Boy uses Dad's AR-15 to Shoot Invader- Thank God For The 2nd

[JALLEN]

[youtube][/youtube]

[JALLEN]

It took me about 6 tries but I finally got it posted right!

[carlson1]

I am glad the young ones are doing fine and the bad guys got just what they deserved. It is a shame they got away so easy.

[Beiruty]

Another example why a small-caliber semi-auto rifle is a good thing to have around when you need it.

[Jumping Frog]

I wish I knew when this story occurred.

[RPB]

I wish I knew when this story occurred.

IIRC july 2010 on one 15 year old with an AR156
Another AR15 with a 15 year old protecting sister was ...
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

another incident with a 14 year old was about a year earlier or later.

[v-rog]

I'm glad that the kids are OK and their was a favorable outcome!

On the other side of the argument, this is another example of Parents not locking-up their firearms and/or keeping the weapons from underage children; similiar to what occured in Sandy Hook. Turn the table a little bit and say that this 15 y/o male had ill feelings toward friends & those in authority. He could use that same firearm to inflict trauma and death on others.

IMO, we have to have a uniform voice concerning our argument and when addressing the anti(s). We don't need more gun legisltaion, a weapons ban, or an EO, we need responsible citizens to account for their firearms & use them in a lawful manner.

[rationality.rebooted]

I'm glad that the kids are OK and their was a favorable outcome!

On the other side of the argument, this is another example of Parents not locking-up their firearms and/or keeping the weapons from underage children; similiar to what occured in Sandy Hook. Turn the table a little bit and say that this 15 y/o male had ill feelings toward friends & those in authority. He could use that same firearm to inflict trauma and death on others.

IMO, we have to have a uniform voice concerning our argument and when addressing the anti(s). We don't need more gun legisltaion, a weapons ban, or an EO, we need responsible citizens to account for their firearms & use them in a lawful manner.

I think you're right to an extent. I do think that laws requiring that we take responsibility for our firearms need to be strictly enforced, but I think it's much better for that law to say THAT they must be secured and not HOW. I plan on teaching my children responsible firearm use and allowing them to practice once they reach an age that they have the ability to understand consequences and rules, and the weapons will be stored out of their reach until that point. I want my kids to be able to defend themselves too in the event they're home alone and have to; the right to self-defense doesn't start at 18 or 21. However, if one of my children showed signs of mental illness or instability, I'd do the proper risk assessment to determine whether the threat of an intruder that he/she would have to defend against with a gun was as high as the threat of he/she taking the gun and using it illegally. Depending on which one wins out is the way I'd go. Ultimately, if I allowed him/her access and I was wrong and he/she did something illegal with it, I would fully expect to be prosecuted and share in the responsibility; conversely, if I locked it up and an intruder broke in and he/she was not able to defend him/herself, then I alone would bear the burden of guilt. But government doesn't know anyone's child as well as the parents. As gun owners, we need to be prepared to take full responsibility for our decisions.

[BigGuy]

Title of thread is misleading. It mentions an AR-15 while the anchor lady clearly identifies the weapon as an "Assault Rifle."
Also noticed a few days ago that ABC's George Stephanopoulos identified the weapon used by the lady who shot the intruder with a crow bar as a .36 caliber revolver.
Pietta Model 1851 Navy .36 Caliber Revolver maybe?

Later in the story another reporter did say it was a .38.

[jimlongley]

Title of thread is misleading. It mentions an AR-15 while the anchor lady clearly identifies the weapon as an "Assault Rifle."
Also noticed a few days ago that ABC's George Stephanopoulos identified the weapon used by the lady who shot the intruder with a crow bar as a .36 caliber revolver.[ Image ]
Pietta Model 1851 Navy .36 Caliber Revolver maybe? [ Image ]

Later in the story another reporter did say it was a .38.

Maybe old George is paying attention after all, instead of just being a Clinton apologist and general liberal shill. It's possible that he knows that a ".38 Special" actually fires a projectile that is .357 inches in diameter, therefore making it truly a ".36 Caliber."

[RoyGBiv]

I'm glad that the kids are OK and their was a favorable outcome!

On the other side of the argument, this is another example of Parents not locking-up their firearms and/or keeping the weapons from underage children; similiar to what occured in Sandy Hook. Turn the table a little bit and say that this 15 y/o male had ill feelings toward friends & those in authority. He could use that same firearm to inflict trauma and death on others.

IMO, we have to have a uniform voice concerning our argument and when addressing the anti(s). We don't need more gun legisltaion, a weapons ban, or an EO, we need responsible citizens to account for their firearms & use them in a lawful manner.

If the kid didn't have access to the weapon, he and his sister might be dead, or worse.
Liberty is dangerous. Personal responsibility is required.

[JALLEN]

I wish I knew when this story occurred.

IIRC july 2010 on one 15 year old with an AR156
Another AR15 with a 15 year old protecting sister was ...
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

another incident with a 14 year old was about a year earlier or later.

You know, I thought it was amiss somehow. The Youtube link said it was December 26, 2012, but it seemed weird that there was not Christmas ornaments on lawns, everybody wearing short sleeved shirts like they were in San Diego or something instead of Tomball Texas. I also thought it odd that nobody in Houston had picked up on it given the attention we are now giving to such matters.

The father is a deputy constable. What is a constable? If he were here in California, he would be heading off to the stony lonesome for the kid accessing it, not secured.

[RoyGBiv]

If he were here in California, he would be heading off to the stony lonesome for the kid accessing it, not secured.

Thankfully... In Texas...

PC §46.13. MAKING A FIREARM ACCESSIBLE TO A CHILD.
(a) In this section:
(1) “Child” means a person younger than 17 years of age.
(2) “Readily dischargeable firearm” means a firearm that is loaded with ammunition, whether or not a round is in the chamber.
(3) “Secure” means to take steps that a reasonable person would take to prevent the access to a readily dischargeable firearm by a child, including but not limited to placing a firearm in a locked container or temporarily rendering the firearm inoperable by a trigger lock or other means
(b) A person commits an offense if a child gains access to a readily dischargeable firearm and the person with criminal negligence:
(1) failed to secure the firearm; or
(2) left the firearm in a place to which the person knew or should have known the child would gain access.
(c) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this section that the child's access to the firearm:
(1) was supervised by a person older than 18 years of age and was for hunting, sporting, or other lawful purposes;
(2) consisted of lawful defense by the child of people or property;

[BigGuy]

The father is a deputy constable. What is a constable? If he were here in California, he would be heading off to the stony lonesome for the kid accessing it, not secured.

I think it's a guy who buys his own lights and drives a Gremlin.
http://www.examiner.com/article/fx-s-ju ... e-the-wall

[v-rog]

I'm glad that the kids are OK and their was a favorable outcome!

On the other side of the argument, this is another example of Parents not locking-up their firearms and/or keeping the weapons from underage children; similiar to what occured in Sandy Hook. Turn the table a little bit and say that this 15 y/o male had ill feelings toward friends & those in authority. He could use that same firearm to inflict trauma and death on others.

IMO, we have to have a uniform voice concerning our argument and when addressing the anti(s). We don't need more gun legisltaion, a weapons ban, or an EO, we need responsible citizens to account for their firearms & use them in a lawful manner.

If the kid didn't have access to the weapon, he and his sister might be dead, or worse.
Liberty is dangerous. Personal responsibility is required.

My point is the same in both situations. If the (Sandy Hook) shooter didn't have access to his mom's weapons, we probably wouldn't be looking at potential bans & EOs. Yes the young boy did the right thing and fought off the burglers, but are you going to apply firearms "personal responsiblity" to young kids? No, it's the parent's responsibility to lock-up guns and the father should have known better as he is a law enforcement officer!

IMO, to be consistent, we have to keep the firearms argument to enforcing current laws and not creating new laws, bans, etc...