Father of boy who shot friend gets 3 yrs

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-23-2003
Father of boy who shot friend gets 3 yrs
186
Sun, 07-18-2004 - 1:21pm

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/apus_story.asp?category=1110&slug=Child%20Shot%20Sentence


Saturday, July 17, 2004 · Last updated 8:28 p.m. PT


Father of boy who shot friend gets 3 years


THE ASSOCIATED PRESS


CLEARWATER, Fla. -- The father of a boy who shot and killed a playmate with a loaded gun he found stashed under a sofa was sentenced to nearly three years in prison, followed by probation during which he must speak monthly on gun safety.


Louis Mevec Sr. was sentenced Friday for felony culpable negligence in the 2003 death of Sean Caroline II. Mevec, who owned the .357-caliber Magnum used to kill the 12-year-old friend of his son Louis, was convicted last month.


During his father's trial, 14-year-old Louis testified that a small group of Largo Middle School students had skipped school and were playing video games at Mevec's apartment when he pointed the gun at Sean and shot him between the eyes.


"I blame you and only you for my son's death," Sean Caroline, Sean's father, told Louis Mevec Sr. in court Friday. "My wife and I are also serving a sentence ... but we got no trial. Ours is a life sentence."


Circuit Judge Brandt Downey sentenced Mevec, 53, to the maximum six-year prison term, but suspended more than half of it and replaced it with probation. His remaining sentence is 34 months, but with good behavior he could be released by late 2006.


The Caroline family had asked that Mevec be required to speak on gun safety after his release.


The younger Louis Mevec was sent to a juvenile facility and is now living in New York with his mother and younger brother.

 Sprinkler cl-nwtreehugger   


Community Leader:  In The News Newspaper 3  & Sports Talk Baseball 


I can also be found at Washington Washington   ,


TV ShowsTV 2 & QOTW Question Mark


 Sewing   Be sure to check out the CraftsPaint Pallet


messageboard for fun, creative & unique projects!






Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-18-2004
Fri, 07-23-2004 - 2:53pm
"I find they spend time justifying why they need some new weapon to meet some imagined threat. "

If they are justifying why they need a weapon they have already lost. My justification is "I want one". I don't need a "valid" reason.

"Anyone who breaks into my home is welcome to take whatever he wants. It can be replaced. "

Can you life be replaced?

"So tell me. With all your weapons, do you feel safe?"

Guess that depends on the individual but safer...sure.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-18-2004
Fri, 07-23-2004 - 3:03pm
"Mark, Mark, Mark. >A firearm is just a tool<???? No, a hammer is a tool, a saw is a tool. "

So is a gun, or at least it can be. A hammer is nothing but a manufactured object. It is useless until it is picked up and used. A gun is nothing but a manufactured object, and unless Canada has guns with AI, they too are useless until they are used. It is the user that adds the danger.


"No one is surprised and it certainly doesn't make the front page or evening news when someone hits a nail with a hammer. "

And it doesn't make the front page when someone shoots on a target range or stops a crime by simply showing the weapon.

Someone beats someone to death with a hammer it makes the news. Want to regulate them? How about if criminals started doing drive by hammerings where they jump out and beat you with a hammer? Regulate hammers? Blame the hammer? Of course not but gun grabbers do this with guns.

"But I could use the same reasoning you have employed, that handgrenades don't kill, people kill."

Correct. I would concede your point if say...every armed person (cop, military, or citizen) were just killed by their weapon jumping out of its safe and pulling the trigger itself. Gun grabbers that argue "guns kill people" are thinking below a 1st grade level. I could say the same thing about a rolled up newspaper, makes as much sense.


"Hopefully people in the United States will become aware of why the rest of the world laughs at the US reasoning, or lack of the same. "

Tell you what, let the world laugh. They (the rest of the world) need us. When was the last time Canadians or any other country helped the US with a natural disaster? Now reverse the question and see what the answer is. When they need us we will still be there bailing their sad unarmed or under-armed countries out of the fire. I hate the "But the rest of the world thinks that you should..." So what.

We'll (US) call them(the world) when we need someone and let them call us when they need someone...want to bet whose phone rings first?


"The US ambivalence towards weapons, the propaganda spread by the self interests of weapons makers, has created a society more un-safe than any other nation on this earth that is not enagaged in war within its own territory. "

This is just blantantly false. First, we ain't ambivalent...we love our guns. Second the facts don't support this position but then again...lets just ignore them....




Edited 7/23/2004 3:20 pm ET ET by vader716

Avatar for merlins_own
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-25-2003
Fri, 07-23-2004 - 3:04pm
"Gotta love the laws that protect the criminals rights..."Ya got that right! :[[ It SHOULD BE that a criminal leaves his rights behind at your propery line...once he crosses over, for robbery or whatever.

Merlins_Own

AS ABOVE, SO BELOW!

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-03-2003
Fri, 07-23-2004 - 3:45pm
So is a firearm, as it's an item used by an individual to accomplish a given task. Just as you use a hammer to drive a nail, and a saw to cut wood, you can use a firearm to accomplish certain goals. Taking game animals, busting a clay pigeon, and defending yourself or others are all tasks, and you can use a firearm to accomplish those tasks.

"It doesn't even make the news when someone shoots a deer with a rifle (a firearm could be a tool in such a case)"

A firearm is a tool in EVERY case. Whether it's used for a good purpose or a foul purpose is irrelevant, it's still just a tool.

"I can buy handgrenades on the internet."

More power to you. In this country you have to have a special license to legally acquire or possess destructive devices such as that one. Aside from that, it's not a firearm, with limited utility outside of a combat zone.

"Explain to me how a handgrenade is a "tool"."

Sure. In combat situations, they are used for a number of military purposes, from forcing an enemy or enemies to keep their head down to taking out a group of enemies all at once. It's a tool, largely used only by military forces, but a tool nonetheless.

"But I could use the same reasoning you have employed, that handgrenades don't kill, people kill."

And at the base of the issue you'd be correct, since it still takes the actions of an individual to use the weapon in question. It's just an inanimate object until such time as it's used for purposes fair or foul.

"Hopefully people in the United States will become aware of why the rest of the world laughs at the US reasoning, or lack of the same."

Lack of reasoning? If the rest of the world is sitting there convinced that inanimate objects are somehow responsible for the manner in which they're used instead of a person being responsible, they can go right on laughing, as the joke's on them.

"Or maybe you are at war and you just don't know it"

Or maybe we're mature enough to recognize firearms for the tools they are, and the rest of the world isn't.

~mark~

Avatar for papparic
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003
Sat, 07-24-2004 - 1:42am
Communication breakdown! Why is it that Americans assume that if someone breaks into your house that he is automatically a homicidal maniac?

I'm sure if you do a thorough check of US statistics you will find that the greatest number of homicides are committed by someone the victim knows, either a relative or acquaintance.

If someone breaks into my house I won't know the person because: I'm not in the habit of forming acquaintances with homicidal maniacs; my circle of friends does not include drug users or violent people; I don't belong to a gang; I don't have a criminal record; I am not in a relationship.

Here in Canada 84% of all homicides are committed by a relative (44%) or an acquaintance (40%). With the average number of 69 homicides by a stranger per year, that gives me a 0.00023% chance of being killed by a stranger in any given year. My chances of being hit by lightning are about the same but I'm not about to give up golf.

So I leave my doors unlocked. Besides, locks only stop honest people. Anyone who wants my stuff will face no resistance from me. (Our insurance rates are apparently higher in Canada but we live longer.)

I feel safe....because I am safe.

Unfortunately, citizens of the US cannot say the same thing.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-03-2003
Sat, 07-24-2004 - 10:22am
"Why is it that Americans assume that if someone breaks into your house that he is automatically a homicidal maniac?"

Why do you assume that's what we believe? The fact of the matter is that such individuals as those who generally break into houses with criminal intent are where they aren't supposed to be, and in many states here Castle Doctrine applies to such situations. Those individuals don't even have to have murder or harm on their minds for us to defend ourselves or our property from their criminal actions.

"So I leave my doors unlocked."

Ah, it's open house for anyone who decides to remove some of your property for you. How enlightened.

"Anyone who wants my stuff will face no resistance from me."

So you'd give a criminal free reign of your home rather than bother to defend it or yourself? I suppose that's some sort of Criminal Aid Society policy, or maybe a crime welfare program for the needy.

"I feel safe....because I am safe."

You *feel* safe because you're in denial about what crime is or who it can happen to. Besides which, safety is a relative thing, and disdaining even reasonable, prudent precautions such as securing your home is a fools game.

"Unfortunately, citizens of the US cannot say the same thing."

Why can't we? Crime is signifantly lower than it was even just a decade or two ago, and we not only have the means to defend ourselves when and if such a need arises, we're willing to do so. You, on the other hand, appear perfectly willing to count on the good nature of someone who has already committed a crime against you to protect you. Now THAT'S warped.

~mark~

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sun, 07-25-2004 - 11:25pm
You are utterly and spectacularly wrong on this. "In every case where private gun ownership is greatly restricted or outlawed crime has risen and gun related crime has gone up as well".



Where on earth do you get your 'facts' from !

Octagonal
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-03-2003
Sun, 07-25-2004 - 11:44pm
Okay, you challenge his claim as being "utterly and spectacularly wrong", yet you offer no contradictory evidence. Curious...

However, just to use an anecdotal example, take a look at the situation in Great Britain since they for all practical purposes outlawed all handguns and most privately owned firearms entirely (in 1998). Subsequently, they've seen a rather significant rise in the crime rates there, to include firearms-related crime. Not arguing cause and effect, but the increase in crime is a fact.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3868411.stm

~mark~

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Mon, 07-26-2004 - 8:24am

The statistics in the UK may reflect the increase of guns in Britain since the ban but there's a reason for this. The reason has nothing to do with the ban. Remember "figures lie when liars figure".


In the UK the only people that owned guns/rifles were gameskeepers, country estate owners, farmers, ex-military types, shooting club members. The general public did not own guns. I have never ever

 


Photobucket&nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-18-2004
Mon, 07-26-2004 - 10:51am
"You are utterly and spectacularly wrong on this"

Wow Utterly and spectacularly!... Man I must have really screwed up. Tell you what..prove me wrong...I could give you statistics, studies, books, articles, anecdotal stories etc.

However, you show me where gun control works. How about it?

The gauntlet is thrown....I'm ready with my facts....let me see yours...

Jim

Pages