|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
19th January 2013, 08:45 PM | #1 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,781
|
2 separate accidental shootings at gun shows today
I am particularly perplexed by this description of one of the accidents from CNN:
Quote:
*edit* The CNN article has been updated to describe 3 separate shootings at 3 different gun shows today. |
__________________
100% Cannuck! |
|
19th January 2013, 09:19 PM | #2 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 13,087
|
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. |
19th January 2013, 09:42 PM | #3 |
In the Peanut Gallery
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 54,891
|
|
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. Sir Winston Churchill |
|
19th January 2013, 09:50 PM | #4 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 421
|
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. |
19th January 2013, 10:59 PM | #5 |
Skepticifimisticalationist
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 28,589
|
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. |
19th January 2013, 11:01 PM | #6 |
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 13,961
|
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 ****" ...... |
19th January 2013, 11:06 PM | #7 |
In the Peanut Gallery
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 54,891
|
|
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. Sir Winston Churchill |
|
20th January 2013, 12:04 AM | #8 |
Straussian
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 15,419
|
Those were not accidental gun shots. Liberal media.
Those were freedom stings. |
__________________
Cain: Don't be a homo. Diablo: What's that supposed to mean? Cain: It's a heteronormative remark meant to be taken at face-value. |
|
20th January 2013, 01:00 AM | #9 |
Daydreamer
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 8,044
|
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. |
__________________
"That is just what you feel, that isn't reality." - hamelekim |
|
20th January 2013, 01:27 AM | #10 |
post-pre-born
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 25,183
|
|
20th January 2013, 03:08 AM | #11 |
Ninja wave: Atomic fire-breath ninja
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,009
|
the bullet, being endowed by its creator with freedom, shall not be infringed on it's way outta the barrel...
|
__________________
"Man, if Socrates thought like Rick, I don't think Socrates would have ever written a word." - "Red" (@ Red Pill Philosophy FB page) |
|
20th January 2013, 07:08 AM | #12 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 19,788
|
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". |
__________________
Any sufficiently advanced idea is indistinguishable from idiocy to those who don't actually understanding the concept. |
|
20th January 2013, 07:37 AM | #13 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: St. Louis, Mo.
Posts: 13,231
|
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?" |
20th January 2013, 08:48 AM | #14 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 24,894
|
|
__________________
Experience is an excellent teacher, but she sends large bills. |
|
20th January 2013, 08:53 AM | #15 |
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 13,961
|
Far too many idiots own cars too.....
|
20th January 2013, 09:12 AM | #16 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,288
|
|
__________________
"I love the poorly educated" -- Donald Trump |
|
20th January 2013, 09:16 AM | #17 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 13,087
|
|
20th January 2013, 09:19 AM | #18 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Hollywood East
Posts: 10,889
|
|
20th January 2013, 09:20 AM | #19 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Hollywood East
Posts: 10,889
|
|
20th January 2013, 09:21 AM | #20 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 13,087
|
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. |
20th January 2013, 09:54 AM | #21 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,781
|
|
__________________
100% Cannuck! |
|
20th January 2013, 09:56 AM | #22 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5,398
|
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.
|
20th January 2013, 10:37 AM | #23 |
Skepticifimisticalationist
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 28,589
|
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? |
20th January 2013, 10:38 AM | #24 |
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 13,961
|
|
20th January 2013, 10:45 AM | #25 |
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 13,961
|
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. |
20th January 2013, 11:12 AM | #26 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,781
|
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? |
__________________
100% Cannuck! |
|
20th January 2013, 11:25 AM | #27 |
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 13,961
|
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. |
20th January 2013, 11:31 AM | #28 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,781
|
|
__________________
100% Cannuck! |
|
20th January 2013, 12:12 PM | #29 |
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 13,961
|
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. |
20th January 2013, 12:22 PM | #30 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,781
|
|
__________________
100% Cannuck! |
|
20th January 2013, 12:55 PM | #31 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,203
|
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? |
__________________
It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871) |
|
20th January 2013, 12:58 PM | #32 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,177
|
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. |
20th January 2013, 03:00 PM | #33 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,620
|
|
20th January 2013, 03:24 PM | #34 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,865
|
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 |
__________________
"Nature abhors a moron." -- H. L. Mencken |
|
20th January 2013, 03:33 PM | #35 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
|
|
20th January 2013, 06:14 PM | #36 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Front Range, CO
Posts: 10,493
|
Gun shows could also be called Darwin Award contests.
|
__________________
For 15 years I never put anyone on ignore. I felt it important to see everyone's view point. Finally I realized the value of some views can be measured in negative terms and were personally destructive. |
|
21st January 2013, 11:16 AM | #37 |
Gatekeeper of The Left
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one.
Posts: 37,538
|
|
__________________
For what doth it profit a man, to fix one bug, but crash the system? |
|
21st January 2013, 11:19 AM | #38 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,154
|
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:
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. |
__________________
"Natural justice is a symbol or expression of usefullness, to prevent one person from harming or being harmed by another."-Epicurus Freedom of Speech is a right recognized in the First Amendment. Freedom from consequence is nowhere to be found. -Bstrong |
|
21st January 2013, 12:31 PM | #39 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,203
|
|
__________________
It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871) |
|
21st January 2013, 12:39 PM | #40 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,626
|
"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. 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. |
Thread Tools | |
|
|