Thursday, June 7, 2012

Accidental Shooting of Topeka Man by a Dropped Gun - No Charges

The Topeka Capitol-Journal reports

A 26-year-old man was taken to a Topeka hospital early Wednesday after he was injured in what authorities said was an accidental shooting.

Authorities said the victim suffered a gunshot wound to the leg after he dropped a gun he had been holding. The gun discharged and a bullet struck the man in the leg, police said.
I know, I know, he probably tried to catch the gun on the way down and hit the trigger. That's what the pro-gun folks keep telling us because, you see, modern guns don't discharge from dropping them.

For me it makes "no never mind," because the negligence already took place either way.

"One strike you're out," and I don't care if you negligently kill a little kid, shoot yourself in the foot or put a bullet in the floor. We have far too much trouble already with guns to allow proven negligent and irresponsible people to have a second chance.

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.

25 comments:

  1. I see at least one, and sometimes several, media stories every week about guns that went off because the fell to the floor. And that's just the ones that made the media and harmed (or killed) someone. They clearly DO go off from just hitting the ground, despite what the gun guys claim.

    Perhaps if guns could be regulated for safety....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You think this because you do not understand how modern guns work. You should take the time to educate yourself.

      These incidents are people who stupidly try to grab a gun in the air and pull the trigger, or simply lie about dropping it. Or rarely a moron who fumbles with a 100 year old derringer that's not drop safe.

      Delete
    2. That's bullshit Anonymous. You heard that from other bullshitters and you're repeating it. It's all to protect the good name of you precious love-object.

      Delete
  2. It would be interesting to see what the make/model of the of the firearm was. This would give us a clue as to what the built in safeties are (many older firearms do not have a firing pin block that is supposed to prevent the gun from firing when it hits the floor). It would also help those of us that enjoy shooting make more informed choices when we purchase new firearms.

    I tend to own handguns that have more safeties. My Springfield XD and XDM each have three, including a grip safety that makes it more difficult for small hands to fire those weapons if any children actually manage to get them in the first place. And yes, before Baldr has a coronary, I do have safeguards in place to prevent children from getting their hands on my guns.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Forgot to mention. No, I would not suspend anyone's Constitutional Rights based on one mistake (as long as no one OTHER than himself was hurt). I doubt there are many that make that mistake again. Would you suspend someones 1st Ammendment Rights for Libel or Slander? Those are abuses of the 1st Ammendment and I have not heard of anyone being denied their Right to Free Speach for commiting those abuses. And the pen is mightier than the sword, right?

      Having said that, if someone else IS hurt, then the law has to run its course. If convicted of a felony he will have his 2nd Ammendment rights stripped from him.

      Delete
    2. That "(as long as no one OTHER than himself was hurt)" disclaimer is not fair. It's the behavior that needs to be judged not the results.

      Delete
    3. Ok, how about if they drop a gun and it doesn’t go off? Exact same behavior- different result. Loss of gun rights for life?

      Delete
    4. "That "(as long as no one OTHER than himself was hurt)" disclaimer is not fair."

      It's perfectly fair. If a person is hurt by thir own weapon (by accident or negligence), then it's a reminder not to be complacent.

      Let me see if I've got this right - negligence or irresponsiblity in the exercise of a right means they should forfeit that right, regardless of whether or not innocents are harmed?

      Delete
    5. No, Guy, negligence and irresponsibility in the use of a GUN results in the loss of you gun privileges. We do refer to them as "rights," but they're not the inviolable sacred kinda rights, no matter how much you guys try to say so.

      Why are you guys so afraid of holding gun owners responsible for the highest standard of behavior? It would save lives and you responsible ones would be fine.

      Delete
    6. A right that isn't sacred and inviolable--barring conviction for an act that took a person outside the boundaries of society--isn't a right. It's a privilege. Until you accept that, you will never reach us. What the government can grant, it can take away. Give the tyrant time. He'll come after something that you value soon enough.

      Delete
    7. "Why are you guys so afraid of holding gun owners responsible for the highest standard of behavior?"

      They're not. They just acknowledge that accidents can and do happen. If nobody's hurt as a result of them, why punish them needlessly? High standards don't necessarily mean being overly harsh-handed.

      What I was getting at was if you ask advocates of responsible law to hold each other to the highest standard of behaviour with certain actions (such as carrying weapons in public), surely you can hold other advocates of stronger controls to a similar high standard with their actions (for example, their factual negligence in the firearms debate)?

      Delete
    8. Guy, A bunch of old guys who worked in machine shops all their lives all had fingers missing from mishaps with the punch press or the shear throughout their careers. The young guy asked them why. They said accidents happen, you'll see if you stick around. He said, bullshit. The only way to lose a finger is if you put it where it shouldn't be and step on the pedal.

      There's not such thing as a gun accident. It's always negligence and that should be criminal.

      Delete
    9. Mikeb, no matter how conscious of safety rules a person is, everyone makes errors. That's human nature. Accidents are lessons to us all, and we can do things that will reduce the risk and the numbers, but they will happen. The total number of gun accidents in a year is tiny, telling me that we're doing what we need to do.

      But because you have a perverse obsession with guns, you see any accident as a reason for new laws and for taking away more rights. Relax. You live in a country where guns are heavily restricted. Leave us alone.

      Delete
    10. You guys are too accepting of "mistakes." Do the scientists who handle the ebola virus make mistakes and have accidents because they're human. How about the plutonium handlers in nuclear plants?

      Sure they do, but they're extremely rare and properly contained because THEY TAKE IT SERIOUSLY.

      Delete
  3. my brother died.....with a gun in his hand
    tom webber miami

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry to hear it. Would you send me the details by e-mail. I'll post them.

      Delete
    2. Yeah send Mike the details so he can dance in your brother's blood for his own selfish, meddling purposes.

      Delete
  4. MikeB: “That's what the pro-gun folks keep telling us because, you see, modern guns don't discharge from dropping them.”

    The article makes no mention of whether or not it was a modern gun. The thing about guns are that they last a very long time, so there are millions and millions of older guns still in circulation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sure. Why am I not convinced by that bullshit I've heard over and over again. It sounds like you get offended that I dare to disparage your precious fetish item, the object of your love and loyalty.

      Delete
    2. Boy, you're in a cranky mood today.

      Delete
    3. Yup, we refuse to bow down and surrender our rights. That always makes control freaks cranky.

      Delete
    4. "Boy, you're in a cranky mood today."

      Wouldn't you be cranky if most of your waking hours were consumed by trolling the internet looking for stories of shootings? I don't see how running this blog brings about any kind of enjoyment at all.

      Delete
    5. Well, I guess you're right Anonymous. It is a dirty job, but someone's got to do it. (actually, I'm having the time of my life, otherwise I would stop)

      Delete
    6. "actually, I'm having the time of my life"

      Explain please. Which part is enjoyable? Is it all of the stories about people dying? Do you just like being an irritable asshole to people? Or maybe you enjoy the time away from your family while you spend all of the time on the computer.

      Delete
    7. The funniest part is that for all of your ranting on here for the past couple of years, you haven't accomplished shit. Ladd and Josh are probably laughing all of the way to the bank. They get paid a healthy salary to push a few stories onto suckers like you who do the heavy lifting.

      Delete