Sunday, February 27, 2011

Ashley Cole in "Accidental" Shooting

Ashley Cole shot and injured a trainee with an air rifle at Chelsea's Cobham training ground.

The incident happened in the Chelsea dressing room last Sunday, while the England defender was reportedly carrying his rifle around.

Cole, who did not realize that the gun was loaded, accidentally shot at Tom Cowan who was at Cobham on a placement programme.

The News of the World reported the accident and Chelsea owner Roman Abramovich is apparently livid with his star defender's silly antic that caused a bleeding wound.

A source told the paper: "It's truly inconceivable that a Premier League footballer could bring a gun to the training ground.

"But Ashley pulled the rifle from a box and started larking about with it in the changing room.

"Cole didn't know the gun was loaded but it's a disgrace. His behaviour beggars belief."
Those Brits sure do talk funny, but when it comes to professional athletes doing stupid shit with guns, we're all the same.

Does this mean that air-rifles are allowed in the U.K.? Maybe they need to tighten up on their gun laws.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.


  1. Maybe they simply need to fire people who shoot other people, regardless of their respective athletic talent?

  2. THE UK laws makes no distinction between air rifles and more powerful guns for which you need a licence – they are all classed as firearms.

  3. Just goes to show that just because you make alot of money playing sports that you are not stupid as a fence post.

    He violated the four rules. He was playing around with a weapon. (no matter what twisted logic calls it a firearm, it is not.).

    The weapon did not pull itself from the box nor did it load it self or go it by itself. Blame the idiot not the tool

  4. That boy could have benefited from some basic safety training.

    I dream of a world where every child receives a basic education in reading, writing, 'rithmetic, and safe firearms handling training.


  5. Orygunner, In your future world do they get safe-sex training too?

    Laci, thanks for that info about their treating air soft guns just like the others.

  6. mike - this is way off topic, but surely you know there is no such thing as "safe sex". You can have "safer" sex with use of contraceptives, but all of them have a failure rate. If you don't know this, then you either did not have a sex education class or had a really poor one.

  7. @Mikeb, Well, yeah, I didn't mention it specifically, but if we feel it worthy in our society to include Sex Ed and Drug Ed in public schools now, we should also have some "Gun Ed."

    Especially in the US with as high of gun ownership as we have. I see this as having a great potential to save a lot of lives and prevent injuries.


  8. MikeB: “Laci, thanks for that info about their treating air soft guns just like the others.”

    Point of clarification, that wasn’t about air soft guns (which are toys), it was about air powered guns (like BB guns, pellet guns, etc). Technically they can’t be firearms because there is no fire (powder). You can still call them arms, you can call them weapons, you can even call them guns- but it would be improper to call them firearms even if the Brits regulate them as if they were.

  9. It was silly of me to bring it up. I was trying to catch Orygunner by getting him to admit he opposes sex-ed because it sends the message to kids that having sex is OK. Then I could have said, a-ha, that's why I oppose gun-ed.

    But what I forgot is how much I detest all these comparisons.

    Gun-ed in school and in the home is useless, or next to useless. Younger kids are curious and older kids think they're gonna live forever, so they don't learn safety. Preventing access is the only hope. The down side of gun-ed is it does communicate the message that the gun culture is normal, which is far from the truth. Kids educated like that do bad things with guns - not all of them, but too many during their wild young-adult years, misuse guns.