Saturday, January 21, 2012

Man Fires Nail into Brain

“It’s a miracle,” his fiancee Gail Glaenzer said. “Un-freaking-believable.”

She said the accident happened when Autullo was standing on a ladder and working on a project in the garage. He had fired several nails when the recoil of the final shot sent the gun near his head.

With his finger still on the trigger, a sensor on the top of the gun recognized a flat surface, and unloaded a nail into his brain.
What do you think? Should this guy lose his rights to own guns?

Please leave a comment.


  1. Naw, he will probably want the right to carry fully automatic weapons to church.

  2. You can't yammer on about how guns aren't tools and then conclude that someone who does something silly with a tool should lose his gun rights.

  3. Actually Greg, I can do whatever I want, especially on my own blog.

    This story gave me a whole new idea. How about if anyone who cuts his finger off with a power saw, or accidentally knocks his eye out with an hammer or puts a nail into his brain with a nail gun, loses his right to own weapons.

    I like this idea and it's not based on the fact that they're all tools, it's based on the fact that extreme carelessness and/or stupidity should be a disqualifier for gun ownership. You're the one who keeps saying that determining who qualifies for the disqualification cannot be an arbitrary judgment call, well here you go. Lose a finger, lose an eye, put a nail into your body, you surrender your guns for everybody's good.

  4. Autullo said he had a thought, I guess he nailed it.

  5. Mike- Since you asked nicely, I will leave a comment.

    No, this guy should not lose his rights to bear arms. Why should he?

    Your argument seems misguided. You & Laci don't even know this guy. But I will agree to your ideas of losing ownership rights. As long, as we can agree that High-school drop-outs and welfare recipients lose their right to vote. Sounds like a fair trade.

  6. Nope, I think nail guns are a menace and should be banned. We're all gonna have to use hammers again because no one can get hur.....oh s**t.
    Guess we're going back to mud huts.

  7. Let me put it this way for all you gun-rights advocates, would you feel safe shooting with this guy? Now, keep in mind he's already demonstrated the incredible ability to shoot himself in the head with a nail gun. Would you keep an extra eye on a guy like that, or would you presume that he's a no-risk kinda guy?

  8. It sounds as if he might have had an illegally modified, "fully automatic" nail gun:)

    There are, afaia, two different styles of triggers for pneumatic nailers. They are the "sequential" and the "contact" style. The sequential type will fire a nail, if the trigger is held down, every time the contact bumper meets an object with sufficient pressure. The contact type will only fire after the trigger is released and then re-activated AFTER the tool is moved away from and back to the surface. I own both types.

    The reason I said that it might be illegally modified is that I think CA made a change in the laws about such things some years ago and prohibits so called, "bump firing" nailers.

    J.O.B.: Eat shit and die; okay?

  9. Second try to answer Mikeb302000,

    You and others here have spent many pages insisting that guns aren't tools and tools aren't guns. Yet you now claim that one's behavior with a tool should affect one's right to own a firearm. You may write whatever you want, but how is that idea logical?


    Are you capable of being polite to anyone with whom you disagree?

  10. Demo- You must be that high school dropout.

  11. GC writes:You and others here have spent many pages insisting that guns aren't tools and tools aren't guns. Yet you now claim that one's behavior with a tool should affect one's right to own a firearm. You may write whatever you want, but how is that idea logical?

    That should be obvious. We are comparing a gun-like construction tool to safety with a firearm.

    You guys were comparing UNLIKE and DISSIMILAR tools to weapons.

    I would be reluctant to classify all accidents as mistakes in judgment. But I would agree with Mikeb that this seems to be one where this guy raises a safety question. Further, the problems associated with brain injury and judgment would seem to be in play here appropriately.

  12. This is a kind of gun that I don't have. I prefer a regular hammer. Actually, when I'm working with wood, I find that screws do a better job of holding things together.

  13. All right Greg, let's expand it a bit. Anybody who attempts to bring an ice cream cone to their mouth and hits the middle of their forehead should be banned from owning guns.

    It's not about the tools. It's about the stupidity or recklessness or carelessness or whatever you want to call it. Guys who shoot nails into their heads are not fit for owning guns.

  14. Lets expand a bit further Mike.

    People who don't recognize the danger posed to themselves and others shouldn't be allowed to handle those dangerous things.

    That applies to tools.

    And that applies to weapons.

    This guy is a Dick Cheney style accident waiting to happen to someone else.

  15. Mikeb302000 and Dog Gone,

    I take it that neither of you ever have an accident of any kind. Fortunately, the laws of the United States don't get written according to your program.

    1. Greg, I'm happy to report that I have all my fingers and eyes and so far, no nails in the brain.

  16. GC writes:I take it that neither of you ever have an accident of any kind. Fortunately, the laws of the United States don't get written according to your program.

    Not all kinds of accidents are equal, Greg, or similar. I saw this guy interviewed this morning on one of the morning television talk shows. He wasn't even aware that he had shot himself in the head, and didn't seek medical care for an extended period of time.

    "The flat head of the nail actually helped slow down the penetration and amazingly, kept Autullo alive. According to doctors, Autullo isn't suffering from any side effects from the nail-in-brain (or brain surgery) and hasn't shown any loss of function in his body. What's crazier is how long it took for Autullo to realize the nail was there. After nailing his brain, he still managed to drive his plow truck for eight hours, take his kids to a play rehearsal and take a nap before he went to the doc and saw the so-ridiculous-it-must-be-a-joke-x-ray.

    While this appears to be an extreme instance, it doesn't appear to be a unique one for this individual.

    "He's also, according to his wife, a very accident prone guy.

    Yeah, I've had a rare accident, but I've never injured myself or anyone else like this, whereas this guy has lots of accidents.

  17. Dog Gone,

    So now you want legislation regarding the accident prone? Please, do tell us how that piece of legislation would be written. How would you define what sort of accidents are just too bad as opposed to the kind that would disqualify a person from owning a firearm? Here's a better question: Do you ever get tired of being meddlesome?

    Of course, I know your real answer. You want the police to have discretion as to those who are allowed to own and carry firearms. Do you realize that would mean that cops would have to keep lists of what happens to everyone within their jurisdictions? This accident wasn't a criminal matter. How would this get reported to your fantasy background check system? Do you have no concerns about the government keeping lists of citizens and their actions, lists that would be difficult to see, lists that would be difficult to correct? (Remember that Teddy Kennedy appeared on the terrorist watch list.)

    You really should give some thought to your unending quest to enhance government power.

  18. I already defined it Greg.

    One nail in the brain, one finger cut off, one eye knocked out you lose your gun rights.

    Of course that's just a rough list. The lawyers could come up with more, I'm sure.

    1. Here's proof of my suspicion about you. You want no private citizen to have a firearm. You'll use any excuse to take guns away. So somebody slips while using a table saw and cuts off a finger? Take his guns away!

      Just be honest, and post an article stating that you want no one to have guns.

    2. MikeB has some legitimate concerns about people who are careless, reckless, or otherwise unsafe regarding how they use or abuse dangerous tools.

      Your lot love to claim that guns are just tools.....yet you get your knickers in a terrible twist at the idea of holding people responsible for how they use 'tools' when they harm themselves or others.

      I do respect that even with care, an occasional accident can happen with power tools. I've used dangerous power tools myself, including things like chain saws. I know what it is like to be cutting through a downed tree or branch, and to have a bounce back from encountering a nail deep in the wood that the tree has grown around, or to have bits of things, including embedded metal fly off while using one.

      But I think it is a fair concern that someone who has a dangerous accident through recklessness is looked at as person who will be no more safe with a firearm than they are with a nail gun. Reckless or careless behavior with something that could endanger another person or the user IS a valid concern.

      Clearly, you Greg are unwilling to hold anyone accountable for reckless or dangerous conduct, with a firearm or anything else, apparently. Shame on you for being so willing to endanger others to further your stupid fetish relationship with firearms.

    3. And shame on you for your eagerness to take away rights. You're far too willing to punish people who harm no one, and in this case, you're arguing to take away rights from someone who only hurt himself in an accident. I don't believe in taking away rights without a strong reason for doing so--felony conviction, for example.

      By the way, do we even know if the man in question here owns or cares about owning firearms?

    4. Greg, what you call "taking people's rights away" I call protecting them from themselves, not to mention all those around them.

      Some of you guys are unfit to own guns. Why do you resist that so?