Accidental shooting at Aloha Council camp news

[scoutldr]

40 year career in Health and Safety (OSHA) here.  Certified Industrial Hygienist.  We never used the word "accident".  There are either unsafe acts or unsafe conditions, and both are foreseeable and preventable.  If there is a "mishap", there is always an identifiable cause.  I believe the term used now is "negligent discharge."

[Mrjeff]

Making sure that someone doesn't hit their head on a pipe, slip on a wet floor or has an eyewash handy isn't close to being responsible for a group of people on a firing line or during dynamic firearms training.  I agree that there is always an identifiable abuse but unless an act was intentional, its an accident.

[DuctTape]

On 9/21/2022 at 3:30 PM, fred8033 said:

#1 ... not only extorting defendants ... it biases juries.   "Beyond a reasonable doubt" is to convict on a single charge; but situations are rarely clear cut.  A jury can feel good about their decision if they feel they proportionately convict.  ...  Thinking being we're not really sure if the accused is really guilty.  So, let's convict on one of five of the charges.  That way the decision to not convict on the 4 of 5 reflects the doubt and feels like a fair decision.   In addition, juries think he must be guilty of one of these.  Let's choose the closest match.  ... Even worse, these situations are ugly.  It's hard for a jury to see an ugly situation and not convict on any of multiple charges.  

#2  Fair punishment is always hard to decide.   Even harder deciding on fair without having a single fact.  

Having served on a jury where multiple charges were presented. This type of thinking was not present at all. What the multiple charges allowed us to do was to deliberate on the specifics of each charge to determine if the defendant was guilty of any of them. In our case, and I surmise in most others, the difference in the charges was the particulars in the law specific to each charge. The judge was excellent in providing instructions so we understood exactly what was needed to have been proven by the DA beyond a reasonable doubt to support each of the different charges. Some of them were unbelievably specific. Prior to my service I did not know that the jury had to parse all the details for the specifics. I thought that was the judge's job if the jury said "guilty". Jury duty was not easy, but it was a fantastic learning experience. 

[MattR]

2 hours ago, Mrjeff said:

I agree that there is always an identifiable abuse but unless an act was intentional, its an accident.

Just to be clear, accidental death, sometimes called involuntary manslaughter, is still a crime. In the military it can lead to dishonorable discharge and/or jail. An example I found of involuntary manslaughter is pointing a pistol in jest at someone and pulling the trigger, believing it wasn't loaded but not taking reasonable precautions. A 12 year old scout is not allowed to fire a semiautomatic weapon. It should never have been there, much less loaded. Sounds to me like "reasonable precautions" were likely not taken.

So, whether or not it was an accident only changes the sentencing.

But, more to the point. If the BSA's response is "it was an accident, so sad, thoughts and prayers" (and I really doubt it will be) then I wouldn't want my kid in scouts. I remember as a scout the grumpy old RSO that would throw you off the range if you so much as looked at a gun without respect. That likely helped me save someone's life years later when someone did start waving a gun around at a party and I told him to put it down. He explained that it wasn't loaded and proceeded to show me ... the bullet in the chamber. That's what I wanted for my kids to learn. Calling it an accident doesn't sound like what I learned as a scout.

[Navybone]

6 hours ago, Mrjeff said:

.  I agree that there is always an identifiable abuse but unless an act was intentional, its an accident.

Intentional or not has nothing to do with if the incident was the result of negligence.  Negligence occurs when someone fails to do something, like make sure a loaded semi-automatic weapon is not able to be put in a boys hand.  To put in military terms, dereliction of duty.  The young boy pulling the trigger is an accident, but the steps leading to that weapon in that boys hand in that condition is not an accident.  It is failure at several point by responsible adults. 

[yknot]

Most of the general public, even those neutral or casually supportive of youth shooting sports and probably a lot of scout parents, are unaware that an AK47 could be at a scout range. This particular tragedy is about adult negligence and the apparent failure of training programs but on the macro level it may lead people to wonder what an AK47 is doing anywhere near a scout. The public facing side of scout shooting sports has been gun safety, marksmanship, and hunting as a component of outdoor sportsmanship. An AK47 does not fit into that picture. 

[InquisitiveScouter]

17 minutes ago, yknot said:

Most of the general public, even those neutral or casually supportive of youth shooting sports and probably a lot of scout parents, are unaware that an AK47 could be at a scout range. This particular tragedy is about adult negligence and the apparent failure of training programs but on the macro level it may lead people to wonder what an AK47 is doing anywhere near a scout. The public facing side of scout shooting sports has been gun safety, marksmanship, and hunting as a component of outdoor sportsmanship. An AK47 does not fit into that picture. 

The type of firearm is irrelevant.  And the mention of it, I equate to fearmongering.  This death could have occurred with a .22 single shot rifle, or even a pellet gun (.177)

Here is someone else's perspective I am evaluating, but do not currently agree with:

https://www.kake.com/story/47530873/opinion-why-im-rethinking-boy-scouts-for-my-son

Edited October 21, 2022 by InquisitiveScouter

[yknot]

5 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

The type of firearm is irrelevant.  And the mention of it, I equate to fearmongering.  This death could have occurred with a .22 single shot rifle, or even a pellet gun (.177)

Here is someone else's perspective I am evaluating, but do not currently agree with:

https://www.kake.com/story/47530873/opinion-why-im-rethinking-boy-scouts-for-my-son

What are you saying is fear mongering? The actual news reports that mention the weapon involved was an AK47 or noting this will be news to many parents and members of the general public? 

Interesting opinion piece. I'm not anti firearms for youth but I no longer think BSA has the organizational competence, consistently delivered across the board, to oversee a youth shooting sports program -- along with a few other things. 

[InquisitiveScouter]

Yes, the actual news report itself is fearmongering, or, at a minimum, sensationalizing.

Take this one:

https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2022/10/20/court-orders-police-turn-over-records-related-accidental-shooting-death-boy-scout/

"Carvalho was accidentally shot and killed when another child picked up an AK-47 at the shooting range on the Boy Scouts campsite near Honokaa."

Would the story be any different if it said "Carvalho was accidentally shot and killed when another child picked up an unsecured rifle at the shooting range on the Boy Scouts campsite near Honokaa."

Here's another one:

https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2022/10/18/criminal-investigation-into-deadly-shooting-big-island-boy-scouts-camp-hits-roadblock/

"Carvalho was shot when another boy, who police said was unsupervised, picked up a loaded AK-47 semi automatic rifle at the range. When the boy set the gun back down, it went off and the bullet struck Carvalho in the head."

Substantially different if it was reported this way??: "Carvalho was shot when another boy, who police said was unsupervised, picked up a loaded AK-47 semi automatic rifle at the range. When the boy set the gun back down, it went off and the bullet struck Carvalho in the head."

That is what I mean by fearmongering (and now sensationalizing.)  Again, the type of firearm was irrelevant.

The first article in the thread is a good piece of objective reporting:

https://www.mauinews.com/news/local-news/2022/08/child-killed-in-shooting-accident-at-hawaii-boy-scout-camp/

[yknot]

3 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Yes, the actual news report itself is fearmongering, or, at a minimum, sensationalizing.

Take this one:

https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2022/10/20/court-orders-police-turn-over-records-related-accidental-shooting-death-boy-scout/

"Carvalho was accidentally shot and killed when another child picked up an AK-47 at the shooting range on the Boy Scouts campsite near Honokaa."

Would the story be any different if it said "Carvalho was accidentally shot and killed when another child picked up an unsecured rifle at the shooting range on the Boy Scouts campsite near Honokaa."

Here's another one:

https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2022/10/18/criminal-investigation-into-deadly-shooting-big-island-boy-scouts-camp-hits-roadblock/

"Carvalho was shot when another boy, who police said was unsupervised, picked up a loaded AK-47 semi automatic rifle at the range. When the boy set the gun back down, it went off and the bullet struck Carvalho in the head."

Substantially different if it was reported this way??: "Carvalho was shot when another boy, who police said was unsupervised, picked up a loaded AK-47 semi automatic rifle at the range. When the boy set the gun back down, it went off and the bullet struck Carvalho in the head."

That is what I mean by fearmongering (and now sensationalizing.)  Again, the type of firearm was irrelevant.

The first article in the thread is a good piece of objective reporting:

https://www.mauinews.com/news/local-news/2022/08/child-killed-in-shooting-accident-at-hawaii-boy-scout-camp/

OK. I see it more as an issue of transparency. I think the public, and any parents considering a scout shooting program for their child, have a right to know what type of rifle was involved in this and in any other incident. Information by itself is never bad and I don't see where the mere citing of that detail alone t in these media reports is by itself sensationalistic. It would have been sensationalizing the incident if they had included a paragraph on how the AK47 has become one of the preferred weapons of choice in mass shootings.  

[InquisitiveScouter]

2 minutes ago, yknot said:

AK47 has become one of the preferred weapons of choice in mass shootings.  

Only, it isn't.  Preferred firearm for mass shootings? Handguns

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:GY7acnqEfiwJ:https://www.statista.com/statistics/476409/mass-shootings-in-the-us-by-weapon-types-used/&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

And this wasn't a mass shooting...

And most people probably wouldn't know what an AK47 looks like.  

[Eagle1993]

 

32 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

The type of firearm is irrelevant.  And the mention of it, I equate to fearmongering.  This death could have occurred with a .22 single shot rifle, or even a pellet gun (.177)

 

So could tripping down a few stairs. However,  AK47 propel a larger mass at a higher velocity resulting in far more energy.  .22 is around 250 joules ... AK47 are closer to 2000 joules.  There has been studies that show ... larger caliber weapons increase likelihood of death.  In Boston, if individuals were shot with only smaller caliber bullets, their gun homicide rate would have dropped nearly 40%.  Simply put, higher caliber is more deadly.

Quote

A logit analysis of the likelihood of death found that compared with small-caliber cases, medium caliber had an odds ratio of 2.25 (95% CI, 1.37-3.70; P = .001) and large caliber had an odds ratio of 4.54 (95% CI, 2.37-8.70; P < .001). Based on a simulation using the logit equation, replacing the medium- and large-caliber guns with small-caliber guns would have reduced gun homicides by 39.5%.

The Association of Firearm Caliber With Likelihood of Death From Gunshot Injury in Criminal Assaults | Emergency Medicine | JAMA Network Open | JAMA Network

I have allowed my son to shoot a variety of guns, including some larger caliber long rifles.  There is a BIG difference between controlling a .22 and larger caliber or higher velocity gun/ammo.  You can teach everything scouting should teach with a .22  ... if you want more, then expand your experience outside scouting.  I wouldn't argue against maintaining separate options for older scouts ... but it seems like most camps I go to struggle to have an RSO/instructor available to manage a .22 and shotgun range.

16 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

https://www.mauinews.com/news/local-news/2022/08/child-killed-in-shooting-accident-at-hawaii-boy-scout-camp/

No surprise here ...  I fully disagree with the opinion piece and believe the BSA shooting sports are a great program that should continue.  However, insurance companies and some anti gun parents will use cases like this to push BSA to end the program.  (Shooting sports is already in trouble in many areas due to lack of trained volunteers).  Hopefully BSA pushes back, but all volunteers need to ensure they follow the BSA/NRA rules or there is no doubt the program will end.

 

[InquisitiveScouter]

10 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

In Boston, if individuals were shot with only smaller caliber bullets, their gun homicide rate would have dropped nearly 40%

Pure speculation.  

[yknot]

5 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Only, it isn't.  Preferred firearm for mass shootings? Handguns

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:GY7acnqEfiwJ:https://www.statista.com/statistics/476409/mass-shootings-in-the-us-by-weapon-types-used/&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

And this wasn't a mass shooting...

And most people probably wouldn't know what an AK47 looks like.  

You're missing my point. You're arguing with me about what an Ak47 is or isn't. I'm talking about transparency -- there is no reason not to include what type of rifle was involved. I also noted what the connotations for the AK47 are in the press, which really aren't debatable. It doesn't matter what you or I think or if it's number one used or number ten, it is still one of the preferred firearms that have been involved in high profile cases. I'm noting that its presence at a scouting event will likely be news to the general public, and even more so if it becomes clear that it wasn't an aberrance. And maybe I'm wrong, no one will care. But if this story gets much more pickup by national media, we will find out what the public reactions will be. Most members of the general public do not think of scouts or youth marksmen as utilizing or having access to AK47s. Even among shooting families, you can go all the way to the Olympics in  youth marksmanship and never encounter one. They are not used. I've had any number of parents emphatically clarifying that their youth use different weapons for their competitions and practices.  

[malraux]

1 hour ago, yknot said:

You're missing my point. You're arguing with me about what an Ak47 is or isn't. I'm talking about transparency -- there is no reason not to include what type of rifle was involved. I also noted what the connotations for the AK47 are in the press, which really aren't debatable. It doesn't matter what you or I think or if it's number one used or number ten, it is still one of the preferred firearms that have been involved in high profile cases. I'm noting that its presence at a scouting event will likely be news to the general public, and even more so if it becomes clear that it wasn't an aberrance. And maybe I'm wrong, no one will care. But if this story gets much more pickup by national media, we will find out what the public reactions will be. Most members of the general public do not think of scouts or youth marksmen as utilizing or having access to AK47s. Even among shooting families, you can go all the way to the Olympics in  youth marksmanship and never encounter one. They are not used. I've had any number of parents emphatically clarifying that their youth use different weapons for their competitions and practices.  

Certainly to me, having a larger caliber semi-auto rifle loaded and unsecured at a BSA owned rifle range to me says something has gone wrong. Sure, its an accident, but that's the sort of thing where whatever happened clearly does not comport with the official rules for BSA ranges. If we can't examine what went wrong and figure out how to prevent it in the future, then I'll agree with the position that we need to drop shooting sports. But declaring this an accident and thus we don't need to look any further is not a reasonable position.