Worker indicted for manslaughter in Texas gun range shooting
Posted: May 04, 2018 11:09 AM CDTUpdated: May 04, 2018 11:09 AM CDT
Link

CYPRESS, Texas (AP) - Authorities say an employee of a Houston-area gun range discharged a customer's rifle without checking if it was loaded, sending a bullet into the head of another customer who died.
The Harris County district attorney's office said in a statement Friday that 21-year-old Tyler Sutton has been indicted on a count of manslaughter.
Sutton was working the counter at the gun range in Cypress last December when he pulled the trigger without apparently realizing the gun was loaded. The bullet traveled through a window and struck a man in the parking lot.
Harris County prosecutor Jim Leitner says presuming a firearm is not loaded "is always a recipe for disaster."
The penalty for manslaughter is 2 to 20 years in prison.
A working phone listing for Sutton couldn't be found.
Copyright 2018 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

probably the correct charge.

That's very very sad. I sure hope that poor guy gets a light sentence. What a horrible and preventable accident that was.

such a sad story. I may be in the minority but I wish sympathy on the kid.

I'm in the middle on this one, he shouldn't get the minimum but 20 would be too much.

I could see something like 8-10 with parole at 4-5 with good behavior.

I feel like the gun owner should have some culpability here too.

Maybe someone can link the original thread but I remember the owner brought the gun in because he has having an issue (bolt stuck or something) and wanted someone to take a look at it.

If that's the case, I don't see how the owner is at fault.

I guess when it is your time to go it is your time. That poor unlucky guy in the parking lot. Can you imagine what his family must be thinking? If his timing would have been one second different in either direction he might not have been hit.

If I remember correctly, the employee was actually aiming at the back of the guys head.

Yeah I remember that as well from the thread but couldn't remember if it was just "this is what I heard" or from a news source.

This was the accident at Hotwells, yes? Awful situation for everyone involved.

I go to that range. I don't know for sure but I doubt he aimed at the guy. I don't know of an angle he could do that at(no windows towards where they say it happened).

Quote:

---

If I remember correctly, the employee was actually aiming at the back of the guys head.

---

If true, this changes everything... in my mind at least.

DatTallArchitect said:

---

If I remember correctly, the employee was actually aiming at the back of the guys head.

---

I was going to ask. It didn't go through a blind wall and randomly hit him in the head did it?

If he actually put a man's head in the crosshairs, I feel he should be held accountable.

https://texags.com/forums/34/topics/2915755/1#discussion


Original thread.

Depending on the article you read the gun was either in for service or being cleaned.

Gun being pointed at someone was BS someone came in to spew.

I agree a lot more with the takes in the original thread about gun safety/who is at fault than this one.

DallasAggies01 said:

---

I feel like the gun owner should have some culpability here too.

---

Should the owner have brought in a loaded gun? No (unless he was trying to get help on it), but lets not overthink this. The guy worked at a gun range and can't practice the absolute most basic safety principle of handling a gun...

I do feel for the kid, but he does need to serve some time for his carelessness. Definitely not 20 years worth. But I think itll help be a reminder to others to be more careful

CharlieBrown17 said:

---

Maybe someone can link the original thread but I remember the owner brought the gun in because he has having an issue (bolt stuck or something) and wanted someone to take a look at it.

If that's the case, I don't see how the owner is at fault.

---

If that's the case not the owners fault. If the owner brought the gun in to be cleaned, as stated by the Sheriff in the other thread you linked, with a round in the chamber yes I believe the owner should shoulder some of the blame.

I never hand off a loaded weapon to anyone. I double check that the firearm is safe and clear. Same when anyone hands me a firearm.

Sad deal all the way around.

That said I doubt this ever sees the inside of courthouse going forward.

Any gun range should have a safe direction, ballistic barrel, whatever that can be used to drop the hammer on a firearm in a safe place. He broke all the safety rules - ALL OF THEM - and should be held liable for doing so.

If the range did not have safety protocols in place that the employee violated, the range should be liable as well.

Make no mistake, the employee/kid is at fault (clearly) and violated RULE NUMERO UNO and as 96Austin said, ALL THE REST OF THE RULES about firearm safety.

It is super unfortunate that it cost a father of young children his life. For that he should clearly be punished, but I don't wish the max punishment on him given the actual facts.

Now if he really had actually pointed and aimed the gun at someone, **** his day up, give him the max.

He was the father of 3 y/o triplets!

Assuming it wasn't an aimed shot, should be a probation deal.

It's easy for me to say, since it's not my relative who died, but I don't see how sending him to prison does anything to benefit society, the family of the deceased, or the employee who tragically screwed up. What good comes from that? DWI offenders (a much great threat to public safety) aren't punished that severely.

He's effectively living his punishment right now. Would it not be better for everyone if he participated in gun safety speeches to various groups? Schools, LTC classes, ranges, NRA events, etc.

I agree. I wouldn't send him to prison. Or I guess in this case I would give him the minimum sentence.

DatTallArchitect said:

---

If I remember correctly, the employee was actually aiming at the back of the guys head.

---

If that is the case, he had better get the full 20.

DatTallArchitect said:

---

If I remember correctly, the employee was actually aiming at the back of the guys head.

---

20 yrs if so. 2 yrs if not. Guess we'll find out at trial if that was a rumor or not.

Everything I saw said that the victim was walking through the parking lot. How was he aiming at his head in that scenario? Let's not perpetuate that rumor by suggesting it unless someone has an article saying that he was.

If a complete accident, why would they not have gone with involuntary manslaughter? Is this just a higher charge to plea it out lower?

n_touch said:

---

If a complete accident, why would they not have gone with involuntary manslaughter? Is this just a higher charge to plea it out lower?

---

If it was a complete accident, maybe let the Civil suit be the solution. I am sure the gun range has a liability policy.

I guess what I am getting at is why is this criminal? A similar scenario: You go hunting with your buddy. You lean your loaded rifle against a fence as you cross it. It falls over, discharges and kills your buddy. Is that a criminal act? Should it be?

It's surely careless, and unsafe, but is it criminal. Should you serve time?

Putting the man in prison will only make another career criminal and it won't bring back the deceased. I agree that there are more productive sentences where he could offer a benefit to society.

n_touch said:

---

If a complete accident, why would they not have gone with involuntary manslaughter? Is this just a higher charge to plea it out lower?

---

Because there's no such charge in Texas. Manslaughter in Texas is when a person recklessly causes the death of another person. It doesn't deal with intent, etc. I'd say this guy's actions were reckless. Up to a jury to decide if his actions are something a reasonable person would or wouldn't do.

I bet they plea it down to criminally negligent homicide. I think it fits the definition.

Thank you for the breakdown

I'm on the side of a light sentence if he's to be sent to prison. I seriously doubt prison time will do anything beneficial for the guy...retribution for the family probably won't ease their pain either.

I certainly don't think he should be cleared of any charges but I think prison should be saved for intentional law breakers. If he is sent to prison I'd hate for him to be on a floor with violent offenders. Seems like that could do much more harm than good, especially to his physical and mental health.

I like the idea of having to put his story out there for others to learn from. What he did, how he wishes he could take it back, what its like living with that burden...That I think would do a world of service.

21 is not a 'kid' or anything close to it. This adult man worked at a shooting range, which happens to be involved with firearms and discharging them on a daily basis. He willingly broke multiple very simple rules, whoch he should be intimate with, based on where he worked. His negligence resulted in an innocent person getting his brains splattered onto the pavement.

Not sure what the punishment should be, but he killed a man because he acted like a fool.

Not trying to derail, but this brings up an intersting point, as there were posters (perhaps not on the OB) saying people at the construction company and/or the design firm behind the Florida bridge that collapsed should face criminal charges and jail-time. (note, I have zero ties to the firm(s) in question)

But, just like with this situation, there are rules and professional standards that likely were not complied with that resulted in the deaths of several people. Similarly, no one at the firm(s) in question intended to harm or kill anyone.

I guess, I'm interested in the boards thoughts about the two situations, especially given the boards sympathy towards firearm owners (which I am as well). Historically, in engineering amd construction, absent intent (which is pracitically non-existent) there is willful disregard, ie, you knew better but did it anyway (reckless), and there is incompetence. I believe a determination of reckless can involve criminal charges, but as far as I know, incompetence is a civil matter subject to civil penalties and professional sanctions. Not a lawyer, so take with a grain of salt.