Would a firearms ban prevent this

Status
Not open for further replies.
We are in serious denial, well, some of us anyway, about the gang/thug problem here in Montgomery, AL.

Just ask our Mayor. We don't have a problem.

But on the bright side (no pun intended to Mayor Bright) he did tell us we should get a gun, learn to use it, and protect ourselves. Plus he threw out the first pitch at one of my over 40 MSBL baseball games for us some time back. Not a bad guy all around. He likes Baseball, tells us to get a gun. Yea, not too bad. ;)

Hey there Elrod.
 
I really want to say sometihng constructive here, but I'm speechless. The guys who did this not only need to go to prison, but just simply get the snot beat out of them daily for about 5 years.

Shooting at anyone is despicable, but to shoot at a mother and her baby in a doctor's parking lot... Those guys aren't human. They are vicious animals that need to be destroyed.
 
Did you happen to read that the punks used a pellet gun and not a firearm?

Since no firearm was used, how would this relate to illegal use of a firearm or illegal ownership of a firearm?
 
Well, this hits kind of close to home in a firearms related way. My brother was living in an apartment complex a few months ago. Some idiots just like these drove through about fifteen minutes before he returned home one day and sprayed the whole parking lot with bbs and pellets, damaging dozens of cars.

When a neighbor asked what he would've done if he'd been there and in the lot when this happened, my brother said "well, I'd have no idea if it was a pellet gun or a .22 or what, I probably would've returned fire."

The neighbor was astonished.

But I can tell you this. If some punk kid opened up on my infant son with a pellet gun, I'd be returning fire, and with something significantly broader in diameter than .177".

I'd like to see these three charged with more than assault, too.
 
hso,

I think his point was that a firearm was not used.

People who want to hurt people will find ways other than guns. I hope that was the point.
 
agreed with most parties above. It's still possible to die or suffer grievous bodily harm from a pellet gun wound. Especially if you're a kid whose skull hasn't fully fused yet.

What a stupid way to die. I'm glad they're all in custody.
 
I fully understand that a pellet gun isn't designed to cause serious injury or death, but it was still used as such.

This is like those stupid kids that rob gas stations with a syringe or a hot cup of coffee. They aren't weapons by definition or design, but when used as such the charges and punishment should match.
 
I'd like to see these three charged with more than assault, too.

Assault with a dealdy weapon and attempted murder for starters. The baby was maybe an inch or two from possible life threatening/altering injuries.

Baby killers will get no sympathy from a jury.
 
It may not be gun related per se but the antis will use it as evidence when it comes to attempts at gun control! And as Walkalong says we don't have a problem here in Montg., just like we didn't have a problem in 1992 when a couple of gangbanger decided to ambush people on Federal Dr. and the Northern Blvd. with SKSs either.
 
I fully understand that a pellet gun isn't designed to cause serious injury or death, but it was still used as such.

I have to respectfully disagree with you, Rob. While no one intelligent would call even the heaviest .22 pellet a "manstopper," all projectile weapons were designed to cause injury at a distance. In the case of the air-propelled pellet, the intended target is small game -- squirrels, rabbits, rats, birds, etc. A .177-caliber lead pellet or steel BB moving at around 400fps (typical velocity) could definitely kill a baby or blind an adult.

In Texas, a lethal-force response to this attack would just have been justified, it would have been widely applauded.
 
What the story didn't say was these guys were riding around randomly sniping at innocent and unsuspecting people. One lady was putting her groceries into her car when the rear glass was shattered. Another guy was gassing his car when the side window burst. These were apparently near-misses.:fire:

And Walkalong says we don't have a problem here in Montg

I may be wrong, but I took that as sarcasm.

The whole point of this post was to point out that even if a firearm ban is enacted, very dangerous items remain. Do you ban everything? Slingshots, bow and arrows, spears, even rocks are dangerous to those with ill intentions.
Do government schools prevent kids from drawing sticks? (BTW, why didn't the kid who was suspended for drawing a gun tell them it was a picture of a toy gun??:confused:)
I sure don't have the answer!
 
In Texas, a lethal-force response to this attack would just have been justified, it would have been widely applauded.

In Colorado, lethal force is justified when you are in "imminent danger or serious bodily injury". Since air guns are capable of causing serious bodily injury, deadly force is an acceptable response.

Shoot at me with an air rifle, expect to get 180 grain Golden Sabres in return.
 
A .177-caliber lead pellet or steel BB moving at around 400fps (typical velocity) could definitely kill a baby or blind an adult.

It'll do more than that. I remember a story about a kid who was shot from across a neighborhood street with a smooth-bore BB gun...like a Red Ryder or something in its class. The ball passed through a screen door and struck him in the chest. It got between his ribs and entered a lung...and he nearly died enroute to the hospital.

The boy who shot him stated that he didn't mean to hurt him...that he just wanted to scare him a little.

That would penetrate the carotid artery in neat fashion. Freak occurrence? Yes. Potential for a lethal wound? You bet.
 
Well even in England, you can still get some air guns (albeit with some restrictions) and as this points out, they can be dangerous. That's why sites like THR advocate safe practices for handling guns. Many people say that air guns can be used in crimes and their handlers potentially shot. I say: "and?"

If someone is stupid enough to try to use a gun, fake or not, in a manner that is illegal then I say they deserve whatever happens to them. I mean what's next, oh the bad guy only has a 9mm but the good guy used a .45 on him.

I don't know of any gun control laws that would prevent this, nor do I think they should try. What these kids did was criminal already as assault.
 
I can't find any links to it right now, but there was a young teen killed here in greater Cleverland a couple of years back by a "BB/Pellet Gun Drive-By". BB went through kid's t-shirt, between ribs and punched a hole in his aorta.
 
I probably shouldn't have done this, but several years ago I was living in a townhouse when I heard a couple of "whaps" on the outside wall near the window I was sitting next to. I peeked out the window in time to see a kid with a pellet gun duck behind his fence the next block over. I got in my car and drove to his house and knocked on the front door. The kid's mother answered and I told her what had happened. She acted astonished and said they took the pellet gun away from the boy (apparently this had been a problem before). I informed her that if I saw him shoot at me or my house again that I would return fire and I would not be using a pellet gun. Had no more "sniping" problems after that.

In hindsight I should have just called the police, but my adrenaline was pumping. Made a vow to myself to be more level headed if anything like this happened again.
 
air rifles have killed in the uk usually either by accident or in the hands of a malicious idiot.
Don't think theres been a murder case as nobody would set out to kill using a 12ft/lb air rifle but you can kill with them :mad:

even if you brought in strict fire arms laws and all the law abiding people handed their guns in you would still have a vast amount of weapons in the hands of bad guys and just forgotten about weapons
every so often we have firearms amnesty's and its surprising what comes out of the woodwork
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top