Canadians Shoot People Too (Unfortunately)

[EVT1]

That's why I said it needs to be a strict liability offense.  Intent should be irrelevant when you send a bullet into a public place or someone's home.  BTW laws do exist in some states on this- negligent discharge.

And the reason this is a real problem is illustrated quite nicely by the last shooter.  At some point- and to be generous say everyone get's a mulligan- it is time to take away the weapons.

My point is that it needs to be on record so that if a second incident occurs you are boned.  I think they guy got the holster lesson- but I still don't see how this can happen- love to know what he was carrying and how.  It's a pretty safe rule that most guns are not capable of firing without a trigger pull.  Not saying it couldn't happen- hell my car might start itself and back out into traffic one day. 

[Virgil Showlion]

Oct 3, 2013 23:14:30 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

That's why I said it needs to be a strict liability offense.  Intent should be irrelevant when you send a bullet into a public place or someone's home.  BTW laws do exist in some states on this- negligent discharge.

And the reason this is a real problem is illustrated quite nicely by the last shooter.  At some point- and to be generous say everyone get's a mulligan- it is time to take away the weapons.

My point is that it needs to be on record so that if a second incident occurs you are boned.  I think they guy got the holster lesson- but I still don't see how this can happen- love to know what he was carrying and how.  It's a pretty safe rule that most guns are not capable of firing without a trigger pull.  Not saying it couldn't happen- hell my car might start itself and back out into traffic one day. 

Trigger hooks on the elastic to your briefs. Boom.

[EVT1]

I was thinking a pocket full of keys/gun/change/lighter getting into the mix- but elastic?  Don't see how- he had to have been messing with it- that's usually when it happens.  It takes a decent amount of force to pull a trigger so unless he was playing with it I still don't buy it. 

On the other shooter- how do you explain shooting a hole into the roof and into your neighbors floor?  (officially a gun cleaning 'accident')

No such thing as a gun cleaning accident.  Gun cleaning fuck-ups on the other hand..........And I'd say even the NRA would back me up on that one- so at least in that other incident the guy needed to be charged with something- how trespassing by proxy? 

[Virgil Showlion]

Oct 4, 2013 0:01:15 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

I was thinking a pocket full of keys/gun/change/lighter getting into the mix- but elastic?  Don't see how- he had to have been messing with it- that's usually when it happens.  It takes a decent amount of force to pull a trigger so unless he was playing with it I still don't buy it. 

On the other shooter- how do you explain shooting a hole into the roof and into your neighbors floor?  (officially a gun cleaning 'accident')

No such thing as a gun cleaning accident.  Gun cleaning fuck-ups on the other hand..........And I'd say even the NRA would back me up on that one- so at least in that other incident the guy needed to be charged with something- how trespassing by proxy? 

Why is this issue important to you?

I'd be surprised if there were more than two or three accidental shootings a year in the US (not counting Dick Cheney mistake-your-hunting-partner-for-a-grouse type shootings), virtually all of which affect only the person responsible for pulling the trigger. Ergo you're campaigning to punish individuals who've caused themselves harm, caused nobody but themselves any harm, and are about as likely to accidentally discharge a weapon again as George Zimmerman is to win the 2025 Nobel Prize for Chemistry.

Did one of your friends or relatives accidentally shoot himself or something?

[EVT1]

Nope- plenty of guns and plenty of shooting.  Simple really- back to topic.  A person that (1) shot out the tires of a construction worker, and (2) shot a bullet into their neighbors house was (3) allowed to buy another gun that they used to start a rampage. 

And bullshit to your second argument- I have friends on the job here and being fired is the norm.  Had a cop's gun fire in the bathroom in the station while dropping his pants to shit- guess what- fired.  Guns do not go off by themselves.

But tell me- how does a gun discharge without human intervention...

[Virgil Showlion]

A person that (1) shot out the tires of a construction worker, and (2) shot a bullet into their neighbors house was (3) allowed to buy another gun that they used to start a rampage.

How are the first two shootings in any way accidental? If a guy puts a hole in his leg at a WalMart, I can believe the act wasn't intentional. If he claims he accidentally fired his gun into a rival's car tires, not so much.

And bullshit to your second argument- I have friends on the job here and being fired is the norm.

I can't possibly believe that, but hypothetically supposing it to be true, why not focus on a preventative solution instead of a punitive one? Legally require that weapons have the safety engaged while not in use and not in a holster. In the event a gun goes off accidentally, the offender is charged because he neglected to engage the safety as required by law, not because he accidentally fired the weapon and didn't hurt anyone.

But tell me- how does a gun discharge without human intervention...

It doesn't, but "accidental" simply requires an act to be unintentional (and, depending on the context, not reasonably foreseeable). You can argue that an accidental discharge is negligent if you believe the firearm bearer might reasonably have foreseen the accident and yet did nothing to prevent it, but it is nevertheless still an accident. And I reiterate: codify in law what measures you expect carriers to take to prevent accidental discharges (e.g. trigger locks), don't just punish them for victimless, unintentional blunders.

[zibazinski]

Must have shot themselves in Florida.

[Deleted]

Oct 4, 2013 5:39:11 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

A person that (1) shot out the tires of a construction worker, and (2) shot a bullet into their neighbors house was (3) allowed to buy another gun that they used to start a rampage.

How are the first two shootings in any way accidental? If a guy puts a hole in his leg at a WalMart, I can believe the act wasn't intentional. If he claims he accidentally fired his gun into a rival's car tires, not so much.

And bullshit to your second argument- I have friends on the job here and being fired is the norm.

I can't possibly believe that, but hypothetically supposing it to be true, why not focus on a preventative solution instead of a punitive one? Legally require that weapons have the safety engaged while not in use and not in a holster. In the event a gun goes off accidentally, the offender is charged because he neglected to engage the safety as required by law, not because he accidentally fired the weapon and didn't hurt anyone.

But tell me- how does a gun discharge without human intervention...

It doesn't, but "accidental" simply requires an act to be unintentional (and, depending on the context, not reasonably foreseeable). You can argue that an accidental discharge is negligent if you believe the firearm bearer might reasonably have foreseen the accident and yet did nothing to prevent it, but it is nevertheless still an accident. And I reiterate: codify in law what measures you expect carriers to take to prevent accidental discharges (e.g. trigger locks), don't just punish them for victimless, unintentional blunders.

Unfortunately the US has about 20,000 gun laws in effect across the country because everyone and every area has their own idea what gun control should be. The problem now has become enforcement, due to complexity. And of course the continuing chorous of "we need more gun laws" to save us from violence. Which are only heeded by the people who aren't a threat (law abiding).

[Virgil Showlion]

Unfortunately the US has about 20,000 gun laws in effect across the country because everyone and every area has their own idea what gun control should be. The problem now has become enforcement, due to complexity. And of course the continuing chorous of "we need more gun laws" to save us from violence. Which are only heeded by the people who aren't a threat (law abiding).

In fairness to evt, we are talking about accidental shootings. It's the not same cohort of people that have no respect for the law.

Trigger locks engaged on concealed weapons seem like a reasonable duty of care for a firearm owner. It eliminates any excuses if a carrier accidentally sends bullets flying, and since the lock can be disengaged instantly in a life-or-death situation, it's not a meaningful impediment to the function of the weapon.

[Deleted]

Oct 4, 2013 14:57:04 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Unfortunately the US has about 20,000 gun laws in effect across the country because everyone and every area has their own idea what gun control should be. The problem now has become enforcement, due to complexity. And of course the continuing chorous of "we need more gun laws" to save us from violence. Which are only heeded by the people who aren't a threat (law abiding).

In fairness to evt, we are talking about accidental shootings. It's the not same cohort of people that have no respect for the law.

Trigger locks engaged on concealed weapons seem like a reasonable duty of care for a firearm owner. It eliminates any excuses if a carrier accidentally sends bullets flying, and since the lock can be disengaged instantly in a life-or-death situation, it's not a meaningful impediment to the function of the weapon.

My mistake for not reading thoroughly. Safeties should be used if a round is chambered, law or no law. This is the most basic "gun control". One of the first things taught in a NRA or other gun usage class.

[EVT1]

All I am really saying is there needs to be legal consequences when this happens.  To me it is negligence per se when someone discharges a weapon in public or into their neighbor's home.  Wonder if the goofball had medical insurance or are we going to pay for his ER visit. 

[Deleted]

Oct 4, 2013 17:16:08 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

All I am really saying is there needs to be legal consequences when this happens.  To me it is negligence per se when someone discharges a weapon in public or into their neighbor's home.  Wonder if the goofball had medical insurance or are we going to pay for his ER visit. 

If he can't afford it, of course we're going to pay for his ER visit. Whether through higher hospital rates or through taxpayer subsidy using the AHA (for US goofballs).