Shoot Lots of Bullets = Don't Worry You Won't Get Shot : Greg Laden's Blog

Profile

Welcome to Greg Laden's Blog.

Search

Shoot Lots of Bullets = Don't Worry You Won't Get Shot

Category: Gun Ownership
Posted on: October 12, 2009 8:51 PM, by Greg Laden

No one was shot in the following video. So don't worry about carrying around guns. It's perfectly safe.

Share this: Facebook Twitter Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More

TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/122151

Comments

No one was shot?
Natural selection isn't what it used to be.

Posted by: Kitty'sBitch | October 12, 2009 9:45 PM

It is probably a bad idea to hang out where people illegally carry guns. Maybe if we passed another law, besides the one that makes it a felony to carry a gun in an Ohio bar (or maybe I'm jumping to conclusions, and that was the bar owner or an undercover cop) it would make this never happen.

Posted by: Sevesteen | October 12, 2009 11:36 PM

Yeah, how do you know they were illegal guns?

Posted by: Greg Laden | October 12, 2009 11:37 PM

They are referencing state law, I think.He said 'illegally carry' not illegally purchase.

http://crime.about.com/od/gunlawsbystate/a/gunlaws_oh_2.htm

"It is unlawful to possess a firearm in any room in which liquor is being dispensed pursuant to a liquor license. "

I dunno if this includes the bar owner or not. I guess the people he was asking to leave were trying to sell pot there.

Posted by: skeptifem | October 13, 2009 12:48 AM

Off topic, unless you consider the topic to be Ohio, but I have a question of you wise people. Besides, this topic will inevitably devolve into shouted insults "You hate freedom! vs. Shut up, gun nut! anyway so it's not like I'm hijacking an interesting discussion.

Ohio has an upcoming ballot issue to create several casinos. Offhand, I consider lotteries and casinos to be destructive to society and a regressive tax. On the other hand, the only arguments against that I have seen so far are ludicrous 'no part of the law specifies that the jobs have to go to Ohioans' or 'the catholic church festivals will lose money' (Oh no!). So I am unsure, I prefer to allow people freedom to make their own stupid choices and I wouldn't mind taking away some money from a corrupt religion. On the other hand I would rather not see gambling addicts be victimized to make some casino owner richer. Anyone have any insight on this?

Posted by: Jason | October 13, 2009 9:26 AM

Unless you are the owner or an on-duty cop, it is a felony to carry a handgun in an Ohio bar or restaurant that serves liquor.
So even in the highly unlikely event that the shooter had a carry license, he was still committing a felony even before he whipped it out and committed more felonies.

I haven't followed the current casino bill yet. The last one wanted to set up monopoly casinos for a specific company, with a somewhat complicated tax structure and the possibility of loopholes where they could avoid a good bit of the taxes. The one before that granted regional monopolies to a small handful of already-picked companies.

I would vote for a law that in general allowed casinos, but not one that only allows certain companies to set up casinos. Based on the past proposals, I'm inclined to vote against just about any Ohio casino referendum, unless it both meets my objections and is simple and easily understood.

Posted by: Sevesteen | October 13, 2009 9:13 PM