The parents of a New Jersey boy who fatally shot his 6-year-old neighbor must pay over $570,000 to the slain boy’s family, a judge ruled Monday.
Brandon Holt died a day after the shooting in April 2013 in Toms River. The father of the boy who was 4 years old when he shot Brandon in the head has pleaded guilty to child endangerment, but Anthony and Melissa Senatore were ordered Monday to pay $572,588 to Brandon’s family.
Anthony Senatore received a three-year prison sentence in February 2015 after admitting he left his loaded .22-caliber rifle unlocked under his bed.
Brandon Holt died a day after the shooting in April 2013 in Toms River. The father of the boy who was 4 years old when he shot Brandon in the head has pleaded guilty to child endangerment, but Anthony and Melissa Senatore were ordered Monday to pay $572,588 to Brandon’s family.
Call me cruel and heartless but no one should “hit the lottery” just because of a stupid act. They will live the rest of their lives knowing their lack of securing a weapon resulted in the loss of a child’s life.
While I generally agree that lawsuits shouldn't be used to make a million dollars when you spill hot coffee on yourself, as a parent I can pretty definitively say that there's no "hitting the lottery" after someone's negligence causes you to lose your child.
Take responsibility for your guns prior to a bad situation and this would not be an issue.
Holding the adult responsible for the kid is a good thing if you ask me.
However a 600k fine that will likely never be pd is not bow to do it.
Difference between a 4 yr old and a Juvenile which I consider a teen. Most 4 yr old dont know gun safety and woould be a tuff sell convincing someone they know proper use and operation of a firearm. I CAN Believe a teen would and should know these things. So not a good comparison.
My point was and is that parents should ensure that firearms are kept in such a way children DONOT have access.
This in a state that tries to control everyone's gun. So much for gun control. If this guy had been to a class on how to keep and care his weapons this most likely wouldn't have happened.
Sad and tragic story. The guy could have bought a Stack On gun cabinet for $110 at Walmart and prevented the whole thing. This is why I keep my firearms locked up while I am at work. People ask me if I don't trust my kids...I tell them sure I do...but I don't trust their friends.
$600k seems quite low for a settlement these days. Especially involving the loss of a child. If the article said the settlement was 7 figures, I probably would not have been surprised.
It is negligence with punishment of both time and money. It is a normal and often used method for negligence. If this is political, then every other type of negligence that results in money and time as punishment must also be political.
Why shouldn't the negligent patent have to pay through the nose for their stupidity?? Sorry, but their choice lead to the death of an innocent child. They got off easy IMO.
The parents were negligent and a child lost his life as a result. The $600K is a paltry sum compared to the loss of a child. The money is merely punishment for their negligence, as is the prison sentence for the father. As responsible gun owners we need to take these stories seriously and not get involved in the politics. Gun safety is primary and non-negotiable. Accidents do happen, but practicing gun safety at all times can reduce their occurrence. With a child in the house, the gun should have been kept locked up when not in the father's control.
So, for the sake of argument, having the gun 'hidden' is not enough. What is?
Locked in a closet, hidden in the back behind clothes ok, even though the child is able to pry the door open with a screwdriver?
What about locked in a closet, hidden, unloaded, but bullets in a bureau drawer?
To me, hidden, inside a bedroom is not the same as propped in a corner of the dining room, though, I bet in the 1960s many of us lived where there was a rifle in plain sight, perhaps over the fireplace next to a stuffed head. Not the same as a loaded semi-auto lying on the living room end table (as has happened).
The parent's failure is in not being around when two toddlers were playing, not telling the child since old enough to listen that no one touches the rifle.
The parent's failure is in not being around when two toddlers were playing, not telling the child since old enough to listen that no one touches the rifle.
I agree completely that this was gross negligence on the part of the gun owner and it is a tragedy. But firearms are not even close to being the main cause of fatal accidents with children. The big causes are:
Falls
Fires
Scalds and burns
Glass-related accidents
Poisoning
Suffocating and choking
Drowning
If this same neighbor had this child die in his house through one of the causes above, would he have been treated the same way? I think there would still have been a civil suit, but unless it was some gross negilgence, I doubt he would have had any criminal charge.
You referenced those bulleted items as "accidents" and you are correct that it is a good chance that no criminal charge would result from an accident. However, the case we are referring to was no accident. It was negligence. If a fire was started due to negligence, a criminal charge might be forthcoming.
It's not hard or expensive to reasonably secure weapons today, even the ones you want readily accessible by you if needed. Yes, it is negligent of the parents. Boys will be boys and as rare as these incidents are, they always make the news and appear to be even more of an issue. We should use any means we have to protect our kids from harm regardless of what that is. Make no mistake, I am not for mandating things like storage laws, but if you choose to leave your guns laying around for anyone to get to, there should also be consequences for those choices if someone his hurt because of your choices.
Here's where you can look up the stats for 2014 (latest year avail.) CDC statistics regarding unintentional firearm deaths of all kids age 0-15. The number was 58!
I think the key to the negligence issue is whether the parents made a reasonable, good-faith effort to maintain a safe environment and monitor children under their care.
For example, if a child accesses a firearm in a house and shoots someone:
1. It would be reasonable to charge the firearm owner with negligence if the firearm was left loaded and unattended in a place where someone could reasonably foresee that a child might find and access it. In my opinion as the parent of young children, that's actually a pretty wide variety of places that does not include "Places I think are hidden" or "Places I think are out of reach." Kids are like guided missiles mixed with Sherpas.
2. It would NOT be reasonable to charge the firearm owner with negligence if the firearm was left loaded and attended in a locked drawer or cabinet that the child accessed by breaking or bypassing the lock, as this requires a criminal action on behalf of the child.
Really these are all passive issues, though, the real issue is the lack of supervision. It doesn't matter if you have Drain-O sitting on the counter where the kid can see it if you're actually watching the kid. If you're not actually watching the kid, then it shouldn't be on the counter. Just like the rules of firearms safety, you have to actively break at least two of the rules before anything catastrophic can happen.
Just my $0.02, I make no pretense to this being the way things are legally, this is just what I think it should be.
I have a Stack On 3 point locking long gun cabinet and a digital shelf safe that I keep my firearms in. Total cost for both: $135. The stack on cabinet is California firearm safety certified. Both of these are lag bolted to the wall and bolted to each other so to break in you would need a small sledge hammer & crow bar. I bought these after the Sandy Hook shooting where the wacked out kid used his Mother's AR. Had she spent the $150 she would probably still be alive. But everyone should consider their criminal and civil liability in different scenarios such as:
1. a family member gets your gun and kills someone or themselves
2. a friend of a family member gets your gun and kills someone or themselves.
3. a teen breaks into your home and gets your gun and kills someone or themselves
4. a teen breaks into your home and gets your gun and sells it to their drug dealer for drugs
5. Your kids cause a domestic relations disturbance, the police enter your home and seize your unsecured firearms.
6. Your spouse has an affair with ___________ and he/she in turns takes one of your guns and commits a crime with it.
7. One of your spouse's "friends" takes one of your guns...then denies it.
Any one of these scenarios (the list given to my by my attorney) will cause you great anguish and possibly severe monetary and even civil rights loss.
Think about it. At least you might be sitting in court telling the Judge that "the person broke into your California Firearm Safety approved steel locked gun locker and stole your secured firearms"...versus..."they found it under the bed loaded"
$135 was a small price to pay IMO. I hope this helps you. Ok off soap box now. :smile:
None of these situations would give rise to civil or criminal liability in Alabama (or in the 97% of America which lies outside the northeastern liberal seaboard). Live there and you're in a different situation entirely. Outside there, draconian measures are not necessary. Precautions are indicated by your circumstances - more if you have small children, of course. However, I grew up as a small child with a shotgun standing in a number of corners of rooms in our house. Things have changed since then, but the fact remains that, outside a small number of, thankfully, exceptional states, there is no strict liability for not storing firearms in a "Fort Safe."
I agree that holding parents responsible for failures in securing dangerous tools, devices, chemicals should be the norm. You have dangerous stuff around and exhibit reckless even wanton disregard for the health and safety of others around those items ... well, your negligence caused the problem.
What about parents who sent their child to a house where they do not secure weapons and do not provide proper supervision? I agree weapons should be secured with young children but aren't both sets of parents responsible?
The sad part is that securing weapons is so easy and inexpensive.....most of these people probably think "it will never happen to me"......then they will wish for the reat of their lives they had secured them. Sad really for all involved. That is one really tough lesson to learn. I sure don't envy them.
Tragedies happen to children EVERYday, EVERYwhere . And the VAST majority could be lessened or eliminated by clear-headed, forward-thinking, awake, aware parents. Yet, while getting run-over by a drunk driver or suffocating in a crib leaves a kid just as dead, the second that an evil GUN is involved, there's a special spot in legal/financial hell for the unfortunate participants. Usually as a clear result of political agenda. Seems a LOT cheaper/easier just to keep my (grand)kids outta'...New Jersey! :yup:
It was a tragic thing what happened here. But the near $600K judgement against the parents of the 4 yr old shooter won't/can't take the place of their child.
Do the parents found at fault have the resources to come up with at least half of what they owe? No? Then what? Will the state of NJ garnish their wages forever? Then how does this family live?
I predict in 10 years time and likely much less this couple will get divorced. Their kid will be put thru the trauma of mommy and daddy splitting up. The kid won't get proper parenting and could end up in foster care or worse he'll get in a gang and wind his way thru the legal system until he pulls an armed robbery and is killed by the storekeeper.
I think we are well past the point of no return with NJ. Just cut the mooring ropes loose and let NJ drift out into the north Atlantic. Perhaps a Rooski sub will spot it and put a couple of fish in it as a favor to Obamma.
This is why safes are important. A $400 safe or hell even a $20 lock box would have prevented a 4 year old from getting his hands on the gun. The fine is very high, but I don't think it's unfair.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Defensive Carry
5.4M posts
117.5K members
Since 2004
A forum community dedicated to defensive firearm owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about everyday carry, optics, holsters, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!