Kim Palmer in Cleveland; Editing by Susan Heavey and Bill Trott)

One-year-old shot dead by 3-year old in Cleveland home

Right to bare arms? Shouldn't that right come with responsibility not to have a loaded gun where kids can get hold of them? Surely this is common sense. Another senseless and preventable death...face palm

Gun control? No?
 
How many times are we going to have to go through this?

Rights inherently come with a responsibility of having them, there is nothing in the 2nd Amendment that alleviates someone from negligence. This was another in a long line of senseless and preventable deaths, but that has nothing to do with legislative gun control and everything to do with personal responsibility with one's rights. Once they find who was responsible for leaving that gun out in a manner in which a 3 year old could get it and shoot a 1 year old, the remedy is criminal charges.

That is the way it has to be else we have even bigger problems.
 
If the thought of your child killing another one of your children doesn't scare you into securing your weapon, does anyone think the threat of a criminal penalty will?
 
This is absolutely tragic, the death of a child, especially so violently and horrifically is a haunting thought as a father myself.

But you can't legislate against stupidity.

Whoever left that gun where it was should face negligent homicide.
 
This is absolutely tragic, the death of a child, especially so violently and horrifically is a haunting thought as a father myself.

But you can't legislate against stupidity.

Whoever left that gun where it was should face negligent homicide.

true, but I doubt even a 20 year prison sentence will serve as a deterrent to others that stupid
 
How many times are we going to have to go through this?
About ten thousand times less than we have to go through the deaths of a children being killed in an auto accidents. More kids are killed by being left in hot cars and they are just as dead as the kid that was shot.
 
true, but I doubt even a 20 year prison sentence will serve as a deterrent to others that stupid

Perhaps, but more importantly, now that it's happened, doesn't the owner deserve to be punished for failing to secure his weapon under the law?
 
About ten thousand times less than we have to go through the deaths of a children being killed in an auto accidents. More kids are killed by being left in hot cars and they are just as dead as the kid that was shot.

And how many children get in cars each day? Tens of millions?, how many children handle loaded weapons each day? A few less?

Trying to equate the two is silly.
 
Perhaps, but more importantly, now that it's happened, doesn't the owner deserve to be punished for failing to secure his weapon under the law?

if the facts meet the standards under the law then sure

but claiming punishing this person will deter others is contrary to logic
 
if the facts meet the standards under the law then sure

but claiming punishing this person will deter others is contrary to logic

I'm not sure that I agree that making a law that obligates a firearm owner to "reasonable" secure his weapon where children cannot get to it or face a fine/ prison won't motivate anyone, but having said that, I'm much, much more in favor in owners changing the culture of what is acceptable and what is not. Laws can be the start, but it requires people to do the rest if it is going to be truly effective, but one thing I do know is the justification of doing nothing because owners will do it anyway isn't the right way to go either.

Seat belts are one of the best examples I can think of of laws that morph into effective culture change. When I was a kid no one wore them, today a parent with a child in the car without a seat belt is scorned by other members of society.

Enough people were motivated by the law initially, but later on it became an idea enforced by the reasonable expectations of society. If you rescinded the seat belt law, I think a vast majority of people would still wear their seat belts due to societal pressure.

We need the same kind of culture change when it comes to firearms.
 
And how many children get in cars each day? Tens of millions?, how many children handle loaded weapons each day? A few less?

Trying to equate the two is silly.

It would be more accurate to equate the number of children in homes with firearms to the number of children that get into a car every day.

Another fun statistic to look at is drowning deaths, specifically in swimming pools. According to the CDC:

Children: Children ages 1 to 4 have the highest drowning rates. In 2009, among children 1 to 4 years old who died from an unintentional injury, more than 30% died from drowning.1,2 Among children ages 1 to 4, most drownings occur in home swimming pools.2 Drowning is responsible for more deaths among children 1-4 than any other cause except congenital anomalies (birth defects).1 Among those 1-14, fatal drowning remains the second-leading cause of unintentional injury-related death behind motor vehicle crashes.1

Seeing as how there are far more guns in the US than there are swimming pools, I'd have to say it's downright irresponsible to let your child even get near one! A swimming pool, that is.
 
I'm not sure that I agree that making a law that obligates a firearm owner to "reasonable" secure his weapon where children cannot get to it or face a fine/ prison won't motivate anyone, but having said that, I'm much, much more in favor in owners changing the culture of what is acceptable and what is not. Laws can be the start, but it requires people to do the rest if it is going to be truly effective, but one thing I do know is the justification of doing nothing because owners will do it anyway isn't the right way to go either.

Seat belts are one of the best examples I can think of of laws that morph into effective culture change. When I was a kid no one wore them, today a parent with a child in the car without a seat belt is scorned by other members of society.

Enough people were motivated by the law initially, but later on it became an idea enforced by the reasonable expectations of society. If you rescinded the seat belt law, I think a vast majority of people would still wear their seat belts due to societal pressure.

We need the same kind of culture change when it comes to firearms.

Using law to change culture is an assholish approach, imho.
 
I don't see the need for punishment in cases like this; I don't think they are likely to do it again.

Using law to change culture is an assholish approach, imho.

Sometimes you have to fight asshole with asshole.
 
I don't see the need for punishment in cases like this; I don't think they are likely to do it again.



Sometimes you have to fight asshole with asshole.

Passing laws to create social change seems pretty fascist to me.
 
Passing laws to create social change seems pretty fascist to me.

Have you got a better way? I don't form my political views based on labels, I form them based on effectiveness. Not everything fascism did was bad. For example, if all the stupid people let their kids play with guns there will be less stupid people. There's a fine line between eugenics and personal responsibility.
 
Have you got a better way? I don't form my political views based on labels, I form them based on effectiveness. Not everything fascism did was bad. For example, if all the stupid people let their kids play with guns there will be less stupid people. There's a fine line between eugenics and personal responsibility.

If all I cared about was how I could get people to do what I want then I would indeed support forcing my will on others through law. That is however not something I value and instead prefer bringing people to my position through reason and understanding. It may not be as effective, but is far more civilized.
 
As soon as I saw the title of the thread I knew EXACTLY what was going to be said in this thread. I was not the slightest bit disappointed/surprised that I was exactly correct. From the OP on.

Disgusting.
 
I wonder why "People will be held accountable for this tragedy", while other tragedies are just considered "accidents".

Accident:
A Kentucky mother stepped outside of her home just for a few minutes, but it was long enough for her 5-year-old son to accidentally shoot and kill his 2-year-old sister with the .22-caliber rifle he got for his birthday, state officials said.

The shooting that took the life of Caroline Sparks in southern Kentucky has been ruled an accident, Kentucky State Police Trooper Billy Gregory said.
5-year-old Kentucky boy fatally shoots 2-year-old sister - CNN.com

Accident:
FAYETTE COUNTY, Pa. —

A 2-year-old boy was shot in the head late Thursday night at a home on 2nd Street in Luzerne Township, Fayette County.
Police said the boy accidentally shot himself after finding a gun, owned by his stepfather, in his mother's purse. According to police, charges are not being filed, and the shooting was an accident.
Police: Boy, 2, accidentally shoots self after finding gun in... | www.wpxi.com

Seeking to arrest:
CLEVELAND (Reuters) - A 3-year-old fatally shot a 1-year-old at a Cleveland house during the weekend, according to police, who said they are seeking to arrest the adult who left the gun in the home.
One-year-old shot dead by 3-year old in Cleveland home

The word accident doesn't even appear in the OPs article or headline.

One of these things is not like the others :thinking
 
Last edited:
One-year-old shot dead by 3-year old in Cleveland home

Right to bare arms? Shouldn't that right come with responsibility not to have a loaded gun where kids can get hold of them? Surely this is common sense. Another senseless and preventable death...face palm

Gun control? No?

A tragic situation, but not indicative of the many responsible gun owners in the US. With over 300 million guns in circulation in the US, this is in many ways surprisingly rare.

I hope the owners of the gun used suffer the full consequences of the law if their actions and/or neglect led directly to this tragedy.
 
One-year-old shot dead by 3-year old in Cleveland home

Right to bare arms? Shouldn't that right come with responsibility not to have a loaded gun where kids can get hold of them? Surely this is common sense. Another senseless and preventable death...face palm

Gun control? No?

Quick BAN ALL GUNS BAN ALL GUNS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:roll:

Common gun safety is a given, we all know about it. The mother was irresponsible.
 
Clearly Cleveland should be outlawed.
 
One-year-old shot dead by 3-year old in Cleveland home

Right to bare arms? Shouldn't that right come with responsibility not to have a loaded gun where kids can get hold of them? Surely this is common sense. Another senseless and preventable death...face palm

Gun control? No?

Right to bare arms? No, you have no right to wear sleeveless shirts. Anyone caught cutting the sleeves off their shirts should be jailed immediately. :roll:
 
true, but I doubt even a 20 year prison sentence will serve as a deterrent to others that stupid

It won't, because in order for the idea that "If my kid shoots someone with a gun I left lying out, I'll go to prison" to affect your behavior, you first have to be capable of making the connection that "If I leave my loaded gun lying out, my kid might shoot someone with it". And that's something these people are obviously unable to do.
 
Back
Top Bottom