Shoot In A Random Direction. Hit A Child. No Charges.

[Ginger Tea]

Shooting up is just as dangerous, those bullets will come back down and at a speed that is sufficient enough to still harm someone 'miles' away.
Unless that was debunked on Myth Busters, which I don't have a TV to watch.
it's just that the odds of actually people being around are slimmer.

You want reckless discharges in that respect, any celebration in the middle east seems to be punctuated with rifle fire in the air, those bullets don't just dissipate at a certain height.

[Duelist925]

Shooting up is just as dangerous, those bullets will come back down and at a speed that is sufficient enough to still harm someone 'miles' away.
Unless that was debunked on Myth Busters, which I don't have a TV to watch.
it's just that the odds of actually people being around are slimmer.

You want reckless discharges in that respect, any celebration in the middle east seems to be punctuated with rifle fire in the air, those bullets don't just dissipate at a certain height.

Mythbusters proved that a bullet, if fired straight into the air, will not have sufficient terminal velocity coming back (since it'll have spent all the energy imparted by the gun on the journey up, that doesn't factor in) to fatally wound someone.

They further pointed out, however, that the vast majority of shots fired into the air are fired at an angle--which is often sufficient enough for them to retain enough energy imparted from the gun to remain lethal.

[kamn]

Shooting up is just as dangerous, those bullets will come back down and at a speed that is sufficient enough to still harm someone 'miles' away.
Unless that was debunked on Myth Busters, which I don't have a TV to watch.
it's just that the odds of actually people being around are slimmer.

You want reckless discharges in that respect, any celebration in the middle east seems to be punctuated with rifle fire in the air, those bullets don't just dissipate at a certain height.

IIRC they said it could be done, but hard (plausible). Also, there have been interviews on the very same episode, where 2 people were found dead due to a bullet from the top.

[lordlundar]

And this right here is why we can't have rational discussions about gun rights / gun control anywhere, anytime - people on both sides of the aisle inevitably jump out to extremist name-calling, declaring the other side to be monsters and demons devoid of any possible rational thought.

Forget it. I'm out.

Oh , I'm sorry. What part about that was not true? A parent bought a lethal weapon for a child, handed it to him and said "have fun!" Then he goes and shoots a family member and everyone is saying it was an unavoidable accident.

Meanwhile you have the likes of the NRA who actively lobby against any bill that might possibly limit such a scenario from happening, including ones that require common sense education for people not to be stupid while handling a weapon and apparently I'm the bad guy.

Yes, I'm being blunt about it. I'm sick of people getting shot because they're too stupid to even have a gun let alone use it properly but they don't have to get trained because "guns r freedum!"

And before anyone starts calling me an anti-gun crusader are something similar, I'm not. I'm pro education. Then you get the likes of HYHYBT arguing that basic rules are a waste of time because of a failure to apply some basic common sense and of course I'm going to call out the stupidity of it.

As a final note, I never said that HYHYBT backed the NRA, but his arguments mirror theirs in why basic weapon education requirements should not be mandatory. Maybe when the 2000th "accidental" shooting in a year happens people will wake up but I doubt it.

[Gravekeeper]

They further pointed out, however, that the vast majority of shots fired into the air are fired at an angle--which is often sufficient enough for them to retain enough energy imparted from the gun to remain lethal.

Yes, I know I've seen more than a fair share of news stories where someone got picked off by a bullet coming back down that someone had shot into the air a few blocks away.

[s_stabeler]

IIRC they said it could be done, but hard (plausible). Also, there have been interviews on the very same episode, where 2 people were found dead due to a bullet from the top.

IIRC, they determined that if a) there was no wind and b) it was at EXACTLY 90 degrees to the ground, it would not follow a ballistic trajectvory, and therefore be non-lethal. if it's even slightly off of straight up, or there is any wind at all, thne the bullet would follow a ballistic trajectory, and be lethal. in short, don't do it.

[Gravekeeper]

Christ, yet another one yesterday.

At least Florida miraculously has a law covering this to charge the parents.

[Ginger Tea]

In the footnotes of that article was a case where a girl was shot on a school bus during a makeshift 'show and tell' and the father of the deceased killed himself soon after.
Not sure if it is related or just the timing, but the fact it was the victims father who committed suicide and not the father who's gun was taken ... not sure where I'm going with this so I'll stop there.

[Jaden]

Then you get the likes of HYHYBT arguing that basic rules are a waste of time because of a failure to apply some basic common sense and of course I'm going to call out the stupidity of it.

That's not even remotely what HYHYBT was saying. I already clarified what he was saying. Take a deep breath, go back and read his post, and read my post if you have to. That's almost the exact opposite of what he was saying. Raving about only works if you're picking the right targets. Otherwise you just look crazy. And I don't support the low-blow insults, either. Even though I personally am in favor of more gun control, I don't think any entire group of people should be called incestuous hillbillies or whatever you called them, I don't even feel like checking. Something more vilifying than necessary.

[HYHYBT]

So now you're saying that the basic fundamental rules of owning and operating a gun, each and every one of them a rudimentary application of common sense, is bullshit and should not be taught?

That's not anywhere near what I said nor what I meant. Condensed (which I admit to being bad at) my point is that the only way all unintentional shootings become negligent is by reading those rules more strictly and literally than intended. Why this has been twisted into my not understanding the intent of the rules is beyond me.

Know what? you have now officially convinced me that anyone backing the NRA (who won't even recognize a discussion regarding mandatory education for gun registration) is an inbred hillbilly hick. Congratulations.

How did I manage to do that, given the fact that I neither support the NRA nor have taken the positions you claim I have?

Then you get the likes of HYHYBT arguing that basic rules are a waste of time because of a failure to apply some basic common sense and of course I'm going to call out the stupidity of it.

Again, NOT AT ALL what I was arguing. Not even CLOSE to what I was arguing. Far enough that I'm sorely tempted to ask if you really even read my posts, rather than seeing half a sentence you didn't like and running with it.

(And thank you, Jaden. All but the part about only reading the rules briefly is exactly right; I'm long familiar with them, or at least the principles involved, including the long explanations I was accused of not reading, though I couldn't rattle them off as a list.)

[Panacea]

Not all guns have them, but setting that aside, how is that a response to "How is a gun useful for self-defense if you keep it unloaded?" A loaded gun with the safety on is not an unloaded gun.

True, but if you're going to keep it loaded (which is not safe and should not be done), at least engage the safety if you have one.

All of my weapons have safeties. None are kept loaded. I figure if I don't have time to load the weapon, then I don't have time to properly use it to defend myself anyway. I'd rather not give an assailant or home invader a weapon to use against me.

I use other tools to protect myself in the home. I have solid doors with deadbolts that are always locked, even when I'm home. I practice situational awareness. There is good lighting around the house at night. I have a security system which I engage at night; an alarm will go off if someone breaks in while I'm sleeping.

I live in a good neighborhood that borders a bad one. However, I feel very safe in my home.

Ladies and gentlemen, this is what the NRA is protecting. The right for little Billy-Bob Hickton to get a gun, shoot his family then say "I didn't know what would happen." You must be so proud of yourselves.

Can we not paint people with broad brushes here. I think the hillbilly comment is uncalled for. Many gun owners are well educated people. Many irresponsible gun owners are not country hicks, but urban dwellers with a sense of entitlement.

Name calling is destructive, and turns the discussion away from what's possible into a game of one upsmanship.

[HYHYBT]

True, but if you're going to keep it loaded (which is not safe and should not be done), at least engage the safety if you have one.

All of my weapons have safeties. None are kept loaded. I figure if I don't have time to load the weapon, then I don't have time to properly use it to defend myself anyway. I'd rather not give an assailant or home invader a weapon to use against me.

I use other tools to protect myself in the home. I have solid doors with deadbolts that are always locked, even when I'm home. I practice situational awareness. There is good lighting around the house at night. I have a security system which I engage at night; an alarm will go off if someone breaks in while I'm sleeping.

I live in a good neighborhood that borders a bad one. However, I feel very safe in my home.

We seem to be talking about different things here: you're speaking specifically about at home, and I'm speaking specifically about *carrying* a gun.

[Panacea]

We seem to be talking about different things here: you're speaking specifically about at home, and I'm speaking specifically about *carrying* a gun.

Fair enough. But if I'm going to be carrying a firearm in public loaded, then it will be a gun with a safety, and the safety will be on.

[Gravekeeper]

Annnd again.

For fuck sakes, people. Put the god damn thing somewhere safe.

[Andara Bledin]

Good gravy. This man comes from a line of law enforcement professionals (his father was a detective), and he's found to have "multiple unsecured weapons" "unsecured and in close proximity to ammunition and accessible to Senatore's own children." If he really is guilty, he deserves to be hit with the fines and likely upcoming civil case.

And then the article goes on to mention the same old knee-jerk feel-good and possibly-unconstitutional measures that hit the legislature every damned time, and continue to be nothing but a waste of resources. Apparently, nobody has learned a damn thing, yet.