Police chief indicted after Uzi death of boy, 8

A pity that the indictments did not include the dead boy's father.
He's the man who put that first gun in his child's hand. What kind of a
"doctor" would do a thing like place a deadly weapon, designed solely to kill PEOPLE, in the hands of a little kid? Nobody I would trust with my health or the health of my children, that's for sure!
This man took an oath swearing to do no harm. I believe he should be stripped of his license to practice medicine and sent to jail for setting up the "play date" that killied his own son. For shame!

The father, poor thing, should have been indicted, too. He let his SMALL CHILD handle an Uzi. Unlike trooper Gallucio, Chief Fleury was not at fault - he trusted the parent and the gun instructor. The Clun should be held responsible, too. Fleury did not tell the father to give the child an Uzi.

Guns kill people. Kids should not be near guns. its about some of these idiotic zealots are held accountable for their ignorance.

What a trumped up charge. It was an accident at a gun club. It wasn't on Blue Hill Avenue.

One tragic dumb act followed by another. I hope they are all acquitted and that there is never a civil suit. The father was solely responsible for his own child and both of them paid the ultimate price for his error in judgment. It should end there.

bravo!

next time an underage kid dies leaving a house party sue Budweiser for letting the parents buy the alcohol. Don't forget to sue Ford or GM for making the car the teenager drove in! Never mind asking the parents to take responsibilty!

what a joke! the father should be the FIRST person charged! but he's a doctor....so forget it couldn't have been his fault...

Wait a second, the father bears the most responsibility for what happened to his son. He should be charged just like the other three men.

Will - I would be careful - you're treading very close to racially charged statements.

Umm Read the charge please:

furnishing a machine gun to a minor

I think this is pretty much against the law.. Yes they should be punished.

If guns kill people, pens misspell words.... people kill people (or themselves) "using" guns, thats just my belief. The kid should have never even had the gun in his hands. With that said, I feel so sorry for this incident, I have a son his age and it just kills me to read this story and see that poor little boys face. So sad. What a tragic accident.....

Way to blame everyone except the person who is TRULY responsible; the boy's father.

"He regularly visited the schools to teach the National Rifle Association's "Eddie Eagle Gun Safety Program" to children as young as 5 and 6."

You have got to be kidding!

Gun safety to five and six year olds! And letting eight-year-olds fire Uzis!!?

The authors of the 2nd Amendment are turning over in their graves. The right to bear arms? Kids?

The founder

Whether it happened on Blue Hill Ave,or at a gun club, those responsible should be prosecuted

I think the indictments are justified, however I totally disagree with NOT indicting the father. He should face the strictest penalties there are. If it were not for his, and the parents of the other three children, permission, the gun club would not have handed over the machine gun.

Now, the indictments on the gun club guy and others is important because even though the father was there giving permission, they should know better too and should have a policy that no one under a certain age is allowed to operate a machine gun, PERIOD.

How some of these people indicted when it should be the father? I'd be willing to bet that some of these guys had no idea that a child had a gun in his hands before it happened.

On the fence about indictments but if people are gonna be indicted, HOW can everyone else be and NOT the father? This doesn't make sense!!! Again, I;m not saying anyone should be cuz God knows the father will pay the rest of his life but I don't get this!

What a field day the anti-gun, Second Amendment haters will have with this tragedy; they are surely wringing their hands in glee!

There should be laws governing the use of such weapons by minors, and yes, even I think someone should be held responsible for this. I lean toward the father and the gun club if proper safety procedures were not followed; but I also think a man should be able to teach his son how to fire any weapon he chooses as long as it is safe.

The father should have been the first to be indicted......and the last. About time people started to take responsibility for themselves and not place blame on everyone else

it shouldn't end till there are some changes in gun laws -- no person, not just no child, should be firing an uzi -- its only function is to kill -- only a soilder in battle should know how to use one -- i'm torn as to whether anyone should be prosecuted -- but laws should be changed

Funny. Last year, when a mother on Seaver Street (off of Blue Hill Avenue, btw), allowed her teenage son to bring a handgun in her home which was then used by a nine year old child to accidentally kill his 8 year old cousin (Lliquarry Jefferson), people like you insisted she be charged with involuntary manslaughter. Yet the father here allowed his child to handle an assault weapon. Why should she be indicted, but not him?

It was an accident.
Accident's happen, not just with guns.
Ruining the lives of good people is not the answer.
If you aren't going to indite the father who was right there, you ought to leave the rest of them alone as well.

Sorry folks ,but the only person responsible here is the gun instructor.
He should have known the recoil and should have been assisting this kid before the safety was off.

I don't even know what to say about this tragedy. I have 4 children, two are very young. I am an engineer and a part time gunsmith, have quite a few guns securely locked up to the extent that my children don't even know that there are guns in our home. When they get older, if and when they express an interest in guns, I will certanly do my best to properly educate them on gun safety. With that being said, I would never allow my minor children to handle a fully automatic firearm. I'm sure the dad never imagined what could have happened with what seemed like a fun time at the gun club. The profesionals there certainly should have.

Translation of the 1:46 PM comment of "Will" above: Suburbanites should be allowed to do play as they will with firearms - including machine guns - without facing consequences, whereas firearms laws should be strictly enforced against urban (and presumably poorer) residents.

Personally, I think that absolutely no private citizen should be allowed to own a machine gun, and I think that manslaughter charges against all of the morons involved in this case are perfectly appropriate.

I'm not sure if I would indict the dad, it would depend on a few more facts that I'm not privy to (such as, how experienced was the father with gun shows), but one thing about this story that floors me is that the dad is an ER doctor.

$$$$$$$$$$$$

You people make me sick, it was an accident. But i forget, in MASS guns= pure evil, but free $ from the government is ok!

The father should have at least been indicted as his conduct raised an issue as to whether his act of giving a child a loaded automatic weapon was below the standard of conduct/care of an ordinary reasonable prudent person. At least let a jury of his peers make that determination after hearing all the evidence.

This is ridiculous. It was an accident, plain, simple, and preventable. It was poor judgment on the behalf of the father and the range safety officer. That's all there is to it. Had the father and/or the RSO been WITH the child and assisting him, this NEVER would have happened.

I am for gun rights. A NRA member and even I cannot believe this is allowed. To have someone as young as 8 years old fire an UZI and legally!! Also, I have to say, the father still should be indicted. I saw him on the news the SAME day his son passed and I know people grieve differently but he sounded so earily calm - gave two long interviews and he also took NO responsibility for it. The whole interview was creepy.

Hey, let's give a deadly machine gun to an eight year-old who knows nothing about it, and stand back and see what happens!

More kids will die in swimming pools this year than by guns.
But no one cares about that. No mandatory "pool safety" programs or licenses to have a pool. That would inconvenience the "beautiful people". Let the kids drown instead.

Correction, michael. The father is not dead. He did not pay the ultimate price; his son did. On the other hand, it is certainly true that the father will suffer for this the rest of his life, unless of course, he manages to rationalize it away with the same denial that he seemed to show after it happened. He called the accident a "travesty." I wasn't quite sure what he meant by that. It seemed that he wasn't able to accept that his own irresponsibility led to his son's death. Again, that is probably understandable coming fresh from the disaster. He must have been in some sort of shell shock.

And I agree with another poster that he should never consider filing a civil suit against any of the suspects in the criminal complaint. The state’s attorney did not fail to indict him because he thinks the father is innocent and certainly not to give the father license to extract damages on those who may be found guilty or not. In any case, a civil case should find the father as much at fault as anyone else, and would probably be a no-decision (whatever the legal term for it is).

The father did not pay a price. Parents need to be held criminally responsible for their criminal negligence. If the baby sitter had taken the victim to the gun show, you know there would be charges. Don't give me that "he'll be punished every day for the rest of his life" crap. Sometimes parents don't learn their lessons and make the same mistakes multiple times. How many more children have to die before he does get charged? What is this, one free shot for Dad? Was this father acting in the child's best interests when he took him to a gun show and supported and assisted in his shooting an Uzi? Dad knew what the risks were--he took the kid to the show.

Cars kill people. Cars kill occupants and pedestrians. Children should not be allowed in or near cars. Ever!

The issue here is the lack of supervision. It's unfortunate and unintended -- that's why it's manslaughter and not murder -- but you don't have some live firing gun show without enough trained personnel to ensure a level of safety. The dad no doubt made a mistake in judgment but not one in legal responsibility. As I recall, the dad was very familiar with firearms, and probably should have connected the danger of 8-year-old firing an automatic weapon. But, for all the club and sponsors knew, the dad could have been completely clueless. This was an open event, no prior training or experience necessary. If you (i.e. the club) is going to be so cavalier, then they should have made sure they had the right people there. While the story doesn't specify, this was the Micro Uzi, which I believe is an automatic variant -- you don't have to keep pulling the trigger to fire the round. Even an 18-year-old, experienced with other firearms, probably should be well-supervised when first firing an automatic weapon. The fact that someone from the show wasn't holding that 8-year-old's hand is the crime here. The club and the sponsors should have known better. They, supposedly, know these guns. Should the dad be blamed for trusting the club and sponsors? Aguably, yes. Should it be crime to trust them? Of course not.

While I agree the father is the one most responsible for this tragedy.... there is nothing you can do to him that will compare with the agony that he will experience for the rest of his life. It would be like a drunk driver smashing into a guard rail and breaking his neck.. what good does charging him with DWI do then? They father is unquestionably going to live every minute of his life an agonizing hell knowing he is the reason the person he loved most in the world will never get to grow up because of his gross negligence.

Sounds like a Witch Hunt.

What happened to parental responsibility? This tragedy isn't the fault of the gun club, the gun itself, or the show promoters. Blaming firearms for this is a silly arguement. I suppose flies bring garbage? Pencils cause misspelled words? What about spoons causing obesity? Get off the Kool-Aid...

Wow, another hatchet job on the 2nd amendment spewing from the lunatic left. This was a tragic accident, not a crime. Its looks like the DA's is making this up as he goes along in order to advance his anti-gun agenda.

I felt bad for the father until I saw the jerk on the news, he seemed to have no remorse about this incident. They all should be indicted just for having lack of common sense.....and to think these men are police officers and doctors, very scary.

The National Rifle Association shouldn't be teaching children anything. Guns should be for our police and military only.

Police cheif is professionally certified in weapons management, teaches children, and seems to have suspended his judgment while gaining profits for a side business.

Hard to believe ANY certified training program would advocate exposing kids to firing weapons like an Uzi.

It is unjust for the father not to charged also. After all he bears the most responsibility! I think they should make a example of the father for such very poor judgement and give him years to think about his judgement at the house of many doors.

the father of that boy disgusts me! no one should be accountable except for the boys father! shame on the justice system!

"What a trumped up charge. It was an accident at a gun club. It wasn't on Blue Hill Avenue."

What a comment. Are you saying it's OK to indict people for gun deaths only if they occur in the Black neighborhoods but not at an elite gun club? Reckless is reckless. I agree with others, the father is the one who should be indicted. But he's white, a doctor, and doesn't live on Blue Hill Avenue so I suppose that automatically makes him a model citizen by default. It's 1930 all over again.

When one person is just as culpable as another or others, then how can the prosecutor pick & choose who gets indicted? There is no leniency being given due to witness cooperation, so what is the legal reason, as conscience is not a legal reason so far as I have ever heard. This is a clear case of Class Discrimination in the Justice System. The Prosecutor should lose his job.

This story brings tears to my eyes. With two young sons at home I can not imagen what this father and the family is going through. This boy and his sweet smile and everything he was ever going to be are gone forever. How so very, very sad.

What's "trumped up" about prosecuting criminal offenses? Evidently it's a crime in Massachusetts (as it should be) to furnish a minor with a machine gun. (unless of course the law state that this ceases to be a crime as long as the minor's father is standing nearby with a camera, or if nobody involved meant for anyone to get hurt). Can anyone deny that the Bizilj boy and several others were furnished with machine guns? Death or no death, everyone responsible for putting a machine gun into their hands committed a crime: the gun owner/s, the instructor, the gun club itself (and its owner) and - sadly - the father. This isn't an opinion...this is how the law works. And when the commission of one offense, no matter how minor (and giving a kid a machine gun is no minor offense) leads to someone getting killed, then anyone guilty of the initial offense has to also answer for it's consequences, even if those people happen to be police chiefs or physicians. It's a little thing called the rule of law.

You people who think the father should have been indicted are complete nitwits. It was the firearm instructors and even a police chief that determined that having children who were supervised could fire an Uzi safely. As far as I can see it was the firearm instructor who should have had a hand on the gun to prevent recoil. It was a tragic accident.

Uh, I feel the father should be prosecuted as well. There is no way an 8 year old child should be handling an Uzi. And there is no way an ER physician should be taking his children to gun shows.

The organizers of the show and the proprietor's of the site are accountable as well, regardless of whether they knew the child had the weapon or not. There should have been an age restriction at the event as well as security enforcing it. This is a room full of guns for pete's sake!

If paying for the rest of his life is an excuse not to indict the father than what about drunks who kill their firends in car accidents. Won't they live with killing someone the rest of their lives? I believe all the people shoudl have been charged.

Eddie Eagle Gun safety programs teach kids NOT to touch guns without an adult present and what to do if they find a gun unattended. They aren't being taught gun safety like Adults are.

It seems that everyone agrees the father is responsible and I would have to agree. The father is the one who ultimately gave the okay for the gun to be put in his son's hands...........

But I would also have to say that as a firearms instructor myself it's extremely foolish and stupid to allow a small child to handle a full auto weapon........I mean, c'mon people!! Use some sense! I've seen adults that can't handle full auto weapons........why give that to a kid??? Dumb!!!!

Has the photo of the police chief been photoshopped or does he naturally look like the moron he is???

The father was stupid was letting his son handle the weapon, but unless he himself had fired one, would not have known that the weapon had such a kick as to pose a danger for his son. It's incredible that a gun instructor would have handed an Uzi to a child. I could understand a single shot .22 or even a 410 shotgun, but a 9 mm Uzi?

I think this father and any other father or mother that takes their children to a machine gun shooting contest is a complete and total idiot! When I saw the interview of this father I felt just sick-it was so strange.

Because the prosecutor did not indict the father, a jury some day will acquit the others. What a disgrace.

#8 Boston - There is is nothing racially charged about Will's comment; he named a street. It only became racial when you brought it up as such.

What a joke our law system truly is. Another prime example of how everyone else is at fault BUT the person that should have been watching the young child. It's horrible on what happened and my sympathy goes out to the family. But the boy should NOT have been there in the first place. Blaming everyone else, there is no need for that.

Would everyone stop with the racially charged crap. The comment simply meant that a gun club is a place for legally owned weapons where no person goes to intentionally shoot another. You don't even know what the race the person who made the Blue Hill comment is to begin with so spare us the "you must be a racist because you referenced an area known for multiple shootings"

People Kill people, Guns do not.

Just another example of the lack of accountability in our country...Its ALWAYS someone else's fault. The father must be suffering but still he put his son in that situation. A person who kills anohter drunk driving may feel awful but is still heal accountable.

Let me start by saying that I grew up in Pelham Massachusetts and was in grade school to "learn" about gun safety from Cheif Fleury. Several years before this tragic incident he was giving a gun safety lecture when he forgot to take the bullet out of the chamber and the gun went off in a small room with a dozen people. Fortunately the bullet hit the wall and no one was injured. His track record as a gun safety instructor is pathetic and he should be put in jail. Guns wont shoot if there are no bullets, how he managed to TWICE forget to take the bullets out of the gun for the safety demonstration can only be thought of as plain old stupidity.

What happened to all the hardcore law and order types around here who posted yesterday expressing disappointment that the state didn't execute a 95 year old inmate in order to be more cost effective? You two (Will and Michael) really think these guys should go free?

How about child endangerment, reckless endangerment, various gun laws restricting minors using machine guns, violations to safety protocols (an unlicensed 16 year old supervising an 8 year old on how to use a gun? Really?) and second degree murder. You guys really don’t even want to see a civil suit from all this?

These people should do time. Second degree murder might be a bit harsh, but they’re certainly are guilty of violating several laws. The father unfortunately is only responsible for this tragedy but not really guilty of any crimes. I’m certain the loss of his child and guilt surrounding the entire event is worse than anything the state could dish out.

I really hope the gun nuts don’t come out of the woodwork to defend these people. There is a real worth while debate regarding constitutional law and limitations placed on the second amendment. These idiots on the other hand should be seen as guilty regardless of ones views on gun ownership in America.

Hey "boston"

Racially charged statement? How many murders are there over crack deals gone bad in Pelham, as opposed to gangbangers taking each other out on Blue Hill Ave.

Get over yourself, you overly sensitive clown...

They all should be indicted. None excluded. Anyone who hands a weapon to a kid, or watches the act, or willing agrees to the act, should be indicted for utter stupidity and send to jail. Do you know how much force an Uzi kicks when fired? A child cannot control a weapon like that. Poor kid. Dead because of a dumb parent and dumb gun nutz. His brother was standing next to him when it happened. That kid will never be the same either.

I read the above and agree with everybody. It is a tragic sad accident. There should be no indictments for criminal reasons. The Police Chief should be early retired ( 20 years of good service), the Gun Club should lose their license. , the 2 guys from Ct should lose their license if they have one and told to stay out of the state. The father sholuld have any kids taken away from him as he a selfish unfit father. He then should get a frontal lobe labotomy as he must be nuts. As a matter of fact they all should get one-they are all nuts

Perhaps people should know what they are talking about before the make a comment or just blindly agree with what is written in a story.

Eddie Eagle teaches children NOT to touch guns if they see them. He does not teach gun safety. He teaches, Stop - do not touch the gun, Leave the area and tell an adult what you saw...

So before people go all flying off the handle learn something...

Oh by the way...I have been shooting guns since I was 5yrs old, and my daughter will have the same lessons that I did.

The father may be grieving, but he was a total idiot to place the child in that situation. The father was taking pictures, and had allowed the child to be around guns prior to his death. It is unbelievable, that he was not indicated by the jury. What does this mean that parents can be negilent, but they are not to blame? This father was well educated, and a Doctor. Did he not ever see shooting victims in the emergency room? He should have known the ramficiations. Has the prosecutors lost their mind, or is the pressure only to indict ?

I feel bad for all involved including the Chief. Just shows how on bad decsion can change your life. What a shame!!!

It's completely ridiculous and irresponsible for an 8 year old boy to have been allowed to handle a loaded uzi. The people in charge knew how dangerous it was and allowed it anyway. I fully support prosecution to the max for the people in charge as well as the father.

The original story broke my heart. This boy never had a chance because everyone involved who possessed the authority to lead and influence him assisted in killing him, i.e. local police chief, business owners and his father. Not a flicker of intelligence among them. Now, this. The D.A. will not charge the father. Is everyone in the Pelham/Westfield area mentally challenged?

As a parent, this whole thing makes me sick. I hate assault weapons and handguns that are designed to do nothing more or less than kill fellow human beings. I cannot understand how the NRA and gun zealots can continue to try to chip away at the smallest, crappiest requirements we DO have in place to try to keep them out of the hands of criminals (or in this case, children).

I do agree that presumably, nothing can be done to punish the father more than he will be punished for the rest of his life, but these gun freaks are so messed in the head that I have to wonder if this guy truly understands the consequences of their actions. If it were me, I'd probably kill myself if I ever sat by and allowed that to happen to my kid on my watch (not just watched it happen but encouraged it). But this idiot still probably thinks that this is just a "terrible accident" - it's not an accident. Something this insanely stupid and preventable is nothing short of negligent homocide on the part of the father. What a waste and what a terrible price for an innocent kid to pay for his father's (and the club's) stupidity.

Whoa... how can you say the dad should be indicted? Just because he's a doctor doesn't make him an expert on gun safety. If he thought there was a chance of this happening, he probably would not have allowed it. The experts on the other hand should have known better - and the indictments reflect that.

Guns kill, and those psychopaths who are obsessed with guns deserve every lawsuit and criminal charge they are faced with, especially cops who should know better!

There is some misconception of the Eddie Eagle program.
The program is not in any way designed to teach children how to use or handle firearms. Quite the opposite.

The mantra of Eddie Eagle is:
If you see a gun:

STOP!
Don't Touch.
Leave the Area.
Tell an Adult.

From the Eddie Eagle program website:
The purpose of the Eddie Eagle Program isn't to teach whether guns are good or bad, but rather to promote the protection and safety of children. The program makes no value judgments about firearms, and no firearms are ever used in the program. Like swimming pools, electrical outlets, matchbooks and household poison, they're treated simply as a fact of everyday life. With firearms found in about half of all American households, it's a stance that makes sense.

Eddie Eagle is never shown touching a firearm, and he does not promote firearm ownership or use. The program prohibits the use of Eddie Eagle mascots anywhere that guns are present. The Eddie Eagle Program has no agenda other than accident prevention -- ensuring that children stay safe should they encounter a gun. The program never mentions the NRA. Nor does it encourage children to buy guns or to become NRA members.

2nd Amendment knee-jerk protectors.

They would defend their right to keep WMDs in their homes.

Perhaps nuclear devices?

C'mon, people, when the amendment was written, the flintlock muzzle-loader was state of the art.

You have to draw the line somewhere.

I know the father and his family...he is a good man who had a horrible accident happen to his son....may Christopher rest in peace.

Oxsox (#27), you hit it right on the head. Now if you would only back up your words and move to Mississippi and encourage like-minded citizens to do the same, you would be happier, we would be happier and fewer kids would get Uzied in OUR state (Commonwealth). How often do we have to hear conservatives say things like, "If you don't like it here, move somewhere else, Liberal!" Well, Oxsox ....

I love how all you gun nuts go turn into Bill O'Reilly at the drop of a hat.

"...another hatchet job on the 2nd amendment spewing from the "lunatic left"..."

It's just comical at this point.

What, on god's green earth this has to do with the second amendment is beyond me. Its like any story, anywhere, that comes up about guns, some bozo has to bring up the second amendment. The second amendment give you the right to bear arms, not to put them into the hands of children and be absolved from all responsibility if that child does some wrong (if accidentially).

And for the guy making the comparison to suing a car manufacturer if someone is killed drunk driving. Your comparison really doesn't work, because noone is suing the gun company. However, if a car dealership had let an underage person take a car out for a test drive, and that underage person killed someone, I would think that the car dealership would be sued.

Some of you conveniently forget that this is child who was allowed to handle a machine gun. It has nothing to do with the right to bear arms. It has everything to do with the responsible (or irresponsible in this case) use of firearms.

If you pro gun people would act like human beings and not just say nonsensical shit you might better get through to people. But I can tell you, I'm turned off to your plight, when cases like this, and their impending law suits are linked to the 2nd amendment.

So the one person most responsible to insure the 8 yr old does not engage in a life threatening injury, to himself or others, is not indicted. So much for parental responsibility and accountability. I use firearms for both hunting and target practice and would never consider using such a weapon. For an 8 yr old to be permitted to use this weapon is both fool hardy and irresponsible. No doubt the father has suffered. However, an indictment followed by consideration that the father is experiencing sufficient grief, may have helped others rethink, before allowing a youngster to engage in such such foolish action.

"You have got to be kidding! -Gun safety to five and six year olds" - You're obviously not familiar with the Eddie Eagle program. The SOLE message taught in that program is that if a child encounters a gun, the reaction is "don't touch it; leave the area; tell an adult". The NRA Eddie Eagle guidelines prohibit the presence of any firearms where the program is taught.

Are you suggesting that 5 or 6 years olds are too young to be told not to tough unattended fiearms?

This is nauseating. Another example of parents taking no responsibility for their kids and leaving the public to clean up their mess

Talk about a witch hunt! The ultimate responsibility for this rests with the father. It was he who brought the boy to the club and gave permission for the child to handle the gun. Not a very intelligient decision for an 'educated' person - an UZI!! But - - this is the age of blame everyone else so the DA is going on a witch hunt instead of calling it as it should be called - tragic accident resulting from poor parental decision.

A high school student was killed in an idiotic cheerleading stunt here in Newton just last year. I happen to think the coaches and parents should be held responsible for the dangerous practices of tossing cheerleaders high into the air. But I don't think they ought to be prosecuted for manslaughter. People in Massachusetts are insane when it comes to firearms. Poor judgement does not equal murder, you fools.

There are no such things as "accidents' and this is no exception. This was easily preventable if just a few people had actually used common sense. I have grown up with guns, I own a gun and I like the fact that I can. But this parent just stood there (a well educated doctor who knew exactly what the possibilty for injury would entail) and said "well if they give him the gun it must be safe and make sense". He was wrong. The so called "instructor" should have been the first one to know the weapon was dangerous for adults - let alone a child. But they were all caught up in "gun fever" and of course showing themselves that they were competent enough to deal with the situation, they were wrong. I have seen it on hunting trips, at the range, in people's back yards. Folks who dont know or respect guns are just itching to shoot them, at cats, cows, dogs and even pumpkins, especially since they might actually hit a pumpkin. And yes, people should be charged and punished (the chief runs the company responsible, the others ran the club that sponsored the silly event that was responsible, and the Father went along with the whole thing and when you heard his statements he STILL thinks it was "just one of those things - an accident"), how else can it be prevented from happening again, you think we should just rely on common sense, how did that work out this time?

Umm Read the charge please:

furnishing a machine gun to a minor

I think this is pretty much against the law.. Yes they should be punished.

No It IS NOT, It is not legal for him to own it, but the license holder can let anybody use it.

this is absurd. the father should be held responsible for this. nobody wants to take responsibility for their actions anymore. It was a gun show, did he think they were going to play with toys? NO. Yes, maybe you feel its morally wrong for the gun instructor to have allowed this, but its not illegal. and the father gave permission. The parent is the guardian of the young child and as such should be held responsible for the decisions they make on behalf of that child.

Cars kill people. Cars kill occupants and pedestrians. Children should not be allowed in or near cars. Ever!
Posted by Jack December 4, 08 02:36 P
----------------------------------------------------
Jack, this is EXACTLY why we do NOT allow 8 year olds in or near cars to drive on the road! Because they COULD kill someone as they are not yet old enough to handle the responsibility! Just like an 8 year old is not old enough to handle a military grade machine gun. Common sense. I hope the mom divorced the father and took any remaining children with her. Idiot.

It is a gross miscarriage of justice that the father was not indicted too. And an ED doctor, too: it's almost as if he was using his son's life to tempt fate! I hope he gets stripped of his license to practice: I certainly wouldn't want him anywhere near me!

The father was the person there MOST responsible for the child, and he let the child fire it. I don't believe the sponsor of the event should be charged, unless he was advertising and encouraging youth to handle the weapons. The trainers should be charged if they maintained and convinced parents that it was safe and ok. Ultimately, there were several degrees of failure here, but as sad as it is, the dad was the one with the power to make the decision.

Dan, this WAS NOT an accident, it was criminal negligence. An accident would have been the father shot the uzi downrange, and ala the Warren commision the bullet turned around the struck the boy killing him. THAT would have been an accident. THIS was criminal negligence and everyone involved, including the boy's father, belongs in jail. Period, end of discussion.

Just another example of why these unregulated gun shows should be banned. Anyone who wants to can buy a gun - that day, with no background check - nevermind shoot one.

Jack, children are not allowed to DRIVE cars.

Jack, if you take your kid to a car show and a dealer lets him drive Mustang into a wall and die, I would think that they would be facing similar charges. The gun issue is almost inconsequential in this case.

All this suit will accomplish will be to allow the father, who brought his son to the show and allowed him to handle the gun, to file a wrongful death suit. And any guy who lacked the insight to appreciate the peril in which he was placing his kid will have no qualms about doing so. In fact, he will see in the suit a chance to exonerate himself.

Dan, this WAS NOT an accident, it was criminal negligence. An accident would have been the father shot the uzi downrange, and ala the Warren commision the bullet turned around the struck the boy killing him. THAT would have been an accident. THIS was criminal negligence and everyone involved, including the boy's father, belongs in jail. Period, end of discussion.

what is a child doing at a gun show??? there should be strict age regulations for these events. 21+ to enter a bar, and most concert events, but no age restrictions on entering a place filled with deadly weapons...doesnt make much sense. why would you want to teach a child this young how to fire a gun? putting weapons in a childs hand is completely stupid...THINK PEOPLE!!

People seem to be missing the point here - it is illegal to allow a minor access to an automatic weapon. The gun club and Fleury's company did just that. It is no different than if a gun dealer sold a gun to someone with out a firearm's permit. The laws says you can't do X, you did X and now you are indicted. Should the father be indicted? Maybe, but the DA made a decision that it was more worthwhile to go after the gun club and the show sponser.

Hey Jerry! Why dontcha go down to Wal-Mart and load up on ammo! I heard they're havin' a sale!

Why would children ever be allowed at a WEAPONS/GUN show?

Jerry, a "tragic accident" that results in wrongful death is most certainly a crime; it's called manslaughter, and it's as old as common law. Seems like you're the one making things up as he goes along to advance an agenda.

The "accident" wreaks of negligence on behalf of the father and the gun club. I would put the fault at 50/50 between the two. However, taking into consideration the father has lost his son (and unless of course you don't have a single caring bone in your body), there's no need to inflict more pain and suffering on him. However, gun club and the chief of police who owns it must take some responsibility here--especially the way the event was promoted. Of course the NRA will defend these despicable gun happy events even if another thousand kids are killed!

Jerry, I'm not an anti-gun nut, nor am I opposed to bloodsports. However, I see no reason why private citizens need to own assault/semi-automatic weapons. Seriously, where's the sport in that?

Great response sueeveryone!! Very well stated, it is the parent's responsibility to keep their children safe. I'm sure he signed a waiver and he was aware of the danger. Unfortunately, he has to live with his actions for the rest of his life and everyone else does now too.

wow.......how can the populace not feel stupider having read these comments. emotion has NO business in law! thats how OJ got off! go by the facts. just the facts maam, just the facts

Seems to me someone should look into Fleury's gun safety record even further. I seem to recall a bullet hole at the front entrance of the Pelham Fire/Police building after an indoor gun safety program that he ran. The story that time was that the gun was not supposed to be loaded. Between that and allowing a small child to handle a loaded gun with that kind of kick-back at his club...from the perspective of someone who has taught gun safety to children... there seems to be a serious problem here with his safety record and judgment when he is in charge of a class or range.

Looks like an attention grab from the prosecutor's office, trying to charge the most high-profile person available. I say this as someone who is in favor of stricter gun controls.

YOU GUN NUTS ARE UNBELIEVABLE IDIOTS.

You call it a "tragic accident"? Well, having a few beers and getting behind the wheel and killing someone would justify jail time, how you can you possibly think this doesn't ?!?!?! No one means to kill someone in a car accident if they were over the legal limit. But, fact is, you do it, you PAY FOR IT. People drive drunk (even a little drunk) and get home fine all the time. But, if they crash and kill they would pay - BOTTOM LINE. You wouldn't call a drunk driving incident an "tragic accident" and let it slide! Its so clear!

NEGLIGENCE IS NEGLIGENCE IS NEGLIGENCE!!!!!

You've got to be kidding right?

First, the father was an idiot and should be culpable for allowing his child to play Rambo with a real uzi. If he let his eith year old drive a car that crashed into a tree he would be in jail. It was an accident, but one that was due to negligence and was a train wreck anyone with a little common sense could see from a mile away.

Second, to the "second ammendment advocates" out there; Most of you are conservative, pro-life floks, unless it comes to lethal weapons. We are living in the 21st century here, not the 1800's wild west. Let it go.

"Why should she be indicted, but not him?"

She knew a minor had unsupervised access to an illegal gun, thus making her an accessory during and after the fact. She knew her son was committing a crime. The father could not be expected to know that allowing a child to shoot a firearm under the supervision of a licensed instructor, at an event run by a MA police chief, was a crime. In fact, he might even be able to raise an entrapment by estoppel defense since a representative of the MA law enforcement represented the act as lawful.

Jerry, do you have 8 year old children that you allow to play with UZIs? This has nothing to do with the 2nd amendment. It has to do with parental reponsibility and vendor responsibility. So I agree the father should have been indicted for at least neglect. Since when does the DA establish who has paid a sufficient price when the person is not even indicted.
The only person who may be being railroaded is the police chief as I haven't read anything that said that he was present when the accident happened.

Actually it was a GRAND JURY who brought these charges so the peers HAVE spoken at least on the merits of the case. I agree the father should also be charged however. He ulitmately is responsible for the safety of his child and he was standing 10 feet behind. Reaching for his camera. Glad I don't live anywhere near where he practices medicine. And as a strong believer and defender of the 2nd amendment, I have no problem with strict laws being enacted and enforced against weapons in the hands of children, especially automatic weapons that I also believe should be illegal for use except by the military. What's next? Personal nuclear weapons.

Give me a break, Jerry. You consider this a 2nd amendment issue? You think the founding fathers had an Uzi and an 8 year old in mind?

Lunatic left? It's the lunatic gun nuts we have to rein in. Enough already. Uzis should be banned outright.

Too much neglect involved here to label it an accident. If the gun misfired, it would be one thing. But that did not happen, the gun performed accordling to its design. The problem is that a young child was incapble of controlling such a powerful machine. Common sense should not be confused with politics; no how is the 2nd amendment involved here. People don't learn to drive by jumping into a race car.

Yes, it was a tragic accident, but that does not mean that no one was at fault, or that no one should be held accountable. What if the 8 y.o had killed someone else with the Uzi? What if the dad let the 8 y.o. drive his SUV and he hit and killed someone? It would still be an accident, but be sure the victims families and the public would be calling for charges.

The unfortunate truth is that if no one is held accountable this time, it is more likely that there will be a next time. The criminal prosecutions do more than punish these men, they send a message to others that more care must be taken with children and guns.

We have become a society were everyone else is responsible for our children except us, as parents. While I cannot even attempt to understand what the Father must be going through, he alone is responsible for allowing his minor child to handle the gun. I do believe that vendor's who sell products that have the potiental to harm a minor whether is it a gun or free food samples in the grocery store should not do so without the parents consent and obviously they had the Father's consent in this case. The Father should be brought up on charges and the vendor loose their license, if they have one, in this case. My heart truly goes out to everyone involved in this tragic death and once again it takes a senseless death for the laws to change.

U.S. Swimming pool related deaths in 1994: 1,851. U.S. Gun related deaths in 1994: 39,892. Gee, I guess Sean in Boston was lying. Imagine that, a pro-gun nutjob lying to advance their "cause". And as for outlawing cars, or pools, or pens, you people are simply too stupid to be allowed to comment on a public website. Cars and pools and pens are not designed, marketed and manufactured with the sole purpose of KILLING PEOPLE. Uzi's are.

As for prosecuting these people, if there are laws against providing an 8 year old with an Uzi, then go ahead and prosecute. If there are no laws against that, then don't (although I can't imagine why there wouldn't be a law against that.)

why is an uzi even allowed in a gun club ? uzi's should be banned . from EVERYWHERE.

What is this "Pin the tail on the closest schmuck"? The horse has already escaped. Too late to shut the barn door. What reasonable parent allows their young son to "try out" a weapon of war? This has nothing to do with sport shooting. Unless the wanton judgement of the parent is brought to bear these indictments are patronizing, salutory and ridiculous.

What a tragic error. The MD father ought to be charged. The micro uzi has some recoil, to allow an 8 year old to fire one unsupervised is a poor decision. What a tragic loss. Now the anti gun nuts have an issue to throw around.

I applaud the D.A. for taking the stand that he did. The people involved should and need to be held accountable. An eight year old should never have been allowed to fire a machine gun, and marketing this machine gun shoot to minors, with no age restictions was complete and utter insanity. These class of weapons (machine guns) have no business being in the hands of civilians (let alone children).

The father is an emergency room physician?! If he thinks an eight year old is capable of handling an Uzi, good luck to anyone who visits his ER. I can only guess how many patients have died due to his negligence over the years.

So many people in these comments say "cars kill people"... to justify this somehow. YES, cars kill people, that's why we dont' allow kids to drive them. get it??? the dad is an idiot... but that fact should not prevent anyone from prosecuting him for reckless endangerment of a child.

The father should not only be indicted, the AMA should revoke his license to practice medicine since he clearly lacks judgement. The AMA has ethical standards for physicians and this guy clearly crossed the line. I agree that It's insane that kids were allowed into the gun show at all, never mind allowing kids to use an uzi, however Dr. Wackjob is the one who actually brought his kid to the event and put an uzi in his hands. In his warped mind he thought this event was an appropriate male bonding experience with his 8 year old kid! Hey, the bar down the street has martini happy hour on Fridays, maybe my 8 year old daughter and I can bond over cosmos!

daughter and I can bonm

I blame our gun-obsessed society where somehow it is lawful to put a loaded sub-machine gun in anyone's hands, much less an 8 year old. What a sick nation we are.

Police Chief Edward B. Fleury, a trained fire arms instructor, should have never allowed a minor to fire anything other than a 22 cailber rifle, and this only after a training class and under close supervision. The same goes for the operators of the gun show. In fact no one, other than a trained expert in the use of such weapons should be allowed to fire a fully automatic weapon at a gun show. I think you would find that the NRA would support that position. Police Chief Edward B. Fleury and the operators of the gun show should be charged with crimes. The father on the other hand is a different story. While it can be said that he should have known better, it is not unreasonable for him to submit to the judgement of the so called "experts" and allow his son to fire the weapon. He had also seen other children fire the weapon without incident. It is reasonable to conclude that the father thought it would be safe. He should not be charged.

The father on the other hand

Guns, swimming pools (#32) and cars (#35): I believe that if a car rental agency gave car keys to an 8 year old and let him drive off the lot, it would be a crime; and even swimming pools are required by law to have a secure fence around them, and a homeowner that violated that or allowed a child unsecured access to a pool would be liable. So you guys picked some pretty bad examples to use to suggest that 8 year olds should be handed Uzis because they are no worse than pools or cars.

The DA is grandstanding. The likelihood of conviction is slim. The applicable standard for involuntary manslaughter is the unintentional killing occasioned by an act which constitutes such a disregard of the probable harmful consequences to another as to be wanton or reckless. The situation at hand does not meet the requirement for "probable" harmful consequences. "Wanton and reckless" is also a very high standard, much greater than mere stupidity. Clearly, the comments to this article indicate a lack of consensus, and the high probability that twelve jurors will not agree to convict.

Some people think guns are great and they deserve their rights. However, somehow there should be an age limit imposed on kids handling guns. We have laws for drinking smoking and driving but nothing on guns? Imagine if the kid spun around and took out 15 or 20 people!

A wise person once said that blame doesn't stop at one door. I believe that. You could point to several factors that all contributed to this tradgedy. This tradgedy needs to be ended however. Drop the inditements. It is not brining anyone back and many people share in the blame.

Hey Jack...kids aren't allowed to drive cars!

"More kids will die in swimming pools this year than by guns.
But no one cares about that. No mandatory "pool safety" programs or licenses to have a pool. That would inconvenience the "beautiful people". Let the kids drown instead."

This is false, there were actually double the number of children and teenagers killed by guns in 2005 than those who were killed by drowning (roughly 3,000 gun deaths vs. 1,500 drownings). The drownings include all bodies of water: pools, oceans, lakes, bathtubs, etc.

Your data is wrong. But regardless of numbers being wrong please also think about how many children regularly swim in the ocean, pools, lakes, not to mention take baths. Then think about the number of children who fire guns or are around those who fire guns. Any intelligent person would know that there is a huge discrepancy between the numbers. So per capita, the scale to which your numbers are wrong is massive. So please Sean from Boston, take it from another Sean from Boston and think before you type. Any way you cut it guns are exceptionally dangerous and the less children are exposed to them the safer those children will be.

If someone is collecting $$ from customers for some activity, he or she has to bear the responsiblity if the activity being paid for is against the law.

This is the first death at a shoot. Statistically your child is more likely to be killed while playing sports, riding his/her bike or just about anything else. Tragic yes, but lets not lose all control.

The mere thought of a 9 year old holding a loaded Uzi submachine gun is absolutely ridiculous. This is not your grandad's double barrel shotgun....which shouldn't be held by a 9 year old either. Note to parents: guns aren't cute. The father is responsible for this accident. Charging the gun club owner is just a way of seeking some kind of societal retribution for something that cannot be undone. Pathetic. Why would anyone want to exonerate the father and sacrifice the gun club owner? The father took his son...9 years old...to a gun club...allowed him to hold and fire a military weapon used for combat that fires 600 rounds a minute. The father needs to pay a real price.

WHAT WAS AN 8 YEAR-OLD DOING ANYWHERE NEAR THE FIRING LINE? I have owned guns but avoid gun clubs because of the morons in this case. Usually, at a machinegun shoot there are a few ATF guys walking around. I would bet money that there was at least one other law enforcement officer there who kept his mouth shut to avoid getting dragged into this.

jack - i'm not saying i support this indictment but your arguement makes no sense. cars are not specifically designed to kill people, unlike uzis.

as long as the lawyers get rich off of this incident. that's all that matters

Guns kill people. The people pulling the triggers also kill people. And the NRA, by keeping guns within easy reach, kills people. Events have multiple causes.

His failure as a father is beyond words. His first and foremost responsibility was to secure the safety of his child. He should be stripped not just of his license but of his university degrees too. What an imbecile!
This is the only western world country that access to guns is easy and legal, even to minors. Take all guns AWAY. What on Earth do you need the guns for? We are no longer fighting the British legions for liberation! Only highly certified or military personnel should be allowed to carry and fire a real, DEADLY, weapon. If you want to have fun shooting, go play that paint ball game. You wouldn't be less of a man! What a nightmare ... poor child!

Where did common sense go? This is preposterous!

Myself, I don't see this as a gun issue. Yes, there are other kinds of dangerous things besides guns.
But, I seem to recall that one of the advertised attractions of this event was the opportunity to have fun with guns, "no experience necessary". Fine, but we would assume that kids or novices would receive adequate assistance and supervision. Oops. So it's not surprising at all that the sponsors, and not the dad, would get charged.
A chainsaw isn't a lethal weapon, but you wouldn't let an inexperienced kid just pick one up and start bucking firewood, would you?

“A well-schooled electorate, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and read Books, shall not be infringed.’

The weapon was in the kid's hands and it was not locked onto any kind of firing stand. A micro uzi fires some insane number of rounds per second and tends to recoil upwards in the hands of a fully grown man. The lack of judgement is staggering. Certainly these guys should be banned from handling firearms in the future. Having said that, is being a jackass a crime? Criminal negligance perhaps but manslaughter? Seems a bit much. It might be poetic justice to allow the kid's mom to shoot everyone involved but that won't happen of course.

And yeah I agree the dad was creepy on TV.

Of course it was a crime!!! You wouldn't let an 8 year old drive your car down the street! It was reckless to hand him an Uzi in the first place.

Easy access to guns in America certainly worked out for the safety of that little boy.

More blood on the hands of gun nuts.

Are you kidding me???? This whole thing is tragic enough, but let's place the blame where it belongs......on the father!! Why isn't he being indicted?? I know, I know, he has to live with his stupid actions for the rest of his life......GOOD! Typical Massachusetts, wasting yet again, the taxpayers money (Oh, that's right; we live in TAXachusetts, how could I forget!!) on a frivilous indictment and potential trial that will go on and on and waste the court's good time that would be better spent trying real criminals! I hope it gets thrown out . How can the Chief be more responsible than the father who placed the gun in his childs hands!!

Hoplophobic fear of weapons on one side and absurd advocacy of 'personal responsibility' (only the father should be charged) on the other.

About what I expect on such discussions.

As a weapons instructor for four decades AND a parent of small fry, I'd have indicted the father, the chief, the folks who brought the Uzi, the Range Safety Officer (the Club DID have one, right?) and anyone else whose fingerprints could be put on this travesty of firearms safety.

IF you are going to have untrained people - of ANY age - firing full-auto weapons for the first time, you MUST utilize extreme safety measures.

I don't know that I would have done it, period - although I've taught kids not much older to shoot semi-auto weapons. But if I did, that Uzi would have been secured, either in a frame or by chains anchoring it to the table (frame is better) to ensure it could not shoot anywhere but in a narrow cone down range.

This wasn't a gun problem - it was a people problem. But a LOT of people screwed up before that kid was killed - and they all should face charges.

It was a tragic accident, but one that could have been avoided. Father, club owner(s) and firearm provider should've known that the child was not physically strong enough, nor cognitively mature enough to handle the weapon. Sponsors and participants in these events often highlight their gun safety stance right along with their second amendment support. An intelligent second amendment supporter would never have allowed, offered or put this type of weapon in an eight year old's hands.

Pools are designed for recreation, uzis are designed to kill people. Death in a pool is an accident, death by uzi is death by design.

to sueeveryone- they arent suing the gun manufacturer so your analogy of suing budweiser is flawed. the people giving the gun to the child are definitley responsible! including the dad in my opinion.

Dumb Doctor Dad should have been the first person indicted. The father had his boy shooting at other times. The father should have tried the powerful gun before he handed it to his son. The person who was supposed to be supervising the shooter is also at fault.

The father should be indicted and tried. If you feel he has been punished enough, as he surely has, then let him plead guilty to a suspended sentence. Circumventing the law entirely by failing to indict him makes no sense to me.

What aren't the father and firearms instructor being charged?

Several people had negative comments about the NRA's "Eddie Eagle" program, but it's obvious that they have no idea what the program is about. The whole thrust of "Eddie Eagle" is to teach kids not to mess with guns that they find, whether in their own home, on the street, or anyplace else. The rules for what children should do if they find a gun are quite clear--
1. STOP! Don't touch, move, or examine the gun.
2. Leave the area immediately.
3. Find a responsible adult and tell him/her where you found the gun.
That's it. If you think there's something wrong with those rules and children shouldn't know them, I'd like to know why.

All of the adults involved in this mess are equally culpable and either all of them should be charged, or none should.

Mari McAvenia ,

It was an accident. Not everyone is as sheltered as you. 99% of gun owners are responsible people. If you believe his father should be locked up for an accident than I think you should be deported to China for being so stupid.

What a tragedy- all the more so because so few on this board seem to learn so little from it, entrenching themselves further in their long held beliefs rather than questioning them.

It is possible to respect the Second Amendment and advocate for reasonable gun control measures which would include keeping military grade weaponry out of the hands of minors. It is also reasonable for a prosecutor to exercise discretion about indicting the father: what statutory penalty compares to the loss of one's child? Involuntary manslaughter sounds reasonable, though if they could charge felony murder and plea bargain down, that would be about right.

Putting a loaded uzi known to recoil violently in an 8 year olds hand was reckless and negligent. The resulting death is negligent homicide by whomever had knowledge of the gun's characteristics and that a child was using it. It doesn't seem as though the father knew about the gun. All others charged did know or they should have.

It is so strange to me how all these knowledgeable adults could allow this to happen. Who takes an 8 year old to a gun show anyway? It is proof to me there are no checks and balances in this world by people who should know and trained to know better. A beautiful child is gone forever.

Terrible tradgedy, but who lets there 8 year fire an UZI???

I understand teaching your kids how to shoot, maybe with a hand gun or rifle, but an UZI????

Plane ole dumb. But somehow, this will cost us taxpayers money.

As a teacher who sees more and more parents who blame their children's problems on every other adult the child comes in contact with, I have to ask who has the ultimate responsibility here? ONLY THE FATHER who used no common sense or good judgment in this tragic case. No responsible mature adult with any common sense would put a weapon in the hands of a child of that age without full culpability as to the results. The outcome here is so sad but it is an injustice to not give the largest share of the blame to the father. We don't let kids play with matches, we keep prescription drugs out of the hands of our children. But we hand them GUNS ??? Get real !

Come on ....

As much as I hate to say this, the father, as intelligent as the media make him out to be, made a really, really bad choice in letting his small child handle this type of weapon.
He was neglectful. He should never have allowed the boy to handle an uzi. He will live with this the rest of his life but don't pin the whole blame on the soprtsman club.

Since this is a case to be decided in the courts , it can be linked to the second amendment .
Where is the NRA on this issue. Don't they have catchy slogans?
"Only criminals use guns to kill innocent people" ?

Who has the right to bear arms? Citizens - voting , tax paying (over 16 year old and of sound mind adults)

How does their gun safety and training mantras and diatribes fit with this accident

More kids will die in cars this year than anything else. Why doesn't the media talk about that?

The real crime is that the father was not indicted. My guess is that even the poor 8-year old boy knew that firing an Uzi was not typical and danger-free. The only person in the room whom he trusted to prevent him from harm was his father. The buck stops there.

Well the Lakers are going to Win the championship go Lakers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I love the people that have no idea what the heck they are talking about...

So many posters that have no idea that you don't get to just walk into a store and buy a gun...Wow! I wish it were that easy...The one by Sue I think it was is my favorite…

I have been shooting for 30yrs...YES, 30 yrs....and guess what! I am only 36yrs old!!
It amazes me how many people with these huge posts about what they “KNOW” about guns…You have no idea what people have to go through to get a Firearms License…or a firearm…

I agree there was some negligence involved here, both by the father and by those running the event. Both of them had the responsibility for knowing if he could handle that gun. The father said he had used a handgun before, so he should have known.

All I ask is that before you all go running off at the mouth with your mind boggling knowledge of firearms laws is that you actually know what you are talking about.

Don’t start spouting off some myth that you can walk into any gun shop and just say hey I want a gun and pick one out like you’re at Stop &Shop and there is no background check or anything.

Quick question: How many of you “Guns are dangerous, Guns Scare me” people have ever actually handled a firearm?

The father probably was unaware of the kickback potential of the weapon ... the supplier however most likely was aware of the kickback. Not to mention the gun wasn't just lying there ... someone at this event ultimately made the decision to let a child ... and multiple children .. fire an automatic weapon. Regardless of the regrettable decision of the boy's father .. someone else familiar with the fire arm should have overruled and denied children access to this weapon. The organizers and the staff are responsible and are ultimately going to pay a heavy price.

Also SueEverywhere made a ridiculous comment. Budweiser isn't successfully sued after a drunk driving fatality because they are the manufacturer of the product .. they aren't the server of the alcohol. Typically a bar, liquor store, or private citizen that provides and could ultimately choose to deny access to alcohol is sued.

Regardless ... the boy's father will have to live with the decision he made and the image of his son shooting himself for the rest of his life.

Additoa

I have just read all 117 comments and am sickened by some of them. There is never a good outcome of mixing kids with guns, whether it is on Blue Hill Ave. or a licensed gun club. An 8 year old does not have the strength or the maturity to handle the kickback from an automatic weapon and shouldn't even be present where people are shooting. An 8 year old does not have the common sense to understand and to respect the weapon. I blame everyone from the club owners to the police chief to the dad, but nobody has mentioned the boy's mother. Did she not know her husband, the 'good doctor' was taking
her son to play with guns? Did she forget how to say NO or was she afraid if she didn't agree her husband would shoot her???? There was gross negligence on everyone's part. Based on the indifference of the father in his televised interview, one can bet, that he is back at work saving the lives of other people's children.

D

is d.

I hope the people who decided that the dad did not need to be charged see all these comments. I CANNOT believe that the father has no legal accountability. Just because his grief is extraordinary, shouldn't allow him to be off the hook. It was a preventable death, the child should not have been there in the first place. Be pro-gun all you want, but an 8 year old has no business with an uzi. Really, no one in the general public does. So much that is wrong with the youth of today is a result of poor parenting. Is dad off the hook because he's a white, affluent suburban guy so society has more empathy for his grief?

This is a tragic ACCIDENT - indirectly caused by well-meaning adults. All you irrational knucklehead gun haters should go cry in the corner - let us adults manage this unfortunate incident. For the record, I grew up shooting and I'll bet NONE OF YOU know ANYTHING about a "MICRO" Uzi - note the word MICRO. Where's you delicate genious when it comes to 8 yr olds moving lawn with a power mower? ps - I'm from Massachusetts - the home of pathetic, whiney liberals and gay marriage - so embarrassed to be from there.

COP Firearms and Safety implies that the police chief (COP) runs a Firearms and Safety program to train in firearm safety.

Only a nut or a gun zealot would assert that 8 year old boys should be given an UZI to fire. The Police chief who owned the company sponsoring the show should be indicted for manslaugter.

This isn't a gun liberty issue. Its a case of recklessness. Should the father also be indicted? I think he has suffered enough. He also wasn't advised by the COP Gun Saftey company that an 8 year old can fire an UZI. Deterrence is a factor heer as well. Next time, Gun shows will think twice before engaging in such reclklessness

Hmmm.

1. Tragedy? Yes.
2. Blame? Range officer only.
3. Kids with guns? Don't be foolish. Look at the world. Ever hear of children-soldiers? They exist. 8-year olds regularly carry AK-47's.
4. The first time a person, young or old, encounters a firearm, should only be in a protected environment. Yes, this one failed. Find out where it failed, and fix it. Most people will encounter a firearm at some point in their life. Familiarity and training should be a must for everyone except ostriches.

Morons like Jerry and Jack are typical NRA members and apologists. I used to be an NRA member about 25 years ago, but the stupidity spouted by it's members, much like the tripe posted by Jerry, made me quit. Here we have a terrible tragedy, but all they can do is whine about how their precious rights are being infringed upon. Pathetic.

"Anyone who wants to can buy a gun - that day, with no background check"

Your repeating gun control mantra without understanding the facts.

First off, this was not a "gun show", but a shooting event. No guns were offered for sale.

Secondly, all sales at gun shows in Massachusetts require a firearm license - which means a background check (local, state, federal, mental health) was done. If the seller is a dealer, they also need to phone the NICS system for a background check before the sale at a gun show can take place.

Now, look at the club's situation - they relied on the advice of a POLICE CHIEF that the activity and they are now being indicted for it. This sounds like an entrapment by estoppel defense would be in order - assuming, of course, the club can afford it.

just sad that this happened. gun clubs in this state are places where kids have gone for nearly a hundred years to learn gun safety and marksmanship always with single shot 22 rifles and never an incident. but the media has convinced kids that it is all a game, with rapid fire "terminators", cars careeing through space, heroes jumping through explosions and the like. we are in for a long siege of disasters base upon hollywoods denial of the realities of physics.

All you people who think the father should be indicted are absolutely ridiculous. Just because you don't believe in hunting or using guns doesn't mean it's wrong. This is America. You can own a gun. You can use a gun. You can allow your child to use a gun under proper supervision and training.

If you sent your kid to camp, and your kid drowned in the ocean, and they charged the owners of the camp for failing to provide a lifeguard... how would YOU feel if everyone said it's your fault? "That mother/father is a bad parent because they let their kid go into that dangerous ocean. They practically drowned the kid themselves."

That's how ridiculous you sound.

One thing's really clear.

This is a show trial. The defendants can't get a fair trial in this atmosphere or seething hate.

Why the indictments? Well, a prosecutor is a politician, and this one wants to be a congressman, and he needs name recognition. Here he can wave a child's bloody shirt on Court TV, Nancy Grace, etc., etc. for weeks or months on end, and that's all that's driving this -- Bennett's personal ambition.

Indict the father. Let him plead guilty to a charge that will allow him to serve his time on probation, loose his gun carrying license (he showed poor judgment about gun handling by a child with an unfamiliar weapon).

Not prosecuting the father because he has suffered enough sounds like an old joke flipped on its head - the teenager who kills his parents and then asks for mercy because he's an orphan.

They should all be indicted - it is criminal to give a gun, much less an Uzi, to a child. I realize guns are legal. For people licensed to have them.

What if the dad gave the 8-year-old a fifth of vodka? Or allowed him to drive a car on the highway? If the kid got killed or killed someone, the father would certainly be charged. This is no different.

Dad brought the little kid to a gun show, knew he was about to fire the uzi.. he should have tried the gun himself first that is fatherly negligence #2, #1 was to bring an 8 y/o to a gun firing event?? (coo coo). I think the father being a Doctor for Gods Sakes.. should go to prison and also be charged for a lesser crime of endangering the welfare of a child no doubt about it!! The father apparently has lots of experience with guns according to the article so I say he should be prosecuted.. but you know the status of all men involved.. the Doctor will be given the mercy.. the cops and businessmen will rot in prison. That's America!

"8-year olds regularly carry AK-47's"

Guess what? Not in a civilized society, they don't.

Does the Police Chief get suspended with pay?

People in Mass scare me. Glad I got out when I did. You all seem very vengeful. I don't like that tone. Investigate the case. Get the facts. If laws were broken then arrest the suspects and send the case to trial.

This case will go nowhere. Charging sponsors of a legal gun club for the stupid and reckless act of a Father? Assinine. Not only is this stupid, it's stupid in the way ONLY Massachusetts can seem to be.

If a Father decided to let his 8 year old Son race a car should we charged the Ford and NASCAR?

As a gun owner and avid shooter, I think the Father should be charged, if anyone.

Chuck Snow

In addition to the manslaughter indictment, Chief Fleury should have at least two other charges pending against him:

(a) Being Fat
(b) Being Absent from Work without a Legitimate Excuse

As for fatness charge, the prima facie evidence can be seen above. Would you get a look at those jowls! I am not going to dwell on the fatness indictment, which I see as a "misdemeanor," other than to say that I find it unseemly at best when police officers and fire fighters become overweight. Frankly, seeing a fat cop of firefighter makes me wonder if he/she is properly doing his/her job, or if he/she is capable of doing his or her job properly. After all, these are jobs that should require a significant level of fitness, a level of fitness that is not consistent with being 15, 20 or 25+ lbs. over specified BMI.

Being absent from work without an excuse is much more serious charge, a "felony," if you will. According to the above article, Fleury has been on "medical leave" from his job since the day on which the 8 year old shot his own head off (well, he didn't do it all by himself, he was assisted). But how does this event render Fleury medical unable to discharge (no pun intended) his duties as chief of police? For crying out loud, if you are so confident that what you were doing vis-a-vis arming 8 year olds was reasonable and lawful conduct, then you should have enough backbone to keep going with the day-to-day slog in the aftermath. You can't have it both ways. Indeed, Fleury's behavior surrounding his "medical condition" might even give rise to an inference that he actually did something wrong.

Now it may well be that, as an indicted criminal, Fleury is no longer fit to serve in his police capacity, but for the past several weeks, he has been getting a free ride. This strikes me as a fraud on the good people of Pelham, who are paying his salary. But then again, it seems to be a pretty common phenomenon in the uniformed services. A certain Firefighter Arroyo comes to mind.

I almost couldn't believe this story when I first heard it. All I could think of was the final moments of terror that child must have felt when he realized he was losing control of the gun. And how hard his little muscles must have gripped it to try to manage it.

ALL THE ADULTS involved in this situation should be facing charges. I'm sorry the dad lost his son, but the son paid the ultimate price for grownup stupidity.

Every person with any opinion whatsoever about guns uses this sad event to justify their position. It is that stupid and tragic.

The post that makes the most sense is #73. Check it out.

It took all of the defendants and the fathers of all the children to complete the crime. Each one is culpable because without their act the crime could not have been committed. The three other fathers who allowed their children to fire the weapon should have been charged with endangering the welfare of a minor.

I am appalled at the men who do not think that the father has not been punished. He knows that he is guilty of the death of his son which he witnessed. Whether he should also be charged will not impact whether such a crime is committed again.

To charge only the father would be tantamount to encouraging other gun shows and other deaths which the community in general would want to do. I do not know if that is the case with many who have posted here. They seem more concerned with the accessibility of arms than they do about the loss of life.

This just gets more bizzare. The guy violated the basic NRA safety rules during this incident... and he's teaching the kid's safety classes! Perhaps the chief did practice proper safety every other day of his life, but there just isn't any way to sqare this incident with the basic rules and common sense everyone raised with or trained on guns has drilled into them.
As an aside, a standard Uzi is tame and easier to fire in semi-auto than a typical pistol, but this was Micro-Uzi, and not an ordinary Micro-Uzi but the restricted, government agency only version with the full-auto (machine gun) selector. The difference is like that between a housecat and a cougar. A *real* gun advocate wouldn't consider allowing it to be in untrained hands for a _split second_ never mind to be fired by a kid with the selector on "full"!

But to put it in perspective I believe this is the first such accident of its kind in MA. When a soccer mom backs the minivan over a kid it's hardly news, we even continue to let the same person drive.
Tragic and preventable yes, worthy of the hysterical coverage and comments, no.

A father may not have known the kickback of an Uzi?

I'm simply baffled that anyone here could call this an "innocent mistake" and compare it with learning about hunting rifles at an early age.

I do not use guns. My grandfather, an avid hunter, used guns his entire life. Kept him fed as a youth in Northern Wisconsin. I don't know the ins and outs of guns, but I know that an Uzi is not intended for sport shooting. And I know that when I let my boys practice target shooting at ages 9 and 11, it was with an air gun. Duh.

If the father's parents had practiced birth control, this would never have happened.

We, the people, don't deserve the dignity of a right if we are so incredibly ignorant and disrespectful of the terrible responsibility it entails. I used to be a card carrying member of the NRA. But not anymore. And this incident really illustrates, in the most tragic terms, exactly why it is no longer appropriate for our society to allow assault weapons of any kind. Just my personal opinion.

Next time you consider the rights of our fellow citizens, consider these morons, and remember the face of the little boy who lost his life. Think of what it must have been like for his brother to witness this. And then, oh zealot, tell us again why you need your assault weapons so badly?

All right, 'people kill people'. But there's a huge difference between a gun and, say, a knive. Both can kill people. But the gun has this uniqueness : it can do it remotely, using only one finger. That's why it's so fascinating by the way : you can act upon your visible environment, and transform it violently and suddenly. It's not creation, it's destruction, but nevertheless transformation. That's the 'fun' people have firing guns on odd targets like cars in those shooting ranges. Bearing guns should be a law enforcement privilege, our violent society is not what the founding fathers wanted. It only takes courage to confront tyranny anyway, not arms.

Look at the cheeks on the Police Chief. He looks like a friggin' hamster. What's he got packed in there?

the father is responsible not the shop or gun owners.

It's pretty simple.
Machine Guns do not belong in the hands of children.
It is against Massachusetts Law.
So following legal procedure these 3 men were indicted.
Still following legal procedure they will be put on trial.
The father of the dead child is a MORON for allowing his child to touch such a weapon. It killed the child. Most of you likely have never fired a machine gun,
nor never will. I have. They are very dangerous weapons even in the hands of a qualified adult. They are not toys in any way, shape or form. The bottom line remains, the child died because he could not handle the weapon properly.

It concerns me that people are making arguments that using guns is comparable to regular daily activities that are a necessary part of life, such as driving in a car. You have to be 16 to drive a car last I checked...

Those people running that gun show are idiots. never let a kid handle a weapon like a fully auto Uzi., its insane. the fathers a jerk for lettig his kid handle the gun in the first place.
He'll live in hell for that.

I'm so sick of the "guns don't kill people, people kill people" nonsense. What a load of crap! People kill people WITH GUNS! This is one of the reasons I moved out of the US. This story sickens me on so many levels. It involves two of the US's favorite pastimes: shooting guns and suing people. When are people going to finally get it into their heads that guns are NO GOOD and don't belong in the hands of ANY civilian (or even most cops for that matter)? Evolve already, please!
All mentioned should be held accountable, and if at least one person becomes anti-gun because of this tragedy, then at least that poor boy didn't die in vain.

I'm not suprised by this at all actually.. When i lived in pelham several years ago... Fleury was teaching a firearms safety course in the Police station, and mistakenly discharged a handgun in the training room. The bullet went through the wall, across the lobby of the police station, out the front door, and sailed over a trailer park across the street. Luckily nobody was hit/hurt.
Ironic part about the whole thing was that an investigation into the incident was required by law... so who investigates?? Fleury does. He investigates his own mistake and find nobody at fault.

Chief Fleury is NOT known "for his personal zeal for gun safety" as the Globe story reports. He is, however, well known in Western Massachusetts for his personal zeal for the right everyone, including young children to own guns. As "S" reported, a few years ago he accidentally discharged a gun during a gun safety class he was conducting. Later he admitted he did not know the gun was loaded. (The part about it sailing over the trailer park across the street is wrong -- it actually lodged in the wall of the adjoining elementary school if I recall correctly).

Since t

The NRA will Attorney the Chief up. The press is leaving out one major part of the story the Father is a Physician and Head of Emergency Medicine at a CT Hospital. I wonder how many gun shot wounds he has seen and/or treated. A Baby handling and shooting machine guns CRAZY with his Parents consent. May any one involved enjoy a long Prison term? Inmates will love having a Police Chief as a cell mate.

i dont know why everyone is making a big deal out of this. It's the kids fault he died. he didnt listen to what he was told to do. He was probably told to stand there and wait, and instead decided to pull the trigger figuring it was no big deal. well he paid for his mistake, why should everyone else?

let it go.........

Clear case of a trumped up charge(s) by an anti-gun persecutor. Kids die in accidents, it is unfortunate but it happens. Fortunately we have the NRA and GCA to protect the defendants in these political witch hunts.