PLYMOUTH, Minn. (WCCO) — Plymouth Police say a man is in the hospital after he accidentally shot himself inside a Rainbow Foods Sunday afternoon.Plymouth is a quiet suburb of Minneapolis. There is something ... unstable about a person who thinks they need a gun to go to Rainbow on a Sunday afternoon.
The shooting occurred inside the bathroom of the grocery store, which is located at 4190 Vinewood Ln. N. at 4:26 p.m.
The man suffered a non-life threatening injury to his lower leg.
Police are not sure how the gun discharged. There is no indication that this is anything other than an accident.
No one else was injured.
Police say the man has a conceal and carry permit.
Though I have to admit that there is another possibility: maybe he uses his pistol to get off instead of Playboy centerfolds and couldn't wait till he got home. That would make this incident about mental health instead of guns.
Guns in the hands of incompetent people are a public health menace and should be treated as such. One man's right to play vigilante ends when he presents a danger to the public. This guy's permit should be revoked and he should made the object of ridicule by competent gun owners everywhere.
Instead of minimizing and excusing such incidents the NRA should get on the stick and demand higher standards for gun ownership.
12 comments:
So when are you going to complain about how many people die in car accidents? And 5 gallon buckets?
Regarding car accidents, do you support the tough penalties on drinking and driving? Should people be allowed to drink as much as they want and drive?
Are all car accidents caused by drunk driving? Was alcohol involved in this accidental discharge?
Do you support the tough penalties on drinking and driving? Should people be allowed to drink as much as they want and drive?
My argument is not about drunk driving. (That's just a Voice In Your Head™.) People die in car accidents even when no drinking or other mind altering substances are involved. And young children die in 5 gallon buckets.
Where are the complaints about those deadly devices?
Those incidents happen FAR more often than gun related incidents like the one Nikto referenced. If you're actually concerned about safety, why aren't you going after even more dangerous items?
Do you support the tough penalties on drinking and driving? Should people be allowed to drink as much as they want and drive?
Two simple yes or no questions.
Earth to Marxy, the comment "My argument is not about drunk driving" invalidates your questions and repeating them only reinforces and illustrates that you do not pay attention to what is said.
Aww, leave him alone, gd. He's just obeying the Voices In His Head. I'm sure the nice young men in the white coats will be along presently.
[/sarc]
Mark, that has absolutely nothing to do with my argument. Therefore, I do not have to respond to it. Furthermore, I WILL NOT. So stop with the Voices In Your Head straw man (Fallacy: unsound, erroneous, misleading, deceptive, FALSE) and deal with MY ACTUAL ARGUMENT for a change.
Do you support the tough penalties on drinking and driving? Should people be allowed to drink as much as they want and drive?
Chew that bone little doggy, chew real hard, and growl too.
Having a discussion about deaths from automobile accidents without talking about drinking and driving laws is essentially the same as saying lets talk about gun violence and not talk about mental health. 40 percent of all auto deaths are from drunk drivers. A person dies every 39 minutes from a drunk driver with 112 million people a year operating a motor vehicle while impaired.
So, not only do feel the need to ask weasel questions which frame the argument in such a way the you always "win" but you avoid answers that have the same result. If you don't want to answer, that's fine but there's no point in discussing deaths from automobiles if you don't want to examine the laws around them.
Nikto's example had nothing to do with "mental health issues". And 99.9999% of gun owners don't have "mental health issues" either. You're trying to add oranges to a comparison of apples.
By now, it's clear. The answer to my original questions is, "we're not." Which means that safety isn't the issue.
Post a Comment