Tuesday, March 27, 2012

Owner of Mattress Gun Arrested



A Southwest Side man was ordered held on $100,000 bond Monday for allegedly storing a gun between two mattresses that accidentally went off and wounded a 4-year-old girl jumping on the bed.

Jarquise Upton, 21, of the 6400 block of South Artesian Avenue, was charged Sunday with one count of felony unlawful use of a weapon by a felon, misdemeanor possession of ammunition and theft of lost or mislaid property, police said.

As commenter Greg predicted, the owner of this gun was indeed a disqualified person. I don't think I ever doubted that in cases like this justice is usually done. Black guys who have criminal records and do something wrong with a gun do pay the price. It's the others I'm concerned with. The "lawful" gun owners who have "accidents" and get away scott free, those fat white men.

In this case, it looks like justice will be served and thank goodness the little girl was not seriously hurt.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

15 comments:

  1. "Black guys who have criminal records and do something wrong with a gun do pay the price. It's the others I'm concerned with. The "lawful" gun owners who have "accidents" and get away scott free, those fat white men."

    Isn't America great? No where else can a black criminal keeping an illegal gun injure a black child and it be the white man's fault.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. "Isn't America great? No where else can a black criminal keeping an illegal gun injure a black child and it be the white man's fault."

    This is one of the many examples of the problem that a lot of folkz who luvz them teh gunz haz with critical thinking skillz.

    Mikeb302000 did not, actually, blame a white person for the shooting. What he said, and what is borne out by many of the shootings he links to, is that it's an accident that's forgivable if it happenz with a gun, LEGALLY OWNED, by someone without the Trayvonmartinish or darker pigmentation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And that's nonsense. We have a felon with an illegal gun. That gun injured someone. Do you really believe that a white man would get away with that?

      Thanks for the acknowledgement, Mikeb.

      Delete
    2. "What he said, and what is borne out by many of the shootings he links to, is that it's an accident that's forgivable if it happenz with a gun, LEGALLY OWNED, by someone without the Trayvonmartinish or darker pigmentation."

      Demo,

      Why would someone with a legally owned gun be charged with unlawful use of a weapon by a felon and theft? What does the color of his skin matter? Where's that critical thinking at? Why are you all so racist anyway?

      Delete
    3. Greg, we have examples of white gun owners getting away with much worse than a foot injury. They're just accidents after all.

      Delete
    4. If I injure myself, that shouldn't be a crime. Charging someone who suffers a self-inflicted wound would be adding insult to injury. If I injure someone else in an unjustified way, on the other hand, we now have something to talk about.

      Delete
    5. Greg, you wouldn't be punished for injuring yourself but for misusing your gun. Even if you negligently shoot your basement floor, in my opinion, you should forfeit your gun rights. Of course we'd need witnesses and a bit of due process.

      Delete
  4. "Why would someone with a legally owned gun be charged with unlawful use of a weapon by a felon and theft?'

    You gunzloonz do love your strawmen.

    Conflating this:

    "What he said, and what is borne out by many of the shootings he links to, is that it's an accident that's forgivable if it happenz with a gun, LEGALLY OWNED, by someone without the Trayvonmartinish or darker pigmentation."

    with your notion that I SAID that white guyz with illegal gunz and felony sheets would get away with it? That would be your FAIL, not mine.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I'm not following you or MikeB. Let's try this again, without the color of their skin clouding your judgement.

    A. Criminal leaves illegal gun in mattress. Little girl jumps on mattress and is hurt. Man is charged with crimes surrounding his illegal gun.

    B. Theoretically, non criminal leaves legal gun in mattress. Little girl jumps on mattress and gets hurt. Man is not charged with crimes surrounding his legal gun.

    Okay, so what point are you trying to make? That person B should be charged with the same crimes as person A?

    Please explain you point (without extra Z's if possible so normal people can read it).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My point is the legal gun owner should be held responsible for his behavior. If he is negligent, he should lose his gun rights.

      That's my point.

      Delete
  6. "I'm not following you or MikeB."

    That's obvious.

    "Let's try this again, without the color of their skin clouding your judgement.'

    It isn't clouding my judgment.

    "Okay, so what point are you trying to make? That person B should be charged with the same crimes as person A?"

    No, and I never said that, nor did mikeb302000. What BOTH individuals should be charged with is child endangerment and gross negligence in leavin a loaded, unsecured firearm where it could be "stupidently" discharged.

    The number of links that mikeb302000 provides to "stupidental" shooting incidents rarely include any mention of criminal charges being filed against anyone. Most of the links he provides involve nonblacks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Could that be because the majority of Americans are white? The majority of legal gun owners are white? As for the even application of the law, how many accidental discharges are prosecuted? What percentage of whites with a criminal record are given a pass?

      Delete