OK I have to make a comment. I am an ex-military pro-gun liberal, however the sad tragedy that occured in Massachusetts makes anyone who is pro-gun look terrible and is the prime example of what I advocate whenever the gun ownership argument comes up...education and responsibility. The 8 year old is not to blame in any of this. The father and the supposed weapon instructor supervising are. This is why I believe that NO CHILD SHOULD EVER HANDLE A WEAPON. Especially an Uzi. The Uzi, like all machine weapons, fires rounds from the "open bolt" position, which in laymans terms has an aggressive kickback to get the next round in the series increasing the rate of fire but lowering control. The original intent of this weapon was for use by well trained Israeli Commandos (note none of them are 8 yr old boys). Open bolt action is fine when using a tripod mounted weapon or even a hand held weapon with a stock. However with a hand held weapon that does not have a stock, it is very VERY difficult to control the recoil. Combine that with the initial reaction to hang on to the weapon (thus putting a death grip on the trigger) it is in no way a surprise that this tragedy happened. This is a difficult weapon to control as a full grown adult and is in no way a weapon that should be handled by a child (because NO WEAPON SHOULD BE HANDLED BY A CHILD). So folks, before anyone gets seriously upset at my statements I wish to point out, it isn't guns that kill people, it is stupid people with guns that kill people. So if you are anti-gun, great! I respect your decision, like I hope you respect mine. But lets try for some laws that make people more responsible in gun ownership, instead of just harder to get guns. Also my sincerest condolences to the mother of that boy, whom I hope divorces her husband right after she castrates him, so that he can not pass on those moron genes.

Darwin should have gotten the kids' parents instead.

The 8-yr-old is not to blame. DUH.

who, in this litigious society, is?

as the expert says, the gun had no stock, has intense recoil and jumps when you fire it, and wasn't on a tripod. Its the bullet spewing equivalent of a panicked tuna. NO CHILD WILL BE ABLE TO HOLD ONTO IT.
I say the gun show was negligent.

The father and instructor are to blame. Like Urk said NO CHILD SHOULD HOLD A WEAPON.

why exactly is the father to blame? was he even there? for all we know his mother was the gun nut "supervising him." sheesh.. you guys jump to such instant conclusions..

having been raised around guns. i can't agree with NO CHILD SHOULD HOLD WEAPONS(!!1!), but he sure as shit souldn't have been holding that weapon. a .22, sure. criminal negligence for all involved.

gun control means you can shoot staight

Devon, the father holds responsibility as he, a doctor, was the one who took his son to the gun expo. He thought it would be a good time...which it might have been had he shown greater care and responsibility for the safety of his son. My dad used to take any one of us to gun shows on a fairly regular basis - which was about the most boring thing in the world because he wouldn't let us touch anything much less fire any weapon. Nevertheless, he loved guns and wanted to teach us about them. And, yes, he took us to shooting ranges often, but only to shoot guns that were to our size and skill level which is to say, he would hold his hands over ours and let us fire a .22 every once in a while NOT an Uzi.

How about holding the guy who put the event on accountable? Oh wait..he is the Chief of Police.