Gun goes off in hospital, hits six - with one bullet

Dumbass gun owner of the day. This is the kind of idiot who shouldn't have a gun and should have his LCTF(story mentions he has) pulled. And once more - get a damn pocket holster!

Albuquerque, NM - A man trying to join his wife who was in labor at UNM Hospital (UNMH) may have missed the birth after accidentally shooting 6 people in the lobby.

The man was waiting in line inside the emergency room, and police say he was fiddling with a gun in his front pocket when it went off.

Lovett says the man made a strange move, “He went to reach and pull it out of his pocket like he thought ‘Oh my God I forgot’".

Lovett then laid the timeline for what happened next, “All of the sudden it just went off… People were going ‘What was that? What the heck was that?... The guy looked at my girlfriend looked at myself and he turned around and walked out the door. He said excuse me and he turned around and walked out the door”.

http://www.krqe.com/dpp/news/crime/man-accidentally-shoots-6-at-unmh

I expressed this as a concern in having guns everywhere, including Starbucks. People DO lose focus and these kind of mistakes happen, even if the majority of CCW or open carry gun owners are far more responsible (and I believe that they are). Even responsible owners may not be immune from such accidents. :shrug:

But the percentage is far lower than the general population. As a group, we are extremely safe with guns.

I do believe the majority of lawful gun owners take their responsibilities quite seriously. But the question remains, how do we deal with these idiots, if there is going to be essentially no limits on where they can take their guns?

I am not sure about that particular hospital, but the ones where I live say, "No Firearms" allowed. Permit or no, that means I cannot carry there. You also cannot carry in a school zone, at government offices, or in any private establishment that prohibits it.

Again, I don't know about that particular hospital, but I suspect that this idiot broke the law the moment he walked into that hospital. The bottom line is that we have to deal with idiots everywhere in all facets of life. The idiot driving and putting on make up, or reading the paper is as big a risk to people as that idiot in the hospital is. The idiot who store the gasoline he uses for his lawn mower outside in a can is a threat. The guy on the assembly line who spaces and does not put the right bolt in your Prius' accelerator is a threat.

.

Do we suspend the right of protest because of the Westboro Baptist morons?

only concerned with himself. That would be shown by him muttering excuse me and leaving the building and also asking the police if they could just cut him a break.

So do people that act so irresponsibly get to keep their CCW?

Generally they do not

regarding the proliferation of automobiles and alcohol people DO get drunk and drive and this kind of thing happens, even if the majority of motor vehicle owners are responsible (and I believe that they are). Even responsible car owners may not be immune from such accidents.

Turn in your keys

are required to own and operate a motor vehicle. Gun owners have fought that with a vengeance second to virtually no other interest. THAT is the distinction.

So, you then have made the case for licensure and registration of guns and routine testing of "gun operators", it seems. In addition, law restricts where and how a car can be operated. So, you have also made a case for restricting where guns can be carried. (somehow, I am betting your fellow gun owners are hoping that you will not be making their case for them)

Gun owners have fought that with a vengeance second to virtually no other interest. THAT is the distinction.

Second a license is required to carry a concealed hand gun in NM Testing is required to get that license and there are restrictions placed on where you can carry a handgun so what's your point?

accept the additional restrictions.

Which amendment protects my right to drive?

On edit

I admit my analogy isn’t perfect. Like all analogies it fails if you take it too far. However that doesn’t mean my point, that restricting the rights of the overwhelming majority of gun owners because of the criminal or negligent actions of a few isn’t valid. Can you refute that?

I only have 371 posts it shouldn't be that hard

Poor strawman you made. Try again.

(and I am damn sure you absolutely don't)

That just like a driver's license allows me to operate my car on any public highway in any state, with few exceptional restrictions, will my "hitthe2b approved" gun license allow me to carry my gun, in public, in every state? Or are you proposing that the licensing scheme be so expensive and so onerous that no one will bother?

I'll go you one further. Here in Kentucky, every concealed carry holder is run through NICS, NCIC and FBI background checks every 30 days, routinely and automatically. Is someone running your driving record once a month?

And before you even start, there is no requirement to license or register a car UNLESS it is operated on a public road. I don't have to ask the government's permission to buy a car, there is no restriction on how many I buy, or even how fast they may go. There are tens of thousands of farm and ranch trucks that are unlicensed operated by unlicensed drivers. It was and is still common, for example, for the youngest kid, sometimes as young as eight, to drive the hay wagon until he was grown enough to toss a bale onto it.

"LICENSURE, registration & Testing are are required to own and operate a motor vehicle."

No, thats factually false.

In the great majority of places - states - in America, one need not be licensed or trained to OWN an automobile, nor to drive one on ones own property.

One need only be trained, licensed, and the vehicle registered IF and WHEN said vehicle is driven on public roads.

"So, you then have made the case for licensure and registration of guns and routine testing of "gun operators", it seems. In addition, law restricts where and how a car can be operated. So, you have also made a case for restricting where guns can be carried. (somehow, I am betting your fellow gun owners are hoping that you will not be making their case for them)"

You have just made the case that you do not know the facts on this subject.

If you keep the vehicle on private property at all times, you don't need to register it or have a license. An example would be an old pickup that is used exclusively for a ranch truck and never goes on the public roads. If you take the vehicle on public roads, then it has to be licensed, safety tested, and you need a license.

If you keep your gun on private property, it does not need (In most states) to be registered. But to carry it in public, in most states, requires licensing, testing, and fees.

What most of us fight is licensing to have a gun in your home or other property.

Just like you have to have a license in most states to carry a concealed firearm on your person, but do not need a license to merely own one. And just as with car licenses, if you do something stupid with a gun, your license will be revoked.

is the best you can make of it.

It sounds like he realized it was in his pocket (dumbass!! Get a holster), touched the wrong part and discharged it. The bullet ripped his pants all the way down (but not him, alas) and shattered on the floor. The fragments ricocheted and struck six people, one of whom was his sister in law (dumbass!).

CCW laws without pressing need are the stupidest things ever. There are too many dumbasses out there and they all seem to think they're naked without a sidearm.

Should we subject all civil rights to a pressing need argument?

I'm far more worried about the clueless assholes behind the wheel paying attention to everything but the road than I am about someone with a CCW permit.

...wanted to pull a gun.

I guess this guy just started early.

Serioulsy though: what should be the penalty for something this brazenly careless?

Reckless handling of a firearm.. He will loose his CCW permit.

At the very least..

Just sayin.

:rofl:

Indeed.

than I am of gangs or other criminals and I lived in one of the worst gang areas in LA for a time and was never afraid. To join a gang just before the school year started you had to shoot someone. We stayed in the apartment complex during those times.

Legal gun owners are statistically much safer than gang members.

The more people carry guns around the more there will be accidents.

states like OH, WV, etc I know I'm around a lot of people legally carrying guns. And I have no worry. I have a much better chance of dropping dead from a heart attack or being in a car accident than being shot by a legal gun owner.

than being hit by lightning.

are safer than random bone-headed accidents.

QUERY TO ALL VIEWING: would a holster have prevented this accident? The article seems to imply it was loose in his pocket where he was fiddling with it and presumably his finger on the trigger.

I don't know squat about guns but it seems you can't reach the trigger if the gun is in a holster.

Umm... got any sisters? Mom single?

But seriously, excellent observation.

Rule #1: Booger-hooker stays off the bang-switch.

Sorry, no sisters.

BTW - it's spelled: intelligence

:evilgrin:

(I know, I know, simple typo...but I had to.)

People look at you funny when you're banging your head on the steering wheel....

Sigh. :eyes:

I'd have to know exactly what happened to answer 100% but I'm sure it would have helped. I'm going to bet the gun was a Glock

The news story says it was a "snub-nosed .357," so it's pretty surely a revolver. Which makes it all that much weirder. If he's carrying it in his pocket cocked, then he's a total moron. If not cocked (or a DAO), it really isn't that easy to pull the trigger accidentally. He had to be messing around with it, finger on the trigger. Total jackass. Bye-bye permit.

How does one "accidently" pull the trigger on a DA revolver?

This revolver has an enclosed hammer and therefore is double action only. It also has a heavy trigger pull.

I never play with my firearm while carrying it. That's foolish and might lead to an accidental discharge.


S&W Model 642



I use a Bianchi pocket holster. It helps conceal the shape of the gun and is moisture resistant. The smooth inner lining allows for a fast draw while the textured outside surface keeps the holster in the pocket.

And for any gun that fits in a pocket you can get a pocket holster for a very reasonable price. Too easy to get finger or an object in the trigger without a holster.

Too many fools will shove their gun in pocket or waistband. And end up shooting themselves or someone else.

There are valid reasons to opt for carry in a trouser pocket. I carry one of my guns in my front pocket. Nothing else if ever put into that pocket. That way I don't have to go fishing around the gun to find what I put in the pocket.

The main advantage of having the gun in my trousers pocket is that if a situation starts looking dangerous, but hasn't reached the point where the gun needs to be drawn, I can prepare by putting my hand in the pocket and grasping the gun, finger alongside the trigger, NOT on the trigger. That way I don't look threatening, I just look like an old guy with his hand in his pocket. Then if things go south I can draw and fire in 1/2 second. Street thugs usually know what the hand-in-pocket means and will almost always stay away.

Majority of gun owners are safe and most of us are not going to take the chance of losing our carry license by being stupid with our guns.

Gangbangers usually don't give a damn about pulling a gun and shooting someone. They are probably already carrying illegaly. Many have already done time in jail. And most wouldn't take much provocation to shoot someone.

The more people carry guns the more gun accidents there will be.

I understand that if you want to carry a gun around you will disagree with me. It doesn't change my mind and I don't want to change yours.

Personally I don't believe there is a need for anyone who's life is not lived in more dangerous circumstances than mine needs to carry a gun. I think people do for other reasons than safety.

I can't change the laws but I think there is something mentally wrong with people who feel they need to carry a gun.

I am a gun owner too and I wouldn't think if taking it out of the safe place where I have it with the cylinder out and a gun lock on the frame and carry it around with me. I just don't need the protection.

Cite?

I wouldn't think if taking it out of the safe place where I have it with the cylinder out and a gun lock on the frame and carry it around with me. I just don't need the protection.

2 AM and some one kicks in your door let us know how that gun lock works out for ya

I am 70 yrs. old, live alone, but would never carry or even have in my home a gun. I live in a safe neighborhood, travel about in safe neighborhoods, and use common sense. My sons have guns (mostly rifles) at our ranch, and there have been at least three accidental discharges of bullets in that house. Thankfully no one got hurt, but they could have been tragic. I have small grandchildren around often, and I would not want to put them at risk by having a weapon around, even hidden. I think this country has gone mad with imagined danger. People carrying their weapons with ostentation have problems with their self image in my opinion. I do not feel safer to think that anyone driving by or in a store or restaurant might have a weapon. Maybe they are sane, but maybe they are crazy. I can understand that people working or traveling in dangerous areas might want to carry a weapon, as would people in certain occupations. The statistics are clear: compare countries with stringent laws about possessing and carrying weapons have less violence. I know that we will never eliminate guns. But we could have common sense registration and back-ground checking for the whole country, not just hap-hazzard state by state. I support the goals of the Brady bill. Owning assault guns outside the military or police should be prohibited. That's my opinion.

and have absolutely no problem with that. I don't question your psychological makeup because of your choice.

I often wonder why it seems necessary for many who make a choice not to own firearms to broad brush those who do decide to own and carry firearms as living in "imagined danger" or having "problems with their self image".

I considered the same factors as you and I made a rational decision to own firearms. After many years of enjoying the sport of target shooting, I decided to invest the time and money to obtain a concealed weapons permit. Self defense is just one of the reasons to get a carry permit. I can walk into a gun store, fill out the required paperwork and buy a firearm and walk out of the store with it because I have a carry permit. I don't have to wait three days. If I am stopped by a police officer I can show him my carry permit and he doesn't wonder why I have a firearm and if I am an honest citizen. I don't have to leave my weapon in the car where it might be stolen when I go shopping but can carry it with me.

And yes, if absolutely necessary I can use lethal force to defend myself or my family from an attacker who intends to inflict severe bodily injury or death. I seriously doubt that I will ever have to pull my weapon as I too live in a safe neighborhood and travel in safe areas. (At one time before I retired, I did live in a far more dangerous neighborhood. Luck was with me and I never had any serious problems there either.)

You are wise to not have firearms in the reach of your grandchildren. If you did own firearms there are many excellent and affordable means to child proof them.

I do disagree with your contention that "countries with stringent laws about possessing and carrying weapons have less violence".

Yes, but the most common "relationship" is drug business acquaintance. That's the part they always leave off.

In a majority of cases, no relationship can be determined.

Second largest group is 'acquaintance', but that is separated from all the 'family' categories, friend, boy/girlfriend, employer, neighbor, etc. So a majority of situations can't be determined, the next most likely is not family, not neighbor, not employer, not employee- 'acquaintance'*. The next biggest category? 'stranger'.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2008/offenses/expanded_information/data/shrtable_10.html


*considering what they ruled out to arrive at 'acquaintance', and considering the breakdown by race and age of most murder victims / offenders, you're left with categories like 'drug dealer / junkie', 'fence / thief', 'pimp / sex worker', 'rival gang member'.

Also, Mafia member know each other, drug dealers know each other and their customers, pimps know their prostitutes and the regular johns, thieves know their fences, loan sharks know who owes them money, gamblers know their bookies, and so on. In fact, about 52% of murder victims are involved in some sort of criminals activity. With domestic (family) murders, the killer usually has a history of violence.

If you are not involved in something criminal, and are not in an abusive relationship, then if you are murdered it will likely be a stranger that does it.

California CHL is issued at the total discretion of the local Sheriff. As a routine process they don't issue except for friends, the rich, or political cronies. There are VERY FEW CHL permits issued in California.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

than being shot in a freak accident..

Few year ago I ran into an elderly guy, 70s, that had a cast on his left hand. I asked what happen. He said his hand gun went off while he was cleaning it. Next, he told me has been an NRA safety instructor for over 30 years. You might want to think again.

trampled by onlookers during the second coming, then errant gunfire. I shoot often as well.

I worry about you kid on their cell driving. We will die boring deaths, cancer, heart disease, stroke. Reality.

The gun is innocent of all charges.

I wonder if we would be saying that if it happened at the republican convention.

Ex-state House Speaker Craig DeRoche charged with carrying a gun while drunk at Novi home

Fresh off a conviction for impaired driving, former state House Speaker Craig DeRoche is back in court for an alcohol-related offense.

The Detroit Free Press reports DeRoche, a Republican who represented parts of Metro Detroit in Michigan's 38th District for much of the past decade, was arrested early Sunday at his Novi home after a family member called police to say he was drunk and carrying a gun.

A blood test revealed he had a blood alcohol level of .13, and the newspaper reports he was arraigned Monday on a charge of possessing a gun while intoxicated.

The good news is he wasn't driving a car. He was riding a bike.

http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2010/06/former_state_house_speaker_cra.html

It has happened to me on more than one occasion, I have walked into a few "Gun Free" zones, with my sidearm....and when I realize it, without saying a word I "beat feet" to the parking lot.

When you daily carry, the gun, becomes like a set of car keys, or a wallet, it is always their, so you stop thinking about it being their.

but in Colorado he's legal until he goes through the metal detector. He'd also be legal in a hospital here.

My wife carried in a post office the other day, she had no clue and will never do it again. Should she be jailed?

Do you have a reasoned argument to present?

Let me educate you..

If I carry my gun, into "MOST" gun free zones "including schools", and I am discovered, ARMED.

I can be asked to leave, and I MUST leave at once, if asked...

Only if I refuse to leave, can I be charged with a misdemeanor trespassing charge.

So yes, I technically broke the law, but, I was not asked to, nor did I refuse to, leave..

No harm, NO foul, and NO basis for filing any charges..After all, I have a permit.

And for clarification, I DO, try my best to obey the law, even silly "gun free zones"..But even honest people make honest mistakes. And once I realize I have erred, I take immediate action to correct that error. UNLIKE A CRIMNAL WOULD.

People are not scared of guns down here...Unless your a criminal..

Why would you be scared of someone who is acting normaly, that just has a buldge under his jacket??

A gun, does not mean "Criminal".

then say that it doesn't even matter at all and you get a pass if anyone sees the gun and has to say off hand that you are not allowed to carry? I mean now you act as though it is not even important that you have a gun where you should not. Like it is no big deal at all?

I have not had an inadvertent "exposure", of a grip, or spare magazine in many many months... It is a CONCEALED weapon.

State law matters to me, that is why I leave if I realize I am carrying in a "Gun free" zone...It is respect for the law...

It is NOT important, but I respect the law, are you perfect, do you NEVER speed?? Not even by one mph??? Think about it.

And you act like it is my intent to break the law, it is not..It is that their is such a patchwork of laws, they are easy to break. But thankfully, tomorrow, here in Virginia, many off limit locations will become legal.. Which will simplify mine and my wife's lives...

Like today, we went, as a family, to a great Mexican grill near the house, and , today was the last time, that we lock our guns up in the car...In 3 hrs, it will be legal for us to carry into that restaurant to have a meal with our weapons... Ahh, July 1st...

If you were unarmed and you noticed an armed man enter the convenience store you were in would you rush over to confront him or try to be as inconspicuous as possible?

Would it make a difference if he was wearing a stocking mask, and profanely demanding everyone's money while ignoring the "Gun free Zone" sign?

How about if it was a calm ordinary looking guy and you thought you saw part of a gun holster peek from under his shirt as he reached for something on a high shelf?

How about if the gun was concealed and you didn't see it, didn't notice a bulge, and but he was wearing bib overalls, manure covered barn boots, a John Deere hat and an NRA sticker on his Ford F250 with the up in back rifle rack?

weapon and causes 6 innocent people to be shot and then tries to leave and then asks for a break from the police. Would it matter if he has a NRA sticker and wears bib overalls and John Deere hat?

Silly "gun free zones" and the "silly un-armed people" who confront you about the gun, eh?

I was just trying to see where you fit in.

Now if you are saying anyone who through negligence injures someone should be held responsible that's one thing. The severity of the penalty should be directly proportional to the severity of the injuries and the willfullness of the negligence. That's one thing I can agree on.

But watching you squawk on relentlessly like a banty rooster about the one posters realization that he had entered a business that prohibited guns removing himself from the premises, I just had to ask how you would react and how would you know who had the concealed weapon? Do those X-ray glasses on the back of the comic book really work?

I will spare you the mental image your statement gave me.:rofl:

state they are not allowed to carry concealed when signs are posted stating that the premises are a gun free zone.

If I did not know a person had committed a crime by entering a gun free zone then I would act normally - wouldn't any one. And if I saw a gun then I would act like the guy had a gun. What is your point.

You gun carrying people seem to feel that if you want to do it then the rest better shut up and allow you whatever you want. And the mountain man gut is the one that posted with the "silly gun free" crap about he could do it and it was OK unless someone did have x-ray vision and scanned him for the weapon. And then he would have to be confronted by someone about it before he was required to leave. But since the gun is concealed and it is a given that it would likely not be seen then it would seem that discovering it would be rather slim. And so if this guy from Virginoia was not required to remove the weapon until he was asked to then why would he even care about there being a gun free zone. He pretty much gets the pass even if it is discovered as long as he goes to his car and puts it away. And what if he had a second gun on his ankle that was not discovered??

The guy that wounded the 6 was in a gun free zone and obviously did not know how to safely operate or carry his weapon. That is one problem with people who want to carry who dot seem to assume the responsibility that goes with carrying a weapon.

The law does vary from state to state some but I will give you the simplest version. Secondly, you were the one who posted in bold letters "'silly un-armed people' who confront you..."

Federal law specifically prohibits guns in some areas, like the security zone at an airport. No guns and trying to go past the metal detectors with one is a really bad idea. The absolute best you can possibly hope for is you lose your gun, your permit and a whole pile of money in legal fees. Even then it is likely to be, "Go to jail. Go directly to jail. Do not pass GO. Do not collect $200" unless you are Sean Penn.

State laws, vary but many have a prohibition against carrying a gun in certain government buildings or in saloons and attach a criminal penalty to it. Again you get caught carrying in these areas, permit or no, you have a major problem.

Some states also permit the owner of a business to post a "No Guns" sign. However, the violation of that sign may carry no criminal penalty. If you can read now without jumping to conclusions (there really is no cardiac benefit from it). There is NO CRIME, again there is NO CRIME, unless and until two things happen, first, someone has to become aware that a person has a weapon. second, someone has to ask the person with the weapon to leave and they have to refuse. The refusal, again, the refusal to leave is the crime of TRESPASS!

So from a practical standpoint, if the weapon were concealed, how would you know it was there if you couldn't see it? Conversely if you could see it, than by definition, it must not be concealed. They are mutually exclusive states!

Now, I know this will cause your head to explode, but concealed carry holders are usually not looking for a confrontation. The last thing we want is some hysterical biddy running around in a panic, hollering, "He's got a gun!! He's got a gun!!" I simply don't go into stores with a sign. There are plenty of other places in town I can take my trade.

"And if I saw a gun then I would act like the guy had a gun. What is your point?"

I was asking you to specify your action or reaction. How do you act if the guy has a gun? Do you have a universal reaction or does it depend on the situation or perhaps maybe on what the guy with the gun is doing or not doing with the gun. You tell me, you're the one who made a point of confronting people with a gun and I'd like to know how you think it should be done or how you would do it?

MountainMan who said that even if he went into a gun free zone armed - then he was not breaking any laws unless he was confronted by someone who was brave enough to ask him to leave and he refused to leave. So do you now understand that I did not make a point of confronting anyone.

I was just saying that that is what Virginia MountainMan said about the laws in Virginia.

So if you want an answer then ask Viginia MountainMan how he would want to be confronted by someone who wanted to let him know he was unaware that he had a concealed weapon in a gun free zone.

Please tell me that you do not have a CHL.

Than asking me anything else??

And frankly, at this point, I could not care less about your point of view..

I will continue to carry a .45 pistol...and their anit a damn thing YOU, can do about it..

I have a CCDW.

Kentucky State Police CCDW FAQ

I am sure your own state likely has a similar page. You might find it instructive. It might clear up some misconceptions. You will generally get links and cites to specific statutes that cover the use of deadly force, when it is justified and when it isn't. Where you can carry and where you can't and under what circumstances. There's a lot of old wives' tales and flat out bogosity concerning the subject.

One of the things that Kentucky does is routinely and systematically rerun the background checks on every CCDW holder every month, not just initially or when it's time to renew. And as a whole, the performance of CCDW holders in the Commonwealth has been pretty good. A half dozen years ago when the Louisville Metro Police Department changed their service pistol from Smith & Wesson to Glock they had a rash of negligent discharges, fortunately no fatalities. One that really baffled me was one Sergeant had his pistol go off in the locker room while tying his shoe!

Anyway, 1200 Louisville cops had more reported accidental discharges in two weeks than 150,000 CCDW holders in 15 years. Go figure!

Read his post

""""virginia mountainman (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-01-10 12:15 AM
Response to Reply #42
47. You clearly don't understand Virginia law..

Edited on Thu Jul-01-10 12:17 AM by virginia mountainman
Let me educate you..

If I carry my gun, into "MOST" gun free zones "including schools", and I am discovered, ARMED.

I can be asked to leave, and I MUST leave at once, if asked...

Only if I refuse to leave, can I be charged with a misdemeanor trespassing charge.

So yes, I technically broke the law, but, I was not asked to, nor did I refuse to, leave..

No harm, NO foul, and NO basis for filing any charges..After all, I have a permit.

And for clarification, I DO, try my best to obey the law, even silly "gun free zones"..But even honest people make honest mistakes. And once I realize I have erred, I take immediate action to correct that error. UNLIKE A CRIMNAL WOULD.""""""


See where he says that he has to be asked to leave??? See how he says that he must be discovered with a gun before it is even hinted that a crime is being committed??? You see This guyt thinks that people need to read his mind and get the message that he is going to bring a concealed weapon onto the premisses and be told or asked rather that he not do so before he does it or he gets a pass and is breaking no law until he says he is not leaving.

GOT IT?

You did get that part right!

"is breaking no law until he says he is not leaving."

You can call him discourteous, but under the LAW he broke no LAW by simply ignoring the sign in those places he mentioned.

That is the LAW in Virginia and it also happens to be the LAW here in Kentucky. Texas has a law where the sign has to follow a specified format, known there as the "30.06 sign" from the Texas statute, to carry any force while the generic
sign is meaningless. Some business owners in Texas post the generic sign simply to placate those customers who are against concealed carry while still allowing concealed carry by those customers who have a permit.

posting a lie to keep the business of some because they are afraid to admit that they are pro-concealed carry.

And in Virginia a person can ignore the gun free zones wishes legally until someone informs the person that he is carrying in a gun free zone.

So you admit that some permit holders are disrespectful of and untruthful to others. Big Surprise there , eh?

I hope the sarcasm is clear enough for even you.

YOU NEVER JAYWALK??

You NEVER make a mistake??

Holy Cow, it is Jesus!!!! He LIVES!!!!!!!!

What real, measurable, damage does the fact that I'm carrying a fire arm in a business that prohibits me from doing so cause? I know of one place that is actually posted in Colorado Springs and I use the drive through there, every where else doesn't seem to care. I carry a gun in the police station if I have business there. I've carried for a few years and I've never been "made" yet.

I wonder, does this mean the rapture starts???

Thanks for posting the story, RamboLiberal.

after reading article I found that six people were hit by fragments of one bullet.

as I have been hit by ricochets three times on an indoor gun range. Two hits were on my arm and drew blood. One hit my leg, but my jeans protected me.

(One good reason to wear eye protection even when not shooting.)

I was shooting steel plates. One of the rounds did not splatter enough and the copper jacket bounced back and hit me in the leg, jeans preventing any injury.

+1 on eye protection for all in the area.