Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Girl, 2, accidentally shot and killed by mom


Still Waters

Recommended Posts

Police are investigating the fatal shooting of a 2-year-old girl at a Wickliffe hotel Friday night.

The shooting happened around 11 p.m. at the Econo Lodge Wickliffe-Cleveland East, 28611 Euclid Ave. Police said it appears the child's mother was handling a gun when it went off and 2-year-old Laila Johnson was shot in the chest.

https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/local-news/oh-lake/police-two-year-old-child-accidentally-shot-and-killed-by-mother-at-wickliffe-hotel-

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Hopefully mom has lots of solid support around her. She must be devastated. Not sure if anyone could forgive themselves for such a careless tragedy. I feel bad for her and her family but whats she doing with a firearm when she clearly doesn't know how to handle one ? Cars kill. People are trained through the system to understand safe driving methods, write an exam and drive with an instructor before getting a liscence. Shouldnt guns face the same stringent requirements ? Accidents will happen but I think many are preventable like this one

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, khol said:

Hopefully mom has lots of solid support around her. She must be devastated. Not sure if anyone could forgive themselves for such a careless tragedy. I feel bad for her and her family but whats she doing with a firearm when she clearly doesn't know how to handle one ? Cars kill. People are trained through the system to understand safe driving methods, write an exam and drive with an instructor before getting a liscence. Shouldnt guns face the same stringent requirements ? Accidents will happen but I think many are preventable like this one

police has more accidents than civilians, per 100k, so lack of  training is not the issue,  even trained make mistakes.

funny you should bring up cars, we have about 40000 death a year from mishandling cars and only 600-700 from mishandling guns, that includes kids getting a hold of them. which is not really a training issue, but a safekeeping issue

Edited by aztek
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

good points..but it sounds like you find 600 to 700 mishandling deaths acceptable ?  "mishandling" should be preventable. If it isnt training like you say what do we do about it...nothing at all?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, khol said:

good points..but it sounds like you find 600 to 700 mishandling deaths acceptable ?  "mishandling" should be preventable. If it isnt training like you say what do we do about it...nothing at all?

yes, pretty much nothing at all.  because you simply can not do  anything in reality. just like we can't really do anything about. 40k deaths due to mistakes of trained driver s, and 250k deaths a year from mistakes of trained doctors, compare to that, 600-700 deaths from mistakes with guns does not seem to be alarming. 

if you want to do something be my guest, make sure you do not become statistic, that is all you can do.

Edited by aztek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, aztek said:

yes, pretty much nothing at all.  because you simply can not do  anything in reality. just like we can't really do anything about. 40k deaths due to mistakes of trained driver s, and 250k deaths a year from mistakes of trained doctors, compare to that, 600-700 deaths from mistakes with guns does not seem to be alarming. 

if you want to do something be my guest, make sure you do not become statistic, that is all you can do.

One of the biggest reasons we are going to driverless cars is the safety issue. That at least is attempting to do something about it. Also careless mistakes in the medical profession has its repurcussions.

Guns owned by civilians are not used everyday like cars are... 700 preventable deaths is alarming IMO

 

Edited by khol
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, khol said:

One of the biggest reasons we are going to driverless cars is the safety issue. That at least is attempting to do something about it. Also careless mistakes in the medical profession has its repurcussions.

Guns owned by civilians are not used everyday like cars are... 700 preventable deaths is alarming IMO

 

no it is not the reason for driverless cars at all.

guess what accidental discharges have its repercussions too,  if that reasoning is good enough for 250k death by doctors, it must be good enough for accidental discharges. you are 416 times more likely to die from doctors mistake than from a gun accident.

btw why you do not see 40000 deaths due to car accidents preventable, but 600 gun deaths are?

just out of curiosity, what do you propose? 

Edited by aztek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, aztek said:

no it is not the reason for driverless cars at all.

guess what accidental discharges have its repercussions too,  if that reasoning is good enough for 250k death by doctors, it must be good enough for accidental discharges. you are 416 times more likely to die from doctors mistake than from a gun accident.

btw why you do not see 40000 deaths due to car accidents preventable, but 600 gun deaths are?

just out of curiosity, what do you propose? 

https://www.sciencealert.com/driverless-cars-could-reduce-traffic-fatalities-by-up-to-90-says-report

I believe it may be one of the reasons

As far as what i can propose aztek I just dont know to be honest. Your correct in that more training probably wouldnt solve the issue with these kinds of deaths. With cars they remove the human component to bring fatalities down. With guns this is impossible

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

driver less car is a next logical step in transportation evolution, sure one could make a point that it will be safer, but at this point it is nothing but assumption, we already had few crashes with drive less cars, in both cases outside factors were at fault, something a human would most likely predict,  few cases is very tiny number by itself, but the ratio is astronomical.  

the biggest reason i see would be transfer of liability.

the worst thing someone can do is do something just because he  can't stand to do nothing, yet he has no clue what to do,  that is how things are made a lot worst not fixed,.

imagine this situation, you are in a driver less car, there is an accident ahead, all driver less cars stopped and wait until a car in front moves,  road markings prohibit it to go anywhere else, human driver uses grass shoulder to go around the accident. you sit another hour or two and wait until dot clears the accident scene after emergency vehicles and tow truck leave.

 

Edited by aztek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i have no doubt the mother would answer correctly if asked, "should you point a gun at anything you are not intending to shot",  i'm sure she would say no, and i'm sure she knew it, just as she knew bullets fly out of the barrel,  yet she still did that one thing wrong, accidentally. maybe there were other mistakes she made that day, but gun safety is pretty simple, 

i have no doubt if you ask safety questions to any random CCW holder, he\she will have no problems answering any, including legal questions. but mistakes still happen. the only way to prevent, accidents is to remove every single gun. but at least 1,5 mil of instances of defensive gun use every year, (low estimate by Clinton antigun research) say benefits outweigh downsides

here many ranges wont even let you shoot until you pass safety test to one of their instructors, they do not want untrained person to be there, it is their liability. so it is pretty safe to say almost every gun owner has sufficient safety  training. 

Edited by aztek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, aztek said:

police has more accidents than civilians, per 100k, so lack of  training is not the issue,  even trained make mistakes.

This is quite misleading. While it might be true (you offer no source), police have a gun on them at all times. The vast majority of people, I'd assume, probably don't even access their gun once a week.

So, of course a group that spends 40+ hours a week with a gun strapped to them is going to have a higher accident rate than a group that probably, on average, handles their gun for less than an hour a week. 

Also, it is well known that US police are generally not well trained with firearms. I'd like to see their statistics compared to organisations that are properly, highly trained, like the FBI or military. I think you'd see a chasm of difference.

Edited by ExpandMyMind
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ExpandMyMind said:

This is quite misleading. While it might be true (you offer no source), police have a gun on them at all times.

more people carry on daily basis legally, than there are police in usa. there are about 16 milion ccw permits, there are about 2M active leo in usa.  see wiki if you do not believe me, 

btw several states allow open carry, and do not require ccw  some states do not require ccw to carry concealed.  so real number is even higher than 16M

for the 100th time, familiarize yourself with subject before talking about it

Edited by aztek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
9 minutes ago, aztek said:

more people carry on daily basis legally, than there are police in usa. there are about 16 milion ccw permits, there are about 2M active leo in usa. 

for the 100th time, familiarize yourself with subject before talking about it

Um, you just used a total number to justify a point you made about a per capita statistic. Those two do not equate.

My point is valid. Perhaps you should take some extra time to make sure that you actually understand it. At the moment, clearly you don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ExpandMyMind said:

 

Also, it is well known that US police are generally not well trained with firearms.

and you base this on what?     no it is  not well know at all, 

Edited by aztek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, aztek said:

and you base this on what?    

Their performance and intensity of training compared to cops worldwide. 

Quote

“[T]his study’s results indicate an alarming need for improved firearms training for officers,” writes lead researcher Dr. Bill Lewinski, FSI’s executive director. After finishing academy instruction and practice, new officers “were a mere 13%” more accurate than novices in shooting at distances where a high proportion of officer-involved shootings occur.

“What these statistics appear to imply,” Lewinski states, “is that officer firearms training is not extensive enough and occurs too sparsely for officers to gain, and maintain, the expert level of accuracy with their service weapons that is expected of them.” This training deficiency “may result in injury, death, or other severe consequences.”

Link.

Like I said, if you were to compare firearms accidents carried out by the police to those in the FBI or military, I'd bet everything I own that the results would be absolutely clear. It's a large part of why you get so many nervous cops killing unarmed civilians.

Edited by ExpandMyMind
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mother said... "Ooppss.."

Ok, sad story for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most cops are cool. Back-off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ExpandMyMind said:

Um, you just used a total number to justify a point you made about a per capita statistic. Those two do not equate.

My point is valid. 

lmoa

you never had a point, you had an assumption  which i proved to be completely wrong, that is all there is to it.  

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.