Congratulations Unknown IN Man Tony E. Ward! You Are Our 2nd Amendment Hero Du Jour

[UPDATE:]

Won’t face charges. Because, freedom.

———————————————————

A responsible gun owner responsibly took his gun to Walmart where it responsibly fell out of his waistband (where he kept it! Just like they do in the movies!) and subsequently shot a woman in the arm:

COLUMBUS, Ind. (WISH) – A woman was accidentally shot in the arm at a Columbus Walmart, according to 24-Hour News 8′s partners The Republic.

Police said a man’s 22-caliber handgun fell from his waistband while he was shopping and discharged.

Columbus Police Chief Jon Rohde was inside the Walmart, located at 2025 Merchants Mile, when he heard the gunshot. Rohde immediately called for help.

The woman was shot in the arm and suffered a minor injury, according to police.

Police said the man has a permit for the gun and it was in a holster when it fell.

Remind me again why we don’t want these people carrying liability insurance along with their firearms?

About these ads

15 Comments

Filed under gun control

15 responses to “Congratulations Unknown IN Man Tony E. Ward! You Are Our 2nd Amendment Hero Du Jour

  1. When I tap your linkyloo it goes to a story about a shooting in San Antonio, TX.

    From what I saw in a couple of searches, there’s a lot of “Polite” goin’ on this weekend in MurKKKan society.

  2. Mary Wilson

    Heck, he was probably taking it back to WalMart to buy a bigger one..

  3. Meanwhile I see that the NRAbots are out in force on Yahoo’s story about the Santa Barbara shootings. It’s all the CRAZY KILLAHS FAULT!! He used a knife, toooooooooooooo. They don’t explain how he killed THREE people with a knife or knives (and there’s no information about how that went down, yet) and then had to SHOOT 11 more people and yet, it’s not at all about gunz.

    • They’ve also been saying that he “used a car,” as if he was shooting out of his vehicle, which according to everything I’ve read is false. He used his car … to drive to the places he killed people.

      The bottom line is, he bought 3 guns legally, despite a documented history that indicated he’d be the last person you’d want buying a gun. The problem with the NRA loons’ position is that everyone looks like a responsible citizen on paper until they do something proving they aren’t. I suppose we could have the government keep detailed computerized records on every citizen in America, every time they visit a mental health professional, every time they argued with a parent or spouse or coworker, every time they vented frustration about a situation on a blog or Facebook post. Pretty sure that kind of information would preclude about 99% of the American public from owning a firearm, not to mention all of the other civil rights it would violate. But that seems to be the impractical position the gun loonz are taking. Makes no sense.

      • “But that seems to be the impractical position the gun loonz are taking. Makes no sense.”

        Like their famous “Four Rules”, based on the comments at the Yahoo News site, the people who are most vociferous about the need for GOOD mental health checks are those MOST likely to get dinged if they undergo a comprehensive psych exam.

  4. deep

    Ah. Yahoo. I remember trolling there fondly. Their commenting rules were so lax I could taunt people for hours with no repercussions.

  5. bartlebyx

    If he has a homeowner’s or renter’s insurance policy, he likely already has liability insurance.

    • Homeowners insurance will probably not cover expenses related to an accidental gun discharge at a Walmart, unless he has a specific rider stating as such.

      Every gun owner should be required to carry additional liability insurance for their firearms, just like we have to for our cars. That way when you 2nd Amendment someone at the fucking local Walmart they aren’t the ones paying the economic price for your negligent behavior.

      • I think you also need a strict liability law that says gun owners have to pay for the all the damage their guns do. The only exception would be for guns that were stored responsibly (e.g. locked up with a safe or trigger lock) that somebody else deliberately circumvented. Owners should be criminally liable if their guns are stolen and used in a crime unless the guns were locked up and the theft was reported promptly.

      • In a Walmart, the odds of either party being insured are prolly about 50/50; which means that the insured people pick up the tab.

      • The fun begins when the victim sues Walmart. Bwaaahaa.

  6. Actually, it might at that. When a lawyer can satisfy a jury that Walmart is committing gross negligence in letting fucking moronz wit teh gunz hang out in the store, oh well.