Chuck Jennings
Member
It would be stupid enough to pull this with real body armor. This sounds like it was a flack vest. IIRC they have a warning on the label that clearly states they are not for stopping bullets! :banghead:
Another one for the Darwin Awards!
- Thread starter Chuck Jennings
- Start date
- Status
It would be stupid enough to pull this with real body armor. This sounds like it was a flack vest. IIRC they have a warning on the label that clearly states they are not for stopping bullets! :banghead:
Sindawe
Member
Involuntary my 'gluts! His buddy ASKED him to shot him, and he willingly obliged. The blame rests soley on the dead chaps head. HE knew the gun was loaded. HE stood in front of the thing. HE told his buddy.."Go ahead, SHOOT ME!"
Yep, Darwin wins. Again.
steveno
Member
maybe there is hope for cleaning up the gene pool after all
jojo
Member
What an idiot, but then again, most people don't know the difference between a flack jacket and a bullet proof vest.
While the friend is an idiot, I cant see why he should go to jail. The experience alone will be enough to keep him down for a long time.
jojo
While the friend is an idiot, I cant see why he should go to jail. The experience alone will be enough to keep him down for a long time.
jojo
NavajoNPaleFace
Member
Yep...they re-defined the meaning of stupid.
There were TWO irresponsible cretins
the shooter and the target. This incident - a gift to the anti-gunners - would not have occurred if the shooter were not just as stupid and far more irresponsible than the target.
"Involuntary my 'gluts! His buddy ASKED him to shot [sic] him, and he willingly obliged. The blame rests soley [sic] on the dead chaps head."
Wrong. Try giving the car keys to an obvious drunk and trotting out that assinine excuse when you are sued for negligent entrustment.
The operative word - YOURS, by the way - is "willingly." Two male idiots (a classic Darwin Award scenario -I suspect liquor was also a major factor) overdosing on testosterone and ignorance. Result? One dead; one facing charges. Yes, stellar examples of responsible firearms owners.
Reminds me of another DA winner from a few years back.
Bitten by a rattlesnake. Several times. On the face.
SAME wounds on his buddy. Both were drunk.
They were playing "catch" with a rattlesnake. One dead, one seriously injured.
Too bad the snake ran out of venom.....
the shooter and the target. This incident - a gift to the anti-gunners - would not have occurred if the shooter were not just as stupid and far more irresponsible than the target.
"Involuntary my 'gluts! His buddy ASKED him to shot [sic] him, and he willingly obliged. The blame rests soley [sic] on the dead chaps head."
Wrong. Try giving the car keys to an obvious drunk and trotting out that assinine excuse when you are sued for negligent entrustment.
The operative word - YOURS, by the way - is "willingly." Two male idiots (a classic Darwin Award scenario -I suspect liquor was also a major factor) overdosing on testosterone and ignorance. Result? One dead; one facing charges. Yes, stellar examples of responsible firearms owners.
Reminds me of another DA winner from a few years back.
Bitten by a rattlesnake. Several times. On the face.
SAME wounds on his buddy. Both were drunk.
They were playing "catch" with a rattlesnake. One dead, one seriously injured.
Too bad the snake ran out of venom.....
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
I tried to find the actual story, but nothing came up on Google when trying to match names, location, and/or Associated Press. I checked the Idaho Statesman and it had nothing. Do you have an actual link for the article?
Johnny Knoxville, of MTV's "Jackass" fame, first got somewhat famous for having someone shoot him while wearing a bullet proof vest (with trauma plate). I think they used a .38 as well. Of course he then went on to a career of doing lots of other incredibly stupid things. I don't know if he ever topped being shot though.
Everybody wants to be a jackass these days.
brad cook
Everybody wants to be a jackass these days.
brad cook
Chuck Jennings
Member
357Texas
Member
DA winner is a understatement
I have been working Security for about 15 years now, and have been shot at a few times in my life even when I wore my vest I never just stood there. I did not care what the other guy had I got my a** down.
I have been working Security for about 15 years now, and have been shot at a few times in my life even when I wore my vest I never just stood there. I did not care what the other guy had I got my a** down.
Sleeping Dog
Member
Yep, a Darwinian "two-fer".
One permanently removed from gene pool, the other will be removed from the populating population for some period of time.
At least they saved some... well one of the two saved some dignity buy shooting at it with it propped up, where it apparently stopped/ deflected the bullet. It would be absolutly halarious if the bullets went through when they were testing it, and they still went allong with shooting themselves. I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
The_Doc
Member
I think I saw the same video with the Second Chance guy. Not only did he take a pistol bullet, he also had the host of the video take a shot from an FAL at a distance of 5 feet or so - wearing a higher level vest, of course.
That was impressive....
I believe the video was called "Deadly Weapons."
That was impressive....
I believe the video was called "Deadly Weapons."
I didn't see it in the article but I wonder if the phrase, "Hey ya'll, hold my beer and watch this" ever entered into the conversation 
Even though the gun will be blamed (by the anti's), I would suspect that tv and movies had a play in this as well as the upmost stupidity of these two.
Wayne
Even though the gun will be blamed (by the anti's), I would suspect that tv and movies had a play in this as well as the upmost stupidity of these two.
Wayne
shep854
Member
Rich Davis, the developer of the Second Chance vest would, to demonstrate his product, don his vest then shoot himself with a .44 Magnum. Afterward, he would shoot bowling pins off a table to demonstrate that he was using full-house rounds. This was also the origin of the sport of "pin shooting"-great fun if you haven't tried it! Shooting bowling pins-NOT yourself!
The impressive thing about the .308 demonstration (the one I saw, anyway) was that the shootee stood on one foot when he was shot, and all he had to do when hit was put the other foot down to steady himself. So much for "knockdown power".
The impressive thing about the .308 demonstration (the one I saw, anyway) was that the shootee stood on one foot when he was shot, and all he had to do when hit was put the other foot down to steady himself. So much for "knockdown power".
The blame rests on the head of the man who pulled the trigger. None other. The mitigating circumstances only help in determining what punishment to mete out. (I vote for lifetime felony probation and mandatory immediate sterilization.)
Standing Wolf
Member in memoriam
I believe it's mandatory.
That saidâ„¢, these two sound too dumb even to have managed that much right.
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
I love it. Y'all have Rich Davis getting shot with bigger and bigger rounds as the thread progresses. My guess is that it will get to .50 AE pistol and then .50 BMG rifle.
Pooor Tory, he does not understand what involuntary manslaughter means. Yes, Tory, Swandic asked to be shot. He did NOT ask to be killed. The resulting death was unintentional and hence the involuntary manslaughter charge.
Shep854, why should he have fell down if shot with a .308 while wearing a vest that stopped the round? The shooter didn't fall down while shooting the cartridge and so why should Davis?
It is a little frightening to know that folks here are making grand accomplishment claims about Swandic being removed from the gene pool as being something Darwinian, but the Darwinian notion is comepletely thwarted if Swandic has managed to already to pass on his genes. The overly simplified notion of Darwinism counts ONLY if the idiot person removed from the gene pool has done so BEFORE passing on his genes.
Pooor Tory, he does not understand what involuntary manslaughter means. Yes, Tory, Swandic asked to be shot. He did NOT ask to be killed. The resulting death was unintentional and hence the involuntary manslaughter charge.
Shep854, why should he have fell down if shot with a .308 while wearing a vest that stopped the round? The shooter didn't fall down while shooting the cartridge and so why should Davis?
It is a little frightening to know that folks here are making grand accomplishment claims about Swandic being removed from the gene pool as being something Darwinian, but the Darwinian notion is comepletely thwarted if Swandic has managed to already to pass on his genes. The overly simplified notion of Darwinism counts ONLY if the idiot person removed from the gene pool has done so BEFORE passing on his genes.
straightShot
Member
"Suicide by friend"?
How stupid can one be?
How stupid can one be?
shep854
Member
00Spy, I don't know if it was Rich Davis in the .308 video I saw or not. I admit I was surprised, after all the flying bodies I saw on TV, etc. It was well over 10 years ago that I saw it. Since then, I have learned a lot about the physics of shooting.
Homicide
"Pooor Tory, he does not understand what involuntary manslaughter means. Yes, Tory, Swandic asked to be shot. He did NOT ask to be killed. The resulting death was unintentional and hence the involuntary manslaughter charge."
Save your pity for yourself.
If you knew half as much law as you profess to, you would be familiar with the following:
1. Depraved indifference; and
2. Reckless endangerment.
Both are more severe than involuntary manslaughter; both are far more applicable to the fact pattern at hand.
Unless, in your learned fashion, you can explain how he INVOLUNTARILY took what he KNEW to be a loaded rifle, DELIBERATELY aimed it at his fellow cretin, FIRED it after seeing what it had already done to the jacket while on the ground and STILL could not reasonably expect death or serious bodily harm to his idiot friend.
Hint: Start with Black's.......
"Pooor Tory, he does not understand what involuntary manslaughter means. Yes, Tory, Swandic asked to be shot. He did NOT ask to be killed. The resulting death was unintentional and hence the involuntary manslaughter charge."
Save your pity for yourself.
If you knew half as much law as you profess to, you would be familiar with the following:
1. Depraved indifference; and
2. Reckless endangerment.
Both are more severe than involuntary manslaughter; both are far more applicable to the fact pattern at hand.
Unless, in your learned fashion, you can explain how he INVOLUNTARILY took what he KNEW to be a loaded rifle, DELIBERATELY aimed it at his fellow cretin, FIRED it after seeing what it had already done to the jacket while on the ground and STILL could not reasonably expect death or serious bodily harm to his idiot friend.
Hint: Start with Black's.......
fistful
member
Poor fistful,
He does not understand how dying at 20 doesn't aid natural selection, as the fool in question will have fewer descendants than if he had lived to a ripe old age. But fistful is a Biblical creationist, so he's not concerned about it.
He does not understand how dying at 20 doesn't aid natural selection, as the fool in question will have fewer descendants than if he had lived to a ripe old age. But fistful is a Biblical creationist, so he's not concerned about it.
- Status
Similar threads
