Muggs archive

▼

Monday, March 8, 2010

Editorial: Missteps abound in shooting trials

Predictably, given the paper's long history of gun love, the unnamed Courier editor comes out in favor of Steve Solomon, and faults the cops and County Attorney's office for failing to handle the evidence-gathering well.

Could lawnforcement have done a better job? So said the judge, and that's all we really know. But the editor uses that lapse to gloss over the real issue of public concern: the fusillade of AK-47 rounds that Solomon fired off his property and into the wild, which Solomon himself said he did "for fun." Whether he knew there were people in harm's way or not, this was grossly reckless and irresponsible and it was only his dumb luck that this wasn't a manslaughter trial.

The editor's sole observation on this idiocy: "Testimony alleged that Solomon could be more responsible as a gun owner ...." Thanks, editor, for standing up for public order and responsible citizenship. Yeesh.
at

2 comments:

  1. CandaceMarch 8, 2010 at 5:45 PM

    Aahhh, AK-47. Weapon of choice of the Mujahideen and the Free and the Brave.

    ReplyDelete
  2. coyoteradiotheaterMarch 8, 2010 at 9:24 PM

    You know . . . I remember teaching a BRM class . . . year after year in the army that started like this . . . "Remember, men, the bullets keep going. Even past what you were shooting at and they can have a tendancy to hit things you don't want them to. So don't be an idiot and even point it at things you wouldn't be comfortable killing or maiming for life."

    Generally speaking the max effective range of an AK47 is 1,300 ft. But that doesn't matter because he wasn't aiming at them. Basically, you've got a fat chunk of metal heading downrange at people sitting on top of large animals.

    Think about it, idiot.

    The man is unfit to carry the weapon.

    Second Amendment Obsessors: What well-regulated militia was he representing that day?

    ReplyDelete

I encourage you to share your own views and experience with me and other readers. How you do that matters, and I'm committed to maintaining a place where readers and commenters can feel safe from adolescent BS. So here's the deal:

There are two kinds of anonymous comments: those by people who have a genuine fear of revenge from the dark side, and those from darksiders just hiding to avoid accountability. You may post comments anonymously, but I reserve the right to treat anonymous comments as found items that belong to me and do with them as I see fit.

If, on the other hand, you're willing to stand by your convictions and post under your own name or a regular handle, your comments belong to you, and I'll edit them only on egregious violations of respect for others.

If this doesn't work for you, I'm sure you'll be happier somewhere else.