I would imagine that people who experience deadly incidents with gun negligence are not always making their first mistake ever. In many cases this would be the culmination of a lifetime of sloppy gun handling. Sometimes they end up killing themselves, other times it's the neighbor's kid.A 59-year-old man in Boone County, Ark., is dead after an accidental shooting.Boone County Sheriff Danny Hickman says deputies were called to 12057 Couch Bottom Rd. Tuesday.That's where they found Theodor Stansbery along the side of his home with a single gunshot wound.Sheriff Hickman says investigators believe Stansbery may have tripped while walking outside his home and fell on his gun, causing it to discharge.Stansbery's body has been sent to the State Crime Lab for examination to rule out any foul play.
This is why one strike you're out is so important. It's not simply a just response to a negligent incident, but a preventative measure for all future incidents.
What's your opinion? Does that make sense to you?
Please leave a comment.
We should apply "one strike you're out" to everything! All of these situations need this: Chokings, car accidents, work place accidents, drownings, accidental overdosing by doctors, patient accidental overdosing, attempted suicides, caught in a fire, falling, poisoning and the list can go on and on and on. Lets protect everyone from everything including themselves. Lets have 24/7 surveillance of all people. We can create a network of monitoring where each person monitors at least two people at all times to make sure people are punished for every accident they commit.
ReplyDeleteBy exaggerating like that you're not making my argument absurd, you're making yourself sound that way.
DeleteGun ownership should demand a certain level of responsible behavior. Once a person shows himself to be unworthy, he should lose the right. This would benefit everyone.
With your admitted history, would you consider yourself "out" already?
DeleteAll right, Mikeb, how about doctors who kill patients through medical errors? Should they lose their licenses to practice medicine? There are about 100,000 such deaths per annum. That's at least three times the annual deaths from firearms. Yes, this blog is about guns and such, but you should acknowledge valid points that relate to the subject at hand. If you refuse to call for doctors to be included in the "one strike" rule, you're showing that you only care about getting rid of guns, not about safety.
DeleteReally Mike? You think I'm being absurd and you're not? You know how many military and police would have to be punished under your "one strike you're out" theory... People make mistakes, sometimes grave mistakes but if they are truly accidents people deserve a second chance to learn from their mistakes. I highly doubt you are so perfect that you wouldn't ever have an accident sometime in your life that under your proposed rule would get you into trouble.
DeleteWhile this quote is geared more towards morality, it still fits this situation well:
To err is human; to forgive, divine. ~Alexander Pope
When it comes to guns, there are no accidents, only negligence, only violations of one or more of the 4 Rules.
DeleteWhy would you be afraid to hold gun owners to the highest standard. Strictly enforced, this would remove many of the ones who keep making the headlines. The same guy who's negligent enough to trip and fall while holding his finger on the trigger is likely to shortcut other safety rules too. We'd all be better off disarming these dangerous people.
We already hold gun owners to a standard higher than we do a great many others who merely wish to exercise their rights--voters, for example. And yes, I do regard voting as a dangerous activity. It's not as immediately dangerous as a firearm, and that's why you ignore the risk.
DeleteIn addition, accidental death by firearm is the smallest of the gun-related deaths categories. Depending on the year, the number of deaths due to accident is around a thousand or fewer, and that number has been decreasing over the years--as have all categories of firearms deaths. Education is a better solution to this than your draconian measures.
Actually Mike, I suspect the opposite is probably true. I would be willing to bet that most people who experience a negligent discharge, regardless of whether any one is hurt or not, become some of the safest gun handlers on the planet.
ReplyDeleteBut, we already know you are not truly interested in safety as much as you are punishing gun owners because you want even talk about a similar analogy for negligent car operation which is thousands of times more deadly.
I disagree with that "becoming the safest gun owners" theory. That's just a cop-out in order to give fellow negligent gun owners a pass.
DeleteNegligent car operations are not "thousands of times more deadly," first of all. Second of all, Like Greg's nonsense about doctors, there are organizations and I imagine blogs dedicated to that. I'm interested in guns and gun control.
Not only did you use an incredible exaggeration, "thousands of times" you also said I'm interested in "punishing gun owners."
Wrong. I'd like to see gun owners held responsible for their actions. That's not "punishing gun owners," which makes it sound like you guys are a poor beleaguered minority group being harassed for nothing.
On the contrary Mike, if you go look at the CDC's data for accidental deaths, you'll find that it's somewhere in the 100K range for cars vs. 6k for guns (I believe those are the 2008-2009 numbers). That seems like a big difference to me... Should we do more to educate people and try to reduce accidental deaths by fire arms? Absolutely! But punishing people for something like accidentally dropping a firearm is absurd.
DeleteWhat nonsense would that be, Mikeb? It's valid to point out that you're focusing on something that is much lower on the scale of risk than another cause of death. It's also valid to say that it would be consistent to argue for a one-strike rule in the case of all accidents that occur to people in positions of responsibility. Driving is a responsibility. Having a medical license is one. Carrying a gun is another. Why do you want a one-strike rule for just one group and not for all? This suggests to us that you don't really care about safety. You're only interested in control.
DeleteI agree with Greg on this, it's hypocritical to target one group of people or situation with such harsh regulations and punishments and not want equal punishments for all other groups or situations where "negligence" or accidents happen.
DeleteYep, hypocritical to say the least - especially when far far more people are harmed via the situations he chooses to ignore.
DeleteBut I will apologize for my exaggeration. Apparently car accidents are only 16 times more deadly than firearm accidents. So by all means, lets focus on guns.
Well, go ahead and champion those causes, if you like. I'm mainly into gun control.
DeleteJolly, I think you're mistaken about that 100 thousand for car accidents. And it's another mistake to say 6 thousand for guns.
DeleteAre you makin' this shit up as you go along? Or, are you talking strictly "accidents," and not including the homicides and suicides. Even in that case you need to show me the 100,000 for cars.
"Well, go ahead and champion those causes, if you like. I'm mainly into gun control."
DeleteYes, we know. That is what we are saying. You are into gun control not because of safety concerns (obviously) but because of holophobia.
Sources, Mikeb:
DeleteFrom 2003: http://www.uphs.upenn.edu/ficap/resourcebook/pdf/monograph.pdf
From 2007: http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp#accidents
From 2010: http://library.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/GUNS/GUNSTAT.html
These are academic sources. All of them are saying that deaths from firearm accidents are around six to eight hundred a year. By contrast, deaths from automobile accidents come in around 40,000 per annum.
While we're looking at facts, let's also note that suicide is consistently the largest category of firearms deaths. We've shown you that other countries that don't have a lot of guns also have many suicides. Perhaps better options in health care would reduce the number of people who kill themselves intentionally. Some people, though, do reach a point in their lives--incurable illness or the loss of a spouse, as examples--that I cannot fault them for making the choice to die. I know that you disagree, but we've established that you want state control over our lives, while we prefer more freedom than control.
"You are into gun control not because of safety concerns (obviously) but because of holophobia."
DeleteAnd you resist everything I say out of hoplophilia. Who's worse?
Greg, your idea of an honest and fair comparison is pretty funny. You are so biased you try to pawn off the most ridiculous nonsense as convincing argument.
DeleteGun accidents per year 800
car accidents per year 40,000
Total gun deaths per year 32,000
total car deaths per year 40,000
I suppose a few of those car deaths are really suicides and homicides, but let's not nit pick.
By the way, what did you think about Jolly's 100,000? Nothing to say about that?
"You are into gun control not because of safety concerns (obviously) but because of holophobia."
DeleteAnd you resist everything I say out of hoplophilia. Who's worse?
---
No. I highlight your laser focus on "one strike and your out" on guns and not other things that are more deadly when not treated with respect as proof of your hoplophobia.
Mikeb, what was wrong about the numbers that I showed you? I cited my sources for you.
DeleteBut let's consider the numbers. Automobiles kill more every year than guns. To be sure, few vehicle deaths are intentional. Many are accidents, but too many are the result of alcohol or drugs or the result of negligence.
By contrast, under a thousand firearms deaths in a year are accidental. With 300,000,000 guns in this country, there are less than 1,000 deaths from accidents. That suggests that guns are not a danger in themselves. They have to be used intentionally.
More than half of all firearms deaths in a year are suicides. That's a personal choice. We've debated whether or not suicide is the right of the individual, but when you see data demonstrating that countries without guns also have many suicides, you ignore them.
What we see repeatedly is that you are against guns. Safety isn't the reason. Death isn't the reason. Your personal motivations aren't my concern, but you don't get to make public policy on the basis of your whims.
Good news is always welcome.
ReplyDeleteIs there something about this story that you see as good?
Delete