BAD: CCW Negligent Discharge injures child - Page 2

BAD: CCW Negligent Discharge injures child

This is a discussion on BAD: CCW Negligent Discharge injures child within the In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly forums, part of the The Back Porch category; Originally Posted by Jollymann Might as well point out that the prohibitionists like the idea of denying guaranteed firearms rights for an expanding base of ...

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 60
Like Tree19Likes

Thread: BAD: CCW Negligent Discharge injures child

  1. #16
    Senior Member Array Dandyone's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    614
    Quote Originally Posted by Jollymann View Post
    Might as well point out that the prohibitionists like the idea of denying guaranteed firearms rights for an expanding base of reasons such as you're an ex felon, you've been in a mental hospital, you've beat your wife, you've committed a sex crime (Including streaking, or underage sex even if she was simply hot and 17 in some states, and didn't say.), and sometimes accidental discharges, if somehow it's classified ridiculously as a felony. When you start saying that you like their base of reasons, you empower them to keep expanding it and including more and more against guaranteed rights. Make no mistake, if the people who like denying rights as they have been doing since the 1968 Gun Control Act are allowed to keep at it and aren't stopped and reversed, it will eventually boil down to denying rights for the ultimate ends of general prohibition. You'll have rights denied for speeding tickets. You'll have rights denied for littering. You'll have rights denied for parking violations. You'll have rights denied for having a fight in grade school. How does that sound to you? Make you feel safer that all those bad people can't have guns now? As far as I'm concerned it was an accident where no one was killed or gravely injured. It's not right to say that he can't have guns anymore. Just like it's not right to deny rights on the basis of streaking. If he pays a fine OK. If he goes to jail for six months. OK. If he loses his CCW card for a while. OK. But not denying rights for that. That actually could happen to anyone since there was no criminal intent. Probably not if you're not sloppy, but it still could.

    D.J.
    What about the kid's right to not catch shrapnel from an idiot who illegally discharged their weapon (intentionally or not)?

    If you carry, you have the responsibility to ensure that the only time a bullet flies out your barrel is when you are defending yourself (or in Texas, defending your property).
    GGs
    BGs

    ”Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars.”


  2. #17
    Ex Member Array Jollymann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona
    Posts
    106
    I never said it was OK what he did. All of what you said is obvious Dandyone. I'll add defending others to the list. That is a justifcaion as well in many states. But it's the other concerns I was pointing out. If you advocate denying rights to firearms for this or other things where there is no criminal intent you play into the hands of the weasles and despots like Michael Bloomberg who want to erode your right, my right, everyone's right on the basis of "public safety" or "public order" or whatever they say. Also, there are already laws against this, like there are laws against causing an accident or breaking someone's fence. So if the law is broken well fine there are consequences, but there is no need to take it so far that you're disolving someone's basic rights.


    D.J.

  3. #18
    VIP Member Array BugDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Under a Volkswagen somewhere in Florida
    Posts
    9,452
    Quote Originally Posted by Jollymann View Post
    Might as well point out that the prohibitionists like the idea of denying guaranteed firearms rights for an expanding base of reasons such as you're an ex felon, you've been in a mental hospital, you've beat your wife, you've committed a sex crime (Including streaking, or underage sex even if she was simply hot and 17 in some states, and didn't say.), and sometimes accidental discharges, if somehow it's classified ridiculously as a felony. When you start saying that you like their base of reasons, you empower them to keep expanding it and including more and more against guaranteed rights. Make no mistake, if the people who like denying rights as they have been doing since the 1968 Gun Control Act are allowed to keep at it and aren't stopped and reversed, it will eventually boil down to denying rights for the ultimate ends of general prohibition. You'll have rights denied for speeding tickets. You'll have rights denied for littering. You'll have rights denied for parking violations. You'll have rights denied for having a fight in grade school. How does that sound to you? Make you feel safer that all those bad people can't have guns now? As far as I'm concerned it was an accident where no one was killed or gravely injured. It's not right to say that he can't have guns anymore. Just like it's not right to deny rights on the basis of streaking. If he pays a fine OK. If he goes to jail for six months. OK. If he loses his CCW card for a while. OK. But not denying rights for that. That actually could happen to anyone since there was no criminal intent. Probably not if you're not sloppy, but it still could.

    D.J.
    Everyone is free to have their own opinion, but I can't say that mine is the same as yours. Not that mine matters to anyone other than me.

    FWIW, here is why. One is never an "ex-felon." A person is either a convicted felon or they are not. If someone was convicted of domestic violence (beating their wife), been in a mental hospital (especially invountarily), committed sex crimes (especially underage sex), or any other type of violent crime (murder, armed robbery, rape, etc.) or have demonstrated that they are incompetent or irresponsible with a firearm, then I think they deserve to lose that particular right and freedom...and many more...forever. Freedom comes with responsibility. Some people can't handle it. JMO.
    JoeK likes this.
    Know Guns, Know Safety, Know Peace.
    No Guns, No Safety, No Peace.

  4. #19
    Ex Member Array Jollymann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona
    Posts
    106
    Strongly disagree, and furthermore it's that kind of mindset that these draconian statist weasles feed into. The idea of public safety at the expense of more and more liberties generally. Then on top of that if those people are so dangerous then they're in prision for a crime. If they're not in prison then they're free and they are supposed to have all rights that they originally had. Furthermore this idea of denying rights when free for minor offenses is absolutly twisted. It's mostly a relatively recent legal invention based on the the mentality behind the 1968 Gun Control Act. Not all of it possibly. It's the mentality of the police state and I find it absolutely bizare that any person who claims to be pro-gun or pro-freedom can be for. By the way a felon is someone engaged in a felony. Or ought to be convicted of a felony offense. An ex-felon is someone who has been released and is no longer an offender. Therefore ex-felon. Simple.

    D.J.

  5. #20
    Senior Member Array Fausty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    oshkosh wisconsin
    Posts
    959
    Quote Originally Posted by BugDude View Post
    Ummmm, infractions are routinely passed out for discussing illegal activity you have participated in. Score one fail and one face-palm.
    mexican carry is illegal in texas?
    Jollymann likes this.
    My metal band: Born under Sirius

    Glock 23, mic holster, clipdraw, abdominal carry.

  6. #21
    VIP Member Array Gene83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    2,220
    Quote Originally Posted by Fausty View Post
    mexican carry is illegal in texas?
    Probably depends on which Mexican you are carrying.
    Jollymann, carracer and JoeK like this.
    "The superior man, when resting in safety, does not forget that danger may come." ~ Confucius

  7. #22
    Senior Member Array Fausty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    oshkosh wisconsin
    Posts
    959
    HA!
    My metal band: Born under Sirius

    Glock 23, mic holster, clipdraw, abdominal carry.

  8. #23
    Moderator
    Array gasmitty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Gilbert, AZ
    Posts
    11,248
    Quote Originally Posted by Toorop View Post
    One more reason why I feel signs should have the force of law. It is incidents like this that make businesses want to prohibit carry in their property. I have read many statements on here that suggest that if a business prohibits carry then they should be liable for people getting shot or killed on their property, well wouldn't the opposit also be true? That if a business allows carry and someone gets shot on their property, shouldn't they be also be liable as the argument could be made that if they are ok with guns they are accepting responsibility for their property and what happens on it.
    You're not looking at this as the law does. If a particular place allows (or does not prohibit) legal carriage of weapons, and someone negligently triggers a round that causes injury, the only liable party is the one who triggered the round - not the owner of the premises who allowed him to enter.

    The converse is theoretically true, but so far has not been successfully tested in court, which is that a particular place conspicuously barring the carriage of weapons carries the burden of ensuring the safety of its visitors or patrons
    Smitty
    NRA Endowment Member
    NROI Chief Range Officer

  9. #24
    VIP Member Array BugDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Under a Volkswagen somewhere in Florida
    Posts
    9,452
    Quote Originally Posted by Jollymann View Post
    Strongly disagree, and furthermore it's that kind of mindset that these draconian statist weasles feed into. The idea of public safety at the expense of more and more liberties generally. Then on top of that if those people are so dangerous then they're in prision for a crime. If they're not in prison then they're free and they are supposed to have all rights that they originally had. Furthermore this idea of denying rights when free for minor offenses is absolutly twisted. It's mostly a relatively recent legal invention based on the the mentality behind the 1968 Gun Control Act. Not all of it possibly. It's the mentality of the police state and I find it absolutely bizare that any person who claims to be pro-gun or pro-freedom can be for. By the way a felon is someone engaged in a felony. Or ought to be convicted of a felony offense. An ex-felon is someone who has been released and is no longer an offender. Therefore ex-felon. Simple.

    D.J.
    I can't get there from here. Agree to disagree.

    Once you do some of the things I mentioned above, you gave up your right. Too bad life sentences don't actually mean life and our justice system releases people after only a fraction of the time they should do. If it were your sister's ex-husband that had been convicted of armed robbery, domestic violence, and rape now released and threatening her harm and she had a court order of protection against him you think he should be able to walk in a store and legally purchase a gun while the police say "until he has done something, there's nothing we can do"? I can't get there from here. He knew the consequences going in.
    Know Guns, Know Safety, Know Peace.
    No Guns, No Safety, No Peace.

  10. #25
    VIP Member Array BugDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Under a Volkswagen somewhere in Florida
    Posts
    9,452
    Quote Originally Posted by Fausty View Post
    mexican carry is illegal in texas?
    No. The reference to his potentially illegally carrying in California has since been edited from the post I was referencing.
    Know Guns, Know Safety, Know Peace.
    No Guns, No Safety, No Peace.

  11. #26
    Senior Member Array Fausty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    oshkosh wisconsin
    Posts
    959
    oh i see.
    My metal band: Born under Sirius

    Glock 23, mic holster, clipdraw, abdominal carry.

  12. #27
    VIP Member Array BugDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Under a Volkswagen somewhere in Florida
    Posts
    9,452
    Quote Originally Posted by Jollymann View Post
    ...Then on top of that if those people are so dangerous then they're in prision for a crime...If they're not in prison then they're free and they are supposed to have all rights that they originally had....Furthermore this idea of denying rights when free for minor offenses is absolutly twisted...By the way a felon is someone engaged in a felony. Or ought to be convicted of a felony offense. An ex-felon is someone who has been released and is no longer an offender. Therefore ex-felon. Simple.
    D.J.
    This reminds me of a piece of advice I received from my Dad as a teenager. Something about letting people think you're something rather than saying something and proving it. I don't know, that was many moons ago.

    First off, "if they are so dangerous they are in prison". Really? If all of the dangerous people are in prison, then who do we need to protect ourselves from?

    Second, I don't know how you define "minor offenses", but I believe in my post I referenced "beat your wife", "sex crimes", "murder", "armed robbery", "rape", "involuntary mental committal". Where I come from, these are in no way, shape, or form "minor offenses". If they are, then something else somewhere else is absolutely twisted.

    As for "Felon", perhaps you need to ask your area's District Attorney for a definition. Don't take my word for it, get it from your region's elected Chief Attorney. The law states "if you are a convicted felon, you cannot own a firearm or vote." It does not say "ex-felon."

    If you think these things are minor and that one should have their freedoms and rights automatically restored when they walk out of custody, then there is no reason to continue to debate it. We are both free to have our opinions and we can respectfully agree to disagree.
    Know Guns, Know Safety, Know Peace.
    No Guns, No Safety, No Peace.

  13. #28
    Member Array Calling45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    29

    Concealed gun owner shoots own buttocks, wounds children

    Yikes.........that can't be good.




    Concealed gun owner shoots own buttocks and wounds children at Dallas Walmart
    A licensed concealed handgun owner from Waco, Texas hurt more than his pride on Monday when his weapon accidentally discharged while he was reaching for his wallet at a Dallas Walmart store.

    Police said that Todd Canady, 23, was in the checkout line when he fired the pistol he was carrying inside his pants.

    “The bullet struck Canady in the buttock, then ricochet on the floor and broke into pieces,” KDFW reported. Two children and a woman were also wounded when they were struck by bullet fragments.

    Other reports indicated that the bullet grazed Canady’s leg he when dropped the Springfield .40-caliber semi-automatic pistol. Shards of concrete from the floor were said to have caused the wounds to the woman and children.

    Concealed gun owner shoots own buttocks and wounds children at Dallas Walmart | The Raw Story

  14. #29
    Member Array mb1900's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    The Midwest
    Posts
    144
    This is one of the reasons why not everyone should be allowed to -- oops, I mean, "is ready" to own and carry a firearm. He was probably doing the famous "Mexican" carry.

  15. #30
    Member Array Calling45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    29
    When I read this I automatically thought Glock because of no safeties but a Springfield?
    Which Springfield could this be?
    It couldn't be XD because of the grip safety?
    Wrong?

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

accidental discharge in pocket
,
accidental discharge of ccw guns
,

ccw accidental discharge

,

ccw negligent discharge

,
ccw shoots wife
,

concealed carry accidental discharge

,
concealed gun shoots woman
,
guys gun discharges in walmart in texas
,
in waistband accidental discharge
,
negligent discharge
,

sticky holster lawsuit

,
va ccw lawsiut
Click on a term to search for related topics.