Gun Control 1: Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang

[Kepler]

Somehow not Florida.

FORT WAYNE, Ind. -- An Indiana man faces felony charges after he was shot in the back by a 2-year-old boy who found the weapon on a bed, according to authorities.

Justin T. Wiley, 32, of Fort Wayne was charged this week with neglect of a dependent resulting in serious bodily injury and unlawful possession of a handgun. He is not legally allowed to carry a gun because of prior felony convictions, The Journal Gazette reported.

Fort Wayne police officers found Wiley on Sept. 9 suffering from a gunshot wound in his middle to upper back, according to a probable cause affidavit.

He was shot in the home of a woman who has an active protection order against him.

[WeAreNDHockey]

Somehow not Florida.

Well as was once said by someone else, "nothing wrong with shooting as long as the right people get shot."

[Kepler]

An instance in which I am 100% on the side of the shooter and wish he had blown this guy's head clean off.

[WeAreNDHockey]

An instance in which I am 100% on the side of the shooter and wish he had blown this guy's head clean off.

The prankster deserved a beatdown, no doubt. But I don't know how many people I trust discharging a firearm inside a mall under almost any circumstances unless someone is obviously threatening a life. It's why my firearm never leaves my house. If you are in my home, you either belong or you're not wanted. It's easy to tell if someone needs shooting, who needs shot, and the environment is controlled. Not so much in a mall. Frankly I think the shooter did us a favor and maybe idiots like this prankster will think twice, but we encourage more people to think they're gonna be that proverbial "good guy with a gun" if we let the shooter off with a total walk.

[Kepler]

but we encourage more people to think they're gonna be that proverbial "good guy with a gun" if we let the shooter off with a total walk.

No. This guy was not playing impotent Republican with a gun thinks he's High Plains Drifter. He was just an innocent civilian scared by Douche Bro. Douche Bro's brains sprayed all over Auntie Anne's solves the entire problem.

[unofan]

No. This guy was not playing impotent Republican with a gun thinks he's High Plains Drifter. He was just an innocent civilian scared by Douche Bro. Douche Bro's brains sprayed all over Auntie Anne's solves the entire problem.

Jury acquitted him on 2 of 3 charges, including both serious ones. He was found guilty of firing a gun inside the mall, but that's been set aside, at least for now.

Good.

[Handyman]

You sound like Republicans when cops kill Black people...no hyperbole.

I don't care how douchy the guy was you don't fire a gun unless you are threatened. The guy should go to jail and never be allowed to have a gun again.

[unofan]

You sound like Republicans when cops kill Black people...no hyperbole.

I don't care how douchy the guy was you don't fire a gun unless you are threatened. The guy should go to jail and never be allowed to have a gun again.

A jury found that he felt threatened, given that they acquitted him. So...

I'm sorry, but self defense is a thing and if some ******* starts looming over someone after they tell them to stop, they get what's coming to them.

[Drew S.]

A jury found that he felt threatened, given that they acquitted him. So...

I'm sorry, but self defense is a thing and if some ******* starts looming over someone after they tell them to stop, they get what's coming to them.

If you’re a food delivery driver you’re 100% justified in carrying as far as I’m concerned.

If you go up to some random person and shove a phone in their face you should expect to get punched, stabbed, shot, etc. There is no justifying that kind of behavior.

[French Rage]

The fact he said "stop" three times showed he was not in imminent danger, and that takes away the justification for straight-up shooting someone. (Note: this is based on my opinion, and not knowledge of the actual laws, fwiw.) If he did it immediately after the prankster did it the first time, then yes, maybe it was a gut reaction when he felt mortally threatened, but by the third time I just don't see it that way. Don't get me wrong, the prankster's behavior was completely unacceptable; if the shooter had just mercilessly beaten the **** out of him, then he's in the right for the extent to which he felt bothered/threatened and the way in which he responded. But to me to shoot someone there has to me some extra threat that I don't see here. I'm not saying the shooter should get anything serious, mind you, because 95% of the example set here needs to be on the prankster and not the shooter.

Also, this is amusing because this mall is roughly a mile from where my mom lives.

[Slap Shot]

Content creators on principle deserve to be shot so...

But in reality I don't see how the guy justified feeling threatened and is precisely the type of person that I am fearful of carrying a gun in public.

[WeAreNDHockey]

This is one of those hybrid situations where the right person got shot, but there still might be something wrong with shooting. Mainly because you have no control over the round when it exits the barrel, whether you hit your target or not.

With my heart racing, adrenaline pumping, and in fear for my life, I feel confident I would hit my target if it within 5 yards. In my home, regardless of the room I am in, I would be within 5 yards (15 feet) of someone. Then, what happens to the round AFTER it hit the person you were shooting at, provided you do? What kind of ammunition did you load your firearm with? Do you fire something like a 230 grain jacketed hollow point .45 caliber round with a muzzle velocity of 850 feet per second or or a 9MM full metal jacketed round that leaves your firearm at 1200 FPS? Even a hollow point with a relatively low muzzle velocity can travel right through a body. A jacketed round moving much faster is almost SURE to travel right through a body and do almost as much damage -- or possibly more because even a jacketed round can become deformed and act like a hollow pointed round -- when it hits the next, unintended target.

I am clearly not the smartest person in the world, because I own a firearm to begin with. But I am smart enough to know that come hell or high water, that firearm best never leave my home. I don't trust most cops who are allegedly trained in high stress firearm use situations to shoot in public. I am doubtful I trust myself in a setting like a mall. I sure as hell don't trust someone I don't know. So yeah, the right guy got shot, but I won't celebrate the shooter. Leave your guns at home.

[Bronco]

Oxford, MI school shooter sentenced to life without parole for killing four kids and wounding more. Parents still in the court system for supplying him with the gun facing manslaughter charges.

https://apnews.com/article/oxford-sc...cee603b7b1f0e3

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Oxford, MI school shooter sentenced to life without parole for killing four kids and wounding more. Parents still in the court system for supplying him with the gun facing manslaughter charges.

https://apnews.com/article/oxford-sc...cee603b7b1f0e3

I can't like this. I agree it's not likely he'll ever be fit to re-enter society. His parents failed him and both of them should get put away for life along with him, even though that won't happen.

[Bronco]

I can't like this. I agree it's not likely he'll ever be fit to re-enter society. His parents failed him and both of them should get put away for life along with him, even though that won't happen.

I agree his parents failed him and should get serious time (decades). For the kid, I think life in prison without parole is a just outcome if it happens. I normally would agree that he should have a chance at parole but everything I hear about this kid is terrible. No remorse, and sounds like he would do it again if given a chance. If anyone isn't fit to belong in society it is this kid. Maybe in 40 years some DA will come back and look at the case since Michigan has one of the highest rates of kids locked up, but for now I find the possilbe sentence fair.