Michael Santiago, 25, is under arrest for felony child endangerment after his 6-year-old son accidentally shot and killed his 3-year-old brother. Santiago kept the .32-caliber Smith & Wesson revolver fully loaded on top of the refrigerator.
The boys were reportedly playing “cops and robbers” when the gun went off. Their grandfather was watching them but was upstairs at the time. Santiago is a former gang member who said that he had the gun (purchased illegally off the street) to protect himself after testifying against a fellow gang member. Santiago, a manager at a Papa Ray’s Pizza restaurant, is being held on $75,000 bond.
Santiago appears to have been working hard after leaving the gang — putting in six days a week at the pizza restaurant.
The combination of the illegal purchase and the endangerment allegation could result in serious time for Santiago. The question is whether a court should consider the loss of the child in reducing the sentence. Santiago is described as a loving father who did a terribly stupid and reckless thing. Given the loss of the child, do you think that serious jail time is warranted?
Source: CNN
“Fear is an emotion. You operate and proselytize on fear. You fear everything.”
SJWs always project.
You’re proselytizing over your fear of guns.
Fine; don’t own one.
And put a big sign on your door that says: Gun Free Zone.
Show me how unafraid you are.
It hasn’t worked very well for schools, but I’m sure it’ll work for you.
As unfortunate and tragic as it is that these 15 persons died, it is not reasonable to deny a civil right to 310 million others due to 15 child deaths. If that the death of 15 persons was sufficient cause to deny people their liberty it would take less than a day for us to lose nearly all our freedom.
For those who believe in denying firearms rights, as those rights granted by the Second Amendment, you might want to consider the ramifications of such a demand.
One of the largest common elements among mass shootings is the notion of the copy-cat. If such logic with firearms was applied to freedom of the press, that is of the first amendment, then those protesting the second amendment should also demand that the first amendment be repealed as the idea for seeding these deranged shooters stems from their watching or reading about a prior event via the press. Should you then also ban freedom of the press as well? You might scoff at the notion of banning the free press but when you talk about banning firearms as a whole by repealing the second amendment you are making the same constitutional argument in censoring the news to prevent another shooting.
If we fully deprecate one civil right, who is to say the government will not take advantage of this inertia to repeal other amendments and civil rights?
Remember, the biggest threat to liberty is not the firearm, the criminal, the terrorist, or a foreign government. It is Congress, The President, and politicians as a whole, for they have the ability to take it away through self-serving legislation or executive action. That is why we as citizens should never defer or grant them the ability to dispense of our rights because they claim to be protecting us from some unproven calamity. Remember that these promises are not necessarily in our best interests and we should not believe they are always being altruistic in their intentions.
If we voluntarily allow politicians the ability to remove our liberty, history shows that it is often only a matter of time before they take much more away.
There are creepy people at the 7- Eleven.
One man, one vote. I hope that still works. Crazy people with guns will not work.
I need protection at my dentist’s office.
“depend on law enforcement”?
And when it’s law enforcement actually committing the unlawful act, what’s your response? When your government no longer has to be concerned that law-abiding citizens will be able to defend their life, liberty and property, what is to prevent THEM from stripping those citizens of other “constitutionally protected” rights?
Are there any lessons in history that will answer that question?
Fear is an emotion. You operate and proselytize on fear. You fear everything.
That depends on the question, of course.
Like: How do you spell “guns”?
Walmart can be very scary.
Guns are not the answer.
“You poor benighted people. Afraid of everything.”
Emotion over reason.
What’s your list of people who are “approved” to have armed guards?
“Depend upon law enforcement. I do.”
That method hasn’t worked out so well at the school shootings, one must admit.
You poor benighted people. Afraid of everything.
justice said :“Depend upon law enforcement. I do. ”
KCF: When seconds count, they’re minutes away.
Great for outlining the bodies.
When seconds count, they are 45 minutes to an hour away. We depend on ourselves.
So justiceforall, if you want to depend on the police to show up in 30 seconds to protect you….good for you. I don’t have that luxury.
So says the man who suggests that we remove any protection for the President – three of whom have been targeted in the past fifty years.
So…protection for the ‘special’ people, politicians, actors, wealthy. They are special and important. /sarcasm The rest of us schlubs should just suck it up….right?
Note: I do think that the President and VP and their families should be protected by armed guards. After all they are supposed to be representing the Country. However, that doesn’t mean that MY life and that of my family is less valuable and I should be stripped of my right to defend myself.
Anyone in politics who advocates for gun control should give up their armed guard detail as a matter of showing integrity. Just like Al Gore should give up his giant mansions and private jet planes to prove that global warming is real.
Ha hahahahah….what was I thinking. It is just us peons who must sit in the dark throwing rocks. The elites get to fly and be safe and screw the rest of us.
“If you’re President, yes. It is recommended that you have protection.”
What about Mayor Rahm Emanuel?
He’s not President, and yet he has armed guards.
“Depend upon law enforcement. I do. ”
When seconds count, they’re minutes away.
Great for outlining the bodies.
Those of us who want to survive have more responsible plans.
If you’re President, yes. It is recommended that you have protection.
“Maybe if we outfit those little dead kids in coyote furs or wolf pelts…”
Again: ” I can’t argue the facts (dialectic), so I will take the emotional route (rhetoric)”
Depend upon law enforcement. I do. My family does.