Associated Press – October 27, 2008:

An 8-year-old boy has died after accidentally shooting himself in the head while firing an Uzi submachine gun under adult supervision in western Massachusetts.

Police Lt. Lawrence Valliere says the boy lost control of the weapon while firing it Sunday at the Machine Gun Shoot and Firearms Expo at the Westfield Sportsman’s Club. Police say the force of the weapon made it “travel up and back” to the boy’s head.

The victim was taken to Baystate Medical Center where he died.

His name was not immediately released.

Update – The Associated Press as added some details to this tragic story:

With an instructor watching, an 8-year-old boy at a gun fair aimed an Uzi at a pumpkin and pulled the trigger as his dad reached for a camera.

It was his first time shooting a fully automatic machine gun, and the recoil of the weapon was too much for him. He lost control and fatally shooting himself in the head.

Now gun safety experts — and some gun enthusiasts at the club where the shooting happened — are wondering why such a young child was allowed to fire a weapon used in war.




  1. Les says:

    #90,
    the cannon our founding fathers had were orders of magnitude more powerfull than an uzi.

    #68,
    In this case, the gun did not kill the kid, the kid killed the kid, the “parent” assuming responsibility for the kid, therefore killed the kid.
    Also, a hunting rifle is not so different from an uzi, the difference being that the hunting rifle is more accurate, more powerfull (read deadly), and likely to hit more targets than the uzi for any given amount of ammunition.

  2. Mr. Fusion says:

    #58, Ah Yea,

    Maybe I picked the wrong subject to be sarcastic about.

    Remember, in WWI the Arabs fought against the British Empire and lost. The result was the partitioning of the old Ottoman empire into the Middle East States as they are now.

    Nope. The Arab population were on the British side and fought against the Ottoman Empire alongside the British. Have you ever heard of Lawrence of Arabia?

    When the Arab population fought against the British in WWII, it was because the British were as arrogant as the former Turks had been. The Arabs had not been invited to discuss the partitioning of their land into all the various countries in the Mid-East today. Thus the British and French didn’t last past WWII.

    Examining the above article further,

    One assassination (or attempt) does not make a conspiracy or is evident of a national trend.

    I still appreciate your wise, well made arguments. It is so much more pleasant than the battle of wits with the unarmed enemy “J” is having. Aahh, but if only you knew what you were talking about. 8)

  3. Alejo says:

    In my third world country the adult ‘supervisor’ would be in jail immediately and processed by murder. In the USA this is only a ‘unfortunated incident’ and the adult will have his UZI back.

  4. LibertyLover says:

    #92, Jumping to the defense of the bleeding hearts, I doubt there were many parents letting their kids play with cannons, though.

    However, I do agree that this ultimate responsibility is on the part of the parents.

    My first gun was a BB gun. My second was a single-shot .410 breakdown. And my third was a double-barrel .20 gauge breakdown. This was over a period of six years.

    My father knew what a semi-automatic was capable of and wanted to make sure I knew how to handle a weapon before I got my first high-capacity rifle.

  5. Paddy-O says:

    #90 Stephanie said, blah, blah.

    They let you out of the institution? Oh, you can answer the question I asked of you now.

  6. Daniel says:

    As a gun owner, and oft described gun nut, all I have to say is… WTF were this kids parents thinking? An Uzi? Small children shouldn’t be handling automatic weapons. Teach your kid firearm safety… teach your kid how to shoot a rifle, but wtf were you thinking when you handed him an uzi?

  7. brm says:

    Paddy-O is correct, and not a troll.

    Why does J always end up with “I STUDYD IT SO KALL ME WHEN U LERN IT DUMBASS!!” instead of like, actually presenting an argument.

    Cue J calling me a dumbass in 3… 2… 1…

  8. The Monster's Lawyer says:

    #98 brm – Allow me ‘J’….brm you are a dumbass.

  9. bobbo says:

    In a few years, we can have the same arguments about desk top gene splicing tools.

    “Teach your children how to splice genes only with benign characteristic and always in a positive air flow laminar console. You should advise them not to combine genomes of known disease vectors until they get to High School and receive the proper training.”

    Yep, because you know, viruses don’t kill people, people do.

  10. Ah_Yea says:

    Fusion, LOL!

    Thanks for the complement, albeit a somewhat backhanded one.. 🙂

    But to make a few corrections, yes some Arab tribes helped the British and they came out smelling like roses during the partitioning of the old Ottoman Empire. But… for the most part, the greater majority of the Arabian Peninsula were in line with the Ottoman’s. This is obvious.

    2nd point.
    “Examining the above article further,” Meant looking up the clan of Husseini. You state that one assassination attempt does not a conspiracy make. (BTY, not just an attempt, mind you. They did kill the King of Jordan, they only failed to kill the Prince).

    Examining the clan of Husseini, we see this:
    “Husseini is the name of a prominent Palestinian clan formerly based in Jerusalem. Several members of the clan held important political positions such as Mayor and Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and founded and led many Palestinian nationalist groups to fight against Jewish immigrants coming into the British Mandate Palestine, such as the Holy War Army, the Palestine Arab Party and the Arab Higher Committee. Conflicts involving these groups included, the 1920 Palestine riots, the 1936–1939 Arab revolt in Palestine, 1948 Arab-Israeli War.”
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Husseini

    Whoa! These guys were strong enough to launch a WAR!?

    Now, as a bit of homework, look up Yassar Arafat’s lineage, then make the connection to the above clan.
    (Hint: Arafat’s last name is – drum roll! – Arafat al-Husseini)

    3rd point. Although you didn’t mention this, I assert that the Palestinians need to get with the program and go with the roadmap to peace.

  11. Les says:

    viruses would be much more analogous to pitt bulls, not guns.

  12. J says:

    # 99 The Monster’s Lawyer

    Thanks LOL

    # 98 brm

    It doesn’t require I explain because it should be self evident. The fact that we live in a Constitutional Republic by it’s very construction means that majority does not rule!!!!

    I now refer you to post #99

  13. Mr. Fusion says:

    #70, Derik,

    Another ignorant idiot who got their history watching the Disney Channel.

    Remember, America was founded by ordinary citizens resisting their government.

    No it wasn’t. It was fought by the gentry who didn’t like being oppressed by the British. That includes Land Owners, trades people, merchants, speculators, and slave owners. Ordinary farmers were better off under the British and had little issue. Only about 1/3 of the colonists supported the revolution. When the Constitution was written, it was written by those who controlled the legislatures, the rich, not the people.

    Our founders wisely knew this would be needed again and made provisions for it.

    Actually, they were just too cheap to keep much of a standing Army or Navy.

    Europeans who think that military arms have no business in the hands of citizens are naive. Does Hitler ring a bell? How about the Soviets? The French citizenry fighting the occupiers in WWII were sure glad they had arms, weren’t they?

    The German armies over ran every army and country that got in it’s face until 1943. I guess you haven’t heard of the “partisans”, underground, or resistance fighters. Often it was proclaimed that for every German killed by the resistance, the Germans would kill 10, 20 or 100 civilians. Those pea shooters didn’t help them much.

    You’d think the British could’ve warned them. They have experience with those sorts of things (India).

    The US had its own little experience with guerrilla warfare. Maybe you’ve heard of a place called the Philippines, or Lebanon, or Israel. Damn I wish you people would stop getting your history from Old Disney cartoons.

  14. Ah_Yea says:

    Fusion,

    Another hint: Look up the foundation of the PLO, and observe that it was in fact an extension of the Husseini clan. That in fact the PLO was one of the many “Palestinian nationalist groups” that the Husseini clan founded, and grew to prominence under Arafat, a Husseini.

    I know it wouldn’t surprise you to discover the PLO was mostly an organization devoted to empowering the Husseini Clan. They were cut out of the goods when the Ottoman Empire was divided and are still trying to get their piece, and they are willing to sacrifice anyone to get what they want.

    Therefore the intifada’s, etc.

    No surprise here!

  15. The Monster's Lawyer says:

    #104 Fusion – But they always have a happy ending. 🙂

  16. No Name says:

    Go USA!!!

  17. sargasso says:

    Plenty of Palestinian 8 year old kids get shot in the head with Uzis, but not as unintended victims of target practice.

  18. clancys_daddy says:

    Not to discuss the legality of gun ownership.
    The purpose of a fire arm of any type is to fire a projectile. The direction that it is pointed and the intent of the person firing it determines its secondary purpose. Point it at an animal and its for hunting, point it at a piece of paper and its target shooting, at a person its purpose becomes to deter, intimidate, wound or kill that person. This took place at a legal shooting event, with a certified firearms instructor. The father was behind his son bracing and supporting him. basic point it was an accident. Would I let my kids at that age fire an automatic? nope but that’s me and I cannot speak for some one else. Sympathy yes pity no, teaching tool definitely.

  19. Mr. Fusion says:

    #105, Ah Yea,

    I think you and I disagree over some small points and have gotten way off track. Could we save this for another day?

    You are one of the few I can disagree with and still feel clean. The problem is tonight I am just up to a serious mental battle. And damn it, you always make me think!

  20. bobbo says:

    I know almost nothing about firearms but I know lots/most people get “scope eye” shooting a high powered rifle the first time.

    A competent instructor would guard against scope eye for the very first time shooter.

    Seems to me that this uzi was set to automatic fire (thought that was illegal as on this blog it has been reported people have been arrested for automatic firing weapons at ranges?) which any expert should know would “walk the weapon up” ((or are uzi’s known for firing straight?)).

    Anyhow, seems like the range instructor if not the parent should have known about weapon creep and guarded against it for the first time user==ADULT OR CHILD.

    What kind of “expertise” do you have if you act just like an idiot?

  21. Buzz says:

    People don’t kill people. People’s tools kill people.

    Except in extremely violent personal attacks by hand. Rare those, comparatively.

    Of course guns kill people. Knives, screwdrivers and pencils do, too.

    There is probably a case already in which somebody bludgeoned someone to death with an iPhone. One of the metal ones.

  22. Ah_Yea says:

    #110 Mr. Fusion.

    You got it!

    I feel the same way. I greatly admire your thoughts and enjoy our debates!

    Thanks!

  23. FRAGaLOT says:

    #6
    The reason to have a powerful weapon like this is because all the criminals have them already. Banning a gun for whatever reason is stupid because criminals, by DEFINITION, do not obey banning laws, so what’s the point?

    Killing people is already against the law, dosen’t matter if you use a uzi to kill the person, or a baseball bat.

    Banning is just a knee-jerk reaction in response to some tragic event that could have been avoided if the people involved weren’t fucking morons. Banning what they USED during that moment dosen’t do jack shit, otherwise we wouldn’t have so much crime anymore would we?

  24. Thomas says:

    #68
    > guns are DESIGNED with
    > the express purpose of
    > killing people.

    Not true. Looking past hunting and target shooting, have you heard of the phrase “stopping power”? Many guns are designed to halt your assailant’s progress towards you. The 45 automatic comes to mind. In addition, many military weapons are actually designed to injure more than kill as caring for the wounded expends more resources than caring for the dead.

    One person generally cannot defend themselves against a rogue government bent on tyranny however millions of people can. Trying to pacify an armed populace that is dedicated to your destruction can be incredibly costly. See Iraq.

    The child killing themselves was of course tragic. However, the root cause is education. I think we should mandate more gun ownership *in addition* to (much) more gun training.

    #100
    Actually, kids can splice genes now. It is called grafting (well and procreation of course ;->).

    #104
    > Actually, they were just
    > too cheap to keep much of
    > a standing Army or Navy.

    You were doing fine right up until that statement. Money was only a secondary issue. Many of the Founding Fathers, most especially Jefferson, opposed a standing Army on principle because of the temptation of leaders to use it to impose their will on the populace much as recent monarchies had done (and Napoleon would later do). The cost savings was a bonus consequence.

    > Often it was proclaimed
    > that for every German killed
    > by the resistance, the Germans
    > would kill 10, 20 or 100 civilians.
    > Those pea shooters didn’t help them much.

    I don’t buy that statistic. That does not account for the numerous military operations that we made possible or substantially more successful by the efforts of the resistance. If anything Germany’s victory over France in WW2 proves that they did not expend nearly enough effort in arming their population.

  25. Glenn E. says:

    Oh yeah. When we all have automatic weapons strapped to our waists, we’ll all be totally safe at last. Except for all the accidental discharges. There’s a big difference between the right to bear arms, and the right bear arms that can spray lead all day. The founding fathers came up with this amendment, back when it took five minutes to reload a single shot. And there were no police forces then either. Most farmers were lucky to own a single flintlock, in their entire life. I’m sure that if they had envisioned guns like the Uzi, they’d have added some caveats to that right. And there certainly are already restrictions against citizens owning things like bazookas, rocket launchers, nuclear weapons, and yes many types of military automatic weapons.

    Considering how little a gun is actually of much use to most citizens. It’s strange that this one amendment is fought over so much. While the right to own a car or a computer, isn’t in the Constitution as yet. I guess those are still considered as a luxury. But urban sprawl has spread the population out so much, that the need for a gun is far behind having a car to get food or go to one’s job. Or a computer to communicate with the world. Let’s face it, there is a lot about the US Constitution that’s way out of date. And the 2nd Amendment seems to be one that fanatics would kill over, to protect its obscure and outdated wordage.

  26. ubik says:

    It is a small detail, but is the picture used in illustration to the post really the picture of an Uzi ?
    It looks more like an Ingram to me, the smaller version of the Ingram sub-machine gun.

  27. Whysomangry says:

    BOOM HEADSHOT


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 5493 access attempts in the last 7 days.