# 8 yo Boy Killed Firing Submachine Gun



## MJS (Oct 28, 2008)

Saw this in todays paper.  



> Eight-year-old Christopher Bizilj died after accidentally shooting himself in the head in what was supposed to be among the safest possible settings for youngsters to handle firearms.
> 
> The third-grader from Ashford, a well-liked "all-American boy," was attending a "Machine Gun Shoot & Firearms Expo" on Sunday at the long-established Westfield Sportsman's Club in Massachusetts. While shooting, he was supervised by a trained professional and within sight of his father, Dr. Charles Bizilj, the medical director of emergency and critical care at Johnson Memorial Hospital in Stafford.


 
Now, I'll preface this with saying something that I always say when the subject is on firearms...I'm not anti-gun.  I have no issues with people owning them.  I do take issue though, with people who are negligent with them.  In this case, I'd have to say that someone wasn't doing something that they should have been.  I say this, because if we look at the opening paragraph, it states that the gun was on the safest possible setting.  If that was the case, it seems they didn't take into consideration anything else, such as what we see in this part:



> "The weapon was loaded and ready to fire," Westfield police Lt. Hipolito Nunez said. "The 8-year-old victim had the Uzi and as he was firing the weapon, the front end of the weapon went up with the [recoil] and he ended up receiving a round in his head."


 
It'll be interesting to see how this turns out.


----------



## Journeyman (Oct 28, 2008)

Just to clear up any misunderstanding, it's referring to where the gun was being used as "among the safest possible settings" and not the gun itself being on the safest possible setting.  I'm very pro-gun but I think it's unbelievably foolish to allow an 8-year-old to fire a fully automatic weapon.  I wouldn't even let an 8-year-old hold a loaded fully automatic weapon.


----------



## MA-Caver (Oct 28, 2008)

Journeyman said:


> Just to clear up any misunderstanding, it's referring to where the gun was being used as "among the safest possible settings" and not the gun itself being on the safest possible setting.  I'm very pro-gun but I think it's unbelievably foolish to allow an 8-year-old to fire a fully automatic weapon.  I wouldn't even let an 8-year-old hold a loaded fully automatic weapon.


Strongly agree here. That was just plain stupid and ... my god I can't even think of a word strong enough to suit here... A long rifle maybe, an M-16-1A maybe because at least it doesn't have the same jumpiness as an Uzi. Did they forget why Terrorists of the 70's and 80's loved that weapon?? Small and easy to conceal but still pull the trigger and let it point itself at whatever! 
Charges need to be filed and compensation to the family to be dealt out accordingly. The father should be reprimanded as well for even ALLOWING his own to handle the weapon.

I also feel this thread needs to be moved to Horror Stories.


----------



## Jade Tigress (Oct 28, 2008)

I was going to post that same article here and got sidetracked. My thoughts, and I know nothing about guns, but even I could guess that with kick back on a weapon like that it should not be allowed in the hands of a child.

What else gets me about the whole thing is the "family fun", "shooting at pumpkins", "anyone can fire a weapon". For the length of time this *event* has been going on it's shock no one has been injured or killed sooner. 

It's a real shame.


----------



## Deaf Smith (Oct 28, 2008)

Guys,

When I take a student out to shoot, male or female, and they have never shot a large bore pistol, I always put just one round in the mag for the first time they fire so if the gun flys out of their hands nobody gets shot (including me.)

I've seen many people shocked at the recoil had the gun just jump around in their hand alot (none let go of it, but I'm sure it can happen!)

So if an adult can have that problem, why did they allow an 8 year old with a fully loaded Uzi? The Uzi has either a 20 round or 32 round mag and that will allow for alot of muzzle rise.

Another question about this. The Uzi has a grip safey (in case you let go of the gun). So why didn't it activate? Did the kid still have ahold of it and still be pulling the trigger? Was it disabled? 

The father was supposed to be right behind him. Was he also holding the weapon?

Tragic and a lawyers fiest. You know the lawyers will be all over this.

Deaf


----------



## MJS (Oct 29, 2008)

Journeyman said:


> Just to clear up any misunderstanding, it's referring to where the gun was being used as "among the safest possible settings" and not the gun itself being on the safest possible setting. I'm very pro-gun but I think it's unbelievably foolish to allow an 8-year-old to fire a fully automatic weapon. I wouldn't even let an 8-year-old hold a loaded fully automatic weapon.


 
My bad.  Thanks for clearing that up.


----------



## MJS (Oct 29, 2008)

Another article on the same subject in todays paper. Here is the gun he was using. Its the 3rd one down.

Like I said, I'm not anti-gun. I just have a strong opinion that people need to be properly trained. Jade made a good point in her post. Even after reading the article today, the whole thing is billed almost as a game. I have to wonder just how much safety is preached at these things.

Hey, if someone wants to teach their kid how to shoot, fine.  But start them out with something not so powerful.  I don't know much about guns, but I'm sure there is something that is better to start the kid out with.  That'd be like giving a brand new driver a 500hp Corvette to drive.  Seems like alot of power for a new driver.  So, that makes me wonder....how much shooting experience did this 8yo have?


----------



## MJS (Oct 29, 2008)

Deaf Smith said:


> The father was supposed to be right behind him. Was he also holding the weapon?
> 
> 
> Deaf


 
According to the article, no, the child was holding it.  Someone did say that an adult should have held it, while the child pulled the trigger.

"Allowing the boy to handle the gun by himself was stupid and criminal negligence," said Robert A. Greenleaf Sr., 86, who left the club's board of directors because he opposed the annual machine gun shoot. Someone should have held the gun and allowed the boy to pull the trigger, he said."

"While shooting, he was supervised by a trained professional and within sight of his father, Dr. Charles Bizilj, the medical director of emergency and critical care at Johnson Memorial Hospital in Stafford."


----------



## Grenadier (Oct 29, 2008)

It has nothing to do with the firearm, and everything to do with irresponsible parental supervision.  

An 8 year old can learn to fire a fully automatic weapon, but the parent must teach them properly, and not just say "fire away."  

It's the same thing as a child who never had any experience in driving a vehicle, and then tries to drive a snowmobile, and ends up getting crushed by the flipped over vehicle.  Does this mean that I disapprove of 8 year olds driving snowmobiles?  

No.  

If the child were properly trained in the operation of the vehicle, then I would certainly feel comfortable enough letting him snowmobile on his own in a controlled environment.


----------



## MA-Caver (Oct 29, 2008)

MJS said:


> "While shooting, he was supervised by a *trained professional* and within sight of his father, Dr. Charles Bizilj, the medical director of emergency and critical care at Johnson Memorial Hospital in Stafford."


Someone being trained to do something that they get paid for is usually called a professional. It by *no* means makes them an *expert*. There's a difference. 
The fact that this tragedy happened and with such a dangerous weapon (in the wrong hands) and the idea that they thought such a smaller version would be "o.k." for kids to use... it HAD to been their train of thought as they selected the guns for use of that day. "It's small and tiny so yeah a kid can use this. " What all that tells me is that there were NO experienced experts on hand to ensure complete safety. This includes the selection of the weapon, the type of ammo used and who shoots what. 

Next time any one talks to an 8 year old have a nice conversation with them... then imagine putting an automatic weapon in their hands and allowing them to shoot it... makes you wonder why these *******s didn't do the same thing beforehand.


----------



## MJS (Oct 29, 2008)

MA-Caver said:


> Someone being trained to do something that they get paid for is usually called a professional. It by *no* means makes them an *expert*. There's a difference.


 
One would think and hope, that anyone that is teaching someone else how to do something, would know what they're doing.  Unfortunately, as we well know, thats not always the case.  In a martial arts perspective, look at how many McDojos are out there.  They claim that they're teaching real, effective stuff, yet compared to other, more professional, legit schools, theres a huge difference.  

In this case, especially dealing with guns, we could only hope that the people running this event would have a clue.  Sadly in this case, a huge, and fatal error was made, both on the part of the person with this kid, as well as with his father.


----------



## MJS (Oct 29, 2008)

Grenadier said:


> It has nothing to do with the firearm, and everything to do with irresponsible parental supervision.
> 
> An 8 year old can learn to fire a fully automatic weapon, but the parent must teach them properly, and not just say "fire away."
> 
> ...


 
Just so I'm understanding...an 8yo, who weighs less and is much smaller than a grown adult is going to be able to handle the same weapon, regardless of what the weapon is?


----------



## Big Don (Oct 29, 2008)

I've read several articles about this and am still having trouble grasping the mechanics of what happened. When he fired did the weapon rotate around his finger(s)  with the trigger guard as a pivot point?


----------



## Grenadier (Oct 29, 2008)

MJS said:


> Just so I'm understanding...an 8yo, who weighs less and is much smaller than a grown adult is going to be able to handle the same weapon, regardless of what the weapon is?




Apples and oranges here.  Most 8 year olds will not be able to handle, say, a BAR chambered in the 30.06 Springfield.  That's just too powerful of a cartridge for them to handle safely in full auto mode.  

The UZI listed there has 4.4 lbs of weight, and firing standard pressure 115 grain 9 mm ammo is actually quite manageable, even for a child, in semiautomatic mode.  

With proper training and supervision, a child could certainly control such a weapon, even in automatic mode.  

Unfortunately, for this child, he had neither the training, nor the supervision.  

As with any automatic weapon, though, there will be muzzle climb, and if someone who has never fired an automatic weapon before, isn't instructed properly (maintain firm grip, lean forward, etc),


----------



## MA-Caver (Oct 29, 2008)

MJS said:


> One would think and hope, that anyone that is teaching someone else how to do something, would know what they're doing.  Unfortunately, as we well know, thats not always the case.  In a martial arts perspective, look at how many McDojos are out there.  They claim that they're teaching real, effective stuff, yet compared to other, more professional, legit schools, there's a huge difference.
> 
> In this case, especially dealing with guns, we could only hope that the people running this event would have a clue.  Sadly in this case, a huge, and fatal error was made, both on the part of the person with this kid, as well as with his father.


What makes me angry is three things... 1. the un-necessary death of a child who was there to have a good time and was probably really enjoying himself right up to the moment the gun started to buck in his hands... then it got scary/confusing real quick up to the moment he died. 2. The total lack of responsibility on the part of the whole group that lead the event. Not ensuring that age appropriate firearms (for an 8 yr. old a bb gun is probably the best bet.. and that is still with close supervision) were issued and supervised throughout. 3. it provides more fodder for anti-gun groups to pass stricter laws against firearms. 
That the people running the event are far and beyond having a clue now. If they're lucky they won't be shut down permanently because of this event. As it was said, lawyers are going to be swarming all over this and the WRONG type of lawyers at that! The ones who are on the same side as the anti-gun folks. 

As I've mentioned before elsewhere... it only takes one guy to screw it up for the rest of us. 

That a child, and from the photo an obviously happy and beautiful child had to die because of this negligent act is far beyond what is usually called a tragedy.


----------



## MJS (Dec 5, 2008)

Saw this in todays paper.  A few things that stuck out.



> As Christopher fired at a pumpkin, the Uzi's rapid rate of fire &#8212; 1,700 rounds per minute &#8212; caused the gun's barrel to climb and the boy lost control of the weapon, said William M. Bennett, the Hampden, Mass., district attorney who announced the indictments Thursday


 
As I said, I'm not against guns and am no gun expert, but I still find it hard to believe that even with training, a child that young and small, could handle a gun with that much power.  IMO, its kind of like saying an 8yo would be able to take on a 6'5, 250lb grown man.  Note the height and weight of this child:



> Bennett said Bizilj selected the small weapon for his 4-foot-3, 66-pound son to fire after being assured it was safe


 



> Bennett said Giuffre and Spano brought the weapon to the show after being assured by Fleury that it was legal for children to use it under Massachusetts law. It was not known Thursday how many firms supplied guns at the event.
> 
> That, however, is not the case, Bennett said. Massachusetts law prohibits furnishing a machine gun to any person younger than 18, Bennett said. "There is no exception that would allow a machine gun to be furnished to an 8-year-old, with or without parental consent," Bennett said.


 
Looks like there was some confusion, as these 2 statements contradict each other a bit.




> Bennett noted that the weapon Christopher fired is "made by and for the Israeli Armed Forces and is intended to meet the operational needs of Israeli Special Forces. It is not a hunting weapon. It has a rate of fire of 1,700 rounds per minute."
> 
> The grand jury did not indict Christopher's father, Dr. Charles Bizilj, who was standing nearby preparing to snap a photo of his son when the accident occurred. Bennett said Bizilj will be punished each day for the rest of his life.
> 
> ...



Hmmmmm.....


----------



## Big Don (Dec 5, 2008)

> As Christopher fired at a pumpkin, the Uzi's rapid rate of fire &#8212; 1,700 rounds per minute &#8212; caused the gun's barrel to climb and the boy lost control of the weapon, said William M. Bennett, the Hampden, Mass., district attorney who announced the indictments Thursday


Uh, No. The rate of fire they mention is almost THREE TIMES the actual 600 round per minute rate of fire. 
600 RPM would still be a lot for a little kid to handle, but, overstating the actual rate of fire is inflammatory at best.
When in Basic Training, we were allowed one magazine at full-auto, we were instructed to make a loop in the sling, just large enough for our off hand to fit through and we were specifically told to PULL DOWN to counteract the recoil induced muzzle climb. I was a big kid and I was amazed how much the barrel still climbed on me.


----------



## MA-Caver (Dec 5, 2008)

Either way, it's a tragic loss and the company/companies that sponsored this careless event should lose their licenses. Careless that they had instructors who apparently didn't know better and were more concerned with making sure everyone had a good time. 
This is an example of the gun(s) being in the wrong hands.


----------



## MJS (Dec 5, 2008)

Big Don said:


> Uh, No. The rate of fire they mention is almost THREE TIMES the actual 600 round per minute rate of fire.
> 600 RPM would still be a lot for a little kid to handle, but, overstating the actual rate of fire is inflammatory at best.
> When in Basic Training, we were allowed one magazine at full-auto, we were instructed to make a loop in the sling, just large enough for our off hand to fit through and we were specifically told to PULL DOWN to counteract the recoil induced muzzle climb. I was a big kid and I was amazed how much the barrel still climbed on me.


 
Please see this link which I posted on page one. The gun in question is the 3rd one down on that page and if you scroll down further, it gives the stats on the various weapons.


----------

