man smokes pot, accidentally shoots, kills friend

Post Reply New Topic

I used to shoot things while smoking weed all the time. I don't see the problem. I'm pritty sure it was the person. Not once has it entered my mind. Ooh crap, I fogot to not point it at you, and not pull the trigger, because I'm high. WTF? Completely sober idiots produce accidental gun discharge.

Lack of knowledge of firearms but that's no surprise. Firearms are designed to put holes in designated things at a distance. There is no sorcery or inherent evil involved.


Regardless of the intent, there are still more automotive related deaths and injuries than firearm related.


It depends on the skill (or luck) of the shooter.


It's not so much about using cars as weapons as the probability of of vehicle related death/injury as opposed to the same with firearms.

No, firearms cannot just be done away with or rounded up.

The car comparison is apples and oranges.
Comparing devices sole desinged to kill with a mode of transportation which happens to be dangerous & risky is disingenuous, and nothing but an attempt to deflect attention from the fact that there's a machine in this country designed & built only to kill things for each human being living here.
A death machine for each of us.

I said nothing about sorcery.
It's technology, it's engineered with one purpose: to kill.

'Putting holes in things at a distance' is NOT what firearms are designed to do.
An air rifle can do that with BBs that sting & punch holes in things at a distance just fine.

Firearms, on the other hand, are designed to kill things quickly and efficiently, nothing else.
Handguns in particular are only designed for the killing of humans.
They have no other use, unlike hunting rifles many of which are designed to kill animals at a distance, rather than humans.
Still, even those rifles are designed to kill, just not specifically humans like handguns are.

I understand firearms, their history, use, design & design purposes quite well thank you.
I've fired them, I understand the physics, and I was even a good shot as a youth.
That doesn't change the fact that they're designed as lethal weapons and nothing else.
It's you who's delusional or exceptionally naive if you think 'putting holes in things at a distance' is what firearms were designed to do, rather than killing living things.
The were designed to kill, period.

Austalia rounded up its guns years ago (especially the handguns), & hasn't had a mass shooting since.
It's not impossible, there's just a lack of political will to do so thanks to people who, like yourself apparently, would rather have a bunch of devices designed for nothing except lethal violence around than live without easy access to killing machines.

I don't really understand that sort of irrationality.
Is it a fear of impotence, or some deep-seated need to know that you can kill at a moment's notice perhaps?
What could possibly compell you to want to have something around that could easily kill you in an instant, and indeed has been painstakingly engineered & designed over the years to do just that, with no warning, defense, or recourse other than that?

It does not say if he was high on pot at the time of the incident, how long before this did he smoke it.....sounds like the sort of accident that could occur even with perfectly sober individuals....its sad but certainly does not change my mind about legalization. But what do you charge someone with for accidentally killing someone? negligence or something?

And without cars there would be no car accidents....I suppose I just don't see how they are going to totally eliminate guns from the world. If they are banned, criminals can still easily get them so not sure exactly what it would help. I am by no means a conservative, republican or any of those.

Right, the people dead from gunshot wounds are deader than those (more frequent) dead from auto accidents. What was I thinking?


Apparently you don’t understand firearms past the most rudimentary knowledge. Having shot your Uncle Bob’s .22 in the back yard as a kid doesn't make you knowledgeable beyond that.


Ah, the Australia did it argument.
My advice; move to Australia.


Well I have lots of them but I just don’t suffer from the fear of inanimate objects as you apparently do. We've had several of these gunz-r-bad debates here and not once has anyone like you been able to bring anything to the table that qualifies your argument. Emotion and hyperbole don't qualify as anything.

I never advocated anything close to totally eliminating guns from the world or said anything like that.
The truth is, however, that in countries with a far lower number of guns, and those mostly rifles in the hands of hunters, or handguns in the hands of people with dangerous jobs who can prove a need, it is not easy for criminals to get guns at all.

There are over 300million guns in this country, mostly handguns which have no other use than short range shooting of humans.
That's a gun for every man, woman, and child.
That's why it's easy for criminals or anyone to get a gun here, this country is flooded with them.

If we had say, only 3million, or better yet 300k or so, that'd still be plenty for the hunters and those who can prove a need, but far too few for criminals to easily obtain one.
That's what Australia did, they rounded up most of the guns, especially the handguns, let the hunters keep their hunting rifles, and let those who could prove a need get a liscense.
Not a single mass shooting there since and almost no accidental deaths.
No mass anarchy or huge icrease in crime, either.

I didn't say we should ban guns or get rid of them entirely, in fact I didn't even suggest what I just did above.
All I pointed out was the gun deaths are unnecessary, avoidable, and a result of the unnecessary, unjustifiable mass ownership of devices whose sole design purpose is to kill things, or in the case of handguns, humans specifically.

Again, it's doable, given the political will, to get rid of enough of them to address & significantly remidiate the public health hazard the mass numbers of firearms in this country is responsible for.
There's no evidence whatsoever that there would be any negative consequences for anyone except gun & bullet manufacturers by doing so, and frankly people who profit enourmously by producing instruments of death can stand to take it on the chin for our safety.
It could be done voluntarily, like in Australia, over a period of time.

Throwing up our hands and saying its impossible because of the sheer numbers is simply defeatism.
This is an eminently fixable problem, and the fix has almost 0 downside, but the political will simply doesn't exist here to do it at the moment, and it never will so long as people continue to believe false equivalencies as a way to justify their (pathetic, insecure) ego need to own a killing machine.

I'm not a politician, I don't have an agenda, neither I or anyone I know well has been the victim of gun violence, but I have studied this issue extensively for my own understanding & edification, and those are simply the rational conclusions I've come to based on the best available information.

Wow, you managed to reply to my entire post without a single refutation of any of my arguments, and without making a single point other than some rather vaguely directed insults, assumptions, and references to 'hyperbole' & 'emotion' without actually stating what you thought qualified as such therefore exposing those claims mere baseless rhetoric.
Way to lose the argument, say absolutely nothing, and still manage to come off as pathetic and defensive.

*golf clap*

Get back to me when you have an actual refutation rather than a blanket dismissal which fails to actually refute a single point.
Better yet, go back to school and learn how to make a proper logical argument, then maybe we can have a rational discussion instead of you merely flinging baseless, hilarious accusations based on completely unfounded assumptions & your inability to formulate a single coherent refutation of any of my points.

/\ Yawn...... Just go back and read some of the older gun debate threads. Really, just use the search function and copy & paste gunz-r-bad to it (a term I've intentionally added to each one for future search purposes). There you can get your ass whuppin handed to you indirectly. Every anti-gun argument that there is to make has been made repeatedly and shot down by the WP pro-gunners with boring consistency.

In fact, here's the search results for gunz-r-bad for your enjoyment. Maybe later on I or someone will take the time to address you personally.

GUNS-R-BAD threads

If someone takes away my fishing pole... there is going to be a problem.

The next step when you can't actually argue on your own and someone calls you out on it:
Appeal to authority.

Make your own arguments.
Refute mine.

If you can't, you've lost.
I have no interest in conversations I did not have, because I did not make any of the arguments.
I made the ones above.
The ones you've yet to refute a single point from.

There is also the issue of that second amendment though, it clearly states citizens are allowed to have weapons....guns being within that category. I don't know its a complex issue....I don't even entirely know how exactly I feel about it. But I do know a lot of people would say they have the 'right' to have a gun which based on our constitution they do. Also though there are all kinds of other ways people could kill each other....I suppose I just don't see an easy solution.

But I like to hear about both sides of the debate and what arguments each side has....can't really jump on one side or the other though.

It actually gives you the right to bear arms, not guns specifically.
Back when it was written, the most sophisticated gun was a musket.
A sword qualifies as arms.
The Courts have repeatedly ruled that it's not absolute, the right to bear arms.
You can't own an rpg, or a tank, or a nuclear device, but those are all types of arms.

Let anyone own simple, small clip hunting rifles and shotguns, those are types of arms, but get rid of the assault rifles, handguns, and pretty much all the semi-&full auto firearms and you'll have largely fixed the public health hazard.

That's silly,a shotgun is not going to fit in the drawer by my nightstand.

Psssp.........Bodyles is an anti.
He'll tell you that you should just call the police, and that the chances of the wrong person being shot FAR outweigh the chances of a handgun being used to thwart a home invasion or an attack in public. The same things and many more that have been shot down here time and time again.
Next.....

Actually a sawed off double barrel, with a stock sawed off into a pistol grip will.