3-Month-Old Baby Shoots Texas Man In The Face
This totally never happens except when it does. After another apparent accidental shooting, Houston police are investigating. This time, the culprit is a 3-month-old baby. You see, the baby had access to his binkie, a blankie and of course, a gun.
Sanders was napping on the couch in the living room of his apartment, according to the police report, when the gun stashed in his pocket slipped out and onto the floor.
What could go wrong?
Well, when the man awoke, he found his firearm in the hands of the three-month-old boy, HPD Homicide Division Sergeant R. Rodriguez and W. Gilbert said.
You know how babies are. Oh look, a shiny thing!
Sanders tried to grab the gun from the infant, which caused the gun to fire, resulting in the man being shot in the face.
The baby was not injured during the incident, according to the police report.
Sanders was transported to a local hospital where he is listed in critical condition. It’s not clear as to whether Sanders is the3-month-old shooter’s father or not.
On the plus side: At least the baby didn’t put the gun in its mouth. Babies tend to put everything in their mouths, like shiny things, for example.
As far as I know, the gun survived the incident and is ready for the next. I’m sure the NRA would support gun owners teaching little babies proper gun safety. “More guns” is totally the answer.
Copyright 2014 Liberaland
By: Anomaly100
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
bcbob October 30th, 2014 at 13:17
by the same logic we should ban automobiles . . .
http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/29/us/arizona-fatal-joyride/
Wallace Torbert October 30th, 2014 at 19:48
Nope, cars have a purpose for transportation and require training and a license. And cars are patrolled for violations. Guns? Just buy them, training? Nope, responsibility? Nope. License? Nope
bcbob October 31st, 2014 at 13:59
Ok . . did you read my link . .. I think not . . . how many 8 year olds have training and a license? and if cars are so closely patrolled how did an 8 year old get out of the driveway . . . and actually this idiot shot himself if you read this article. Whens the last time you tried to buy a gun . . . you just don’t go down and buy one – its a long drawn out process. And their ain’t no fixing stupid which is what this guy was. Admittedly the kids parents are stupid too. But a gun and a car are just machines so get over it like I said you can’t fix stupid or make idiots go away all we can do is hope the darwin awards pick up their pace.
Wallace Torbert October 31st, 2014 at 17:18
Cars and driving require license, registration. That is all we ask of guns. Be licensed, register the gun and get trained. Both are machines and both should require training, maintenance and registration. Your car gets stolen and you ID it by the registration.
Now does this mean folks skirt this? Sure, but you would agree that just because folks skirt the law does not mean we should have no laws.
It might be hard to get a gun , why I don’t know, at a dealer, but gun shows are wide open.
In addition, police patrol cars and driving. Noone polices guns. Once sold one can have a billion guns and 500,000 rounds of ammunition (exaggerating).
The 9 year old girl who killed her instructor with an uzzi was not breaking the law. It was legal. Now, do we legally license 9 year olds to drive? I think not. When a PTSD marine can legally get guns and head to Mexico you know there is a problem because he is using being crazy as a defense on how he got into Mexico. his PTSD disoriented him.
Nothing wrong with guns or cars, just need to control them and no a zombie apocolapse isn’t in your future
Derp November 2nd, 2014 at 23:48
Long, drawn out process? I can go online right now, buy a gun with no background check at all and have it here overnight parcel if the shipper is willing to send it that fast. That long, drawn out process is filling out a piece of paper and wait will they run it through the database. Nothing near as complicated as the driving test. I’d love to see people have to pass target practice and a safety course before being able to own a gun because most wouldn’t be able to pass.
John Churchill November 2nd, 2014 at 20:27
guns have only one purpose and that is to kill. there is no other use for them. cars, on the other hand, are pretty useful for transportation of people and goods, and are important for all kinds of services that are necessary for a functioning society. so no, banning automobiles is not the same as banning guns. a driver’s license means you can drive, a gun license means you can kill (under certain circumstances, of course, but sometimes “stuff” happens…).
bcbob October 30th, 2014 at 13:17
by the same logic we should ban automobiles . . .
http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/29/us/arizona-fatal-joyride/
Wallace Torbert October 30th, 2014 at 19:48
Nope, cars have a purpose for transportation and require training and a license. And cars are patrolled for violations. Guns? Just buy them, training? Nope, responsibility? Nope. License? Nope
bcbob October 31st, 2014 at 13:59
Ok . . did you read my link . .. I think not . . . how many 8 year olds have training and a license? and if cars are so closely patrolled how did an 8 year old get out of the driveway . . . and actually this idiot shot himself if you read this article. Whens the last time you tried to buy a gun . . . you just don’t go down and buy one – its a long drawn out process. And their ain’t no fixing stupid which is what this guy was. Admittedly the kids parents are stupid too. But a gun and a car are just machines so get over it like I said you can’t fix stupid or make idiots go away all we can do is hope the darwin awards pick up their pace.
Wallace Torbert October 31st, 2014 at 17:18
Cars and driving require license, registration. That is all we ask of guns. Be licensed, register the gun and get trained. Both are machines and both should require training, maintenance and registration. Your car gets stolen and you ID it by the registration.
Now does this mean folks skirt this? Sure, but you would agree that just because folks skirt the law does not mean we should have no laws.
It might be hard to get a gun , why I don’t know, at a dealer, but gun shows are wide open.
In addition, police patrol cars and driving. Noone polices guns. Once sold one can have a billion guns and 500,000 rounds of ammunition (exaggerating).
The 9 year old girl who killed her instructor with an uzzi was not breaking the law. It was legal. Now, do we legally license 9 year olds to drive? I think not. When a PTSD marine can legally get guns and head to Mexico you know there is a problem because he is using being crazy as a defense on how he got into Mexico. his PTSD disoriented him.
Nothing wrong with guns or cars, just need to control them and no a zombie apocolapse isn’t in your future
Derp November 3rd, 2014 at 00:48
Long, drawn out process? I can go online right now, buy a gun with no background check at all and have it here overnight parcel if the shipper is willing to send it that fast. That long, drawn out process is filling out a piece of paper and wait will they run it through the database. Nothing near as complicated as the driving test. I’d love to see people have to pass target practice and a safety course before being able to own a gun because most wouldn’t be able to pass.
John Churchill November 2nd, 2014 at 21:27
guns have only one purpose and that is to kill. there is no other use for them. cars, on the other hand, are pretty useful for transportation of people and goods, and are important for all kinds of services that are necessary for a functioning society. so no, banning automobiles is not the same as banning guns. a driver’s license means you can drive, a gun license means you can kill (under certain circumstances, of course, but sometimes “stuff” happens…).
flakingnapstich October 30th, 2014 at 16:12
I have a suspicion this young man was not the graduate of a gun safety course. I have no objections to private gun ownership, but clearly we need folks to pass a few mandatory ownership and safety courses before they get one!
whamprod October 30th, 2014 at 16:54
The guy who goes to sleep with an unholstered gun in his pocket and a baby in his lap is an idiot. More laws are not going to make idiots any safer. That’s why we call them “IDIOTS” in the first place.
Every single time….. and I mean EVERY single time that the NRA tries to get it’s Eddy the Eagle gun safety course implemented in public schools, lefties have a cow. Guns are out there. They are a fact of life. Why on earth someone wouldn’t want their child to be educated in how to respond SAFELY if the child comes across a firearm in the home of a playmate he or she is visiting is beyond me. It goes to the notion that a child found dead with a bullet through his head is somehow more noble than a child who sees the gun, knows not to handle it, and knows to go get an adult……which is what the NRA teaches……..more noble simply because the instructor in this case is the Big Bugaboo – the NRA – and God forbid THEY should be credited with making kids safer, just because the lefties don’t know how.
I will accept enforced government mandated ownership and safety courses to practice any of my rights, when you accept the same to practice yours…… ALL of yours. Anyone who thinks that words cannot be dangerous, even lethal, never read a history book in his or her life.
flakingnapstich October 30th, 2014 at 17:13
One big problem with gun safety taught in public schools is the lack of funding for it. The NRA has this lovely history of trying to get their courses mandated but ignoring the need to actually FUND those courses. Gee, why would parents object to ANOTHER unfunded mandate?
Then there’s the fat that the NRA isn’t exactly consistent on their gun programs to begin with. Not long ago, they advocated mandatory licensing for gun ownership. Now they push for open carry without a license, except when someone tries to open carry while black. I don’t trust an NRA authored safety course simply because they’re too fickle an organization to be trusted.
Wallace Torbert October 30th, 2014 at 19:41
A three year old could be taught how to use a gun ?
Wallace Torbert October 30th, 2014 at 19:50
They do…Have you got $500? Yup. Congratulations you are now Audie Murphy.
flakingnapstich October 30th, 2014 at 16:12
I have a suspicion this young man was not the graduate of a gun safety course. I have no objections to private gun ownership, but clearly we need folks to pass a few mandatory ownership and safety courses before they get one!
whamprod October 30th, 2014 at 16:54
The guy who goes to sleep with an unholstered gun in his pocket and a baby in his lap is an idiot. More laws are not going to make idiots any safer. That’s why we call them “IDIOTS” in the first place.
Every single time….. and I mean EVERY single time that the NRA tries to get it’s Eddy the Eagle gun safety course implemented in public schools, lefties have a cow. Guns are out there. They are a fact of life. Why on earth someone wouldn’t want their child to be educated in how to respond SAFELY if the child comes across a firearm in the home of a playmate he or she is visiting is beyond me. It goes to the notion that a child found dead with a bullet through his head is somehow more noble than a child who sees the gun, knows not to handle it, and knows to go get an adult……which is what the NRA teaches……..more noble simply because the instructor in this case is the Big Bugaboo – the NRA – and God forbid THEY should be credited with making kids safer, just because the lefties don’t know how.
I will accept enforced government mandated ownership and safety courses to practice any of my rights, when you accept the same to practice yours…… ALL of yours. Anyone who thinks that words cannot be dangerous, even lethal, never read a history book in his or her life.
flakingnapstich October 30th, 2014 at 17:13
One big problem with gun safety taught in public schools is the lack of funding for it. The NRA has this lovely history of trying to get their courses mandated but ignoring the need to actually FUND those courses. Gee, why would parents object to ANOTHER unfunded mandate?
Then there’s the fat that the NRA isn’t exactly consistent on their gun programs to begin with. Not long ago, they advocated mandatory licensing for gun ownership. Now they push for open carry without a license, except when someone tries to open carry while black. I don’t trust an NRA authored safety course simply because they’re too fickle an organization to be trusted.
whamprod October 30th, 2014 at 17:35
Sources please about your NRA claims? I am an Endowment Life Member and have belonged to the NRA for decades now. Unlike a lot of people, I actually READ what they send me.
Funding? THAT’s your objection? Try this one on for size. PUBLIC schools, funded by TAXPAYERS promote sex education classes which necessarily include information about contraception, abortion, and where to obtain them. Whom do they promote as the source of these wonders? Do they say, “ask your parents if you need an abortion”? No, using taxpayer dollars, they promote Planned Parenthood. WHY? Because the schools accept that Planned Parenthood are the experts in the distribution of birth control and abortion.
But you have a problem with another NGO which is expert on gun safety for children teaching or providing the materials for teaching gun safety because of funding? That’s bullshit and you know it. You don’t object because of funding. You object because it is the NRA. My guess is you wouldn’t object to taxpayer funding for sex education classes which creates a customer base for Planned Parenthood as the direct beneficiary. If I’m right, then you’re just making shit up because you don’t like the NRA.
Your characterization of the NRA’s response to Open Carry is inaccurate. Please show me where they are against Open Carry while Black. What they ARE against, is open carry in a manner intended to convey alarm, DURING political protests….no matter the color of the person doing it. As such, they have been against ALL of these open carry demonstrations, AND HAVE SAID SO, regardless of the color of the demonstrator. THE REASON: it is NOT because they are against open carry. It is because they are against irresponsible OC protests which scare the crap out of regular people and end up doing more harm to the gun rights movement than help. The VAST majority of OC protestors have been white, and the NRA does not support them either. I favor open carry, but I think it is dumb as fuck to open carry an AR15 into a Target to try and ‘educate’ people about OC of pistols….. and I LIKE AR15s and own several of them. It is dumb as fuck because it scares fence-sitters into thinking that people who favor OC are all black-rifle toting whack jobs; when in fact, the OC protesters (black skinned or white skinned) are only a very tiny minority of the both A) the gun carrying community, and B) people who would open carry if the law were less draconian. Your outrage is selective because it ignores the NRA’s negative reaction to mostly WHITE open carry protestors.
You are grasping at rhetorical straws, and your mistrust is poorly founded. And BTW, I’m not a republican, and I’m not a conservative. What I AM is a truth-speaker.
Wallace Torbert October 30th, 2014 at 19:47
Folks don’t like the NRA because they are silent about gun training and laws. They favor neither. But are vocal when it suits them. What is wrong with a doctor telling a family that a gun in the house with kids is unsafe? It is. Mainly because you can’t train toddlers or 9 year old girls (see 9 year old kills instrictor with uzzi). I saw many adults who cannt handle a fire arm properly. It takes a lot of training and since training is not required we have millions of idiots with guns carrying them around and one killed a visitor to Helen Ga, a touist because he was drinking at Octoberfest and playing with his gun. Idiot equals dead innocent people. Guns should be for the trained only. Since you may like anyone with a gun, then you don’t object to Iran having a nuke.
Wallace Torbert October 30th, 2014 at 19:41
A three year old could be taught how to use a gun ?
Wallace Torbert October 30th, 2014 at 19:50
They do…Have you got $500? Yup. Congratulations you are now Audie Murphy.
Wallace Torbert October 30th, 2014 at 19:47
Folks don’t like the NRA because they are silent about gun training and laws. They favor neither. But are vocal when it suits them. What is wrong with a doctor telling a family that a gun in the house with kids is unsafe? It is. Mainly because you can’t train toddlers or 9 year old girls (see 9 year old kills instrictor with uzzi). I saw many adults who cannt handle a fire arm properly. It takes a lot of training and since training is not required we have millions of idiots with guns carrying them around and one killed a visitor to Helen Ga, a touist because he was drinking at Octoberfest and playing with his gun. Idiot equals dead innocent people. Guns should be for the trained only. Since you may like anyone with a gun, then you don’t object to Iran having a nuke.
LittleMrJ October 30th, 2014 at 21:22
My son was once 3 months old. He couldn’t hold his own pacifier, let alone hold a gun & squeeze the trigger. How is this kid in the photo miraculously holding the gun with all 5 of his fingers in front of it? He’s not. Glock doesn’t even make a gun that small anyway. A Photoshopped picture for a fake article. Ridicules. Why do liberals need to lie to push the political agenda? The kid was three YEARS old, not 3 months. Perhaps read a major news outlet instead of a fraudulent blog entry.
Wallace Torbert October 31st, 2014 at 17:20
Yeah like being three is a lot different.
Cynthia Kramer November 1st, 2014 at 04:55
You said exactly what I was thinking and I couldn’t agree more, LittleMrJ!
Derp November 2nd, 2014 at 23:44
Sorry, this is quite real.
http://houston.cbslocal.com/2014/10/27/man-shot-when-gun-falls-to-floor-picked-up-by-boy/
Why do conservatives have to claim every thing is fake when they damn well know it’s not?
Gibbs November 5th, 2014 at 21:01
Read your own link. It clearly states YEARS, where this article says MONTHS. Why can’t liberals read?
Derp November 15th, 2014 at 17:58
I read it and the ONLY thing wrong in the article is whoever typed it put in months, not years. Doesn’t change what happened, doesn’t change the outcome and doesn’t change that yet another child got hold of a ‘responsible gun owner’s weapon and fired it since the safety was off and the gun loaded. It also doesn’t take away the justice that the idiot gun owner got shot in his face with his own gun and the child did not get hurt.
Next.
LittleMrJ November 6th, 2014 at 11:16
Derp, the news story you linked is true, but this article is not. They state different details! Did you even read them? Look at my profile, I live in Houston, I know what happened, & it ain’t what this article says. Also, that picture is Photoshopped to Hell. Don’t talk trash if you don’t even know what you’re talking about. The people agreeing with you are just as retarded. If you learn how to read more than a headline, you might actually understand things better.
Derp November 15th, 2014 at 17:56
This is in fact the very same story. The problem is THIS SITE posted misinformation – the child was three years old, not three months. And yes DUH the image used is photoshopped because it’s not like a photographer was there when it happened to snap real pictures. What it does NOT change is yet another story of a ‘responsible gun owner’ securing his weapon properly. The gun did fall out. A child did get hold of it. The safety was not on and it was loaded and the child did indeed fire the weapon. The man did get shot in the face. The only inaccuracy was the age of the child which is really a moot point.
LittleMrJ October 30th, 2014 at 21:22
My son was once 3 months old. He couldn’t hold his own pacifier, let alone hold a gun & squeeze the trigger. How is this kid in the photo miraculously holding the gun with all 5 of his fingers in front of it? He’s not. Glock doesn’t even make a gun that small anyway. A Photoshopped picture for a fake article. Ridicules. Why do liberals need to lie to push the political agenda? The kid was three YEARS old, not 3 months. Perhaps read a major news outlet instead of a fraudulent blog entry.
Wallace Torbert October 31st, 2014 at 17:20
Yeah like being three is a lot different.
Cynthia Kramer November 1st, 2014 at 04:55
You said exactly what I was thinking and I couldn’t agree more, LittleMrJ!
Derp November 3rd, 2014 at 00:44
Sorry, this is quite real.
http://houston.cbslocal.com/2014/10/27/man-shot-when-gun-falls-to-floor-picked-up-by-boy/
Why do conservatives have to claim every thing is fake when they damn well know it’s not?
Gibbs November 5th, 2014 at 22:01
Read your own link. It clearly states YEARS, where this article says MONTHS. Why can’t liberals read?
Derp November 15th, 2014 at 18:58
I read it and the ONLY thing wrong in the article is whoever typed it put in months, not years. Doesn’t change what happened, doesn’t change the outcome and doesn’t change that yet another child got hold of a ‘responsible gun owner’s weapon and fired it since the safety was off and the gun loaded. It also doesn’t take away the justice that the idiot gun owner got shot in his face with his own gun and the child did not get hurt.
Next.
LittleMrJ November 6th, 2014 at 12:16
Derp, the news story you linked is true, but this article is not. They state different details! Did you even read them? Look at my profile, I live in Houston, I know what happened, & it ain’t what this article says. Also, that picture is Photoshopped to Hell. Don’t talk trash if you don’t even know what you’re talking about. The people agreeing with you are just as retarded. If you learn how to read more than a headline, you might actually understand things better.
Derp November 15th, 2014 at 18:56
This is in fact the very same story. The problem is THIS SITE posted misinformation – the child was three years old, not three months. And yes DUH the image used is photoshopped because it’s not like a photographer was there when it happened to snap real pictures. What it does NOT change is yet another story of a ‘responsible gun owner’ securing his weapon properly. The gun did fall out. A child did get hold of it. The safety was not on and it was loaded and the child did indeed fire the weapon. The man did get shot in the face. The only inaccuracy was the age of the child which is really a moot point.
JM October 31st, 2014 at 10:36
ummm if this is accurate- which I doubt – perhaps one should be given an IQ test before being issued a gun or a child for that matter!
JM October 31st, 2014 at 10:36
ummm if this is accurate- which I doubt – perhaps one should be given an IQ test before being issued a gun or a child for that matter!
Wallace Torbert October 31st, 2014 at 17:22
This is not the first time a child has obtained daddas gun and killed himself , brother, mom or even dad or a neighbors kid. The US has guns for everyone, no training required. Just load them up and head to Target where who knows if that gun has a safety or the open carry person will lose it, drop it. Or is the gun working properly? Training? I got your training right here…I watch old John Wayne movies and that prepper show…I’m an expert..BLAM!!!..WHAT WAS THAT?
Wallace Torbert October 31st, 2014 at 17:22
This is not the first time a child has obtained daddas gun and killed himself , brother, mom or even dad or a neighbors kid. The US has guns for everyone, no training required. Just load them up and head to Target where who knows if that gun has a safety or the open carry person will lose it, drop it. Or is the gun working properly? Training? I got your training right here…I watch old John Wayne movies and that prepper show…I’m an expert..BLAM!!!..WHAT WAS THAT?
Cam Sa July 7th, 2015 at 01:36
A 3 month old baby cannot even crawl or sit up. How stupid are you people
Cam Sa July 7th, 2015 at 01:39
you would not know what a 3 month old baby is capable of doing. You’re too busy aborting them. they can’t crawl or sit up let alone pick up a gun or for that matter hold a gun