He thought he saw a deer and fired his pistol. Now his neighbor is dead.

I am flagging this in my mind for now anyways as a Global Engagement Center propaganda piece brought to us legally by the NDAA 2017.
Well, I mean its technically entirely legally possible this is a psy-op.

“Identifying current and emerging trends in… information obtained from print, broadcast, online and social media, support for third-party outlets such as think tanks, political parties, and nongovernmental organizations… and the use of covert or clandestine special operators and agents to influence targeted populations and governments…”
— §1259C, b4

Or it could be entirely legit and sad story. Maybe the truth is a little bit of both??

Well I tell ya, nobody’s safe anywhere.
If it weren’t dealt from the hands of
a blind guy with a pistol and an empty pantry
mistaking a
merry making turkey trotter
for a meal, at dusk, ending the fun with a whimsical God given right to take
potshots,
it’d be the woeful toxic plumes streaming from another narcissist’s fireplace chimney
that kills ya. Why do you think they call it smoke.

Or maybe one day your house is swallowed by the sea thanks to global warming.

Can’t blame this on Obama.


It’s like a jungle out there. We must do something!


a reply to: worldstarcountry

# 913

originally posted by: FyreByrd
a reply to: seattlerat

It wouldn't have happened - if gun owners were required to take and pass a safety test and had to renew their 'license' for time to time for each weapon owned. Just like the registration of a car and the license to drive a car requires.

More people die each year from vehicle accidents than they do from firearms. That proves your idiotic requirements for firearm owners would do dick all to prevent stupid people from doing stupid things.

The 2nd amendment is a RIGHT not a privilege. We don't need the government requiring every firearm owner to take a safety test and pay for a license every few years on each firearm they own. Let me guess, if someone should happen to let that idiotic license idea of yours to laps, you would have no problems with them becoming a felon.

originally posted by: kelbtalfenek
a reply to: seattlerat

First off...I think the basic rule of hunting is..."know exactly what you are shooting at." Correct me, if I'm wrong. The guy "thought he saw a deer??" Well, he should have known he saw a deer before taking the weapon off of safety.

This is a sad and tragic event that didn't have to happen...because some idiot "thought" he saw a deer.

That's the logic. Read it all the time.

It's not the reality though.

More propaganda to push anti American agenda. plain and simple.a reply to: seattlerat

It does seem a bit suspicion to me. I suspect he ran out there, shot her, and then called for help. Ballistics analysis will show the trajectory and velocity of the bullet.

The shooter:
peopledotcom.files.wordpress.com...

This isn't the first time that something like this has happened. There was the case of Karen Wood who was shot because she was wearing white mittens and wasn't wearing orange clothing, while she walked along the side of wood. Hunter shot her.

outthere.bangordailynews.com...

a reply to: silo13

Anyone who takes a 200 yard shot with a pistol? That's not a hunter.

A good shot none the less....

No different then a drunk who kills someone while driving a car,should we ban cars?,can find all sorts of stupid things do that result in death,inanimate objects are just that,till you use them ,use common sense

Even if it was a deer, SO FREAKING WHAT!!?! The deer was just living his life like you and me damn it!!! Oh theres a DEER I better #ing shoot it!!! Most people disgust me!!!

Apart from the fact this guy is a bloody idiot, why would he want to shoot a deer in his backyard in the first place????

He should go to jail.

originally posted by: TheOnlyBilko
Even if it was a deer, SO FREAKING WHAT!!?! The deer was just living his life like you and me damn it!!! Oh theres a DEER I better #ing shoot it!!! Most people disgust me!!!

Yeah shoot it and eat it because it tastes good, where is the issue here?

Ya'll disgust me.

Screaming for someone to go to prison for a mistake / accident / etc.

It's like saying you should be fired from your jobs for spelling mistakes.

# happens, this I know. The actual legal / law system will determine if he should be charged.

Rather then yelling for him to just go to prison, perhaps there is a better course of action for your emotional needs, like sending donations to her widow?

originally posted by: silo13
a reply to: seattlerat

Anyone who takes a 200 yard shot with a pistol?

That's not a hunter.

Even if using a Thompson Contender Unit with a .223 barrel.

Something's funky fishy about this.

Or just plain stupid.

Edit to add:

From article: 'Sheriff Joe Gerace told the Buffalo News that Jadlowski used a single-shot handgun permissible for deer hunting.'

So a black powder/muzzleloader pistol? 200 yards?

He's either too stupid to wipe his own arse without dirtying his hands - or there's something so wrong with this.

Then again - it just could be an example of 'pure stoopid'.

It's a single shot handgun. This is more of a mini-rifle with tactical telescope that a pistol or revolver. Shooting competitions have ranges from 200 to 500 meters. Almost like something out of Batman:

www.eabco.com...

originally posted by: Cygnis
Ya'll disgust me.

Screaming for someone to go to prison for a mistake / accident / etc.

It's like saying you should be fired from your jobs for spelling mistakes.

# happens, this I know. The actual legal / law system will determine if he should be charged.

Rather then yelling for him to just go to prison, perhaps there is a better course of action for your emotional needs, like sending donations to her widow?

Spelling mistakes don't generally result in serious injury or death.

The duty of care required when wielding a firearm is much higher than when using a writing utensil.

This man made a poor decision, he must accept responsibility for his negligence.

originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: silo13

Anyone who takes a 200 yard shot with a pistol? That's not a hunter.

A good shot none the less....

Maybe not...I am curious what breed / size were the dogs she was walking? It seems more likely that he would mistake the dogs for deer and a badly aimed pistol shot missed them and hit her.

a reply to: FyreByrd

No but it does cut down on them.

I don't think it does at all. In order to drive, you have to be licensed unless you want legal trouble, so all it does is force everyone to take a very simple test, and fork out some money every few years. It doesn't fix stupidity. My parents taught me to drive. Licensing did not make me a better driver. It was my parent's advice and experience that made me a better driver.

What you're suggesting would be unconstitutional, and if it where ever imposed, people like me would absolutely reject it, the same way people drive without licenses to day.

a reply to: seattlerat


I know a guy from high school who thought he was shooting a deer so he pulled the trigger. As it happens his brother was in a stand and the angle of the shot took him out of his stand. He died instantly. That guy was never the same.

originally posted by: Cygnis
Screaming for someone to go to prison for a mistake / accident / etc.

A mistake is spelling 'conceive' without the I after the E. An accident is you asking me to hand you a beer and then it drops.

This guy broke the law by hunting after sunset and killed someone, this is neither a mistake nor and accident, it was a willful decision and he should be punished for his moronic actions.

There are NEVER any accidents when it comes to guns unless there was a manufacturer defect and something happened despite the best efforts of the shooter to be safe.

It is otherwise called NEGLIGENCE.

Negligent Discharge: Time to Talk About Gun Safety

Accident:

An accident is defined as an injurious occurrence whose circumstances were beyond the capability of the individual to avoid. With prudence and caution accidents can be avoided, but things can still happen regardless of the risk mitigators we put in place. You can never really remove risk entirely. But what happens cannot be attributed or faulted to any particular party or person.

Negligence:

Negligence is the FAILURE to take ANY precautions at all. Drinking and driving without a seatbelt on while speeding is negligent. Whereas accidental occurances happen despite risk mitigators, negligent occurences happen IN SPITE of risk mitigators. How many times do people have to be told and shown why drinking and driving is so bad? Still they do it anyway.

I'm not sure how banning guns comes up over a negligent discharge. He failed to take basic gun safety precautions, and someone died as a result. This has nothing to do with gun owners at large, and everything to do with this one specific individual adult failing to adhere to established safety protocols.

And yes, I believe he should face incarceration. Our actions have consequences. This is no different than an innocent person getting negligently shot during a defensive encounter. If you lawfully shoot an attacker, but negligently hit a bystander then you deserve to face manslaughter or felony assault charges (depending whether they die or not). You are totally responsible for each and every projectile that leaves your barrel.

Of course this isn't "murder" but it probably would qualify under "negligent homicide" or even "manslaughter"