When two teens were shot in an apparent hunting accident, the family wanted to know why not more was done to the teen responsible.
TORNADO — On August 8, Keith Holsopple was hunting squirrels with two teenage friends. It would end with he and another friend being peppered with shotgun pellets in their arms.
“It was like claws digging into my arm and being pulled out slowly,” said Holsopple. “Blood was squirting everywhere.”10 pellets are still under Holsopple’s skin and full mobility could take as long as a year to return.
The teen who fired the shotgun has not been charged with any crime. According to Dwight Holsopple, Keith’s father, he was banned from getting a hunting permit for a number of years.
Have you read the breakthrough novel of the year? When you are done with that, try:
In Search of Sungudogo by Greg Laden, now in Kindle
or Paperback
*Please note:
Links to books and other items on this page and elsewhere on Greg Ladens' blog may send you to Amazon, where I am a registered affiliate. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases, which helps to fund this site.
or Paperback
*Please note:
Links to books and other items on this page and elsewhere on Greg Ladens' blog may send you to Amazon, where I am a registered affiliate. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases, which helps to fund this site.
I still don’t understand this fetishization of guns in the States. Someone please explain it to this Canadian, and without referencing the 2nd Amendment, which covers a well-regulated militia.
I think there should at least be a mandatory psych evaluation, mandatory gun safety courses (I know they already have to pass one in hunter’s ed, but if they’re shooting people even by accident, they need a refresher) and an inspection of the person’s home to make sure the guns are kept safely.
And there should be all three of these things for every negligent shooting verdict, if only because of how serious shooting somebody is.
Jason, it is impossible to form a well regulated militia made up of citizens if the citizens are unarmed. The second amendment states that “the right of the people shall not be infringed. ” The term “the people” means exactly the same thing everywhere it is found in the constitution, it means ordinary citizens. It would make no sense to raise a militia made up of federal troops when the whole second amendment is directed at standing up to a federal government that has become oppressive.
Your attempt to dismiss the second amendment is a cheap attempt to limit an opposition point of view.
Mr. Kirk I agree with you 100%. I would also add that teenagers shouldn’t be allowed to hunt unsupervised. There should always be a responsible adult around to supervise any activity involving firearms. The current laws make it far to easy to obtain a gun. A psych evaluation should be mandatory at least every two years for anyone that owns or wishes to obtain a firearm.
Yes, the punishments should be harsher. In Minnesota there is talk of harsher punishments for negligent or inattentive driving, so why not shooting?
ckerst: you didn’t actually answer the question (about the fetishization of guns in the States). In your response, I do not understand where the ‘well-regulated’ fits in. Who does the regulating and under what authority?
It’s all a red herring. The “arms” referred to in the Second Amendment are heraldic arms, not weapons. That is to say, in order to ensure the largest possible pool of potential officers for the militia, all citizens shall be considered to be armigerous.
He didn’t ask about the legal ownership, he asked about our fetish. To which I say, what my wife and I do in our bedroom with our guns is nobody’s business but ours (and obviously Rick Santorum’s).
My family is very into firearms, but not for any kind of militia thing. They hunt and just have a general interest. Much like collecting any other kind of thing. There would have been hell to pay if any of us were ever caught by our dad mishandling a gun. All of us took hunter’s safety. I never developed a real interest myself, but I could shoot decent at one time, and I shoot a bow occasionally at targets. Really, I like disk golf better for my hobby.
I’ve run into plenty of other people who tie their identities to their firearms, which I think is unhealthy. It’s much like viewing one’s worth by any other outside thing: size of one’s house, expensive jewelry, how good one is at sports, or one’s job. You are not the things you own.
Some people feel guns are the only true protection. I found a sharpened hockey stick works very well. It successfully backed up a guy that was trying to get into my apartment through a window. No one ever tried again after that. Cast iron pans work pretty well too, and they are awesome for cooking (multifunctional). The times that a gun would help over anything else are very few and far between. There are far more accidentally shootings than there are people successfully defending themselves with a gun.
I think some people misinterpret what is intended by keeping a militia. It would take some research though to see if there were any court cases that had an opinion on that. If the US citizens decided to overthrow the government, there’s the problem with the military being willing to fire on their own families. I think half the military would turn against the government as well, which effectively makes the government unable to defend itself. If someone left the military to defend their family, I doubt they are going to leave their firearm on the base. It would probably go home with them as well.
The current militia’s that exist in the US don’t have a lot of popular support as far as I know, and aren’t likely to launch a successful coup against the government. They’ll just upset a lot of people by managing to kill normal US citizens.
Everyone sees other people’s hobbies as crazy anyway. Most people don’t understand why I have a big iguana in my house, but he’s been my bestest buddy for over 17 years. It’s just something I like as much as someone else might like having a dog or a cat.
Oh, I forgot to mention that my post was in response to the person asking what was with the US and firearms.
As far as the kid being punished, there should be some punishment. Not being allowed access to firearms for at least 5 years, no shooting permit nor license, no ability to buy firearms for a period of time, a firearm safety class, and a fine.
If it went down as described in the video, this goes well beyond negligence. Even if it didn’t, there was clearly an unacceptable level of stupidity here. It seems odd that state law apparently gives people special treatment they do something stupid while hunting. If they’d been shooting trap, this would be more of a crime? Bizarre.
Not every consequence has to be criminal. The injured kids (or the parents, on the kids’ behalf) can sue the shooter and the parents of the shooter for damages. I guarantee you that this sort of civil action will be quite a bit more onerous than dealing with a criminal prosecution/plea bargain.
Is it possible to take the matter more seriously without necessarily involving harsher punishment? Is harsh punishment really the best way of modifying behaviour?
How about the same punishments with the addition of something simple, if anyone is involved in a gun related accident that arises from negligence (insecure storage, letting kids play with them etc), their guns are confiscated and they’re never allowed to get another one
If you’re dumb enough to think it’s “fun” to shoot at other living things, you fucking deserve to be shot.
That said, this is EXACTLY why guns should NEVER be in the hands of anyone but a trained professional. Even then, it’s iffy…
I’m American, and I don’t get the gun-fetish, either. It’s just fucking STUPID.
WMDKitty, it sounds to me like your argument is coming from a place of emotion, not a place of reason.
Guns are simple devices. They are much, much easier to operate safely than, say, a car. A small amount of training and a normal serving of not-being-a-complete-dumbass is all it takes to prevent this stuff.
Aliasalpha:
Precisely.
The best reason to prosecute firearm negligence is not (always) to put people in jail but to create a situation where they can never legally own or use another firearm again and have that procedure pass a Constitutional challenge.