To: Richard Kimball
He hit what he was aiming at. That isn't random, and he couldn't have been very drunk.
Keep in mind he was charged with "criminal use of a firearm" whatever the hell that means. What was criminal? Shooting in your house? (no more indoor ranges) Shooting a TV? (is this a new part of the "fairness doctrine"?) It all seems a little silly to me. He didn't hurt anything but a TV, let the man alone.
37 posted on
02/20/2009 7:14:24 AM PST by
Durus
(The People have abdicated our duties and anxiously hopes for just two things, "Bread and Circuses")
To: Durus
This is one where we'll just have to disagree. As a firefighter, if I make a call at a house and there's a drunk guy that's been shooting his television, I'm bringing in LEO, and we're figuring out some way to separate the guy from his gun and get him in custody until he's sober. He's a danger to himself, his wife, and the people next door.
40 posted on
02/20/2009 7:28:54 AM PST by
Richard Kimball
(We're all criminals. They just haven't figured out what some of us have done yet.)
To: Durus
Discharging a firearm in a city is usually illegal because bullets tend to go through things and houses are pretty close together.
Exceptions are of course made for properly-built gun ranges and self defense, but I don’t think shooting your TV qualifies as a necessary use of a firearm, even if Helen Thomas was on and it was a knee-jerk reaction to keep you from pulling your eyes out.
44 posted on
02/20/2009 7:53:33 AM PST by
antiRepublicrat
("I am a firm believer that there are not two sides to every issue..." -- Arianna Huffington)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson