Mastodawn

MicroWave Oct 3, 2023

Man accidentally shot child while officiating wedding near Lincoln, deputy says

https://lemmy.world/post/6216309

Man accidentally shot child while officiating wedding near Lincoln, deputy says - Lemmy.world

A Texas man accidentally shot a child while officiating a wedding in Lancaster County on Saturday, the sheriff’s office says. Chief Deputy Ben Houchin said deputies were sent to a wedding at Hillside Events near Denton on a report of a gunshot wound. Deputies learned that 62-year-old Michael Gardner, the wedding’s officiant, fired a gun to get everyone’s attention. “He was going to fire in the air, and as he did that, it slipped and went off,” Houchin said. The gun was loaded with a blank that Gardner made with gunpowder and glue.

breadsmasher Oct 3, 2023

“buh guns not the the problem!1!”

They truly aren’t, this is straight up lack of brain cells that’s the issue here

Creamatine Oct 3, 2023

Picture if he didn’t have a gun how this situation would have went.

Hubi Oct 3, 2023

He could have shot the child with a bow and arrow :(

jackoneill Oct 3, 2023

Someone who makes their own blank and whips it out at a wedding near a child simply to get folks attention is so fucking dumb he’d find a way to hurt himself with his dinner fork

The issue isn’t the tool, it’s the retard wielding it

WarmSoda Oct 3, 2023

It can be both

Nudding Oct 3, 2023

Do you think he would have killed a child accidentally with a dinner fork?

jackoneill Oct 3, 2023

The child didn’t die in this case, but yeah I think someone this dumb could easily have some similar damage with something more innocuous

That’s not really the point though…. Guy like this should never have passed certification process to get a gun if we had proper controls in place. Something that I always argue for but because I’m arguing for good testing and controls and limits rather than outright banning and forcible confiscation all the privileged folks that have never had to defend their families come out of the woodwork to shit in my face, every time

Nudding Oct 3, 2023

If you keep getting shit on, maybe stop acting like a toilet. Idk man every other country in the world figured it out, the US isn’t as special as you’re all taught it is. I’m all about sensible gun controls as well.

jackoneill Oct 3, 2023

Copy pasted for I think the seventh time now

Yeah 100% if you want to own a class of gun (say a revolver) you should have to take a class on that specific type of gun and pass a written and practical test, and renew this regularly. Want a different type of gun? Better go take that class and pass that test.

Rabid anti gun folks are just as bad as the rabid pro gun folks, but the regular ass folks in the middle all seem to agree that strong controls on who can purchase the dangerous tool is the most reasonable solution

But this is lemmy, basically Reddit but more intense. I fully expect the folks here to be rabid anti gun without any rationale arguments for that stance

BruceTwarzen Oct 3, 2023

Someone who is living in a allegedly first world country who needs to carry a gun around is the issue.

jackoneill Oct 3, 2023

Hey if you’ll pay to move my family to a safe neighborhood give you my gun

Creamatine Oct 3, 2023

So he probably shouldn’t have a gun then…

jackoneill Oct 3, 2023

This asshole? Definitely not

SheeEttin Oct 3, 2023

He probably would have used firecrackers or something. At least then it would have probably only have been his own fingers.

The Pantser Oct 3, 2023

So we need to control who gets guns then, right? Some kind of control?

Omega Oct 3, 2023

You’d think the “don’t ban guns” people would be all for registration and background checks. After all, guns aren’t the problem, people are.

Yeather Oct 3, 2023

I’m all for background checks, even mandatory safety classes, it’s the random banning of features that gets me. Banning firearms because they have a pistol grip or more than 10 round magazines makes no sense. The problem is most people who think like this get lumped in with the crazies.

PapaStevesy Oct 3, 2023

If they actually out-and-out banned anything, I’m sure it was for monetary reasons, not for health and safety. But idk, it seems like a small price to pay, you still get to feel like John Wayne whenever you want. Sorry you can’t really fuck up that paper target like you want, but don’t worry, it’s dead.

Yeather Oct 3, 2023

The second amendment wasn’t made for plinking, hunting, or home defense. It was made to allow the common citizen to defend their rights by force against the government. In which case you should have every feature you can afford available to you.

Nudding Oct 3, 2023

No. It wasn’t. I’ve seen you say this more than once in this thread. The right to bear arms was intended to defend the US against a foreign military, as the founding fathers did not want a standing army. Obviously that was retarded, but they were a bunch of rich slave owning assholes, so maybe you need a new set of guiding principles.

The Pantser Oct 3, 2023

The right was given when guns were muskets. I have no issue following the forefathers intended right. You may have all the muskets you want but if it’s not needed for hunting or defending your home from an intruder then you shouldn’t have it. Nobody needs a hundred round clip or full auto for an intruder.

RedKrieg Oct 3, 2023

I hate to argue against you because I agree that nobody needs a hundred round clip or full auto for an intruder, but the forefathers’ intended right wasn’t “people should have muskets”. It was much closer to “the people should be armed in case of tyrrany by their government”. The intention was for people to defend their other rights by force, making it more difficult for the government (or an invading force) to take over (this was immediately post-revolution mind you and much of the bill of rights was in direct response to british soldiers’ activities). Of course they also thought we’d be reforming the government and drafting new constitutions as the culture changed, but of course that never happened.

I am not a historian, just a pedant.

ThunderingJerboa Oct 3, 2023

I mean I get you are playing Devil's advocate but its clear we have also moved far those ideals. You are right the founding fathers didn't just say "people should have muskets" but we also have to think in the context of the times, private companies were also able to be armed with naval cannons but in the modern day I don't think Pepsi, Coke, Johnson and Johnson, or Nestle have an battalion of M1 Abrams and F22 raptors and the such. Like we are told we have the right to bear arms and in those days would be able to purchase the same arms that the military uses but I don't think I would want a world where every idiot can somehow afford and operate nukes, apache helicopters, etc. Hell while full automatic weapons aren't "technically" illegal in the US they are heavily regulated and expensive to possess and we the common people are boxed out owning such devices. So its clear we are "compromising" on the vision already quite a bit. Hell I would hope even some of the most die hard conservatives would think a private citizen owning the right such devices would be a bit much as well.

Whiskey_iicarus Oct 3, 2023

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-2/

The founding father’s used capitalization to put emphasis on certain terms. It seems to me that they wanted the well regulated Militia, made up of the people, to keep and bear Arms to protect the State and by extension themselves from a tyrannical federal government. If they intended the people to bear arms, why did they add the terms Militia, State, and Arms with emphasis but the people without it?

The only other place in the Constitution that speaks about what constitutes a militia is the fifth amendment, and it specifically only protects a Militia when it is in service to the government, which again is capitalized because they wanted emphasis that it was a proper militia and not a make shift one.

SheeEttin Oct 4, 2023

I agree with you, but I wouldn’t read that much into their writing. The English language was even more lawless in their day.

In fact, the German-style capitalization of nouns may have just been a stylistic choice by the calligrapher:

Modern printings of the Constitution that follow the engrossed copy of the original can be identified by the many stylistic features in which Jacob Shallus’s calligraphy departs from the style of the printers of 1787. The most conspicuous difference is Shallus’s capitalization of almost all the nouns, in contrast to the very limited presence of capital letters in the work of the printers. The capital letters now help to give quotations from the Constitution, when taken from modern prints that follow the engrossed copy, an air of authenticity.

www.archives.gov/…/const-errors.html

Errors in the Constitution—Typographical and Congressional

Fall 2012, Vol. 44, No. 2 By Henry Bain © 2012 by Henry Bain Americans love their Constitution, even with its faults. And it has surely had some faults during its more than two centuries—some big faults that have been remedied, like slavery and Prohibition, and numerous smaller ones that are still with us, like the rule that has prevented the recent governors of California and Michigan from offering themselves as presidential candidates.

National Archives

Whiskey_iicarus Oct 4, 2023

What exactly do modern reprints have to do with why the founding fathers capitalize certain words?

SheeEttin Oct 4, 2023

No idea, I didn’t say anything about modern reprints.

Whiskey_iicarus Oct 5, 2023

But your quote was specifically about modern reprints and nothing about why they original writers capitalized specific words.

SheeEttin Oct 5, 2023

Read it again, they didn’t. It was a stylistic choice by the calligrapher.

havokdj Oct 3, 2023

Cool, so we’ll be taking those away from law enforcement and the military too then, right?

Echo Dot Oct 3, 2023

Yep. That’s what would happen except it won’t happen because you won’t do it

Yeather Oct 3, 2023

The Second Amendment was never about hunting or home defense. It was about arming yourself against the government and to defend your other rights by force. In which case you should have every feature you can afford. Also, about muskets, the founding fathers understood the march of progress would eventually create bigger and more powerful smalls arms, they even wanted the en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalthoff_repeater for their army to stay ahead. To think the second amendment only covers muskets is moronic.

Kalthoff repeater - Wikipedia

Haywire Oct 3, 2023

How do you feel about the forced reset trigger?

Yeather Oct 3, 2023

Sounds fun

assassin_aragorn Oct 4, 2023

For what it’s worth, people like you are necessary if we’re going to have a future without gun violence while maintaining gun ownership. My understanding is that banning specific guns really doesn’t do anything.

Most people stop at that, but I appreciate that you go on to say what will work instead. Mandatory safety classes and comprehensive background checks that include psychological evaluation are necessary. And if someone rabid comes into a safety class and says they want a gun to make a point or uses a racial slur in the process, they should be denied ownership and that should be recorded in a manner that background checks will see it. They’d be free to retake the class, but until they reform their behavior and show responsibility, they won’t get a gun.

I reckon that’s probably agreeable to you? I think it would go a long way. The other half of the puzzle is strengthening and enforcing the laws we currently have on the books. Police need to be held accountable if they refuse to enforce a gun law, including prosecution as an accessory to murder if warranted.

There’s so many times after a shooting when information comes out that they were a troubled individual who showed some violent tendencies. That should have been caught in advance.

Yeather Oct 5, 2023

At this point it’s been proven psych evals don’t really work, firearms classes and background checks should be plenty to stop people with issues and allow us I not have our rights infringed upon.

assassin_aragorn Oct 5, 2023

Works for me. We should just have an option for a medical provider to say they don’t believe the person will be safe with a gun – this goes for not only homicidal tendencies, but people at risk of suicide.

wolf6152 Oct 3, 2023

Your ideas are incredibly radical. We first must imagine the mindset of dead 200 year old wealthy men before we do such a thing.

jackoneill Oct 3, 2023

Yeah 100% if you want to own a class of gun (say a revolver) you should have to take a class on that specific type of gun and pass a written and practical test, and renew this regularly. Want a different type of gun? Better go take that class and pass that test.

Rabid anti gun folks are just as bad as the rabid pro gun folks, but the regular ass folks in the middle all seem to agree that strong controls on who can purchase the dangerous tool is the most reasonable solution

But this is lemmy, basically Reddit but more intense. I fully expect the folks here to be rabid anti gun without any rationale arguments for that stance

Heresy_generator Oct 3, 2023

Rabid anti gun folks are just as bad as the rabid pro gun folks

Ammosexuals are so wild. You can't actually believe this. You can't actually believe that the "rabid anti gun folks are just as bad" as someone like Kyle Riddenhouse. The rabid pro gun folks regularly fucking shoot people. There is no equivalence to be found here.

NotAnonymousAtAll Oct 3, 2023

Your comment seems needlessly inflammatory, almost aggressive. I did not vote on it at all, but I would not be surprised if the downvotes you received were mostly because of that and not due to disagreement with your points.

jackoneill Oct 3, 2023

Yeah my bad. I’m tired of every single time a fun in mentioned seeing “just get rid of all of them it’s so easy” then when I reply with reasonable solutions, get shit on. Just tired of it. Shouldn’t have bothered to comment on this thread in the first place

Copy pasted for like the 6th time now:

Yeah 100% if you want to own a class of gun (say a revolver) you should have to take a class on that specific type of gun and pass a written and practical test, and renew this regularly. Want a different type of gun? Better go take that class and pass that test.

Rabid anti gun folks are just as bad as the rabid pro gun folks, but the regular ass folks in the middle all seem to agree that strong controls on who can purchase the dangerous tool is the most reasonable solution

But this is lemmy, basically Reddit but more intense. I fully expect the folks here to be rabid anti gun without any rationale arguments for that stance

AWistfulNihilist Oct 3, 2023

You are a walking strawman factory 🤣

jackoneill Oct 3, 2023

Cool. I don’t care. I just want to keep my family safe. If that offends you I couldn’t give a fuck less

AWistfulNihilist Oct 3, 2023

Yeah, I’m really feeling that lack of general empathy! No surprises here my man.

jackoneill Oct 3, 2023

Yeah nothing but irritation for you folks in this thread

AWistfulNihilist Oct 3, 2023

I’m personally calling you out for visibly having trouble with empathy in this thread, it’s just you and me, don’t have to diffuse it with a we like you and I aren’t people talking.

I mean you might have an opinion so stupid that you just copy pasted 26 times in the thread, so plenty of other people have noticed how weird it seems and commented on it. But like, that’s a you problem yanno?

jackoneill Oct 3, 2023

I pasted that because my inbox kept filling up with obnoxious comments that all needed a similar reply, and I don’t care enough to personalize the message a dozen times for folks that aren’t giving r the same courtesy.

Fuck me for coming here expecting to have an actual conversation. In the beginning you could actually chat on lemmy, it was nice. This thread is just like the toxic Reddit I left.

Last time I try to have a conversation here.

AWistfulNihilist Oct 3, 2023

Oh, you think you’re having a conversation by copy and pasting the same shit that makes you seem weird, yeah, that seems like everyone else is the problem!!

Nudding Oct 3, 2023

Last time I try to have a conversation here.

At least something constructive came out of this.

lightnsfw Oct 3, 2023

Or send anyone over the age of 16 who you wouldn’t trust to be safe with a gun to reeducation camp until they get their shit together.

DTFpanda Oct 3, 2023

Americans have an estimated 120 guns per 100 citizens, almost double that of the country with the second highest amount of firearms per capita.

Tell me again how that isn’t a problem.

jackoneill Oct 3, 2023

It’s a tool. Blame the idiots that don’t use it correctly, not the tool itself

There are 908 motor vehicles per 1000 citizens in the US (source

In 2020, there were 5,250,837 vehicle collisions in America.

Tell me again how cars aren’t the problem.

Oh wait, that’s right, they are just a tool. The problem is people.

List of countries by vehicles per capita - Wikipedia

PRUSSIA_x86 Oct 3, 2023

Exactly, we should treating guns like cars. They should require revocable licenses, registration, training, and significant financial investment.

jackoneill Oct 3, 2023

I’ve been arguing this for years

tburkhol Oct 3, 2023

Not to mention liability insurance. Your gun harms/kills someone? You’ve got insurance to pay for it. Your gun stolen and used to harm someone? Prove it was securely stored or it goes on your insurance.

N4CHEM Oct 3, 2023

No, no, you’re right there. Cars are a problem too. But that’s a different topic, we’re talking guns now.

jackoneill Oct 3, 2023

Ah ok so any tool that can possibly harm you must be banned

Just go live in a padded cell and leave the rest of us alone

N4CHEM Oct 3, 2023

Who talked about banning cars? Don’t put words in my mouth and don’t be so rude.

Cars are a source of different problems: pollution, traffic congestion, lack of space in cities due to parking needs… and accidents too, yes. All of these issues can be solved with his public transport, and 95% car rides can be replaced by public transport (unless I’m transporting the furniture I just bought back to my house).

There’s no need to go live in a padded cell (although if you wish to, be my guest), just shop whining online and look for solutions instead.

jackoneill Oct 3, 2023

Read the post again, you got everything backwards lol

Nudding Oct 3, 2023

How do countries with less access to those tools even function? Maybe the tool isn’t as necessary as you’ve been led to believe. Maybe the companies that make that tool spend billions to make you feel like you really need that tool and God also says you should probably have one too.

You sound like all the other retarded gun sucking Americans. Just admit that you don’t care that there’s a gun problem.