>


The family of a 6-year-old boy who shot and wounded his teacher
 in Virginia said Thursday that the child suffered from “an acute 
disability” and that one of his parents usually accompanied him in class
 but did not the week the shooting occurred.

...What?
If a six year old can acquire your firearm, it was never secure. >

They’re throwing their kid under the bus. >

Probably the best legal strategy to take. I imagine Adult negligence vs. child shenanigans have very different punishments >

Plus, the kid is already going to jail. Parents are just hoping he'll take the entire rap. >

I'm not to sure. But I don't think you guys jail 6 year olds. More likely would be put into a specific child care program. Or am I wrong? >

Not wrong. Probably some treatment program, depending on the situation. Hopefully they'll let him visit his parents in jail. Secure, my ass. >

Yeah, if a six year old can get to something. It's not secure. It's probably on the counter. >

I think we need his definition of 'secured'.. >

Maybe he meant to say "locked and loaded"? >

....a couple of things here. My parents had a handgun in our house for a very long time before I was ever aware of it. Especially at 6 years old. Is it common you tell your kids about these things? Additionally,  it was a 9mm....ok, so how does a 6 year old know how to chamber a round, take the safety off and have the hand strength to do this? Beside all that what was his big beef with this teacher? I mean sure, some people kill random strangers but this kid made very specific decisions aimed at one person. The parents had to have some knowledge of his anger towards her...this wasn't some spur of the moment impulse. He made efforts to conceal the weapon.
The message from the lawyer is pandering IMO. They are trying very hard to say all the right things to mitigate the issue. I'm not buying the "it was secure" story. Maybe they have measures in place but weren't using them for convenience and an opportunity for a misguided child presented itself. >

Supposedly up on a high closet shelf with a trigger lock on.
So, on top of everything you listed, the kid knew where the weapon was, knew where the key was, and how to unlock said trigger lock. >

The teacher is very lucky to be alive. >

"If the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?" >

Amazing movie and this line in particular had an effect on my life. >

Please elaborate >

Obviously not secured enough! Or did they simply hide it in the underwear drawer with a note attached saying "Do not bring to school!" >

Yeah, but the kid can’t read >

"That sign can't stop me because I can't read" >

Arthur was darker than I remember >

“The firearm our son accessed was secured.”
Obviously it wasn't. >

You don't know.  Maybe he knew where the key was, unlocked the gun safe, found the bullets, loaded the magazine, and chambered a round, all by himself...at the age of 6.  
/s >

It was probably more like "it was secured - we didn't think he could reach that shelf yet". >

I think it might have been more “we had a secured spot for it, but someone forgot to put it back.” >

Was it, like, in a shoe box with the lid on?  Maybe under a towel too?
If a 6 yr old had the gun, it was NOT secure. >

“Hmmm, my kid shot someone… OH SHIT I MIGHT LOSE MY GUNS!” >

This is America, we don't take guns from anyone, not even toddlers. Something something individual rights, unless you're LGTBQ. Guns are ok, but using a different pronoun is uhh... bad for freedom of speech????? Something like that. >

Ah, the gun was secured because the parents say so.
Clearly, a teacher-hating gremlin must have snuck in the house, "unsecured" the firearm, loaded and handed it to the child, then left without a trace.
It's the only explanation that even remotely makes sense. >

Narrator: It was not, in fact, secured >

Lawyer: Yes, it was.
Edit: It's an Arrested Development gag, guys. >

Narrator: “Clearly, this was not the case.” >

What kind of a care plan requires a parent to attend school with the child?  It sounds like he should have been in a specialized school, depending on his disability. >

Whoever released that statement should be arrested along with the parents.
Its insane how a 6 year old who is a seriously troubled kid who is at a special school was able to get a secured weapon…
Secure my ass , arrest these scumbags >

I don’t really know much about the case, but the one thing I can say for sure, with like 100% confidence, is that the firearm was not secured. >

The kid is described as having a "severe disability" that requires his parents to go to school with him every day, but for some reason they didn't that day. This sounds a lot like the kid in Detroit (I think) that shot and killed his mom because she wouldn't buy him a PS5 or something like that. Childhood schizophrenia is a real thing and has to be a parent's worst nightmare. I don't know if that's what he had but it reads like it. >

On the far end of my extended family is a kid around this age with a whole grab bag of disabilities.  Along with the problems comes a complete mastery of whatever he focuses on.  The family has gone to extreme lengths to secure everything that needs securing.  He gets out of seatbelts, climbs over barriers, figures out keypad passwords.  And the most important form of security is keeping an eye on the kid.  
I don't claim to fully understand the story OP posted, it seems to be missing crucial info, but I think it's possible the kid is a bit more competent than your average crayon muncher >

Ok, but the simple fact is, the gun was not “secured” by definition. It may have been locked up, but it was not “secured” because he was able to get to it. If I were the injured teacher, the release of this statement would piss me off so much. >

Fair enough.  I'm Canadian, so these definitions aren't immediately obvious to me.  
Does Secured mean (among other things) that a dependent can't access the gun? >

To me, secured means my guns are in a safe unless i'm carrying them and i have the only key. To some people, it might mean "In a drawer with a simple child proof tab" or "Up on a high shelf". >

Good thing the kid had a gun or this could have turned out so much worse. 😢 >

Narrator: Clearly, it wasn’t >

They said that their son had some issues. Not blaming anyone but why did they feel the need to mention this. It’s like they’re saying something bad was eventually going to happen with him. Another reason not to have a gun secured or not in the home that was apparently easy for him to get to. I think the parents are the ones with issues! >

I've read a couple of these articles but I haven't found one that says how they secured it.  Any one have a source on how the family claims the secured it?  Safe?  Biometric pistol lockbox?  Top shelf? >

"“Our family has always been committed to responsible gun ownership and keeping firearms out of the reach of children,” said the family, which was not identified. “The firearm our son accessed was secured.” 
The statement did not elaborate further on where the 9mm handgun was kept or what they meant by “secured.”" >

Umm, apparently not. >

Perhaps this kid is an extreme sociopath evil genius (Chucky Age 6), or the gun wasn't sufficiently secure. Either way, the parents did not exercise sufficient oversight, and are ultimately responsible. >

Lots of half-assed statements from the lawyer himself.
“It is my understanding…”
“I believe…”
Straight up “And I guess…”
What do you know? >

Shit lawyer says what? >

Bullshit. Absolutely bullshit. Parents need jail time. Kid needs counseling >

This kid sounds like a real darling. >

"you keep using that word. It does not mean what you think it means" >

Has anybody else seen the LockpickingLawyer's videos on gun locks and safes? >

So you think a 6 year old would be smart enough to follow them?  Never mind getting their hands on the tools he uses.. >

Some locks you can just grab a fork, knife, card, and push it into a gap. Honestly quite interesting that any of it gets sold at all. >

It said in the article how the gun was secured. Glad to know you took the time to post all those links but didn’t bother to read the article. >

“Our family has always been committed to responsible gun ownership and keeping firearms out of the reach of children,” said the family, which was not identified. “The firearm our son accessed was secured.”
The statement did not elaborate further on where the 9mm handgun was kept or what they meant by “secured.”
Ellenson told The Associated Press by phone Thursday evening that his understanding is that the gun was in the mother’s closet on a top shelf that was well over six feet high. The weapon also had a trigger lock that requires a key, similar to a bike lock.
Again, if the parents claim they had the key, how smart is the kid to know to google how to unlock this, and then delete their search history.  Why does the child even know where the gun is in the first place?
Stop defending this shit. >

I was simply calling you out for not reading the article. You care so much about this issue but don’t even bother to read the article before commenting. I have no dog in this fight. >

One more American thing to do -> arm more teachers so they can shoot first and prevent these things. >

You're thinking too small, ya gotta think big-American-style!
Arm the parents and make them strip-search kids at gunpoint before they leave the house, then escort them to school under armed parental guard (you know, in case someone tries to slip them a weapon), then have the parents of each child sit in the lessons and "cover" all the other parents to make sure nobody's at risk of a gun in the school.
With cheerleaders. >

The child shooting their teacher proved that was a lie. >

Imagine trying to throw your disabled (per article) son under the bus to save yourself >

Securely placed in the kids backpack so teachers couldn't find it?
WTF kinda of mother we dealin' with here? >

The bullet wasn't even in the chamber and it was on the high shelf! How is any nine year old gonna figure that out?? >

kid watches lock picking lawyer I guess. >

I don't think that word means what they think it means. >

Legally? Maybe. Actually? Nah. >

Playing devil's advocate, here...
I was a latchkey kid, starting in the first grade.  Kids can identify and use keys.  The gun may have been secured, but the keys obviously were not.  I think that parents often forget that a 5 year old kid isn't as dumb as they act.
Supporting anecdote:  I had an African Grey parrot ages ago.  They are ranked as having the intelligence of a human 5 year old.  And she figured out how to unlock every cage we bought for her. >

Oups, they missed a part: gun was secured... by an idiot. >

It was probably just lying out somewhere with a post-it note that said “ do not tuch” >

So is the parent that is usually with him in school strapped?  Was he an evil five year old that watched mom punch in the code and then. got it himself when he realized he would be unprotected at school? His parents do need a vigorous defense on the unsecured weapons charge. >

Secured… in the child’s hands. >

Everyone is talking about keys or the kid picking the lock somehow. If the gun was actually secure, my guess is it was in a gun safe with a punch code, and the parents never took care to make sure the kid didn’t see them punch the code. A 4 digit punch code isn’t that difficult to remember, especially if it’s something simple like 1-2-3-4, 1-1-1-1, 2-2-4-4 ect. >

So... he's a boy genius. >

Must be Baby Boss... >

This is like when I got hit by a car while riding my bike and the cop told me that he couldn't charge the driver with anything.  He couldn't be sure the driver was within the 3ft safe passing distance. >

Is the plan to get their client a mistrial? >

The combination to the safe was 1-2-3-4-5... >

wtf, that's the same combination as my luggage >

Don't spit on my cupcake and call it frosting, counselor! >

I think that the kid shot the teacher with a different gun. He called an Uber to take him to a gun shop where he used the money he had saved from the tooth faerie to buy the gun. He wanted to get an AK-47 but he had not lost enough teeth yet. >

I'm not so sure that word means what you think it means. - Inigo Montoya >

From who?  Because it sure wasn't from the kid.
If I was that teacher I'd sue that family into homelessness >

It’s Newport News, not like the family will have anything to get >

So the mother or father unsecured the firearm and provided the gun to the child? >

Gonna have to disagree with your police work there Vern. >

Guessing it was a shitty lock on the trigger and that it could still be fired while it was on. Lockpickinglawyer has done tons of videos on these shitty gun safes/locks. If youre going to call yourself a responsible gun owner, buy a proper gun safe >

In a purse, night aide table, or kitchen counter? Like what level of "secure" are we talking. Because if it was in a safer they left the door open. >

Was it, though? >

It most certainly was. It was securely in the child’s grip it seemed. >

Ok, I’m seeing several red flags in this… the shooting happening “the first time” no parent was with him, the fact that the gun was “secured” but no details how, the warning to the school about the weapon, and the failure to locate it when the bag was searched. >

The weapon was secured with Thoughts and Prayers.