Thursday, October 10, 2013

Utah Gun Accident Injures Two - No Charges Naturally

A 67-year-old man and his wife were hospitalized early Tuesday after he accidentally fired his gun while cleaning it.
Ogden Police Lt. Steve Zaccardi said police responded just after 2 a.m. to the 1100 block of Maxfield Drive on reports of a shooting. The man had not realized his .45-caliber semi-automatic handgun was loaded and accidentally fired. The bullet struck his left index finger before hitting the upper thigh of his 56-year-old wife.
Both were taken to McKay Dee Hospital and are expected to fully recover, Zaccardi said.
I wonder how many other gun mishaps this guy has been responsible for in his long life. Gross negligence disguised as accidents are the way these idiots continue to own and misuse guns.
They should be disarmed the very first time the do something like this.
What's your opinion?  Please leave  a comment.

19 comments:

  1. "They should be disarmed the very first time the [sic] do something like this." -- Mike B.

    No, they should be responsible for any property damage that they cause and prosecuted for any criminal actions if the victims want to press charges.

    Cars are several thousand pound deadly weapons. Should a person never be able to own or operate a car ever again in their entire life if they skid off the road and into a ditch?

    A much better parallel: should a person never be able to own or operate a car ever again in their entire life if they lose control in the rain and strike/kill a person on the sidewalk? My answer is that our criminal justice system should prosecute them (and hopefully convict and imprison them) for negligent homicide. Upon completing their prison sentence, they should be able to own and operate cars again.

    If a citizen is negligent and causes the injury or death of another citizen, why does it matter what objects were involved? Either the citizen was negligent which lead to the injury or death of another citizen or they were not. If they were, then prosecute them. If not, let it be.

    -- TruthBeTold

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As long as we are willing to take into account degrees of accident or negligence, I agree. Skidding in the rain, for example, can be completely an accident and beyond the driver's control.

      Delete
    2. It's not an accident that an idiot does not know when his gun is loaded, or not, it's negligent stupidity. Which is why you defend such crap. You are a negligent idiot. Worse, you are a law breaker and promote death.

      Delete
    3. I believe the amount of negligence involved should translate to the duration of a prison sentence if convicted. If you were driving 20 mph over the speed limit in heavy rain and then lost control and ran over a person on the sidewalk, that is not an "accident", that is gross negligence. And I believe a long prison sentence (on the order of 10 years) is in order. On the other hand if you were driving 10 mph on an icy road and slid through an intersection hitting a person on the sidewalk, that is not gross negligence but it is still negligence. Maybe 6 months in jail is appropriate in that situation?

      You are always responsible to maintain control of your car no matter what the road conditions may be. If you lose control driving 10 mph on icy roads then you were driving too fast for conditions and are responsible. Similarly, you are always responsible for your conduct with a firearm. If you harm someone with a firearm, you are responsible whether or not you know how to safely operate and handle that particular firearm. We would not give an adult a "pass" if they did not know how to operate a bulldozer and then drove into someone. The same applies to firearms. Again, the object involved doesn't matter.

      The beauty in all of this is that instruction and training on the safe operation and handling of firearms in general only takes about 30 minutes ... and the instruction on how to operate a particular firearm only takes a minute. This being the case, there really is no "excuse" for anyone over the age of 12 or so negligently harming someone with a firearm.

      -- TruthBeTold

      Delete
    4. Jim, I agree with you that anyone who uses that excuse shows him to be a fool. In fact, I have a safety video of Col. Cooper saying exactly that when he covers the four rules of gun safety.

      Delete
    5. Jim, prove that I break the law, or admit that you just committed libel.

      Delete
    6. Your statements speak for themselves.
      You would go after the drug dealer with your gun, fuck the police.
      You would forcibly take over Calif., because you don't agree with the way they are running that State.
      There are many more, but I won't waste my time with a fuck head idiot hillbilly who won't even stand by his own words.
      Be a law breaking anarchist, but have the convictions to not deny what you have said.

      Delete
    7. Would he do those things, or did he do those things? As far as I know, California is still in control of the state government and not Greg.

      Delete
    8. Hillbilly NRA fake professor Greg said,

      "Thank goodness for hillbillies and gangsters when you need them."
      ""During Prohibition, we hillbillies supplied alcohol to a lot of people."

      There are plenty more statements (on this blog) that proves the lying fuck head hillbilly Greg is and promotes illegality and anarchy.
      That's right, laugh while you are proven wrong, what else can a lying fuck head hillbilly do.

      Delete
    9. Oh, he was a moonshine runner during prohibition? I didn't know that. I guess he is a criminal then.

      Delete
    10. Truth Be Told, can you not make your point without resorting to the care comparisons?

      How do you justify a guy forgetting there's a round in the chamber?

      Delete
    11. Yup, I ran 'shine in the 20s. I look good for my age, don't I?

      Delete
    12. Mike,

      So, if we mention cars in any way you're going to call it a car comparison and say that it's illegitimate, huh? Truth Be Told was not making the standard car comparison; He was using car "accidents" to show how we treat certain species of negligence under our current law since those are the same rules that govern other accidents caused by the negligence of one party or another.

      If you think he misapplied the law (as it currently stands), then please, enlighten us as to how. If you don't think he misapplied it, but you think the outcome should be different, then try to convince the general population that you're right.

      Delete
  2. Forgive my skeptical nature, but what the hecks this cleaning your gun at 2am? This is sort of the witching hour for folks doing stupid stuff. Just getting home from closing down the bar and such. I tend to stay up late pretty regular, but can't recall the last time I had the urge to clean weapons at that hour.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It's so cute when the troll breaks the law while accusing others of being law breakers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What, Greg? Huh?

      How about you, ss? Is there ever a justification for forgetting there's a round in the chamber?

      Delete
    2. Mikeb, under civil law, a false accusation that another person is a criminal is an offense called defamation--slander or libel, depending on the context. Some states make that a criminal offense. So what we have here is Jim, who runs his mouth constantly about how I'm a law-breaker, has, in fact, himself broken the law.

      Delete
    3. Those were YOUR WORDS fucking lying hillbilly, Explain them.

      Delete
    4. Thought not.
      Just a coward lying fucking hillbilly.

      Delete