This case presents an interesting dilemma to gun rights supporters, and you can see it in many of the comments already posted. On the one hand, we advocate the notion that we live in what should be a free society where citizens can keep and bear arms free of infringement from the government. We strongly object to the notion of reasonable gun control where the government can mandate for example that guns can only be kept in the home, unloaded, disabled, locked, and secured from easy access, etc.
Well, should we be free to make individual choices about self defense of our own families or should we as a society make those judgments and enforce our collective judgment through the government? You can't have it both ways, and that's what we see in many of the comments so far. Who can make a better judgment about the welfare and safety of these two children? You, the government, or the parent? Keep in mind that if we're going to judge, we should have to make that judgment in advance, not after the fact, just like this parent did. Keep in mind that, in advance, society's judgment will be freedom or gun control. Which do you support?