12-Year-Old Kills Stepsister, Self With Father’s Gun
The 12-year-old boy from Washington state used his father’s gun to kill his stepsister and himself.
[su_center_ad]
Officials in Benton County on Friday ruled the deaths of Ethan, 12, and Kaitlin Austin, 16, a murder-suicide.
“There is no evidence of what the motivation was,” the family’s attorney Scott Johnson told the Tri-City Herald. “Without that you are left to speculate.”
Investigators do not believe the attack was premeditated…
Ethan, who was an avid hunter, suffered a single bullet wound to the head.
The murder weapon was kept in a family safe that Ethan reportedly had access to. Investigators said Ethan was allowed to handle guns without his parents’ supervision…[su_csky_ad]
D.B. Hirsch is a political activist, news junkie, and retired ad copy writer and spin doctor. He lives in Brooklyn, New York.
William October 11th, 2014 at 3:26 pm
Tragic.
Mike Butkus Jr. October 11th, 2014 at 4:12 pm
Goddamn right its tragic! Our priorities are totally backwards
M D Reese October 11th, 2014 at 3:27 pm
More cold, dead fingers. Thanks, NRA.
edmeyer_able October 11th, 2014 at 3:36 pm
Giving a 12yo unsupervised access to firearms is not only irresponsible but should be criminal. jmo
Gretchen1 October 11th, 2014 at 8:31 pm
It is a crime.
tiredoftea October 11th, 2014 at 3:42 pm
The entire senior management of the NRA will attend the funerals to show their support for this fine NRA family.
Larry Schmitt October 11th, 2014 at 3:47 pm
I think they should be treated like Westboro “Church,” and blocked from the funerals.
tracey marie October 11th, 2014 at 4:04 pm
How many chiuldren have to die before the gun nutz admit the violence has to stop?
whatthe46 October 11th, 2014 at 4:15 pm
“Investigators said Ethan was allowed to handle guns without his parents’ supervision…”
how’d that work out mom and dad?
Larry Schmitt October 11th, 2014 at 4:38 pm
Why is it you have to be a certain age to drive a car, which can also be deadly when used improperly, and you have to be licensed, but neither is an issue with guns?
whatthe46 October 11th, 2014 at 5:56 pm
why can you join the military at the age of 18 fight in a war, come home possibly lamed and can’t have a beer? but, you can own a gun.
tiredoftea October 11th, 2014 at 6:15 pm
Why is it that guns aren’t treated the same way as vehicles? Testing, licensing, insurance?
whatthe46 October 11th, 2014 at 6:27 pm
well, you can pass a driving test and still drive like sh’t. you can pass a psych. exam and still become a cop (even though you’re batty as sh’t). you can have all the training (cops) with guns and still shoot yourself. some things just involve common sense. like don’t play with guns, and don’t allow your children access to them. the insurance part. bingo. make it expensive.
tiredoftea October 11th, 2014 at 6:43 pm
All true. But, gun ownership doesn’t require any of that, for the most part. And, while I can be the world’s worst driver in the world’s crappiest car, with no insurance, I can still buy groceries and take a vacation all without maiming or killing someone, every time! Can’t do any of that with a gun.
whatthe46 October 11th, 2014 at 7:09 pm
trust me, i’m not arguing with you. but, i’m glad that you mentioned insurance. it would be wonderful that you’d have to have insurance to own one. not everyone who owns a gun lives in a house, therefore, no homeowners insurance. and about the drivers license, my neighbor and best friend, her son is 21 has a driver’s license and can’t drive worth a sh’t. he has a car, but he doesn’t drive it. he actually lucked out. he took the online written test and went in for his permit, but the clerk mistakingly gave him an actual license. he’s had it for 2 years, still hasn’t learned to drive.
tiredoftea October 11th, 2014 at 7:45 pm
I didn’t detect an argument! Otherwise, I would have flagged you!! But, since the mods are trying to catch up to you, the others would have cried foul!
You don’t need to own a house to have a vehicle and insurance. You don’t even need to own a vehicle to get non-owner liability insurance, so gun insurance can be easily established. It even exists now. The ‘f’ing NRA sells it!!
whatthe46 October 11th, 2014 at 8:06 pm
“…I would have flagged you!! But, since the mods are trying to catch up to you, the others would have cried foul!” flagged for what purpose and catch up to me for what? and cried foul over what?
you have to have homeowners insurance (or should) you have to have car insurance (or should). and since i’m not a member of the NRA i wasn’t aware that they sold insurance (liability). it would have actually been easy for you to say that instead of ranting about flagging someone. if you have a problem with me just say so.
tiredoftea October 11th, 2014 at 8:40 pm
You are number one with a bullet for being flagged by our friendly, opposition. Congratulations! None of the mods are even close to being flagged as much as you and we are jealous!
I was making the statement about those insurance policies relative to guns, “not everyone who owns a gun lives in a house, therefore, no homeowners insurance”. Gun insurance is a liability policy and has nothing to do with owning a home other than adding it to theft coverage as with other valuables.
whatthe46 October 11th, 2014 at 9:15 pm
i had no clue. about the flagging. and what i meant by homeowners ins. and guns. i meant if someone is visiting someone, who lives in an apt. and they don’t have renters ins. they should at least have liablilty ins. if they have guns. what if the visitor gets shot with the owners gun? just like if a child was visiting a home that had a pool, if he/she (GOD forbid) drowned, and the ins. company is aware of the pool and its included in the coverage, you’re covered for liability. most ins. company’s won’t pay out for those incidents if its not listed in the coverage. just like a trampeline (sp).
tiredoftea October 11th, 2014 at 9:19 pm
No worries, we have your back! Keep doing what you do.OK, so we are in agreement about gun liability insurance being a good thing and not tied to homeowners policy.
whatthe46 October 11th, 2014 at 9:28 pm
yes and it should be mandatory at time of purchase. can’t pull a car off the lot without it right. well, that is unless you pay cash and just chose not to. then, you’re off.
Carla Akins October 11th, 2014 at 9:55 pm
About the flagging – we were simply humbled by the master. 🙂
whatthe46 October 11th, 2014 at 10:34 pm
LOL.
Gretchen1 October 11th, 2014 at 8:30 pm
Renters insurance should cover it, people should’ve required to show current proof of insurance fr a reputable company.
arc99 October 11th, 2014 at 10:28 pm
whenever you require a test to prove competency to exercise a right, you are on thin Constitutional ice.
you cannot have literacy tests for voting. the same precedent would almost certainly apply that you cannot have competency tests to exercise second amendment rights because anyone who fails the competency test would have no right to bear arms. I have to think that even the most liberal of judges would strike down firearms competency testing.
having to prove you are qualified to exercise a constitutional right is just not how our system works. no matter how practical it might be to have competency testing, I think it would violate the Constitution and for better or worse, the Constitution trumps any other considerations.
tiredoftea October 11th, 2014 at 11:09 pm
Good point! But, given the sole purpose of guns, and the missing dominant clause of “A well regulate militia” that Heller didn’t entirely dissolve, that seems to be a test worth taking.
jasperjava October 12th, 2014 at 1:11 am
It may be best to repeal the Second Amendment entirely. It was an 18th century attempt to create citizen militias, because the Founders didn’t much trust standing armies and the power they might exert on a fledgling democracy. Nowadays, we have dozens of well-functioning democracies all over the world, only one of which guarantees the right to bear arms (and that one isn’t even all that well-functioning sometimes.)
If not repealed, it should be modified to include reasonable qualifying requirements. Nobody gets killed if you misuse your right to vote (though I suppose you could argue that those who voted for George W. B*$h have blood on their hands). However, if you misuse your constitutional right to bear arms, people can die.
jasperjava October 12th, 2014 at 1:25 am
We already restrict the Right to Bear Arms for felons, mentally incompetent people, children, and other categories of persons.
If these restrictions are Constitutional, then it should be OK to require some kind of minimum competency to those who wish to own deadly weapons. Surely, those who demonstrate that they can’t exercise their rights in a responsible manner should lose them temporarily or permanently, depending on the severity of the offense.
annaaurora October 13th, 2014 at 11:23 am
However the 2A is not limitless. It can be burdened with limits as it should be. Voting and 2A should fall under Federal Laws and Guidelines. Too much hankity pankity going on… you know what I’m saying.
Mike Butkus Jr. October 11th, 2014 at 4:16 pm
Sickening
searambler October 11th, 2014 at 11:13 pm
And of course, no charges will be filed against the parents for negligence or criminal stupidity. What a country.
rg9rts October 12th, 2014 at 10:11 am
RIP another sad story
annaaurora October 13th, 2014 at 11:29 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFaUX9ZbyRM&feature=player_detailpage
annaaurora October 13th, 2014 at 11:31 am
I love the above clip from “Parenthood”. I hope I did this OK?
Geral Bassham October 13th, 2014 at 9:12 pm
Sounds like an unhappy home