FL 6 people including 4 children shot at Florida gun range

New Posts

At this time they are all injured with no fatalities!
 
ETA for info, re the 2008 renovations made at range, apparently operated by state on US Forestry prop.
.
"We did all the fencing around the complete perimeter," Greg Workman, Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission regional hunter safety supervisor, said."
"Right now, there's no money in the budget for a range master, he said."
He also said 1000 people per week come to the range which is free.
http://www.ocala.com/article/20080528/NEWS/305225834?p=2&tc=pg

Yikes. No range master? What about a safety officer? That was 2008, I wonder if there is RM or SO now.


Also http://www.ocala.com/article/20051218/NEWS/212180390
Per article, 38 y/o man practicing 'cowboy action shooting' accidentally shot & killed himself at that range in 2005.
There were also 2 other accident there in 1990s.

Altogether, for the heavy range usage, 1000/wk, seems like low-ish accident rate. Still sad, but glad no fatalities this time.
 
http://myfwc.com/hunting/safety-education/shooting-ranges/

If this is same range, above link stating no shotgun' seems to be outdated/inaccurate.
"Ocala Public Shooting RangeMarion County
Forest Road 11
north of S. R. 40 in the Ocala National Forest ...
Contact
Ocala Conservation Center
(352) 625-2804

Facility Features

  • 100/50/25/15 yard rifle/handgun - 12 positions
  • Self-Service Shotgun - 1 shooting pad"

 
Jovi Girl said:
Why were there young children at a shooting range ?
Click to expand...

Why wouldn't there be? Shooting is a fine activity for children, provided they're mature enough to learn and follow the safety rules.
 
They (Ocala Public Shooting Range) seem to have a great track record for safety.
It is the shooter's fault, in my opinion.
An unfortunate yet terrifying incident and worthy of much concern and study.
 
Starry Night said:
They (Ocala Public Shooting Range) seem to have a great track record for safety.
It is the shooter's fault, in my opinion.
An unfortunate yet terrifying incident and worthy of much concern and study.
Click to expand...

Most gun ranges do have very good safety records.

The article said the shooter was using an antique shotgun. I'm wondering if, due to the age of the firearm, there might have been a malfunction and this might have been a true accidental discharge, as opposed to a negligent discharge, which is what these things usually are when something like this happens.

The shooter is probably guilty of not keeping the firearm pointed in a safe direction at all times. The article said the shot pellets ricocheted; one of the articles said they ricocheted off the concrete floor. If the shotgun was pointed in a safe direction (i.e., downrange), there shouldn't have been anything for the pellets to ricochet off of to deflect them back toward the people at the firing line. I wish I knew where everyone was standing at the time, which way the gun was pointing when it discharged, and how the pellets ricocheted to hit multiple people.

With only superficial injuries and with LE considering it an accident, there may well be no more investigation of this and we might never know.
 
sonjay said:
Why wouldn't there be? Shooting is a fine activity for children, provided they're mature enough to learn and follow the safety rules.
Click to expand...

:facepalm: Because it’s child endangerment, and four children were almost killed because of this stupidity.
 
KaaBoom said:
:facepalm: Because it’s child endangerment, and four children were almost killed because of this stupidity.
Click to expand...

Don't be silly. All of the people who were hit by ricocheting pellets received only superficial wounds.

There are FAR more children killed and seriously injured every year by cars, ladders, buckets, pools, household cleaners, dogs, falls, and other things than are accidentally killed or injured by guns.

If the threshold for "child endangerment" is that any child, ever, is ever injured by something, then it's child endangerment every time a parent puts a child in their crib, straps them into a car seat, lets them ride in the shopping cart seat, gives them food, or does anything with a child other than lock them in a padded room.
 
Starry Night said:
They (Ocala Public Shooting Range) seem to have a great track record for safety.
It is the shooter's fault, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Kind of reminds me of the pit bull argument. My pit bull never hurt anyone, before it jumped the fence and killed the neighbor’s kid.

One word “responsibility”. People need to start accepting some of it.:rolleyes:

Unfortunately neither the gun range or the shooter will. They never do. It will be labeled just and unfortunate accident.
 
sonjay said:
Don't be silly.
Click to expand...

Child safety is not silly.:facepalm: Young children have been killed at shooting ranges while trying to fire automatic weapons, that they are not even physically large enough to handle.

This is insanity.:mad:
 
KaaBoom said:
Child safety is not silly.:facepalm: Young children have been killed at shooting ranges while trying to fire automatic weapons, that they are not even physically large enough to handle.

This is insanity.:mad:
Click to expand...

No one said child safety is silly.

No one has advocated children shooting automatic weapons.

There was an antique shotgun that wasn't even being fired by any of the children.

Tell me, do you scream "child endangerment" just as loudly whenever a parent straps their wee one into a car seat and goes hurtling down the highway at 70mph in the death machines that we fondly call "cars"? It endangers children far more to do that than it does to teach them firearm safety and marksmanship.
 
sonjay said:
Don't be silly. All of the people who were hit by ricocheting pellets received only superficial wounds.

There are FAR more children killed and seriously injured every year by cars, ladders, buckets, pools, household cleaners, dogs, falls, and other things than are accidentally killed or injured by guns.

If the threshold for "child endangerment" is that any child, ever, is ever injured by something, then it's child endangerment every time a parent puts a child in their crib, straps them into a car seat, lets them ride in the shopping cart seat, gives them food, or does anything with a child other than lock them in a padded room.
Click to expand...

BBM

While you have JMO and MOO at the end of your post, this is a statement that people are being asked to believe.

There are 7 items listed (and a plus sign indicating more) that, as a combination, kill more children annually than guns. I'm sure that's true, but not seeing the connection without a study that such a combination gives a true value of anything.

Or do you mean each of the items listed kill more children annually that a gun?

TIA.
 
Woodland said:
BBM

While you have JMO and MOO at the end of your post, this is a statement that people are being asked to believe.

There are 7 items listed (and a plus sign indicating more) that, as a combination, kill more children annually than guns. I'm sure that's true, but not seeing the connection without a study that such a combination gives a true value of anything.

Or do you mean each of the items listed kill more children annually that a gun?

TIA.
Click to expand...

You can see what the CDC is concerned about with respect to accidental injuries to children:
http://www.cdc.gov/safechild/NAP/background.html

I mean that getting sooooooooo upset about a couple of children receiving superficial injuries from richocheting shotgun pellets that it's worthy of being called child endangerment is beyond silly. If taking a child to a gun range is "child endangerment," then allowing a child outside of its padded room is also child endangerment. Taking a child on a public road in a motor vehicle should make us all demand prosecution of every parent for child endangerment.

It's just silly, all the hysteria. I'm looking forward to teaching my grandson to shoot, as soon as he's old enough. He's in FAR more danger every time he gets in a car than he'll ever be plinking with a .22 at empty soda cans.
 
Woodland said:
BBM

While you have JMO and MOO at the end of your post, this is a statement that people are being asked to believe.

There are 7 items listed (and a plus sign indicating more) that, as a combination, kill more children annually than guns. I'm sure that's true, but not seeing the connection without a study that such a combination gives a true value of anything.

Or do you mean each of the items listed kill more children annually that a gun?

TIA.
Click to expand...

Specifically, motor vehicles kill far more children every year than accidental firearm injuries.
More children drown every year than are accidentally killed by firearms, so that encompasses buckets & pools.
More children die from accidental falls every year than are accidentally killed by firearms, so that includes ladders.
More children die from accidental poisoning every year than are accidentally killed by firearms, so there's your household cleaners.
I don't have any numbers handy for dogs, but I know that I worry a lot more about my neighbor's pack of dogs hurting my grandson than I do about my neighbor's firearms hurting my grandson.

You can check the CDC's Wisqars data reports for more specific information:
http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/leadcaus10_us.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 73 more.
Total: 3,938 (members: 74, guests: 3,864)

Online statistics

Members online
74
Guests online
3,864
Total visitors
3,938
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,663
Messages
17,957,220
Members
228,583
Latest member
Vjeanine
Back
Top