Previous Post
Next Post

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Shoot people twice, blame (only) the kid? I don’t think so. After a second shooting incident in three months, a Kenner, LA boy was charged with negligent injuring, being a juvenile in possession of a gun and being a status offender in need of supervision. What, no assault charge? Juvy law is always different and they operate under Napoleonic law down there. But yeah, I’d say he’s “in need of supervision”…

In April, the kid went on a shooting spree with a BB gun, hitting three people. He was arrested at the time, but not charged. If you were the arresting cop, it would have been natural to assume the kid would have, in Shrek’s words, gone the right way for a smacked bottom. Not to mention having his Red Ryder confiscated.

Clearly, though, the parents didn’t make much of an impression on the lad. Now he’s been arrested for shooting a seven-year-old through the leg with “a small-caliber pistol,” what you have to assume is a .22. Fortunately, the seven-year-old wasn’t seriously injured.

The little delinquent demonstrated quite clearly in April that he has no idea how to handle something like a BB gun. And now his behavior’s tilting toward the sociopathic.

But the story doesn’t mention the parents at all. Or the big question – how the kid got his hands on the .22. Shouldn’t the parental units have some serious ‘splainin’ to do? Was the gun owned by one of them? If so, was the April shooting incident not enough of a warning to lead them to secure any actual firearms in the house?

Certainly, the little cretin could have acquired the gun on the street somehow. And maybe this (thankfully non-lethal) incident is the big red flag the parents need to get this kid some help before something even more serious happens.

But you’d have to expect the parents will have an awful lot of questions – from the police and social services – to answer now. Not to mention legal bills to pay. And, depending on the circumstances, would you really be surprised if they lost their right to own guns at all?

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. The *first* time, the kid should’ve gotten a serious talking to from the police *and* from his parents. His parents should’ve gotten a fine large enough to make their eyes bug out. The *second* time, the kid gets removed from the home for six months, and the parents – at least one of them – goes to jail for the same time. Classes on anger management and gun safety *ALL* ’round, and don’t let there be a third time.

  2. I wonder if the family of little Damien has tried to get psychological counseling, therapy or a freaking leash. If they didn’t after the BB gun assaults, they certainly are liable. I am the non custodial parent of a now 17 year old who basically “lost her damn mind” a year ago. I had deputies take her aside and try to put the fear of God in her, but I had no luck getting her mother to follow through. She claimed she tried to have her put in for observation, but not being suicidal, the center wouldn’t accept her. The deputies wouldn’t take her into custody the night I called them because she was still 16. Unfortunately, they told her the same thing. That also was the night I found out that she had attacked my father a few years earlier, and had recently attacked her other grandmother. As to the evil little bastard in this story, he looks to be on the yellow brick road to being a card carrying member of the Sociopath Club. If not the Psychopaths.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here