International Skeptics Forum

International Skeptics Forum (https://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumindex.php)
-   Social Issues & Current Events (https://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=82)
-   -   2 separate accidental shootings at gun shows today (https://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=251659)

Molinaro 19th January 2013 08:45 PM

2 separate accidental shootings at gun shows today
 
I am particularly perplexed by this description of one of the accidents from CNN:

Quote:

Meanwhile, in Indianapolis, a man walking out of the Indy 1500 Gun and Knife Show shot himself in the hand as he was loading his .45-caliber semi-automatic firearm, Indiana State Police said in a statement.
The 54-year-old Indianapolis man was sent to Wishard Hospital for treatment after being "slightly" injured.
"The investigation determined the shooting to be accidental, and no charges will be filed," police said.
It seems very odd to me that loading your gun while walking around in a public place, and having it go off while doing so, does not entail any crime having been committed.

*edit*
The CNN article has been updated to describe 3 separate shootings at 3 different gun shows today.

BStrong 19th January 2013 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Molinaro (Post 8928321)
I am particularly perplexed by this description of one of the accidents from CNN:



It seems very odd to me that loading your gun while walking around in a public place, and having it go off while doing so, does not entail any crime having been committed.

The cops fingered the suspect, what more do you expect?

Seriously though, unless he had injured another party or damaged public or private property, the most the guy would possibly face is a charge of unlawful discharge, and if he did enough damage to himself, the locals probably feel he's going to suffer enough as it is.

lionking 19th January 2013 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Molinaro (Post 8928321)
It seems very odd to me that loading your gun while walking around in a public place, and having it go off while doing so, does not entail any crime having been committed.

"Odd" isn't the right word. Nor is "perplexing". "Lunacy" is far better.

volcano 19th January 2013 09:50 PM

I'm not as vehemently anti-gun as many other liberals, but I was still shocked to see some of my friends' postings on Facebook this evening-- they were excitedly describing what they bought at today's gun show at Wasilla High School.

Seriously, a gun show at a high school? Even if the risks are no higher than holding a gun show elsewhere, it still seems to be in terrible taste.

Checkmite 19th January 2013 10:59 PM

Wow, sounds like today was just not the right day to be at a gun show.

Just how common are accidents at gunshows? I'm surmising that nonlethal incidents such as these have happened before, but until the current climate of debate never merited more than brief local coverage.

triforcharity 19th January 2013 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lionking (Post 8928406)
"Odd" isn't the right word. Nor is "perplexing". "Lunacy" is far better.

Guy was a dumbass for for trying to apparently walk and load a weapon at the same time, agreed.

But, an accidental discharge, even while doing something pretty dumb, doesn't fall into a crime category that I am aware of. Unless of course that states laws includes "Stupid ****" ......

lionking 19th January 2013 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by triforcharity (Post 8928496)
Guy was a dumbass for for trying to apparently walk and load a weapon at the same time, agreed.

But, an accidental discharge, even while doing something pretty dumb, doesn't fall into a crime category that I am aware of. Unless of course that states laws includes "Stupid ****" ......

Did I say it was illegal? The fact that it isn't makes this whole incident completely surreal.

Cain 20th January 2013 12:04 AM

Those were not accidental gun shots. Liberal media.

Those were freedom stings.

Brian-M 20th January 2013 01:00 AM

I'm confused as to how he could have shot himself in the hand while loading it. Presumably he'd be holding the gun in one hand and the ammunition in the other, so how could he shoot himself in the hand unless he had his hand covering the end of the muzzle? (And it seems to me like that would be a very awkward way to hold a gun.)

ETA: Shooting himself in the foot would sound much more plausible.

SezMe 20th January 2013 01:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian-M (Post 8928615)
I'm confused as to how he could have shot himself in the hand while loading it. Presumably he'd be holding the gun in one hand and the ammunition in the other, so how could he shoot himself in the hand unless he had his hand covering the end of the muzzle? (And it seems to me like that would be a very awkward way to hold a gun.)

ETA: Shooting himself in the foot would sound much more plausible.

I'm gonna guess that the "while loading it" part is not altogether accurate.

rikzilla 20th January 2013 03:08 AM

the bullet, being endowed by its creator with freedom, shall not be infringed on it's way outta the barrel...

casebro 20th January 2013 07:08 AM

I suspect the anti-gun hysteria of prompting more inexperienced individuals to rush out and get one while the getting is good. Blame Feinstein and Obama.

And note that the spirit of this thread is that "guns don't shoot idiots, idiots shoot themselves".

Bikewer 20th January 2013 07:37 AM

With two reported incidents over the weekend, I wonder if gun shows are attracting a lot of new participants, perhaps fueled by "gun grab fever"?
Gun shows go on across the country on a weekly basis, and accidents are vastly rare....

Prior to the '68 Gun Control act, I used to go to a big one "across the river" in Illinois, and they were for the most part very calm affairs, even in that very loose atmosphere.
Of course, it was said that there was more action in the parking lot than on the showroom floor. "Psst... Hey buddy, wanna see a bazooka?"

MRC_Hans 20th January 2013 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by casebro (Post 8928912)
I suspect the anti-gun hysteria of prompting more inexperienced individuals to rush out and get one while the getting is good. Blame Feinstein and Obama.

And note that the spirit of this thread is that "guns don't shoot idiots, idiots shoot themselves".

Which is exactly the problem with lack of rigid gun restrictions: Far too many idiots get to own guns.

(creeps back under stone)

Hans :boxedin:

triforcharity 20th January 2013 08:53 AM

Far too many idiots own cars too.....

Varanid 20th January 2013 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by casebro (Post 8928912)
Blame Feinstein and Obama.

Yeah, definitely blame anyone other than the idiot that wasn't in control of his weapon.


:rolleyes:

BStrong 20th January 2013 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian-M (Post 8928615)
I'm confused as to how he could have shot himself in the hand while loading it. Presumably he'd be holding the gun in one hand and the ammunition in the other, so how could he shoot himself in the hand unless he had his hand covering the end of the muzzle? (And it seems to me like that would be a very awkward way to hold a gun.)

ETA: Shooting himself in the foot would sound much more plausible.

Semi-auto pistol, guy goes to "press-check" to see if the piece is loaded, had finger on trigger.

That's my bet.

A whole bag of mistakes all in one place.

12AX7 20th January 2013 09:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by triforcharity (Post 8929103)
Far too many idiots own cars too.....

And pools. Don't forget those.

12AX7 20th January 2013 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cain (Post 8928580)
Those were not accidental gun shots. Liberal media.

Those were freedom stings.

Yep.

If only there had been one good, God-fearing, NRA card-carring CCW'er nearby to prevent this.

BStrong 20th January 2013 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bikewer (Post 8928967)
With two reported incidents over the weekend, I wonder if gun shows are attracting a lot of new participants, perhaps fueled by "gun grab fever"?
Gun shows go on across the country on a weekly basis, and accidents are vastly rare....

Prior to the '68 Gun Control act, I used to go to a big one "across the river" in Illinois, and they were for the most part very calm affairs, even in that very loose atmosphere.
Of course, it was said that there was more action in the parking lot than on the showroom floor. "Psst... Hey buddy, wanna see a bazooka?"

Didn't need to go any farther than a magazine rack pre-'68, the Destructive Device classification in the NFA hadn't yet been established.

I All sorts of things that would make a strong anti-gunner faint was sold through the mail, no questions asked.

No ammo (at least legally) but the live mortars, bazookas, cannons, AT guns etc. where easily purchased and dirt cheap.

Flamethrowers were my personal favorite.

Molinaro 20th January 2013 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by triforcharity (Post 8929103)
Far too many idiots own cars too.....

And when you have an at fault accident with your car you can find your license to use one suspended.

Why does this not happen with your gun license when you demonstrate carelessness?

000063 20th January 2013 09:56 AM

Depends on the degree of offense. Shoot yourself in the foot, little penalty. Shoot through a wall and hit someone on the other side, and you goin' to jail.

Checkmite 20th January 2013 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bikewer (Post 8928967)
With two reported incidents over the weekend, I wonder if gun shows are attracting a lot of new participants, perhaps fueled by "gun grab fever"?

Well that's the other side of the coin. Gun fans have taken pleasure in pointing out that the current uptick in the gun control debate has led to many more new gun owners, usually saying things along the lines of "Obama is the best gun salesman there ever was". But the fact is, all these people who are buying guns are buying them because they've fallen for the rhetorical claim that "Obama wants to ban all guns" - in other words, mostly unintelligent people. Unintelligent people with guns do things like accidentally shoot themselves and each other - this is the result. All these proud new gun owners that gun fans might be smugly gloating over now, might ultimately prove to help create the best argument ever for stricter gun control.

We can conveniently avoid dealing with that reality through misdirection, however. I'll go first: isn't it convenient for the anti-gun lobby who wants to ban private gun sales that there were accidents at 3 gun shows in different states on the same day?

triforcharity 20th January 2013 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elypsis44 (Post 8929155)
And pools. Don't forget those.

And keys too. I haven't forgot those.

triforcharity 20th January 2013 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Molinaro (Post 8929240)
And when you have an at fault accident with your car you can find your license to use one suspended.

Why does this not happen with your gun license when you demonstrate carelessness?

That's not true. An at fault accident typically only results in a small fine, unless you're displaying gross negligence. Like, drinking and driving, or driving 120 MPH.

When people start losing their licenses for 1 accident, then you might have a point. But, since that's not true, it's bad logic.

Molinaro 20th January 2013 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by triforcharity (Post 8929344)
That's not true. An at fault accident typically only results in a small fine, unless you're displaying gross negligence. Like, drinking and driving, or driving 120 MPH.

When people start losing their licenses for 1 accident, then you might have a point. But, since that's not true, it's bad logic.

That's a very dishonest misrepresentation of what I said.

I did not say, YOU WILL lose your license. I said YOU CAN. There's a big difference between the two that you decided to ignore when you opened with the assertion that my statement was not true.

You then point out that you in fact can lose it, showing that what I said was in fact true.


If a million people had their license application denied last year in the US based on the potential for misuse, why shouldn't it be taken away from people who actually demonstrate misuse?

triforcharity 20th January 2013 11:25 AM

Yes, you CAN lose your license for an at fault accident. However, you're going to, 95% of the time, receive a fine.

Gross negligence, such as reckless driving, or DUI, will usually result in at minimum a short suspension, however not always.

When you state carelessness as a reason to remove a persons right to own a firearm, you've failed to take into consideration that the hugely vast majority of accidents are the result of a careless action. Run a red light, not slow down during rain or snow, not maintaining your vehicle, etc. All careless actions. Almost all result in a fine.

Do you understand how comparing the two is silly? I hope you do.

However, I do agree that if you exhibit gross negligence (leaving a loaded weapon in the cup holder with kids in the car certainly qualifies) or repeated negligence in general, you should have to pay stiff penalties. However, it's going to have to rise above just one incident.

Molinaro 20th January 2013 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by triforcharity (Post 8929424)
Do you understand how comparing the two is silly? I hope you do.

Thank you. You finally get it.

You were the one who brought cars into this discussion. :rolleyes:

It is such a sad state of affairs in the US the way so many bring in such irrelevant and silly comparisons as they attempt to excuse irresponsibility.

triforcharity 20th January 2013 12:12 PM

Yes, I did. Mockingly. I should have added a sarcasm smiley.

Who said anything about excusing responsibility? The idiot who shot himself, should have to pay his medical bills, and any lawsuit brought by the victim he should have to defend himself too. Oh, wait.....nevermind.
(Nobody claimed that someone else was responsible for the idiot's actions.)

I'm glad you said that though. So you agree that personal responsibility is important, right?

So, we can stop the whole discussion on gun control, because, in reality, the most important part, correct? Start holding criminals responsible.

Molinaro 20th January 2013 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by triforcharity (Post 8929512)
Who said anything about excusing responsibility?

I would call the very 1st reply to this thread an example of making excuses for irresponsibility.

PhantomWolf 20th January 2013 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by triforcharity (Post 8929103)
Far too many idiots own cars too.....

While it is true that too many idiots do have cars, at least we try and mitigate that by..

a) Licencing Users
b) Forcing Users to meet a minimum standard to gain that Licence
c) Registering vehicles and forcing users to have insurance
d) Having strict rules about the operation of that vehicle and a dedicated enforcement system to make sure those rules are followed
e) Revoking Licences of those that seriously offend with said vehicle
f) Removing the vehicle from some of those offenders
g) Ban serious offenders from the use or ownership of vehicles.

Do you agree the same things should be done with guns?

Charlie Wilkes 20th January 2013 12:58 PM

It's unfortunate that the stupidest and most reckless members of American society are precisely the ones who are most obsessed with guns. Often the results are merely humorous...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...ef=mostpopular

But not always.

Halfcentaur 20th January 2013 03:00 PM

It's actually three, not two. :)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...6pLid%3D259483

steve s 20th January 2013 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 000063 (Post 8929246)
Shoot through a wall and hit someone on the other side, and you goin' to jail.

Don't be so sure. Apparently you can kill your own son and not get charged with anything.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_2489451.html

Steve S

Unabogie 20th January 2013 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve s (Post 8929918)
Don't be so sure. Apparently you can kill your own son and not get charged with anything.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_2489451.html

**** happens.

ETA: Wait a second, dude. Your link is full of bad information.

Quote:

"I own a number myself," the statement said. "Further, with the reduction of public safety forces firearms ownership may be becoming more necessary.

"Persons who make the decision to own a firearm for personal protection must realize that their primary purpose in owning the firearm is to kill someone or something. They have an obligation to know how the firearm works not just on the day they purchase it but on every occasion that they touch it and always remembering its purpose."
Guns have no purpose! Or if they did, it's for sport shooting paper targets.

DavidJames 20th January 2013 06:14 PM

Gun shows could also be called Darwin Award contests.

BenBurch 21st January 2013 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidJames (Post 8930288)
Gun shows could also be called Darwin Award contests.

The Constitution was not meant to be a suicide pact.

Xulld 21st January 2013 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by triforcharity (Post 8928496)
Guy was a dumbass for for trying to apparently walk and load a weapon at the same time, agreed.

But, an accidental discharge, even while doing something pretty dumb, doesn't fall into a crime category that I am aware of. Unless of course that states laws includes "Stupid ****" ......

I am not so sure, I have never lived in an area that did not have at least ordinance against public discharge within a certain distance of a dwelling.

As everyone knows . . a million laws could make everything illegal, but enforcement is what really matters.

Quote:

It's unfortunate that the stupidest and most reckless members of American society are precisely the ones who are most obsessed with guns.
Do you have any data to back this up?

Can you show that gun owners are prone to accidents more so than non-gun owners while controlling for other risky behaviors?

Can you show a statistically significant difference in IQ while controlling for other factors?

I dont think you can.

PhantomWolf 21st January 2013 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xulld (Post 8932003)
Can you show that gun owners are prone to accidents more so than non-gun owners while controlling for other risky behaviors?

Well that data does show catagorically that gun owners are statistically more likely to be shot than non-gun owners.

Nihilianth 21st January 2013 12:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by triforcharity (Post 8928496)
Guy was a dumbass for for trying to apparently walk and load a weapon at the same time, agreed.

But, an accidental discharge, even while doing something pretty dumb, doesn't fall into a crime category that I am aware of. Unless of course that states laws includes "Stupid ****" ......

"Accidental discharge" could just as easily result in a bullet stuck in another person's brain, as it did in his hand.

Seems to me that the charge of "accidental discharge" needs to be strengthened. A lot.

You know that police officers have to go through years and years of training, and strict background checks and psychological profiles before they are ever able to even touch a gun.

Likewise, teachers have to go through the same rigorous background checks and psychological profiles in order to teach.

Yet, there is this ongoing "debate" about stricter gun laws and background checks for ordinary citizens to be able to walk around with machines built for one specific purpose: To kill.

Quote:

Originally Posted by triforcharity (Post 8929103)
Far too many idiots own cars too.....

True that! There should also be much stricter laws about who can drive as well. Age limit for drivers need to be raised, perhaps to at least 18. And far too many people get busted for DWI far too many times.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:00 AM.

Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2015-24, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.