News from Nashville - what do you think?

[Olinb]

Yesterday in a Nashville walmart some idiot improperly carrying his firearm in his waistband sans holster shot himself in the leg as he was checking out.
Apparently he felt his gun slipping and tried to grab it. (groan) It turns out he had a valid carry permit so no charges were filed.

As hard as we have fought for the right to carry and shall issue permits, I wonder just how much "ammunition" (pun intended)
these types of incidents will give to opponents of various 2nd amendment issues.

In order to nip this in the bud, do you think it would be a good idea to legislate some mild common sense. E.G. requiring a trigger
covering holster for on-body carry.

I share most peoples hesitation to legislate certain types of behavior, especially as related to firearms. But if we are going to issue
permits to stupid people we may need to insure there are less incidents of this type rather than more.

Link Removed

 

[Olinb]

In addition to this case, we have the following item that occurred in Arizona:

"the 18-year-old man was embracing his 24-year-old girlfriend at a home on Tuesday morning when the gun he was wearing in his waistband went off".

Unfortunately the young lady was killed.

First, the 18 year old legally should not have had a handgun. Right? And of course it SHOULD NOT have been in a waistband unholstered!!!!

Link Removed

As my original post asks, do we try and force people to stop shoving firearms in their waistband before someone shoots a child and gets the antis all worked up or not?

Thanks all....Olin

 

[Timothy Bryant]

In addition to this case, we have the following item that occurred in Arizona:

"the 18-year-old man was embracing his 24-year-old girlfriend at a home on Tuesday morning when the gun he was wearing in his waistband went off".

Unfortunately the young lady was killed.

First, the 18 year old legally should not have had a handgun. Right? And of course it SHOULD NOT have been in a waistband unholstered!!!!

Link Removed

As my original post asks, do we try and force people to stop shoving firearms in their waistband before someone shoots a child and gets the antis all worked up or not?

Thanks all....Olin

It's my understanding that you actually can legally own a handgun at 18 years old in most states but you are merely prohibited from purchasing from a federal licensed dealer. This means you could legally obtain a handgun at 18 through a private transfer.

 

[MartyB]

Stupid is as stupid does. With freedom comes responsibility, we don't need more laws, just make people accountable for there own stupidity.

 

[ezkl2230]

It's my understanding that you actually can legally own a handgun at 18 years old in most states but you are merely prohibited from purchasing from a federal licensed dealer. This means you could legally obtain a handgun at 18 through a private transfer.

Federal law - 21 to purchase a handgun regardless of the source (ffl or private).

 

[bofh]

As a TN resident, I can say that there is no need for any new laws here. The TN carry class already covers the need for a proper holster.

 

[mojoman]

Sorry but you can't fix "stupid".

 

[jtg452]

Think of it this way.

Not only will the guy that shot himself in the leg rethink carrying a gun without using a holster but think of all those that learn from his mistake and start using a holster, too. Maybe someone will read about what happened to him and decide not to follow his example. Being a bad example is still being an example. Being stupid should hurt. You can't legislate common sense and you can't make anything 'fool proof'. When you think you can do so, the fools take it as a challenge and come up with a new way to screw it up.

 

[sdprof]

You cannot legislate away stupidity (you can only send it to Congress).

Such incidents keep happening, no matter how much publicity they get - remember Plaxico? Perhaps that's what we should label such incidents, "He did a Plaxico." Kind of like Glock Leg.

 

[NavyLCDR]

First, the 18 year old legally should not have had a handgun. Right?

Wrong.

Federal law - 21 to purchase a handgun regardless of the source (ffl or private).

Would you care to post a citation to the source of your misinformation? I would be very interested in seeing it. Here is the Federal law [18 USC 922(x)] which states that the age limit for private handgun sales is 18, not 21:

18 USC § 922 - Unlawful acts | Title 18 - Crimes and Criminal Procedure | U.S. Code | LII / Legal Information Institute

(x) (1) It shall be unlawful for a person to sell, deliver, or otherwise transfer to a person who the transferor knows or has reasonable cause to believe is a juvenile—

(A) a handgun; or

(B) ammunition that is suitable for use only in a handgun.

(2) It shall be unlawful for any person who is a juvenile to knowingly possess—

(A) a handgun; or

(B) ammunition that is suitable for use only in a handgun.
...

(5) For purposes of this subsection, the term “juvenile” means a person who is less than 18 years of age.

 

[wolf_fire]

Yesterday in a Nashville walmart some idiot improperly carrying his firearm in his waistband sans holster shot himself in the leg as he was checking out.
Apparently he felt his gun slipping and tried to grab it. (groan) It turns out he had a valid carry permit so no charges were filed.

As hard as we have fought for the right to carry and shall issue permits, I wonder just how much "ammunition" (pun intended)
these types of incidents will give to opponents of various 2nd amendment issues.

In order to nip this in the bud, do you think it would be a good idea to legislate some mild common sense. E.G. requiring a trigger
covering holster for on-body carry.

I share most peoples hesitation to legislate certain types of behavior, especially as related to firearms. But if we are going to issue
permits to stupid people we may need to insure there are less incidents of this type rather than more.

Link Removed

First, we shouldn't be issuing any sort of privilege card to exercise a right. Second, karma is a beotch. When you act stupid, stupid things happen to you.

 

[wolf_fire]

In addition to this case, we have the following item that occurred in Arizona:

"the 18-year-old man was embracing his 24-year-old girlfriend at a home on Tuesday morning when the gun he was wearing in his waistband went off".

Unfortunately the young lady was killed.

First, the 18 year old legally should not have had a handgun. Right? And of course it SHOULD NOT have been in a waistband unholstered!!!!

Link Removed

As my original post asks, do we try and force people to stop shoving firearms in their waistband before someone shoots a child and gets the antis all worked up or not?

Thanks all....Olin

We don't try to force people to act in a certain way EVER. If you violate my rights then yes. But if a moron wants to put his piece next to his piece, hey more power to him. He's going to have to live with the fact of knowing he killed his girlfriend for the rest of his life. He will also go to prison for either murder or manslaughter due to his negligence. Regulating how we carry? Seriously? What about "shall not be infringed" do you not get?

 

[telpinaro]

Hey, maybe Darwinism will take over and we'll get a smarter population.

I was only able to watch about half of it... internet's slow out here and only half would load.

 

[the dark]

No law can fix stupid...but that is why some want to take away tools. Still our freedoms cannot be defined by the least capable among us and stupid always finds a way.

 

[Olinb]

Believe me I am a committed 2nd amendment supporter as well as an NRA Life Member. I do not like much the idea of new legislation regarding firearms. However, that said I do worry that the anti 2nd amendment coalition will use such incidents in their efforts. They may be used one day in the future to limit our freedom to carry. With just a few seats in the house and senate switching that could make a real difference in the ability to impose more and severe restrictions. And with some of the states going too far in certain policies the pendulum will swing the other way sooner than later and leave us ripe for new state restrictions.

So, it just seems like it "may" be a good idea to impose a minor insignificant piece of good common sense on the more ignorant among us to help limit the "ammunition" of the other side.

I certainly do not worry or care what happens to one so dumb as to do this. But, just imagine if someone at a checkout counter were to accidentally shoot and kill a cute, newborn, baby. And imagine the media getting hold of disturbing video and looping it on cable news. If all of these things were to happen we might find ourselves in real jeopardy of having some of our hard won battles undone. All because of the stupidest among us.

Olin

 

[NavyLCDR]

So, it just seems like it "may" be a good idea to impose a minor insignificant piece of good common sense on the more ignorant among us to help limit the "ammunition" of the other side.

Olin

Isn't it enough that it is already illegal to discharge a firearm in public? Isn't it already enough that it is illegal to injure someone negligently, including with a firearm? You have to remember that "impose a minor insignificant piece of good common sense on the more ignorant among us" is not only going to affect the more ignorant. It is going to affect the rest of the 95% of the population that don't have the problem you are trying to solve.

For example - tens of thousands of people every year are victims of drunk drivers. So we should make it illegal for anyone to possess a vehicle in a parking lot of anywhere that serves alcohol, right? Or make it illegal to possess car keys in any place that serves alcohol, right? Minor common sense imposed upon the more ignorant, right?

Why can't it be enough to make just the stupid ACTION illegal rather than regulate the tool.

 

[topgun47]

Yesterday in a Nashville walmart some idiot improperly carrying his firearm in his waistband sans holster shot himself in the leg as he was checking out.
Apparently he felt his gun slipping and tried to grab it. (groan) It turns out he had a valid carry permit so no charges were filed.

As hard as we have fought for the right to carry and shall issue permits, I wonder just how much "ammunition" (pun intended)
these types of incidents will give to opponents of various 2nd amendment issues.

In order to nip this in the bud, do you think it would be a good idea to legislate some mild common sense. E.G. requiring a trigger
covering holster for on-body carry.

I share most peoples hesitation to legislate certain types of behavior, especially as related to firearms. But if we are going to issue
permits to stupid people we may need to insure there are less incidents of this type rather than more.

Link Removed

Fortunately, Mother Nature has a way of weeding these people out of the gene pool. Usually, they will also earn a Darwin Award in the process.

 

[vernsimpson]

You cannot legislate away stupidity (you can only send it to Congress).

Such incidents keep happening, no matter how much publicity they get - remember Plaxico? Perhaps that's what we should label such incidents, "He did a Plaxico." Kind of like Glock Leg.

You have answered my question about ALL our "wonderful and caring" elected morons!!!!!

 

[NavyLCDR]

Federal law - 21 to purchase a handgun regardless of the source (ffl or private).

I notice no reply has been made to where this misinformation came from...

 

[s0nspark]

With such excellent and affordable minimalist holsters like the Raven Concealment Vanguard/Vanguard 2 why... WHY... do people still think it is okay to carry without a holster??

So stupid...