Family of Christopher Bizilj says gun jammed twice before 8-year-old was shot during Westfield Sport

[RamboLiberal]

SPRINGFIELD – The Uzi machine gun jammed twice and was inspected by a 15-year-old before 8-year-old Christopher K. Bizilj attempted to fire it a third time and was met with a lethal recoil during a gun exposition in Westfield a year ago. These and other details were revealed in a $4 million lawsuit filed by the dead boy’s family on Nov. 6 in U.S. District Court in Springfield. The child accidentally shot himself in the head at the “Great New England Pumpkin Shoot” last October. The incident drew national attention, sparked widespread calls for gun reform and drew manslaughter charges against organizers of the annual expo – touted as an event for all ages where comers could fire exotic assault weapons without the permitting constraints.

Christopher K. BiziljThe details in the court documents show the gun apparently went off when the boy was attempting to keep it from falling after the stock of the weapon slipped down from his shoulder. His father, Dr. Charles D. Bizilj, who brought Christopher and his 11-year-old brother Colin, to the show, had been ordered to remain away from the firing line behind restraining ropes, according to the suit.

http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2009/11/family_of_christopher_bizijl_s.html

I believe the criminal trial starts this week against the police chief & 2 other defendents. IMHO massive negligence. For one having a 15 year old in charge is irresponsible. A parent also should've been allowed on the line with his child. And IMHO a child of this age should not be firing a full auto weapon without at least an adult having their hand on the weapon in support.

I've been following this case since the tragedy last year.

[Better Today]

1. Parenting failure in my opinion. First, knowing about recoils and all,

unless that boy was particularly sturdy compared to other 8 year old boys, I wouldn't have let him shoot an Uzi.

Second, had I ignored my first sensibility, when I was told I had to be behind restraining ropes, I would've said no and the boy would not have been able to continue.

Lastly, when I saw the Uzi jam the first, or the second, or the third time, I WOULD'VE PULLED MY KID OUT OF THERE. And by "there" I mean the entire event. Just knowing that a faulty Uzi was being used by anyone, would mean the entire area was no longer a reasonably safe place.

Just my opinion.

[benEzra]

4. It wasn't even a standard Uzi, it was a MICRO...

which is a different animal, and one that is much more of a challenge to shoot for an adult.

[jancantor]

10. There's plenty of blame to go around

if this article is accurate. Parenting failure ? Absolutely. Range/RSO failure? Yes.

[pipoman]

11. For me seeing a 15 year old IN CHARGE or the gun would have

made me not participate. I don't care how mature the 15 year old. I do feel badly for him too.

[Ikonoklast]

2. Where was Range Safety? I mean, a trained adult?

A fifteen year old was acting as RSO?


These people will get what they deserve, but a parent letting an eight-year old fire a fully automatic weapon with little or no training is...child abuse.


I remember when this first happened, sadder beyond belief.

[benEzra]

5. It wouldn't be dangerous IF a suitable weapon were chosen, and an instructor

had his hands on the gun or the child's arm. Firing a rifle-length .223 from a bench with an instructor's hands on or very near the gun, or a mounted MG from a tripod, or a carbine-length .22LR SMG, is a whole lot different than is the unsupervised firing of an ultra-compact 9mm SMG noted for a vicious tendency to rotate (combination of very light weight, very low moment of rotational inertia, and one of the highest cyclic rates extant).

I don't agree that letting a child fire an *appropriate* full-auto under *close supervision* is child abuse. And I suspect the father thought that's exactly what was happening here; the fault here is with the instructor and/or range staff, IMO. As I've mentioned before, it would be like an naive parent signing up to let their child ski a few dozen yards down a slope while holding an instructor's hand, and instead the instructor sends the child down a double black diamond run unsupervised.

[Ikonoklast]

6. That's if the child was already well-versed in firearm safety.

My three children all learned to shoot with a single-shot .22 rifle, and even then that was after learning about range safety and proper gun handling with a .17 air rifle first.

Never in my life would I have let one of my children's first firearm experiences be with a difficult to handle full automatic Uzi.

Not seeing any information to the contrary, I was assuming that this was the boy's first time firing a weapon; I may be wrong. Is there any information that he had previously handled a firearm?

[benEzra]

9. From what I have read elsewhere, the child was experienced, but not with 1250rpm snubby subguns.

The problem is, shooting .22's, 9mm pistols, and AR-15's doesn't prepare someone for a 4.5" barreled stubby 9mm that fires 21 rounds per second. It takes adult grip strength to keep one of those tamed.

Here's some footage of one; fast forward to 0:40 and notice how it pushes the (experienced adult) shooter around between 0:40 and 0:45. Also note how high the center of mass is above the grip axis (large rotational torque, which you can see in a couple places).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jI9cKhApwv8&feature=related

Replace the adult with a young child who doesn't have the experience to let off the trigger if the gun starts to rotate, and you have a recipe for disaster if the stock slips off the shoulder; if the trigger is held down and the gun is uncontrolled, recoil will spin it 180 in half a second. There are full autos gentle enough for young children to shoot under supervision, but an unsuppressed Micro isn't among them.

BTW, it *is* possible for a relative novice with sufficient upper-body strength to shoot a Micro under close supervision:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nP9oQJfLfk&NR=1

but note that in this case, the shooter was an adult with adult upper-body strength in addition to prior shooting experience, the gun was fitted with a suppressor to reduce recoil and increase inertial resistance to rotation, the instructor has the shooter firmly grasp the suppressor (leverage) to prevent rotation, and the instructor has one hand on her shoulder and the other hand floating ready to grab the gun if it starts to get away from her.

Contrast that with the tragedy in the OP. I don't believe it was suppressed (meaning it had the same stubby configuration as the first video above, thus more recoil and no forward grip), the shooter was a small child, and the instructor was nowhere near the shooter.


BTW, for any non-gunnies reading, that gun is as tightly controlled in the USA as a 105mm howitzer or a 500lb bomb. That's not a civilian "assault weapon", that's a NFA Title 2 restricted military submachinegun.

[cleanhippie]

3. One thing is clear about this whole tragedy....

It is people who are responsible, not the weapon.

[RamboLiberal]

7. Criminal Trial set for Dec 6th

SPRINGFIELD, Mass. (WWLP) - A trial date has been set for three men charged in connection with the accidental shooting death of an 8 year old boy.

The trial has been scheduled for December 6 for Edward Fleury, Carl Guiffre, and Domenico Spano.

http://www.wwlp.com/dpp/news/local/hampden/Trial-date-set-in-Uzi-death-case

Be interesting to see what comes out in the trial.

[AtheistCrusader]

8. The Jamming issue is completely unrelated.

When the kid killed himself, the firearm operated as intended, unless someone is alleging a runaway.

Nor was he met with 'lethal recoil'. The weapon didn't bounce off him, causing mortal injuries, the weapon was oriented in such a way that when fired, the bullet would pass through the kid's head. The stock slipped off his shoulder and the weapon rotated, because the kid was unprepared for, or unable to control the P-torque from the weapon cycling in FA mode.


The 15 year old should be left out of this. Not his responsibility. The legal question should be:

1. Is a 15 year old rangemaster at such an event legal? (Probably, and that should probably be changed)
2. Did this 15 year old have adequate training to BE a rangemaster? (Certainly not, and the people responsible for the event should be liable.)


When you fire a FA weapon the first time, a proper range master will give you 1 round. If you control the weapon, you get two. The entire time, the range master is evaluating your ability to handle a weapon AT ALL, and then handle full auto fire, incrementally.

You CANNOT trust a novice user to release the trigger if they are struggling to maintain physical control of the weapon. If they are a novice, and unable to handle the recoil, the trigger just becomes part of the handle to the user, so it will continue to fire until ammo is exhausted, with all the consequences that entails.

Even with the parent in support, this should never have been allowed to occur. An adult can make the same mistake. It all boils down to the training of the range officer (probably none) and the event's employ of that person. (Minor status irrelevant)