The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1883-08-28
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.
Criminal -Carelessness.

To the Edltor OF the Indianapolis Journal:
The report in your Saturdays issue OF a
man mistaking a dark object for burglar,
and firing upon it, killing his nephew, only
adds another to the many illustrations that
people are too quick on the trigger" The
converting of ones house into fort be-
longs to the colonial days, and the wide
circulation and use of firearms are not
necessary in peace and good government.
Men shoot on slight provocation drunk or
sober. An outraged client seeks redress
from an attorney at the point of pistol.
A man with private wrongs goes cunning
for his enemy. Chivalrous (cowardly) citi-
zens clear up the family reputation by
shooting the sanderer in the back All
these and similar ones in the midst of
an illustrious and campaigning civiliza-
ton.
In the case of a burglar who comes in the
night in stealth and seeks to carry away your
honest possessions, 1 admit he ought to be
shot down like dog, if caught in the act
But there ought to be at least reasonable
certainty that the object aimed at is the
burglar Ii there is, you are Justified in
treating him as an enemy. II you shoot
with only a suspicion and disastrous results
follow, \, g clear case of criminal careless
ness.
Freouent accidents result from the care
less handling of dangerous weapons. That
playful spirit some people have of endan-
gerng the lives of their companions by try
ing to alarm or frighten; that astonishing
ignorance in not knowing that the gun was
loaded; that thoughtlessness in allowing
deadly weapons to lie within the reach of
children, every year produce serious wounds
and violent deaths The conscience of the
.perpetrator is the punishment for these
phases of criminal carelessness; the law pass
ing them by. The frequency of their occur
renee is not diminished, and every day records
a victim of some ones fearful but uninteu-
tional mistake
The time is coming when these things Will
be comprehended within the scope of Grim
inal law, and.somebody will have to answer
in a court of justice for an accidental
DEATH" and nothing but contingencies i'm
posi- bic to be foreseen Will excuse any one
Mere thoughtlessness and negligence, when
connected with dangerous circumstances
will be criminal, and punished accordingly
The last Legislature passed an act making 1T
misdemeanor for any one over ten years of
or without malice. (Acts 1881, p. 1919 So
it seems to me that if a death should result
from such pointing, an indictment for man
slaughter would be sustained, because the
slayer was engaged in an unlawful act.
In Crawfordsville dealer sold a boy about
ten years of age a toy pistol, which he took
home and it fell into the hands of younger
brother. II was accidentally discharged, and
the younger one received a fatal wound. In
civil action for damages the Supreme Court
held that there was liability on the dealer
(Binford VS.. Johnson, 81 Ind In an earlier
decision WAL VS. State, 81 Ind, 400 Justice
Biddle said that where one points weapon
in an angry or threatening manner, the other
may kill the person so aiming and be acquit-
ted OH the ground of self-defense, though the
gun prove to be not loaded. These illusTa-
tions are given to show that it may be fairly
inferred that the tendency of the law is such
that in time a remedy will be provided for
the numerous accidents that are careless
and ought to be criminal. THEoPHILUs