• @Rekorse
    link
    -74 days ago

    I agree. Still different than what the article title implies happened. And quite a lot of people won’t read the article, or the whole article.

    The title implies an enraged or insane councilman shot a random teen in the face on sight.

    What actually happened the councilman mishandled his gun and shot someone.

    Still awful right? Why would he even have the gun out? But not quite the same thing.

    • @RoquetteQueen
      link
      74 days ago

      Personally it makes no difference. This wouldn’t happen if you guys had sane gun laws like the rest of us.

      • @Rekorse
        link
        -24 days ago

        Thats the point I’m trying to make.

        Everyone’s arguing about how to perfectly handle a gun so you don’t ever make mistakes, rather than talking about how everyone makes mistakes and that mistakes with guns are deadly.

        Maybe there shouldnt be more guns than people out there.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      64 days ago

      If someone got shot, the rest of it is sort of moot, isn’t it? Responding to trespassers by pulling out a gun is insane to begin with, if the trespassers aren’t doing anything else to imply a threat. Blocking the trespassers from leaving the property is bad enough, but to then threaten then with a gun is horrendous in its own right. Pointing that gun at them is insane unless he intended to shoot them.

      If he was shooting targets for practice and had a lapse of judgement and accidentally shot someone, sure, that is a different situation. If you knowingly and intentionally point a gun at someone and “accidentally” shoot them, I don’t see how that is any different than intentionally shooting them, other than the timing of when you pull the trigger.

      • @Rekorse
        link
        -34 days ago

        You are right it doesnt change that the person is shot. Guilt and sentencing are separate things. I think this person is guilty of shooting someone, but as far as punishment goes, the intention does matter.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          13 days ago

          I think the difference between our positions is that I believe pointing a loaded weapon at someone should be considered as intending to kill that person, at least until evidence and circumstance can determine otherwise. Because aiming a weapon at someone is more than just a threat that you will use it against then, it is taking physical action to prepare to use it against them.

          • @Rekorse
            link
            212 hours ago

            I’d honestly like to hear the councilman’s version of events, as in what he actually intended to do.

            That said I agree with you it should likely be intent regardless of what you meant to do with it.

            My guess would be he would argue he was just brandishing, or was aiming at the car.

            I don’t like people being so casual with guns, its disturbing how widespread it is.