Darwin Award

[going_home]

http://www.khqa.com/news/news_story.aspx?id=112401

Sad the guy lost his wife because of stupidity.


:(

[michbich]

Only in america will you see something like that. Not the stupidity part, but the "gun will fix it" attitude part.

[grEnAlEins]

:eek:

Remember that Simpsons episode where home got the revolver... {facepalm}

[PyRo]

Finally, concrete proof that a gun is more likely to kill a family member than an intruder!

[chafnerjr]

Finally, concrete proof that a gun is more likely to kill a family member than an intruder!


Yet another gun's kill people attitude... Seriously guys your putting the blame on the gun and not the idiot husband who though it was safe and reasonable to use a pistol to punch a hole in the wall? Maybe it's because I'm from NH and have been brought up with a respect for guns and the ramifications of their mis-use.

I don't really want to fuel a huge gun control debate here but the guy should go to jail. Anyone who thinks that it was reasonable to do what he did is obviously a danger to himself and those around him NOT THE GUN. It's like saying that we should ban car's because an average of 1 person/second dies in a drunk driving accident. What about the drunk driver? Nope the car was the weapon so that's what we ban right? If cars weren't legal there would be no drunk driving accidents right?

OK: So I guess the flame war begins here... :cheers:

Should the original quote be "Finally, concrete proof that a family member is more likely to kill a family member than an intruder!"?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

[grEnAlEins]

we should ban car's because an average of 1 person/second dies in a drunk driving accident.
Also, spoons should be outlawed. They made Rosie O'Donnell fat, just imagine what they could do to you :ninja:

But then an interesting problem would occur. If spoons are outlawed, only outlaws would have spoons. Quite the conundrum :p

/silliness

I cannot speak for all guns or gun owners, but my guns have never done anything bad, nor have they killed anything. I use them to kill things somewhat often (birds, squirrels, especially raccoons and possums, and the occasional deer). I killed the animals, not my guns. My guns cannot in fact kill anything. They cannot really do anything, as the are inanimate objects.

So...


Finally, a single case that suggests that a stupid redneck is more likely to kill a family member than an intruder!
fixed

[KevinA]

That man should definatley got to jail, it was plain stupid to think that that was the better solution. I enjoy the word conundrum :clap:

[grEnAlEins]

I enjoy the word conundrum :clap:
:spit_take

I forgot to bring this up, but is jail/prison the best solution? As a criminal justice major (done with CJ classes, I am just finishing up my minors this semester) I would tend to think not. He is not violent, and did not purposefully do harm to anyone (that we know of). He is just to reckless/stupid for his own good, and the good of those around him. If you want to charge him criminally that is fine. Convict him of a felony, fine. But what good could prison do? He already has to live with the fact that his stupidity killed someone that he (probably) loved. It seems that by punishing him with heat in the winter, AC in the summer, cable/satellite TV, health-care, and three meals a day would pale in comparison to what the man already has to live with. Convict him of manslaughter, a felony, and then the issue of this incident repeating itself with this individual is gone, even without a day in the slammer. Is it really worth $40,000+ per year to imprison this guy? Is it worth paroling a convicted sex offender to make room? Costs of incarceration and prison/jail overcrowding are very real.

Just trying to make this interesting :cheers: Seriously, what are your thoughts?

I personally do not think that imprisoning this guy would be an effective use of public funds. I think we are better off keeping a dangerous or predatory criminal off of parole instead.

Also, before one of you knuckle-heads brings it up, a am not a dope smoking hippy liberal communist vegan, so lets not go there... :cool:

[KevinA]

You sir bring up a very good point, and now that you put it that way, it seems that the best way to handle it would not be jail time.


However, I have a cousin, who went down to Tijuana with some friends for a night of drinking. They stayed out all night, and then left the same night. The driver was sober, but she fell asleep at the wheel. She flew off the freeway, and killed my cousin's Fiance, one of his friends, and gave him a permanant disability. She survived, and was going to get charged with vehicular man slaughter, but later had all the charges dropped, because they felt that her living with what she had done was enough punishment. Do you think jail time was deserved? I certainly do, and not just because of the fact that it was my cousin in the car, but because she knowingly made a stupid descion, and killed two people. Same case with this genlteman. I still feel some sentence should be served. We somehow need to get the message across that stupidity won't fly. "I didn't know" stopped working when we were about five or six years old.

[grEnAlEins]

We somehow need to get the message across that stupidity won't fly. "I didn't know" stopped working when we were about five or six years old.
Absolutely true, I id not want him to get off. I think the stigma of being convicted, being on court supervision, and losing a great deal of his rights (voting, bearing arms, etc.) would be enough to punish him and ensure public safety. Plus, don't forget that he will likely be punishing himself too. He must be going through mental/emotional agony. A felony conviction would also (virtually) eliminate him from holding a position of public trust--which is nice, as he is obviously too stupid and/or reckless to be trusted. I feel that that is the best option.

As for your specific case, I do not think that the driver should have seen jail time. I am unsure as to whether she should have even been charged. Going with the sober driver was the best bet. Should she have been driving if she was that tired? No, of course not. Was she negligent in my opinion? Possibly, I really do not know enough about what happened, nor am I familiar with the applicable laws in the jurisdiction where this occurred. Even in this case, I think that she would punish herself more than the justice system ever could. I guess charging her and going for a conviction would be good on one hand, but look at it this way. The incident is bad enough as it is. Two lives were lost, two people will never be the same again, families/friends/communities were probably devastated. Would shipper her off to the slammer really help any of the effected parties? Is it worth (virtually) damning the driver to a menial life? If convicted, she may not be able to get into college, would not be likely to get a decent job, and would be living off your dollars via welfare/Medicaid. I really do not see that helping the situation any. Although I guess it might bring some degree of closure. I'd have to think about it a great deal more...

EDIT: As a secondary/tertiary victim, how much closure would the girl getting convicted/imprisoned bring to you/your family? I have never been in that situation, and therefore cannot speak as to how valuable a conviction/incarceration could be to a victim.

Also, I am sorry that that happened. It must have been a tough situation to cope with.

EDIT, PART DUEX: I am not saying that I am correct, or even remotely close. I am just saying these situations must be very carefully weighed.

[KevinA]

I see what your saying, and thank you for the condlences. Now say this person had no remorse, and cared nothing for the lives lost, the families ruined, and the lives that won't ever again be the same. Say that they only care that they survived, and now that they can go to college, get a decent job, and live an unmenial life. Is it still ok not to convict them on some charge? I'm not saying she had no remorse, nor that the gentleman didn't either, but whats to say that they won't make another bad choice, another "I thought everyone was in the house", or " I didn't think I was that tired"? Do you still feel the same way? If punishment is swift, and stinging, the individual is more than likely to think twice if anywhere remotely close to being in said situation again. Remember when you were a kid and burned your hand on the stove...

[grEnAlEins]

I see what your saying, and thank you for the condlences. Now say this person had no remorse, and cared nothing for the lives lost, the families ruined, and the lives that won't ever again be the same. Say that they only care that they survived, and now that they can go to college, get a decent job, and live an unmenial life. Is it still ok not to convict them on some charge? I'm not saying she had no remorse, nor that the gentleman didn't either, but whats to say that they won't make another bad choice, another "I thought everyone was in the house", or " I didn't think I was that tired"? Do you still feel the same way? If punishment is swift, and stinging, the individual is more than likely to think twice if anywhere remotely close to being in said situation again. Remember when you were a kid and burnt your hand on the stove...
I agree with you that some people do need a swift and severe punishment, but it depends solely on the individual. That is why coppers, prosecutors, and judges have the discretion that they do. We need tailor made justice in this country, I guess that is what I was getting at. I was expecting more of the "Book 'em, Dano!" type thing than came out in the thread. People are quiet--or not around anymore... I just think that jail/prison is far from a cure-all.

If a person shows no remorse, then they need a kick in the pants, figuratively speaking (literally in some cases ;) ).

And I :rofl:'d at the stove thing. That has never happened to me before, but we'll just say that every time I use a hatchet, I double check to make sure that the head is snuggly attached :argh: (really :cuss:ing hurt my hand)

[KevinA]

So we can both agree to agree, and disagree. :clap:

Never had any experiences with a hatchet, I did however forget to set my E-brake, and had my nice "new" Skyline roll into a curb, and destroy my kit up front. That really :cuss: ing hurt the pocket. :)

[chafnerjr]

Well, I have to make a concession here. I am certainly re thinking my "send him to jail" statement... as perhaps a felony conviction, not being allowed to hold public office or own a gun would be sufficient as stupid/deadly accidents will happen: but to return to the major point of this thread:

Have we all agreed that the gun is not to blame here? It is rather a stupid person with a gun which is to blame, as I think?

Great discussion here... not much to do with paintball, but it has certainly been a whole lot more civil than it would be on any other forum... what does that mean? AO rocks!!! :cheers:

P.S. Certainly very very sorry for your loss. :(

[jenarelJAM]

I vote 10,000 hours of community service ...

... To be completed in 1 year.

[grEnAlEins]

Have we all agreed that the gun is not to blame here? It is rather a stupid person with a gun which is to blame, as I think?

Great discussion here... not much to do with paintball, but it has certainly been a whole lot more civil than it would be on any other forum... what does that mean? AO rocks!!! :cheers:
1) I quote Curly Howard, "Coitenly"
2)I agree. I am actually shocked at the level of civility thus far. :cheers: to AO.


I vote 10,000 hours of community service ...

... To be completed in 1 year.
:spit_take :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[acropilot19]

I vote 10,000 hours of community service ...

... To be completed in 1 year.

I agree, The jails are already full of people who need to be there. Community service is a great option.

[KevinA]

Absoulutley agree stupid person with a gun, and not stupid gun. I didn't think that there was any other form of conversation on AO. This was the place I came when I felt "grown up" enough to leave PBN. :dance:

[grEnAlEins]

Just so everyone knows, a year is less that 8,800 hours. I think that this is what JAM was getting at ;)

[KevinA]

:rofl:

[ThePixelGuru]

Firearms ≠ Power Tools. Makes me wish there was an IQ test as part of getting a firearm permit, because people with judgement that bad shouldn't be trusted with a gun.

KevinA: Sorry for your loss, but it doesn't sound like it was solely her decision. If I decide to ride with a drunk, tired or otherwise impaired driver, that's my bad choice as well as the driver's. It's a shame that stuff like this happens, but no one was forced into a car with an impaired driver; they made that choice on their own.

[thejere]

So did we just this 200 year old issue in a swift, civil manner? Maybe, or else everyone is being polite.

I know a few responsible gun owners, a friend in high school shot a *mumble don't know much about hunting mumble* 16 point buck before he had his driver's license. I know someone so redneck they shot and ate a porcupine (they are really disgusting he claims). Both are responsible with their firearms, the tricky part of this issue how do we root out the irresponsible gun owners you discharge them recklessly, do not properly secure them allowing for easy theft and entry to the black market, or the people who decide there best move in life is to shoot a school? There in lies the rub, I believe the second amendment allows for the ownership of firearms and am cynical enough to imagine a day when the populous may need guns to address a corrupt government but there are people who should not have the ability to massacre 30 people in a mater hours. Is the best approach to just work towards a society where people understand responsibility, are able to identify a mental unstable individual, and don't commit violent crimes?

Alright, I am getting of my high horse, the political primaries are :cuss: with my head

[ThePixelGuru]

Is the best approach to just work towards a society where people understand responsibility, are able to identify a mental unstable individual, and don't commit violent crimes?
:rofl: I think you're setting your sights a little high, there. Sure would be nice, though.

It is true, however, that we're focusing on the wrong part of the issue. If it's illegal to shoot people, why do we bother making more guns illegal every time it happens? Clearly the laws in place aren't stopping it, so why would we think banning more guns is the answer? If someone is going to shoot people, smart money says he doesn't care if the gun he does it with is legal or not.

[drg]

Guns don't kill people. People who say guns don't kill people kill people.

[LegumeOfTerror]

my guns never killed anyone...

[drg]

BTW this isn't a Darwin Award candidate, as the idiot was not removed from the gene pool.

[SkinnyHare]

BTW this isn't a Darwin Award candidate, as the idiot was not removed from the gene pool.

true, but it will prevent him from procreating, at least for the time being.







(i am so going to hell for posting that)

[Hilltop Customs]

true, but it will prevent him from procreating, at least for the time being.







(i am so going to hell for posting that)
Yea right, his sister is already pregnant






(I have to say, if anyone is going to hell for the previous comments, it is me)

[chafnerjr]

Heh, here goes the thread. In any event, great discussion all :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:

In all my years on a variety of forums and other such online posting services I have never seen such a polarizing issue handled in such a civilized manner! If only AO ran the 9th circut eh? In any event Cheers :cheers:

[Pneumagger]

my guns never killed anyone...
They must be defective.

Haven't been over here in awhile. 'sup?