Gun Legislation

[O Really]

Well, they are more likely to miss their target, though I'm not sure anyone other than the school mascot will consider it a good thing.

According to the article, this member of Buncombe's finest first missed the vicious Border Collie from less than five feet while shooting in the general direction of his kids, then fired again and hit the dog. If there had been some "law abiding citizen" exercising his "Second Amendment Rights" close by and seen some guy with a gun firing in the general direction of kids, maybe there would have been somebody else claiming "he had no choice."

[O Really]

Nothing could possibly go wrong with that idea, could it?

[Wneglia]

Georgia lawmakers approve gun-carry rights in college classrooms (and bars, churches, some other unsecured government buildings)

My brother is a GA Tech prof.

A Tale Of Two Cities

[Wneglia]

"...Now compare a city like Kennesaw (population 29,783) to New York City..."

See any problems with that? Even then, according to the article's figures, the 2010 murder rate in Kennesaw was 1 per 9928 residents whereas in NYC it was 1 per 16,010 residents. Opps.

In a 25-year period, New York City has had more than 15,000 murders – 2245 in 1990 alone – while Kennesaw, Georgia, had 1. Link

And you just happened to pick the one year Kennesaw had a murder.

[O Really]

Kennesaw does have a substantially lower than national average crime rate. They did have a murder in 99, 2000,2003, and 2004 in addition to any others Doc found. But it's still low by any count. Now showing a direct correlation between their never enforced gun law and that figure gets a little dicey. There are quite a few other factors that affect crime rate. Kennesaw is above average in income, housing, and education. Let's compare instead of NYC to a more similar town - Coral Gables, FL. The Gables is a little larger, but not all that much, and has no such mandatory firearm law as Kennesaw. It is also a suburb of a large city with high crime rates (Miami vs. Atlanta) and has above average demographics as well as a university. Since 1999, they've had 10 murders - twice Kennesaw's 5, but still an actual lower rate per 100,000 than Kennesaw in the years each had murders.

Let's consider also NYC crime rate. Sure, in 99 it was high. Now it's among the lowest of major cities. The city did a lot of things to get the crime (including murder) rate down, but requiring everyone to buy a gun wasn't one of them.

Statistics don't lie - sometimes statistians do, but somebody (and you know who you are) needs to refresh their understanding of "causal relationship."

[O Really]

More on Kennesaw - according to FBI crime statistics, Kennesaw maintains a low crime rate, but not remarkably so, compared with other Georgia towns of similar size. It reported 21 violent crimes in 2011, according to the FBI's uniform crime statistics database. That put it well below Douglasville, which recorded 179 violent crimes, but above Milton (14 violent crimes) and Peachtree City (eight violent crimes).

The real point with their gun law, though, is that there is no means of enforcement (e.g., inspections, etc.), no attempt at enforcement, and no penalties for violation. That's like saying a town motto like "Happiest Town in the USA" has a direct effect on divorce rate. It might, but you could never prove it.

[bannination]

The US Gun Control Thing

[k9nanny]

A few points from the article conveniently left out of O really's post:

Honeycutt has four dogs and has been involved in canine training,

A sign at Catawba Falls urges people to keep their pets under physical restraint at all times. Schulman said the dogs were not on a leash....

The article is even headed with a photo of the sign. However, I'm not surprised at the typical responses here. We are all supposed to wait and see what might happen. Never mind that it would only have taken a matter of seconds for one of Honeycutt's children to have been scarred for life or worse.

I didn't leave anything out - I linked to the entire article. Who cares whether he has dogs or has "been involved" in canine training. Find a reputable trainer that says he responded reasonably.

K9? You there?

Yep. Just now found this.
Maybe he overreacted, maybe not. Border collies can be hinky, and I've known several who were fear biters.
The owner's story is also suspicious. What, he fell in a creek, unleashed three dogs, and pled, "Lassie, go find Timmy?" Was he wet when he emerged? Did he produce three leashes? What kind of idiot let's a ten pound dog run loose in the forest?

I've seen too many cases of attacks, pack mentality, and "my dog would never bite." Can't call this one as I wasn't there. I wouldn't dismiss it as unjustifiable just because the shooter was a cop.

There's one hard fast rule. Anything that happens to your dog off-leash is ultimately your responsibility.

[O Really]

There's one hard fast rule. Anything that happens to your dog off-leash is ultimately your responsibility.

True that. But there are limits. Just because my dog gets out doesn't mean you can, for example, take him back to your lair and torture him. And if the shooter hadn't been a cop, there would have been the automatic questions about firing the gun around people in the forest. I don't believe either story completely. People always tell the version that makes them look better than the other guy. But I go hiking at least once a week, weather and travel schedule permitting, and I've run across a lot of loose dogs. Never thought I needed to shoot one. I still think the owner was an idiot and the shooter was both an idiot and an asshole.

[O Really]

It could be that the dog owner is an idiot but we don't know that for sure. His dogs may have never threatened or bitten anyone in their lives and the cop may have completely misread the situation, aggravated it and overreacted.

Yeah, that's my real guess. But as K9 noted, letting a ten-pounder loose in the forest is pretty careless if nothing else. In my years in forests and parks, I find that the dogs people let run loose are not likely to be dangerous. Probably didn't help that the shooter kicked one of the pack members.

[k9nanny]

Yeah, he most likely overreacted. I still want to know why the owner claimed he needed help.
Still, I can't say what I would do in that situation with two kids and no bad ass German Shepherd by my side, because I have no idea how threatening the dog was. I've been around dogs who would attack unprovoked, and picking up a rock or standing still wouldn't have prevented it.

The dog was probably just doing its "job." We get lots of owners whose herding dogs nip the kids. They don't get it - you chose a breed whose instinct is to do just that, then you want to get rid of it for doing its job.

If the cop should be castigated, so should the owner. Again, anything that happens to your dog off leash is your responsibility. The owner is an idiot for letting his dogs run loose. I've sat on many an appeals case where the owner swears, "But Cujo plays with my babies. He wouldn't hurt a flea." No, but he ripped open your neighbor's face. Any dog is capable of biting, even one that never has. One must wonder how the kids were acting. Flailing arms, high pitched squealing, running .... all those can excite a dog. If the dog is with a pack, everything is escalated.

I think there's plenty of blame on both sides, and I do feel especially sorry for the kids. They're already scarred, Mad Bowhunter.

The article is very vague about what kind of training this guy had. If the cop were actually a k9 handler, I have no doubt he would have reacted differently. There's a huge difference between training knowledge and behavior knowledge. A real handler would have told the kids what to do, and what not to do, and I seriously doubt s/he would drop a circling border collie, who would have to work hard to inflict fatal damage.

[O Really]

I might have a different opinion if we changed a few of the facts. I can understand a person being afraid of a strange dog - particularly if s/he thinks it might attack the kids. And I can see that a person who goes armed to take his kids for a walk in the forest might look to his gun as a "reasonable" response. And since I wasn't there and there is apparently no video (which must have been the only thing left on earth that wasn't videoed), then I don't know that the vicious Border Collie didn't look like Cujo. But my opinion of the asshole was formed and carved into stone when I read his comment after the shooting... "Damn right I shot your dog." Even assuming that everything the shooter said was exactly correct and accurate (Big assumption), any human being with a brain or shred of decency would have said instead, "I'm sorry, man...he looked like he was attacking my kids" or something recognizing the seriousness of what he had done. I really hope Karma bites.

[O Really]

Good book review - probably a good book:
http://www.tampabay.com/features/books/ ... sy/2108916

Dan Baum explores in his new book, Gun Guys: A Road Trip. For a year he traveled the United States, stopping at every gun shop his phone apps could locate, dropping in on gun shows and shooting ranges to interact with the men of his title and try to answer some basic questions: "Why do we like these things? Why do they move us so deeply?'' His encounters show just how emotionally charged firearms are in our America — and he researched and wrote before the Newtown, Conn., massacre.

[JTA]

I might have a different opinion if we changed a few of the facts. I can understand a person being afraid of a strange dog - particularly if s/he thinks it might attack the kids. And I can see that a person who goes armed to take his kids for a walk in the forest might look to his gun as a "reasonable" response. And since I wasn't there and there is apparently no video (which must have been the only thing left on earth that wasn't videoed), then I don't know that the vicious Border Collie didn't look like Cujo. But my opinion of the asshole was formed and carved into stone when I read his comment after the shooting... "Damn right I shot your dog." Even assuming that everything the shooter said was exactly correct and accurate (Big assumption), any human being with a brain or shred of decency would have said instead, "I'm sorry, man...he looked like he was attacking my kids" or something recognizing the seriousness of what he had done. I really hope Karma bites.

When I was a kid my dad's douche-bag cop friend stopped by for a visit. We had a pretty docile medium sized white lab mix that would sit in the front yard and bark when anyone drove down the lane.

As officer douche-bag exits his vehicle, our old dog stays right where he was when D-Bag first pulled up and starts barking like he always does when anyone drove down our driveway. Officer D-bag pulls out his gun and points it at our dog and starts yelling that he's going to have to shoot him if someone doesn't restrain him.

Meanwhile me, my brother, and my stepsister (all under the age of twelve!) are about 20 feet away in the swimming pool looking on in horror as this guy is about to shoot our old-ass dog.

Screw that guy.

Ok. Dogs can be scary. I've been chased by many a dog whilst riding my bike around town as a kid. But when your vehicle is right next to you and a dog is barking at you, the most logical solution to such a confrontation would be to re-enter your vehicle and wait for the owner to restrain the dog.

[O Really]

Another (formerly) "law-abiding citizen", now deceased, whose only crime up to his death apparently was keeping weapons in a UCF dorm room, an offense that wouldn't be an offense if the NRA-owned legislators get their way.
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03 ... e-say?lite

Good ending overall, though.

[O Really]

New York has a program - a year or so old by now - where a $500 reward is offered for reporting somebody with an illegal firearm. Gun ummm, "enthusiasts", being a little slow in the reading department, hadn't noticed it until recently when the state ran some public service announcements about it and now have gotten their panties in a wad. So, I suppose it would be OK to offer a reward for turning in a burglar? How about a car thief? Meth seller - or even user? Illegal Mexican? But not an illegal gun. Riiiight.

Here's one reaction from the lunesphere... http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/a ... 34273.html

[Ombudsman]

Why would gun enthusiasts be upset? This only affects illegal firearms. Have they changed their opinion about "illegals?"

[O Really]

"Illegal" only counts if you're Mexican. Many of the gun ummm "enthusiasts" proudly state their willingness, nay eagerness, to be law-breakers if asked to buy smaller magazines or God forbid register their piece.

[O Really]

...Here's one reaction from the lunesphere... http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/a ... 34273.html

"it isn’t legitimately a crime, since it didn’t involve injury or fraud on his part". That's an interesting interpretation - drugs, prostitution, gambling, open containers, adult porn, public nudity, illegal immigration, etc.? And why is fraud not included in injury?

Maybe it's like "legitimate rape"

[O Really]

Actually, I'm not usually much in favor of sting operations. And I don't really think this guy was the best choice to make an example of. But the thing is, if you can run a sting for drug sales, you can run a sting for gun sales. I'm guessing he won't get much of a sentence - maybe get to plead "oops" or something. But the cops still got the publicity for trying to enforce the law. I'm waiting for the gun ummm, "enthusiasts" to come out in opposition to the use of confidential informants, and maybe even use of 911 to report an apparent crime. Best laugh will be when they actually use the term "snitch."