EDIT: There's no "rack" mentioned in the source. I assumed that. A loose loaded gun makes even less sense, tho.
Loaded while in a vehicle-mounted rack. Not just illegal, but also violates some fairly fundamental gun safety principles.
Heck, just "treat every gun a loaded" and "never point a gun at anything you don't want shot" means we should probably do away with most vehicle-mounted racks to being with. I suppose inside the metal toolbox in the truck bed would be okay; at least then the dog wouldn't fire it.
I’m not sure what entirely trying to say here …. At least then the dog would take the idiot out of the gene pool?
But seriously, this is exactly the reason people shouldn’t be allowed to carry weapons. They are more likely to harm or kill innocent people, more likely to escalate violence, than they are to defend themselves from inescapable violence. I get that many people claim the right, and have a foundational document to support it, but what about the victims?
I agree. Certainly while in public (e.g. public roads).
That said, I want to say that got proposed in the 90s and somehow the NRA not only defeated it at the federal level, but got congress to ban states from doing it. I could have just imagined that tho.
I'm not a gun person, but I wonder if some pool of funds from insurance premiums could be made available for victims who wish to apply for restitution( or something).
This incident definitely will cost this woman money she would presumably only recover through a suit.
Oh, insurance would probably help in this case. It would depend on the specifics of the law, and whether the gun owner was negligent / grossly negligent.
The main reason it wouldn't help in general is because most gun violence is intentional, and you generally can't insure against intentional acts, only accidents.
If the act was intentional or the result of (gross) negligence, the negligent/intentional person could (probably) be successfully sued for damages. Failing that, I doubt the victim will be able to recover her costs at all.
Though using IDs for rights in the US has historically been seen as racist (voting,) so technically we shouldn't even be IDd for guns or we should get background checked to make sure felons don't vote.
Not that I agree we should actually do either of those things but y'know, consistancy applied and all.
The only woman in the story is the victim, who was standing outside the vehicle as it pulled up and the gun blew through the door.
It's interesting to me that nothing is mentioned about the driver/gun owner, and it's written in passive voice as if the vehicle, dog, and gun all acted by themselves. But SOMEONE not only drove to the store with a loaded unsecured shotgun, they also had their unsecured dog with it in the backseat.
Fortunately it appears the door took the brunt and the woman wasn't killed. Maybe the gun and dog should have aimed at the driver's seat.
Its simply the case that this wasnt written for you (or us in this case). This is simply a right wing attempt at victim blaming while hiding the real subject here. Now root cause analysis I've seen isnt everybody's suite, but right wingers really dismiss it the most.
A vertical mount should be better too. Rarely is there something above you that's going to be harmed if it fires. Still, having it locked up is the best option. Firearms are the most stolen item in the US. Having yours visible and unlocked in your vehicle is just inviting thieves. Even the most selfish gun owner should have their gun locked up for this reason alone.
Just want to chime in and say that, as best I can tell, in Nebraska, vehicular gun mounts/racks are legal, I cannot find any law specifically mandating or banning or regulating them, beyond uh...
(Not that I think that is any kind of a sane approach to gun law, nor was this a sane demonstration of gun handling practices... just trying to lay out the facts as best as I can.)
Note that "highway" in US state law contexts is generally a legal term of art that more or less boils down to meaning "public road." They don't mean highway as in like specifically interstates with on and off ramps.
The intent is that you can bounce around dirt roads on your own farm or private property or possibly on game lands with your gun loaded dangling in your rear window, but not on public roads with other people on them.
From what I understand of various states road laws and... basically dialects... 'freeway' and 'highway' technically mean slightly different things, by state, and sometimes literally by county or city.
So... yeah. I'm not from Nebraska, you might be right.
But the... intent, that you're ascribing, to the law... I mean thats a factor in how a judge would rule, but... the actual texts of the relevant laws are factors as well.
You are correct that "freeway" or more likely some variation of "controlled access freeway" will have a separate legal definition that is closer to what normal people probably think of when they hear the word "highway."
Not just Nebraska but most, possibly all, US states. From what I've seen, anyhow. Hence my note about it being a term of art. In the law books it doesn't mean the same thing normal people think it ought to mean.
I don't even think it was in a rack. It sounds like it was just laying against the back seat, shell chambered with safety off, and the dog jumping around set it off.
Negligent as fuck. This person should not own firearms.
I don't know enough to be sure, and i would imagine it would depends a lot of the year of manufacture and how well it had been maintained. It would probably still be illegal; guns really should be unloaded during transport.
But, even if it did fire, the toolbox is likely a bit more durable than the cab interior. It's meant to have potentially heavy, metal things banging around in there even when driving rough.
Well that’s the thing I’m trying to say. It shouldn't need to be enforced or checked (but yes, i support legislation) any more than putting pants on before going outside. But clearly, it’s fairly common behaviour to ignore basic rules.
I believe the government should have carte blanche to simply bypass constituonal rights that I deem inconvenient rather than following the established process to change them
Oh I agree, even if it was one with manual safeties I never kept one in the chamber, if I don't have time to rack the slide I don't have time to pull safely.
How the fuck did that journalist manage to get "Saint-Michel-de-Double" right, a random-ass town with 250 inhabitants, but fucked up Bordeaux, which is a major city with a far simpler name ?
I see, when it's a dog we use the active voice but when it's a white nationalist we use the passive voice.
No but on a more serious note, why are people who are this unsafe with guns allowed to be gun owners in the US? It's okay though because next time a good guy with a gun will be there to kill the dog before it kills someone.
Or like it's a very bad idea to have easy access to lethal firearms for basically everyone because "mistakes" like this are bound to happen again and again, but whatever...
Accidental gun discharges are pretty rare. In the hundreds a year. And they are almost always with negligent gun owners storing a loaded gun not in a lock box.
It's not a mistake, it's willful ignorance by dumb ass fuck trumpets.
Bro we're humans we're all negligent at some point, you are trying to distance yourself from these negligent gun owners but you actually can't because your human and you make mistakes too.
Fair enough, but i guess yeah im scared of guns and i dont like having the right to carry one. Because any of the other 400 million Americans have the same right and they might be grossly negligent and then i end up the victim of someone's dog accidentally discharging a shotgun from the car in the lane next to me.
I like shooting guns i go a few times a year to the shooting range, it's always a good day and i feel good about knowing im ready to use one. I still just don't need one in my home and I don't think my neighbors need to be walking around with them either.
Hey you do you and we all feel how we feel. But are you that afraid of lightning? Because we're talking the same percentages.or kids drowning in a pool.
Gun violence sucks and it's dumb that we can't have any sort of middle ground on the conversation, but getting accidentally shot is so far down on that list of things that will kill you.
I'm not addressing that. You just want to argue against guns and are going on an unrelated tangent.
Legally, as in words mean something, it is negligence in the majority of cases and these people will face legal repercussions because they as a matter of law have been defined at fault.
Or like, store them safely and not rig traps and keep them loaded under a dashboard. That would probably drive accidental deaths lower than the current number of ~.0000625% of gun owners involved in an accidental discharge to an even lower number.
She wasn't killed but your point stands: The headline, while obviously being clickbaity and maybe even trying to be funny hides the underlying problem:
Somehow, the dog had triggered the shotgun – which had a live round chambered – to fire, damaging the vehicle and striking a female passerby.
[...]
It is illegal in Nebraska to drive with a loaded shotgun in your vehicle.
Every law follows a necessitating incident. Why are people so stupid? I have a shotgun, and while it is loaded, I never had an inclination to keep it chambered for any reason.
"Police responding to reports of a shotgun blast at a convenience store sounds like the opening of countless American crime movies[...]"
No, it sounds like the beginning of a normal day in America.
Never a bad time to mention that besides killing almost 3 people per day american cops also shoot a huge number of dogs per year.
The Department of Justice estimates that American police officers shoot 10,000 pet dogs in the line of duty each year. It is impossible to ascertain a reliable number, however, because most law enforcement agencies do not maintain accurate records of animal killings. The tally may be substantially higher, and some suggest it could reach six figures.
...some animals have been deliberately shot and killed under questionable circumstances, including through doors or while tied, running away, or hiding. Studies show that some officers shoot pets unnecessarily, recklessly, or in retaliation, and that subsequent civilian complaints are investigated inadequately. Moreover, not every animal that police officers shoot is a large dog that may be more likely to pose a genuine risk to human safety—or even a dog at all. Police claiming a threat to human safety have shot puppies, Chihuahuas, Miniature Dachshunds, and domestic cats, among other pets. In some tragic cases, bullets missed their nonhuman targets and injured or even killed human bystanders instead.
...Make sure to take your pup for at least 2 walks a day, give him treats and tell him hes a good boy every so often, or he get depressed and decide to start blastin'
In many "open carry" states, that's one of the only legal places you can put it without inadvertantly "concealing" it (the others being usually "on the dash" which is insane or "in the trunk" which technically is "transporting" not "carrying.") Pretty bad idea and is unsafe as hell, if you do that you shouldn't have a round chambered (or imo shouldn't do it at all, concealing it illegally is honestly safer), but y'know what are you gonna do.
Pretty sure this guy could be charged with criminal negligence for that since a bystander was hit btw, as to whether the DA will decide to bring charges we could never guess it's a coin toss, maybe they have already for all I know.
Well if you're carrying it for defense it has to be loaded by definition, the attacker never gives you time to load it lol, BUT:
A) Get a handgun and a proper holster, much easier. You can even get a trigger guard, so it's safe(r) if your state has dumb unsafe laws that tell you to leave a loaded gun unsecured flopping around a car, at least the trigger is blocked.
B) If you're married to the unsecured shotgun that then has to be loaded, you can't leave it chambered, or this could happen.
It's dumb either way, for sure, it's complete negligence on their part.
Capitalism can solve this.
There should be a market for gun holsters that attach to seatbelts.
The ads write themselves: "Stay safe! Protect yourself and your loved ones! BuckleUp™
At no point in that article is the driver even mentioned, let alone blamed.
as the vehicle had pulled up to the store
Apparently the vehicle has agency and it was indeed the vehicle that had to go to the store that day.
Foot note, it's illegal to drive with a loaded weapon in the vehicle, the last line of the article added seemingly as an afterthought. Im surprised they didn't say the dog was being investigated.
220 Comments
SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world · 162 pts · 90d
That dog didn't shoot anyone the negligent gun owner did.
bss03@infosec.pub · 60 pts · 90d
EDIT: There's no "rack" mentioned in the source. I assumed that. A loose loaded gun makes even less sense, tho.
Loaded while in a vehicle-mounted rack. Not just illegal, but also violates some fairly fundamental gun safety principles.
Heck, just "treat every gun a loaded" and "never point a gun at anything you don't want shot" means we should probably do away with most vehicle-mounted racks to being with. I suppose inside the metal toolbox in the truck bed would be okay; at least then the dog wouldn't fire it.
Marshezezz@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 37 pts · 90d
ouRKaoS@lemmy.today · 14 pts · 90d
How else am I supposed to poach deer by shooting them while they're blinded by my headlights if my shotgun isn't loaded?
/s
Marshezezz@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 6 pts · 89d
PapaStevesy@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 89d
Headlights? You mean the giant truck-mounted spotlight right? No /s, these people really exist.
ouRKaoS@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 89d
Yeah, the 100,000 Lumen LED light bar doesn't always work
wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz · 7 pts · 90d
Literally driving around flagging everyone on the highway. That's insane.
AA5B@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 86d
I’m not sure what entirely trying to say here …. At least then the dog would take the idiot out of the gene pool?
But seriously, this is exactly the reason people shouldn’t be allowed to carry weapons. They are more likely to harm or kill innocent people, more likely to escalate violence, than they are to defend themselves from inescapable violence. I get that many people claim the right, and have a foundational document to support it, but what about the victims?
SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world · 22 pts · 90d
Gun owners should have to carry liability insurance for things like this.
Rooskie91@discuss.online · 27 pts · 90d
Yeah, if only there were an example of insuring and licensing for some other kind of common deadly consumer product.
bss03@infosec.pub · 6 pts · 90d
I agree. Certainly while in public (e.g. public roads).
That said, I want to say that got proposed in the 90s and somehow the NRA not only defeated it at the federal level, but got congress to ban states from doing it. I could have just imagined that tho.EDIT: https://sclawreview.org/article/gun-insurance-mandates-and-the-second-amendment/ (summary: there's a couple of laws [one state; one local], that will probably get SCOTUS review eventually, but are on the books for now; it's questionable whether insurance will cut down gun violence.)
I'd expect guns to be at least as regulated as vehicles, but I guess vehicles don't have their own amendment.
brbposting@sh.itjust.works · 5 pts · 90d
I'm not a gun person, but I wonder if some pool of funds from insurance premiums could be made available for victims who wish to apply for restitution( or something).
This incident definitely will cost this woman money she would presumably only recover through a suit.
bss03@infosec.pub · 2 pts · 90d
Oh, insurance would probably help in this case. It would depend on the specifics of the law, and whether the gun owner was negligent / grossly negligent.
The main reason it wouldn't help in general is because most gun violence is intentional, and you generally can't insure against intentional acts, only accidents.
If the act was intentional or the result of (gross) negligence, the negligent/intentional person could (probably) be successfully sued for damages. Failing that, I doubt the victim will be able to recover her costs at all.
IANAL; TINLA.
SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world · 2 pts · 90d
Car insurance still covers your victims if you’re intentionally speeding or drunk driving so I’m not sure what you’re trying to say here.
bss03@infosec.pub · 1 pts · 89d
See the legal analysis linked earlier, in particular note 9.
SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 90d
Especially because this trash has no money to sue them.
RobotToaster@mander.xyz · 1 pts · 90d
That would just discriminate against poor people and people that live in high crime areas.
SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world · 7 pts · 90d
It would promote responsible gun ownership.
RobotToaster@mander.xyz · 3 pts · 90d
Plenty of rich people are irresponsible
SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world · 6 pts · 90d
Plenty of poor people have driving licences and are insured too.
ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 90d
Though using IDs for rights in the US has historically been seen as racist (voting,) so technically we shouldn't even be IDd for guns or we should get background checked to make sure felons don't vote.
Not that I agree we should actually do either of those things but y'know, consistancy applied and all.
SwingingTheLamp@piefed.zip · 4 pts · 90d
What kind of idiot takes a gun into a high-crime area? Great way to end up mugged or killed for your gun.
bss03@infosec.pub · 4 pts · 90d
It would do that, but it wouldn't just do that.
Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca · 16 pts · 90d
There's no mention of a gun rack; I think she just had it loose in the back seat...
Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works · 33 pts · 90d
The only woman in the story is the victim, who was standing outside the vehicle as it pulled up and the gun blew through the door.
It's interesting to me that nothing is mentioned about the driver/gun owner, and it's written in passive voice as if the vehicle, dog, and gun all acted by themselves. But SOMEONE not only drove to the store with a loaded unsecured shotgun, they also had their unsecured dog with it in the backseat.
Fortunately it appears the door took the brunt and the woman wasn't killed. Maybe the gun and dog should have aimed at the driver's seat.
Virtvirt588@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 89d
Its simply the case that this wasnt written for you (or us in this case). This is simply a right wing attempt at victim blaming while hiding the real subject here. Now root cause analysis I've seen isnt everybody's suite, but right wingers really dismiss it the most.
bss03@infosec.pub · 3 pts · 90d
Good catch; I just assumed.
Cethin@lemmy.zip · 6 pts · 90d
A vertical mount should be better too. Rarely is there something above you that's going to be harmed if it fires. Still, having it locked up is the best option. Firearms are the most stolen item in the US. Having yours visible and unlocked in your vehicle is just inviting thieves. Even the most selfish gun owner should have their gun locked up for this reason alone.
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 90d
Just want to chime in and say that, as best I can tell, in Nebraska, vehicular gun mounts/racks are legal, I cannot find any law specifically mandating or banning or regulating them, beyond uh...
https://nebraskalegislature.gov/laws/statutes.php?statute=28-1204.04
Which says that if you're in a school zone, your vehicular gun must be unloaded and in a locked gun mount within the vehicle.
The most relevant law I can find says that shotguns in a vehicle can't be loaded, while said vehicle is on the highway.
https://nebraskalegislature.gov/laws/statutes.php?statute=37-522
Class III Misdemeanor.
There does not appear to be a law that just says 'any gun in a vehicle must be unloaded', full stop.
So... if the driver was never on the highway...
No actual crime, as far as I can tell.
Maybe I missed something?
https://giffords.org/lawcenter/state-laws/guns-in-vehicles-in-nebraska/
(Not that I think that is any kind of a sane approach to gun law, nor was this a sane demonstration of gun handling practices... just trying to lay out the facts as best as I can.)
dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 90d
Note that "highway" in US state law contexts is generally a legal term of art that more or less boils down to meaning "public road." They don't mean highway as in like specifically interstates with on and off ramps.
The intent is that you can bounce around dirt roads on your own farm or private property or possibly on game lands with your gun loaded dangling in your rear window, but not on public roads with other people on them.
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 89d
Thats true, that is an important technicality.
From what I understand of various states road laws and... basically dialects... 'freeway' and 'highway' technically mean slightly different things, by state, and sometimes literally by county or city.
So... yeah. I'm not from Nebraska, you might be right.
But the... intent, that you're ascribing, to the law... I mean thats a factor in how a judge would rule, but... the actual texts of the relevant laws are factors as well.
dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 89d
Not to worry, Nebraska (and most/all other states) has this definition codified into law:
https://nebraskalegislature.gov/laws/statutes.php?statute=60-624
You are correct that "freeway" or more likely some variation of "controlled access freeway" will have a separate legal definition that is closer to what normal people probably think of when they hear the word "highway."
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 89d
Ah shit ok, you're right then, this 'highway' is pretty much just 'any publicly maintained road' in Nebrasaka.
dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 89d
Not just Nebraska but most, possibly all, US states. From what I've seen, anyhow. Hence my note about it being a term of art. In the law books it doesn't mean the same thing normal people think it ought to mean.
(Same thing with "assault," incidentally.)
SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 90d
Why have gun racks in 2026.
SnarkoPolo@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 90d
You just never know when Moose Lambs are going to helicopter onto the highway, ready to implement Shakira Law!!!
wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz · 3 pts · 90d
At least their hips don't lie!
LePoisson@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 89d
I don't even think it was in a rack. It sounds like it was just laying against the back seat, shell chambered with safety off, and the dog jumping around set it off.
Negligent as fuck. This person should not own firearms.
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 2 pts · 89d
Oh well. Guess there's literally nothing that anyone can do 🙄
wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz · 4 pts · 90d
Must've had the weapon off safe too...
Sylvartas@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 89d
If it were somewhat loose in that toolbox, depending on the model of shotgun, wouldn't there still be a risk of slam fire ?
bss03@infosec.pub · 2 pts · 89d
I don't know enough to be sure, and i would imagine it would depends a lot of the year of manufacture and how well it had been maintained. It would probably still be illegal; guns really should be unloaded during transport.
But, even if it did fire, the toolbox is likely a bit more durable than the cab interior. It's meant to have potentially heavy, metal things banging around in there even when driving rough.
Akasazh@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 89d
The negligent governement did, for supplying idiots with guns
JusticeForPorygon@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 127 pts · 90d
Kristi Noem absolutely shitting bricks right now
JennaR8r@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 37 pts · 90d
That dog is in training to seek vengeance upon Kristi Noem on behalf of the entire canine species.
P00ptart@lemmy.world · 16 pts · 90d
That dogs name? B.I.N.G.O.
ThrowawayPermanente@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 89d
Semper sic tyrannus
DigDoug@lemmy.world · 114 pts · 90d
If only there had been a good dog with a gun.
Bane_Killgrind@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 41 pts · 90d
Good boy*
wreckedcarzz@lemmy.world · 22 pts · 90d
All the good girls: :(
JasonDJ@lemmy.zip · 20 pts · 90d
All dogs are good dogs until proven otherwise.
CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de · 100 pts · 90d
A lot of things have to go wrong. Yes, it’s illegal to drive with a loaded firearm, but this is basic firearm safety.
The person hit was a passerby.
SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca · 41 pts · 90d
which no one enforces or even checks.
CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de · 22 pts · 90d
Well that’s the thing I’m trying to say. It shouldn't need to be enforced or checked (but yes, i support legislation) any more than putting pants on before going outside. But clearly, it’s fairly common behaviour to ignore basic rules.
Evil_Shrubbery@thelemmy.club · 21 pts · 90d
You get fined and put on a list if you go donaldducking around.
Saying that is a bit like expecting politicians won't be corrupt bcs of some decency & not because of consequences.
We pay taxes to get such things sorted out for us, so we don't have to assemble French street furniture every few years.
(But I'm not exactly saying I know how to police dog gun safety habits.)
M0oP0o@mander.xyz · 3 pts · 90d
Not in the states at least. I assure you in real nations you will get at the very least a smack upside the head for this level of stupidity.
PunnyName@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 90d
ShaLl nOt bE iNfrInGeD
– idiots
the_crotch@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 89d
I believe the government should have carte blanche to simply bypass constituonal rights that I deem inconvenient rather than following the established process to change them
-- bootlicking authoritarian idiots
MML@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 90d
You can have a firearm loaded if you have a carry permit most places.
CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de · 7 pts · 90d
Loaded is one thing but chambered is ignorant.
MML@sh.itjust.works · 5 pts · 90d
Oh I agree, even if it was one with manual safeties I never kept one in the chamber, if I don't have time to rack the slide I don't have time to pull safely.
mbp@slrpnk.net · 5 pts · 90d
Not in Nebraska
HikingVet@lemmy.ca · 79 pts · 90d
How many other countries have "shot by babies" and "shot by animals" stats?
Treczoks@lemmy.world · 40 pts · 90d
None of the civilized ones.
RobotToaster@mander.xyz · 16 pts · 90d
France https://abcnews.com/blogs/headlines/2012/09/dog-shoots-man/
SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca · 11 pts · 90d
France...still debating hunting while drunk.
Archer@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 90d
If you hunt in Europe then that means you’re rich, that’s why it’s even a debate
Rothe@piefed.social · 3 pts · 90d
One incident is not a "stat" though. In the people getting shot by animals and babies is occurring so often that keeping stats for it is necessary.
HikingVet@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 90d
Well, at least this one wasn't just pinballing in the back seat. Seems like the guy should remember his saftey though.
Sylvartas@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 89d
How the fuck did that journalist manage to get "Saint-Michel-de-Double" right, a random-ass town with 250 inhabitants, but fucked up Bordeaux, which is a major city with a far simpler name ?
Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world · 72 pts · 90d
If the woman had had her own shotgun, this would never have happened.
dhork@lemmy.world · 35 pts · 90d
Also known as the "Kristi Noem Rule"
luthis@lemmy.nz · 11 pts · 90d
I'm still waiting for the good guy with a gun to save Kurt. Any day now..
Evil_Shrubbery@thelemmy.club · 6 pts · 90d
Wouldn't have tho?
Imo she lacked a dog with a gun.
farmgineer@nord.pub · 2 pts · 90d
The headline does say "woman with shotgun", though :)
albbi@piefed.ca · 2 pts · 90d
I thought the dog was a good boy with a gun who shot a woman with a shotgun.
middlemanSI@lemmy.world · 55 pts · 90d
Was the dog black?
sachamato@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 90d
I'm dying over here
Fedizen@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 89d
Powerful "Charlie Kirk's last words" energy in this post.
absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz · 5 pts · 90d
Amazing comment.
Smeagol666@crazypeople.online · 3 pts · 89d
Did the pigs empty 20 or 30 rounds into it? Then I guess not.
humanspiral@lemmy.ca · 47 pts · 90d
it's important that dogs be armed. Only a good dog with a gun can stop Kristi Noem.
MajorasTerribleFate@lemmy.zip · 5 pts · 89d
They're all good dogs, Brent
Coleslaw4145@lemmy.world · 47 pts · 89d
Its crazy how a dog can just buy a shotgun in the US with no background checks.
Numenor@lemmy.world · 17 pts · 89d
Maybe he passed the sniff test
Assassassin@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 39 pts · 90d
She should have thrown the fucking ball
Kolanaki@pawb.social · 37 pts · 90d
Let's be clear here: The dog was not the real cause. The human with the loaded and unsecured shotgun in their front seat was the cause.
BagOfHeavyStones@piefed.social · 19 pts · 90d
And now the dog is probably deaf and has a gun phobia.
Cocodapuf@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 90d
And that good boy is going to serve 10 to 20 upstate...
Tetragrade@leminal.space · 3 pts · 90d
Car Seat Shoots Woman With Shotgun. Read all about it!
ElJefe@lemmy.ca · 36 pts · 90d
Most American thing I’ve ever read
driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br · 15 pts · 90d
If only had happened on a school
ZoDoneRightNow@kbin.earth · 34 pts · 90d
I see, when it's a dog we use the active voice but when it's a white nationalist we use the passive voice.
No but on a more serious note, why are people who are this unsafe with guns allowed to be gun owners in the US? It's okay though because next time a good guy with a gun will be there to kill the dog before it kills someone.
TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 89d
there is no test for 'safe gun owner'. most states don't even require a license if it's a shotgun. all you need is an state ID and a background check.
only five states require a gun license. 45 do not.
phoenixz@lemmy.ca · 31 pts · 90d
I'm feeling so bad for the dog, it must be terrified
mech@feddit.org · 4 pts · 90d
I'm feeling a lot worse for the innocent bystander who was fucking shot with a shotgun.
Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 89d
Cost of doing business living in the US wcyd
Dryad@lemmy.world · 31 pts · 89d
This is no time to get political. Lots of thoughts and prayers. Remember, guns don’t kill people, people kill people /s/
Hawk5000@lemmy.ml · 22 pts · 89d
Guns don't kill people, dogs kill people.
YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today · 5 pts · 89d
Big
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_Bites_Dog_%28film%29
energy
dan1101@lemmy.world · 29 pts · 90d
I could not relax with a ready-to-fire shotgun rattling around in my vehicle. Negligent gun owner bigtime.
darthsundhaft@piefed.social · 29 pts · 90d
iTs NoT tHe GuNs FaUlT iTs tHe PeOpLe 🙄🙄🙄
tomi000@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 90d
*dogs
darthsundhaft@piefed.social · 12 pts · 90d
My bad. *dOgS
makeshift0546@lemmy.today · -5 pts · 90d
Or like you could read about the gross legal negligence and seemingly booby trap shit, but whatever, it aligns with your view it whatever.
uniquethrowagay@feddit.org · 6 pts · 90d
Or like it's a very bad idea to have easy access to lethal firearms for basically everyone because "mistakes" like this are bound to happen again and again, but whatever...
makeshift0546@lemmy.today · -3 pts · 90d
Accidental gun discharges are pretty rare. In the hundreds a year. And they are almost always with negligent gun owners storing a loaded gun not in a lock box.
It's not a mistake, it's willful ignorance by dumb ass fuck trumpets.
Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 89d
Bro we're humans we're all negligent at some point, you are trying to distance yourself from these negligent gun owners but you actually can't because your human and you make mistakes too.
makeshift0546@lemmy.today · -1 pts · 89d
.000625%(napkin math) of gun owners experience an accidental gun discharge each year.
It just doesn't happen that often without gross negligence 🤷♂️.
Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 86d
Fair enough, but i guess yeah im scared of guns and i dont like having the right to carry one. Because any of the other 400 million Americans have the same right and they might be grossly negligent and then i end up the victim of someone's dog accidentally discharging a shotgun from the car in the lane next to me.
I like shooting guns i go a few times a year to the shooting range, it's always a good day and i feel good about knowing im ready to use one. I still just don't need one in my home and I don't think my neighbors need to be walking around with them either.
makeshift0546@lemmy.today · -1 pts · 86d
Hey you do you and we all feel how we feel. But are you that afraid of lightning? Because we're talking the same percentages.or kids drowning in a pool.
Gun violence sucks and it's dumb that we can't have any sort of middle ground on the conversation, but getting accidentally shot is so far down on that list of things that will kill you.
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 0 pts · 89d
And I'm sure it's just as high in every other country, right? Right??
makeshift0546@lemmy.today · -1 pts · 89d
I'm not addressing that. You just want to argue against guns and are going on an unrelated tangent.
Legally, as in words mean something, it is negligence in the majority of cases and these people will face legal repercussions because they as a matter of law have been defined at fault.
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 1 pts · 88d
How is that unrelated lol. Desperate to ignore reality
Acting like hundreds of people dying a year is acceptable. Fuck off.
Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 89d
No you're right loaded guns kill people, we can just keep them all unloaded and it would be safe.
makeshift0546@lemmy.today · 0 pts · 89d
Or like, store them safely and not rig traps and keep them loaded under a dashboard. That would probably drive accidental deaths lower than the current number of ~.0000625% of gun owners involved in an accidental discharge to an even lower number.
ThePantser@sh.itjust.works · 26 pts · 90d
Guns don't kill people, Good boys do.
Treczoks@lemmy.world · 26 pts · 90d
More like "Unqualified gun owners criminal neglect kills woman at convenience store."
sockenklaus@sh.itjust.works · 21 pts · 90d
She wasn't killed but your point stands: The headline, while obviously being clickbaity and maybe even trying to be funny hides the underlying problem:
YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 89d
Every law follows a necessitating incident. Why are people so stupid? I have a shotgun, and while it is loaded, I never had an inclination to keep it chambered for any reason.
Lumisal@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 90d
That's what the dog wants you to think 🐕
TronBronson@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 90d
Found the dogs defense attorney
TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 89d
there are no qualifications for gun ownership in Nebraska.
only a 5 states require a license for a shot gun, in the form of a Firearms ID. They require no coursework on training.
Typically you only need to take a gun safety class if you are buying a handgun, and even then only a dozen states require that.
Treczoks@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 89d
That is a big part of the American Problem.
TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 89d
do you live in Nebraska? you are welcome to move there and participate in their politics and change the laws.
but I don't think you're interested in doing that.
AA5B@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 86d
Moving to Nebraska is a pretty high cost for trying to improve the life expectancy of people who don’t want that
axexrx@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 89d
So everyone in Nebraska is an unqualified gun owner.
TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 89d
legally. they are qualified.
according to your feelings? i guess not.
quick_snail@feddit.nl · 3 pts · 89d
Nobody died. There was 1 minor injury
Gammelfisch@lemmy.world · 24 pts · 89d
Driving around locked, loaded and the safety off. The gun owner is a fucking idiot and should not be allowed to own firearms.
Zink@programming.dev · 12 pts · 89d
That's our wonderful american culture for you.
iamverysmart + iamverybadass + iliveinconstantfear
=
et tu, dogé?
WhyDoYouThinkThat@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 89d
this is such a weird way to use an education in latin
ecvanalog@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 89d
I just figured he was a big fan of the Spin Doctors.
Zink@programming.dev · 2 pts · 89d
I thought of it as a Julius Caesar reference, but I'll take what I can get, lol.
CrypticCoffee@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 89d
I don't think she will make this mistake again.
titanicx@lemmy.zip · 4 pts · 89d
Wasn't the woman's truck, dog, or gun. But that'll teach her to live in Nebraska.
phutatorius@lemmy.zip · 4 pts · 89d
Getting shotgun blasted by a dog isn't even in the top ten worst things about living in Nebraska.
Source: I'm a Midwestern cultural refugee.
Good thing: potato salad.
ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca · 24 pts · 89d
The only thing stopping a bad woman with a gun is a good boy with a gun.
i_stole_ur_taco@lemmy.ca · 19 pts · 90d
She was shot by a well-regulated militia, not a dog.
AgOkami@lemmy.world · 19 pts · 90d
"Police responding to reports of a shotgun blast at a convenience store sounds like the opening of countless American crime movies[...]" No, it sounds like the beginning of a normal day in America.
Soulg@ani.social · 3 pts · 90d
Believe it or not, a convenience store having a dog fire a shotgun is still a very abnormal thing in america
Macallan@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 90d
Yet at the same time, not at all surprising.
AgOkami@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 89d
The sentence I quoted and commented on didn't have anything do to with dogs.
quarkquasar@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 89d
rustyricotta@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 18 pts · 89d
SabinStargem@lemmy.today · 5 pts · 89d
vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 89d
Unironically a solid fucken metal song.
rumba@lemmy.zip · 16 pts · 89d
YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today · 6 pts · 89d
JFC its been forever since I've heard about, or even seen, him.
rumba@lemmy.zip · 6 pts · 89d
sorry to break that streak for you
Stalinwolf@lemmy.ca · 16 pts · 89d
He can't keep getting away with this!
Big_Boss_77@fedinsfw.app · 15 pts · 90d
Self defense?
TheGoldenV@lemmy.world · 18 pts · 90d
No means no.
Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works · 10 pts · 90d
Woof means woof
Bloomcole@lemmy.world · 15 pts · 90d
Never a bad time to mention that besides killing almost 3 people per day american cops also shoot a huge number of dogs per year.
The Department of Justice estimates that American police officers shoot 10,000 pet dogs in the line of duty each year. It is impossible to ascertain a reliable number, however, because most law enforcement agencies do not maintain accurate records of animal killings. The tally may be substantially higher, and some suggest it could reach six figures.
...some animals have been deliberately shot and killed under questionable circumstances, including through doors or while tied, running away, or hiding. Studies show that some officers shoot pets unnecessarily, recklessly, or in retaliation, and that subsequent civilian complaints are investigated inadequately. Moreover, not every animal that police officers shoot is a large dog that may be more likely to pose a genuine risk to human safety—or even a dog at all. Police claiming a threat to human safety have shot puppies, Chihuahuas, Miniature Dachshunds, and domestic cats, among other pets. In some tragic cases, bullets missed their nonhuman targets and injured or even killed human bystanders instead.
Fedizen@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 89d
There's a dog genocide going on conducted by america's police forces.
binux@sh.itjust.works · 14 pts · 90d
Had to double-check the headline to make sure I didn't have a brain aneurysm
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 90d
there has been quite a few dog-related shootings over the years.
pineapplelover@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 14 pts · 89d
GUNS AREN'T THE PROBLEM, IT'S DOGS
echodot@feddit.uk · 14 pts · 90d
This is the most American thing ever to happen.
anon_8675309@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 89d
Guns don’t kill people, dogs do.
sploosh@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 89d
The only thing that can stop a bad dog with a gun is a good dog with a gun, or a squirrel across the street.
BarneyPiccolo@lemmings.world · 1 pts · 88d
Skwrl?
pyre@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 88d
ilinamorato@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 90d
Maybe one of the most literal instances of "Man Bites Dog" I've ever seen. There's even a dog involved!
mech@feddit.org · 10 pts · 90d
She should have just obeyed his orders.
NottaLottaOcelot@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 89d
Training takes time. Perhaps he needed to make sure she could see the liver treat to entice her to perform the command
thethrilloftime69@feddit.online · 10 pts · 90d
I'm not joking, this is the plot line to an episode of 30 Rock.
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 9 pts · 89d
Only because this is literally a thing that happened before (probably more than once). This country is a joke.
YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today · 4 pts · 89d
And we still have no microwave with a ham setting!!!
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 89d
funny thing ALEC baldwin is pretty trigger happy.
artifex@piefed.social · 8 pts · 90d
30 Rock did it first. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sSYzhd3iepo
SatyrSack@quokk.au · 7 pts · 90d
I'm going to get into politics!
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 1 pts · 89d
Except they didn't because I'm pretty sure they were parodying something that literally happened. Probably more than once.
Taleya@aussie.zone · 8 pts · 90d
Not the first time it's happened
genuineparts@infosec.pub · 7 pts · 89d
Good that Woman with a shotgun could have done real damage.
spicehoarder@lemmy.zip · 12 pts · 89d
You've heard of good guys with guns, now get ready for good boys with guns.
ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 89d
First a quadruple amputee, now a dog...
HerbalGamer@sh.itjust.works · 7 pts · 89d
Good boi with a gun
slaacaa@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 90d
Rise of the Planet of the Dogs
PunnyName@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 90d
So I guess now is a time to talk about mental health...
axexrx@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 89d
...Make sure to take your pup for at least 2 walks a day, give him treats and tell him hes a good boy every so often, or he get depressed and decide to start blastin'
Sprocketfree@sh.itjust.works · 5 pts · 90d
Is this a 3o rock bit?
benderbeerman@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 90d
"... The Big Bad Dog... BOUNNN.TAYYY HUNTERRRR!"
Paranoidfactoid@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 90d
DOG BITES MAN
Zedstrian@sopuli.xyz · 5 pts · 90d
A good dog with a gun?
SabinStargem@lemmy.today · 5 pts · 90d
Wataba@sh.itjust.works · 5 pts · 90d
It's the crossover mashup of John Wick and Cats vs Dogs that no-one asked for.
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 2 pts · 89d
John Wick gets murdered, and his dog wants revenge
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 90d
its a DOG shoot people world out there.
possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip · 5 pts · 90d
Who leaves a loaded gun on the passenger seat
ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 90d
In many "open carry" states, that's one of the only legal places you can put it without inadvertantly "concealing" it (the others being usually "on the dash" which is insane or "in the trunk" which technically is "transporting" not "carrying.") Pretty bad idea and is unsafe as hell, if you do that you shouldn't have a round chambered (or imo shouldn't do it at all, concealing it illegally is honestly safer), but y'know what are you gonna do.
Pretty sure this guy could be charged with criminal negligence for that since a bystander was hit btw, as to whether the DA will decide to bring charges we could never guess it's a coin toss, maybe they have already for all I know.
possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 90d
I can sort of understand leaving it in the passenger seat
I don't understand why it would be loaded
ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 89d
Well if you're carrying it for defense it has to be loaded by definition, the attacker never gives you time to load it lol, BUT:
A) Get a handgun and a proper holster, much easier. You can even get a trigger guard, so it's safe(r) if your state has dumb unsafe laws that tell you to leave a loaded gun unsecured flopping around a car, at least the trigger is blocked.
B) If you're married to the unsecured shotgun that then has to be loaded, you can't leave it chambered, or this could happen.
It's dumb either way, for sure, it's complete negligence on their part.
PunnyName@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 90d
Or chambered.
mech@feddit.org · 1 pts · 90d
Capitalism can solve this.
There should be a market for gun holsters that attach to seatbelts.
The ads write themselves: "Stay safe! Protect yourself and your loved ones! BuckleUp™
obvs@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 89d
Wait, which one of them had the shotgun?
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 89d
the doggo.
_stranger_@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 88d
At no point in that article is the driver even mentioned, let alone blamed.
Apparently the vehicle has agency and it was indeed the vehicle that had to go to the store that day.
Foot note, it's illegal to drive with a loaded weapon in the vehicle, the last line of the article added seemingly as an afterthought. Im surprised they didn't say the dog was being investigated.
Godric@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 90d
Cricket Noem still has shooters, never forget <3
MapleEngineer@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 88d
Why did the woman have a shotgun and what did the dog use to shoot her?
Natanael@slrpnk.net · 3 pts · 90d
Noem?
Eh_I@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 89d
Sounds like a man bites dog headline
Naz@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 90d
I burst out laughing at the article headline
This must be article of the year
bizarroland@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 90d
Honey, wake up, a new man bites dog just dropped.
hanrahan@slrpnk.net · 2 pts · 89d
i wonder if the ladies out there will now cross dogs and men off the list and just stick with bears ?
But_my_mom_says_im_cool@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 89d
https://youtube.com/shorts/bfgFRINQxwI
Jhex@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 90d
Why? was she trying to eat the dog?
frog_brawler@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 88d
JennaR8r@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 90d
How did doggo pull trigger without opposable thumbs?
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 3 pts · 90d
with the dew claw, or the nails?
imhungry@leminal.space · 2 pts · 90d
So that scene in Plague Dogs wasn't comically impossible after all...
qevlarr@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 90d
Brave officers shot the suspect. No?
Nathan@sopuli.xyz · 1 pts · 83d
agapecaptain@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 89d
How did the dog know how to use the Gun?
winkerjadams@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 88d
Natural born murican
Sixtyforce@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 89d
Woof!