Sunday, December 23, 2012

In NC - Drunken Lawful Gun Owner Accidentally Kills 15-Year-old Neighbor

Local news reports

 

Perry is also angry because she says this is not the first time Furey's had a gun accident. The Johnston County Sheriff's Office confirms deputies were called to his David Drive home last month, but Furey was not arrested. Perry says the incident involved shots Furey accidentally fired at a neighbor's home. 

“They didn’t arrest him. They didn’t take his guns," Perry said. "They didn’t do anything but tell him don’t use firearms when he’s drinking alcohol, which was a regular thing for the man.”
Like many of these accidental shootings, a strict one strike you're out policy would have prevented it.

Sarcastic gun-rights fanatics love to ask, when they know there is no answer, "what law would have prevented this?"  Well, in this case we have a clear answer.  The irresponsible gun owner should have been disarmed already.

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.

11 comments:

  1. Gunsuckitude and alcohol are a bad mix.

    ReplyDelete
  2. From the reports, it's apparent that this man was not a "lawful gun owner." One category of prohibited person is a habitual user of alcohol--an alcoholic, in other words. You'd know that if you'd filled out the ATF form.

    This man has been charged with involuntary manslaughter. I'd like to see him face trial for a depraved indifference murder charge, and I do hope he gets as many years behind bars as possible.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Greg:

      "This man has been charged with involuntary manslaughter. I'd like to see him face trial for a depraved indifference murder charge, and I do hope he gets as many years behind bars as possible."


      Why couldn't this be achieved preemptively? Is actual bloodshed truly necessary for an arrest in a civilized society?

      Delete
    2. A person is not a criminal until he has committed a crime. You're promoting tyranny here.

      Delete
    3. That's what I keep telling you, Greg. This guy was the hidden criminal type of lawful gun owner.

      Delete
    4. Your nonsense term, hidden criminal, is a contradiction. Until a person commits a crime, that person is not a criminal, hidden or otherwise. You attempt to use this term to create a principle of anticipated wrong--anyone who wants to own a gun has to prove that he won't be a criminal. When you're ready to prove that you'll never use language to threaten anyone or to commit fraud, you may speak. How would you like that?

      Delete
    5. Greg, I'm quite disappointed that after going steady for so long, you don't even know what I mean by hidden criminal.

      http://mikeb302000.blogspot.it/2011/04/venn-diagram-of-gun-owners.html

      Delete
  3. He is a criminal, not a "drunken lawful gun owner". One of the most used tactics the anti gun side has is the vapid attempts to demonize all gun owners for the actions of a few, completely ignoring presumption of innocence, due process, personal responsibility, etc..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. RTev, you love the presumption of innocence until I suggest we should do the one strike out policy on all gun negligence.

      Delete
  4. Freedom is messy! Sometimes to celebrate freedom we have to kill each other. if 247,000 Americans die between 2003-2010 from gun violence well that's glorious glorious freedom!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And there's not one things, constitutional or otherwise, that you could propose that would have changed that.

      Delete