Skip to main content

View Diary: GunFAIL VI (282 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Since no one here has made the argument... (6+ / 0-)

    ...that "drunken gun play is protected by the second amendment," then it is simply a falsehood to attribute that argument to anyone here.

    No matter how many times you repeat it, it is still not true.

    Yes, I often dress as a pirate. Your point?

    by theatre goon on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 06:21:20 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Go ahead and support your claim of falsehood (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      coquiero, DefendOurConstitution
      then it is simply a falsehood to attribute that argument to anyone here.
      •  All right. (5+ / 0-)

        You have, several times now in this thread, attributed to people the stance "drunken gun play is protected by the second amendment."

        As a direct example, you ask this question:

        Why do you think drunken gun play is protected by the second amendment?
        You quite clearly ask someone why they take a particular stance.

        No one has taken that stance.

        Therefore, your attributing to them that stance is false.

        How is this difficult...?

        Yes, I often dress as a pirate. Your point?

        by theatre goon on Sat Feb 23, 2013 at 04:09:37 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Those were obviously rhetorical (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          coquiero, DefendOurConstitution

          questions, intentionally absurd questions, to make a point about only a few of the absurd defenses of "accidental"  shootings.

          They were deployed in the context of this specific discussion, pointing to absurd ideas that have been asserted (here or elsewhere) over and over again.

          This particular example, was clearly in response to the poster who asserted, absurdly, that NOTHING can be done to reduce "accidental" shootings.

          •  Now I see. (4+ / 0-)

            When called on falsehoods, you try to characterize them as "rhetorical," even though, when read in context, they were clearly attributing to people specific stances.

            That explains quite a bit, actually.

            Rush Limbaugh uses that dodge quite a bit, as well.  

            I'll try to recall, in the future, that this is a tactic that you use as well, and react accordingly.

            You have a lovely day.

            Yes, I often dress as a pirate. Your point?

            by theatre goon on Sat Feb 23, 2013 at 06:02:02 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  Since you're inclined to see accusations (3+ / 0-)

          and make accusations, let me clarify my view for you.

          I do not believe any responsible gun owner casually mixes intoxication with firearms. But thousands of gun owners DO mix alcohol with firearms.

          It seems plain as day, that thousands of gun owners, who enjoy default RKBA DO handle guns, or play with guns under the influence of drugs or alcohol, and sometimes in the presence of children - with relative IMPUNITY, even after injuring or killing people.

          What's tragic about our acceptance of the "gun went off" BS, is our inability, as a civil society, to acknowledge that many of these injuries and deaths result from alcohol impaired judgment.

          Passing measures that support the separation of lawful RKBA from lawful or benign intoxication should be easy.

          •  Those measures already exist (7+ / 0-)

            in most places. If you check, you will find that many states already prohibit carrying a gun, hunting, or shooting while intoxicated. In my state, a person with ANY detectable blood alcohol level is not allowed to carry or use a weapon, period. If you do, you lose your rights.

            Ask anyone who works in an ER how many accidents--car accidents, falls from ladders, hurt themselves with a power tool, you name it--involve alcohol. It's a huge number. Guns are no different. And before you ask, no, those people are not responsible gun owners, just as someone who drinks and drives is not a responsible car owner.

            "A lie is not the other side of a story; it's just a lie."

            by happy camper on Sat Feb 23, 2013 at 09:54:11 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Good then - official sources would be a start (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              DefendOurConstitution

              What is "most"?

              No officer, I didn't mean to shoot my girl friend with multiple rounds. Yes, officer I did put the ammo and the magazine in the oven. How was I supposed to know she would use the oven for baking? - ST. PETERSBURG, FL, 2/18/13

              by LilithGardener on Sat Feb 23, 2013 at 10:58:00 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  You can start here: (4+ / 0-)

                www.handgunlaw.us

                Your hate-mail will be graded.

                by PavePusher on Sat Feb 23, 2013 at 11:44:08 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  Only twenty states (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                LilithGardener, happy camper

                Which surprises me, because I would have hoped all fifty had a law prohibiting use of a firearm while under the influence. That is a gun restriction I would gladly support.

                Anyway, here is a link to the article "A Review of Legislation Restricting the Intersection of Firearms and Alcohol in the U.S.," Public Health Rep. 2010 Sep-Oct; 125(5): 674–679.

                These two charts summarize the laws and which states have them:
                http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/...
                http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/...

                •  Actually 26 states (from the text) (0+ / 0-)

                  I noticed figure 1 is limited to "acute" intoxication, and that figure 3 covers "habitual" alcohol use.

                  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/...

                  It's interesting that we've been studying alcohol related injuries for an entire century and know a lot about reducing deaths from drunk driving, yet have done little research on alcohol use and shootings (see bolded text below).

                  Results

                  We found three types of laws in 26 states that restrict firearm use by intoxicated people: sales or transfers are restricted in six states, carrying of concealed weapons is restricted in four states, and possession or discharge of a firearm while intoxicated is restricted in 20 states.

                  Injury is the leading cause of alcohol-related death in the United States, and alcohol is the leading risk factor for injury.1,2 Owing to the considerable presence of alcohol in injury events of all types, alcohol's relationship to injury has been the subject of modern scientific investigation for an entire century.3–7 Roughly one-quarter of the alcohol-related injury deaths in the U.S. each year are due to motor vehicle crashes.8 As a result, the great majority of the research dedicated to understanding alcohol's relationship to injury has focused on drunk driving. This work has effectively decreased the number of traffic fatalities involving alcohol,9 and the prevention of drinking and driving has been hailed as one of the top 10 U.S. public health achievements of the 20th century by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).10,11 A nearly equal one-fifth of alcohol-related injury deaths are the result of firearm injuries;8 however, little research has focused on alcohol use and shootings.

                  No officer, I didn't mean to shoot my girl friend with multiple rounds. Yes, officer I did put the ammo and the magazine in the oven. How was I supposed to know she would use the oven for baking? - ST. PETERSBURG, FL, 2/18/13

                  by LilithGardener on Sun Feb 24, 2013 at 03:25:14 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Search methods and laws cited (2008) (0+ / 0-)

                  Even though the study was published in 2010, the study was done back in 2008; probably some of these laws have changed since then.

                  One dilemma I find compelling is a clear need for national (or regional) standards and consistent enforcement, yet how diverse the regulations are depending on the state.

                  The relative utility of fire arm use and risks of firearm injury for those living on 500 hundred acres in Wyoming or Montana is quite different than those living in 700 square feet in Brooklyn, which is quite different from someone living up in the Adirondacks or on the Canadian border.

                  METHODS

                  We used Westlaw and LexisNexis to conduct on online search of the criminal codes in existence in all 50 U.S. states and DC as of January 1, 2008. We performed searches using various combinations of the key words alcohol, intoxication, firearm, gun, liquor(s), alcoholic, and bar using methods previously described.23 We also reviewed legal criminal codes of states pertaining to firearms to capture any codes not resulting from the key word search. The search was performed by one of the authors (GP), who has training in advanced legal research and extensive knowledge and experience using these databases. We then compared results with simultaneously performed searches performed by trained legal librarians and Westlaw representatives to ensure that the search strategy was appropriate and that all relevant databases were cross-checked. Any discrepancies were resolved through discussion to obtain consensus.

                  What resulted was a database of laws identified in the U.S., arrayed as one law per row. Each law was classified according to the primary intent of the legislation. The assigned categories were (1) prohibition of possession of a loaded firearm in a place where intoxicating liquor is sold for consumption on premises; (2) restriction of sale, transfer, possession, or discharge of a firearm to/by an intoxicated person; and (3) restriction of firearm ownership based on habitual alcohol use.

                  The laws cited in the paper:

                  24. 18 U.S.C. § 922(d)(3); (g)(3).
                  25. 21 U.S.C. § 802(6).
                  26. See generally Ala Code § 13A-11-50 (2004).
                  27. See generally Alaska Stat § 11.61.190 et seq (2009); 18.65.700 et seq (2009).
                  28. See generally Ariz Stat. § 13-905 et seq (2009); § 13-3101 (2010).
                  29. See generally Ark Stat Ann § 5-73-101 et seq (2010); 5-73-201 et seq (2010). 30. See generally California Penal Code § 12000 et seq (2010); Cal WeIf & Inst Code § 8100 et seq (2009).
                  31. See generally Col Revised Stat § 12-26.1-101 (2002); 18-12-101 et seq (2010); 24-33.5-424 (2008).
                  32. See generally Conn Gen Stat § 29-27 (2010) et seq; 53-202 et seq (2010); 53a-211 et seq (2010).
                  33. See generally Del Code § 11-1441 (2007) et seq; 24-901 et seq (2010).
                  34. See generally Fla Stat § 790.001 et seq (2010).
                  35. See generally Ga Code Ann § 16-11-101.1 et seq (2009); 16-11-171 (2009); 16-11-172 (2005); 35-3-34 (2006).
                  36. See generally Haw Rev Stat § 134-1 et seq (2009).
                  37. See generally Idaho Code § 18-310 (2010); 18-3302 et seq (2006).
                  38. See generally Ill Rev Stat 430:65/0.01 et seq (2006); 720:5/24-1 et seq (2009).
                  39. See generally Ind Code Ann § 35- et seq (2010).
                  40. See generally Iowa Code § 702.7 (2008); 724.1 et seq (2010).
                  41. See generally Kansas Stat Ann § 21-4201 et seq (2009).
                  42. See generally Ky Rev Stat Ann § 237.060 et seq (2009); 431.064 (2007); 527.010 et seq (1994).
                  43. See generally La Rev Stat Ann § 14:35.3, 91, 95 et seq (2009); 40:1379.3, 1751 et seq (2008).
                  44. See generally Me Rev Stat Ann title 15 § 393 (2007).
                  45. See generally Md Code Crim Law § 4 (2010); Public Safety § = (2010).
                  46. See generally Mass Gen Laws 140 § 121 et seq (2004).
                  47. See generally Mich Comp Laws Ann 3.111 et seq (2004); § 28.421 et seq (2008); 750.222 et seq (2001).
                  48. See generally Minn Stat § 609.165 (2003); 609.66 et seq (2005); 624.71 et seq (1969).
                  49. See generally Miss Code Ann 45-9-101 (2009); 97-37-1 et seq (2007).
                  50. See generally Mo Rev Stat § 407.500, 505 (2008); 571.010 et seq (2008).
                  51. See generally Mont Code Ann § 45-8-301 et seq (2009); 46-18-801 (1997).
                  52. See generally Neb Rev Stat § 28-1201 et seq (2009); 69-2401 et seq (2009).
                  53. See generally Nev Rev Stat § 202.253 et seq (2005).
                  54. See generally NH Rev Stat Ann § 159-D et seq (1999).
                  55. See generally NJ Rev Stat § 2C:39-1 et seq (2002); 2C:58-1 et seq (1979).
                  56. See generally NM Stat Ann § et seq (2010).
                  57. See generally NY Crim Proc Law § 265.00 (2004) and 400.00; Gen Bus Law Art 39-DD.
                  58. See generally NC Gen Stat § 14-269.7 et seq (1994); 14-402 et seq (2009).
                  59. See generally ND Cent Code § 62.1-01 et seq (2004).
                  60. See generally Ohio Rev Code § 2923.11 et seq (2008).
                  61. See generally Okla Stat 21 § 1271.1 et seq (19944).
                  62. See generally Or Rev Stat § 166.170 et seq (2009).
                  63. See generally Pa Cons Stat 18§ 6101 et seq (1995).
                  64. See generally RI Gen Laws § 8-8.1-3 (2005); 11-47-1 et seq (2009).
                  65. See generally SC Code Ann § 16-23-10 et seq (2004); 23-31-10 et seq (1971).
                  66. See generally SD Codified Laws § 23-7 et seq (2009).
                  67. See generally Tenn Code Ann § 39-17-1301 et seq (2009).
                  68. See generally Tex Penal Code § 30.06; 42.12; 46.01 et seq (2003).
                  68. See generally Utah Code Ann § 53-5-702 et seq (2005); 76-10-501 et seq (2001).
                  70. See generally Vt Stat Ann § 13-4003 et seq (2009).
                  71. See generally Va Code Ann § 18.2-279 et seq (2005); 54.1-4201.1 (2005).
                  72. See generally Wash Rev Code § 9.41.010 et seq (2009).
                  73. See generally W Va Code § et seq (2002).
                  74. See generally Wis Stat § 175.30 et seq (2009); 175.35 (2009); 941.20 et seq (2008).
                  75. See generally Wyo Stat § 6-8-101 et seq (1983).
                  76. District of Columbia v Heller, 554 U.S._128 S. Ct. 2783 (2008).

                  No officer, I didn't mean to shoot my girl friend with multiple rounds. Yes, officer I did put the ammo and the magazine in the oven. How was I supposed to know she would use the oven for baking? - ST. PETERSBURG, FL, 2/18/13

                  by LilithGardener on Sun Feb 24, 2013 at 03:49:32 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I would have (3+ / 0-)

                    thought more states would have laws addressing this. A number of states have liberalized their concealed carry laws since 2008, and I would suspect that at least some of those states included restrictions on alcohol use while carrying in their revised laws.

                    It should be illegal everywhere to use/carry a gun while intoxicated.  

                    "A lie is not the other side of a story; it's just a lie."

                    by happy camper on Sun Feb 24, 2013 at 07:04:56 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  There are citations in the list with 2010 dates (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      happy camper

                      but nothing since then. It looks like they updated their list before publication, but much has changed since 2010.

                      Does the RKBA group here keep any kind of central diary with links to laws, organized by state, that can be updated as laws change around the country?

                      No officer, I didn't mean to shoot my girl friend with multiple rounds. Yes, officer I did put the ammo and the magazine in the oven. How was I supposed to know she would use the oven for baking? - ST. PETERSBURG, FL, 2/18/13

                      by LilithGardener on Sun Feb 24, 2013 at 07:58:27 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  No (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        LilithGardener

                        but that's not a bad idea. I know some members have extensive lists of links to pertinent information. I'll bring it up.

                        "A lie is not the other side of a story; it's just a lie."

                        by happy camper on Sun Feb 24, 2013 at 09:56:40 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Efficient way to sort out posters (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          happy camper

                          who want to consider facts, without any digest.

                          If someone is having a snit, proposing legal theories that don't exist, or an absence of restrictions that do exist, any one can direct that person to the actual current law for their state, and invite them to come back with any questions.

                          That will sort out those who are sincere from others in a hurry.

                          There are plenty of people who want to understand but don't know where to start, or find the whole system so loaded with jargon they give up before they get very far.

                          And maybe you guys can take turns hosting some guided tutorials, such as - "On Monday evening RKBA member so-and-so will host a discussion of current firearms law in the Pacific NorthWest and cover some of the unique or challenging issues in each state, and help noobs understand a little about why local regs are what they are, and how they interface with Federal Law.

                          No officer, I didn't mean to shoot my girl friend with multiple rounds. Yes, officer I did put the ammo and the magazine in the oven. How was I supposed to know she would use the oven for baking? - ST. PETERSBURG, FL, 2/18/13

                          by LilithGardener on Sun Feb 24, 2013 at 11:04:01 AM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                      •  You can start here: (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        LilithGardener

                        www.handgunlaw.us

                        It also links directly to the state Statutes.

                        Your hate-mail will be graded.

                        by PavePusher on Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 06:58:58 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  That's only hand guns right? (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          PavePusher

                          I did look briefly and saw that under Federal law, if I understand correctly, retired LEOs are prohibited from carrying while under the influence or intoxicated.

                          "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

                          by LilithGardener on Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 08:14:39 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                  •  Federal law (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    LilithGardener, theatre goon

                    allows a retired LEO to carry a concealed weapon, regardless of state law, but specifically prohibits it while intoxicated. I have yet to find anything addressing this wrt civilians.

                    Odd...

                    http://www.handgunlaw.us/...

                    Search the doc for "alcohol".

                    "A lie is not the other side of a story; it's just a lie."

                    by happy camper on Sun Feb 24, 2013 at 07:17:10 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Yeah, I only see it twice, but it also prohibits (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      happy camper

                      under the influence, not just intoxication.

                      No officer, I didn't mean to shoot my girl friend with multiple rounds. Yes, officer I did put the ammo and the magazine in the oven. How was I supposed to know she would use the oven for baking? - ST. PETERSBURG, FL, 2/18/13

                      by LilithGardener on Sun Feb 24, 2013 at 08:08:40 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

      •  O.K. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        theatre goon

        http://www.dailykos.com/...

        You were asked, directly, to cite to evidence for your claim.

        You've pulled backflips to avoid answering.

        In short, you are now serially mendacious.

        I'd express my hope that you have a nice day, but frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn.

        Your hate-mail will be graded.

        by PavePusher on Sat Feb 23, 2013 at 11:47:30 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  O.K. - you got me (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          DefendOurConstitution

          I have zero recollection of your expressed hope (since  withdrawn) that I have a nice day.

          I'd express my hope that you have a nice day, but frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn.
          I missed that. Honest. But in practical terms, does it even matter that much? I mean, really, since you've changed your hope, already. And you. obviously. don't. care.

          Please substantiate your claim that I ever accused you of using a rhetorical FU, by ordering me to have a nice day.

          This:

          You have a lovely day.
          was an obviously rhetorical farewell greeting from TG, to me. So I replied with some obvious snark and sarcasm. Admittedly amateurish of me, I know.

          Did you mistake my reply to TG as somehow personally meant for you? How DID that happen?

          No officer, I didn't mean to shoot my girl friend with multiple rounds. Yes, officer I did put the ammo and the magazine in the oven. How was I supposed to know she would use the oven for baking? - ST. PETERSBURG, FL, 2/18/13

          by LilithGardener on Sat Feb 23, 2013 at 01:14:02 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Your reading comprehension... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            theatre goon

            has some serious failure points.

            Your hate-mail will be graded.

            by PavePusher on Sat Feb 23, 2013 at 07:51:24 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  lanx satura (0+ / 0-)
              The expression lanx satura literally means "a full dish of various kinds of fruits."[4]
              I'm sure you know what a non-sequitor is, how loose associations and absurd assertions can be used as rhetorical devices. You do recognize satire, intentional irony and sarcasm, don't you?

              Pave, I know you like to dish it out, but can you tell when you are being served a rhetorical fruit salad?

              https://en.wikipedia.org/...

              Satire is a genre of literature, and sometimes graphic and performing arts, in which vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, and society itself, into improvement.[1] Although satire is usually meant to be funny, its greater purpose is often constructive social criticism, using wit as a weapon.

              A common feature of satire is strong irony or sarcasm—"in satire, irony is militant"[2]—but parody, burlesque, exaggeration,[3] juxtaposition, comparison, analogy, and double entendre are all frequently used in satirical speech and writing.
              This "militant" irony or sarcasm often professes to approve of (or at least accept as natural) the very things the satirist wishes to attack.

              Satire is nowadays found in many artistic forms of expression, including literature, plays, commentary, and media such as lyrics.

              The word satire comes from the Latin word satur and the subsequent phrase lanx satura. Satur meant "full," but the juxtaposition with lanx shifted the meaning to "miscellany or medley": the expression lanx satura literally means "a full dish of various kinds of fruits."[4]

              No officer, I didn't mean to shoot my girl friend with multiple rounds. Yes, officer I did put the ammo and the magazine in the oven. How was I supposed to know she would use the oven for baking? - ST. PETERSBURG, FL, 2/18/13

              by LilithGardener on Sun Feb 24, 2013 at 05:02:31 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  I hope I've clearly (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          DefendOurConstitution

          introduced myself.

          If you bother reading this please consider this fair notice:

          If you want to challenge something I write your first shot better be your best shot, because I will attempt to explain my prior remarks only once again, and ONLY IF I agree with you that there was 1) cause for confusion AND 2) believe your request is offered with sincerity.

          If you persist to follow me around with bullshit questions - which you have done before - I just might mock the shit out of you. Or Not.

          Because I support the right to keep and bear arms.

          And both of mine have a funny bone.

          No officer, I didn't mean to shoot my girl friend with multiple rounds. Yes, officer I did put the ammo and the magazine in the oven. How was I supposed to know she would use the oven for baking? - ST. PETERSBURG, FL, 2/18/13

          by LilithGardener on Sat Feb 23, 2013 at 01:21:23 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  No, no one has claimed those specific words (5+ / 0-)

      but the overused terms

      "responsible gun owner",
      "law abiding gun owner",
      "legal possession of firearms",
      "accidental shooting",
      "accidental discharge" are all used by some to shield a realistic look at contributing factors that increase the risk of injury and death to many gun owners and everyone in their proximity, especially children, who typically can not resist their own curiosity in the presence of a gun.

      You know what I meant.

      Guns don't kill people, and bullets don't kill people, but when poor judgment, or poor impulse control, combine with the open end of a gun that is pointed at a human, then serious injury is much more likely than when those other factors are absent.

      All these people with default RKBA rights and no licensing requirement, and proven failure to show responsible storage and handling frequently face no sanctions, no charges, because drunken hunting and drunken gun play are not rare, but rather are accepted by many as ordinary in the same way drunk driving used to be accepted as ordinary.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site