3 Year Old Mistakes Gun for Wii Remote, Shoots Herself

A three-year old Lebanon, Tennessee girl apparently shot herself in the stomach after mistaking her stepfather’s pistol for a Wii controller.

WSMV in Nashville has the story, which began after Douglas Robert Cronberger investigated a trespasser on his property. Returning inside, Cronberger placed his gun on the counter where Cheyenne Alexis McKeehan picked up the weapon, possibly mistaking it for a Wii controller according to her mother, and shot herself in the abdomen.

The little girl succumbed to her injuries on Sunday night. No charges have been filed against the stepfather.

It’s unclear if the girl mistook the gun for a standard Wii remote or for a Wii gun accessory, but in the end it doesn’t really matter.

Update: GPer Rodrigo Ybáñez García points out a Kotaku story, which references an All About The Games story that in turn points to News Channel  5 article which features a picture of both the real gun and the Wii gun.

The Wii accessory in question is a Wii Semi-Auto Pistol, which Kotaku says is manufactured by the Chinese company HAIHONGCHANG Electronics. The HAIHONGCHANG is black and quite realistic looking and was most likely illegally imported. Section 4, Title 15 of the Federal Energy Management Improvement Act of 1988 dictates that all toy guns transported or imported within the U.S. must feature a “blaze orange” (or brighter) marking on the muzzle of any toy gun.

Thanks Andrew

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone


  1. Brokenscope says:

    Um, not if there was a round chambered and the hammer was already cocked, which seems likely.

  2. Erik says:

    On gun fantatic websites I’ve often seen pictures of people with a gun underneath their pillow.  Anyone who cannot see just how wrong that is need help.  Then there are the nuts who think that if people could carry guns onto planes that 9/11 would have never happend.  That is why NRA members and "responsible gun owners" frighten me more than any criminal.  I mean with a criminal you pretty much know what you are going to get.  They point the gun at you and will likely shoot you.  No surprise.  But with "responsible gun owners" you might just get fucked up out of the blue.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  3. Sai says:

     Blame video games and you won’t be charged with gross neglect that resulted in a child’s death. Wonderful.

  4. Rodrigo Ybáñez García says:

    I´m agree that this fact doesn´t cover any negligency about this matter. It could be a water gun, but then this story could fall into oblivion by the media.

    ———————————————————— My DeviantArt Page (aka DeviantCensorship): http://www.darkknightstrikes.deviantart.com

  5. Arcanagos says:

    That explains a good deal, but it still doesn’t explain why the father left a F***KING LOADED GUN within reach of his three-year-old in the first place.

    "Go ahead and hate your neighbor, go ahead and cheat a friend. Do it in the name of Heaven, Jack Thompson’ll justify it in the end." – nightwng2000

  6. Austin_Lewis says:

    If it was single action, it would require more force, most likely.  At LEAST enough force applied to the hammer to cock it fully, or enough force applied to the slide to chamber the round AND cock the hammer.

  7. chadachada321 says:


    -Optimum est pati quod emendare non possis-It is best to endure what you cannot change-

  8. gamegod25 says:

    If you’re too stupid to keep a loaded weapon out of reach of your unsupervised children, you might be…a criminally negligent parent!

    Seriously how is this guy not in jail?

  9. Cecil475 says:

    Yeah, That’s true.

    I’m trying to figure out where everyone else is getting the idea that the kid mistook the gun for the wiimote. Afterall the kid didn’t say ‘Oops, I thought that was the wiimote, and not a loaded gun.’ I’m not trying to make light of the situation, I just son’t know where they are comming up with that assumption.


     – W

    edit – Just read the update. Nevermind.

    R.i.P GamePolitics 2005-2016

  10. Brokenscope says:

    Well, I’m glad GP, unlike every other news source, is willing to admit that the child shot herself and not that the gun auto magically "Went off".

  11. Brokenscope says:

    Unless the gun was a double action it doesn’t take all tha tmuch to pull the trigger.

  12. ChrowX says:

    Why am I the only one who seems concerned that this 3-year old seemingly picked up and pulled the trigger on a gun with ease? Sensationalism aside, there is very clearly something much worse than negligence going on here.

    I want you to imagine this full scenario step by step and tell me that you believe a three year old girl could pick up a gun, which is somewhat heavy for a three year old, position it barrel first at herself and somehow pull the trigger, or at least put enough force on it to discharge the gun. Depending on the kind of gun, there’s also the question of her being able to manipulate the safety on the gun. If that’s not the case, this means the stepfather left a loaded and live weapon out, which only makes this even worse.

    I can’t really imagine this kid being shot in this way without someone else behind behind the gun. It just doesn’t add up at all. I almost want to accuse this guy of shooting his kid and then shifting the blame to the Wii because he figured the videogame angle would keep the focus off himself.

  13. locopuyo says:


    Epic Fails

    1. Loaded handgun kept in living room

    2. 3 year old with a gun

    3. 3 year old alone

    4. 3 year old can’t tell difference between Wii peripheral and real gun?

    5. 3 year old doesn’t know how to use a gun?

    If the parents would have prevented any one of these EPIC FAILs their child would be alive.  

    Pwnage of Empires


  14. Spartan says:

    Todays lesson boys and girls:

    Room + Child + Unsecured Weapon + Unsupervised Environment = Criminal Negligence.

    Case closed…


    "The most difficult pain a man can suffer is to have knowledge of much and power over little" – Herodotus

  15. Magic says:

    You’re missing the fact that 3 year olds don’t have the same cognitive abilities as you (I hope). -_-

  16. Austin_Lewis says:

    Especially as they’re just theorizing that the child thought the pistol was a wiimote.  I’m sorry, but I don’t buy that.  The child was three years old, which, as I recall, was the age when my child began to pick up fucking EVERYTHING of mine, forcing me to move my expensive, breakable, and mobile property to higher surfaces.

  17. Cecil475 says:

    I’m unsure of how a gun could be mistaken for a wiimote as guns are normaly alot heavier. Or, am I missing something?

     – W

    R.i.P GamePolitics 2005-2016

  18. Erik says:

    Um, yeah.  So if GP cut out all of the stories where any video games didn’t have any relevance but has been dragged into it anyhow then there would be MUCH MUCH less stories than there already are.  Like, every single story involving any sort of act of violence or shootings ever.

    But people like Johnny Bruce, and Leland Yee try to make it the issue.  The act isn’t the story, the shoehorning is the story.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  19. DorthLous says:

    While I won’t jump to the ceiling because of it, point for these 2. The game controller has, indeed, no relevance whatsoever to the story except as a plausible theory behind the action of the child, hence, not game related (nor politic) and even less headline worthy.

    Now if you tell me the girl played vg at her age and died, well, it can be seen as a sympathy post as some other have been before, in which case it’s fine.

  20. FlakAttack says:

    The man has a point: the title is misleading and the importance of the story is misplaced: a girl died because some dumbass left a loaded gun on a table within her reach. The wiimote HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ANYTHING.

  21. ZippyDSMlee says:

    To the "ZOMG! a locked gun is bad might as well take them away" people…here is a thought……. you keep it locked or on you during the day and unlocked at night…… so you know….you can get to it.


    I swear we need to lock people away for misuseing and abusing guns….. they are the reason why people fear and laoth guns…..

    Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! CP/IP laws should not effect the daily life of common people! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/

  22. GrimCW says:

    i think Kotaku made a better point of it tbh.

    wii remote peripheral or not 3 yo’s get into EVERYTHING.

    crap, my 5yo cousin has to be swatted out of my shelf space to prevent him from trying to play with my collections (much of which is either hard work hand made stuff, or $200+ imported items. or just random trash i bought during my military time and brought home)

    so Wii remote or not, the kid would’ve grabbed the gun. ‘nother question is what game was a 3yo playing that had that peripheral, and probably been NOT playing?

  23. Kajex says:

    Oh yes. GP is the ultimate evil for posting another source’s story and you calling it "sensationalist". Overreact much?

  24. Father Time says:

    You think she would’ve shot the TV or the sensor bar first.

    Also how many guns are white, true it could’ve been painted but still?


    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  25. Pinworm says:

     Shame on you GP for posting this sensationalist garbage.

    I don’t care if you were just posting what another article said. To make what you made your title and talk about the wiimote pistol LIKE IT HAS ANY FUCKING RELEVANCE TO A THREE YEAR OLD WHEN A LOADED AND ARMED PISTOL WAS LEFT ON A LIVING ROOM TABLE is simply an embarassment. I never thought I’d be one of those people, but this is about the 4th time I’ve seen an article posting shit like this. I’m done.

    Yes, you can have my stuff. 

  26. Erik says:

    Ahem, http://www.a-human-right.com/s_fearfree.jpg

    Also.  I don’t care if they are "the most law-abiding group in the United States".  Again, I’ll take my risks with the bears and criminals.  I would still rather run into a bear and/or criminal in a national park than an NRA goon.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  27. Austin_Lewis says:

    Nobody sleeps with guns beneath their pillows, and your opinion of people who choose to conceal and carry is moronic.  By the way, those people are one of the most law-abiding groups in the United States, even more law abiding than some Police Departments.

    If you want to risk death in some National Park, that’s your business.  But don’t sit there and judge others because they’re willing to be responsible for themselves.

  28. Erik says:

    People who sleep with guns beneath their pillows are nuts.  There isn’t a second option.  Those who have insane levels of faith in their fellow batshit crazy gun totters where they think a plane full of them are crazy.  Again there isn’t a second option.

    So in a National Park I would gladly be in a situation where I needed the police, as long as I don’t run across some NRA goon.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  29. Austin_Lewis says:

    Yeah, those crazy people willing to take responsibility for their own safety due to the fact that you can’t really rely on police to save you.  They’re craaaaaaaaaaaaazy.

    If you’re unwilling to protect yourself, that’s fine, but don’t call those willing to be responsible for their own safety ‘nuts’. 

    National Parks have, by and large, been lawless areas for years and years.  In situations where one is in the middle of nowhere with no hope of quick (or even slow) response from any sort of policing body, they ought be allowed the right to defend theirselves. 

  30. Austin_Lewis says:

    It was more a reply to Neneeko, but it kind of fed of your comment too.  I wasn’t intending to come across as ‘angry at you’.

  31. Conster says:

    I wasn’t arguing anything about US exports. I simply read your comment, searched a bit, found some statistics, and decided to post them, combined with a "from my country’s view, that’s a lot". I’m fully aware that from the US’ point of view, it’s only about 0.1%, and that the vast majority goes to ethically sound locations. The way I see it, the statistics I found support your point of view. There’s no need to get angry at me. 🙁

  32. Erik says:

    After walking around in one of these big national parks I think that one of the last things I would want to come across is an NRA member.  I think a bear would be a close second though.  Concealed carry nuts scare the hell out of me.  I am against gun control on the basis of it being a "right" protected by The Constitution alone.  That is the only thing that seperates me from true gun control advocates. 

    So in response to the tired old saying of: "If guns are outlawed then only outlaws will have guns"  My response is" "I’m not concerned with the outlaws, and never have been.  I want guns out of the hands of the "other" people."

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  33. Austin_Lewis says:

    Actually, if you had read the draft, you would have found that it said it respected the states’ rights to import and export arms, ammo, etc. as needed for their defense.  Nowhere did it recognize the right’s of citizens of the states.  It also said that it would push for disarmament, reward those nations that had a disarmed population, and would set in place guidelines for disarmament and an INTERNATIONAL LIST tracking all firearms (that’s one of those things that has, in the past, been a precursor to disarmament).

    The rest of the bill was about Nuclear Arms, which doesn’t really pertain to us.

    And if you think the NRA and PETA are at all similar, you know less about firearms rights than I thought (and far less then you seem to believe).

  34. Austin_Lewis says:

    Do you realize that most firearms exported from the US legally go to

    A) Foreign Militaries (Thailand, South Korea, allies to the South, Iraq and Afghanistan, and even some Ex Soviet Bloc

    B) Foreign Police (basically the same list of countries

    and the rarest

    C) Individual ownership in other countries.

    It’s true, our firearm industry does export a few hundred firearms a year. None of the legally exported firearms go to any ‘war-torn nation’.

    What I was saying was that Neneeko seems to have no idea what he’s talking about.  There is a reason that on battlefields of African nations, one occasionally runs across an American Military firearm, and that’s most often because either A) it was stolen or B) it was left behind by our military, as many militaries do.  You know why you see UN weapons in Africa more often?  Because they’ve left far more weapons behind than ANY other organization, save the USSR and it’s commie brethern.

    So, the truth of where the vast majority of those firearms come from is the UN and the uncaring USSR.

  35. Neeneko says:

    Is he the ‘reason’?  Of course not.  But his backers did have an interest in continuing to do buisness uninterrupted.  It could, however, be argued that Regan is the reason there are so many US weapons floating around in war torn areas since his admin started the government sponsered stateless arms market.

    As for the 2008 treaty.  Even in its draft form, the idea that it would have banned individual ownership in america is pure unadultrated fearmongering bullshit.  The draft covers international trafficing.  This whole ‘this is a back door to taking away our guns!’ is a meme and nothing else.  The draft even say, EXPLICITLY, that nation states retain full  and exclusive control over internal gun ownership laws.

    *sigh* this is what I hate hate hate hate HATE about what the gun rights movement has become.  Instead of focusing on real arguments and real issues, you see these bullshit memes come up over and over that people get worked up about and just make the whole movement look like a bunch of nutters.

    The NRA has become little more then the PETA of gun control… useless,.. it as more to do with chest thumping and talking points then actual laws. 

  36. Conster says:

    Those would be the ATF’s 2008 statistics about the total amount of exported firearms. If the US were really responsible for doubling the amount of firearms in the Netherlands in a single year, I would be extremely angry at them, but they’re not, so I’m not.

  37. Defenestrator says:

    A lot of carry permits are used by hunters and only they carry during hunting season.  This way you don’t have to worry about leaving a sidearm on if you walk into a public building.  (NOTE:  most states won’t allow you to carry a sidearm into an establishment that sells alcohol even if you have a carry permit.  I’m not sure if this is a federal law or more of a local jurisdiction rule.)

  38. chadachada321 says:

    If I recall correctly, only half of US households have firearms, and there are about 200 million legally owned firearms in the US (so about 2:3 gun-to-American ratio). About 1% percent of legal adults (I think it’s 1% of legal adults in Texas, I’m not sure) have a license to carry a gun concealed, and many people have their carry permit but don’t carry often at all (like my dad).

    One question about your comment, did the US export 245k guns into the Netherlands, or did the US export that many guns total in 2008 to a bunch of different countries?

    -Optimum est pati quod emendare non possis-It is best to endure what you cannot change-

  39. Conster says:

    You know, in my country, there are apparently 3 firearms per 100 people, while it’s probably about 100 per 100 in the US. It’s not as bad as it sounds, by the way – I think the crime rate is lower than in the US. Anyway, with 17 million people, that’s about 500,000 firearms, most of them in hands of law enforcement, I wager. Meanwhile, 54,045 pistols, 28,205 revolvers, 104,592 rifles, 41,270 shotguns and 17,531 miscellaneous firearms were exported from the US in 2008. That’s 245,643 firearms: not really that much for the US, I suppose, but about half as many firearms as exist in the Netherlands. Whoa.

  40. Austin_Lewis says:

    Yeah, because Bush is the reason that you see american firearms all over war-torn countries.

    Oh wait, you see Aks?


    And in 2008, the UN had a treaty that would have effectively banned all individual ownership of firearms to all (except the extremely wealthy, famous, and politicians), but the UN delegate from America at the time basically told them to fuck themselves.

  41. DorthLous says:



    Seriously though, Ad Nomines attacks, really? Unbacked by proofs? And Hitlery, really? Also, skanky? Clinton? Are we talking about the same person here?

    Thou, my friend, is uterly mad 🙂

  42. Neeneko says:

    I am not sure how much stock I put in the ‘gun treaty’ rumors. The only references I can find are on rabbid pro-gun sites that have a habbit of exagerating things.. as well as talking about how the UN is trying to destroy america and all that over the top retoric.

    In fact, the only solid information I could find indicates that the treaty focuses exclusivly on international trafficing of small arms (which is not the same as ‘hand guns’).

    The reason Bush was against the treaty and Obama is not has less to do with 2nd ammendment and more to do with political contributions.  Exporting small arms to war torn areas is big buisness and the companies involved would like to keep it that way.  Bush had many ties to these companies and thus it was not in his best interest to hurt them.  Obama has ties to differnt companies and thus he can support it.

    The actual impact on american’s gun rights however would be non-existant.  They might effect jobs and prices though since the export market would marginally decrease.

  43. BearDogg-X says:

    Well, too bad for that dirty, filthy, disgusting, skanky, brutal, bottom-feeding trash-bag whore Hiltery Clinton that that so-called UN treaty would be ruled unconstitutional so fast that it would make their heads spin. And besides that, doesn’t any treaty that the USA enters have to be approved by a 2/3rds majority of the Senate?

    Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Hornets, Jack Thompson can geaux chase a chupacabra. Hell will stay frozen over for quite a while since the Saints won the Super Bowl.

    Proud supporter of the New Orleans Saints, LSU, 1st Amendment; Real American; Hound of Justice; Even through the darkest days, this fire burns always

    Saints(3-4), LSU(7-0)

  44. Conster says:

    Hey, I’m not against people bringing loaded firearms into parks in the US (not my country, don’t care if they shoot wildlife with it, and it seems like a good place for serial killers, so you’ll want protection from them), and I definitely don’t think a freak case like this means you should sharpen gun laws (with gun laws, it’s kinda all-or-nothing – either you forbid guns altogether, or you have to accept the idea that if people are allowed to carry guns, tragic (but rare) accidents will happen), I just think that crying "they’re going to use this to take away our guns! =(" isn’t an appropiate response here, just like I think crying "they’re going to use this to crack down on gamers!" if someone dies in a way similar to a video game isn’t an appropiate response. First, you mourn, then if people try to take advantage of the situation, you rage. Going straight to pre-emptive rage just seems wrong to me.

    And yes, I still think it’s unlikely that US gun laws will be sharpened. <hyperbole> If Obama really tries to severely restrict the constitutional right to form a militia in case Mexico invades, the NRA will probably end up assassinating him anyway.</hyperbole>

  45. Austin_Lewis says:

    Yeah, do you know how big some national parks are?  In many of them, you will not get help in time should someone mug you (or nature try to mug you).

    As for the state of firearm laws, there’s talk that Hillary is trying to sign a UN treaty that would ban smallarms.  And of course, we all know where Obama and Eric Holder stand on the 2nd amendment, blaming America for Mexico’s long standing problem with firearms being in the hands of the drug cartels they ignored for the last two decades.

  46. Alex says:

    I’m sorry, but no. This is a family. They have a kid. This kid, like most kids and indeed human beings in general, is prone to moving from one room to another.

    If there is a child in the house, a gun should not be left within reach of that child. Period. Whether the child was in the room when the gun was left out or not changes absolutely nothing as far as I’m concerned.

    I’m not under the affluence of incohol as some thinkle peep I am. I’m not half as thunk as you might drink. I fool so feelish I don’t know who is me, and the drunker I stand here, the longer I get.

  47. Craig R. says:

    "Again, from what I’ve read, it does not appear that anyone is trying to shift blame or deny responsibility for their actions."

    The fact that the Wii was mentioned is an attempt to shift blame or deny responsiblity. There is no reason to do that whatsoever unless you’re looking for a scapegoat.

    We should be reading and hearing nothing from these parents beyond "We royally fucked up".

  48. chadachada321 says:

    Whoa, that could change everything. If I’m asleep on this couch in the living room, and before I went to sleep I set my gun on the counter, and then some little girl comes in with mother after I’m asleep, then how could I be responsible when I’m ASLEEP?

    If this is true, and he was asleep when the girl entered the room, then I’d say it would either be a freak accident with no one at fault, or a freak accident with the mother slightly at fault for not, you know, moving the gun or the girl or something.

    But, if the stepfather put the gun on the table with the girl in the room and then fell asleep…

    -Optimum est pati quod emendare non possis-It is best to endure what you cannot change-

  49. Andrew Eisen says:

    Yeah, it’s possible Mom had no idea there was a gun on the table.  If that’s the case, then the stepfather is at fault.  However, if she did know the gun was on the table, then the two share blame.

    Also, one report mentions a prowler, another says the stepfather was running off a few dogs.  Either way, maybe the kid was corraled while the stepfather was investigating.  We don’t know.


    Andrew Eisen

  50. Andrew Eisen says:

    "The game’s controller was shaped like a gun that looked very similar to the real handgun, which her stepfather had put on a table in the living room." -Wilson County Sheriff Terry Ashe

    "The mother told investigators her daughter could have thought the gun was a controller for a Nintendo Wii."

    "Cronberger [the stepfather] said Cheyenne mistook the weapon for a Wii video game controller and fatally shot herself in the abdomen."

    That’s all I’ve seen so far.  As I said earlier, none of that reads to me like an attempt to shift blame.

    "The game’s controller was shaped like a gun that looked very similar to the real handgun, which her stepfather had put on a table in the living room."

    "Ashe said the girl’s mother was in the same room and the stepfather was asleep when it happened."

    "The stepfather told deputies he got out the gun because he heard a prowler, then left it on a living room end table."

    "When he returned inside, he placed the gun on a living room table." -the stepfather

    The stepfather left a loaded gun the living room table and went to sleep.  The mother was in the room with the daughter at the time.  Again, from what I’ve read, it does not appear that anyone is trying to shift blame or deny responsibility for their actions.


    Andrew Eisen

  51. nightwng2000 says:

    A line from that FOX News story got to me also:

    "Ashe said the girl’s mother was in the same room and the stepfather was asleep when it happened."

    Did mom know dear ole jackarse left the gun on the table?

    The possibility that mommy dearest was across the room and made a dive for child and gun when she realized what was about to happen is possible.

    But, still, did mom KNOW the gun was there, and that child was in or near the room?  Even if child was not in the room and entered without being seen initially, mom should have had the brains to put the gun out of reach of the child.  If they were still worried about someone possibly stalking the house, then they should have corraled the child somewhere, rather than letting the child roam.

    Yeah, hindsight.  But lack of responsible foresight should be taken into consideration too.


    NW2K Software


    Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

  52. Craig R. says:

    "Possible both the stepfather and mother are providing the same rationalization."

    Let’s call it what it really is: the same bullshit excuse for their own lack of responsiblity.

  53. Andrew Eisen says:

    From what I’ve read, I don’t get the sense that either parent is using the "maybe she thought it was a Wii controller" as a means to shift blame but as a way to explain why the kid picked the gun up in the first place.  Of course, to me, a 3-year-old picking up something dangerous (be it a gun, power sander, or gila monster) doesn’t require rationalization.


    Andrew Eisen

  54. nightwng2000 says:

    GP is using a different source story.  It’s from WSMV.  And Kotaku is using the Tennesean article, which I actually saw when I Google News Searched the child’s name.  I’m beginning to think the whole lot, stepfather, mother, and even the sheriff are trying to scapegoat video game controllers to steer away from this bastard’s screwup. 

    And many, from around various commenting areas, are saying that this <fill in the blank with any obscene name you want as I can pretty much call him every one of them) should merely be left with the knowledge of what has happened.


    He, the mother, and even the sheriff don’t seem to give a snot about what he is responsible for.  They’re busy pawning off the responsibility elsewhere.  We’ll NEVER know what the kid was really thinking.  But THEY seem to know.  As long as he doesn’t have to take direct responsibility for his acts.  The DIRECT causal link here?  HE left a REAL gun where the 3 year old could reach it, for whatever reason she did.  It’s solely HIS responsibility. 

    Some folks think he should suffer with his thoughts about his mistake.  Fine.  Stick him in solitary confinement or, even better, a sensory deprivation tank for the rest of his natural life.  That’s ALL he’ll be able to do, think about what he did.


    NW2K Software


    Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

  55. nightwng2000 says:

    From the article:

    "Cheyenne’s stepfather, Douglas Robert Cronberger…"

    Next paragraph:

    "Cronberger said Cheyenne mistook the weapon for a Wii video game controller …"

    According to The Tennessean (  http://www.tennessean.com/article/20100308/NEWS03/100308009/Accidental-shooting-kills-Wilson-County-child    ), the sheriff, Terry Ashe, also made reference to it:

    "The child had been playing a Nintendo Wii video game, Ashe said. The game’s controller was shaped like a gun that looked very similar to the real handgun, which her stepfather had put on a table in the living room. Ashe said the girl pulled the gun off the table and it went off."


    NW2K Software


    Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

  56. Erik says:

    "What’s the point of having a handgun for emergencies if it is locked up when the emergency comes?"

    To prevent the much more likely scenerio of the gun becoming the emergency.  The chances of what happend in this situation happening to an actually responsible gun owner would be much lower.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  57. Rodrigo Ybáñez García says:

    Guns were never needed.

    Humans have been killing before guns, because there are individuals or groups who use violence against others to accomplish their goals (power, territory, money, you name it).

    Now we have criminals who wouldn´t doubt on take your life if you have some dollars in your wallet. They will use anything to get what they want.

    People should know how to use guns, not to fear to use them.

    I think that one of our main problems as society is the believing that if we get rid of guns, then the violence will magically dissapear form our society. That´s unrealistic. 


    ———————————————————— My DeviantArt Page (aka DeviantCensorship): http://www.darkknightstrikes.deviantart.com

  58. Valdearg says:

    Don’t worry, A_L. You aren’t the only person who lauged at SSB and AE’s response. Though that might just make us both horrible, horrible people.

  59. Monte says:

     Well for one thing, i don’t think the ammo needs to be locked up aswell, so it would be just one lock… and if we are talking about the time it takes to grab a gun when the intruder has already burst into you’re room, i highly doubt you will even have the time to grab both the gun, the ammo, and load it with or without the lock… so you’re screwed at that point either way.

  60. Defenestrator says:

    No, you are wrong.  Violence has solved plenty of things in this world.

    Is it the ideal way to solve a problem?  No.  But it can solve problems.

    People who have the intent of inflicting ill will upon others will not abide by any sort of gun ban.  I’d like to keep my meager arsenal in case I have to deal with such a person.  Fortunately, I’ve never been in a situation where I’ve had to point a gun at another human being and hopefully that day will never come.

    That said, the gun owner in this story was a complete and utter dumbass.  I feel horrible for this family and it’s truly tragic that a 3-year-old is dead due to someone’s negligence.

  61. Austin_Lewis says:

    Or continue to shoot each other, as by definition criminals are not likely to abide by any law.

  62. Neeneko says:

    Though in most cases, it is closer to ‘I hear someone in another part of the house, I have time to get my gun’  the whole ‘evil-doer bursts into your bedroom’ thing is a fabrication of hollywood. Yes, it does happen, but not often.  Far less often then ‘crimes of passion’ shooting where one spouce kills another because a weapon was nearby.

  63. Flamespeak says:

    To illustrate the point of this have someone come over to your house and tell them to enter and come to your bedroom when you give the signal and touch your arm. Take two locks and secure one to the other and place the locks in one part of your room where you would have the gun and the key to both locks where you would have the ammo and the key to the trigger lock.

    See if that person can reach you walking in at a normal rate and touch you before you can get both locks undone. Most people can’t get it done. And that is when they are expecting someone to enter, know exactly what to do, where to reach, and are wide awake. When someone breaks in when you asleep (or watching a movie, on the phone, or playing a video game) and you are not thinking clearly you would need to add a lot more time to your little excercise.

  64. Flamespeak says:

    good point. let’s get rid of guns, the police, and all forms of military. People will just act nice, nobody will attack us, and the next thing you know we’ll all fart roses.

    You don’t like guns? Fine. Heck, I don’t like guns personally (which is odd given my job and deep south upbringing), but I am not so foolish as to think they are not needed and shouldn’t be. An innocent child is dead from a gun so we should get rid of them. Then we need to get rid of everything that has caused innocent children to die. Cars, hard surfaces, buckets, and so much more. Yes people die in war and gang shoot-outs, but you would also be foolish to think that these same people wouldn’t just stab the bejesus out of each other, beat each other with clubs, or just stomp the other guy to death.

    Part of being a complete person is being someone that understands why things exist that you don’t agree with personally.

  65. Monte says:

     "A locked gun is a useless gun."

    I don’t see how a locked gun could necessarily take much time… if you keep the key close at hand or some place you can quickly grab it, you should have the gun on hand as fast as you can turn a key.

  66. JulieGray says:

    My understanding is that the girl died as pointed out in the article:

    "The little girl succumbed to her injuries on Sunday night."


  67. Mr.Tastix says:

    "What’s the point of having a handgun for emergencies if it is locked up when the emergency comes?"

    We shouldn’t ever have to use guns at all. Has the millions of lives lost through war not taught us that guns and violence solve nothing? Sure it might be fun to run around a fake city in a video game killing people with bullets and flamethrowers, but in real life? It’s exactly the opposite.

    Guns were never needed. They should never be used. I don’t give a flying toss about your "protection", there’s better ways to handle your problems than by shooting it, cutting it, burning it, or blowing it up. If gangs and war won’t teach us, innocent children shooting themselves should.

    — Randi Tastix

  68. Neeneko says:

    Well, it would depend on the type of lock and how far away the key is.  It only has to be suffiently difficult to stop a child… so.. key hanging on a nail out of reach would do the trick.

  69. chadachada321 says:

    A locked gun is a useless gun. In an emergency, you want the gun to be there, ready to use.

    The ammo should be in a separate spot, though, not IN the gun when left alone. Say, if the gun is in a desk drawer, the ammo should be in a different drawer so that even if the kid finds the gun, there is no chance of accidentally shooting themselves/others.

    What’s the point of having a handgun for emergencies if it is locked up when the emergency comes?

    -Optimum est pati quod emendare non possis-It is best to endure what you cannot change-

  70. Austin_Lewis says:

    I know this may be terrible, but this line of discussion is hilarious.


    It reminds me of ‘once she turned me into a newt!!!!’… ‘I got better’.

  71. Andrew Eisen says:

    "Poor little girl. I hope she gets better and doesn’t have perminant damage."

    She’s dead.


    Andrew Eisen

  72. sharpshooterbabe says:

    No they don’t keep loaded guns around the house, but they do keep them locked up. Poor little girl. I hope she gets better and doesn’t have perminant damage.

        The stepfather on the other hand needs to take some classes in gun ownership. An avid gun collector like my brother, doesn’t keep bullets in the weapon. The stepfather needs to be charged for something & to be asked to see if he has a valid gun liscence.

         The reason I say this is b/c in Texas, there are numerous shootings, some on accidents. One I can still remember for the news had nothing to do w/games but except for imaginary cowboys and indians game. 2 brothers were playing w/a loaded gun. & pulled the trigger and shot and killed his brother by accident. The father did get charged. & it was put up & away from their kids. So sad.



    "It’s better to be hated for who you are, then be loved for who you are not." – Montgomery Gentry

  73. Erik says:

    Rehabilitation is a failure.  How many people see the inside of a jail two or more times?  I say we stop trying to turn broken, violent assholes into John Q Public and start lopping off the hands of theives.  Whenever I hear about rehabilitation I just shake my head.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  74. chadachada321 says:

    It could very well have been a once-in-a-million mistake. He could have set it down for a minute just to change his clothes or something, and in that short amount of time…

    I’m not saying that he’s innocent, absolutely not, but that the situation should be looked into to figure out just to what degree it was stupidity/carelessness and not just bad luck.

    -Optimum est pati quod emendare non possis-It is best to endure what you cannot change-

  75. Austin_Lewis says:

    All I can think of is ‘child endangerment’ or something similar.  And honestly, they are guilty of it.  Who the FUCK leaves a handgun in range of a three year old?

  76. DorthLous says:

    Actually, laws are a set of rules meant to attain an objective. Hence the range of possible penalties for a crime. In a perfect system where the only flaw would be to have some people commit crime yet having omniscient judges that all abide the same ideal goals, there would be no need for the punishment to be enshrined in the law as the judge would give each crime the proper sentence.

    Punishment as a policing method has never compared advantageously to rehabilitation. Crimes, both violents and not go down when people that actually commited a crime don’t look at the time left on their head as something they can’t alter. And that’s not talking about death sentences. Ignoring the possibility of errors, the odds of removing someone who could have saved lives or done some greater good at a later point and the morality of the thing, how likely is someone that is personaly convinced he will get the death sentence of surrendering?

    It is not about being politically correct, it’s about supporting a few ideals that make us better while basing our society choices on research. Both of which tend toward the same point, which is, rehabilitation.

  77. Erik says:

    Prison is punishment, regardless of the politically correct window dressing they put on it to make it more palatabe.  If the law states that crime A leads to punishment B, then that is it.  His mindset is irrelevant.  Does the law say A or B.  That is what matters.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  78. Erik says:

    How he will be punished by karma and/or himself is a moot point.  The law is, and should be, impartial in these situations.  fairness and justice must be eschwed and the facts should be judged in a mechanical manner.  If his actions match the "verbal equation" of a written law then he is guilty.

    So let me ask you: Was what he did illegal based on the law and not you or anyone else’s emotions?

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  79. DorthLous says:

    Don’t forget that the stated goal of the penitenciary system is rehabilitation. If this man has trully learned from his mistake (which I see no proof of, seeing only the blame of a toy and the fact he was a step-father with all the possible detachment it can bring), then emprisoning him would not serve any purpose.

  80. FlakAttack says:

    I disagree. The goal of the justice system is not to apply the law in a black or white fashion, it is to ensure justice. Since justice is about being "fair" and "right", and "fairness" does not necessarily mean "equality", it doesn’t always make sense to apply the same penalty to two men commiting the same crime: the situation is ALWAYS different, and the justice system must account for that.

    This man stands to lose so much more than you can imagine, and has already lost his daughter, not to just any accident, but a preventable one. It is likely his (or the mother’s) fault and unless they suffer from a psychological disorder, this will take its toll on them.

    Justice has been served, and it will not be kind to either of them.

  81. Erik says:

    "Don’t you think that’s punishment enough?"

    Legally?  No.  I mean why even have laws, law enforcement, and a judiciary system if we are just going to rely on karma.  I mean it doesn’t look like my tax dollars are going to go to getting health care any time soon.  So I might as well get SOME bang for my buck with the imprisonment of this man.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  82. nightwng2000 says:

    The color may not matter.  IF they have a Wii, and IF they use gun shaped controllers, the child may have merely registered the shape and thought it safe.  She may not have even played with a Wii, gun shaped controller or not.  She may merely have seen OTHERS play with it and associated the okay-ness of it.

    As someone else said, too, she may have merely seen it and generally thought "new toy".

    We’ll never know what she was thinking.  Everyone around the globe will turn psychic now and decide what she was thinking for her.


    NW2K Software


    Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

  83. Neeneko says:

    I think it would depend on the timescale.  If he left it overnight or overweekend… yeah, he is in trouble.  if he left it on the counter when checking other things, that is more reasonable.

  84. chadachada321 says:

    Given the fact that his own daughter got killed because of his mistake, I think that is punishment enough.

    He’ll never be looked at the same way by his townsmen, he’ll likely lose all/most of his friends, he’s almost definitely going to lose his wife and half of his possessions in the divorce. There’s a chance that he could be let go from his job, he’ll likely never be allowed to legally own a firearm again.

    Don’t you think that’s punishment enough?

    -Optimum est pati quod emendare non possis-It is best to endure what you cannot change-

  85. Erik says:

    Wait, no charges against the father?  Leaving a deadly instrument laying out in easy access doesn’t count as child endangerment anymore?

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  86. Andrew Eisen says:

    "Actually, it should.  It was the stepfather who made the comment."

    It was the mother.


    Andrew Eisen

  87. nightwng2000 says:

    "It’s unclear if the girl mistook the gun for a standard Wii remote or for a Wii gun accessory, but in the end it doesn’t really matter."

    Actually, it should.  It was the stepfather who made the comment.  It was the stepfather who was the idiot boob who left his gun lying within reach of a 3 year old.  It’s the stepfather who needs to derail any responsibility of his by blaming a video game console controller.

    Yes, she may have seen such a controller used.  Yes, she may have generally thought "new toy".

    But, yes, he was the idiot who left a real, harmful object around where the 3 year old could reach it and do what she did.  If it had been a Wii controller, she wouldn’t be dead.

    This isn’t about being for or against gun control/rights.

    This isn’t about the value, harm, or Freedom of Speech Rights/censorship of video games, violent or otherwise.

    This is about a f**kwit who left a REAL weapon lying around where a 3 year old could reach it.

    Charges?  The fact that he tried to pawn his responsibility off on something else shows he’s learned NOTHING whatsoever from this.  While, legally, he couldn’t be charged with the most serious acts, his very act of trying to get out of his responsibility is more than enough for me to want to see him charged with murder in the 1st degree.  This, to me, is no different than a drunk driver running down someone in the street and trying to put the blame on the alcohol and being drunk.

    Now, I’ve had my rant for the night.  I’m going to Facebook this one, point out my rant so it gets further mentioned, since I can’t rant on the news site, and move on to other important stories of the day on other news sites.


    NW2K Software


    Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

  88. hellfire7885 says:

    Giving that there are black Wii remotes, a black Wii zapper or other gun shaped accessory isn’t much of a stretch, meaning it’ likely only a matter of time.

  89. Kincyr says:

    that was a bit uncalled for. the real question is whether there even exists a Wii Remote gun peripheral that is colored like a real handgun

    岩「…Where do masochists go when they die?」

  90. sharpshooterbabe says:

    The mother is obviously stupid. Do they even have a wii & has her child EVER seen a wii?




    "It’s better to be hated for who you are, then be loved for who you are not." – Montgomery Gentry

  91. Conster says:

    Last I checked, Tennessee was part of the US. You’re allowed to bring guns into parks now. What makes you think gun legislation is going to get more, rather than less, intrusive? If there weren’t any "keep your guns away from your kids" laws before, you’re probably not going to get them now.

    Why is it that whenever there’s a tragedy, people here feel the need to complain that this tragedy will no doubt be used by people to try and implement something they don’t want? Have we as a species sunk so deep that we can’t simply mourn, we have to take advantage of the situation or accuse someone else of wanting to take advantage of the situation?

  92. chadachada321 says:

    A responsible gun owner would keep a gun out of reach of their children until their children are old enough to know how to handle a gun responsibly. This guy could have just made a one-in-a-million mistake, or he could have been genuinely irresponsible. In either case, he’s learned the ultimate lesson, and in my opinion that should be enough of a punishment. Most gun owners don’t leave loaded guns around the house like that.

    -Optimum est pati quod emendare non possis-It is best to endure what you cannot change-

  93. chadachada321 says:

    And just like how many people use tragic stories to promote censorship, so, too, will people use this as an example to support intrusive gun legislation…

    -Optimum est pati quod emendare non possis-It is best to endure what you cannot change-

  94. CMiner says:

    "possibly mistaking it for a Wii controller according to her mother"

    Possibly mistaking it for a wii controller.. or possibly, being a 3 year old, thinking "Hey, new toy!", like a 3 year old would do with -any- hand sized object placed within reach.


    And, as others have said, what moron leaves a gun on the counter with a three year old in the house?

  95. hellfire7885 says:

    No, it doesn’t matter as due to one mistake a young one lost her life, but those for gun control and those for game banning will sieze both points and eploit this for their own gains.

Comments are closed.