MN Man Charged in Shooting after IPad Sale Goes Wrong.

[MineralMan]

http://www.twincities.com/localnews/ci_17851360

Source: St. Paul Pioneer-Press

"An iPad sale gone bad in West St. Paul resulted in gunfire when the seller shot at a supposed buyer, who fled with the gadget without paying, authorities said.

The seller, Jesse Jay Cherrier, 30, was charged with felony reckless discharge of a firearm in a city, according to a Dakota County criminal complaint filed Thursday. The man who took the iPad has not been located.

Cherrier, of Cottage Grove, told police he shot in the air, the complaint said. He had a permit to carry a pistol."

------------------------------------

Looks like someone wasn't listening during his CCW permit training class. Oops.

[jpak]

1. Another law abider

not

[MineralMan]

2. Craig's List Meetup, no doubt.

Knowing that area, I have to sorta wonder about the actual ownership of that iPad, too. But, I have no actual information in that regard.

[GreenStormCloud]

5. No systems of screening is 100% effective.

Out of about 8 million of us, there are going to be a few screw-ups. But they are very few and rare.

[MineralMan]

6. And worthy of note, too.

Which is why I posted it.

[Starboard Tack]

12. How many screw-ups do you find acceptable?

Is there a point where you might eventually draw the line, or would it be pointless by then, because we'd be living in pure anarchy? Which will be the time I start carrying.

[GreenStormCloud]

13. Obviously more than .025%

That is 1/40th of one percent, or 4 in 100,000. That number is the ratio of convictions to permit holders in Texas in 2009. Your chances of being struck by lightning are over thirty times greater than you chances of being illegally shot and killed by a CCW holder. Further, it is easy to demonstrate a greater number of CCW DGUs than CCW facilitated murders, therefore we are a benefit to society.

[Starboard Tack]

16. The only control we have against lightning strikes is to avoid them

I use that same technique with guns.
So, 4 in 100,000 is OK. I guess some minorities will never count.
How many is too many? 40? 400? 4000?

[rl6214]

17. "I guess some minorities will never count."

Where did minorities get brought into this?

[Starboard Tack]

19. The 4 in 100,000 killed by Texan CCW holders

[GreenStormCloud]

25. FALSE.

As usual, you distort what I say. I did not say 4 in 100,000 murders. That number is for all convictions of all kinds. For murders the number for 2009 is ONE out of 462,000 CHL holders.

[Starboard Tack]

27. My apologies. Did not mean to distort.

Let's try to keep it civil

[Name removed]

63. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rl6214]

15. There are screw ups in everything, a lot of them causing deaths

Yet the screw ups by concealed carry holders are very small.

Why focus on these few screw ups when you could make such a difference in life focusing on the big screw ups?

How many screw ups are ok when it results in a childs death in a swimming pool?

The "top causes of accidental death are drowning, fire, falls, and poisoning." Why don't we focus on one of those?

top causes of accidental death are drowning, fire, falls, and poisoning.

[Starboard Tack]

20. So you don't want to talk about CCW screw-ups here ina gun forum?

You'd rather talk about swimming pool deaths and fire. Did I miss something here?

[rl6214]

21. Oh no, I have no problem talking about screw ups in a gun forum

If they require police action on them I am all for taking care of the screw ups. But why demonize all gun owners because of the screw ups of a few? It's already been shown that gun owners that do screw up (CCH) are a VERY small minority.

[Starboard Tack]

22. I am not demonizing all gun owners. I am one.

I don't like the idea of folks walking around armed, especially with concealed weapons. I'm not so rigid about females having a firearm in a vehicle. There has to be a line somewhere and I'm not the one to draw it. That should be done by consensus.

[Straw Man]

24. Don't you trust yourself?

I am not demonizing all gun owners. I am one.

I don't like the idea of folks walking around armed, especially with concealed weapons.

Because we all know that violent crime always happens in the home, right?

Do you become somehow less trustworthy when you go out your front door? Or is it just all those other folks that you worry about?

I'm not so rigid about females having a firearm in a vehicle. There has to be a line somewhere and I'm not the one to draw it.

Good thing, because it sounds almost as if you're going to propose an institutionalized gender bias for CCW.

[Starboard Tack]

28. I think demonstrable reason for CC makes sense

Not just I'm going out now so just in case. That seems way over the top and should be considered during psychological screening, which is also a good idea. Obviously the screening process is the main point of contention for most people.

[GreenStormCloud]

33. The best psychological screening is a person's history.

If a person has lived a peaceful life with a clean police record then they have demonstrated that they are stable in real life. If you would care to look at a demographic breakdown of the ages that get CHLs you would find that it is mostly people in their 50s and up.

Here are the 2010 statistics for Texas: http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/chl/PDF/2010Calendar/ByAge/CY10AgeLicApplIssued.pdf

The peak year is age 52.

People with anger issues usually get in trouble with the law early in their lives. Relying on an interview with a shrink is not a good idea as a person can feed the shrink the answers he wants to hear.

[Starboard Tack]

35. I agree with you, but we can't restrict to 50+

So, as I've suggested before, how about a MMPI or similar every year or two. Can't be too careful if we want to stay responsible.

[GreenStormCloud]

37. There isn't any problem now. People with CCWs have compiled an excellent safety record.

We are several times safer with guns than the general public. As I have stated several times, you are over 35 times more likely to be struck by lightning than to be illegally shot and killed by a CCWer. With a safety record like that, what are you worried about? The best screening is their continued police record. Very rarely do people commit murder as a first crime. If someone commits a crime and is convicted then they lose their CCW.

[Starboard Tack]

38. And the band played on

[rrneck]

39. How you fixed for proof? nt

[Starboard Tack]

40. Sorry, didn't get that. Anglais s'il vous plait

[rrneck]

41. Do you have proof of

increasing crime, murder and mayhem due to firearms in this country? More importantly, do you have proof that it is caused by CCW holders?

[Starboard Tack]

44. No, but can you prove the opposite?

[rrneck]

47. I don't have to.

I'm not proposing any new laws. You're the one trying to make a case. So make it.

[GreenStormCloud]

50. Yes. You have been refered many times to published detailed statistics.

It is very easy to prove that CCW is saving more lives than are taken by it. That has been done several times but you ignore it. The VPC site counts CCW "kills" and to get the number as high as they can they include suicides and non-gun murders. The actual number of CCW facilitated murders is in the single digits over a four year period. In the time that you have been here there have been several news account posted of a person with a CCW defending themselves or another. And that is only counting CCW justified kills. If the bad guy runs away with no shots fired that is still a DGU save but you don't hear of it because the media doesn't bother with it.

[Starboard Tack]

52. And how exactly do you prove that?

[GreenStormCloud]

56. My post #50 tells you how we prove it. N/T

[Starboard Tack]

58. Sorry, but you can't prove a negative.

The only fact I am sure of is, the more guns toted, the greater potential for violence.

[GreenStormCloud]

61. I prove a positive. Armed citizens are a benefit to society.

Method is shown in post #50.

[Starboard Tack]

65. And I completely disagree. Armed citizens are a social impediment.

We can agree to disagree you know. It's OK

[rrneck]

67. Prove it.

Prove that a firearm incites violence. See? I told you somebody would call you on it although I didn't expect it to be me.

[GreenStormCloud]

42. Why shouldn't the band play on?

The statistics on CCW holders are well established. There is no hidden epidemic. We aren't out gunning down hordes of people. Since the original reference to the band playing on is to the Titanic, then this band can play on. The RMS CCW is sailing in daylight and calm seas, in tropical Caribbean waters in February.

[Starboard Tack]

45. Thanks for the explanation of my own post

You make my point so beautifully. They thought it was unsinkable.

[rrneck]

48. Show proof that it's sinking.

You're actually onto something. Run with it.

[Starboard Tack]

53. The Titanic isn't sinking. It sank and the band played on in disbelief

How could the unsinkable sink? Dunno, an iceberg, maybe. Oops!

[rrneck]

54. Would that it had

dodged that iceberg as well as you Dodge a simple question.

[Starboard Tack]

59. An the question was?

[GreenStormCloud]

55. Post proof that CCW is sinking. You can't. N/T

[Starboard Tack]

60. Maybe it isn't yet. Keep your eye on the horizon

The icebergs are out there

[GreenStormCloud]

62. You are wishing for icebergs.

Because you don't like armed citizens you are wishing for something to go wrong to prove you right. But in the last 25 years things have only been going right for the CCW movement.

[Starboard Tack]

66. There's a difference between not liking the toting of arms and

not liking armed citizens. I don't judge the person because he decides to carry. It's the carrying I dislike, not the person. I hope I'm being clear.

[Katya Mullethov]

64. More like the Lexington

"She sinks beneath the deep blue seas each evening, all hands aboard, only to re-appear each morning on the horizon."

[GreenStormCloud]

49. The Titanic had never sailed.

Modern CCWs have been around for over 25 years in dozens of states. The evidence is in but you refuse to look at it. You keep hoping for an iceberg in the tropics.

[petronius]

51. In the case of the Titanic, there was clear and incontrovertible evidence that there was a problem,

and the band did nothing (albeit admirable, if true). In the case of HIV/AIDS, there was clear and incontrovertible evidence that there was a problem, and many agencies did nothing.

In the case of CCW, all evidence points to there not being a problem, so in fact the band should keep playing, and playing louder. Your analogy doesn't work at all...

[PavePusher]

57. 1.5 million violent crimes per year.

I'm not sure how many "non-violent" crimes, too lazy to look it up right now.

Unless you are a better precog than I am, your advice on when/if/where I'll need a firearm is rather less than useful.

Reason. Demonstrated.

[GreenStormCloud]

26. But you seek to demonize all CCW holders by the actions of a very few. N/T

[Starboard Tack]

29. I don't want to demonize them.

I think the accountability is not there and the bar is too low. Nobody would care if they believed that every toter was a sane responsible person with perfect judgment and integrity. Unfortunately, that's not the case. Most folk don't see proliferation as a common sense solution.

[rl6214]

31. "That should be done by consensus."

Yes it should, and it is. Throughout the country concealed carry laws are being passed around the country and it's not being passed just because the "NRA/GOP MORANS" are getting them passed.

[oneshooter]

34. " That should be done by consensus" It has, you just don't like it. n/t

[Starboard Tack]

36. I may not like everything done by consensus but I accept it

Just like I accepted the insanity by consensus of the reign of Dubya. I'm pretty good at holding my breath until sanity prevails.

[rl6214]

14. Just like YOU?

You ARE just a crime waiting to happen.

That is basically what you say about all gun owners.

[msongs]

3. Gun owner shoots.... nt

[MineralMan]

4. Illegally. His CCW permit is now history. If convicted of the felony,

so will be his ability to own a firearm of any kind. Not too bright, was he?

[Logical]

43. +1

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[one-eyed fat man]

46. Touched a nerve, I see

Is swinging a broad brush acceptable as long as hews to the proper orthodoxy?

All men are rapists and that's all they are. -Marilyn French

Is the solution to drown every male child at birth?

[TheCowsCameHome]

7. bookmarking.

[spin]

8. K&R ...There are times when a individual with a carry license ...

does something incredibly stupid with his firearm and makes other permit holders look bad by association.

Fortunately such occurrences are extremely rare.

[MineralMan]

9. Yes. Rare, but not nonexistent.

It's always something to be considered, I think. Incidents like this is why I do not support carry into places like sporting events, where tempers often flare in the best of times. I don't want the guy who poured a beer over my head and insulted my wife to be carrying, and I don't want to be carrying when that happens, either. I carry very rarely in Minnesota, even though I hold a CCW license.

[spin]

10. In Florida you can't carry at most profesional sporting events...

Possession Restrictions

***snip***
any school, college, or professional athletic event not related to firearms
http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/weapons/possession.html

However there is armed security at most professional and college sporting events provided by the police.

[MineralMan]

11. Some states are trying to make it OK to carry at them, though.

I just don't like the idea one bit.

[spin]

30. Emotions run high at sporting events ...

as long as there is armed security, I have no problems with leaving my firearm behind.

I do have a problem with places that don't allow firearms and don't have good security. People with severe mental problems are attracted to these sites because they are shooting galleries.

[rl6214]

18. Same in Texas

No sporting events, stadiums, amusement parks. Not excusing the guy but a stolen Ipad is not the same as going to a sporting event.

[Logical]

32. I agree, and they should be exposed. But this is one bad one out mostly good ones! n-t