Accidentally discharged? More like negligently discharged. This guy needs to be charged with a crime.
1 Like
Ha Haaaaaaaaaaaa
Well of course. Youâre house is never safe with just a handgun, no wonder people got hurt in such a dangerous situation. If only he had an assault rifle with a high capacity clip, THEN everyone would have been safe.
Thatâll learn her!
At least this month is churning out examples of very black humor.
In June alone weâve had:
6.3. - The drunk dude in Georgia who was so shitfaced that he thought s Smith & Wesson .38 was not a real gun cause it had a laser sight and shot one of his friends. Fortunately it resulted in superficial injuries.
6.6 - The guy in Tennessee who accidentally shot himself in the thigh while driving and bled out.
6.6. - A real, loaded gun found in a South Carolina Target toy display.
6.9. - And now the dude in New York who accidentally shoots his wife in the leg while showing her how to use his new toy.
After a while, all you can do is shake your head and utter a bark of sardonic laughter at these careless bastards.
1 Like
You know itâs negligent, and I know itâs negligent, but the newspaper canât say itâs negligent because of libel issues. âNegligentâ implies fault on the part of the shooter while âaccidentalâ does not.
1 Like
**The man was showing his wife how to use the gunâs tactical light when the weapon accidentally discharged, police told the Times-Herald-Record. **
Another responsible gun owner increasing the safety of his family by acquiring a tactical firearm. I directly blame the NRA and their sluts for misinforming people about the benefits of domestic firearms for safety. Theyâve lied about it repeatedly, funded bogus studies and publicized them, and shouted down anyone who dares to speak the truth about this in the popular press, creating a false equivalency between the arguments.
1 Like
Just this year? Because I know there have been more that that in those states.
Libs says: âTrolly troll trolling trollily! Argle bargle! Hamburger! Herp derp!â
2 Likes
Doesnât actual libel require intent to lible, and isnât it pretty hard to prove generally? And how does the fact that the person shot someone (we assume without intending to) factor in? If it had been a car we wouldnât even get to discuss it, it would be negligent driving.
Libs and his kind are personally responsible for promoting these incidents with their lies. These fact- and brain-cell-challenged trolls believe that they will be a hero with their tactical firearms equipped with lights and high-capacity magazines when the next mass shooter comes along. Theyâve been raised on and fed TV shows and movies that simplify the complexities of using a firearm in a confrontation, and because theyâve never been in a firefight or even trained to anticipate one, they have their wet-dreams about them where they make all the right moves and the shooter doesnât. Theyâre so stupid they donât realize the advantage the shooter usually has in terms of planning and preparation as well as hardware. They spread their dementia to others who canât think things through clearly and you end up with the scenario the thread is about. Poor, stupid troll.
2 Likes
Absolutely, But these are just the ones on TPM and Raw Story.
Gee⌠We get about one of these stories a week⌠so⌠At that rate, Nature will have eliminated most of the stupid ones in about 400,000 years or so⌠Sounds about rightâŚ
The nasty downside is that lots of innocents are going to die along the wayâŚ
Careful, it will flag you for calling out its derp,
Be wery cwaeful gwasshoppah
Nopeâ their dementia can be spread no further no more. All of the Faux Sheeple and illiterate gun nuts that could be affected already have the disease. Now comes the dawn of responsible gun owners who do not live under the NRA bubble of frothing mouths, spittle, fear & loathing.
Very poor shooting. No excuse not to hit center mass at that distance with a red dot sight.
âNY Man Accidentally Shoots Wife While Demonstrating How To Use Gunâ
Well, on the bright side, I guess he really showed her how guns work.
So , when you show someone how to use the light , you keep your finger on the trigger to stand your ground .
âActual maliceâ and âreckless disregard for the truthâ are standards that have to be met by government officials or other public figures to prove defamation. For private individuals, the bar is set much lower.
This standard was set by the Supreme Court decision New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (376 U.S. 254 [1964]):
Defamation law varies from state to state and can be quite complex, but generally for private individuals in order to prove defamation the plaintiff must show evidence of four elements: that the defendant conveyed a defamatory message; that the material was published, meaning that it was conveyed to someone other than the plaintiff; that the plaintiff could be identified as the person referred to in the defamatory material; and that the plaintiff suffered some injury to his or her reputation as a result of the communication.
However, the last element does not have to be supported by evidence if the defamatory statement is considered slander per se. Such statements are presumed to be damaging to the plaintiff. Among the things that are considered slander per se is imputing criminal activity to the plaintiff. Since negligent discharge of a firearm is in most places a criminal act, a statement to that effect without an actual charge having been filed would be libelous. Newspapers generally tend to err on the side of caution, hence you see a lot of âallegedlyâ, âaccidentallyâ, and the use of the passive voice or intransitive verbs (as in âthe gun accidentally dischargedâ). However, newspapers do have an advantage in that in cases against media outlets the plaintiff has to prove that the defamatory statement was untrue. The media outlet does not have to prove the truth of its allegations. Still, they tend to err on the side of caution.
Have a look at http://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/personal-injury/defamation-libel-slander.html. It explains a complex subject fairly succinctly.
1 Like
A firearm - with a tactical lasersight. Because THAT is what she is going to need - uh huh. Definitely HIS gun.
Whatever happened to getting the little lady a gun of her own, one that fits her, and that she can become accustomed to? Maybe a nice .32 5 shot auto? Maybe even a .25 to start with?
Or even better, why not actually sign her up for REAL LESSONS FROM AN INSTRUCTORâŚthat would properly fit her with a gun, teach her gun safety, the formalities of shooting, and proper stance and gun control?
The problem isnât just that America has a lot of guns - it is that no country on earth has so many UNTRAINED gun owners. Yâall basically suck at firearms safety, because you have no national conscription to train people in the military, nor do many of you actually have to hunt for food. So, basically, you get your instruction from your uncle Wilbur, or your husband if a woman, and whatever you internalise from Hollywood movies. There are not tests, no licensing requirements about the safe use of a gunâŚbecause in so doing, the gun makers would have their market shrunk, and letâs face it the entire NRA-hysteria is driven by making sure the gun makers have the largest possible sales.
And you all are paying for that, life by life.
All it would take is a few mandatory lessons, a short test on gun safety, and probably half your accidental/negligent shootings would vanish. That is an awful lot of lives, for a very minor inconvenienceâŚ
1 Like