If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Times)   "I did what Joe Biden told me to do. I went outside and fired my shotgun in the air"   (washingtontimes.com) divider line 155
    More: Dumbass, Jill Biden, shotgun in the air, shotguns  
•       •       •

3669 clicks; posted to Politics » on 18 Jul 2013 at 12:30 PM (51 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



155 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-07-18 12:31:51 PM
And Joe was an idiot to say it.

What goes up, must come down, and his advice could have killed someone.
 
2013-07-18 12:31:53 PM
Should have followed Cheney's advice and Farked Off
 
2013-07-18 12:32:11 PM
This story is about 2 people who don't know the law.  One is a misinformed idiot from Jerkwater USA who has no clue that firing a shotgun into the air in a town could be dangerous, and the other is not the vice president.
 
2013-07-18 12:33:19 PM

meat0918: And Joe was an idiot to say it.

What goes up, must come down, and his advice could have killed someone.


Well, unless it's trajectory intersects an alternate gravitational frame of reference
 
2013-07-18 12:33:25 PM
Did you have a Natty Light sitting on the hood of your Trans Am while you did it? Was AC/DC playing on the Trans Am's radio? Were you shirtless? If not, you were not doing it the Biden way.

Also, that is the greatest picture of Uncle Joe in that article.
 
2013-07-18 12:35:06 PM
FLASE FLAG. This guy is obviously a conservative plant,
out to discredit the administration's views on gun control.

Study it out.
 
2013-07-18 12:36:24 PM

Elegy: FLASE FLAG. This guy is obviously a conservative plant,
out to discredit the administration's views on gun control.

Study it out.


No need to study anything.  This is from the Washignton Times.  No need to go any further.
 
2013-07-18 12:36:44 PM

meat0918: And Joe was an idiot to say it.

What goes up, must come down, and his advice could have killed someone.


Falling shot isn't going to kill anyone.
 
2013-07-18 12:36:55 PM
Only pull the trigger if you are aiming at something you intend to kill or destroy
 
2013-07-18 12:36:59 PM
If Joe said it was alright, then 'nuff Farking said, right?
 
2013-07-18 12:39:10 PM

meat0918: And Joe was an idiot to say it.

What goes up, must come down, and his advice could have killed someone.


Meh.  Many kids were pulled out of my school for the first day of dove season and I recall their stories of having shot rain down upon them as they retrieved birds.

Anyway, the dude should have known that there are restrictions on shooting a firearm within town limits.  That is amazingly ignorant.
 
2013-07-18 12:39:52 PM

meat0918: And Joe was an idiot to say it.

What goes up, must come down, and his advice could have killed someone.


Wellllllllll, to be *COMPLETELY* technically honest, if you are shooting birdshot up into the air, it's not going to kill someone when it comes back down.  It might sting a bit if you look up and get some in your eye, but that's about it.

Hell, I'd let you shoot a shotgun straight up, and I'd stand underneath it, so long as it's birdshot.  Completely safe, as the terminal velocity on something like #7 shot is small.  I'd even do it with a bare head.

Slugs and buckshot are a different matter entirely, however.
 
2013-07-18 12:39:53 PM
Biden was just using reverse psychology on Republitards, since they tend to do the opposite of whatever a Democrat does.
 
2013-07-18 12:40:05 PM
From the comments in TFA:

Posted by the great thinker who goes by the handle, leftrloons:
Love bidens Jack Nicholson smile!
Now is barry going to publicly say biden 'acted stupidly' giving out that advice!


To which intarwebz juggernaut, NotKennedy, replies:
Can you imagine Nicholson and O'Biden doing a homo show?

dafuq?
 
2013-07-18 12:40:53 PM
I'm pretty sure the VP made this recommendation when it came to home invasion, not because you might have maybe thought you saw two people who weren't there breaking into your car.
 
2013-07-18 12:41:42 PM
It's clearly Joe Biden's fault. Why won't he take personal responsibility for this other person's actions?
 
2013-07-18 12:42:18 PM

Doctor Funkenstein: From the comments in TFA:

Posted by the great thinker who goes by the handle, leftrloons:
Love bidens Jack Nicholson smile!
Now is barry going to publicly say biden 'acted stupidly' giving out that advice!

To which intarwebz juggernaut, NotKennedy, replies:
Can you imagine Nicholson and O'Biden doing a homo show?

dafuq?


Could they have found a worse picture of Biden? Fark the moonie Times and their yellow journalism propaganda rag.
 
2013-07-18 12:42:54 PM
Dumbass Tag?

Yea, Biden is a Dumbass.
 
2013-07-18 12:43:35 PM
www.redstatereport.com
 
2013-07-18 12:44:23 PM

Danger Mouse: Dumbass Tag?

Yea, Biden is a Dumbass.


Personal responsibility!
 
2013-07-18 12:44:54 PM

Codenamechaz: I'm pretty sure the VP made this recommendation when it came to home invasion, not because you might have maybe thought you saw two people who weren't there breaking into your car.


Ar eyou talking about the time he advised to shoot blindly through the door, or the time to go to the balcony and fire a few rounds in the air?
 
2013-07-18 12:47:03 PM
"who's more foolish, the fool or the fool who follows him?" - Kenobi
 
2013-07-18 12:50:58 PM
Did he fire from a balcony? Cuz otherwise....
 
2013-07-18 12:52:27 PM
Farking context how does it work? Referring to self-defense is different than randomly firing a weapon in the air. But the Moonie Times knows their target audience are morons so there's that.
 
2013-07-18 12:53:20 PM

A Dark Evil Omen: Did you have a Natty Light sitting on the hood of your Trans Am while you did it? Was AC/DC playing on the Trans Am's radio? Were you shirtless? If not, you were not doing it the Biden way.

Also, that is the greatest picture of Uncle Joe in that article.


Photoshopped.


/pixels
 
2013-07-18 12:54:05 PM
2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-07-18 12:55:33 PM

robrr2003: "who's more foolish, the fool or the fool who follows him?" - Kenobi


"Only the awkward question; only the foolish ask twice." - The Emperor of Mankind
 
2013-07-18 12:56:45 PM

meat0918: And Joe was an idiot to say it.

What goes up, must come down, and his advice could have killed someone.


Well, to be fair, unless you're firing a slug from that shotgun, you're not going to do much damage. Maybe that big ass buckshot, but nothing else has enough mass... Bullets are a totally different story, though. The law doesn't make such distinctions though...

That being said, he was stupid to say it, and even stupider to follow up with the "just shoot through the door" crap, but this guy is even stupider to claim this defense, if for no other reason than the fact that everybody and their dog jumped on that statement from day 1...
 
2013-07-18 12:57:32 PM
<i>However, sheriff's deputies noted to KOIN Wednesday that current law does not afford people the right to just fire off their gun. There must be a self-defense component, along with a life-threatening situation. None of which appeared to be the case here, they said.</i>

Jeez, I'm pretty sure Biden said to just randomly fire your shotgun into the air...
 
2013-07-18 12:57:34 PM
Dumb people are only responsible for their actions when they follow the advice of a Democrat.
 
2013-07-18 12:58:03 PM

dittybopper: meat0918: And Joe was an idiot to say it.

What goes up, must come down, and his advice could have killed someone.

Wellllllllll, to be *COMPLETELY* technically honest, if you are shooting birdshot up into the air, it's not going to kill someone when it comes back down.  It might sting a bit if you look up and get some in your eye, but that's about it.

Hell, I'd let you shoot a shotgun straight up, and I'd stand underneath it, so long as it's birdshot.  Completely safe, as the terminal velocity on something like #7 shot is small.  I'd even do it with a bare head.

Slugs and buckshot are a different matter entirely, however.


I'm projecting.  I really only have slugs and buckshot in the house, but I also live in the city, so I better have a damn good reason to discharge a firearm.  I might have some birdshot, I'd have to look.
 
2013-07-18 12:58:12 PM

Codenamechaz: I'm pretty sure the VP made this recommendation when it came to home invasion, not because you might have maybe thought you saw two people who weren't there breaking into your car.


It's bad advice in that context too. Firing into the air is a bad idea. Emptying the gun you want to use in self defense in a dangerous situation is a bad idea. Firing warning shots usually gets you in more trouble than shooting at the person threatening you. It's just bad advice all around.
 
2013-07-18 12:58:42 PM

Danger Mouse: Dumbass Tag?

Yea, Biden is a Dumbass.


It is amazing that Ryan was trounced so handily in the VP debate. The GoP candidates were awful.
 
2013-07-18 12:59:02 PM
And if he shot the thieves, he wouldn't be in trouble.
 
2013-07-18 12:59:30 PM

tricycleracer: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 368x400]


It's pretty safe to assume that that gun was firing blanks. Then again...
 
2013-07-18 01:00:43 PM

Esc7: And if he shot the thieves, he wouldn't be in trouble.


FTFA:
A sergeant with the Wilmington, Del., police department explained to U.S. News that city residents are not allowed to fire guns on their property.

The sergeant, who preferred not to be identified, said that Wilmington residents are also not allowed to shoot trespassers. "On your property you can't just shoot someone," he said. "You have to really feel that your life is being threatened."
 
2013-07-18 01:01:24 PM

jst3p: Danger Mouse: Dumbass Tag?

Yea, Biden is a Dumbass.

It is amazing that Ryan was trounced so handily in the VP debate. The GoP candidates were awful.


He's not so much a dumbass as he just doesn't have much of a filter.  When he's speaking on legislation, policy, or things that he's spent his professional life involved in he's remarkably eloquent and on point.  When he's just riffing about his various opinions on things his foot finds its way into his mouth fairly often.
 
2013-07-18 01:02:02 PM

meat0918: And Joe was an idiot to say it.

What goes up, must come down, and his advice could have killed someone.


Bullshiat.  Prove that falling buckshot will kill someone.
 
2013-07-18 01:02:10 PM

meat0918: And Joe was an idiot to say it.

What goes up, must come down, and his advice could have killed someone.


I assure you, without a doubt in my mind, that falling shotgun-shot pellets are not going to even break your skin.

If he was using a slug, yea, he could kill someone, but I assume it was just bird, or even buck shot. I know this from first hand knowledge.

/was hunting across a huge field from another group, and every so often they'd shoot at a bird and some of their pellets would fall on us, and I"m sure it was the same otherwise.
 
2013-07-18 01:02:40 PM

TuteTibiImperes: jst3p: Danger Mouse: Dumbass Tag?

Yea, Biden is a Dumbass.

It is amazing that Ryan was trounced so handily in the VP debate. The GoP candidates were awful.

He's not so much a dumbass as he just doesn't have much of a filter.  When he's speaking on legislation, policy, or things that he's spent his professional life involved in he's remarkably eloquent and on point.  When he's just riffing about his various opinions on things his foot finds its way into his mouth fairly often.


Both are good reasons for him to be under constant attack from his political rivals.
 
2013-07-18 01:02:45 PM
Republicans:  paragons of personal responsibility.
 
2013-07-18 01:02:49 PM

Dedmon: meat0918: And Joe was an idiot to say it.

What goes up, must come down, and his advice could have killed someone.

I assure you, without a doubt in my mind, that falling shotgun-shot pellets are not going to even break your skin.

If he was using a slug, yea, he could kill someone, but I assume it was just bird, or even buck shot. I know this from first hand knowledge.

/was hunting across a huge field from another group, and every so often they'd shoot at a bird and some of their pellets would fall on us, and I"m sure it was the same otherwise.


I would like to clarify. I know that falling shot wont break your skin, I don't know first hand what kind of ammo he used.
 
2013-07-18 01:03:46 PM

Mikey1969: Esc7: And if he shot the thieves, he wouldn't be in trouble.

FTFA:
A sergeant with the Wilmington, Del., police department explained to U.S. News that city residents are not allowed to fire guns on their property.

The sergeant, who preferred not to be identified, said that Wilmington residents are also not allowed to shoot trespassers. "On your property you can't just shoot someone," he said. "You have to really feel that your life is being threatened."


FTFA: A Washington state man who fired a shotgun....
 
2013-07-18 01:06:00 PM

LasersHurt: Dumb people are only responsible for their actions when they follow the advice of a Democrat.


There, much more to the point.
 
2013-07-18 01:08:10 PM

TuteTibiImperes: When he's speaking on legislation, policy, or things that he's spent his professional life involved in he's remarkably eloquent and on point.  When he's just riffing about his various opinions on things his foot finds its way into his mouth fairly often.


Translation:  He's the Democratic Dan Quayle.
 
2013-07-18 01:09:06 PM

HeadLever: LasersHurt: Dumb people are only responsible for their actions when they follow the advice of a Democrat.

There, much more to the point.


Well, I wouldn't say being a centrist is "dumb" per se, though I agree most people would find more to agree with further left if there wasn't such a concerted effort to demonize socialist politics. But, hey, at least they're not goosestepping rightists, right?
 
2013-07-18 01:09:44 PM
Maybe next time he should shoot through a closed door, which is something else Biden suggests.
 
2013-07-18 01:12:54 PM

dittybopper: Maybe next time he should shoot through a closed door, which is something else Biden suggests.


Oscar Pistorius would like a word.
 
2013-07-18 01:14:20 PM
He shoulda ignored Joe and pointed it at a Librul!  AMIRITE PEEPZ??<./l
 
2013-07-18 01:15:12 PM

A Dark Evil Omen: Well, I wouldn't say being a centrist is "dumb" per se,


When it comes to guns and politics, you can bet that the majority of 'suggestions' that comes out of the typical democrat's mouth will be pretty damn dumb.
 
2013-07-18 01:15:57 PM
He shoulda ignored Joe and pointed it at a Librul!

See?
 
2013-07-18 01:17:01 PM
We live in a pretty stupid country where if you shoot someone down you get off but if you shoot warning shots to scare them off you go to jail.
 
2013-07-18 01:19:46 PM

gnosis301: Republicans:  paragons of personal responsibility.


Does'nt sound like a republican to me.

Republicans shoot to kill.
 
2013-07-18 01:20:59 PM
M-O-O-N.  That spells "greenlight".
 
2013-07-18 01:21:31 PM

Elegy: gnosis301: Republicans:  paragons of personal responsibility.

Does'nt sound like a republican to me.

Republicans shoot to kill.


media1.s-nbcnews.com
 
2013-07-18 01:22:14 PM

Mikey1969: Esc7: And if he shot the thieves, he wouldn't be in trouble.

FTFA:
A sergeant with the Wilmington, Del., police department explained to U.S. News that city residents are not allowed to fire guns on their property.

The sergeant, who preferred not to be identified, said that Wilmington residents are also not allowed to shoot trespassers. "On your property you can't just shoot someone," he said. "You have to really feel that your life is being threatened."


That sergeant  might want to reread Delaware self-defense laws:

§ 466. Same - Use of force for the protection of property.
(a) The use of force upon or toward the person of another is justifiable when the defendant believes that such force is immediately necessary:
(1) To prevent the commission of criminal trespass or burglary in a building or upon real property in the defendant's possession or in the possession of another person for whose protection the defendant acts; or
(2) To prevent entry upon real property in the defendant's possession or in the possession of another person for whose protection the defendant acts; or
(3) To prevent theft, criminal mischief or any trespassory taking of tangible, movable property in the defendant's possession or in the possession of another person for whose protection the defendant acts.

§ 821. Criminal trespass in the third degree; a violation.
A person is guilty of criminal trespass in the third degree when the person knowingly enters or remains unlawfully upon real property.


It's not necessarily a good idea, but it's legal.
 
2013-07-18 01:22:49 PM

Elegy: gnosis301: Republicans:  paragons of personal responsibility.

Does'nt sound like a republican to me.

Republicans shoot to kill.


Like Cheney.
 
2013-07-18 01:25:01 PM

DarwiOdrade: dittybopper: Maybe next time he should shoot through a closed door, which is something else Biden suggests.

Oscar Pistorius would like a word.


And some legs.
 
2013-07-18 01:26:46 PM

redmid17: Mikey1969: Esc7: And if he shot the thieves, he wouldn't be in trouble.

FTFA:
A sergeant with the Wilmington, Del., police department explained to U.S. News that city residents are not allowed to fire guns on their property.

The sergeant, who preferred not to be identified, said that Wilmington residents are also not allowed to shoot trespassers. "On your property you can't just shoot someone," he said. "You have to really feel that your life is being threatened."

That sergeant  might want to reread Delaware self-defense laws:

§ 466. Same - Use of force for the protection of property.
(a) The use of force upon or toward the person of another is justifiable when the defendant believes that such force is immediately necessary:
(1) To prevent the commission of criminal trespass or burglary in a building or upon real property in the defendant's possession or in the possession of another person for whose protection the defendant acts; or
(2) To prevent entry upon real property in the defendant's possession or in the possession of another person for whose protection the defendant acts; or
(3) To prevent theft, criminal mischief or any trespassory taking of tangible, movable property in the defendant's possession or in the possession of another person for whose protection the defendant acts.

§ 821. Criminal trespass in the third degree; a violation.
A person is guilty of criminal trespass in the third degree when the person knowingly enters or remains unlawfully upon real property.

It's not necessarily a good idea, but it's legal.


Actually, I think the bolded one applies:  He thought they were trying to steal/steal from his car.
 
2013-07-18 01:27:45 PM

HeadLever: A Dark Evil Omen: Well, I wouldn't say being a centrist is "dumb" per se,

When it comes to guns and politics, you can bet that the majority of 'suggestions' that comes out of the typical democrat's mouth will be pretty damn dumb.


You should listen to the smart insights of a Republican.

media.theweek.com
 
2013-07-18 01:29:26 PM

dittybopper: redmid17: Mikey1969: Esc7: And if he shot the thieves, he wouldn't be in trouble.

FTFA:
A sergeant with the Wilmington, Del., police department explained to U.S. News that city residents are not allowed to fire guns on their property.

The sergeant, who preferred not to be identified, said that Wilmington residents are also not allowed to shoot trespassers. "On your property you can't just shoot someone," he said. "You have to really feel that your life is being threatened."

That sergeant  might want to reread Delaware self-defense laws:

§ 466. Same - Use of force for the protection of property.
(a) The use of force upon or toward the person of another is justifiable when the defendant believes that such force is immediately necessary:
(1) To prevent the commission of criminal trespass or burglary in a building or upon real property in the defendant's possession or in the possession of another person for whose protection the defendant acts; or
(2) To prevent entry upon real property in the defendant's possession or in the possession of another person for whose protection the defendant acts; or
(3) To prevent theft, criminal mischief or any trespassory taking of tangible, movable property in the defendant's possession or in the possession of another person for whose protection the defendant acts.

§ 821. Criminal trespass in the third degree; a violation.
A person is guilty of criminal trespass in the third degree when the person knowingly enters or remains unlawfully upon real property.

It's not necessarily a good idea, but it's legal.

Actually, I think the bolded one applies:  He thought they were trying to steal/steal from his car.


3 probably applies more but I was picturing his car as sitting in his driveway. It could well have been on the street.
 
2013-07-18 01:30:35 PM

Corvus: We live in a pretty stupid country where if you shoot someone down you get off but if you shoot warning shots to scare them off you go to jail.


I bet you biatch sarcastically about "responsible gun owners" quite frequently, and yet you want to decriminalize one of the most irresponsible things you can do with a gun.

What a great idea. Hey everybody! Firing random and unaimed shots off is now perfectly legal and OK to do!

Tell me how stupid our country is again.
 
2013-07-18 01:34:01 PM
"The sergeant, who preferred not to be identified, said that Wilmington residents are also not allowed to shoot trespassers. "On your property you can't just shoot someone," he said. "You have to really feel that your life is being threatened."

LOL, as long as you kill the trespassers your story is treated as unquestionable truth.
 
2013-07-18 01:34:28 PM

HeadLever: LasersHurt: Dumb people are only responsible for their actions when they follow the advice of a Democrat.

There, much more to the point.


And that's why every study says that blue states are the dumbest in the country.

EVERY!
SINGLE!
ONE!
 
2013-07-18 01:34:38 PM

Elegy: Corvus: We live in a pretty stupid country where if you shoot someone down you get off but if you shoot warning shots to scare them off you go to jail.

I bet you biatch sarcastically about "responsible gun owners" quite frequently, and yet you want to decriminalize one of the most irresponsible things you can do with a gun.

What a great idea. Hey everybody! Firing random and unaimed shots off is now perfectly legal and OK to do!

Tell me how stupid our country is again.


Where did I say that? It's funny how you dopes need to make shiat up to live in your fantasy world that you are smarter than everyone.

Where did I said what I bolded? I never did. Do you know what are "warning shot" is? because it's not what you just described.
 
2013-07-18 01:37:46 PM

Elegy: Corvus: We live in a pretty stupid country where if you shoot someone down you get off but if you shoot warning shots to scare them off you go to jail.

I bet you biatch sarcastically about "responsible gun owners" quite frequently, and yet you want to decriminalize one of the most irresponsible things you can do with a gun.

What a great idea. Hey everybody! Firing random and unaimed shots off is now perfectly legal and OK to do!

Tell me how stupid our country is again.


It's stupid when it's full of idiots like you who think a "warning shot" is "Firing random and unaimed shots off "
 
2013-07-18 01:37:46 PM

Corvus: We live in a pretty stupid country where if you shoot someone down you get off but if you shoot warning shots to scare them off you go to jail.


For 20 years, if your a black woman who doesn't fulfill her wifely duties by letting her husband beat her.
 
2013-07-18 01:42:21 PM

Corvus: Elegy: Corvus: We live in a pretty stupid country where if you shoot someone down you get off but if you shoot warning shots to scare them off you go to jail.

I bet you biatch sarcastically about "responsible gun owners" quite frequently, and yet you want to decriminalize one of the most irresponsible things you can do with a gun.

What a great idea. Hey everybody! Firing random and unaimed shots off is now perfectly legal and OK to do!

Tell me how stupid our country is again.

Where did I say that? It's funny how you dopes need to make shiat up to live in your fantasy world that you are smarter than everyone.

Where did I said what I bolded? I never did. Do you know what are "warning shot" is? because it's not what you just described.


Tell me then: how would you fire a warning shot that isn't random and unaimed?
 
2013-07-18 01:44:22 PM
Warning shots are reckless.
 
2013-07-18 01:46:32 PM

Elegy: Corvus: Elegy: Corvus: We live in a pretty stupid country where if you shoot someone down you get off but if you shoot warning shots to scare them off you go to jail.

I bet you biatch sarcastically about "responsible gun owners" quite frequently, and yet you want to decriminalize one of the most irresponsible things you can do with a gun.

What a great idea. Hey everybody! Firing random and unaimed shots off is now perfectly legal and OK to do!

Tell me how stupid our country is again.

Where did I say that? It's funny how you dopes need to make shiat up to live in your fantasy world that you are smarter than everyone.

Where did I said what I bolded? I never did. Do you know what are "warning shot" is? because it's not what you just described.

Tell me then: how would you fire a warning shot that isn't random and unaimed?


My guess would be that they deliberately and purposely aim a shot to miss the person. I think it's still pretty negligent, dangerous, and/or reckless but a warning shot doesn't have to be random or unaimed.
 
2013-07-18 01:47:29 PM

The Lone Gunman: Corvus: We live in a pretty stupid country where if you shoot someone down you get off but if you shoot warning shots to scare them off you go to jail.

For 20 years, if your a black woman who doesn't fulfill her wifely duties by letting her husband beat her.


Please stop referring to that case. It is a truly terrible example and does not help at all.
 
2013-07-18 01:48:24 PM

Corvus: Elegy: Corvus: We live in a pretty stupid country where if you shoot someone down you get off but if you shoot warning shots to scare them off you go to jail.

I bet you biatch sarcastically about "responsible gun owners" quite frequently, and yet you want to decriminalize one of the most irresponsible things you can do with a gun.

What a great idea. Hey everybody! Firing random and unaimed shots off is now perfectly legal and OK to do!

Tell me how stupid our country is again.

It's stupid when it's full of idiots like you who think a "warning shot" is "Firing random and unaimed shots off "


A warning shot is nothing but a negligent discharge. And it is by its nature unaimed--sure it is presumably aimed away from whomever you are trying to warn, but your attention is on the threat, not what lies beyond it. Even fired straight into the ground, a warning shot can easily ricochet and hit an unintended target. As a gun owner, you are responsible for the final disposition of every bullet you fire--that's why 'warning' shots are a very stupid, and legitimately illegal practice.

If you have time for a warning shot, you have pulled your gun prematurely (when the threat is not yet a legitimate danger) and should also be looking at brandishing charges. Words are for warnings, not bullets.
 
2013-07-18 01:52:14 PM
Biden plagiarized that advice from someone else.
 
Bf+
2013-07-18 01:53:15 PM
It worked, didn't it?
 
2013-07-18 01:53:17 PM

odinsposse: The Lone Gunman: Corvus: We live in a pretty stupid country where if you shoot someone down you get off but if you shoot warning shots to scare them off you go to jail.

For 20 years, if your a black woman who doesn't fulfill her wifely duties by letting her husband beat her.

Please stop referring to that case. It is a truly terrible example and does not help at all.


Yes it does. It shows quite clearly how utterly batshiat insane your gun culture and laws have become.
 
2013-07-18 01:54:03 PM

Codenamechaz: I'm pretty sure the VP made this recommendation when it came to home invasion, not because you might have maybe thought you saw two people who weren't there breaking into your car.


No, TFA had the entire quote.  All he said was, "if there's ever a problem, ..."  He did not qualify what type of "problem" justifies firing off two shells into the air in violation of law.
 
2013-07-18 01:54:14 PM
Yup.

Dedmon: Dedmon: meat0918: And Joe was an idiot to say it.

What goes up, must come down, and his advice could have killed someone.

I assure you, without a doubt in my mind, that falling shotgun-shot pellets are not going to even break your skin.

If he was using a slug, yea, he could kill someone, but I assume it was just bird, or even buck shot. I know this from first hand knowledge.

/was hunting across a huge field from another group, and every so often they'd shoot at a bird and some of their pellets would fall on us, and I"m sure it was the same otherwise.

I would like to clarify. I know that falling shot wont break your skin, I don't know first hand what kind of ammo he used.


You could get an eye injury , or it could lodge under the skin and cause a nasty infection.
 
2013-07-18 01:54:17 PM

redmid17: Mikey1969: Esc7: And if he shot the thieves, he wouldn't be in trouble.

FTFA:
A sergeant with the Wilmington, Del., police department explained to U.S. News that city residents are not allowed to fire guns on their property.

The sergeant, who preferred not to be identified, said that Wilmington residents are also not allowed to shoot trespassers. "On your property you can't just shoot someone," he said. "You have to really feel that your life is being threatened."

That sergeant  might want to reread Delaware self-defense laws:

§ 466. Same - Use of force for the protection of property.
(a) The use of force upon or toward the person of another is justifiable when the defendant believes that such force is immediately necessary:
(1) To prevent the commission of criminal trespass or burglary in a building or upon real property in the defendant's possession or in the possession of another person for whose protection the defendant acts; or
(2) To prevent entry upon real property in the defendant's possession or in the possession of another person for whose protection the defendant acts; or
(3) To prevent theft, criminal mischief or any trespassory taking of tangible, movable property in the defendant's possession or in the possession of another person for whose protection the defendant acts.

§ 821. Criminal trespass in the third degree; a violation.
A person is guilty of criminal trespass in the third degree when the person knowingly enters or remains unlawfully upon real property.

It's not necessarily a good idea, but it's legal.


Delaware law makes a distinction between Force and Deadly Force.  From the same section, subsection C defines the increased requirements for Deadly Force, which can only be applied if the criminal is trying to steal your entire residence or you feel you are under imminent risk of death or serious injury:

(c) The use of deadly force for the protection of property is justifiable only if the defendant believes that:

(1) The person against whom the force is used is attempting to dispossess the defendant of the defendant's dwelling otherwise than under a claim of right to its possession; or

(2) The person against whom the deadly force is used is attempting to commit arson, burglary, robbery or felonious theft or property destruction and either:

a. Had employed or threatened deadly force against or in the presence of the defendant; or

b. Under the circumstances existing at the time, the defendant believed the use of force other than deadly force would expose the defendant, or another person in the defendant's presence, to the reasonable likelihood of serious physical injury.

 The City of Wilmington may have their own statutes that further limit justification for force, but after digging around the city codes for a bit I couldn't find it.

I did find it amusing however that in the City of Wilmington -

1. Slingshots are forbidden

2. Nunchucks (nunchaku) are forbidden

3. Skateboarding is regulated under the section of the code dealing with weapons violations.
 
2013-07-18 01:56:05 PM
He was referring to preventing a home invasion, in self defense, on your own property.

But don't let facts get in the way of your poor decisions.

/still not good advice
 
2013-07-18 01:56:05 PM

dittybopper: This story is about 2 people who don't know the law.  One is a misinformed idiot from Jerkwater USA who has no clue that firing a shotgun into the air in a town could be dangerous, and the other is not the vice president.


Keep repeating it, someday it'll be true if you believe it hard enough.

Terminal velocity, think in terms of hailstones.

Then shut it.
 
2013-07-18 01:58:43 PM

TuteTibiImperes: (c) The use of deadly force for the protection of property is justifiable only if the defendant believes that:

(1) The person against whom the force is used is attempting to dispossess the defendant of the defendant's dwelling otherwise than under a claim of right to its possession; or

(2) The person against whom the deadly force is used is attempting to commit arson, burglary, robbery or felonious theft or property destruction and either:

a. Had employed or threatened deadly force against or in the presence of the defendant; or

b. Under the circumstances existing at the time, the defendant believed the use of force other than deadly force would expose the defendant, or another person in the defendant's presence, to the reasonable likelihood of serious physical injury.


Both of those could have been true at the time.  I don't think it would have been right, shooting two car thieves, but I believe he could have satisfied 2b by saying it was likely reasonable attacking 2 guys with his fist would cause him to be seriously injured.
 
2013-07-18 01:59:09 PM
Lulz. I like it. Wonder if he planned it out or if it was an after the fact inspired troll defense.
 
2013-07-18 02:00:33 PM
.

new_york_monty: A warning shot is nothing but a negligent discharge.


Nope, these can definatly be two mutually exclusive actions.  just because there is a correlation of these actions in your mind, does not prove any causation.
 
2013-07-18 02:00:44 PM

Gordon Bennett: odinsposse: The Lone Gunman: Corvus: We live in a pretty stupid country where if you shoot someone down you get off but if you shoot warning shots to scare them off you go to jail.

For 20 years, if your a black woman who doesn't fulfill her wifely duties by letting her husband beat her.

Please stop referring to that case. It is a truly terrible example and does not help at all.

Yes it does. It shows quite clearly how utterly batshiat insane your gun culture and laws have become.


The mandatory minimums are something that can be brought up for debate. However leaving a house, violating a restraining order, and negligently discharging a firearm AT your ex and two minors is a great way to be convicted. Hell right before she fires the gun she says "I have something for you" after he says "I'm out of here." It was on the 911 call.
 
2013-07-18 02:01:41 PM

dragonfire77: Elegy: FLASE FLAG. This guy is obviously a conservative plant,
out to discredit the administration's views on gun control.

Study it out.

No need to study anything.  This is from the Washignton Times.  No need to go any further.


The Washington Times actually got it from a local news channel where this happened, and they provided a link to that story, but you obviously didn't know that because you couldn't bear to look at the mean, awful Washington Times.
 
2013-07-18 02:02:03 PM

HeadLever: A Dark Evil Omen: Well, I wouldn't say being a centrist is "dumb" per se,

When it comes to guns and politics, you can bet that the majority of 'suggestions' that comes out of the typical democrat's mouth will be pretty damn dumb.


...in a thread where the Republican suggests pellets coming down at terminal velocity are deadly.

Yep, Poe's law strikes again.
 
2013-07-18 02:02:08 PM

TheBigJerk: dittybopper: This story is about 2 people who don't know the law.  One is a misinformed idiot from Jerkwater USA who has no clue that firing a shotgun into the air in a town could be dangerous, and the other is not the vice president.

Keep repeating it, someday it'll be true if you believe it hard enough.

Terminal velocity, think in terms of hailstones.


so you are saying that hailstones are not dangerous.
well, that explains why everyone says you should hang out outside during a hailstorm.
 
2013-07-18 02:02:10 PM

justtray: But don't let facts get in the way of your poor decisions.

/still not good advice


Lol.  Some ironic gold right there, Jerry.
 
2013-07-18 02:03:31 PM

TheBigJerk: ...in a thread where the Republican suggests pellets coming down at terminal velocity are deadly.


This point has nothing to do with the fact that Republicans can also say dumb things.
 
2013-07-18 02:03:56 PM

HeadLever: .new_york_monty: A warning shot is nothing but a negligent discharge.

Nope, these can definatly be two mutually exclusive actions.  just because there is a correlation of these actions in your mind, does not prove any causation.


In certain places, perhaps, a warning shot is an appropriate action. I mean for a civilian in the USA, under the laws of our country, a warning shot is a negligent discharge. You know, for the reasons you snipped from the post you quoted.
 
2013-07-18 02:04:21 PM

Gordon Bennett: odinsposse: The Lone Gunman: Corvus: We live in a pretty stupid country where if you shoot someone down you get off but if you shoot warning shots to scare them off you go to jail.

For 20 years, if your a black woman who doesn't fulfill her wifely duties by letting her husband beat her.

Please stop referring to that case. It is a truly terrible example and does not help at all.

Yes it does. It shows quite clearly how utterly batshiat insane your gun culture and laws have become.


More accurately, it demonstrates the willful ignorance of many individuals who complain about the firearm regulations of the United States of America.
 
2013-07-18 02:06:03 PM

TheBigJerk: ...in a thread where the Republican suggests pellets coming down at terminal velocity are deadly


And which Republican said that?  Not seeing it anywhere.  Or are you making stuff up again?
 
2013-07-18 02:07:04 PM

new_york_monty: under the laws of our country, a warning shot is a negligent discharge.


State said law, please.
 
2013-07-18 02:07:21 PM
 
2013-07-18 02:07:25 PM
Party of Personal Responsibility strikes again!

/I'm guessing, since this guy just does whatever Biden says, he also voted for President Obama's second term and is deeply in favor of gay marriage!
 
2013-07-18 02:08:20 PM
The quote in the article is advice to his wife, I don't know where they live but where I live, in a  rural area, you could go out on your porch and fire a shotgun off and nobody would know the difference.
 
2013-07-18 02:08:56 PM

tenpoundsofcheese: Biden plagiarized that advice from someone else.


Stop trying to make "fetch" happen.
 
2013-07-18 02:14:37 PM
Also, the washington times apparently added the word [up] to his quote.. kinda sleazy of them but it is the washington times so.. you know...
 
2013-07-18 02:14:57 PM

HeadLever: new_york_monty: under the laws of our country, a warning shot is a negligent discharge.

State said law, please.


I'm going to take a half step back here and state that, under the laws in most parts of our country, a warning shot is a highly stupid idea that will likely be considered a negligent discharge (even if the particular phrase is not used) but can also be considered improper use of deadly force. I won't say there's never an appropriate time for a warning shot, but it's opening a legal can of worms that the shooter probably doesn't want to open.

https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-columns/its-just-the-law/warnin g- shots/
 
2013-07-18 02:22:08 PM

HeadLever: A Dark Evil Omen: Well, I wouldn't say being a centrist is "dumb" per se,

When it comes to guns and politics, you can bet that the majority of 'suggestions' that comes out of the typical democrat's mouth will be pretty damn dumb.


I'm sorry I can't hear you over the sound of calls to arm fetuses or how Agenda 21 will disarm America.
 
2013-07-18 02:25:48 PM

redmid17: Elegy: Corvus: Elegy: Corvus: We live in a pretty stupid country where if you shoot someone down you get off but if you shoot warning shots to scare them off you go to jail.

I bet you biatch sarcastically about "responsible gun owners" quite frequently, and yet you want to decriminalize one of the most irresponsible things you can do with a gun.

What a great idea. Hey everybody! Firing random and unaimed shots off is now perfectly legal and OK to do!

Tell me how stupid our country is again.

Where did I say that? It's funny how you dopes need to make shiat up to live in your fantasy world that you are smarter than everyone.

Where did I said what I bolded? I never did. Do you know what are "warning shot" is? because it's not what you just described.

Tell me then: how would you fire a warning shot that isn't random and unaimed?

My guess would be that they deliberately and purposely aim a shot to miss the person. I think it's still pretty negligent, dangerous, and/or reckless but a warning shot doesn't have to be random or unaimed.


In the heat of the moment, do you clearly know what is behind the person? Are there kids playing in the street? The UPS guy making his daily deliveries? Is there something the round could deflect off of, say a utility box, that could cause the round to ricochet and hit an innocent bystander?

If you do not know EXACTLY what the round is going to hit and what it will do when it hits that target, it is a random and unaimed shot. You are trusting chance and luck that nothing bad will happen.
 
2013-07-18 02:29:02 PM

Elegy: redmid17: Elegy: Corvus: Elegy: Corvus: We live in a pretty stupid country where if you shoot someone down you get off but if you shoot warning shots to scare them off you go to jail.

I bet you biatch sarcastically about "responsible gun owners" quite frequently, and yet you want to decriminalize one of the most irresponsible things you can do with a gun.

What a great idea. Hey everybody! Firing random and unaimed shots off is now perfectly legal and OK to do!

Tell me how stupid our country is again.

Where did I say that? It's funny how you dopes need to make shiat up to live in your fantasy world that you are smarter than everyone.

Where did I said what I bolded? I never did. Do you know what are "warning shot" is? because it's not what you just described.

Tell me then: how would you fire a warning shot that isn't random and unaimed?

My guess would be that they deliberately and purposely aim a shot to miss the person. I think it's still pretty negligent, dangerous, and/or reckless but a warning shot doesn't have to be random or unaimed.

In the heat of the moment, do you clearly know what is behind the person? Are there kids playing in the street? The UPS guy making his daily deliveries? Is there something the round could deflect off of, say a utility box, that could cause the round to ricochet and hit an innocent bystander?

If you do not know EXACTLY what the round is going to hit and what it will do when it hits that target, it is a random and unaimed shot. You are trusting chance and luck that nothing bad will happen.

t2.gstatic.com

Brett knows well the danger of the ricochet.
 
2013-07-18 02:29:16 PM

Fart_Machine: I'm sorry I can't hear you over the sound of calls to arm fetuses or how Agenda 21 will disarm America.


 Not sure how dumbass and crackpot theories from the right exonerates the dumbass and crackpot ideas from the left.  Or is it just a BSABSVD post?
 
2013-07-18 02:32:44 PM

Lost Thought 00: meat0918: And Joe was an idiot to say it.

What goes up, must come down, and his advice could have killed someone.

Well, unless it's trajectory intersects an alternate gravitational frame of reference


Would this alternate gravitational frame of reference be in an alternate universe where the English language developed differently and the pronoun "its" has an apostrophe? ;-)

[bobtheangryflower_apostrophe.png]
 
2013-07-18 02:33:13 PM
Discharging a firearm in a residential area is almost always a bad idea.  That's more or less why there are laws against it.  No, you might not kill someone when the bullet or shot comes back down.  You could still hurt someone, though.  People get injured with some frequency due to falling bullets on New Year's Eve in New Orleans because some dumbasses enjoy firing their guns in the air at midnight.
 
2013-07-18 02:33:34 PM

tricycleracer: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 368x400]


Good lord.  I accidentally clicked the "smart" button
 
2013-07-18 02:36:19 PM

HeadLever: Fart_Machine: I'm sorry I can't hear you over the sound of calls to arm fetuses or how Agenda 21 will disarm America.

 Not sure how dumbass and crackpot theories from the right exonerates the dumbass and crackpot ideas from the left.  Or is it just a BSABSVD post?


Because only Democrats make dumb comments regarding guns amirite?
 
2013-07-18 02:36:56 PM

Fart_Machine: HeadLever: A Dark Evil Omen: Well, I wouldn't say being a centrist is "dumb" per se,

When it comes to guns and politics, you can bet that the majority of 'suggestions' that comes out of the typical democrat's mouth will be pretty damn dumb.

I'm sorry I can't hear you over the sound of calls to arm fetuses or how Agenda 21 will disarm America.


Links between abortion and cancer, death panels . . .
 
2013-07-18 02:37:11 PM

new_york_monty: I'm going to take a half step back here and state that, under the laws in most parts of our country, a warning shot is a highly stupid idea that will likely be considered a negligent discharge


Depends upon how and where the shot was fired.  Taking a warning shot itself is not illegal.  However, if said warning shot is negligently fired or if there are local laws against firingin within a certain boundary, then you can definatly get hit with this type of charge.  Firing a warning shot because you stubled upon a grizzly cub and sow in the wildnerness and you are having a face-off is not going to land you in jail.
 
2013-07-18 02:40:47 PM

Fart_Machine: Because only Democrats make dumb comments regarding guns amirite?


Not sure where you bought that silly strawman. Kind of reinforces my point of "When it comes to guns and politics, you can bet that the majority of 'suggestions' that comes out of the typical democrat's mouth will be pretty damn dumb."
 
2013-07-18 02:44:04 PM

HeadLever: Fart_Machine: Because only Democrats make dumb comments regarding guns amirite?

Not sure where you bought that silly strawman. Kind of reinforces my point of "When it comes to guns and politics, you can bet that the majority of 'suggestions' that comes out of the typical democrat's mouth will be pretty damn dumb."


It reinforces that you're a hack you mean.
 
2013-07-18 02:46:47 PM

Nabb1: Discharging a firearm in a residential area is almost always a bad idea.  That's more or less why there are laws against it.  No, you might not kill someone when the bullet or shot comes back down.  You could still hurt someone, though.  People get injured with some frequency due to falling bullets on New Year's Eve in New Orleans because some dumbasses enjoy firing their guns in the air at midnight.


And sometimes, you accidentally kill a kid or two.
 
2013-07-18 02:49:47 PM

Fart_Machine: It reinforces that you're a hack you mean.


Nah, I don't think you are a hack.  Just a misguided Democrat that has to resort to strawmen instead of addressing the argument head-on.  Dumb, yes.  Hack, nah.
 
2013-07-18 02:57:51 PM

HeadLever: Fart_Machine: It reinforces that you're a hack you mean.

Nah, I don't think you are a hack.  Just a misguided Democrat that has to resort to strawmen instead of addressing the argument head-on.  Dumb, yes.  Hack, nah.


Wow you gave the No U! I'm crushed. No I'm not a democrat. Never have been. Pointing out that the "typical democrat" has dumb suggestions about guns while ignoring the mountain of dumb firearms suggestions on the other side makes you a hack. It's not a strawman. Even someone as dumb as you should be able to figure it out.
 
2013-07-18 03:07:18 PM

Taking self defense advice from an anti-gun democrat.


dl.dropboxusercontent.com
 
2013-07-18 03:07:19 PM
So, both left and right-- we seem to have a consensus that:

1.  Biden gave some stupid advice.
2.  The guy in TFA was stupid to follow it.

======================================

Lost Thought 00: meat0918: And Joe was an idiot to say it.

What goes up, must come down, and his advice could have killed someone.

Well, unless it's trajectory intersects an alternate gravitational frame of reference


Or if the object going up exceeds the gravitational body's escape velocity.
 
2013-07-18 03:07:25 PM

Fart_Machine: Pointing out that the "typical democrat" has dumb suggestions about guns while ignoring the mountain of dumb firearms suggestions on the other side makes you a hack.


Where am I ignoring them?  I fully recognize the derp from the crackpot right.  That has nothing to do with my argument,  however.

/Therefore, your argument is a strawman.
//but you still are not a hack
 
2013-07-18 03:10:27 PM

Elegy: redmid17: In the heat of the momen

t, do you clearly know what is behind the person? Are there kids playing in the street? The UPS guy making his daily deliveries? Is there something the round could deflect off of, say a utility box, that could cause the round to ricochet and hit an innocent bystander?

If you do not know EXACTLY what the round is going to hit and what it will do when it hits that target, it is a random and unaimed shot. You are trusting chance and luck that nothing bad will happen.


Because firing a shot with the intent to hit the person doesn't involve thinking of those things?
 
2013-07-18 03:11:35 PM

HeadLever: Fart_Machine: Pointing out that the "typical democrat" has dumb suggestions about guns while ignoring the mountain of dumb firearms suggestions on the other side makes you a hack.

Where am I ignoring them?  I fully recognize the derp from the crackpot right.  That has nothing to do with my argument,  however.

/Therefore, your argument is a strawman.
//but you still are not a hack


Except the crackpot right has become the typical Republican politician.
 
2013-07-18 03:16:06 PM

theknuckler_33: Elegy: redmid17: In the heat of the moment, do you clearly know what is behind the person? Are there kids playing in the street? The UPS guy making his daily deliveries? Is there something the round could deflect off of, say a utility box, that could cause the round to ricochet and hit an innocent bystander?

If you do not know EXACTLY what the round is going to hit and what it will do when it hits that target, it is a random and unaimed shot. You are trusting chance and luck that nothing bad will happen.

Because firing a shot with the intent to hit the person doesn't involve thinking of those things?


That's generally why the only reason you can fire a gun is if you believe that you will die if you don't (or you're hunting and there isn't anyone around to get hurt if you screw up). Otherwise the risk of something even worse happening is unacceptably high. Trying to scare someone by shooting at them is like trying showing how good your hand strength is by dangling a toddler out a window.
 
2013-07-18 03:22:43 PM

odinsposse: theknuckler_33: Elegy: redmid17: In the heat of the moment, do you clearly know what is behind the person? Are there kids playing in the street? The UPS guy making his daily deliveries? Is there something the round could deflect off of, say a utility box, that could cause the round to ricochet and hit an innocent bystander?

If you do not know EXACTLY what the round is going to hit and what it will do when it hits that target, it is a random and unaimed shot. You are trusting chance and luck that nothing bad will happen.

Because firing a shot with the intent to hit the person doesn't involve thinking of those things?

That's generally why the only reason you can fire a gun is if you believe that you will die if you don't (or you're hunting and there isn't anyone around to get hurt if you screw up). Otherwise the risk of something even worse happening is unacceptably high. Trying to scare someone by shooting at them is like trying showing how good your hand strength is by dangling a toddler out a window.


Yea, I understand that. It's exactly why I get so discouraged at the cavalier nature some folks seem to have about when they think use of their firearm is justified. I recall a story (can't find it now, my google-fu is weak) about an intoxicated man who went to the wrong house and started banging on the door to be let in. The homeowner shot him through the door and killed him.  He wasn't getting in, why not just call the cops and keep the gun handy in case he tries breaking in?
 
2013-07-18 03:27:53 PM

Fart_Machine: Except the crackpot right has become the typical Republican politician.


False continum argument.  None of the 'typical republican' politicians that I know is worried about Agenda 21 or belives that it is a good idea to arm fetuses.
 
2013-07-18 03:33:28 PM

Fart_Machine: self-defense


is not attained by firing a shotgun in the air.  Biden is a moron for suggesting this as a valid method of HD.  This guy, plant or not is as big of a moron for taking it seriously.
 
2013-07-18 03:40:15 PM
HeadLever:  False continum argument.  None of the 'typical republican' politicians that I know is worried about Agenda 21 or belives that it is a good idea to arm fetuses.

It's in the Republican platform.
 
2013-07-18 03:43:10 PM

Fart_Machine: HeadLever: Fart_Machine: Pointing out that the "typical democrat" has dumb suggestions about guns while ignoring the mountain of dumb firearms suggestions on the other side makes you a hack.

Where am I ignoring them?  I fully recognize the derp from the crackpot right.  That has nothing to do with my argument,  however.

/Therefore, your argument is a strawman.
//but you still are not a hack

Except the crackpot right has become the typical Republican politician.


Not really. Both sides have plenty of stupid to go around.
Its just a matter of who's crazy gets fronted on the news more often.

Outlandish statements from mouthpieces like Limbaugh or Nugent fit the "crazy racist right" narrative. So they get bashed more than the stupid things liberals say. It creates the illusion that one side is wrong when the reality is that failure in leadership is a bipartisan problem.
 /The vice president not only gave bad gun advise, he told people it was ok to commit a felony.

/How that did not get an immediate redress from every Sheriff and Police chief in the nation is a mystery.
 
2013-07-18 03:46:29 PM

HeadLever: Fart_Machine: Except the crackpot right has become the typical Republican politician.

False continum argument.  None of the 'typical republican' politicians  that I know is worried about Agenda 21 or belives that it is a good idea to arm fetuses.


Your anecdotal argument is quite compelling especially since the RNC adopted a resolution "Exposing Agenda 21" last year.
 
2013-07-18 03:48:49 PM

way south: /The vice president not only gave bad gun advise, he told people it was ok to commit a felony.


No he didn't.
 
2013-07-18 03:50:35 PM

way south: Outlandish statements from mouthpieces like Limbaugh or Nugent fit the "crazy racist right" narrative. So they get bashed more than the stupid things liberals say.


Fox News is really a liberal conspiracy to make conservatives look bad?
 
2013-07-18 03:55:12 PM

Fart_Machine: way south: /The vice president not only gave bad gun advise, he told people it was ok to commit a felony.

No he didn't.


Uhm, yeah; he did.
 
2013-07-18 03:56:14 PM

odinsposse: It's in the Republican platform.


So?  That does not mean that they fear it or are worried about it.  They just oppose the implementation of its policy.  With this, I agree.  Any legislation that has to do with sustainablity and the environment should come internally.  I bet if you asked most Republicans, most of them wouldn't even know what it refers to.  Just because it is mentioned as one item in a 54 page document oulining platform positions, doesn't mean much.
 
2013-07-18 03:56:53 PM

TheBigJerk: dittybopper: This story is about 2 people who don't know the law.  One is a misinformed idiot from Jerkwater USA who has no clue that firing a shotgun into the air in a town could be dangerous, and the other is not the vice president.

Keep repeating it, someday it'll be true if you believe it hard enough.

Terminal velocity, think in terms of hailstones.

Then shut it.


Bullets fired STRAIGHT (at a 90 degree angle to the ground) into the air usually fall back at terminal velocity, speeds much lower than those at which they leave the barrel of a firearm. Nevertheless, people can be injured, sometimes fatally, when bullets discharged into the air fall back down. Bullets fired other than exactly vertical are more dangerous, as the bullet maintains its angular ballistic trajectory, is far less likely to engage in tumbling motion, and so travels at a speed much higher than its terminal velocity would be in a purely vertical fall.
A study by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found that 80% of celebratory gunfire-related injuries are to the head, feet, and shoulders.[4] In Puerto Rico, about two people die and about 25 more are injured each year from celebratory gunfire on New Year's Eve, the CDC says.[5] Between the years 1985 and 1992, doctors at the King/Drew Medical Center in Los Angeles, California, treated some 118 people for random falling-bullet injuries. Thirty-eight of them died.[6] Kuwaitis celebrating in 1991 at the end of the Gulf War by firing weapons into the air caused 20 deaths from falling bullets.[6]
 
2013-07-18 03:57:13 PM
Having been shot and shot at, I can say with some authority that shotgun pellets in the 4-9 range become relatively benign once you get 30-40 yards away from the muzzle.  Slugs, at 2,000 FPS are another matter altogether.
 
2013-07-18 03:58:28 PM

FuzedBox: Fart_Machine: way south: /The vice president not only gave bad gun advise, he told people it was ok to commit a felony.

No he didn't.

Uhm, yeah; he did.


If you read the actual quote he didn't, If you live in a rural area and your home is far enough away from another person's home you can legally shot off your porch...
 
2013-07-18 04:00:06 PM

HeadLever: odinsposse: It's in the Republican platform.

So?  That does not mean that they fear it or are worried about it.  They just oppose the implementation of its policy.  With this, I agree.  Any legislation that has to do with sustainablity and the environment should come internally.  I bet if you asked most Republicans, most of them wouldn't even know what it refers to.  Just because it is mentioned as one item in a 54 page document oulining platform positions, doesn't mean much.


officiallyscrewed.com

Those must get heavy after awhile.
 
2013-07-18 04:02:33 PM

Headso: FuzedBox: Fart_Machine: way south: /The vice president not only gave bad gun advise, he told people it was ok to commit a felony.

No he didn't.

Uhm, yeah; he did.

If you read the actual quote he didn't, If you live in a rural area and your home is far enough away from another person's home you can legally shot off your porch...


Yes, because the people living in rural areas are most certainly the majority of the population and are going to take a Dem's advice on guns.
 
2013-07-18 04:02:49 PM

Headso: FuzedBox: Fart_Machine: way south: /The vice president not only gave bad gun advise, he told people it was ok to commit a felony.

No he didn't.

Uhm, yeah; he did.

If you read the actual quote he didn't, If you live in a rural area and your home is far enough away from another person's home you can legally shot off your porch...


He's also talking about his wife in a particular situation; not as a one-size-fits-all approach that you should fire off a shotgun in suburbia to scare kids off your porch.
 
2013-07-18 04:10:32 PM

FuzedBox: Headso: FuzedBox: Fart_Machine: way south: /The vice president not only gave bad gun advise, he told people it was ok to commit a felony.

No he didn't.

Uhm, yeah; he did.

If you read the actual quote he didn't, If you live in a rural area and your home is far enough away from another person's home you can legally shot off your porch...

Yes, because the people living in rural areas are most certainly the majority of the population and are going to take a Dem's advice on guns.


What's a rural area? The laws in MA don't state "rural area" they state X amount of feet from a dwelling. So Joe Blow may "think" he's in a rural area, but legally cannot dishcarge a firearm. I would guess other states have similliar laws. So Biden implying a rural area, legally means squat.

Oh, and fireing a gun at someone (rural area or not) wouldn't that constitute assault with a deadly weapon?
 
2013-07-18 04:11:16 PM

FuzedBox: Headso: FuzedBox: Fart_Machine: way south: /The vice president not only gave bad gun advise, he told people it was ok to commit a felony.

No he didn't.

Uhm, yeah; he did.

If you read the actual quote he didn't, If you live in a rural area and your home is far enough away from another person's home you can legally shot off your porch...

Yes, because the people living in rural areas are most certainly the majority of the population and are going to take a Dem's advice on guns.


I'm just correcting your assertion that he told people it was ok to commit a felony
 
2013-07-18 04:17:48 PM

dittybopper: meat0918: And Joe was an idiot to say it.

What goes up, must come down, and his advice could have killed someone.

Wellllllllll, to be *COMPLETELY* technically honest, if you are shooting birdshot up into the air, it's not going to kill someone when it comes back down.  It might sting a bit if you look up and get some in your eye, but that's about it.

Hell, I'd let you shoot a shotgun straight up, and I'd stand underneath it, so long as it's birdshot.  Completely safe, as the terminal velocity on something like #7 shot is small.  I'd even do it with a bare head.

Slugs and buckshot are a different matter entirely, however.


This. Good rule to follow in general, but bird shot and the like is the exception to the rule in most cases, since that's what it's made for.
 
2013-07-18 04:21:06 PM

Danger Mouse: What's a rural area? The laws in MA don't state "rural area" they state X amount of feet from a dwelling. So Joe Blow may "think" he's in a rural area, but legally cannot dishcarge a firearm. I would guess other states have similliar laws. So Biden implying a rural area, legally means squat.


Biden never even said "rural area" I said rural area simply because that is generally where you'd have to live to have enough space to legally fire off a weapon from your porch, if you were rich enough I guess you could have a home in a suburban or even an urban area where you still meet the criteria if you owned enough land.
 
2013-07-18 04:22:07 PM
He should just be thankful he's not a black woman from Florida. I'm betting that he won't get 20 years.
 
2013-07-18 04:27:17 PM

Headso: Danger Mouse: What's a rural area? The laws in MA don't state "rural area" they state X amount of feet from a dwelling. So Joe Blow may "think" he's in a rural area, but legally cannot dishcarge a firearm. I would guess other states have similliar laws. So Biden implying a rural area, legally means squat.

Biden never even said "rural area" I said rural area simply because that is generally where you'd have to live to have enough space to legally fire off a weapon from your porch, if you were rich enough I guess you could have a home in a suburban or even an urban area where you still meet the criteria if you owned enough land.


I agree. Biden didn't say rurall area. But I belive HEadso was implying it was ok to shoot off your porch if you were in a rural area.  My point is the legality depends speficially how far away from a dwelling you are.

And given what you are shooting at, could also get you in trouble for 1) discharging a fire arm with city limits, or so many feet from a dwelling.  2) assault with a deadly weapon.

Biden indeed gave very poor advice.  The Deleware police confirmed  as much.
 
2013-07-18 04:37:35 PM
If it legally ok for Biden's wife to shoot off their porch then it's up to debate if that is poor advice or not, the police think it's poor advice for me to tell you to smoke a few bong rips but I'd disagree there...
 
2013-07-18 04:52:46 PM
The easiest way to make a loud noise that would simulate a shotgun blast (though you might be investigated for disturbing the peace) is to blow-up a small balloon filled with acetylyne gas.  No bigger than 2" diameter will rattle windows.  And the evidence disappears at the explosion
 
2013-07-18 05:32:06 PM

SauronWasFramed: The easiest way to make a loud noise that would simulate a shotgun blast (though you might be investigated for disturbing the peace) is to blow-up a small balloon filled with acetylyne gas.  No bigger than 2" diameter will rattle windows.  And the evidence disappears at the explosion




They sell pocket sized noisemakers, which would do just as well as a bang if that's the intention. Problem is if your assailant isn't scared off by the noise then you'll still need lethal force.

Personally I've wondered if the use of a guard round or blank would be procedures the same as lethal ammunition.
Technically the purpose is to make noise and alert the neighbors, but you still have a gun.

/probably won't matter by the time the prosecution is done.
 
2013-07-18 06:11:23 PM
 
2013-07-18 06:12:00 PM
I meant Headlever. Sorry Headso
 
2013-07-18 06:14:06 PM

Fart_Machine: He's also talking about his wife in a particular situation; not as a one-size-fits-all approach that you should fire off a shotgun in suburbia to scare kids off your porch.


You shouldn't fire off a shotgun in the air in any area as a means of scaring anyone.  The Act of even pumping a shotgun (which some morons think scares people) simply tells your attacker where you are and if your only weapon of defense is a double-barrelled shotgun, firing off 2 blasts in the air has not only alerted your attacker as to where you are but has now emptied any rounds from your weapon.

heaven forbid you need it for defense, you have to break the action, manually load one or two more shells, lock the action, pull back the hammer(s), acquire your target and fire.

Saying that it isn't a one-size-fits-all approach is correct if you also acknowledge that it doesn't fit any approach and is weapons-grade retarded.
 
2013-07-18 06:19:09 PM

kronicfeld: It's clearly Joe Biden's fault. Why won't he take personal responsibility for this other person's actions?


I hope Congress holds hearings to determine what Joe Biden knew and when he knew it. I believe that if a really intrepid congressman like Issa digs long enough, he will eventually uncover evidence that could be used to imply that Biden is trying to cover up his involvement.
 
2013-07-18 10:15:00 PM

The Larch: kronicfeld: It's clearly Joe Biden's fault. Why won't he take personal responsibility for this other person's actions?

I hope Congress holds hearings to determine what Joe Biden knew and when he knew it. I believe that if a really intrepid congressman like Issa digs long enough, he will eventually uncover evidence that could be used to imply that Biden is trying to cover up his involvement.


Issa intrepid?
i18.photobucket.com
 
2013-07-18 10:24:05 PM

justtray: He was referring to preventing a home invasion, in self defense, on your own property.



Where, conveniently, it's also a farking terrible idea.
 
2013-07-18 10:38:44 PM
Only Joe Biden could make coach guns uncool.
 
2013-07-18 11:29:27 PM

TheBigJerk: dittybopper: This story is about 2 people who don't know the law.  One is a misinformed idiot from Jerkwater USA who has no clue that firing a shotgun into the air in a town could be dangerous, and the other is not the vice president.

Keep repeating it, someday it'll be true if you believe it hard enough.

Terminal velocity, think in terms of hailstones.

Then shut it.


When a projectile leaves a gun, it has a vertical and a horizontal velocity vector.  The vertical vector is impacted by air resistance and gravity.  The horizontal component is affected only by the air it's passing through.  If you fire nearly vertical (85 degrees) the horizontal vector is negligible.  But if you fire a projectile at a 45 degree angle at 1000 fps the initial vertical and horizontal velocity vectors would be about 700 fps and the projectile can return to the ground with enough velocity to kill.

Terminal velocity only applies to a limited subset of "into the air."
 
2013-07-19 04:22:57 AM

Smeggy Smurf: Only pull the trigger if you are aiming at something you intend to kill or destroy


But Joe said to do it if you have any doubts.
 
2013-07-19 10:43:24 AM
The Biden Defense is now in play.

These are uncharted waters my friends...
 
Displayed 155 of 155 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report