Dad indicted--follow up on 2 year old shooting himself with Dad's gun


PDA

JCOJR
January 26, 2003, 04:00 PM
Originally discussed on TFL

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=118880&highlight=100+Oaks+Mall+in+Nashville

Here is today's story:

http://www.tennessean.com/local/archives/03/01/28096368.shtml?Element_ID=28096368


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sunday, 01/26/03
Dad whose son shot himself indicted


A Murfreesboro man whose 2-year-old son last June reached into his father's pocket at a music store, pulled the trigger on a pistol and shot himself in the head, has been indicted by a grand jury.

Bryan Scott Barritt, 31, of the 2700 block of Fawnwood Drive in Murfreesboro, faces charges that stem from his having a .32-caliber semiautomatic pistol within reach of his young son, Elijah, police said.

Although Barritt had a permit to carry the weapon, the Davidson County grand jury indicted him on a charge of reckless endangerment with a deadly weapon. Barritt has turned himself in to police, and his bail was set at $2,500.

The incident took place June 24 at the now-closed Mars Music at 100 Oaks Mall in Nashville. The gun was in a pocket in Barritt's cargo shorts.

One bullet fired, and a fragment of it lodged in the boy's forehead, police said. The youngster was treated at Vanderbilt University Medical Center for the noncritical injury.

— Christian Bottorff





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© Copyright 2002 The Tennessean

If you enjoyed reading about "Dad indicted--follow up on 2 year old shooting himself with Dad's gun" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Airwolf
January 26, 2003, 04:10 PM
Another perfect example of "The System" being obsessed with "doing something", "following procedures", "it's the law", etc... rather than JUSTICE.

It appears to be straightforward accident (preventable, but an accident). I'm sure the father has suffered enough anguish and has learned a lesson that will make him a better father and gun-owner but the State sees fit to futher punish and humliate him.

The so-called "Justice" system has long ceased to deal in justice but has become nothing but a law enforcement and revenue collection/creation system.

:fire: :banghead: :cuss:

Blackhawk
January 26, 2003, 04:26 PM
Having a CCW obligates you to be constantly aware of it. If you can't be, you shouldn't be carrying.

The dad doesn't get a pass from me on this. He was negligent.

El Tejon
January 26, 2003, 04:39 PM
Blackhawk, yes, but negligence is not recklessness. The issue is whether his conduct in carrying the pistol in his pocket in plain, conscious and unjustifiable disregard of the harm and whether the harm of pocket carry involves a substantial deviation from acceptable standards of care.

Don't know the facts of the case or what will come in, but pocket carry is another inane practice foisted upon us by the gun rags per se. It is dangerous and should be avoided for a host of reasons. Whether this is negligence or recklessness will be addressed by a petit jury.

He could argue he did not know any better because he listened to the people at the gun shoppe who said "all you need" is to stick the weapon in your pocket or that he read the gun rags. However, if he admits to reading TFL, he's fried because we told him not to.

Another example of problem #2 being activated without a "bad guy" being present. Lesson learned: buy a good holster and belt. Know what's going on around you. Your weapon is not a magic talisman, it is an inert piece of steel.

Blackhawk
January 26, 2003, 05:07 PM
Exactly.

My not giving him a pass is because I think a jury needs to find the facts on this incident to determine culpability, if any.

What .32 pocket pistol can have its trigger pulled by a 2 yo since they're usually DAO? Was he carrying a SA/DA cocked and ready to fire? How did the 2yo manage to get it out with the muzzle pointing at him, or was the fragment that struck him from the bullet hitting something else first? Extracting a gun from a pocket normally causes the muzzle to be pointing away from the extracting person if force is being applied to the trigger, so how did this happen? Most 2yos are much more interested in the displays in stores than something familiar to them because of the novelty of the surroundings. What is the mindset of a person who can have his pocket picked of a gun without having alarms go off in the brain?

I'm guessing the prosecutor had a few of these questions that he relayed to the GJ, which said "we want to know" too, and there's only one way to find out....

Wildalaska
January 26, 2003, 06:25 PM
Ditto, something smells fishy enough here for even me to conclude that a jury should decide people..

Unlike many peoiple here, I do not think that our LEOs and prosecutors go willy nilly charging someone with a crime without some justification...after all, they dont like to lose either...

Read my sig..

WildneverindictunlessyouhaveagoodreasontothinkyoucanwinAlaska

El Tejon
January 26, 2003, 06:31 PM
Wild, willy nilly it is all too often.

What makes you think prosecutors read the police reports (always)?:rolleyes:

However, here, something more to it.

Wildalaska
January 26, 2003, 06:44 PM
Wild, willy nilly it is all too often.

Maybe in your jurisdiction...:)

I think most prosecutors read police reports very well, and if they are junk, the case gets tossed..

Jrisdictions where there are dispostions like ACDs or SOS really get rid of the garbage early on..

Just my experience after 20+ years.....

WildthelawisanassAlaska

DeltaElite
January 26, 2003, 07:02 PM
My child would never be allowed to reach into my gun pocket.
Dad is negligent.
Criminally negligent? I dunno.
Not very bright? For certain, sounds like a 15 watt bulb in the chandelier of life.

El Tejon
January 26, 2003, 07:43 PM
Wild, that applies everywhere. Don't we see it all the time here?

Just my experience. . . .

TheeBadOne
January 26, 2003, 08:45 PM
Not very bright? For certain, sounds like a 15 watt bulb in the chandelier of life.
You are very generous, I give 5 watts max...

anchored
January 27, 2003, 10:31 AM
What got me was the reporter's needlessly inflammatory "shot himself in the head" when, according to the story, the child was simply struck by a fragment of something, causing a "non critical injury" - in other words, he got a boo-boo.

Viking6
January 27, 2003, 12:01 PM
"It appears to be straightforward accident (preventable, but an accident). I'm sure the father has suffered enough anguish and has learned a lesson that will make him a better father and gun-owner ..."

Better father, maybe; but I seriously doubt the gentleman in question will ever touch a firearm again.

"he got a boo-boo." I hope my kids or if I'm ever lucky enough to have grand-kids ever get this kind of boo-boo.

casual
January 27, 2003, 02:28 PM
I think what happened points to negligence on the part of the father, but does not sound like a criminal matter. It sounds like an accident, not recklessness or an intentional misdeed.

As far as prosecutors go, I agree that generally they do get rid of a case if they can't prove it. Unfortunately, they also tend to pursue a case they can prove under the law regardless of whether it is "right" to do so.

It sounds like this is a case they can prove but probably shouldn't.

CWL
January 27, 2003, 05:08 PM
Too many questions unknown by us, leave it up to judge & jury.

I'd like to know if the gun was kept properly holstered. A "pocket gun" should have had some sort of trigger guard/cover to prevent exactly this kind of unintended discharge.

Luckily, this child survived, the man will probably have to pay through his pocketbook as well as probation.

If you enjoyed reading about "Dad indicted--follow up on 2 year old shooting himself with Dad's gun" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!