Warning: Article has detailed accounts of the shooting

Breanna Gayle Devall Runions, 25, was charged with first-degree murder and aggravated child abuse in the death of Evangaline Gunter.

The child’s parents, Adam and Josie Gunter, told ABC affiliate WATE that Evangaline had been in temporary custody at a home in Rockwood, which Runions shared with girlfriend Christina Daniels and another child, a 7-year-old girl.

Before the shooting, Evangaline and the older girl were being punished that morning by Runions for not waking up the women and for eating Daniels’ food without permission, according to the warrant and a statement from Russell Johnson, district attorney general for Tennessee’s 9th Judicial District. Runions struck both girls with a sandal before forcing them to stand in different corners of the women’s bedroom, authorities said the older girl told them.

After the shooting, the women drove Evangaline to a nearby Walmart location to meet an ambulance, Roane County Medical Examiner Dr. Thomas Boduch told the Roane County News, and the vehicle transported the girl to a hospital where she was pronounced dead. Boduch could not immediately be reached by HuffPost.

  • 520@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    All the training in the world wouldn’t have stopped this. They wanted that kid dead.

    • TWeaK@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes but removing access to guns would have certainly gone a long way.

      • 520@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It would change the headline to “4 year old fatally stabbed by woman who was teaching her 'kitchen knife safety '”.

        Again, they wanted this kid dead. Removing guns from this particular equation wouldn’t change much.

        • TWeaK@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          But it most likely wouldn’t, or at least that would have been a more unlikely story. Guns make killing trivially easy, a knife is at least a little harder.

          • 520@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Getting a gun, pressing it against the chest of a 4 year old and pulling the trigger

            Versus

            Getting a knife, pressing it against the chest of a 4 year old and pushing it deeper

            What’s the added difficulty here? Yes, in general you are correct but in this scenario it really wouldn’t have made a blind bit of difference. A 4 year old’s capacity for self defence against an adult is basically zero, this one’s chances of getting to safety was basically zero. Even if you removed both guns and knives from the equation, they would have just used something else.

            • loutr@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              You really don’t see how shooting someone (yes, even a small child) is a much, much easier and quicker way to kill them?

              • 520@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                That’s the thing, in this particular scenario, the way they did it, a gun wasn’t any easier or quicker at all. If anything it was the worse option because of noise and damage from bullet ricochet.

                There are many other scenarios where your assertions are perfectly valid but right here, for this scenario…it doesn’t apply, and you’re missing the point in trying to make it apply.

                • TWeaK@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  It’s not about it being an easier or quicker death, it’s about it being easier and quicker for the perpetrator. It’s much easier to pull a trigger than to stab someone. She had the same opportunity for both, but the gun was easier.

                  There’s also a good chance she thought she could play it off as an accident. Obviously that won’t be the case with all the witness statements, but it would have been much harder to claim a fatal knife wound was an accident, and also less likely that an accidental knife wound would be fatal.

                  • 520@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    It’s not about it being an easier or quicker death, it’s about it being easier and quicker for the perpetrator.

                    But that’s exactly what I’m talking about.

                    It’s much easier to pull a trigger than to stab someone. She had the same opportunity for both, but the gun was easier.

                    So in this particular scenario, the gun is actually not the easier option. Any particular advantage offered by the firearm is completely offset by the scenario, like the fact that there was only one target who was under their complete control.

                    There’s also a good chance she thought she could play it off as an accident. Obviously that won’t be the case with all the witness statements, but it would have been much harder to claim a fatal knife wound was an accident, and also less likely that an accidental knife wound would be fatal.

                    I mean, she didn’t do a particularly good job playing off the gun as an accident either. If she were using the knife, she could say she was working in the kitchen, the kids were playing under her, she tripped, fell forward and plunged the knife into the kids neck. It’d be more believable than the gun safety story, as it relies a lot less on the adult being a completely clueless moron.

                    and also less likely that an accidental knife wound would be fatal.

                    True, depending on how the genuine accident happens. Unless you’re stabbing someone 37 times in the chest, it is still perfectly possible to do a cover-up though.

          • 520@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            …the fact that this was blatantly fucking murder? Use your common sense.

            In what world is pressing the barrel of a gun against the chest of a 4 year old, never mind pulling the fucking trigger, supposed to be about teaching gun safety? How is that anything other than premeditated murder?

            Given the history of abuse in that household, I don’t buy the idiocy angle. The other child watching knew what was happening and turned away so as to not watch it, for god’s sake.

            There was clearly an intent to maim or kill, perhaps to intimidate the other child. If it wasn’t a gun in use, it would either be another weapon or a bare-fisted beat down.

        • yata@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You have no way of knowing that. Removing the gun from the equation would certainly have removed the gun death from it though.

          It is actually quite sad and a little bit scary how eager you are to concoct fictitious scenarios in order to remove the gun issue from this story.

          • 520@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            You have no way of knowing that. Removing the gun from the equation would certainly have removed the gun death from it though.

            Yes I do. Starting with the fact that the story about teaching gun safety is obviously bullshit and there was a history of abuse in the household. You don’t have to know shit about guns to know that pressing the gun barrel against a child and pulling the trigger is an attempt at premeditated murder.

            So, now we’ve established that it’s premeditated murder, if a gun wasn’t in the equation, another weapon would be. The next most obvious choice would be a knife.

            It is actually quite sad and a little bit scary how eager you are to concoct fictitious scenarios in order to remove the gun issue from this story.

            It’s more scary how eager you are to not use your brain before opening your mouth. There are indeed plenty of scenarios where removing guns would indeed limit or prevent damage. This wasn’t one of them because of the circumstances surrounding it.