USA : Two-Year-Old Boy Shoots Dead Mother At Walmart
 

[A two-year-old boy has accidentally shot dead his mother at a Walmart store after a gun fired when he reached in her purse.

The shooting in Hayden, Idaho, about 40 miles (64km) northeast of Spokane, Washington, took place in the back of the store near the electronics department.

"Prelim investigation shows shooting was accidental," Kootenai County sheriff's spokesman Lieutenant Stu Miller posted on Twitter.

Authorities were unsure at first whether the toddler was the woman's son.]

http://news.sky.com/story/1399907/tw...her-at-walmart

How very tragic.
Typical in America , though

Omg poor kid, he is gonna have to live with this for the rest of his life :(
Why on earth did she think she needed a gun on a shopping trip? America seriously need stricter gun laws.

My god,That's crazy.

well maybe now when mothers bring their toddlers to the store and they want candy, they will listen.

omg :( this is shocking

The USA seriously needs to just have the same gun laws as us here, I can't count how many threads I've seen on here with the similar story

My immediate reaction was "thank **** he shot the idiot that brought a gun in her purse, and not HIMSELF". Might sound harsh but... yeah. This could have ended MUCH more tragically.

Shocking news. The USA definitely does need stricter gun laws.

Shocking news

He's still going to have to live with the knowledge that he was the one who killed his mother (obviously not his fault but still a horrible thing to have to live with)

Or if kept in hand bag
its got a stud lock
around it
that a kid could not open


its very legal for for her to carry it every place she goes
thats America.

Which is precisely what the issue is if you ask me.

Tragic accident. WHy was the safety not on?

It was probably a revolver, they don't have safety catches.

They have hammer blocks, well some do.

if you have a gun you should have a holster for it, end of

Some have hammer blocks to stop it going off if you drop it, it's not the same thing as a safety.

Totally agree about the holster. The irresponsibility of having it floating around in your handbag is mindboggling.

I mean you could fecking shoot someone going for your lippy?

I can't see a two year old having the strength in their hand to pull the trigger on a revolver... it's actually very hard to do by accident. For a toddler to have pulled the trigger, it's very likely that the gun was a small semi specifically designed for females who are not regular users of firearms, as the triggers are much easier to pull... which is why I completely agree with the above - having one kicking around in a bag, loaded, is madness. You could throw your car keys into your bag and shoot yourself in the face.

Seems more likely that either the safety wasn't properly engaged, or the toddler somehow took it off, but then if that was the case he would have to have been fiddling around with it for a while without her noticing!

If I was the person now responsible for him, I think I'd probably try to make sure they didn't find out until adulthood when they would be more likely to be able to appreciate that it wasn't in any way their fault. A child would find that hard to understand. At just 2, he thankfully won't realise what happened, or remember it himself.

It completely depends on the spring in the revolver, you can get anything from a 1 to a 9lb pull. It's just as likely that she might have had a revolver with a light pull spring. If it was an auto it should have had the safety on, if it was a revolver it should have been on an empty chamber and in either case, it should have been holstered, as we all agree.

I don't see the need to carry a gun whilst doing your shopping with your baby at all :/

It's crazy to us, but in some cultures it's second nature. I would personally not go out of doors without a gun if I lived in a lot of countries in the world, and as this occurred in America, I think the issue is not that she did carry a gun, but the manner in which she carried it.

As a lot already commented, if it had been holstered then this tragedy would probably never have happened.

I think that it's a double lesson to to all gun owning parents of young children really, that both guns and young children need handling with the utmost responsibility at all times. A gun bought for 'defensive' purposes becomes an offensive weapon in the wrong hands, and because young children are ignorant and unpredictable, theirs will always qualify as 'the wrong hands'.

Totally tragic, but totally avoidable.

..I also don't get keeping it in her bag at all because if she was attacked/if it was for self defence then she wouldn't have time to rummage around in her bag for it...if she was mugged then her bag would be the thing taken..?..doesn't make sense...

If Americans want to walk around with guns they should be forced to wear gun belts tbh.

Well pointed out Ammi - I didn't think of those two excellent and very thought-provoking points.

Thinking about it now you have pointed it out - her bag would be the first thing taken, and along with it her gun.

I agree that it doesn't make sense. :shrug:

Who are you Liv?... I mean really who are you? I suspect we have some kind of secret kick-ass super hero bitch in our midst like Milla Jovovich in 'Resident Evil'. :hehe:

At least this child didn't kill another innocent child, sometimes it's not pretty when the gene pool is cleaned out.

Another Darwin Award ? .... Well maybe




.

Agree.She could've had it attached to her stocking or something.Floating around in her bag is idiotic.

I don't care how many have attempted to justify it, it's not the wild wild west.. get some perspective here innocent babies don't kill people, ignorant people who carry guns do.
In nosituation when shopping with an infant would carrying a gun be considered sensible defence imo.

Can't see anyone on here attempting to justify this. The woman had a permit and therefore a legal right to carry a concealed firearm. It was stupid and irresponsible not to have secured the weapon properly which would have saved her life but she didn't, and tragedy ensued.

My post makes it clear I don't agree with carrying the gun in any way and wouldn't be wise whilst shopping with an infant, therefore the discussions relating to carrying the gun correctly as suggested in the thread I disagree with.

It's a different country where it's legal to carry a gun with a permit, so it doesn't make any difference if any of us approve or disapprove. What people are clearly saying is, had the gun been carried correctly it wouldn't have happened at all. And still I see no one justifying this.

Whether it's legal or not is irrelevant to me, again I don't feel it justifiable in any circumstance to carry a gun whilst shopping with a child.
The justification is the suggestion that it be acceptable with the proposed 'safeguards' in place, to me that's not enough.

With you being so erudite and perceptive Kizzy, I am sure that this is a great response, but as to just which post it is a response to is the big question, because though you quote me, there is absolutely zilch in my post which justifies to any degree any of the sentiments in your response.

Oh I know just why you responded, because my posts are like the proverbial 'red rag' to a bull with you (and certain of your cronies) and it is your Modus Operandi with my posts to see what is not there and ignore what is, but aren't you tired yet of constantly creating another 'strawman' everytime I post?

Anyway, just to show you I appreciate all this effort on my behalf (quite flattering really) I've penned you a little ditty based on a song by one of my favourite singer/songwriters - Robert Zimmerman. It took me about 2 minutes so it's not perfect but is dedicated to you, so enjoy:

'It's Time You Were A Changing'

Come gather round false critics with laptops at hand
To keep criticising what you don't want to understand.
For the clarity of my prose ain't beyond your command
And it's for your own hidden agendas you're raging.

But it's all as transparent as glass and a pain in the ass
So it's time you were a changing.

There's no flaws in my statements and your counters are weak,
So you resort to misquoting in a 'Strawman' technique
But despite all your efforts to keep your reasons oblique

It's all as transparent as glass and a pain in the ass
So it's time you were a changing.

Oh, as a post script and FYI: if "an innocent baby" pulls the trigger of a loaded gun and shoots someone who dies as a result, then the "innocent baby" has "killed someone" - this is beyond argument, and just why you emboldened "young children are ignorant and unpredictable" in my post is a mystery because the absolute truth of my statement is also beyond argument.

Thank my God for you Livia - sometimes I doubt my own sanity and lose the will to live. :hehe: