Utterly tragic.
For what it’s worth, in South Carolina magistrates may carry concealed weapons because of their job. So this woman wasn’t making a statement, or being a gun nut; she was a carrying because of her job.
Her utter incompetence at the task suggests that she’s a better magistrate than she is a handgun carrier.
The difference (well, one of them) between a gun and a leopard is that one of them is perfectly legal for properly licensed people to take into a store, the other is not.
Sure, but you’re still wrong. She did a childish thing, not a stupid thing. For one thing, how is she supposed to know it wasn’t a toy gun?
Sam’s Club Bans 4 Year Olds From This Premesis.
Again, I’m all in favor of legal CCW, but how is shopping at Sam’s Club related to her job as a magistrate?
And to the others, it is extremely unwise for a woman to carry a handgun in her purse. That is the first thing a street thief will take, and you just gave him a free gun.
But if you are going to carry it in your purse, don’t leave you purse in the shopping cart where your 4 year old can play with it…
I dare you to tell that to the leopard.
Are there Guide/Seeing Eye Leopards?
Many state laws (including Minnesota, for example) require a property owner who wishes to prohibit carry of firearms on the premisis to display a sign to that effect. As far as I am aware, there is no requirement for a sign prohibiting the entry of big cats.
She’s four years old and like other kids that age she’s curious about the world around her. She didn’t do anything stupid because she was likely ignorant of the possible consequences. If it were an adult who shot themselves on accident I might agree that she did something stupid but a kid? Nah, she did what comes natural to kids.
Marc
You might want to re-think that as I am one of those “gun nuts”.
Marc
Merely saying that her job as a magistrate is what made it legal for her to have a CCW.
Absolutely agree.
Even MORE absolutely agree.
This just proves again that just because something is legal, doesn’t mean that it’s a good idea. (My position on guns is pretty clear I think, but I’m looking at this more broadly than just that issue)
Well, if you were going to go after the evil magistrate who done you wrong, would you go after her in front of the court house with all its cameras and cops, or maybe somewhere else where no one is protecting her…and she might have a bonus hostage grandchild in tow?
No.
I am unfamiliar with the rules for CCW, but if there isn’t a freakin’ “due care and attention” rule in there, there needs to be. If you want to carry your instrument of deadly force around with you, the least we bystanders can ask for is that you keep an eye on it.
Eh? As far as I can tell, the grandmother did a very stupid thing, while the grandchild paid the price.
Nope. I think I got it right. You said the four year old “did a stupid thing” when she played with the gun. Pure, reflex knee-jerk gun nut blame the victim stuff.
I agree, and hope that the NRA will eventually reinstate her membership.
That was Quartz. MGibson disagreed with him.
Guns don’t shoot 4 year-olds,
4 year-olds shoot themselves.
But having a properly trained, qualified, and armed magistrate present kept the four year old from shooting any innocent bystanders! You’ve got to count that as a success for the concealed carry folks.
You know, in the legal world, we don’t say that a juvenile is “guilty” of a felony. We (at least in Virginia) say, “The juvenile committed an act which would, if committed by an adult, be a felony.”
This seems like weasel-language, but it highlights the distinction between kids and adults with respect to how we consider their responsibility for criminal acts.
I think the same thinking needs to apply here. It’s wrong and misleading to say “…she did a stupid thing.” No. She did something which, if done by an older child, would have been a stupid thing. At four, she can’t be reasonably expected to know that what she’s doing was stupid, or have any possible comprehension of the consequences of her act. She’s blameless.
The grandmother, on the other hand, had an unholstered firearm in her purse, presumably with a round chambered and no safety.
THAT is stupid. Unfortunately, her stupidity means a hospital trip for her grandchild.
I don’t know how South Carolina works, but in Virginia, before I could carry a concealed weapon, I had to provide proof of passing a firearms competence and safety course. If I were a magistrate, no such course would be necessary; magistrates are (among a list of others) not required to have such tests before being legally able to carry concealed. No idea why this is so.
(In Virginia, the “exempt” list includes lots of things that make sense… retired federal law enforcement officers, for example… and some bizarre ones: any special agent retired from the State Corporation Commission or the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, for example, and a special exemption for the Harbormaster of the City of Hopewell.)