Pa. man fires cannon, hits neighbor's house

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=175&topic_id=15571&mesg_id=15571

Please explain its relevance to the Guns forum.

Black powder cannons are specifically exempt from the NFA and GCA.

I see a story about careless weapon handling in which fortunately nobody got hurt.

Y'all want to brag up every justifiable homicide, here's the other side of "responsible" gun ownership.

I must have missed that part of the story.

You're absolutely right. So, how does his stupidity justify punishing me?

Perhaps we should take your car because some idiot drove drunk last night. As a matter of fact I'd bet more people drove drunk last night than fired cannons at their neighbor's homes

firearm safety course before being allowed to own anything more powerful than a bb gun. Don't overly restrict firearms, but make sure that the people who use them have the training to do so responsibly, which includes understanding that a cannon will fire 400 yards and that has to be taken into account when deciding where to fire it.

Even though my wife does not like guns (we don't have any, but i was raised around them and am comfortable with them), my son will be taking gun safety classes as soon as I feel he can get benefit out of it (he is 3, so we have a bit still)... not because we necessarily want him shooting, but more that we want him to be the one making the responsible decision when we aren't there and one of his friends finds their parent's gun.

Is that I see giving the government the ability to license a right as giving the government the ability to set the license standards so high that no one can meet them.
Plus no firearms safety class is going to deal W/ this specific case unless you go to the FATC at FT. Sill

Different classes of weapons requiring different certification. If you can't demonstrate the necessary skill as described by the NRA, then either be accompanied by someone who has the skill (ie: driving permit) or don't use it. I do think that you should be able to have freedom on your own property (like you can with a car... no age limit if you let your kid tool around in your car in your own field), but if you shoot someone else's house (effectively going off your property), then punishment applies.

My opinion is that you should be able to do what you want on your own property, but once it can endanger others, measures should be taken to ensure that the person will not harm others, by way of training. Of course, that will never fly, even with the NRA involved.

But like Treo says, allowing government (at any level) to impose licensing requirements makes it possible for (someone in) government to impose requirements that are, in practice, unattainable, and particularly where the application of any system is left, to some extent, to the discretion of the executive branch of government, historical examples abound of this being applied in an arbitrary and capricious manner at best, and an utterly corrupt manner at worst. Examples include sheriffs and police chiefs simply refusing to issue licenses to particular demographics (blacks, recent immigrants), or to people who didn't contribute to the sheriff's or mayor's campaign fund; or scheduling the required classes in a time and place that most people cannot attend, or just not holding the required class at all.

In a very real sense, opponents of private firearms ownership (styling themselves as pro-gun control) have been the worst enemies of gun control measures that could genuinely be termed reasonable, because by having subverted gun control measures in the past, they've provided pro-gun groups like the NRA with good motive to oppose further gun control measures and distrust the sincerity of those support those measures.

Control of "Permission" to exercise Rights should never be placed in the hands of civil servants.

I do not know why so many conservatives AND liberals do not understand this.

In theory I would see it as being like a hunting or fishing license, except with a requirement that you pass a driver license style test to demonstrate a minimum required knowledge of firearm safety to be in posession of a loaded firearm off of private residential property.

So, the gun and ammo would both be legal to purchase without the license and could be used for personal protection at your home. The license would only apply when you are bringing it off of your property. That would be treated like transporting alcohol (open container laws). It would be legal to transport a firearm without the license so long as it is unloded with a trigger lock and ammo in a locked container. With a license, the same laws would apply as they do today.
With the license training requiremnts developed by the NRA and possibly even have the tests administered by the NRA, you would be eliminating the possibility of descrimination that you are describing. And I am not talking rocket science test. I am talking about the same level of test that you take to get a driving license... minimum basic requirements that demonstrate you know how to safely load, unload, carry, and fire a gun.

I see that as satisfying both the constitutional aspects of anyone being able to own a firearm as well as the public safety issues. The well regulated militia aspect is covered by being allowed to buy, own, transport and use a firearm without this license while on private property (the militia part)... and if you wish to take it out in public while loaded then you show that you are responsible enough to do so without causing harm to others around you (the well regulated part).
I am sure the sticking point here will be the monetary aspect of paying for the license, but there could be waivers for those who cannot afford it. Although, all other types of hunting, fushing, driving etc licenses already cost money, so in reality the 15 dollars or whatever it costs is in line with other licenses.

It sounds like this guy had been into this hobby for some time, and note that the article says the cannonball ricocheted, so it's not like he fired the cannon at the neighbor's house. I'm not saying the guy isn't responsible, but there's no call to paint him as some kind of reckless maniac, when all that happened is that the cannonball bounced off a rock.

that's about a 37mm gun, which in the scheme of things, ain't much of a cannon. Steen Cannons in Ashland, Kentucky builds full size cannon. The 1841 mountain howizter throws a 12 pound ball. The North South Skirmish Association hold competitions for cannon and the targets are normally at 500 yards for smoothbore guns like this one:



and the targets are 1000 yards for rifles, such as this:



There are rather stringent safety rules and procedures for these shoots. Procedures that were well understood and well-known to artillerymen during the era of muzzle loaded cannon are not be taken lightly.

National Safety Rules and Procedures For Shooting Muzzleloading Artillery

On the other hand, there are ALWAYS those people who think the way to deal with drunk drivers is to take cars away from SOBER people.

I want a cannon, but you can drop $20K on just the barrel and carriage!

Some people spend that much on a bass boat they only take to the lake 3 times a year. On the other hand, if a half-dozen re-enactors chip in the cost of feeding the beast is split among the crew. Being a bachelor means such decisions are veto proof too! Good and safe never equal cheap!

I haven't looked recently, but I don't think there is a Misc Projectile Weapon forum... and having had several different types of rifles and even a cannon, they are a lot like a black powder gun with a different trigger mechanism.

I asked the OP to explain its relevance.

BTW here is the tacked post at the top of this forum explaining what topics are appropriate.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x95935

I would say this fits better into the public policy forum... since this story can generate meaningful discussion over 2nd amendment rights and firearm safety.

Or it could turn into a thread full of jokes related to the incident.

you think it is not relevant and being passive-agressive about it... or you are teaching a class and want to make sure he understands the relevance.

If you don't mind me asking, what was the motivation behind it if I am being tinfoil?

That's why I asked.

Sorry for the assumption on my part

this story would have been more interesting if the hit house retaliated with their own volley.:sarcasm: This means WAR!

sandbox that my friend designed and built... would be perfect for a volley.

Life can be quite interesting. One minute, you could be watching a Seinfeld rerun and the next, a 2" cannonball comes crashing thru your living room wall.

...that any kind of talk about needing to change the system just isn't needed.

This happens once about every 20 years. Punish the guy and move on.

If this starts happening once a month, maybe then we should consider changing something.

I bet this guy is fun at parties!