12 year old girl shoots mom

FredAkbar

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jan 18, 2003
660
0
Santa Barbara, CA
Seriously, it seems like a story like this is posted here every week...

abcnews.com said:
A 12-year-old girl upset about being grounded by her mother fatally shot the woman in the face while she slept, police said.

Elvira Marion Walton, 48, was discovered in her bed early Sunday by her son. The 10-year-old boy called police around 1 a.m.

"Apparently the motive is because the daughter was upset that the mother disciplined her," police Sgt. Gary Kirkpatrick said in Monday editions of The Dallas Morning News.

The girl has been charged with murder. Police found a gun in the house, but investigators did not immediately say whether it was the weapon used in the shooting or who owned it.

An older daughter, Thanica Derrick, said her mother had been having trouble with the girl. Walton had six children and lived in a converted garage used as the family home.

"She is your average 12-year-old, hormones and everything," said Derrick, 22. "There's nothing that bad to make her do that to my mama. She had been breaking out of the house and not going to school."
link, though I quoted the entire story here.

Dunno if I agree with her being charged with murder, I don't think locking her up at this age will solve anything...maybe some counseling or whatever...
 

t300

macrumors 6502a
Apr 10, 2004
976
0
Yeah, this news is getting old...

Looks like it's time to change the standards about what age qualifies you to be tried as an adult. She IS in Texas, though, so I say, fry her in the chair.
 

Mr. Anderson

Moderator emeritus
Nov 1, 2001
22,407
0
VA
I think its more than a case of hormones though....there's probably more to the story that's not being told.

Really sad, for the whole family.

D
 

Hemingray

macrumors 68030
Jan 9, 2002
2,913
25
Ha ha haaa!
This is why it's so important to use gun locks in a house with children!

Whoever owns that gun is going to be in big trouble. (Unless it was the mom, in which case... no comment.)
 

grapes911

Moderator emeritus
Jul 28, 2003
6,943
3
Citizens Bank Park
sushi said:
Sad story.

I am not an advocate of gun locks. Too easy to bypass.

I prefer a gun vault/safe.

Sushi
I perfer both. While I think Americans should have the right to arms, they should be more responsible with them.
 

wdlove

macrumors P6
Oct 20, 2002
16,570
0
That is beyond sad, just so tragic. Now seven lives have been ruined. Shooting her mother in the face indicates great anger. There is bound to be more to the story than we are being told. She may be 12, but she committed murder the taking of a life.
 

Hemingray

macrumors 68030
Jan 9, 2002
2,913
25
Ha ha haaa!
sushi said:
Sad story.

I am not an advocate of gun locks. Too easy to bypass.

I prefer a gun vault/safe.

Sushi
I would be surprised if a 12 year old girl could bypass a good gun lock (unless you mean finding the key). But I agree, a gun safe would be the better option. I'm glad that California requires a gun lock be purchased with new firearms. I think it's a step in the right direction at least...
 

belair

macrumors 6502
Jun 10, 2004
342
2
Luxland
jet3004 said:
She IS in Texas, though, so I say, fry her in the chair.
Are you joking?
If you are, it's not very funny.

America really needs to change it's policy on gun ownership real quick. A fight can get so quickly out of hand and if everybody carries a gun the situation becomes deadly.
As edesignuk put it. I am happy that in Europe the law is very strict about guns.
 

sushi

Moderator emeritus
Jul 19, 2002
15,630
3
キャンプスワ&#
edesignuk said:
Sad story, and that's why I'm glad we don't have such a gun culture over here.
Understand where you are coming from.

I would just like to add that guns are quite safe when handled properly by responsible adults. This come from someone who has been around guns their whole life.

The problem with gun safety, is that most folks don't know the correct way to handle a gun be it a pistol, shotgun, rifle, etc. I would like to see the requirement for anyone who wants to own a gun to have to pass a tough mandatory qualification course prior to being able to own a gun.

Having said that, even in England, and well as here in Japan, it is easy to get a gun. Illegal yes. But easy. All it takes is the right connections and some scratch.

Sushi
 

edesignuk

Moderator emeritus
Mar 25, 2002
19,077
1
London, England
sushi said:
I would just like to add that guns are quite safe when handled properly by responsible adults. This come from someone who has been around guns their whole life.
Maybe, but just the fact that they are there presents a greater danger than if they were not.
Having said that, even in England, and well as here in Japan, it is easy to get a gun. Illegal yes. But easy. All it takes is the right connections and some scratch.
I wouldn't have a clue where to get one from, and I think the same would go for the vast majority of people over here.
 

belair

macrumors 6502
Jun 10, 2004
342
2
Luxland
edesignuk said:
I wouldn't have a clue where to get one from, and I think the same would go for the vast majority of people over here.
How come?
I just have to ask my friend Bill, the drug dealer, and my golf partner, where he gets his guns and I'll just ask him to sell one to me. If that does not work i'll as jesse, my pimp mate, whom I enjoy going to theather with to sell one to me, now if that does not work I ring up my Bingo evening buddy Norman, I guess I will have to wait before he gets out of prison tough…
 

James L

macrumors 6502a
Apr 14, 2004
850
1
There are separate issues here:

1) The whole gun safety issue, which I agree with. The right to bear arms MUST be balanced with the responsibility to safe guard those weapons. BUT...

2) This is NO WAY excuses the actions of this child. Sad or not, unless an underlying psych disorder (and I am talking mostly about a psychopath who has no sense of right or wrong) is discovered, 12 year olds know shooting your mother in her sleep is wrong. It is completely irrelevant why the child had access to the weapon... personal responsibility still applies.

3) Sad or not, if the child did this knowing it was wrong, try her as an adult and lock her up. Emotions (i.e., being sad because she is a child) have no place in the equation.
 

frozenstar

macrumors regular
Jan 6, 2003
210
0
jet3004 said:
Yeah, this news is getting old...

Looks like it's time to change the standards about what age qualifies you to be tried as an adult. She IS in Texas, though, so I say, fry her in the chair.
You've got to be kidding. "Fry her in the chair" - yes, that's exactly the kind of attitude we need in order to prevent the spread of violence.

She's 12, barely even through puberty, and you wanna liquify her insides.

This girl wasn't born with the inclination to put a bullet in the head of a loved one. She probably had aggressive tendencies which were only reinforced by her environment. It's not something she DID that made her this way; it's something we DIDN'T do. So instead of following the "eye for an eye" ideology and pretending that the problem has been solved, let's admit that we've really just been trying to ignore a problem that we all know is only getting worse.

That's my take anyway. I could be wrong, of course.
 

EminenceGrise

macrumors member
Jun 23, 2004
86
0
belair said:
America really needs to change it's policy on gun ownership real quick. A fight can get so quickly out of hand and if everybody carries a gun the situation becomes deadly.
As edesignuk put it. I am happy that in Europe the law is very strict about guns.
Except that the right to bear arms is guaranteed by Amendment to the Constitution, as part of the Bill of Rights:

AMENDMENT[II.] A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Further, it is (by design) difficult to modify the Constitution (or it's Amendments - the Second Amendment can only be stricken by another amendment (like Prohibition was)), as set forth in Article V. of the Constitution. An Amendment must be passed by 2/3 of the votes in both the House of Representatives and the Senate - or it can be proposed by 2/3 of the States' Legislatures. It must then be ratified by 3/4 of the States to become an Amendment.

You have to understand some of historical background to know why this Amendment was included in the Bill of Rights. A short list:

1) Firearms were very much a necessity in the early history of the US - the country was a frontier, after all. You had to hunt your own food, and the natives could be 'hostile'.

2) The Revolutionary War would obviously not have happened if the people had not had access to arms. In addition, after the war, the Framers of the Constitution were very distrustful of any form of government, and to some extent each other (in the sense that the different States had differing ideas about how things should be run; the Constitution is direct evidence of this - see also the previous 'Articles of Confederation'). An armed populace would keep things in check, in the sense that should an armed conflict become the only resolution to an oppressive government (as had just occurred), the people would have the tools to deal with that.

3) The US had no standing army at the time. The only defense available were the volunteer colonial militias, which could be called up should they be needed. Traditionally, they supplied their own firearms (they already had them as part of frontier life).

--

Modern day concerns about firearms simply didn't exist when the Bill of Rights was ratified. People were well used to firearms safety, it was a fact of life ("common sense" if you will). Part of the current problem is that for a large part of this nation's history, firearms have been a necessity and many people still view them as such (some legitimately, and others less so...). However, the safety aspect is no longer 'common sense' to a good part of the 'gun toting' populace. There isn't anything inherently unsafe with people owning guns, any more than for people who own and drive cars. People are just no longer well equipped by life alone to know about gun safety (it's not like they teach it in school...). I personally don't own a gun, and probably never will - I simply have no reason to own one. However, I understand why the right to bear arms exists in this country, and I'm not really willing to give up a right simply because I don't have a use for it at the present time.

That's not to say that I don't think what is currently happening in this country RE: gun usage is appalling - rather, I don't think the problem can be legislated away. Too many people are imprisoned in this country as it is. Education would be far more effective (in solving this problem and many others). Something is wrong in this country when 12 year old children are killing their parents, but to me it doesn't follow that is simply because there is 'easy access to guns'. You don't need a gun to kill someone - trying to ban guns, for example, is like treating the symptom and not the disease. It would be better to figure out why so many people think that this kind of violence is an acceptable way to 'solve' problems, and fix that instead.
 

James L

macrumors 6502a
Apr 14, 2004
850
1
frozenstar said:
You've got to be kidding. "Fry her in the chair" - yes, that's exactly the kind of attitude we need in order to prevent the spread of violence.

She's 12, barely even through puberty, and you wanna liquify her insides.

This girl wasn't born with the inclination to put a bullet in the head of a loved one. She probably had aggressive tendencies which were only reinforced by her environment. It's not something she DID that made her this way; it's something we DIDN'T do. So instead of following the "eye for an eye" ideology and pretending that the problem has been solved, let's admit that we've really just been trying to ignore a problem that we all know is only getting worse.

That's my take anyway. I could be wrong, of course.

I am not saying you are wrong, but there are WAY to many cases of people like this getting through the system, only to kill again at a later time.

There is no good solution, but a person who is intelligent enough to know that you do not shoot mom in the head as she sleeps cannot be allowed to walk the streets. I am not saying death penalty (we don't have it where I live), but do the crime, do the time.
 

King Cobra

macrumors 603
Mar 2, 2002
5,403
0
I think this line from the article needs to be reread:

She is your average 12-year-old, hormones and everything," said Derrick, 22. "There's nothing that bad to make her do that to my mama. She had been breaking out of the house and not going to school."

Now let's say that what Derrick said about "average" is true, and that "average" is meant to characterize the female as what is already said above, plus possessing no apparent needs or desires that would qualify for student disability attention, rather than the educational average level of "C." I am very inclined to deduce that something happened that impacted the child's emotional stability, and the original cause was not her fault, as if it was, then she would self-destruct. Otherwise, the child would not murder. So now my take on the situation is: Somebody needs to redevelop parental training programs for these "average" children so that parents more carefully notice the emotional patterns and recognize all of the smallest actions that would set the "average" child off.
 

wdlove

macrumors P6
Oct 20, 2002
16,570
0
James L said:
I am not saying you are wrong, but there are WAY to many cases of people like this getting through the system, only to kill again at a later time.

There is no good solution, but a person who is intelligent enough to know that you do not shoot mom in the head as she sleeps cannot be allowed to walk the streets. I am not saying death penalty (we don't have it where I live), but do the crime, do the time.
I agree, that many are lost in the system and allowed to commit a crime again. More needs to be with chronic offenders.

I agree, don't think that she could ever be trusted. She will need to be under constant monitoring,

The problem with guns doesn't need more laws, the current laws need to be aggressively enforced. If someone knows you have a gun, it is less likely they they will attack. Legal carrying of guns and proper care saves lives.
 

tdhurst

macrumors 601
Dec 27, 2003
4,003
101
Phoenix, AZ
Right, of course it's not her fault...

frozenstar said:
You've got to be kidding. "Fry her in the chair" - yes, that's exactly the kind of attitude we need in order to prevent the spread of violence.

She's 12, barely even through puberty, and you wanna liquify her insides.

This girl wasn't born with the inclination to put a bullet in the head of a loved one. She probably had aggressive tendencies which were only reinforced by her environment. It's not something she DID that made her this way; it's something we DIDN'T do. So instead of following the "eye for an eye" ideology and pretending that the problem has been solved, let's admit that we've really just been trying to ignore a problem that we all know is only getting worse.

That's my take anyway. I could be wrong, of course.
You're saying her ENVIRONMENT prompted her to shoot her mom in the face? Punching someone, swinging a bat during an argument...all those are done in anger. Getting a gun, cocking, aiming and pulling the trigger are premeditated acts that deserve punishment.
Seriously tho, you think that all problems can be solved by therapy? I am a firm believer that executing all those guilty of premeditated murder would do a lot in preventing it...
Oh, gun laws are important too. But I have yet to see a gun kill someone on its own. Someone HAS to pull the trigger...
 

frozenstar

macrumors regular
Jan 6, 2003
210
0
appleretailguy said:
You're saying her ENVIRONMENT prompted her to shoot her mom in the face? Punching someone, swinging a bat during an argument...all those are done in anger. Getting a gun, cocking, aiming and pulling the trigger are premeditated acts that deserve punishment.
Seriously tho, you think that all problems can be solved by therapy? I am a firm believer that executing all those guilty of premeditated murder would do a lot in preventing it...
Why does a premeditated crime necessarily deserve punishment? You say because it deters potential offenders. But there is very little data to support that claim. In fact, just about everything we know about human psychology strongly suggests that rewarding people for good deeds is considerably more effective than punishing people for bad ones. The real reason that a premeditated crime necessarily deserves punishment is because it fuels the innate human desire for vengeance. The inclination to retaliate is an attribute that evolved out of necessity. It's no longer useful as we've abandoned modes of living that involved individual competition for food, land, mates, etc... But we're still stuck with it.
That's what I think, anyway.
 

sushi

Moderator emeritus
Jul 19, 2002
15,630
3
キャンプスワ&#
appleretailguy said:
You're saying her ENVIRONMENT prompted her to shoot her mom in the face? Punching someone, swinging a bat during an argument...all those are done in anger. Getting a gun, cocking, aiming and pulling the trigger are premeditated acts that deserve punishment.
Bottom line, is people need to be held accountable for their actions, regardless of age. Humans have a device located between their ears which allows for judgement to be interjected in any situation. So many times it is much easier to blame someone or something else for our actions.

Sushi
 

sushi

Moderator emeritus
Jul 19, 2002
15,630
3
キャンプスワ&#
frozenstar said:
Why does a premeditated crime necessarily deserve punishment? You say because it deters potential offenders. But there is very little data to support that claim. In fact, just about everything we know about human psychology strongly suggests that rewarding people for good deeds is considerably more effective than punishing people for bad ones.
Okay, no sweat. Understand.

So when your 12 year old, or some other teenager blows you or a close family member away, we'll just say that's fine. No reason to punish them. Besides you would not want them punished anyway. :D

Sushi
 

sushi

Moderator emeritus
Jul 19, 2002
15,630
3
キャンプスワ&#
Hemingray said:
I would be surprised if a 12 year old girl could bypass a good gun lock (unless you mean finding the key). But I agree, a gun safe would be the better option. I'm glad that California requires a gun lock be purchased with new firearms. I think it's a step in the right direction at least...
There are many types of gun locks.

My favorite is free. You just remove the bolt mechanism. That is what I do with assault weapons. This part of the weapon is stored in a different location.

As for the typical key trigger guard, they are easy to overcome. While it is a step in the right direction, it does not necessarily prevent the gun from being used.

Just like a car anti-theft device will not prevent a thief from stealing a car. It just slows them down for the most part. Sure there are exceptions.

The reason that I like a safe or vault is that the whole gun is protected vice just the trigger assembly with a trigger guard. BTW, I have been able to fire a pistol with a trigger guard installed. Most of the time, trigger guard key locks are easily opened/broken.

Anyway, maybe because of my background and military experience I am a bit different than the average person when it comes to guns.

BTW, on a side note, it is a blast to fire a 7.62 minigun or 20mm cannon via a head mounted site while you are flying. Just look at the target and press the trigger. Although, the 20mm will kick the Cobra around a bit when you fire especially off axis firing.

Sushi