The Trace: “Accidental Shooting” In MO Supermarket Proves Need for Permitting, Disarmament

In 1989’s Batman, the Caped Crusader tells the Joker “I made you? You made me first.” I get that feeling about The Trace and TTAG. Anyway, Michael Bloomberg’s anti-gun agitprop machine continues to crank out “common sense” nonsense. Like this . . .

As permitless carry continues to gain steam across the U.S., here’s a story we noticed out of Missouri:

On September 3, a man wearing a loaded gun in his pants waistband accidentally shot himself in a University City grocery store. The man, who was hit in the leg, survived. A fellow shopper was wounded by debris from the blast.

Missouri is one of 12 states that has enacted a permitless carry law. Since January 1, residents have been able to carry concealed guns without permits in most public places.

States that do require a permit to carry a loaded weapon require prospective carriers to undergo a background check and some firearms training, though standards for that training vary widely. Critics of permitless carry say that removing such requirements creates an opportunity for individuals not proficient with guns to carry, creating a public safety risk.

According to the report at the link, the man in question was carrying his gun without a holster. It slipped, he grabbed it and BANG! OK, so, let’s follow author Miles Kohrman‘s logic, such as it is . . .

An armed American — one armed American — negligently discharges his firearm, wounding himself and a fellow shopper (peppered from debris).

The unnamed didn’t need a government permission slip — including “some” firearms training —  to exercise their natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms.

Unnamed “critics of permitless carry” (a.k.a., Constitutional carry) reckon that government mandated training prevents negligent discharges.

Therefore . . .

Permitless carry creates a public safety risk and should be banned. In fact, the whole idea of armed civilians is inherently dangerous and should be discouraged. OK, banned. But we can’t say that. Unless we’re in New Jersey or Hawaii.

Where, pray tell, is any scientific evidence backing up the idea that safety training makes shooters safer — setting aside the fact that the Second Amendment prohibits any government regulation on the keeping and bearing of arms, regardless of its danger to the general public?

Suggesting that an unsafe gun handler can be made safe by government-mandated safety training is like saying that unsafe drivers are made safer by drivers’ ed. trustedchoice.com reports . . .

In 2009, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration conducted a study to evaluate the effectiveness of driver’s education courses. In their conclusion, they stated that “the notion that a traditional driver’s education course can by itself produce safer drivers is optimistic.”

What does that tell you? What does it tell The Trace? Why nothing, of course. You can’t see with blinders on and you can’t hear when you’re shouting.

Nor can you properly balance one — count it one — example of a gun carrier endangering public safety against dozens, hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands of annual examples of defensive gun use. I guess that’s our job.

comments

  1. avatar Green Mtn.Boy says:

    Under that line of thinking I would need to get permission and training for what I just typed,I think Not.

    1. avatar Binder says:

      No, but likely you wen tot school and they taught you. How about we start teaching young adults in high school how to properly use firearms

  2. avatar Kendahl says:

    If training were the answer, no police officer or soldier would ever have a negligent discharge. Of course, we know they do.

    1. avatar Binder says:

      No, but training helps. It help a LOT

  3. avatar Missouri_Mule says:

    “Can’t fix stupid, but _________.” (fill in the blank)

    But seriously folks, you have the right to bare arms, but the RESPONSIBILITY to learn to use them safely.

    1. avatar dph says:

      If you “bare arms” you may be accused of brandishing in some locales.

    2. avatar Nanashi says:

      “if it bleeds we can kill it”?

  4. avatar bobo says:

    Permitless carry creates a public safety risk and should be banned. In fact, the whole idea of armed civilians is inherently dangerous and should be discouraged. OK, banned. But we can’t say that. Unless we’re in New Jersey or Hawaii.

    To follow that logic?? If a lib says that?
    Then all driving should be banned lots of unlicensed illegal ALIEN drivers in Cali that hit stuff and I was one of these ‘things’ in my truck!!!

    1. avatar Desert Dave says:

      Don’t you mean undocumented migrants with drivers licenses and voter registrations.

      (for those that can’t tell /sarc.)

  5. avatar dph says:

    “States that do require a permit to carry a loaded weapon require prospective carriers to undergo a background check and some firearms training, though standards for that training vary widely.”
    Yeah, I guess they vary widely. In Washington they just want your money every five years, no training required.

  6. avatar IYearn4nARnCali says:

    The rules of gun safety, respecting and securing your firearm from being negligently operated by family, friends, and thieves, and several thousand rounds of firing your weapon(s) to ensure you understand you weapon system with PROFICIENCY are all the training needed. The problem with simply stating the above is that The Trace grabs more newspaper and screentime than gun rights groups can, since so many of the “newsy” types are Liberals.

  7. avatar Darkman says:

    What difference would a permit or training have made in this situation. None. A Difference That Makes No Difference is No Difference.

  8. avatar Joe R. says:

    Unlike the festering half-life of V.D. “The Trace”, all proper weapons handling is a perishable skill.

    I trust you (even if you’ve had an ND) before I trust The Trace on anything.

    Anything.

  9. avatar MyName says:

    So, one incident constitutes proof? Well, I carried a gun around all day yesterday and never fired it. So, does this prove that people can carry without shooting themselves?

  10. avatar CLarson says:

    LOL. I guess the Trace has slow news days also when they report on a Mexican carry ND.

  11. avatar Roymond says:

    The problem is people. No one should be allowed to be born without training.

  12. avatar Cliff H says:

    The only thing that could have POSSIBLY been funny about the attached video (I couldn’t make it to the end, so it might have happened) is if one of the students had pulled a pistol and shot both instructors, then been released uncharged for a justified shooting in self defense.

    As for the other ND issue, I can see some, barely, justification for a requirement to carry your pistol in a holster of some sort. A holster of ANY sort. Call it an issue of public safety and a misdemeanor ticket for non-compliance.

    But then we’d be called racists for making Mexican Carry illegal.

  13. avatar David J. says:

    If training and licensing prevents deaths and injuries, then why is it that doctors kill and injure so many every year?

    1. avatar Snatchums says:

      Just because you can train a parrot to speak doesn’t mean it knows wtf it’s saying.

  14. I’m against qualifications to allow someone to bear arms besides being outside of a prison cell.
    But I would like to see those that act irresponsibly with a firearm charged appropriately for that negligence. We don’t even need special firearms laws. Reckless Endangerment is already a thing.

    1. avatar Binder says:

      The problem is that people are only charged after someone is hurt.

      1. Nobody was hurt the last 10 times I was issued a citation for speeding.

        1. avatar Roymond says:

          The source is lost in dim memory, but I recall from college studies of ancient cultures that more than one had the principle “No harm, no crime”. We would do well to honor that.

        2. A 147 grain projectile traveling 1200fps always harms something.

        3. avatar Roymond says:

          THAT is what you were riding when you got a ticket for speeding?

          That’s 818.18 (1818 ad infinitum) mph.

        4. I was pointing my car in a safe direction.
          I knew the road ahead and what was beyond it.
          I didn’t put my foot on the accelerator until my vehicle was on target and I was ready to drive.
          I treat all my cars as if they are loaded.

          The difference between speeding and a negligent discharge is, I am still in control of my vehicle and can stop it at any time.
          Once a bullet leaves the barrel, you can’t bring it back.

        5. avatar Roymond says:

          LOL

          If I had a car that went 818.18 mph, I’d certainly want to point it in a safe direction!

          Though unless I was on a great salt flat, with me as a driver I think the situation would be like how liberals regard guns: there IS no safe direction.

  15. avatar Ad Astra says:

    If the left treated this like every other problem they would be screaming for the government to subsidize holster purchases.

    1. avatar Roymond says:

      Yeah — holsters with a combination lock.

  16. avatar SurfGW says:

    This is a one of the very few reported NDs. Thousands happen every year and are not reported partly because police has been told (by law) in the 90’s not to keep such statistics and the FBI cannot (by law) compile these statistics. Data mining of police reports shows that such incidents are common.
    Wish we would repeal those laws so we can get an accurate count and be able to make informed decisions. (Don’t read this as me being anti-carry because it is not what I said)

    1. avatar Sian says:

      (citation needed)

  17. avatar n64456 says:

    After checking out “The Trace”‘s Facebook page; it looks like the comments are around 80% “pro-gun”, or “anti-GC”… That’s encouraging; as it seems RF’s exposure of their garbage is causing a big response from POTG… I’m sure they’ll close comments, or ban people; because that’s what “statists” do…

  18. avatar FiftycalTX says:

    What should be noted is that it is EXTREMELY STOOPID to carry a handgun without a PROPER HOLSTER. And not proper procedure to try and “catch” a falling gun. A little “training” might prevent STOOPID in the future but maybe not.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email