Teen allegedly shoots his hatchet wielding uncle in self-defense

CHOCTAW COUNTY, Miss. (WCBI) – A 16-year-old boy allegedly shoots his uncle, in self-defense. The shooting happened in rural Choctaw County, on Tuesday afternoon. Investigators say the uncle was wielding a hatching on the teen’s front porch. When deputies arrived, Jerry Lee Robinson was dead. The juvenile is not being charged, at this time, because it appears he was defending himself.

Teen allegedly shoots his hatchet wielding uncle in self-defense

I guess there is a need for someone under 18 years old to have access to a firearm for self-defense. Especially considering his crazed uncle had violent outbursts in the past, and threatened the family with machetes!

I am glad the kid was able to defend himself, and stop his loon of an uncle from killing him. I cannot imagine what would have happened had he called the police and tried to wait it out until they arrived. It quite likely might have been a 180 degree different story here.

That said, I hope the kid gets some counseling because killing someone is not to be taken lightly.

originally posted by: Krakatoa
[B]ecause killing someone is not to be taken lightly.

Especially a mentally unstable family member.

a reply to: Krakatoa

glad the kid is alive but i still dont think a 16 year old should have access. it could have went many different ways.
this time it worked out but it does remain to be seen how #ed up this kid will be for killing his unk.

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: Krakatoa

glad the kid is alive but i still dont think a 16 year old should have access. it could have went many different ways.
this time it worked out but it does remain to be seen how #ed up this kid will be for killing his unk.

IMO, 16 or 60 makes no difference. What does make the difference is training and education. There are 12 year olds I know that I trust more with a firearm than most "adults" over 18. That is because they have been properly trained and learned to respect the tool and what it can do. They know it is not a toy, and that using it is not a video game.

ETA:
But then, if you have never met kids like that I can understand your point. My point is the number is irrelevant, the individual and their mindset is what matters in these cases. I would 100% support mandatory certified training for under 18 to handle and possess firearms. And allowing their parent/guardian the right to remove it from then as they see fit since they should know the child better than any LEO or politician.

originally posted by: Krakatoa


IMO, 16 or 60 makes no difference. What does make the difference is training and education. There are 12 year olds I know that I trust more with a firearm than most "adults" over 18. That is because they have been properly trained and learned to respect the tool and what it can do. They know it is not a toy, and that using it is not a video game.

ETA:
But then, if you have never met kids like that I can understand your point. My point is the number is irrelevant, the individual and their mindset is what matters in these cases. I would 100% support mandatory certified training for under 18 to handle and possess firearms. And allowing their parent/guardian the right to remove it from then as they see fit since they should know the child better than any LEO or politician.

well imo it makes a difference.
just cause you trust certain 12 year olds more than some adult dont mean they are mature enough to handle a gun. more importantly i dont think they are mature enough to handle all the potential emotions that come with a situation where a gun is involved let alone if they used that gun on someone.
there has to be some sort of cutoff man.
some 12 year olds are mature enough to drive but they shouldnt.

12 is too #ing young for that kind of responsibility.
im sure we are not going to agree and thats fine. we dont have to.
my opinion will not be changing on this one.

originally posted by: TinySickTears

originally posted by: Krakatoa


IMO, 16 or 60 makes no difference. What does make the difference is training and education. There are 12 year olds I know that I trust more with a firearm than most "adults" over 18. That is because they have been properly trained and learned to respect the tool and what it can do. They know it is not a toy, and that using it is not a video game.

ETA:
But then, if you have never met kids like that I can understand your point. My point is the number is irrelevant, the individual and their mindset is what matters in these cases. I would 100% support mandatory certified training for under 18 to handle and possess firearms. And allowing their parent/guardian the right to remove it from then as they see fit since they should know the child better than any LEO or politician.

well imo it makes a difference.
just cause you trust certain 12 year olds more than some adult dont mean they are mature enough to handle a gun. more importantly i dont think they are mature enough to handle all the potential emotions that come with a situation where a gun is involved let alone if they used that gun on someone.
there has to be some sort of cutoff man.
some 12 year olds are mature enough to drive but they shouldnt.

12 is too #ing young for that kind of responsibility.
im sure we are not going to agree and thats fine. we dont have to.
my opinion will not be changing on this one.

It seems you misunderstood my point about trusting some 12 year olds I know. Those 12 year olds already are trained and fire guns all the time. They know the reality of it, as they have seen what it will do to a target. They have been told and had it ingrained in their mind that these are not toys. Therefore, I trust them much more than someone who happens to be over 18 and buys a gun without any training or mentor to guide them.

Just because YOU don't know any 12 year olds like that doe snot make ALL of them untrustworthy. Just like not blaming an entire group of people for the indiscretions of a few. I do not think you can make a generalized statement like that above. Unless of course you also think that we should hold all people of a certain age or race or color to the same standard as someone in that group that acts in a criminal manner. Which is exactly what you are doing.

originally posted by: Krakatoa

It seems you misunderstood my point about trusting some 12 year olds I know. Those 12 year olds already are trained and fire guns all the time. They know the reality of it, as they have seen what it will do to a target. They have been told and had it ingrained in their mind that these are not toys. Therefore, I trust them much more than someone who happens to be over 18 and buys a gun without any training or mentor to guide them.

Just because YOU don't know any 12 year olds like that doe snot make ALL of them untrustworthy. Just like not blaming an entire group of people for the indiscretions of a few. I do not think you can make a generalized statement like that above. Unless of course you also think that we should hold all people of a certain age or race or color to the same standard as someone in that group that acts in a criminal manner. Which is exactly what you are doing.

trust them all you want. cool. theyre kick ass with targets and training. i still dont think a 12 year old is mentally capable of dealing with the emotions that would come with shooting a person let alone killing them.
i can make a generalized statement like that. i can and i am.
i am not talking about taking the 22 rifle out with paw to hunt quail together.
im talking about handguns and shooting people.

what i am doing is saying there needs to be some sort of age restrictions with this like with most things.
i am not talking about race so why even bring that up.
call it whatever you want. you are entitled to your opinion. does not make it more or less valid than mine.

originally posted by: TinySickTears

originally posted by: Krakatoa

It seems you misunderstood my point about trusting some 12 year olds I know. Those 12 year olds already are trained and fire guns all the time. They know the reality of it, as they have seen what it will do to a target. They have been told and had it ingrained in their mind that these are not toys. Therefore, I trust them much more than someone who happens to be over 18 and buys a gun without any training or mentor to guide them.

Just because YOU don't know any 12 year olds like that doe snot make ALL of them untrustworthy. Just like not blaming an entire group of people for the indiscretions of a few. I do not think you can make a generalized statement like that above. Unless of course you also think that we should hold all people of a certain age or race or color to the same standard as someone in that group that acts in a criminal manner. Which is exactly what you are doing.

trust them all you want. cool. theyre kick ass with targets and training. i still dont think a 12 year old is mentally capable of dealing with the emotions that would come with shooting a person let alone killing them.
i can make a generalized statement like that. i can and i am.
i am not talking about taking the 22 rifle out with paw to hunt quail together.
im talking about handguns and shooting people.

what i am doing is saying there needs to be some sort of age restrictions with this like with most things.
i am not talking about race so why even bring that up.
call it whatever you want. you are entitled to your opinion. does not make it more or less valid than mine.

So, I guess you are OK with dumping all people of a certain age together into the "can't trust and cannot think" bucket. All that regardless of the fact that every person is different and each with different levels of maturity regardless of age (or race, or creed, or color).

How sorry that is to think that way.
Education and knowledge is the key, not BANNING people from something because of age. Perhaps more education is needed? Perhaps we need mandatory education on guns and gun safety for every citizen of the U.S. since we are all granted that 2nd Amendment protections. At least then we can all have a coherent and educated discussion without the use of profanity laced opinions as part of the dialogue.

I can still dream, can't I ?

BTW: If you actually read the news story I linked in the OP, you would have seen he used a rifle, and not a handgun. So your handgun statement is irrelevant in this thread. Sorry to point out that basic fact.

originally posted by: Krakatoa


So, I guess you are OK with dumping all people of a certain age together into the "can't trust and cannot think" bucket. All that regardless of the fact that every person is different and each with different levels of maturity regardless of age (or race, or creed, or color).

How sorry that is to think that way.
Education and knowledge is the key, not BANNING people from something because of age. Perhaps more education is needed? Perhaps we need mandatory education on guns and gun safety for every citizen of the U.S. since we are all granted that 2nd Amendment protections. At least then we can all have a coherent and educated discussion without the use of profanity laced opinions as part of the dialogue.

I can still dream, can't I ?

youre right. every person is different. some 12 year olds are more mature than others.
my opinion stands. how many different times/ways are you going to ask?

youre bringing up race again? why?

there are things i am banned from doing and i am a 40 year old.

there are age limits and restrictions on a lot of things? do you care about those things too?

why not let 10 year olds drive?

if you dont like the way i talk and use curse words then dont #in interact with me.
i type like i talk and this is it.

if you want to keep going i guess we can but i am not really interested. my opinion is not going to change and i doubt yours is either.

i skimmed it. guess i missed it.

still dont change my opinion.

i guess my handgun statement is as relevant as your multiple mentions of race.


and i said i dont think they are ready for handguns and shooting people
so there is that

whatever man

feel what you want

this is just not something i care enough about to continue to argue with you.
if others chime in and the threads keeps moving ill be around.

no real point in me wasting my time with just you

Sorry that you are so closed minded. I offered a rational compromise of making more education mandatory.

What have you offered other than a complete ban?

Nothing.

As I suspected and part of the reason this goes nowhere. One side has been compromising since 1934, the other, not so much....and still is in favor of banning things.

That is a sad way to live IMO. Thinking you cannot trust your children. Doesn't that reflect upon the lack of parenting skills more than the child?

In this case, a child was faced with a fight or flight scenario. Unfair, yes.... but life is seldom fair. He chose to defend himself, not be a victim, and was obviously trained to do just that with his rifle. And I will state again, I hope he gets counseling on dealing with the consequences of his actions.

a reply to: TinySickTears

I entirely see the point you're making, but in my mind, the end-all, be-all of the situation is that this kid was more mentally capable of pulling the trigger than he was of allowing himself to be hatcheted. I don't know because I've never been in similar straits, but I'm inclined to believe that no age restriction is capable of overriding the survival instinct the boy had in that moment. The kid has every right to exist and he exercised that right using the means he had available to him. On the surface, it looks like the poor kid did the right thing, and he'll still suffer for it. It's just bad all around.

a reply to: DictionaryOfExcuses

i already said i am glad it worked the way it did.

and all kinds of # is banned for all kinds of people.
there are age restrictions on everything.

some i agree with. some i dont.

we supposed to have a free for all?

im sure there are some 12 year olds out there mature enough to smoke cigarettes and drive cars.
should they be able to?

if not, why not?

i am a 40 year old american citizen. the government has decided i am not mature enough to enjoy a certain plant.
BANNED

why ban me from doing it just because there are some #heads out there?

its a pick your battle kind of thing i guess.

Op has every right to be all bunged up about gun rights for kids. thats fine

i choose to be bunged up about drug laws for adults like myself

as an example of something banned/restricted.

driving cars = 16
booze = 21
drugs = never
prostitutes = never unless you live in a certain couple states then its 18
military = 18
a job = 15 with a permit
credit card = 18
bank account = 18
etc etc

there are restrictions on #. and again, some i agree with some i dont

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: DictionaryOfExcuses

....
as an example of something banned/restricted.

driving cars = 16
booze = 21
drugs = never
prostitutes = never unless you live in a certain couple states then its 18
military = 18
a job = 15 with a permit
credit card = 18
bank account = 18
etc etc

there are restrictions on #. and again, some i agree with some i dont

Hmm, lets look at your little list here and compare them to a Constitutionally protected RIGHT. Well, seems like none of them are covered under those protections. Perhaps you need to be more educated on what are Constitutionally protected RIGHTS and what are not?

There is a difference.....a very big difference.

a reply to: TinySickTears

Fair enough brother.

a reply to: Krakatoa

nope.
dont need further education.
for the 10th time i am not going to change my opinion on it

my point was there are age restrictions on #. my point was some i agree with and some i dont.

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: Krakatoa

nope.
dont need further education.
for the 10th time i am not going to change my opinion on it

my point was there are age restrictions on #. my point was some i agree with and some i dont.

And my point is your opinions to a Constitutionally protected right, are irrelevant. You cannot treat those in the same manner as those on your list. There is only one legal way to change that....but it seems folks with opinions such as you do not want to go that route.

I am not here to change your opinion, only state that a protected right cannot be banned by simply passing a law.....nor should it.

a reply to: Krakatoa

but it is treated like the things on my list because there are restrictions on kids and guns.
thats a fact my friend.

protected rights cant be banned by passing a law?
interesting

so felons can own guns?
mentally ill?

those are more restrictions

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: Krakatoa

glad the kid is alive but i still dont think a 16 year old should have access. it could have went many different ways.
this time it worked out but it does remain to be seen how #ed up this kid will be for killing his unk.

I could access my Dad's guns when I was 10. He taught my brothers and I how to be responsible with firearms from the age of 5 or 6. We knew what happened when you squeeze the trigger and the kind of hell we would catch if we ever did anything irresponsible with them.

It is all about training and responsibility.
Believe it or not young children can be responsible with firearms if taught properly.
My dad was an NRA shooting and hunting safety instructor.

a reply to: Krakatoa

Don't bring a hatchet to a gun fight!

got it!