Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #8751  
Old 04-12-2019, 07:29 PM
Muffin is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Great White North
Posts: 20,482
Not a bad haul -- $30,000.
__________________
Hour after hour, day after day, we paddled and sang and slept under the hot sun on the northern ocean, wanting never to return.
  #8752  
Old 04-13-2019, 08:18 AM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 49,295
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreysonCarlisle View Post
You might want to look up accident. Nobody intended for the girl to be shot.
Where was the intent for her not to be shot?

Quote:
Were the parents negligent? Sure.
Then it wasn't a fucking accident.
  #8753  
Old 04-13-2019, 08:22 AM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 49,295
Don't we keep hearing the gunstrokers tell us how they support better mental health treatment, and keeping guns away from the mentally ill? Then they ought to be slobbering all over the new Red Flag Law in Colorado that does just that, oughtn't they? Well, we ought to know better than to expect that, and we do.
Quote:
Known as the "Extreme Risk Protection Order," the law will allow a family member, a roommate or law enforcement to petition a judge to temporarily seize a person's firearms if they are deemed a risk to themselves or others. Fourteen other states have passed similar legislation.

Still, the law now faces major hurdles, with a pro-gun lobby group promising to challenge it in court. Additionally, a growing number of sheriffs in the state have vowed to ignore the law when it takes effect next year, calling it unconstitutional.

Weld County Sheriff Steve Reams told CNN last month that he would rather be found in contempt of court and locked up in his own county jail than carry out a court order to seize a person's weapon.

At least 10 other sheriffs contacted by CNN are lining up behind Reams, saying they are prepared to go to jail rather than enforce a law they believe would violate a person's constitutional rights.
But will they ever quit lying about mental health? We know that too, don't we?
  #8754  
Old 04-13-2019, 09:32 AM
elucidator is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 59,786
Kinda dumb. How will you know that you have confiscated all this person's weapons? Sure, if they are sane and law-abiding, maybe, but then they aren't much of a problem anyway. And if they really are a potential threat, whoever turned them in is at the top of this shit/hit list.
  #8755  
Old 04-13-2019, 11:25 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 60,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by elucidator View Post
Kinda dumb. How will you know that you have confiscated all this person's weapons? Sure, if they are sane and law-abiding, maybe, but then they aren't much of a problem anyway. And if they really are a potential threat, whoever turned them in is at the top of this shit/hit list.
The old "If the law doesn't completely solve the problem it is bad" ploy?
  #8756  
Old 04-13-2019, 11:49 AM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 11,323
Up next:

"If you are worried so much about gun deaths of children, why have you not donated every penny you have to child leukemia research? Huh? Huh? Do you hate children?
  #8757  
Old 04-13-2019, 12:07 PM
sps49sd is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
Don't we keep hearing the gunstrokers tell us how they support better mental health treatment, and keeping guns away from the mentally ill? Then they ought to be slobbering all over the new Red Flag Law in Colorado that does just that, oughtn't they? Well, we ought to know better than to expect that, and we do.But will they ever quit lying about mental health? We know that too, don't we?
The law to which you refer is not controversial because of any mental health provision, but because of how easy it is for someone to lose a fundamental right:

"...the law will allow a family member, a roommate or law enforcement to petition a judge to temporarily seize a person's firearms if they are deemed a risk to themselves or others." "The law is meant to be used only in the most extreme cases, but critics believe it will allow for guns to be taken based on a false accusation."

Maybe you did not read the article.
  #8758  
Old 04-14-2019, 07:48 AM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 49,295
See what I mean?
  #8759  
Old 04-14-2019, 11:57 AM
mhendo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 25,170
Quote:
Originally Posted by sps49sd View Post
The law to which you refer is not controversial because of any mental health provision, but because of how easy it is for someone to lose a fundamental right:

"...the law will allow a family member, a roommate or law enforcement to petition a judge to temporarily seize a person's firearms if they are deemed a risk to themselves or others." "The law is meant to be used only in the most extreme cases, but critics believe it will allow for guns to be taken based on a false accusation."

Maybe you did not read the article.
The problem is that the article gives a very poor sense of how the law works. If we were to simply read the section you quoted, it might sound unreasonable, but there are some problems with that quote. Firstly, it is basically repeating the position taken by the law's opponents. Secondly, and more importantly, it fails to properly explain the actual mechanisms that the law puts in place.

The critics from your article make it sound like you can just have someone's guns taken away by making a false or unfounded claim, without any mechanism for review, but that's not how the law works. I've read both the bill summary and the full text (PDF), and there are a series of steps involved, and this is not something that can happen on a mere whim. Here's my quick and dirty summary of how it works, based on reading the actual law.

The petitioner seeking to have another person's guns removed has to swear out an affidavit, under oath and subject to penalties for perjury, regarding the reasons for removing the firearms.

There is an initial hearing, which is supposed to happen on the same day, or on the first day the court is open, at which the court is required to hear any evidence the petitioner has regarding the claim that the person is a danger to self or others and should have his or her guns removed.

If the court finds, "by a preponderance of the evidence" that the person "poses a significant risk of causing personal injury to self or others," it will issue a temporary order to remove the weapons.

Within 14 days of this temporary order, the court is required to hold a second hearing to determine whether the temporary order should be extended to one year.

At this subsequent hearing, if the court finds "by clear and convincing evidence" that the person "poses a significant risk of causing personal injury to self or others," it will issue a one-year (or, actually 364-day) order. The criteria the court can consider in making this evaluation are listed in the law, and are reasonably extensive. You can't just roll up to court and say, "Well, judge, he seems a bit sketchy to me, so I don't think he should have a gun." The respondent (i.e., the person whose guns are being removed) also has a right to attend this hearing with a lawyer, and to present evidence in his or her defense, and to cross-examine any witnesses.

If the one-year order is issued, there is a mechanism for the respondent to ask for early termination during the period of the order. There is also a mechanism to issue subsequent one-year orders if the person is found to still represent a risk after one year.
The law is 26 pages long, and there are obviously a bunch of details that I can't summarize in a few short paragraphs. If you want to see the evidence the court can consider in deciding whether to grant the one-year order, go to page 9 of the law.

I'm not arguing that there's no risk of abuse here, that there's no risk of guns being taken based on false accusations. But if that is the criterion by which we reject a law, then we would have no laws at all. I can pose a threat to your very freedom by accusing you or something that you didn't do. If I accuse you of a crime, you might end up spending some time in jail even if the charges are eventually dropped, or if you are found "not guilty" in court.

Now, this case is a little different because, unlike a criminal trial, these hearings only require "the preponderance of the evidence" (first hearing) or "clear and convincing evidence" (second hearing) that you posed a danger, rather than the stricter "beyond reasonable doubt" standard of a criminal trial. But the fact that the standard is somewhat lower doesn't mean that there's no standard at all, or that false accusations will be easy and routine. The law itself contains a mechanism by which a person who files a "malicious or false petition" can be "subject to criminal prosecution."

I don't know if this law is the answer, and it's possible that it will result in some problematic cases, but I know that I'm not going to reject it outright based solely on the complaints outlined in that article. Too many gun-rights advocates have cried wolf too many times on reasonable gun regulation for me to take their word at face value.
  #8760  
Old 04-14-2019, 12:12 PM
GreysonCarlisle's Avatar
GreysonCarlisle is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 1,036
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhendo View Post
Now, this case is a little different because, unlike a criminal trial, these hearings only require "the preponderance of the evidence" (first hearing) or "clear and convincing evidence" (second hearing) that you posed a danger, rather than the stricter "beyond reasonable doubt" standard of a criminal trial. But the fact that the standard is somewhat lower doesn't mean that there's no standard at all, or that false accusations will be easy and routine. The law itself contains a mechanism by which a person who files a "malicious or false petition" can be "subject to criminal prosecution."
Which is exactly the burden of proof needed in some states to label someone a child abuser and take their children away. Which is clearly in the best interests of everyone involved. But I don't hear too many complaints about that.

But, dear god, try to take some unstable person's gun....
  #8761  
Old 04-14-2019, 02:55 PM
sps49sd is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
See what I mean?
I see that you are full of shit, since the word "mental" is mentioned once at the very end of the article in the context of sheriffs agreeing with that part of the law.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhendo View Post
The problem is that the article gives a very poor sense of how the law works.
True. The rest of your post is close to how I think, except your last paragraph, and I appreciate the cites and summary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GreysonCarlisle View Post
Which is exactly the burden of proof needed in some states to label someone a child abuser and take their children away. Which is clearly in the best interests of everyone involved. But I don't hear too many complaints about that.

But, dear god, try to take some unstable person's gun....
False accusations of child abuse are NOT in the best interests of everyone involved, and it does happen. The question is the same as trying "to take some unstable person's gun...", what should the burden of proof be to deprive people of their fundamental rights?

Last edited by sps49sd; 04-14-2019 at 02:56 PM. Reason: stupid bluetooth keyboard
  #8762  
Old 04-14-2019, 03:11 PM
GreysonCarlisle's Avatar
GreysonCarlisle is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 1,036
Quote:
Originally Posted by sps49sd View Post
False accusations of child abuse are NOT in the best interests of everyone involved, and it does happen.
True, but it's a vanishingly small problem when compared to the incidence of child abuse.

Quote:
The question is the same as trying "to take some unstable person's gun...", what should the burden of proof be to deprive people of their fundamental rights?
Temporarily, while it's sorted out? The preponderance of the evidence is sufficient. If "clear and convincing evidence" cannot be shown afterward, then rights are restored, as they should be.
  #8763  
Old 04-14-2019, 03:23 PM
sps49sd is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreysonCarlisle View Post
True, but it's a vanishingly small problem when compared to the incidence of child abuse.

Temporarily, while it's sorted out? The preponderance of the evidence is sufficient. If "clear and convincing evidence" cannot be shown afterward, then rights are restored, as they should be.
I don't disagree.
  #8764  
Old 04-22-2019, 04:47 AM
Fear Itself is offline
One of Cecil's six friends
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Flavortown
Posts: 35,745
Quote:
A man in North Carolina has been arrested after he allegedly shot two children as part of a road rage incident involving their father.

...

Surry County authorities say Green shot a 9-year-old boy and a 7-year-old girl on Saturday afternoon after he became involved in a road rage incident with their father in Mount Airy.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/...road-rage.html
  #8765  
Old 04-22-2019, 08:22 AM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 10,636
Father of the year:

Michigan father intentionally shot son, 2, in face with shotgun: prosecutors

I'm sure he'll feel bad for the rest of his life, so no sense in sending him to jail
  #8766  
Old 04-22-2019, 08:53 AM
kayaker's Avatar
kayaker is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Western Pennsylvania
Posts: 31,535
Quote:
Originally Posted by manson1972 View Post
Father of the year:

Michigan father intentionally shot son, 2, in face with shotgun: prosecutors

I'm sure he'll feel bad for the rest of his life, so no sense in sending him to jail
Quote:
Glance allegedly held a pistol to the boy’s temple and pulled the trigger, but it malfunctioned,
Quote:
Glance fired at the mother as she fled the scene with her son in the car, but the shotgun malfunctioned
I've fired various handguns, rifles, and shotguns of different makes and models. Never have I had one malfunction.
  #8767  
Old 04-22-2019, 10:51 AM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 49,295
You've probably always remembered to load them first.
  #8768  
Old 04-22-2019, 10:51 AM
ticker is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,035
Mercifully, he appears to be almost as bad at maintaining his guns as he is at being a human being.
  #8769  
Old 04-22-2019, 11:54 AM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 10,636
Speaking of gun news, haven't seen many posts lately in the "Positive Gun News" thread. With the millions of DGU every year, seems like there would be hundreds of stories each day!
  #8770  
Old 04-25-2019, 12:54 PM
Rick Kitchen's Avatar
Rick Kitchen is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Citrus Heights, CA, USA
Posts: 16,725
School employee's gun accidentally goes off, grazes student.
https://www.tmj4.com/news/local-news...off-in-school?
  #8771  
Old 04-25-2019, 01:46 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 60,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Kitchen View Post
School employee's gun accidentally goes off, grazes student.
https://www.tmj4.com/news/local-news...off-in-school?
The school covered up the incident, and nothing comes of it.
  #8772  
Old 04-25-2019, 01:57 PM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 10,636
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
The school covered up the incident, and nothing comes of it.
The article says the guy was fired, and police are going to press charges. At least that's something.
  #8773  
Old 04-25-2019, 02:01 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 60,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by manson1972 View Post
The article says the guy was fired, and police are going to press charges. At least that's something.
They are pressing charges against the employee that brought the gun, not the school that covered up the incident.
  #8774  
Old 04-25-2019, 02:09 PM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 10,636
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
They are pressing charges against the employee that brought the gun, not the school that covered up the incident.
Yeah, I get that. But how do you charge a school with something?
  #8775  
Old 04-25-2019, 02:11 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 60,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by manson1972 View Post
Yeah, I get that. But how do you charge a school with something?
You charge the officials involved in the cover-up, not the school.
  #8776  
Old 04-25-2019, 02:13 PM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 10,636
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
You charge the officials involved in the cover-up, not the school.
  #8777  
Old 04-25-2019, 02:21 PM
GreysonCarlisle's Avatar
GreysonCarlisle is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 1,036
The bullet grazed the kid, leaving a bruise, but did not penetrate the skin. How's that even possible? Hit something in the kid's backpack, maybe?
  #8778  
Old 04-25-2019, 06:08 PM
Muffin is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Great White North
Posts: 20,482
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreysonCarlisle View Post
The bullet grazed the kid, leaving a bruise, but did not penetrate the skin. How's that even possible? Hit something in the kid's backpack, maybe?
Hey, kids! Wanna groove without being grooved? Wanna be hip without being hit?

You need a bullet proof T-shirt!
__________________
Hour after hour, day after day, we paddled and sang and slept under the hot sun on the northern ocean, wanting never to return.

Last edited by Muffin; 04-25-2019 at 06:08 PM.
  #8779  
Old 04-27-2019, 10:00 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,139
Quote:
Originally Posted by manson1972 View Post
Speaking of gun news, haven't seen many posts lately in the "Positive Gun News" thread. With the millions of DGU every year, seems like there would be hundreds of stories each day!
By their own admissions, the gun nuts save hundreds of lives every day. Ho-hum. Reporting them all would waste time better spent defending the border wall, or confronting blacks wearing hoodies.

To report one of these myriads of life-saving incidents, it needs to be very special. Shooting backwards while looking in a mirror perhaps, or disabling 2 or 3 suspects with a single bullet.
  #8780  
Old 04-28-2019, 12:02 PM
Defensive Indifference is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 6,848
In addition to being racist provacateurs, the NRA is also too corrupt for Oliver North. That takes some doing.

Quote:
National Rifle Association leader Oliver North announced Saturday that he will not seek a second term as president of the gun rights group, as is customary.

The decision plunged the organization into chaos ahead of a board meeting on Monday and sparked debate among NRA members over a resolution on whether to oust Chief Executive Wayne LaPierre.

North's decision to step aside from his leadership role comes amid infighting within the group and follows a number of articles from The New Yorker, The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times detailing allegations of financial mismanagement by senior NRA officials
https://www.npr.org/2019/04/27/71780...ntent=20190427
  #8781  
Old 04-29-2019, 09:03 AM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 10,636
They should settle it with an old-fashioned shoot-out, like real Americans.
  #8782  
Old 04-29-2019, 10:13 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 60,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defensive Indifference View Post
In addition to being racist provacateurs, the NRA is also too corrupt for Oliver North. That takes some doing.
It's not that it is too corrupt for him-It's that it isn't corrupt in his favor this time.
  #8783  
Old 04-29-2019, 11:46 AM
Buck Godot's Avatar
Buck Godot is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: MD outside DC
Posts: 5,659
I realize that this in nut-picking but I couldn't help rolling my eyes at the following quote in the Washington Post.

Quote:
Jeannette Sharp teared up as she talked about the prospect of handing over her guns.

“My firearms are sitting in my safe at home; they’ve never done any harm,” Errol Sharp said.
Won't somebody please think of the poor innocent guns.
  #8784  
Old 04-29-2019, 12:10 PM
Defensive Indifference is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 6,848
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
It's not that it is too corrupt for him-It's that it isn't corrupt in his favor this time.
Fair point!
  #8785  
Old 04-29-2019, 12:16 PM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 49,295
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buck Godot View Post
Won't somebody please think of the poor innocent guns.
When seconds count, and the police are only minutes away, her guns are ... locked in a safe.
  #8786  
Old 04-29-2019, 12:30 PM
eschereal's Avatar
eschereal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Frogstar World B
Posts: 16,113
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
When seconds count, and the police are only minutes away, her guns are ... locked in a safe.
I mean, think of their feelings. Guns get lonely and bored locked up in the safe. They want to be free! Unconfined! Wild and happy! Please stop this unconscionable gun abuse!
  #8787  
Old 04-29-2019, 01:54 PM
Typo Negative's Avatar
Typo Negative is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: 7th Level of Hell, Ca
Posts: 17,464
N.Y. Woman Is Fatally Shot by Boyfriend With Daughter, 4, in Home — and He Claims It Was Accident

Quote:
Shellman told police he had gotten out of bed to take his registered gun out and sat back down with it on the bed next to Tombs, according to a felony complaint obtained by the Standard. He claimed he “inadvertently disengaged the safety” and had his finger on the trigger when Tombs reached over and grabbed the gun. While both of their hands were on the gun it fired, striking Tombs.
So, either he murdered her or he is the dumbest son of a bitch to have ever handled a firearm. Pick 'em.

Either way, he should be many years in prison.
__________________
"God hates Facts"

- seen on a bumper sticker in Sacramento Ca

Last edited by Typo Negative; 04-29-2019 at 01:55 PM.
  #8788  
Old 04-29-2019, 02:19 PM
CookingWithGas's Avatar
CookingWithGas is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Tysons Corner, VA, USA
Posts: 13,018
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
When seconds count, and the police are only minutes away, her guns are ... locked in a safe.
Jim Jefferies does a hilarious bit on this scenario, a guy saying he's a responsible gun owner, with his gun locked in the safe. Then he walks through what happens when someone breaks into they guy's house through a window.
  #8789  
Old 04-29-2019, 02:29 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 60,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by Typo Negative View Post
N.Y. Woman Is Fatally Shot by Boyfriend With Daughter, 4, in Home — and He Claims It Was Accident



So, either he murdered her or he is the dumbest son of a bitch to have ever handled a firearm. Pick 'em.

Either way, he should be many years in prison.
First in with "It was an accident and/or he has suffered enough".
  #8790  
Old 04-29-2019, 02:35 PM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 11,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defensive Indifference View Post
In addition to being racist provacateurs, the NRA is also too corrupt for Oliver North. That takes some doing.
Perhaps North did not like the fact that the NRA is now accepting large sums of cash from Russian Oligarchs. Or maybe he just did not get a cut and he's pissed.
  #8791  
Old 04-29-2019, 05:07 PM
Saintly Loser is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,024
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreysonCarlisle View Post
Yep. If by "feel real bad about it" you mean "totally destroy their lives."

It was an accident, not intentional. There's little the courts can do to punish the parents further, and there's no likely rehabilitation since the parents recently learned to change their ways in the most devastating way possible.

There's not even any point in making an example of them--that was accomplished when the brother killed the sister. That their own child might die is a far more worrisome deterrent to others than whatever fine or brief jail time might be incurred.
Sadly, unfortunately, I agree.

If someone is so colossally stupid and irresponsible as to leave a loaded, operational gun within reach of a four-year-old child, there is probably nothing one can do to help them. And incarcerating these parents, or at least the one who left the gun in the car, will almost certainly do nothing to deter the other epically stupid and irresponsible people who are leaving loaded (or even unloaded) guns within reach of their children. Because they are, obviously, too stupid to understand consequences. Consequences such as imprisonment, not to mention the deaths of their children.

The only thing that will do any good is to keep guns out of their hands in the first place.
  #8792  
Old 04-29-2019, 06:14 PM
Typo Negative's Avatar
Typo Negative is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: 7th Level of Hell, Ca
Posts: 17,464
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saintly Loser View Post
Sadly, unfortunately, I agree.

If someone is so colossally stupid and irresponsible as to leave a loaded, operational gun within reach of a four-year-old child, there is probably nothing one can do to help them.
How about sterilization?
__________________
"God hates Facts"

- seen on a bumper sticker in Sacramento Ca
  #8793  
Old 04-29-2019, 06:30 PM
MEBuckner's Avatar
MEBuckner is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Posts: 12,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
When seconds count, and the police are only minutes away, her guns are ... locked in a safe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CookingWithGas View Post
Jim Jefferies does a hilarious bit on this scenario, a guy saying he's a responsible gun owner, with his gun locked in the safe. Then he walks through what happens when someone breaks into they guy's house through a window.
If only people had come up with solutions to this insoluble dilemma.
  #8794  
Old 04-30-2019, 04:45 AM
Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 23,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by Typo Negative View Post
N.Y. Woman Is Fatally Shot by Boyfriend With Daughter, 4, in Home — and He Claims It Was Accident

Quote:
Shellman told police he had gotten out of bed to take his registered gun out and sat back down with it on the bed next to Tombs, according to a felony complaint obtained by the Standard. He claimed he “inadvertently disengaged the safety” and had his finger on the trigger when Tombs reached over and grabbed the gun. While both of their hands were on the gun it fired, striking Tombs.
Sounds familiar...

Oh yes, oh yes, oh yes they both
Oh yes, they both
Oh yes, they both reached for
The gun, the gun, the gun, the gun,
Oh yes, they both reached for the gun
for the gun.

Understandable, understandable
Yes it's perfectly understandable
Comprehensible, Comprehensible
Not a bit reprehensible
It's so defensible
  #8795  
Old 04-30-2019, 10:57 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 60,529
The NRA has decided to stick with whackjob Wayne LaPierre, reelecting him as Chief Executive. Also, Ollie North was ousted as President. I'm looking forward to a couple more years of LaPierre making ridiculous statements...followed by NRA members, on this board and elsewhere, stating that the Chief Executive of the NRA's statements are not official policy and do not represent what they really feel at all.

Last edited by Czarcasm; 04-30-2019 at 10:58 AM.
  #8796  
Old 04-30-2019, 11:33 AM
Typo Negative's Avatar
Typo Negative is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: 7th Level of Hell, Ca
Posts: 17,464
Well, some folks still not getting the message:

A lesson on gun safety ended when a man accidentally shot his 6-year-old daughter, police say

Quote:
But inexperience didn’t stop the Glendale, Ariz., man from cleaning the weapon Thursday for the first time in front of his 6-year-old daughter, whom he was teaching about “gun safety,” according to a probable cause statement published online by AZFamily.com. The lesson went awry, however, when he slipped and mishandled the firearm, causing it to discharge.
Quote:
Mcinville was arrested Saturday on suspicion of child abuse and aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. It was not clear Monday evening whether he had retained an attorney.
But he already feels bad about it, so he should get a pass, right?
__________________
"God hates Facts"

- seen on a bumper sticker in Sacramento Ca
  #8797  
Old 04-30-2019, 11:34 AM
Defensive Indifference is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 6,848
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
The NRA has decided to stick with whackjob Wayne LaPierre, reelecting him as Chief Executive.
Damn. I was hoping this would be the break Ted Nugent needed. Maybe The Nuge can slide into Oliver North's slimy spot as President, though. At a time like this, the NRA deserves Nugent's leadership.
  #8798  
Old 04-30-2019, 03:29 PM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Typo Negative View Post
Well, some folks still not getting the message:

A lesson on gun safety ended when a man accidentally shot his 6-year-old daughter, police say

But he already feels bad about it, so he should get a pass, right?
He was giving his six year-old daughter a lesson in gun safety?
Perhaps the idea is that she'll need to be the family's gunslinger when she turns eight. He's obviously not qualified.
  #8799  
Old 04-30-2019, 04:43 PM
Saintly Loser is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,024
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
The NRA has decided to stick with whackjob Wayne LaPierre, reelecting him as Chief Executive.
LaPierre is not a "whackjob." He is a highly intelligent sociopath who knows he has a good, a very good, thing going and will go to any lengths to keep it going.

And those lengths include being at least indirectly responsible for the deaths of the children mentioned above in this thread.

The world would be a better place without Wayne LaPierre.*

**Please be aware that I am not advocating violence directed at Mr. LaPierre. I just wish he had never been born.

Last edited by Saintly Loser; 04-30-2019 at 04:43 PM.
  #8800  
Old 04-30-2019, 06:33 PM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 10,636
I'm really not understanding how "Don't handle firearms around your children" runs afoul of the 2nd Amendment.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:22 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017