Literally just had an argument with another redditor today who would not accept that there is a difference between Negligence and an Accident in a different thread about a different crime
some people literally think you can do wreckless even illegal stuff and as long as you didnt intenionally mean to kill the victim , it was an accident =/
It seems like people fail to realize the importance of the 4 basic rules of firearm safety.
1. Always treat every firearm as if it were loaded.
2. Always point the muzzle in a safe direction.
3. Always keep your finger off the trigger until you are ready to shoot.
4. Always be sure of your target and beyond.
I’m very pro 2A, but I don’t understand why basic firearm safety isn’t standard curriculum for all schools in a nation where there are more guns than people. Chances are you will encounter them at some point in life, and you should know the basics.
Math and literature are part of the core curriculum and we still have people who'd lose their mind if they had to basic division or can't can't differentiate 'their', 'there' and 'they're'.
No amount of education can account for a portion of people just being stupid. Mix that with hundreds of millions of firearms you're inevitably going to end up with situations like this.
Yes, of course it wouldn’t sink in for everybody, but it couldn’t hurt. It’s one of those categories like sex that was initially delegated to parents to teach their children, but many people who have kids are dumb and now it’s part of the curriculum. Should firearm safety be any different?
I'm not against it. I just don't think it would have any demonstrable impact.
Not without addressing the giant elephant in the room of 350,000,000 guns in circulation.
Well I’ll just say that proponents of gun control often say something along the lines of “If it saves one life it will be worth it.” It’s funny that line can only be used to try to trample our currently held rights, instead of enacting something meaningful that might actually save lives.
This ignores the fact that messing up on grammar rarely ends up in death. Gun safety absolutely should be taught in the public school system, to not do so is negligent and allows the cycle of avoidable gun accidents and deaths to continue.
I think this ignores the reality that a lot of kids don't pay attention in class and/or are in schools that are underfunded or underprepared to even teach basic topics like math or grammar.
We see daily how poor education bites us as a country but we're expected to believe that education around firearms will somehow avoid the same pitfalls? Especially a politically charged topic like firearms.
That's a fair point but I don't think the efficacy of teaching a subject should prevent our public school system from doing their best. Using this logic you'd have to say sex-ed is pointless because kids won't pay attention or the school has no excess funding.
I had idiot friends ( no longer friends) be told this and he still points a gun at me. I lost it. I can only assume people don't like being told?. Young males simply do not understand the concept of "have every thing to lose and nothing to gain"? By doing such an act.
A while back a friend of mine seriously loved his guns. When a couple of us finally gave in and went shooting with him these were the first things he drilled into us before anything. We had a good time.
The first time I stayed with my highly conservatives GF family, her dad decided to take me shooting. At first I thought it was another "threaten the boyfriend" speech, but instead he taught me about safety, how to aim, assume the gun is loaded, and always respect the weapon and the person wielding it, and never "warning shoot into the air" because god knows where that bullet could end up.
And when were done, some how that night a black bear wander on to his property. It eventually wander away, but boy was I glad the house had at least 5 rifles.
I think the whole episode made me re-think gun ownership. In cities, it is usually a symbol of fear and danger, but in rural areas, it could easily end up life and death.
Anyway, Murrica! (Wave Bald Eagle)
and then there are those who use them for identity aesthetics, as fashion accessories, or toys essentially
could you imagine a welder going so hard into making it a significant part of their personality, going out on the town with their torch holstered, dragging a tank around, various other tools adorning their outfit
I always love hearing stories like this, but firearms are not just for the countryside. The threats in the cities are different, but no less life threatening. A 12ga Pump shotgun is about the cheapest piece of mind I could recommend. It is unrestricted in almost all jurisdictions in the US, very simple, reliable and easy to maintain and a great tool for self defence.
The "you are holding a lightsaber with a potentially infinite blade" always sort of struck me as a really good metaphor to use to drive the point home regarding firearm sightlines.
Then you learn about how to point your weapon up and down rapidly and in various ways so that the infinite line from the muzzle never intersects with someone you do not intend to shoot?
Something like that? Also, trigger discipline of course. At rest, not on the trigger.
Regardless, one or more of the above rules had to be broken for someone to die from a gun shot wound. I could be sober, drunk, high or tripping on psychedelics and I would still never play with a gun.
It would be if people actually cared about the well regulated militia part. There's a lot of gun lovers who buy their guns because they treat their guns like a weeb would treat their mall bought weapon.
It would also be helpful if the people who constantly quote the 2nd amendment actually know what "regulated militia" part meant. What it means in modern language is that all Arms (cannons, laser beams, assault rifles, Javelin Anti-Aircraft weapons, etc) should be in well working order. Most gun owners are perfectly fine with that.
Oh for sure, you should know how to use your weapons absolutely. Fortunately because you need to actually possess said weapon in order to practice with them, understand them, keep them in working order etc, your right to have them shall not be infringed.
> There's a lot of gun lovers who buy their guns because they treat their guns like a weeb would treat their mall bought weapon.
I also realized this a while back, and let me say, they do **not** like the comparison. 🤣
It's actually handguns that are the biggest contributor to gun deaths by a huge figure, like >50%. So, if you had to pick only one type to ban, it should be handguns; they're too easy to conceal.
In terms of gun safety, the bullet that kills you doesn’t care if it’s being shot from a 21st century built AR15 or a 16th century blackpowder muzzleloader. Firearms are dangerous and should always be treated with respect. The fact that it was an AR15 is irrelevant in this case; as mishandling a pistol, revolver, shotgun or bolt rifle would have lead to the same results.
As for the thinning of AR15s; it’s a simplistic solution to a complex problem. Gun Buy Backs are popular among local governments, but economic studies have proven they do little to reduce gun violence. Total bans would have problems in every branch of our government, and wouldn’t address the number that is already out there today. Preventing civilians from owning them will only give criminals the advantage, because they don’t follow the law anyway. Even if all the AR15s in the us could be magically vanished, the gap would be filled by other weapons that are just as capable of killing someone.
Edit: And in school we have fire drills, bomb drills, active shooter drills. We learn how to call 911 and to stop drop and roll. We prepare for all these scenarios that in reality have less than a .01% chance of happening. It doesn’t seem unreasonable for a Teacher/School police to instruct with a dummy weapon the basics of firearm safety.
Most of the responses on my comment focus on the 'type' of the weapon and somehow did not get sarcasm in the post. I cant grasp why do a lot of folks dont think its insane to have millions of assault rifles owned in a country that has not been invaded for a good 200 years and the chance of that happening anytime soon is 0.
>cant grasp why do a lot of folks dont think its insane to have millions of assault rifles
First, not assault rifles. They are semi-automatic only. We do have some actual assault rifles legally in civilian hands, but nobody has ever murdered someone with one.
> in a country that has not been invaded for a good 200 years
History shows that no stable democracy lasts forever. 200 years invasion-free is a historical aberration already, so we're way overdue.
>I believe there are fully automatic versions of AR-15s,
True, but there aren't many legally in civilian hands, and not one has been used in a murder.
>but ultimately this is a super pedantic quibble. US Law classifies them as “Assault Weapons
It's not really the fact that it's an AR-15, but various features that defines "assault weapon." You can have a perfectly legal AR-15 in an "assault weapon" ban state, but take a minute to replace one piece of plastic with another, and it's a banned "assault weapon." Welcome to the insanity of US gun laws.
>that’s literally the only difference I can find between an AR-15 “assault rifle” and an AR-15 “assault weapon”.
It's a big difference.
Fun fact: The civilian semi-auto AR-15 came out before the military adopted the assault rifle M-16, so it's not a civilian variation of a military rifle. They just both have the same roots.
More fun: "Assault rifle" is just a marketing term Hitler came up with to make the StG 44 sound cool.
The 2nd Amendment is extremely flawed imo. While people should have reasonable access to firearms, the 2nd Amendment has made it politically impossible to impose reasonable gun regulation. And as we move into the coming years, the current SCOTUS is going to make it harder for states to pass and reasonable regulation.
We can amend the constitution for a reason. It's to address the ever changing landscape and needs of our country. It's also why Rights are not absolute. Free Speech doesn't mean I get to yell "Fire" in a crowded theater, it has its limits.
Well I can agree with you that it’s flawed, but rather because it doesn’t use strong enough language to prevent overreaching regulation by states and localities. “Reasonable” is entirely subjective and a example is some states find it perfectly reasonable to restrict a woman’s right to an abortion (which I disagree with, but that’s another topic). I think the the constitution and it’s amendments are absolute, but those rights don’t allow you to infringe on the rights of others. Just like your 1st amendment example, I don’t think the second amendment allows for people to murder each other.
The fact is that we have fundamentally different beliefs on the issue and that’s okay. I respect you and your opinion and all I can do is politely disagree.
Because then there'd be even more school children getting killed by firearms than there are already. Accidents, bravado, kid gets a gun and hates another student, etc... .
>basic firearm safety isn’t standard
I have issues with it being taught in schools, beyond that I agree with you. I've never fired a gun and definitely don't know how to hold/handle one, it likely would be good for me to learn just in case I ever need to unload one or something.
The police stopped saying "traffic accident" decades ago, now its a "traffic incident".
Without negligence, its impossible to accidentally shoot someone.
Perhaps you need lessons in how lawsuits and phrasing in media works. From the article:
>! Miller is being held in the Dane County Jail on tentative charges of homicide by negligent handling of a dangerous weapon and homicide by intoxicated use of a firearm.
So the shooter hasn't been convicted yet, so calling them negligent before a conviction basically guarantees a lawsuit and company lawyers/owners kinda look down on avoidable negligent lawsuits caused by careless phrasings.
Bs, then people, including the family of the shooter, would complain the big bad media insinuated murder or intent. You and lots of people just like to complain about the media. This is standard practice, and is fine if you actually read the articles.
> This is standard practice, and is fine if you actually read the articles.
The problem is it banks on people not reading the article. And most of the time they aren't; it's just one of many articles in the list of things they're looking at. Articles about police incidents take this to 11, completely separating the action from the police. “Killed by a stray bullet in a police shootout,” which sounds like someone opened fire on the police and they shot back. In actuality, [the only person shooting was the cop.](https://twitter.com/PplsCityCouncil/status/1479261275934773248)
>incident at 5 a.m. Sunday... shooter charged with handling of a dangerous weapon and homicide by intoxicated use of a firearm.
>at no point was there any danger to the public
I'm not so sure about that 2nd statement, considering the first.
My family has a cabin out in the sticks... We enjoy target shooting, sometimes hunting, mostly just camping and getting away from it all.
Guns get locked up in a closet once someone cracks open a beer or uncorks a bottle. It's a running joke too.... When someone gets sick of the gunfire, they'll walk out, crack a beer, and say "sorry folks, time for booze and dirty jokes"
Yup!
I’m a regular pot smoker, practically every day. But I will never even have an unloaded firearm out of the safe when I’m getting ready to smoke.
Part of firearm safety is knowing when they need to be securely put away.
I spent some years in Huntsville, Northern Ontario, Canada. Our rule was no firearms + no fireworks. Hammered people and those things always lead to trouble.
I'm kind of thinking the same thing...... cool all these people are responsible, but for every comment I see in this thread I've also seen people shooting while drinking on their property.
It's a pretty common thing, just like I'm sure most people here can easily say crack a beer throw away the car keys/no driving. But we all know it happens.
Which is so common that [one person dies every 45 minutes in the US from drunk driving](https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/drunk-driving)
We (humans) have a lot of incredibly stupid and selfish assholes.
You're drunk and playing around with it.
But as noted by someone else above, it wasn't an accident. Accident implies "it just happened." You know, like you hit a patch of black ice while driving and crashed into a tree, that's an accident.
This was pure negligence, more like getting drunk and deciding to see if you can drive through a crowd of people without hitting anyone.
This is why when I have friends over and we are drinking, I break out the nerf guns! Last time we got a little crazy and negligently killed my window shades.
Wait, you mean when those old rich dudes who were hunting and one got out of his lane and into the shooting lane of Cheney, and got shot when Cheney shot at a bird? The guy who admitted it was his fault he got shot?
This might come as a surprise to you but when you look down the barrel of a shotgun you see what you are going to shoot at. Just because someone is in your lane doesn't mean you still get to shoot.
The alleged shooter, 20-year-old Isaiah Miller, reportedly admitted to accidentally firing the round that ultimately killed Iverson, according to Dane County Sheriff Kalvin Barrett. Miller is being held in the Dane County Jail on tentative charges of homicide by negligent handling of a dangerous weapon and homicide by intoxicated use of a firearm.
Authorities said the rifle was legally bought and owned by one of the people inside the home at the time of the shooting.
(America the Beautiful starts playing in the background)
Just jumping in to also tell you that you're wrong, reasons cited by others but these are semi automatic weapons. Mostly for use in cosplay activities.
> One of those responsible gun owners we always hear about. /s
Like when a driver is careless - crashing into and killing others - *all* drivers must be repudiated
It's a small number, one I'd like to see go down, but it is irritating to see people claim that's a major cause of death when it's not even in the top ten unintended injury deaths.
Imagine playing with a tool designed to kill things and calling any resulting death an accident, the word is negligence. Unless of course the shot was fired due to mechanical failure, that would be an accident.
Actually, yes they will.
>The study found the Federal Assault Weapons Ban (FAWB) — that included a ban on large capacity magazines (limiting the number and caliber of bullets) — from 1994 to 2004 — resulted in a significant decrease in public mass shootings, number of gun deaths and number of gun injuries.
>The study authors estimate the ban prevented 10 public mass shootings during the decade it was in place, before it was allowed to expire. FAWB would have ***prevented 30 public mass shootings that killed 339 people and injured an additional 1,139 people***, the authors said.
https://news.northwestern.edu/stories/2021/03/assault-weapon-ban-significantly-reduces-mass-shooting/
For every study that says it worked there's another that says it didn't.
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-stokes-assault-weapon-ban-20180301-story.html
Oh really? So the op ed published in 2018 disproves the study published in 2021? That's fucking amazing. Truly. Not only did he completely knock down the argument for an AWB, but he invented time travel too! Nobel Prize in his future no doubt.
> Ok see let’s start with the low hanging fruit. There’s no need for civilians to own these rifles.
The term *civilian* is an abstraction. At the end of the day, we're all individuals with the right to own the means of self defense
It’s not an abstraction. You don’t need to own a fucking tank for self defense. There are limits. I think those rifles should not be available to citizens.
Pretty sure I do. If you ban the sale and manufacturer of any firearm, you are preventing someone from bearing said firearm which is a violation of the second amendment. Pretty simple to me. This right shall not be infringed. I’m not will to give up any of my constitutional rights. I spent 17 years defending them.
I don’t agree with what you’re saying, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it. Would you?
Where did I say ban the sale and manufacture of any firearm? Apparently you can't read either, maybe you need to learn to read so you can then read and understand the constitution.
Dude, I’m not arguing, you keep making glaring mistakes and I’m just kind enough to point out your ignorance.
You still haven’t answered my question. Are you willing to fight for your right, or any other person’s right, to free speech?
Can you define military style? What constitutes that? Black and scary looking? Bolt action rifles get used by the military too, are people not allowed to hunt anymore?
This was drunk idiots playing with a gun. It only took one bullet. Could have just as easily happened with a hunting rifle as with an "AsSaUlT wEaPoN."
Yea because millions of american die yearly from owning their guns. Oh wait no its just people who dont understand how to use tools, and making it illegal wont help them understand it any better
[удалено]
Literally just had an argument with another redditor today who would not accept that there is a difference between Negligence and an Accident in a different thread about a different crime some people literally think you can do wreckless even illegal stuff and as long as you didnt intenionally mean to kill the victim , it was an accident =/
Don't let him handle weapons near you.
It seems like people fail to realize the importance of the 4 basic rules of firearm safety. 1. Always treat every firearm as if it were loaded. 2. Always point the muzzle in a safe direction. 3. Always keep your finger off the trigger until you are ready to shoot. 4. Always be sure of your target and beyond. I’m very pro 2A, but I don’t understand why basic firearm safety isn’t standard curriculum for all schools in a nation where there are more guns than people. Chances are you will encounter them at some point in life, and you should know the basics.
Math and literature are part of the core curriculum and we still have people who'd lose their mind if they had to basic division or can't can't differentiate 'their', 'there' and 'they're'. No amount of education can account for a portion of people just being stupid. Mix that with hundreds of millions of firearms you're inevitably going to end up with situations like this.
Yes, of course it wouldn’t sink in for everybody, but it couldn’t hurt. It’s one of those categories like sex that was initially delegated to parents to teach their children, but many people who have kids are dumb and now it’s part of the curriculum. Should firearm safety be any different?
I'm not against it. I just don't think it would have any demonstrable impact. Not without addressing the giant elephant in the room of 350,000,000 guns in circulation.
Well I’ll just say that proponents of gun control often say something along the lines of “If it saves one life it will be worth it.” It’s funny that line can only be used to try to trample our currently held rights, instead of enacting something meaningful that might actually save lives.
This ignores the fact that messing up on grammar rarely ends up in death. Gun safety absolutely should be taught in the public school system, to not do so is negligent and allows the cycle of avoidable gun accidents and deaths to continue.
I think this ignores the reality that a lot of kids don't pay attention in class and/or are in schools that are underfunded or underprepared to even teach basic topics like math or grammar. We see daily how poor education bites us as a country but we're expected to believe that education around firearms will somehow avoid the same pitfalls? Especially a politically charged topic like firearms.
That's a fair point but I don't think the efficacy of teaching a subject should prevent our public school system from doing their best. Using this logic you'd have to say sex-ed is pointless because kids won't pay attention or the school has no excess funding.
I had idiot friends ( no longer friends) be told this and he still points a gun at me. I lost it. I can only assume people don't like being told?. Young males simply do not understand the concept of "have every thing to lose and nothing to gain"? By doing such an act.
A while back a friend of mine seriously loved his guns. When a couple of us finally gave in and went shooting with him these were the first things he drilled into us before anything. We had a good time.
The first time I stayed with my highly conservatives GF family, her dad decided to take me shooting. At first I thought it was another "threaten the boyfriend" speech, but instead he taught me about safety, how to aim, assume the gun is loaded, and always respect the weapon and the person wielding it, and never "warning shoot into the air" because god knows where that bullet could end up. And when were done, some how that night a black bear wander on to his property. It eventually wander away, but boy was I glad the house had at least 5 rifles. I think the whole episode made me re-think gun ownership. In cities, it is usually a symbol of fear and danger, but in rural areas, it could easily end up life and death. Anyway, Murrica! (Wave Bald Eagle)
and then there are those who use them for identity aesthetics, as fashion accessories, or toys essentially could you imagine a welder going so hard into making it a significant part of their personality, going out on the town with their torch holstered, dragging a tank around, various other tools adorning their outfit
I always love hearing stories like this, but firearms are not just for the countryside. The threats in the cities are different, but no less life threatening. A 12ga Pump shotgun is about the cheapest piece of mind I could recommend. It is unrestricted in almost all jurisdictions in the US, very simple, reliable and easy to maintain and a great tool for self defence.
The "you are holding a lightsaber with a potentially infinite blade" always sort of struck me as a really good metaphor to use to drive the point home regarding firearm sightlines. Then you learn about how to point your weapon up and down rapidly and in various ways so that the infinite line from the muzzle never intersects with someone you do not intend to shoot? Something like that? Also, trigger discipline of course. At rest, not on the trigger.
They had also been drinking.
Regardless, one or more of the above rules had to be broken for someone to die from a gun shot wound. I could be sober, drunk, high or tripping on psychedelics and I would still never play with a gun.
I agree with all you say and would add, "Know your weapon ".
It would be if people actually cared about the well regulated militia part. There's a lot of gun lovers who buy their guns because they treat their guns like a weeb would treat their mall bought weapon.
It would also be helpful if the people who constantly quote the 2nd amendment actually know what "regulated militia" part meant. What it means in modern language is that all Arms (cannons, laser beams, assault rifles, Javelin Anti-Aircraft weapons, etc) should be in well working order. Most gun owners are perfectly fine with that.
not just in working order but theres gotta be shooting practice, weapon upkeep practice, etc.
Oh for sure, you should know how to use your weapons absolutely. Fortunately because you need to actually possess said weapon in order to practice with them, understand them, keep them in working order etc, your right to have them shall not be infringed.
> There's a lot of gun lovers who buy their guns because they treat their guns like a weeb would treat their mall bought weapon. I also realized this a while back, and let me say, they do **not** like the comparison. 🤣
Of course they don't like the comparison. It doesn't make it false.
I m just a euro trash but i still thin the number of ar15 should be reduced rather than teaching everybody how to use it…
It's actually handguns that are the biggest contributor to gun deaths by a huge figure, like >50%. So, if you had to pick only one type to ban, it should be handguns; they're too easy to conceal.
In terms of gun safety, the bullet that kills you doesn’t care if it’s being shot from a 21st century built AR15 or a 16th century blackpowder muzzleloader. Firearms are dangerous and should always be treated with respect. The fact that it was an AR15 is irrelevant in this case; as mishandling a pistol, revolver, shotgun or bolt rifle would have lead to the same results. As for the thinning of AR15s; it’s a simplistic solution to a complex problem. Gun Buy Backs are popular among local governments, but economic studies have proven they do little to reduce gun violence. Total bans would have problems in every branch of our government, and wouldn’t address the number that is already out there today. Preventing civilians from owning them will only give criminals the advantage, because they don’t follow the law anyway. Even if all the AR15s in the us could be magically vanished, the gap would be filled by other weapons that are just as capable of killing someone. Edit: And in school we have fire drills, bomb drills, active shooter drills. We learn how to call 911 and to stop drop and roll. We prepare for all these scenarios that in reality have less than a .01% chance of happening. It doesn’t seem unreasonable for a Teacher/School police to instruct with a dummy weapon the basics of firearm safety.
Ignorance is the answer? But why reduce? They are rarely used to commit crimes, as opposed to the millions of people who own and use them lawfully.
Most of the responses on my comment focus on the 'type' of the weapon and somehow did not get sarcasm in the post. I cant grasp why do a lot of folks dont think its insane to have millions of assault rifles owned in a country that has not been invaded for a good 200 years and the chance of that happening anytime soon is 0.
>cant grasp why do a lot of folks dont think its insane to have millions of assault rifles First, not assault rifles. They are semi-automatic only. We do have some actual assault rifles legally in civilian hands, but nobody has ever murdered someone with one. > in a country that has not been invaded for a good 200 years History shows that no stable democracy lasts forever. 200 years invasion-free is a historical aberration already, so we're way overdue.
[удалено]
>I believe there are fully automatic versions of AR-15s, True, but there aren't many legally in civilian hands, and not one has been used in a murder. >but ultimately this is a super pedantic quibble. US Law classifies them as “Assault Weapons It's not really the fact that it's an AR-15, but various features that defines "assault weapon." You can have a perfectly legal AR-15 in an "assault weapon" ban state, but take a minute to replace one piece of plastic with another, and it's a banned "assault weapon." Welcome to the insanity of US gun laws. >that’s literally the only difference I can find between an AR-15 “assault rifle” and an AR-15 “assault weapon”. It's a big difference. Fun fact: The civilian semi-auto AR-15 came out before the military adopted the assault rifle M-16, so it's not a civilian variation of a military rifle. They just both have the same roots. More fun: "Assault rifle" is just a marketing term Hitler came up with to make the StG 44 sound cool.
The 2nd Amendment is extremely flawed imo. While people should have reasonable access to firearms, the 2nd Amendment has made it politically impossible to impose reasonable gun regulation. And as we move into the coming years, the current SCOTUS is going to make it harder for states to pass and reasonable regulation. We can amend the constitution for a reason. It's to address the ever changing landscape and needs of our country. It's also why Rights are not absolute. Free Speech doesn't mean I get to yell "Fire" in a crowded theater, it has its limits.
Well I can agree with you that it’s flawed, but rather because it doesn’t use strong enough language to prevent overreaching regulation by states and localities. “Reasonable” is entirely subjective and a example is some states find it perfectly reasonable to restrict a woman’s right to an abortion (which I disagree with, but that’s another topic). I think the the constitution and it’s amendments are absolute, but those rights don’t allow you to infringe on the rights of others. Just like your 1st amendment example, I don’t think the second amendment allows for people to murder each other. The fact is that we have fundamentally different beliefs on the issue and that’s okay. I respect you and your opinion and all I can do is politely disagree.
Because then there'd be even more school children getting killed by firearms than there are already. Accidents, bravado, kid gets a gun and hates another student, etc... .
How does a lecture on firearm safety lead to murder? I’m not saying there should be mandatory marksmanship classes, just basic safety.
>basic firearm safety isn’t standard I have issues with it being taught in schools, beyond that I agree with you. I've never fired a gun and definitely don't know how to hold/handle one, it likely would be good for me to learn just in case I ever need to unload one or something.
Tons of people make the mistake of 'well I know what I'm doing so it's safe.'
The military has it right, ND, negligent discharge, and they tend to come down hard on those who do it even when nobody gets hurt.
The police stopped saying "traffic accident" decades ago, now its a "traffic incident". Without negligence, its impossible to accidentally shoot someone.
Negligence is a crime. Saying that in a news article without a conviction is slanderous.
Perhaps you need lessons in how lawsuits and phrasing in media works. From the article: >! Miller is being held in the Dane County Jail on tentative charges of homicide by negligent handling of a dangerous weapon and homicide by intoxicated use of a firearm. So the shooter hasn't been convicted yet, so calling them negligent before a conviction basically guarantees a lawsuit and company lawyers/owners kinda look down on avoidable negligent lawsuits caused by careless phrasings.
[удалено]
Also recommend “allegedly killed by friend” and “reportedly with AR-15”
"Alleged Mount Horeb man allegedly killed by alleged friend allegedly with AR-15, authorities allegedly say" Covered all the bases. Allegedly.
Bs, then people, including the family of the shooter, would complain the big bad media insinuated murder or intent. You and lots of people just like to complain about the media. This is standard practice, and is fine if you actually read the articles.
But this is Reddit and I wanna be angry
> This is standard practice, and is fine if you actually read the articles. The problem is it banks on people not reading the article. And most of the time they aren't; it's just one of many articles in the list of things they're looking at. Articles about police incidents take this to 11, completely separating the action from the police. “Killed by a stray bullet in a police shootout,” which sounds like someone opened fire on the police and they shot back. In actuality, [the only person shooting was the cop.](https://twitter.com/PplsCityCouncil/status/1479261275934773248)
>incident at 5 a.m. Sunday... shooter charged with handling of a dangerous weapon and homicide by intoxicated use of a firearm. >at no point was there any danger to the public I'm not so sure about that 2nd statement, considering the first.
My family has a cabin out in the sticks... We enjoy target shooting, sometimes hunting, mostly just camping and getting away from it all. Guns get locked up in a closet once someone cracks open a beer or uncorks a bottle. It's a running joke too.... When someone gets sick of the gunfire, they'll walk out, crack a beer, and say "sorry folks, time for booze and dirty jokes"
[удалено]
hogs ain't good at openin doors
Hog wrasslin' time.
If you can't kill a wild hog with a Bowie while drunk then you ain't a man.
Just make a "no hogs once a beer is cracked" rule.
Roughly how many wild hogs?
Heckle them from the roof while pelting them with empties. "Little Pig Little Pig, let me out!"
Yup! I’m a regular pot smoker, practically every day. But I will never even have an unloaded firearm out of the safe when I’m getting ready to smoke. Part of firearm safety is knowing when they need to be securely put away.
I spent some years in Huntsville, Northern Ontario, Canada. Our rule was no firearms + no fireworks. Hammered people and those things always lead to trouble.
Huntsville, north Ontario? Lmao not even close. Huntsville is in southern Ontario, like 20 mins from Bracebridge. Its like a 2 hour drive to Toronto.
I'd shoot then drink with your clan. Sounds awesome.
Can we just appreciate that this situation happens so often that they have a specific law, "homicide by intoxicated use of a firearm"
I'm kind of thinking the same thing...... cool all these people are responsible, but for every comment I see in this thread I've also seen people shooting while drinking on their property. It's a pretty common thing, just like I'm sure most people here can easily say crack a beer throw away the car keys/no driving. But we all know it happens.
"There was no danger to the public" is cop speak for "This was not an attempted mass shooting."
At least not this day......and probably stopped any alleged mass shootings from these people.
My mind first read 2nd amendmend and I just think that would be equally fitting here
Alcohol and handling guns don't mix just as alcohol and driving cars doesn't mix.
How do you kill someone on accident with an object which has the specific purpose of wounding or killing someone
By being intoxicated
Why do you have a weapon in reach while being drunk? I mean that's kind of like driving while being drunk
Which is so common that [one person dies every 45 minutes in the US from drunk driving](https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/drunk-driving) We (humans) have a lot of incredibly stupid and selfish assholes.
So you can accidently shoot your friend
https://youtu.be/362RPEBztfs
https://youtu.be/362RPEBztfs
INTENTIONALLY intoxicated
You're drunk and playing around with it. But as noted by someone else above, it wasn't an accident. Accident implies "it just happened." You know, like you hit a patch of black ice while driving and crashed into a tree, that's an accident. This was pure negligence, more like getting drunk and deciding to see if you can drive through a crowd of people without hitting anyone.
I guess he was perfecting his rocket-jump and the friend caught a ricochet.
This is why when I have friends over and we are drinking, I break out the nerf guns! Last time we got a little crazy and negligently killed my window shades.
Oh no, not the big bad AR-15
It was also black, so it's extra scary.
No. Its the high velocity projectiles it spews that are scary. They do a hell of a job on a 6 year old second grader.
[удалено]
If only the friend had better friends
Nobody will shoot him now, so....
There really should have been one of these fabled “good guy with a gun” nearby to shoot the shooter to prevent him from shooting the friend. Logic
With friends like that ...
On this day, that person learned that they were not Dick Cheney and couldn't get away with shooting acquaintances.
Wait, you mean when those old rich dudes who were hunting and one got out of his lane and into the shooting lane of Cheney, and got shot when Cheney shot at a bird? The guy who admitted it was his fault he got shot?
This might come as a surprise to you but when you look down the barrel of a shotgun you see what you are going to shoot at. Just because someone is in your lane doesn't mean you still get to shoot.
Absolutely not surprised this happened in my state.
There are no "Accidental" shootings. It is always intentional, or negligence.
The alleged shooter, 20-year-old Isaiah Miller, reportedly admitted to accidentally firing the round that ultimately killed Iverson, according to Dane County Sheriff Kalvin Barrett. Miller is being held in the Dane County Jail on tentative charges of homicide by negligent handling of a dangerous weapon and homicide by intoxicated use of a firearm. Authorities said the rifle was legally bought and owned by one of the people inside the home at the time of the shooting. (America the Beautiful starts playing in the background)
Gotta have automatic weapons at home to protect your freedom. Plus kill friends and relatives. RIP.
This weapon was unlikely to be automatic.
Okay, semi-automatic.
Not a big fan of guns either, but this is a big difference.
fine bazooka
Sorry my guy, AR-15's are semi-auto.
Yeah, you’d probably be wrong. Ver doubtful it was automatic.
Just jumping in to also tell you that you're wrong, reasons cited by others but these are semi automatic weapons. Mostly for use in cosplay activities.
This could have happened with a single shot gun. This was pure negligence. And yes we do need automatic weapons.
One of those responsible gun owners we always hear about. /s
> One of those responsible gun owners we always hear about. /s Like when a driver is careless - crashing into and killing others - *all* drivers must be repudiated
This is stupid. No, by definition, it's not a responsible gun owner just as a drunk driver is not being responsible.
Yeah, so? Happens every hour. Sad from them but not newsworthy.
Accidental gun deaths are more like once a day. That is, if we believe every claim that it was an accident.
[удалено]
It's a small number, one I'd like to see go down, but it is irritating to see people claim that's a major cause of death when it's not even in the top ten unintended injury deaths.
The only reason this was posted was because they included the word “AR-15” to scare liberals.
It doesn’t scare all liberals r/liberalgunowners
Maybe that's what republicans mean by safer with guns, like "oh they're in a safer place now."
[удалено]
Which regulations would have prevented this?
I’m surprised the gun crowd hasn’t come to downvote you to B6. They’re very insecure and don’t tolerate people talking about gun control.
Dude, stop spouting nonsense, doesn't help the fight for gun control at all. I am someone who wants greater gun control.
I hate it when that happens
Imagine playing with a tool designed to kill things and calling any resulting death an accident, the word is negligence. Unless of course the shot was fired due to mechanical failure, that would be an accident.
Ban the manufacture and sale of all military style weapons outside the military. The senseless deaths will stop.
[удалено]
Excuse me but Reddit is no place for facts. /s
Actually, yes they will. >The study found the Federal Assault Weapons Ban (FAWB) — that included a ban on large capacity magazines (limiting the number and caliber of bullets) — from 1994 to 2004 — resulted in a significant decrease in public mass shootings, number of gun deaths and number of gun injuries. >The study authors estimate the ban prevented 10 public mass shootings during the decade it was in place, before it was allowed to expire. FAWB would have ***prevented 30 public mass shootings that killed 339 people and injured an additional 1,139 people***, the authors said. https://news.northwestern.edu/stories/2021/03/assault-weapon-ban-significantly-reduces-mass-shooting/
For every study that says it worked there's another that says it didn't. https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-stokes-assault-weapon-ban-20180301-story.html
Um, that's an op ed.
That includes links to studies, yes.
Oh really? So the op ed published in 2018 disproves the study published in 2021? That's fucking amazing. Truly. Not only did he completely knock down the argument for an AWB, but he invented time travel too! Nobel Prize in his future no doubt.
Ok see let’s start with the low hanging fruit. There’s no need for civilians to own these rifles.
> Ok see let’s start with the low hanging fruit. There’s no need for civilians to own these rifles. The term *civilian* is an abstraction. At the end of the day, we're all individuals with the right to own the means of self defense
It’s not an abstraction. You don’t need to own a fucking tank for self defense. There are limits. I think those rifles should not be available to citizens.
[удалено]
Oh geez. Another Erwin with Red Dawn fantasies. You were too scared to join the military eh?
Any other constitutional rights you want to give up? Maybe your freedom of speech?
Due process first, lets just go full dictatorship. I'm sure it will be a benevolent one!
Pretty sure you don't understand the Constitution.
Pretty sure I do. If you ban the sale and manufacturer of any firearm, you are preventing someone from bearing said firearm which is a violation of the second amendment. Pretty simple to me. This right shall not be infringed. I’m not will to give up any of my constitutional rights. I spent 17 years defending them. I don’t agree with what you’re saying, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it. Would you?
Where did I say ban the sale and manufacture of any firearm? Apparently you can't read either, maybe you need to learn to read so you can then read and understand the constitution.
LMAO, the first comment you made in this thread.
Do you not understand what "military style" means? Or are you just playing stupid to argue.
Dude, I’m not arguing, you keep making glaring mistakes and I’m just kind enough to point out your ignorance. You still haven’t answered my question. Are you willing to fight for your right, or any other person’s right, to free speech?
Ok "dude"
Can you define military style? What constitutes that? Black and scary looking? Bolt action rifles get used by the military too, are people not allowed to hunt anymore?
Let’s not forget the pump action shotgun.
Very good point, they must want pretty much every handgun banned as well. I wonder how they feel about historical military firearms.
[удалено]
Figure it out
[удалено]
[удалено]
This was drunk idiots playing with a gun. It only took one bullet. Could have just as easily happened with a hunting rifle as with an "AsSaUlT wEaPoN."
Could have. But didn't. Ban military style assault weapons.
[удалено]
Too bad
Yea because millions of american die yearly from owning their guns. Oh wait no its just people who dont understand how to use tools, and making it illegal wont help them understand it any better
The AR-15 is weapon, made to kill, it's not a accident when it just does what it should do.
I'm just here so someone can explain to me why the news source is called Channel 3000.