Arizona Student, 7-Years-Old, Fires Gun On Packed School Bus (VIDEO)

An unidentified 7-year-old from Mesa, Ariz., has been detained after a handgun he brought discharged on a loaded school bus, authorities say, according to KSAZ TV. About 30 students were on board.

The report states that no one was injured on the bus from the Franklin Elementary School, and that the discharged bullet was lodged in the floor or a seat of the school bus.

Mesa Unified School District spokeswoman Helen Hollands told the East Valley Tribune that no one knew the student had the gun in his backpack, and that it fired a single shot after the boy "manipulated" it in his backpack.

According to a report by KPNX, police and school officials said the weapon was a .22-caliber pistol.

Parent Mike Place told KSAZ TV he's grateful nobody was hurt.

"I think it's a miracle for a handgun to be fired in close proximity on a bus and not have any of those students grazed, much less hit," he told the station, "It's a miracle and a blessing thank God none of them were hurt."

The station reports that the boy acquired the weapon from a closet at home and had the gun with him all day at school.

Comments

[Rooster Coburn]

11:49 PM on 01/29/2012

At least he didn't throw up!

[inonoatama]

03:59 PM on 01/11/2012

I bet if you asked gun owners if they have fantasized about shooting an intruder or heroically stopping a crime – like in the movies – they would all say yes. That is, assuming you got an honest answer. Heck, I've had heroic fantasies like that as well. But that's exactly what these things are: fantasies. People who buy guns and keep them by their beds just take this fantasy into the real world. Never mind that the home invasions they are anticipating very rarely happen, and that guns are more likely to be used against a family member than to protect one.

http://www.bradycampaign.org/studies/view/111/

Also, in general, having a gun in the home increased the risk of dying of a gunshot:

http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/160/10/929.full

[JimInHouston]

05:55 PM on 01/11/2012

"Never mind that the home invasions they are anticipati­ng very rarely happen, and that guns are more likely to be used against a family member than to protect one.

http://www­.bradycamp­aign.org/s­tudies/vie­w/111/

Also, in general, having a gun in the home increased the risk of dying of a gunshot:

http://aje­.oxfordjou­rnals.org/­content/16­0/10/929.f­ull"

You just lost all of your credibility.

[inonoatama]

08:10 PM on 01/11/2012

I can only presume from the little (nothing, really) you explained that your complaint has to do with the link not working.

http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/160/10/929.full

Here it is again, but you can always google this

Linda L. Dahlberg, Robin M. Ikeda and Marcie-jo Kresnow. Guns in the Home and Risk of a Violent Death in the Home: Findings from a National Study. Am. J. Epidemiol. (2004) 160 (10): 929-936.

That's a peer reviewed scientific journal, not a right-wing blog, by the way.

[inonoatama]

05:35 PM on 01/15/2012

Here are some facts from the CDC:

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm

The report states:

“Of 28,663 firearms-related deaths in 2000 --- an average of 79 per day ---16,586 (57.9%) were suicides, 10,801 (37.7%) were homicides, 776 (2.7%) were unintentional, and an additional 500 (1.7%) were legal interventions or of undetermined intent.”

What this report is saying quite clearly is that the majority of firearms deaths are suicides, whereas less than 1.7% were “legal interventions.” Now, you don’t have to have a graduate degree in statistics to see that what this means is, a firearm is THIRTY THREE TIMES more likely to be used to commit suicide than in an act of self defense. A gun is also much more likely to kill someone accidentally than in an act of self-defense.

This is credibility. Just asserting otherwise with no support is the opposite of credibility.

[eaglespark]

07:44 PM on 01/11/2012

"the home invasions they are anticipati­ng very rarely happen"

"Very rarely"? Considering the results of those "rare" incidents (which happen every day in this country), is it unreasonable to be prepared to deal with them? I have never been in a house fire, but I have detectors and extinguishers in my home-- as emergency equipment, just in case. I have already experienced violent criminal attack and resultant injury, so my having a self-defense firearm seems prudent, to me. My wife actually experienced that "very rare" type of incident in her earlier personal history-- her home was invaded by a violet man, and she was beaten and raped. Do you really think that we live in a fantasy world or are paranoid for wanting to be better able to defend ourselves in the future? "People who buy guns and keep them by their beds just take this fantasy into the real world"? Seriously? You may go on believing in that "very rarely" idea and depending on statistical luck for the safety of yourself and your family, if you like. Having intimate experience with the results of being unprepared for emergencies, that is not good enough for me.

[inonoatama]

09:26 PM on 01/11/2012

First of all, let me say that I sincerely appreciate your civil tone and clarity – also an increasingly rare thing. Secondly, a fire extinguisher is designed to prevent destruction, unlike guns. These things are not comparable.

If a loved one died in a plane crash, it would be awful. And I would understand wanting to take the train from then on. But that would not make plane crashes any more common statistically. They are rare occurrances, as are home invasions.

I am not against people owning guns for self-defense (or for hunting). But I am against the lying demagoguery of the NRA, the gun industry, and the many gun owners who are, in fact, insecure and paranoid.

I have, incidentally, been targeted for violence by deranged persons. But I am not going to blow money I could spend on food or furniture or books on a firearm that is, statistically, quite likely to hurt someone accidentally – and I am not going to be driven to that by some miscreant. That would be an unacceptable compromise.

I have dealt with these problems successfully without the use of a weapon, and there are many ways to handle would-be attackers that do not involve gunfights one may lose. I consider my brain a much more powerful weapon than a gun – and a big advantage over a pea-brain who actually thinks crime is a viable idea. Agree?

[inonoatama]

03:25 PM on 01/11/2012

There have been several posts made in this comments section claiming that gun control laws do not work, and asserting that such laws had no effect when instituted in Washington, DC. This is completely false. This report from the New England Journal of Medicine shows the facts about gun control in DC:

"In Washington, D.C., the adoption of the gun-licensing law coincided with an abrupt decline in homicides by firearms (a reduction of 3.3 per month, or 25 percent) and suicides by firearms (reduction, 0.6 per month, or 23 percent)."

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199112053252305

Seriously, I feel bad for these, paranoid, fear-soaked gun nuts. That's no way to live.

[JimInHouston]

05:56 PM on 01/11/2012

"Seriously, I feel bad for these, paranoid, fear-soake­d gun nuts. That's no way to live."

Yup, no credibility.

Instead of swallowing the BS from Kellermann and his like minded cronies, see what the CDC had to say:

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm

[inonoatama]

08:18 PM on 01/11/2012

I have read this report, and what is shows it that there is an epidemic of gun-related deaths in America. What did you get out of it?

And if you think there is any evidence in this report that putting guns in the hands of MORE people will stop this epidemic, please point it out to me.

BTW, given your 5,000+ posts, I have to wonder – are you a full-time pro-gun activist?

[eaglespark]

07:49 PM on 01/11/2012

"Seriously, I feel bad for these, paranoid, fear-soake­d gun nuts. That's no way to live."

That does not describe me and my family at all. Your use insulting use of name-calling and ridicule is really ugly and inappropriate, by the way.

[leonardstique1]

06:49 PM on 01/10/2012

Every drunk driver says he was a social drinker=ban alcohol
Every swimming pool owner says he was watching his kids-ban swimming pools
Every car driver says he was careful before he had an accident-ban cars
Every baseball bat owner says he was law abiding-until he bashed someone over the head with a baseball bat

[inonoatama]

03:29 PM on 01/11/2012

Not much of an argument here. Baseball bats, cars, alcohol, and swimming pools are not specifically designed to kill people as conveniently as possible as guns are. Also, I have yet to hear a swimming pool owner or car owner suggest these things be banned because of accidental deaths. But 44% of Americans think gun control laws should be stronger.

[JimInHouston]

05:57 PM on 01/11/2012

"specifical­ly designed to kill people as convenient­ly as possible as guns are. "

No credibility.

[leonardstique1]

04:57 PM on 01/12/2012

The reason so many people favor "stronger" gun control laws is out of lack of knowledge
Like them, you havent done your homework, let alone research on the utility of a gun for self/home defense
Perhaps you should use a baseball bat to defend your family if they are in danger

[SoulOfDespair]

12:54 PM on 01/10/2012

I wonder what the kid(s) were thinking?

[NewLiberals]

11:58 AM on 01/10/2012

Just about time for the NRA to jump in here with the proposal of teaching gun safety in grade school.

Where were the parents?

[OdinsEye]

12:41 PM on 01/10/2012

I fully advocate teaching firearm safety in schools. Starting with the youngest students, teach them to not touch, leave the area, and tell an adult. The older kids can be taught basics of firearm safety like: Treat all firearms as if they are loaded, never point a firearm at anything you do not wish the kill or destroy, keep your finger off the trigger until ready to shoot, know your target and what is beyond (and between). The eldest can be taught things like firearm laws.

None of this is actually teaching how to use a firearm or marksmanship.

[george22552]

10:33 AM on 01/10/2012

I've said this many times but here we go - again ! I recognize "the right to bear arms" concept BUT " illegal guns " are a dime a dozen. Also, the amendment starts with "a well regulated malitia being necessary to a free state. . .etc." But that concept, in my opinion, is outdated since owning a gun was common way back then. Back then as well guns weren't as sophisticated as they are today ! Back then guns were one shot deals and hunting for food was common too. Today, however, the NRA endorses owning practically any kind of firearm (maybe not ANY but close to it) based on the same amendment. The NRA is also one powerful lobby on its influence on Congress. If a legislator - state or federal - endorses ANY kind of gun control the NRA will encourage NRA voters to vote against that legislator on that one and only issue ! Guns are also as easy to get as toilet paper, candy, fruit, vegetables, etc. Now we need to watch out for armed 7 yr. old kids ? Whew, I hope you all vote 'cause - if you don't vote you don't count !

[wolflover3825]

11:19 AM on 01/10/2012

I am all for freedom of speech concept. But the 1st Amendment starts out, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,". That concept is out dated because of all the civil rights people that will screem if they are not accorded to the freedom.

Also when the free speech concept was formulated, there was no TVs, radios, internet, computers, or even phones and cellphones. Back then it was common to print speeches in the local paper and post it on the wall of the local meeting house.

I don't remember filling out forms and giving IDs every single time I went to purchase candy, nor show proof of age when getting some TP, nor have a background check just the other day when I bought some onions and cucumbers, nor a waiting period to take home my organges from the store on Sunday. When did they start doing that? Must be buying my TP, candy, fruits, and vegetables illegally. Better trurn myself in as a...... melon felon.

[george22552]

07:40 AM on 02/13/2012

Re: Better trurn myself in as a...... melon felon.

Just don't turn yourself in as a comedian ! They'll lock you up for attempting to impersonate one - no joke, they will !

[leonardstique1]

06:50 PM on 01/10/2012

The Brady campaign is not a lobby that has legislators who do what they tell him to do?

[mericart]

02:20 AM on 01/10/2012

7 year olds should never have access to guns! The parents are irresponsible if they leave loaded guns lying around the house instead of locked in a safe. There should be a law against such negligence. This kinds of story has happened so many times, and it's mere luck that children weren't hurt this time.

[OdinsEye]

01:16 PM on 01/10/2012

"There should be a law against such negligence­. "

There is. It is called (are you ready for this?) "Negligence". It can also be charged under "child endangerment".

[sailbatnite]

06:07 AM on 01/11/2012

Correct it is "Negligence" , the sad part is it is usually after the fact.

[sailbatnite]

06:10 AM on 01/11/2012

True, that is the conundrum.

[OdinsEye]

10:58 AM on 01/11/2012

There are several good safes out there which allow rapid access to a handgun while keeping it secure from kids or theft. GunVault is probably the most famous, but there are quite a few other similar products.

[eulogy8894]

01:50 AM on 01/10/2012

He was carrying a .22? Pffttt...what a wuss.
Back in Alabama our kids have already graduated to at least a 9mm by the time they're five!!

[eulogy8894]

01:45 AM on 01/10/2012

I'm as liberal as they come. And a gun owner.
Lets be realistic--we live in the most violent first world country on earth. In a bad year the United Kingdom will see about 500 murders. America will see around 16,000, and that's not even in a bad year.
Combine the populations of France, the United Kingdom, Spain, Canada, and Germany and you'll exceed the population of America. But combine the number of murders committed in those countries in one year and it won't come close to the amount of murders committed in America in one year.
The point is that America is a country rife with violence. I'd be a fool to leave myself unarmed in such a place.
I spend half the year in Europe, and of course carry no gun there. I'd NEVER advise another country to allow gun ownership among the masses. But while in America I keep a gun at my bedside. If America has taught the world one thing it is this: By making it legal to own guns, you make it necessary to own guns.

[captainindustry]

05:22 AM on 01/10/2012

So your thesis is that murder is a bad thing?

[Rebecca Nixon]

09:34 AM on 01/10/2012

I live in the UK and I just can't understand it. Guns are revolting things, and many people here will go their whole life without seeing one in person - possibly on an armed police officer. Your people live in fear and terror of what lurks in the night, when the reality is that it is usually a member of your own family. Back in Australia, I left all my doors and windows open during the day and night, whether I was at home or out. Now in London I laugh when they tell me to double-lock my door. I don't think I could ever live in America. The idea of even so much as touching a gun is enough to make me nauseous. You guys need to find a way to get rid of the damn things.

[OdinsEye]

12:45 PM on 01/10/2012

I have a hard time being revolted or nauseated by a piece of metal and plastic. I have known people to be revolted or nauseated by the sight of blood, vomit, feces, etc., but metal and plastic?

[eaglespark]

08:36 PM on 01/10/2012

"Your people live in fear and terror of what lurks in the night"

Only speaking for myself here, but no-- that does not describe me at all. I have known very few people like that, and they all had some sort of mental disorder.

"The idea of even so much as touching a gun is enough to make me nauseous"

If your reaction to firearms is honestly that extreme, the problem might be "phobia", rather than guns.

"You guys need to find a way to get rid of the damn things."

I disagree. You may do as you wish, of course, but... when was the last time I lectured you about your country, and tried to tell you how to live?

[wca16]

01:18 AM on 01/10/2012

Yes it is the parents fault but how about we take this thing in stride here. There was no harm done, thankfully, and now the father knows that the child knew of his gun. I'm sure it will be very much locked up from now on. People make mistakes and it bothers me to see so many people jump to the ridiculous conclusion that the father should be locked up. How do you think that will impact the child, will he not take full responsibility for it in his mind? It just seems like more of a tragedy than a child shooting the floor of a bus. Post hate mail now.

[DragonsMoon]

04:59 AM on 01/10/2012

Allowing the child to find and take the gun is nothing short of child endangerment and its a crime. Was the gun legal? Did the parent/owner of the gun have a license?
If the owner of the gun did not have a license for it then maybe the better lesson for the child is to show that breaking the law means going to jail. If the gun was legally owned then at the very least the gun should be removed, license revoked and the parent AND child should have to attend gun safety classes... for starters.

[wolflover3825]

10:33 AM on 01/10/2012

If I am not mistaken, in Arizona you do not need a license to own a gun. Where I live you do not need one also. Don't even have to register it.

I grew up in a house with a gun. I knew where it was from the time I can remember. I was taught not to touch it unles I had permission and supervision while I was handling it. By the time I was 7, I had shot a shotgun for the first time.

The article said the gun was in a closet, most likely in the parents bedroom. But still, it wasn't laying around in easy access to the child. And also, in the state where I live, the parents are responsible for this and would be charged as if it was them who did it.

[wca16]

03:39 PM on 01/10/2012

You don't think sending the man to jail and ruining the family over a mistake is a little harsh? In my opinion if someone was to throw my father in jail over something I did, I would develop a bad taste for any kind of authority.

I'm not saying their shouldn't be some type of consequence for both father and child but jail time is ridiculous.

[Xanadutu]

11:56 PM on 01/09/2012

Only in arizona or texas ~~~~

[OdinsEye]

01:37 AM on 01/10/2012

Kansas City Star - Feb 26, 2009

A Kansas City, Kan., elementary student who brought a gun to class Tuesday at Stony Point North Elementary School is now facing disciplinary measures...

I can find you more from across the US if you would really like.

[captainindustry]

05:25 AM on 01/10/2012

Right. Let's get Texas in the mix.

Everybody I know owns guns, and they are locked, and kids know how to use them.

Say. Let's walk down the streets of Detroit some 2 oclock in the morning, shall we?

[bmitche]

11:22 PM on 01/09/2012

The parents are to blame for that.

[belldn3]

10:48 PM on 01/09/2012

W-T-F!

[edusa]

10:48 PM on 01/09/2012

Grade school kids should all be packin guns, keep our schools safe