Dog Shoots Man in Iowa Hunting Accident

[Boiler 45,715]

2 minutes ago, bcking said:

That sounds very reasonable.

 

So the guy who did it, whether it was the man injured or someone else, should be penalized for doing so since it led to bodily harm. 

 

Is there a system of 'refractions' for gun license carriers when they are shown to be unfit to carry the weapon? Like a points system? Having to go through a training course or something?

Not sure it is a gun per se issue, could be anything, but seems to me there is a civil case.

 

Like leaving a car at the top of a hill in neutral with  a dodgy hand brake?

[bcking 3,157]

1 minute ago, Boiler said:

Not sure it is a gun per se issue, could be anything, but seems to me there is a civil case.

 

Like leaving a car at the top of a hill in neutral with  a dodgy hand brake?

Well the gun didn't "malfunction" to leave it loaded right? Aren't you never supposed to leave a loaded gun anywhere? That seems pretty clearly human error. 

 

But yes/no (I honestly don't know the answer) - Do gun licenses have a point-based system (like a driving license) where you can lose it if you consistently display unsafe behaviors?

Edited December 1, 2017 by bcking

[Boiler 45,715]

Just now, bcking said:

Well the gun didn't "malfunction" to leave it loaded right? Aren't you never supposed to leave a loaded gun anywhere? That seems pretty clearly human error. 

 

But yes/no (I honestly don't know the answer) - Do gun licenses have a point-based system (like a driving license) where you can lose it if you consistently display unsafe behaviors?

State issue so do not know, not one in Colorado.

 

Not loaded per se, there are rules for example when riding an ATV and Hunting, has to be unloaded in a case.

 

When I go out I have the safety on and nothing in the chamber, but that is unusual. Might miss an opportunity.

[bcking 3,157]

1 minute ago, Boiler said:

State issue so do not know, not one in Colorado.

 

Not loaded per se, there are rules for example when riding an ATV and Hunting, has to be unloaded in a case.

 

When I go out I have the safety on and nothing in the chamber, but that is unusual. Might miss an opportunity.

I'd say it would be reasonable to have something in the chamber with the safety on when you are carrying your weapon.

 

When you put the weapon down, I'd say it is reasonable to have nothing in the chamber. You are no longer under control.

 

Would you be opposed to a point-based system? I'm not suggesting most gun owners are irresponsible, but the ones that clearly demonstrate they are should no be able to carry one again until they can prove they have learned better. That seems reasonable to me? Not sure what you think.

[Boiler 45,715]

Well hunting for me is a few days a year, not like driving, so chances of anybody accumulating enough points to lose their hunting privileges are minimal. You hear of people losing it for child support issues, and of course hunting violations. Never looked to see if this sort of thing would qualify.

[bcking 3,157]

1 minute ago, Boiler said:

Well hunting for me is a few days a year, not like driving, so chances of anybody accumulating enough points to lose their hunting privileges are minimal. You hear of people losing it for child support issues, and of course hunting violations. Never looked to see if this sort of thing would qualify.

That's true. Not as many opportunities to demonstrate unsafe practices.

 

But since the item in question (a firearm) is a dangerous lethal weapon with very few other purposes other than killing (animals, humans etc...), I would say the system should require very few points to lose your license.

 

The man who set this gun down fully loaded should not be able to carry a weapon again, at least until he goes through some intensive training program and proves that he can do so responsibly. 

[Boiler 45,715]

1 minute ago, bcking said:

That's true. Not as many opportunities to demonstrate unsafe practices.

 

But since the item in question (a firearm) is a dangerous lethal weapon with very few other purposes other than killing (animals, humans etc...), I would say the system should require very few points to lose your license.

 

The man who set this gun down fully loaded should not be able to carry a weapon again, at least until he goes through some intensive training program and proves that he can do so responsibly. 

We are talking about hunting privileges and you can lose them fast if you do obey the rules.

[bcking 3,157]

2 minutes ago, Boiler said:

We are talking about hunting privileges and you can lose them fast if you do obey the rules.

I was talking about weapons privileges, actually.

 

It wouldn't comfort me to know that this man lost his hunting privilege, but can continue to carry that shotgun. If he is irresponsible in the field while hunting, I think he is very high risk for not being responsible at home as well.

 

It would at least warrant a home investigation to ensure he has a proper system in place for safe storage and handling. Especially if he has other people living in his home (spouse, children, etc...).

[Boiler 45,715]

1 minute ago, bcking said:

I was talking about weapons privileges, actually.

 

It wouldn't comfort me to know that this man lost his hunting privilege, but can continue to carry that shotgun. If he is irresponsible in the field while hunting, I think he is very high risk for not being responsible at home as well.

 

It would at least warrant a home investigation to ensure he has a proper system in place for safe storage and handling. Especially if he has other people living in his home (spouse, children, etc...).

I can think of a lot of people driving around who would fall into that definition. Guy down the road with multiple DUI's still driving around.

[bcking 3,157]

1 minute ago, Boiler said:

I can think of a lot of people driving around who would fall into that definition. Guy down the road with multiple DUI's still driving around.

Oh absolutely I agree. Most states have a "point" system but they fail miserably. I think we should be FAR FAR more strict with laws regarding vehicles.

 

I support far more traffic cameras in order to catch people making traffic violations so we can get dangerous drivers off the road. I think every school zone should have a traffic camera. I see people going 40 in a 20 zone all the time when the lights are flashing. You do that 2 or 3 times? Go back to driving school.

While I don't have much experience with it, from what my wife tells me the UK roads have far more monitoring tools used to enforce traffic violations and people generally stick to National Speed, or the posted speeds, as a result. Not sure how true that is though.

Edited December 1, 2017 by bcking

[Boiler 45,715]

This guy banged himself up really badly last time, few local tears, the County did not prosecute as he would be jailed and they would pay for his medical costs.

[Dashinka 24,627]

2 hours ago, bcking said:

So question -

 

If the gun was placed on the ground by another member of the hunting party, would you advocate pressing charges against him for some form of negligence? 

 

Rather than make jokes about the dog I think this should highlight how some people who own firearms need better training on how to properly handle the weapons. Hopefully whoever placed it on the ground loses their license.

Sure firearm owners should be more responsible and in this case this guy deserves honorable mention status as a Darwin Award nominee, but what is life without a little humor.

[bcking 3,157]

21 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

Sure firearm owners should be more responsible and in this case this guy deserves honorable mention status as a Darwin Award nominee, but what is life without a little humor.

It's not actually clear that the man who was shot was the man who put the gun down. The article said he was out with I believe 2 other people. At least that's what I thought I read yesterday when I looked at it.

 

Even if it is the same man. He has clearly demonstrated he can't handle firearms properly. He has no business owning one until he can demonstrate competence, and even then I would always question is ability to properly and safely handle a firearm in the future. Unless he makes his living hunting, or it is his sole source of food, safety of himself and his loved ones should take priority. Guns should be confiscated until he can demonstrate that he is responsible enough to handle them.

[Ban Hammer 13,417]

4 hours ago, bcking said:

So question -

 

If the gun was placed on the ground by another member of the hunting party, would you advocate pressing charges against him for some form of negligence? 

 

Rather than make jokes about the dog I think this should highlight how some people who own firearms need better training on how to properly handle the weapons. Hopefully whoever placed it on the ground loses their license.

whenever a gun is left unattended in a hunting situation, it should be unloaded (example: crossing a fence)

[Dashinka 24,627]

5 minutes ago, Ban Hammer said:

whenever a gun is left unattended in a hunting situation, it should be unloaded (example: crossing a fence)

This is what I learned in hunter safety class.