Five Year Old Boy Shoots, Kills Toddler Sister. So which one was the “bad guy with a gun”?
May 6, 2013


Caroline Sparks: death by idiot parentsLast December, with the echos of gunfire from “Sandy Hook” still ringing in our ears, NRA Spokesman Wayne LaPierre proudly declared, “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun!” Last Friday in Jerkwater, Tennessee (not its real name), the parents of two young children (Caroline, aged 2 & her brother, turning 5 that same day) decided to celebrate by giving this FIVE YEAR OLD CHILD a loaded firearm… this firearm (see photo below)… for his birthday. According to witnesses, the loaded weapon “accidentally” discharged, striking and killing his young sister almost instantly. The weapon in question? A Crickett .22 “Synthetic Youth Rifle” made just for “children”, purchased at Wal*Mart (“Crickett”, what a darling name):


A Birthday present for a five year old?
Crickett .22 'Youth Rifle'
(click to enlarge)


Note the circled areas: “Must be 18 years old” and “Don’t forget your hunting license.” This young boy had not attained either, yet the parents still placed a loaded deadly firearm in the hands of a pre-schooler with disastrous results.

Well who could have seen THAT coming?

Caroline’s uncle called it “a tragedy that no one could have seen coming.” [ibid] Guess that answers THAT question.

Caroline died at her home before help could arrive. Her family says she is in “a better place” now. Hard to disagree with that.

Two lives were destroyed that day. Not just the fatally wounded toddler, but her young brother as well, who will now live the rest of his life with what could very-well be his earliest memory… him accidentally shooting & killing his young sister. The very idea that this weapon is marketed to children is disturbing enough (and while the Wal*Mart ad specifies “18 or older”, a Google image search shows dozens of children barely out of diapers wielding these firearms), but consider the culture & mindset of any group of people that thinks this is an appropriate gift for a five year old child? The argument goes that “if you expose children to firearms at a young age, teaching them responsibility and care, you remove the ‘mystery’ that attracts mischief that so often results in tragedy.” Yet, here we are.

So I find myself wondering:

  1. The Newtown shooter’s mother also “exposed her child to guns at a young age” and look how THAT turned out. Lanza’s mother took her son to the rifle range and taught him to shoot her Bushmaster 223 believing it would maker son (quote) “more sociable”. THAT sure worked like a charm! He shot her in the head with her own assault rifle while she slept before taking off for the local Elementary School to mow down another 20 first Graders and six Teachers.
  2. Doesn’t the same logic apply to “Sex Ed” and “Drugs”? The same people arguing that “early exposure takes away the lure of mystery” and teaches children to be more “responsible”, are the same people arguing “abstinence only education” when it comes to sex and “just say No” when it comes to drugs… two issues than can be every bit as life-ruining (even deadly) as guns.
  3. If “more guns” are the solution, might this tragedy have been prevented if only we had armed the 2-year old? Was the five year old the “bad guy with a gun” we were told to look out for? Did he need that rifle to fend off burglars ala “Home Alone 37”? Should we have armed the toddler so she could have defended herself? Who was the “bad guy” in this debacle that could have been prevented if only he had been shot first? (I’ll give you a second on that one.)

Undoubtedly, some Right-Winger will go after me for “making light of such a tragedy”, but rest assured, I am NOT. (As my redneck step-father used to say, “I’m as serious as a fart in church.”) I am highlighting “absurdity” with “absurdity”. This was not an unforeseeable tragedy that no one could have prevented. Those parents need to go to jail and their surviving son taken away for his own safety.

The NRA’s 142nd Annual Convention wrapped up here in Houston Sunday with a final speech by celebrity gun-nut (and all-around douchebag) “Ted Nugent” imploring:

…an enthusiastic crowd to increase NRA membership 20-fold as the “culture war” over guns continues.

“I want to show them how much we will fight for freedom.

Remember that this is a “man” that defecated in his jeans for two weeks to avoid “fighting for our freedom” in Vietnam. And if you dare express your First Amendment right to protest gun proliferation, you take your very life into your hands as these “lovers of freedom” turn their aggression towards you… quite possibly at the point of a gun… as they try to shut you down.

So tell me how “more guns” in this situation might have prevented this tragedy? Because I can sure as hell tell you how LESS guns would have prevented it.

(Maybe this will make the decision easier: The “Crickett”? Also available in pink.)

Writers Wanted
Got something to say? Mugsy’s Rap Sheet is always looking for article submissions to focus on the stories we may miss each week. To volunteer your own Op/Ed for inclusion here, send us an email with an example of your writing skills & choice of topic, and maybe we’ll put you online!

RSS Please REGISTER to be notified by e-mail every time this Blog is updated! Firefox/IE users can use RSS for a browser link that lists the latest posts! RSS



May 6, 2013 · Admin Mugsy · 4 Comments - Add
Posted in: Crime, Guns & Violence, Right-Wing Insanity

  • fastfeat May 6, 2013 at 12:12 PM

    Hey Mugsy–I really think the only way to curtail these types of events is to enforce child endangerment laws against such parents. Of course, these vary by locale, so…NRA in Houston, eh? Hope ya didn’t get any on ya…On the plus side, here in Austin, I read that UT higher-ups are united against bills to allow concealed-carry on campus. Fingers crossed…

    • Mugsy May 6, 2013 at 1:23 PM

      Keep in mind, the NRA doesn’t exist to protect the rights of gun *owners*, but gun *manufacturers*, so any restriction on gun sales… such as enforcing “child endangerment laws” for buying a child a gun, they would fight tooth-n-nail, rallying their moronic troops by declaring such laws a “direct attack on their freedom” by denying your child’s “right to bear arms”. (As I noted a few weeks ago, the NRA successfully fought to defend an ex-cons’ right to own a firearm, insuring greater gun sales in the future, not just to ex-cons, but now terrified neighbors.)

      PS: Be sure not to help C&L in any way. They rely on that help for content, then show all the appreciation of a foot fungus. 🙂

  • Grant in Texas May 8, 2013 at 9:11 PM

    The Timothy McVeigh “wannabees” now plan to march on Washington, D.C. on July 4th carrying loaded rifes. Looks like they are itching for a Hollywood-style shootout. Sounds like arrested development but sadly they won’t be carrying Red Ryder BB guns. The REICH-wingnuts pretend to be super patriots, always making a big show at NASCAR and other sporting events waving giant U.S. flags, singing patriotic songs, and often a military fly-over along with a Christian prayer. After 9-11, they loved flaunting their NYPD or NYFD caps, jackets, shirts. Don’t they realize that if they fire upon “the government” they will be shooting at their beloved soldiers, police, firefighters???

  • Grant in Texas May 8, 2013 at 9:25 PM

    There were no shortage of kids attending the Houston NRA convention. We don’t market booze, tobacco (remember stopping “Joe Camel” or porn to children and even restricted alcohol/tobacco advertising on signs near schools, but we can market death to them. Just in today’s Houston Chronicle was another local story of child-on-child gunfire, a 5 year old shoots his 7 year old brother but the latter survived so the story only got about 4 inches in the print edition.

  • Post a comment


    Threaded commenting powered by interconnect/it code.