Accidental Gun Dischage Through Mattress

K

KyJim

New member
There's a story of a five year old girl who apparently jumped on a bed, causing a gun stored under the mattress to discharge. According to the story she was wounded in the ankle. Nothing to indicate it was life threatening. http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2012/03...-on-mattress-causing-gun-to-fire-and-hit-her/. No mention of what type of gun it was but I'm guessing a handgun of some type, most probably a semi-auto but that's sheer speculation.

You'll notice that I used the term "accidental" in the title. Is this a case of a truly accidental discharge or is it negligence? Let's define negligence as something a reasonably prudent person would not do.

I think this is a case of an accidental discharge. Sure, you can say the gun shouldn't be under the mattress or the child shouldn't have been jumping on the bed. But how many of you all would have actually thought a gun could be discharged in such a manner (without the benefit of hindsight)?
 
I think it was negligent to keep a gun under a mattress in a home with a young child from the standpoint of it not being secured against unauthorized access by the child. But I would not expect jumping on the bed to actuate the trigger.

So I guess I am agreeing with you.

I was wondering a bit about the geometry of the incident. Presumably a gun hidden under a mattress would be oriented horizontally and could not shoot up through the mattress. I guess the kid was dangling her foot over the edge as she played?
 
This story comes from the Nazi state of Illinois so I think it may not be all true. I don't see how the gun could fire by a mattress that a 50lb(?) 5 year old girl was jumping on.

Maybe the girl was playing with it and the media in Illinois just wanted to paint a picture of how easily an evil gun could hurt your child. Guns look more scary when they go off by themselves rather than by a young child playing with it.

Sorry the child got hurt, but the parents are to blame, not the gun.
 
Stupid people, do stupid things !!!

But how many of you all would have actually thought a gun could be discharged in such a manner (without the benefit of hindsight)?
Click to expand...
Personally, a little alarm bell, in my head, would go off, indicating that putting a loaded gun under a mattress, especially when there are children in the house. Sadly, these things have happened and will continue to happen, all the time. .... :mad:

I recall a few years back, in Winchester Va. when when a man decided to teach his dog a lesson by beating it with the butt-stock of his shotgun. Wife came home and found him in the back yard, dead and his dog was just sitting there, looking around. .... ;)

Be Safe !!!
 
Nocturnus31 said:
This story comes from the Nazi state of Illinois so I think it may not be all true. I don't see how the gun could fire by a mattress that a 50lb(?) 5 year old girl was jumping on.

Maybe the girl was playing with it and the media in Illinois just wanted to paint a picture of how easily an evil gun could hurt your child. Guns look more scary when they go off by themselves rather than by a young child playing with it.

Sorry the child got hurt, but the parents are to blame, not the gun.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

the gun did not load itself and put one in the chamber. the gun did not climb between the mattresses.

A person did those things.
 
I seriously doubt the story was changed by the reporters. Maybe something single action left "cocked and locked" and all the bouncing "unlocked", then fired it?
Whatever happened, if she was old enough to be jumping on the bed she would certainly be old enough to find it under the mattress and play with it.
Freak accident to be sure, but also certainly preventable. Keeping a loaded - and presumably cocked - gun unsecured in a house with small children seems a bit like negligence to me.
 
I don't buy the story. Much more likely that someone involved is lying to make themselves look not quite so stupid.
 
Maybe a new gun owner not clued in to proper gun security measures yet. Getting a gun legally after this ain't gonna be happening. That happened just a few block from where I used to work and close to where my chief mechanic lived. I hope it wasn't anybody he knew but I bet he does.
 
Something smells about this story...

I'd bet someone is lying. It just doesn't seem plausible that a girl would be jumping on the bed and it would go off striking her in the leg.

As was pointed out the physical positioning of the gun wouldn't allow for something like that to happen. Now someone mentioned single action cocked and locked being bounced and going off... I've purposefully dropped a 1911, loaded, cocked and locked, at the range and not had it go off. I've also tossed it down range a good 10 yards and not had it go off. As such I'd trust my life with a 1911. There'd have to be some serious functionality issues in the gun for a 50lb-ish girl bouncing on a bed to make a gun go off. The orientation of the gun would also make for questionable circumstances regarding the girl's injury.

There's falsification in that story somewhere - we just don't know where. I have my guesses and opinions but I'll keep those to myself.

Also about keeping a loaded gun in a house with children - I keep loaded guns in my house with my kids about. In fact all of my kids (with the exception of the infant) know about my guns, which are loaded and where they are. My kids range in age from 13 to 2 (not counting the infant of 3 months). To date none of them have played with my guns, none of them have shot themselves or anyone else with my guns and none of them would even consider messing with my guns unless I handed one to them. The thing is though that my kids are raised around guns and are taught about them as soon as they are old enough to comprehend spoken language. They're taught a great respect for guns and what can be done through their use and misuse. At the age of 3 I start teaching them to shoot (first with a Red Ryder BB rifle). At age 4 they're taught to shoot with a Rossi/Taurus youth .22lr break action rifle. Then when they've proven themselves to be proficient with that they move onto a 10/22 with an adjustable stock to allow for their size. Their firearms training continues to grow from there as they grow.

Now my 13yr old daughter is proficient with rifles and is fairly proficient with a shotgun too. She'll shoot high teens with a 20ga. break action shotgun in trap. Not the greatest wing shooter but she's getting there considering she's not too fond of shotguns. She'll consistently shoot the center out of a clay pigeon at 75 yds with iron sights with a 10/22 though and is deadly when it comes to small game hunting. Next year I'll get her started on handguns. My 8yr old son is a crack shot with the 10/22 and can consistently pick off clay pigeons at 100yds with a 10/22 with ghost ring sights. My 4 yr old girl is currently blowing up generic soda cans at 30yds with the break action .22lr rifle. In any case I don't think its negligent or stupid to have a loaded gun about when children are around. At any point in time my kids have easy access to at least one loaded firearm and yet they choose not to because they have been taught about firearms. Now if they hadn't been taught about firearms and all they knew was from video games and movies - that'd be a different story.
 
In my opinion, I think a 'reasonable' person would not store a loaded weapon in such a place. Unloaded with ammo close by? Sure. At the very least lock the slide/hammer if possible. Just the opinion of a person with a healthy respect of firearms.
 
Something is not right in the state of Denmark.
Click to expand...
No, I just spoke to relatives in Denmark, and everything's hunky dory over there. ;)

I've dealt with a number of negligent discharges, and they all seem to follow the same pattern:
  1. Clean up the immediate mess as much as possible
  2. Is someone hurt? Skip to step 4.
  3. If not, claim you, um, dropped something heavy to explain the loud noise. That hole in the wall? I used to have a picture hanging there. Haven't had a chance to spackle over it yet.
  4. Do you know a doctor, or at least a guy who dropped out of veterinary school? Call them! Hospitals ask questions.
  5. If you're drunk, which is likely the case, start popping breath mints. That always fools the cops.
  6. Suck it up and get your stories straight, preferably something involving mechanical malfunction and/or act of God. Remember, it's the gun's fault it went off.
  7. If you do end up going to court, be honest, fall on your sword, and throw yourself at the mercy of the court. Don't lie. Judges know as well as I do that cats, holsters, and (I wish I was making this up) lightning do not cause guns to discharge.
  8. When the spouse/parents gripe about "getting that stupid thing out of the house," don't tell your friends what really happened. Tell them you just didn't trust the gun, and that you sold it to some poor sucker who didn't know better.
 
There has to be a story behind this.
Click to expand...
The claim was that the gun was in the glove box when it discharged. Of course, this was at a right angle to the trajectory of the bullet, which took off the top edge of the steering wheel, travelled through the instrument cluster, and lodged in the windshield fluid reservoir.

Because the car was struck by lightning. Or wizards. Heck if I know, but that was the guy's story.
 
The claim was that the gun was in the glove box when it discharged. Of course, this was at a right angle to the trajectory of the bullet, which took off the top edge of the steering wheel, travelled through the instrument cluster, and lodged in the windshield fluid reservoir.
Click to expand...


Huh, I bet he was around JFK.

And I'm voting wizard. Get your hat and robe.
 
If it was discharged from under the mattress, you would think there would be hole in the mattress or, at the very least, some powder burns. Still, I guess it's hoping for too much for a TV news department to engage in any in-depth reporting. :)
 
If it was discharged from under the mattress, you would think there would be hole in the mattress or, at the very least, some powder burns. Still, I guess it's hoping for too much for a TV news department to engage in any in-depth reporting.
Click to expand...


Are you insane? This would require effort.
 
I seriously doubt the story was changed by the reporters.
Click to expand...

Maybe not changed by the reporters, but as very frequently happens, reported on the story before they had all the facts. Remember, gotta be the first to cover the story. ;)...

....although on a couple of occasions, I've had the 'misfortune' of having to make a statement to the press and didn't even recognize my own words the next day in the paper. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top