7 year old arrested with pellet gun

[mmhmm]

Apr 27, 2013 18:53:06 GMT -5 @oldtex said:

No kid should EVER bring any sort of gun on a school bus. Every parent should realize this and that parent should make sure their child(ren) realizes this. A child carrying a gun of any sort, loaded or not, on a school bus is NOT a right any more than yelling FIRE! in a crowded theater is a right.

mmhmm your funny. You compare an unloaded pellet gun held by a 7 year old kid to yelling fire in a theater full of people & you believe that it's good to arrest that 7 year old. Yet you don't mind an illegal search in someone's home & the search would be for something that isn't illegal.

A 7 year old with an unloaded pellet gun is something very minor & shouldn't & couldn't have been blown out of proportion except by some who's reality "off". You believe that people that don't meet your strange standards shouldn't have any rights, even though they are spelled out in the constitution of the country that you live in. Yes, you are funny.

Where did I say I didn't mind an illegal search in someone's home, oldtex, for something illegal, or otherwise?  I want you to point me to that post because I don't believe I made any such post.  I also didn't compare an unloaded pellet gun to yelling fire.  I compared the rights to do so, not doing so.  You need to stop insulting people because you can't read what's written without reading into it.  I don't have a mental disorder, and I haven't said the things you're accusing me of saying.  Frankly, I resent the accusations.

[Deleted]

Why do people want to treat a 7 year old with an unloaded pellet gun that it seems he just wanted to show off with a kid with a loaded gun that intended to shoot people? It is a different and much less severe situation. The kid should be reprimanded and the uncle should be made aware that the kid does go through his stuff. But there is nothing here to indicate we have a serial killer on our hands.

[moon/Laura]

There was nothing to indicate we didn't either, Later. Those aren't things you can tell just from looking at him.

Beyond that, I think most agree that they went a little too far.

[mmhmm]

Apr 27, 2013 19:58:07 GMT -5 @justaposter said:

Why do people want to treat a 7 year old with an unloaded pellet gun that it seems he just wanted to show off with a kid with a loaded gun that intended to shoot people? It is a different and much less severe situation. The kid should be reprimanded and the uncle should be made aware that the kid does go through his stuff. But there is nothing here to indicate we have a serial killer on our hands.

I think that's what most people have said, laterbloomer.

[Deleted]

That's not what I read from you at all mmhmmm. You seem to be saying it's as bad as a real gun and this is a huge tragedy.

[Deleted]

Apr 27, 2013 20:12:37 GMT -5 moon/Laura said:

There was nothing to indicate we didn't either, Later. 

We usually react to people like they aren't serial killers until there is some kind of evidence they are.

[moon/Laura]

That's because it IS as bad as a real gun when you don't know at first sight that it's *not* a real gun! FFS, what is so hard to understand? The bus driver could not tell it was a pellet gun and unloaded when he first saw it.

[moon/Laura]

Apr 27, 2013 20:47:16 GMT -5 @justaposter said:

Apr 27, 2013 20:12:37 GMT -5 moon/Laura said:

There was nothing to indicate we didn't either, Later. 

We usually react to people like they aren't serial killers until there is some kind of evidence they are.

apples and oranges. if you see someone walking and you see no weapons, etc., you have nothing to base suspicion on. When you have a kid on a bus with some sort of gun and you can't tell, do you just say "oh it's probably nothing to worry about"? hell no you don't!

[mmhmm]

Apr 27, 2013 20:43:12 GMT -5 @justaposter said:

That's not what I read from you at all mmhmmm. You seem to be saying it's as bad as a real gun and this is a huge tragedy.

Laterbloomer, I posted one link to an adult who died because he was shot with a pellet gun.  There are plenty of other such accounts out there, along with accounts of children losing an eye or suffering other severe injuries because of pellet guns.  They're not totally benign.  They're not cap guns or little, low-powered water guns.  A gun is as real as its victim, I'd say.  Wouldn't you?

A pellet gun is fine for a child of 7 to learn to use in the company of an adult.  It isn't fine for a child of 7 to take on a school bus.  The fact the gun wasn't loaded wasn't known until after the fact, and doesn't really matter.  If it had been loaded, do you think the kid would have left it home?  I don't.  The little guy didn't know.  He was too young to be messing with something like that without adult supervision.

[Deleted]

The police were not called until after the bus driver had the pellet gun and knew both that it was a pellet gun and it was unloaded. The police also didn't make the arrest until after these things were known. I'm not the one that does not understand the situation here.

[mmhmm]

Apr 27, 2013 20:43:12 GMT -5 @justaposter said:

That's not what I read from you at all mmhmmm. You seem to be saying it's as bad as a real gun and this is a huge tragedy.

Laterbloomer, I posted one link to an adult who died because he was shot with a pellet gun.  There are plenty of other such accounts out there, along with accounts of children losing an eye or suffering other severe injuries because of pellet guns.  They're not totally benign.  They're not cap guns or little, low-powered water guns.  A gun is as real as its victim, I'd say.  Wouldn't you?

A pellet gun is fine for a child of 7 to learn to use in the company of an adult.  It isn't fine for a child of 7 to take on a school bus.  The fact the gun wasn't loaded wasn't known until after the fact, and doesn't really matter.  If it had been loaded, do you think the kid would have left it home?  I don't.  The little guy didn't know.  He was too young to be messing with something like that without adult supervision.

[Deleted]

The police were not called until after the bus driver had the pellet gun and knew both that it was a pellet gun and it was unloaded. The police also didn't make the arrest until after these things were known. I'm not the one that does not understand the situation here.

[mmhmm]

The police made the decision they thought was right under the circumstances, laterbloomer.  I wasn't there, so it wasn't my call.  I think the arrest may have been a step too far, but ... as I say, I wasn't there.  I do think the youngun will remember this and I sure hope his parents and his uncle remember it.  As I said, pellet guns can do a lot of damage, and can even kill.

[Deleted]

Apr 27, 2013 21:00:21 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Apr 27, 2013 20:43:12 GMT -5 @justaposter said:

That's not what I read from you at all mmhmmm. You seem to be saying it's as bad as a real gun and this is a huge tragedy.

Laterbloomer, I posted one link to an adult who died because he was shot with a pellet gun.  There are plenty of other such accounts out there, along with accounts of children losing an eye or suffering other severe injuries because of pellet guns.  They're not totally benign.  They're not cap guns or little, low-powered water guns.  A gun is as real as its victim, I'd say.  Wouldn't you?

A pellet gun is fine for a child of 7 to learn to use in the company of an adult.  It isn't fine for a child of 7 to take on a school bus.  The fact the gun wasn't loaded wasn't known until after the fact, and doesn't really matter.  If it had been loaded, do you think the kid would have left it home?  I don't.  The little guy didn't know.  He was too young to be messing with something like that without adult supervision.

mmhmm there are LOTS of examples of strange things happening (like getting killed by a pellet gun). Sorry but a 1 in a million change doesn't excite me & most people. Just like I'm afraid of sharks BUT even though I'm afraid them them I realize that it's not a rational fear based on how many people are killed worldwide by sharks each year. You on the other hand seem to believe that because it ONCE happened, it is a clear & present danger, which it isn't. The way it looks to me, I would have had less fear if it had been a real loaded gun than you have of an unloaded pellet gun. Your fear & reaction seem way out of whack to me.

[Green Eyed Lady]

I didn't see anywhere in that article that the bus driver knew it was a pellet gun OR that he knew it was unloaded.  It appears to me when the bus driver seized the gun, he didn't know what it was.  It's my guess that is why the police were called.  If you are not very familiar with weapons, a pellet gun and a real gun would be nearly impossible to tell apart by looking at it.  The school wasn't taking any chances.  It appears to me that it wasn't discovered that it was a pellet gun until the police got there.

Now I totally agree that arresting the child (citing, actually, since he was never cuffed or taken from the building) was a bit over the top and is an extreme waste of resources already spread thinly enough.  I'm wondering, tho, that if the child hadn't been charged, if we wouldn't have heard the same uproar from people yelling that these incidents should be taken more seriously, zero tolerance, etc.  I bet we would have.

[mmhmm]

Apr 27, 2013 21:23:42 GMT -5 @oldtex said:

Apr 27, 2013 21:00:21 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Laterbloomer, I posted one link to an adult who died because he was shot with a pellet gun.  There are plenty of other such accounts out there, along with accounts of children losing an eye or suffering other severe injuries because of pellet guns.  They're not totally benign.  They're not cap guns or little, low-powered water guns.  A gun is as real as its victim, I'd say.  Wouldn't you?

A pellet gun is fine for a child of 7 to learn to use in the company of an adult.  It isn't fine for a child of 7 to take on a school bus.  The fact the gun wasn't loaded wasn't known until after the fact, and doesn't really matter.  If it had been loaded, do you think the kid would have left it home?  I don't.  The little guy didn't know.  He was too young to be messing with something like that without adult supervision.

mmhmm there are LOTS of examples of strange things happening (like getting killed by a pellet gun). Sorry but a 1 in a million change doesn't excite me & most people. Just like I'm afraid of sharks BUT even though I'm afraid them them I realize that it's not a rational fear based on how many people are killed worldwide by sharks each year. You on the other hand seem to believe that because it ONCE happened, it is a clear & present danger, which it isn't. The way it looks to me, I would have had less fear if it had been a real loaded gun than you have of an unloaded pellet gun. Your fear & reaction seem way out of whack to me.

If you want to believe serious injury by pellet gun is a rare event, oldtex, that's your prerogative.  I spent enough years in hospital ERs to know better.  Yes, death by pellet gun is unusual.  Serious injury due to pellet guns, however, is not.  That said, I've said nothing about being afraid of the pellet gun, or of any gun.  I didn't have the gun.  A 7-year-old had the gun.  I wouldn't take a gun onto a bus full of children unless I was authorized to do so.  A 7-year-old did that, and he wasn't old enough to know better.  His parents, and his uncle, should have been careful enough to ensure this didn't happen.  They weren't.  That's what I've said, along with dispelling some gross ignorance as to whether or not a pellet gun is a benign, harmless toy in the hands of an unmonitored child.

[mmhmm]

Apr 27, 2013 22:12:06 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

I didn't see anywhere in that article that the bus driver knew it was a pellet gun OR that he knew it was unloaded.  It appears to me when the bus driver seized the gun, he didn't know what it was.  It's my guess that is why the police were called.  If you are not very familiar with weapons, a pellet gun and a real gun would be nearly impossible to tell apart by looking at it.  The school wasn't taking any chances.  It appears to me that it wasn't discovered that it was a pellet gun until the police got there.

Now I totally agree that arresting the child (citing, actually, since he was never cuffed or taken from the building) was a bit over the top and is an extreme waste of resources already spread thinly enough.  I'm wondering, tho, that if the child hadn't been charged, if we wouldn't have heard the same uproar from people yelling that these incidents should be taken more seriously, zero tolerance, etc.  I bet we would have.

I'd be willing to bet there are rules about bringing any sort of gun to school, as well.  That would include onto a school bus.

[moon/Laura]

The article clearly states

It's important to point out that the pellet gun never got into the school. It was seized by the school bus driver. It was unloaded but police say it was an exact replica of a real hand gun, and that is a big problem because it is hard to tell the difference by police, and they say that is one of the reasons the 7-year-old was arrested.

"Our first option is not to arrest in a case like this, but certainly in light of the recent tragedy in Newtown, and the alarm that it causes, the officer made that decision," Deputy Chief Chris Corbett, Waterbury police

Police say that the 7-year-old was arrested at this school and then released into custody to his parents. The boy was never transported in handcuffs or locked up. It was a hard decision for police, arresting a 7-year-old, but they want to make sure there are not bigger issues at play.

"The 7-year-old is not going to go to jail, the juvenile court has many options in diversionary programs, where they examine what is the underlying cause, why did the child do this, and how we are going to prevent this from happening again," said Corbett.

so he wasn't even handcuffed or anything. I guess I'm not sure why it's even being called an arrest because it doesn't sound like he'll be charged with anything. They'll just make sure that everything is ok in the home.

[Deleted]

I thought just about every school district had a zero tolerance policy for weapons these days?

In the case of a kid getting suspended for bringing a neon green plastic nerf gun to school, we can have a conversation about public overreaction.

But this was a pellet gun - which looks like a real gun, and is capable of firing actual projectiles and causing actual bodily harm.  It's a gun.  It's a pretty benign gun, and probably a good way to introduce your child to the basics of gun safety if that is important to your family.  But taking it on a school bus is not practicing good gun safety.

So, the kid was arrested.  Doesn't mean he was charged or convicted.  It means the cops picked him up and took him home.  It means they made an example of this kid.

If they have a warrant to enter the uncle's home, it is not an illegal search.  If the uncle let's them come in and look around, it is not an illegal search.  Odds are, the uncle will get a lecture from the cops for being a dumbass (and if you let a 7 year old take a gun to school, you are a dumbass) and that will be the end of the story.

If the uncle's dumbass-ness extends to putting the 7 year old at risk in other ways, it may mean that CPS would get involved.  It doesn't mean that the uncle will be charged with a crime, that anyone will take his guns away, that we no longer have the right to bear arms, or whatever other paranoid reactionary whatever people are suggesting.

[frankq]

Apr 27, 2013 18:31:30 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Why would anyone want to take away guns that were properly secured, frankq?  Nobody has said anything even close to that.  Most of us think arresting the kid might have been a step too far, but it will probably resonate with that kid for awhile and make him more aware of what's okay and what isn't when it comes to guns of any kind.  This wasn't the fault of the child, however. This was indicative of slipshod parenting, IMO.

These guys are talking about searching homes because this little kid had a pellet gun as a result of a mistake. Nobody searches unless they're prepared to take. I'm sure the owner of said pellet gun never thought that such a thing was very dangerous. Kids, especially boys, grow up with BB guns. I would bet that the message has been sent regarding the pellet gun. As a parent, you sometime are surprised at what a child does, is capable of. We sometimes think of our kids as "little" for a little too long, and sometimes we don't think of everything that can possibly be done to secure everything that can possibly be a hazard. The fact that the pellet gun was unloaded is a clue that maybe these people are not as sloppy as one would think by reading these posts. In addition, pellet guns can only fire 2 ways; they must either be pumped several times, which would be difficult for a little kid, provided he even had any concept of that fact, of they require installation of a small co2 cartridge, again, not something very simple for a 7 year old. On top of that, it has to be loaded, which is usually a two step procedure. Since the pellet gun was found inoperative, I think it's reasonable to assume that the owner of said pellet gun felt it was safe as it was. I think, at this point, to call it slipshod parenting might be a little harsh. I would everyone out here with 7 year olds to check all of their electrical outlets. Do they have covers? How about the drawer where the forks and knives are stored? Is it locked? A child can reach in and grab a knife. What about the dishwasher? There's stuff in there too that a kid can grab and stick in an outlet. Anything under kitchen and bathroom sinks, like cleaning supplies that can be injested? Or sissors? Shaving razors and blades? Is all this stuff secured? We could do this all day.

[frankq]

Nobody has said anything even close to that.

You sure about that?

Who is advocating "illegal" searches? You have a seven year old with a gun on a school bus. Take it to court and use that as probable cause for a need to search the house to see if there are other weapons that are more dangerous stored. If the judge agrees, there is nothing illegal about it.

So, because a kid had a BB gun we're going to go to court, get lawyers, and make a probable cause for search and seizure argument? Is this how we're going to "start" to go down this road to confiscation? What other minor infractions would constitute a search of one's home? Do we ban all couples of childbearing age from owning firearms so a child can never accidently gain access to one? Do we ban children from visiting the homes of family members or friends of parents that own firearms? How far does this nonsense go? If people have gotten to the point that they're this afraid, then they've already lost their freedom and exist in their own bubble, apart from the world. That's fine, just don't try to drag me in there with you.

[billisonboard]

Apr 28, 2013 10:43:41 GMT -5 frankq said:

Nobody has said anything even close to that.

You sure about that?

Who is advocating "illegal" searches? You have a seven year old with a gun on a school bus. Take it to court and use that as probable cause for a need to search the house to see if there are other weapons that are more dangerous stored. If the judge agrees, there is nothing illegal about it.

So, because a kid had a BB gun we're going to go to court, get lawyers, and make a probable cause for search and seizure argument? Is this how we're going to "start" to go down this road to confiscation? What other minor infractions would constitute a search of one's home? Do we ban all couples of childbearing age from owning firearms so a child can never accidently gain access to one? Do we ban children from visiting the homes of family members or friends of parents that own firearms? How far does this nonsense go? If people have gotten to the point that they're this afraid, then they've already lost their freedom and exist in their own bubble, apart from the world. That's fine, just don't try to drag me in there with you.

If you are going to recklessly endanger children by leaving weapons laying around and/or not adequately educate them to not take the weapons with them to school, then I have no problem with the government stepping into the middle of your act.

[Virgil Showlion]

When they say "arrest" a 7-year-old, the story indicates it was basically the police taking the kid to the police station. They probably wanted to have a word with his parents, and sort the matter out somewhere safe and private.

Before the Sandy Hook massacre I'd have said "too extreme", but in today's world I could see a 7-year-old walking into an elementary school with any kind of weapon causing a panic.

[EVT1]

Apr 28, 2013 11:01:02 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Apr 28, 2013 10:43:41 GMT -5 frankq said:

Nobody has said anything even close to that.

You sure about that?

Who is advocating "illegal" searches? You have a seven year old with a gun on a school bus. Take it to court and use that as probable cause for a need to search the house to see if there are other weapons that are more dangerous stored. If the judge agrees, there is nothing illegal about it.

So, because a kid had a BB gun we're going to go to court, get lawyers, and make a probable cause for search and seizure argument? Is this how we're going to "start" to go down this road to confiscation? What other minor infractions would constitute a search of one's home? Do we ban all couples of childbearing age from owning firearms so a child can never accidently gain access to one? Do we ban children from visiting the homes of family members or friends of parents that own firearms? How far does this nonsense go? If people have gotten to the point that they're this afraid, then they've already lost their freedom and exist in their own bubble, apart from the world. That's fine, just don't try to drag me in there with you.

If you are going to recklessly endanger children by leaving weapons laying around and/or not adequately educate them to not take the weapons with them to school, then I have no problem with the government stepping into the middle of your act.

Yep- no need to bicker really- just arrest the adults for child endangerment.  And BTW there is no such thing as a child 'accidently gaining access'. If the child shows up with a gun- someone was grossly negligent and put that child in danger.

Methinks if the police shot a 7yo kid in the ghetto holding a pellet gun some of you would be all over the parents on it and stood by the shooting. This little harmless weapon would be a different story in that case.

[Deleted]

Methinks if the police shot a 7yo kid in the ghetto holding a pellet gun some of you would be all over the parents on it and stood by the shooting. This little harmless weapon would be a different story in that case.

I think we are in a bad place when everything has to be treated like it is the most dangerous version of itself possible. The way this story reads the 7 year old was fascinated by his uncle's pellet gun that looked like a real gun and took it to school to show his friends. It should be a case of lessons learned. The uncle learns to secure his toys better and the little boy learns not to go through other people's stuff and take things without asking. But for this poor kid to get arrested because another kid he has never met went psycho is really sad.

[EVT1]

Umm- not a toy.

Also you don't blame the kid for looking the no-no drawer.  You blame the idiot that doesn't secure their weapons.

[frankq]

If you are going to recklessly endanger children by leaving weapons laying around and/or not adequately educate them to not take the weapons with them to school, then I have no problem with the government stepping into the middle of your act.

And we should have people like you defining what a dangerous weapon is and determining when to "step into the middle of our act". No thanks. Some of you people have issues.....Seriously.

[Deleted]

Actually, frankq, this is about the only time I get to speak from a place of experience in a gun thread because the only thing I have ever fired is a pellet gun.  (I'm a pretty good shot... that freaked me out)

We used a plastic milk jug for target practice.  Do you really think that a pellet that can penetrate plastic can't penetrate skin?

I think the bigger "issue" is people not acknowledging that so-called toy guns can still hurt people.  Doesn't mean you can't have them and enjoy them - but it does mean you should owe them the respect they are due and take appropriate safety precautions.

If your kid is not smart/mature enough to know you can't bring a gun to a school, then they aren't smart/mature enough to have access to a gun.

[billisonboard]

Apr 29, 2013 7:04:47 GMT -5 frankq said:

... defining what a dangerous weapon is ...

So there are weapons which are "dangerous" and there are weapons which are not "dangerous"? Seriously?

[frankq]

So there are weapons which are "dangerous" and there are weapons which are not "dangerous"? Seriously?

Whatever bill. You called it a weapon. That is purely ridiculous, as is this whole discussion. It's a BB gun. If you nuts want to make this thing out to be some huge health and safety issue so be it. Why don't you petition the people who own the rights to "The Christmas Story" to stop showing this American classic every Christmas on the grounds that it glorifies violence because the kid wants a BB gun for Christmas.


We used a plastic milk jug for target practice. Do you really think that a pellet that can penetrate plastic can't penetrate skin?

Are you saying that because something penetrated a plastic milk jug that it would penetrate several inches into the human body and cause catastrophic injuries to internal organs? Where are we going with this? Nobody said getting hit with a BB didn't hurt. So does falling off your bike as a kid, and I'll bet there are hundreds of times more injuries as those inflicted with BB guns. Same with roller skates, skate boards and the like. Not to mention fatalities. I'll try to check and see how many people have been killed with a BB guns and get back to you. Yes....it was wrong to bring the thing to school.


If your kid is not smart/mature enough to know you can't bring a gun to a school, then they aren't smart/mature enough to have access to a gun.

With all due respect kid is seven years old. I don't think he's quite ready to take his SAT's yet.