The sad saga of Anna Nicolle Smith has pushed the equally sad story of Astronaut Lisa Marie Nowak off the front pages and it's not our intention to revive it. But we would like to call attention to one aspect that has received no discussion:
Police said Nowak drove 900 miles, donned a disguise and was armed with a BB gun and pepper spray when she confronted a woman she believed was a competitor for the affections of Navy Cmdr. William Oefelein, an unmarried fellow astronaut.[snip]
Police said Nowak told them that she only wanted to scare Shipman into talking to her about her relationship and didn't want to harm her.
"If you were just going to talk to someone, I don't know that you would need a wig, a trench coat, an air cartridge BB gun and pepper spray," Jones said. "It's just really a very sad case." (Fox News)
The undiscussed item is a weapon: "an air cartridge BB gun." For most people a BB gun is a Daisy pump action rifle used by 12 year olds to induce their mothers warn them it could put their eye out. In this case, it belongs to a whole class of unregulated guns variously called "non powder guns," "air guns," "pellet guns," or
"BB guns." The most generic designation is non-powder gun (npg) and we'll use that to designate guns that used compressed air, gas, or a mechanical spring action instead of gunpowder to shoot a projectile. The modern version is no Daisy BB gun for popping squirrels. They look just like firearms (i.e., guns that use powder) and have muzzle velocities of 650 to 1200 feet per second, comparable to or greater than low velocity firearms. A pellet/bullet can penetrate skin at 150 feet per second and bone at 350 feet per second.
Recent estimates are that there are about 30,000 injuries a year in the US from NPGs, three quarters of them unintentional injuries in children under the age of 14. But about 20% of injuries are violence related and these weapons are routinely used in crimes. Here's a test. Guess which of these weapons are npgs and which are firearms:
Which in each of these pairs is a "BB gun"?
Most firearm injuries are intentional (and the majority of deaths are suicides, not homicides). They outnumber NPG injuries four to one. This means that one in five gun injuries is from an NPG, most of them unintentional, with children as victims.
In the picture, the npg is on the left in each row. It is the functional equivalent of the firearm it is paired with, except no license of any kinds is required. Many states have age requirements for purchase or use without adult supervision, but the regulations are rarely enforced, especially in rural areas. Wherever you live a purchase is just a mouse click away. While these weapons cause far fewer deaths than firearms, they cause a lot of injuries, many serious like loss of an eye. Your mother was right.
Too bad the intense, repetitive and voyeuristic coverage by the media didn't include the one public health item that would have been genuine news to most people.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Pic is missing. I need to see what to get for my birthday...
npgs.tiff does not render on my puter when your other pics have.
This reminds me of some of the OH where the guidelines were created with a given technology in mind. The technology for detection or creation changed, but the law hadn't.
I did a quick jump over to http://www.daisy.com and found that the old Daisy Red Ryder pump-action bb gun has a 280fps muzzle velocity and was rated for 10 years of age with adult supervision, a 5th grader while the 750 fps multi-pump air rifle featured on the new products was for 16 years of age with adult supervision.
Remember that there is a second-order risk from anything which is made to resemble an actual powder firearm, to wit, that a person carrying such a device may appear to be armed with a real gun.
There have been a lot of cases where people with toy guns, paintball guns, novelty lighters which look like derringers, and the like have been challenged and then engaged by police officers. Frequently with lethal effect.
I was recently in a situation with some younger family members who were intent on trying out a pellet pistol which was a dead ringer for a .38 Special. I insisted that they observe all three traditional rules for safe and disciplined gun handling.
"But it's not a gun!" was the response. My reply was that as far as I was concerned, it was one. And I noted for their edification that a cop would probably think the same upon seeing it.
--
John, Darin: Changed to .jpg. Hope that works.
marquer: Yes, "It's not a gun" is a common response. But it is a gun. It's not a firearm.
Revere, are you sure a license isn't required to own BB guns in Massachusetts? I've been told they now are. Anyway, I guessed the NPGs correctly, but only because of the names. I sure couldn't tell by looking at them.
I think I agree with Revere on this one. Air rifles are very effective weapons (I own a very nice Benjamin)and need to be treated as such by the regulations AND MOST IMPORTANTLY by the owners/users. Too many people don't practice firearm safety rules and end up hurt or killed, this includes regular rifles and handguns as well as air operated products. Lucky for me, Dad was a Army/Air Force lifer and was a bug on weapon handling so Iearned it very early on, most do not. Very sad...
BTW I don't like firing weapons and only own them for self-defense and the occasional varmit termination.
Its just like airplanes, a certain number go up whole and then a certain number come back down in an uncontrolled fashion. Kids cant buy these weapons and yes thats what they are, weapons. Parents buy them out of ignorance (we have 12 year olds up and down the street all weekend long on 4 wheelers and hi-performance dirt bikes) and no one does squat about it. A certain number of the parents of this world shouldnt be parents because these little devices aint your round ball Daisy from the 1950's. The run point 017 and .223 in a lot of cases and the latter is the same bore as an M-16. Muzzle velocities are quiet high at close range and yeah you can whack yourself, a friend or the occaisional varmint.
I am against all gun control for anyone below the age of 16. I have been a hunter and keep several large bore and small bore weapons. No kid should ever have one of these pistols as they are clearly more than playtoys. You shoot someone with this and at the very least they are are going to be in the hospital, at the worst the morgue.
C. Corax: Massachusetts regulates age (18) and requires adult supervision under 18 but nothing else. No license is required. If a person under age 18 has a hunting or sporting license, then they may possess a BB gun. At least that's how I read the law. You can see it ghere.
OK I'll take the bait...
Why stop at NPGs? Why shouldn't all guns be considered a public health concern?
Disclaimer; I live in the US but wasn't born here, so I really don't understand this whole obsession with firearms.
The only thing I see is a gun related homicide rate that is simply disgusting.
I too thing gun related homocide is a horrible problem but I am amazed also at how many gun related accidents happen as well. I know two people who were killed in gun related accidents. I also have been around enough gun owners to know that the gun safety is reduced to dumb luck in far too many instances.
When I was a kid 30 years ago I shot a friend with a pellet gun by accident (he was hidden but real gun safety requires you know where everyone is); it had a fairly profound effect on me even though with the weak guns of that era it just hurt like hell without breaking the skin. I have not fired any kind of gun since and I come from rural/hunting area filled with guns.
rickr, FS: LOL. It's the United States, silly. We have a God Given Right to Kill each other with Guns. (Oh, oh, Incoming gun mail. Duck!). Of course it's a public health problem and has been defined as such by the public health community for decades. But we got muzzled (is this the right word in this context?) by the Bushies and their cronies. CDC is now forbiddent to talk about anything that might promote control of a major health hazard.
FS: Most gun deaths are either accidents or suicides. If you use a gun in a suicide attempt it won't be unsuccessful. If you use sleeping pills, more often than not it will be unsuccessful. So lovelorn adolescents you make "gestures" with guns don't get a chance to think it over later, when they realize the loved one was a loser.
Uh, where I come from Revere the use of weapons are not unintentional. They happily knife the hell out of each other and make small explosives too.
Health hazard? So is a rock of coke or a rock to the head. Those are health hazards too. You can overdose from a 2 pound rock being used on your skull. Its a tool just as an automatic is. The part about crimes of passion might be well taken but it hasnt changed anything. Poison is the next favorite from what I understand.
Bit presumptive too to be trying to limit the rights of others simply because you think its a health hazard. I prefer to think its a way to keep our government honest. Life is a health hazard.
Love your work Revere. The internet is a beautiful thing, here I am in hot and sunny Melbourne and I can log in and read experts from around the planet discussing public health issues. This particular subject though is a mystery to everyone on the planet who is not a US citizen. Why do you guys insist on the right to kill each other based on the very strange notion of keeping your government honest? No other OECD community has such a mistrust of their democratically elected representatives that they insist on arming themselves to the teeth so that they may, somehow, band together and defeat the armies of the same government. If you guys don't trust your government enough that you need "self protection" from them, how can you then, logically, expect the world to believe that the export of this kind of democracy is a good thing?
Trevor: I obviously don't speak for our legislators. I wish I did.
Trevor: "This particular subject though is a mystery to everyone on the planet who is not a US citizen. Why do you guys insist on the right to kill each other based on the very strange notion of keeping your government honest?"
It's not that we're insisting on the right to kill each other... I'm with MRK as far as keeping the govt honest: I think the desire to own a gun, excepting gang types, goes back to the founding of the country. And in Texas, the sentiment of independence is alive and well, with many choosing to be licensed to carry concealed.
At ranch parties I've attended, women 50 years and considerably older, dressed in fancy denims and boots displayed excellent shotgun skills, having been brought up as hunters with their daddies. (Shotguns on sale at Walmart, folks.)
On the other hand, I remember a local news item several years ago about a fellow who was shot by his friend while sitting up in a tree looking for deer during hunting season. His shooter friend thought he had heard a turkey up there...
Just because you can carry or shoot a gun doesn't mean that you have the sense to do it well or safely.
See, theres the thing really. In Australia, you cannot obtain a firearm licence without rigorous police checks, training etc and then only manual reloading rifles and shotguns. It is not possible to buy or own assault weapons of any kind. No 50 cals, no auto or semi auto weapons, grenade launchers, RPG's etc etc. It is a very serious crime to carry a concealed weapon and very difficult to own a handgun of any kind. Guess what our murder rate by firearm is? Oh, in the zone of 100+ pa for 21 million people. Now compare that to a US population of equivalent size. Lets pick LA or NY or........ Seems a bloody high price to pay to keep the Govt honest and a horribly expensive and preventable public health crisis.
TM-But understand that in the days of B. Clinton as I served my country. I stood in the halls of the unit and we took orders to go to Kosovo, it was actively discussed by the future wing commander, two senior master sergeants and a couple of listener ons that someone should take Mr. Clinton out of office. I wasnt talking about lawful means either. I was in my section briefing my younger troops and we heard the entire conversation. This blade cuts both ways. Even the biggest lib will become an extremist and so will a conservative if they feel its necessary. It is a long step, but once taken there is no turning back. Just as it was in 1775 when the Brits were murdering Bostonians wholesale in the streets, quartering their troops and basically saying WE are the government and YOU shall obey. Some would say that we are there now. I wouldnt take too much issue with that statement. But really we have been there for about eight years or so now. The government tells us what to do.
As for Revere's opinion of it, he is entitled as defined by the laws of the Constitution.The same applies for the people who are packing legally. They are entitled to it. I applaud both because its almost always the lawless that take up the weapons and do someone. Its not a public health problem but if it were I would know how to fix it. Gun crime, you do no time. Take them down every Saturday and hang them publicly as they did in the past. Its a crime problem and not health. Memphis has over 1900 inmates in the County Jail, more than some countries.
I guess we just didnt hand them enough out when they were growing up so that they wouldnt become criminals. There are no jobs where they live because the businesses are broken into, the people that could make a change left because they were robbed or assaulted. They left permanently, that is if they could because their cars were stolen. This all done by a 14 year old as an example who was arrested (county stat) 36 times before age 14. Yep, I guess there just werent enough giveaways to prevent him/her from going bad. Now they steal cars and run out of S. Memphis to the burbs and rob/kill (just this past week by a 14, 16 and 19 year old) and we are just supposed to say oh well, lets just get rid of the guns and that will solve all the problems.
Me, I see a mad dog I kill it. Dominant species thing. I am dealing with mad dogs and I see no other way other than to kill it. I certainly do not sit around and try to decide if he had enough to eat today, or whether he had his leash on, or whether he went to obedience school. I dont see humans in this respect when they are doing this kind of stuff. I see the mad dog and I put it down if I can. See my post on GUNS to the left column. Reverer is a good guy but what MIGHT float in the boat in the Northern US doesnt even begin to down here. Lawlessness is handled a lot more abruptly and we dont try to psychoanalyze it.
Hmmmm
Trevor wrote:
Why do you guys insist on the right to kill each other based on the very strange notion of keeping your government honest? No other OECD community has such a mistrust of their democratically elected representatives that they insist on arming themselves to the teeth so that they may, somehow, band together and defeat the armies of the same government. If you guys don't trust your government enough that you need "self protection" from them, how can you then, logically, expect the world to believe that the export of this kind of democracy is a good thing?
Actually, there have been cases where American citizens have, either definitely or allegedly, taken up arms against their own government or police on American soil in the belief that they were defending themselves or their way of life. Mumia Abu-Jamal. Leonard Peltier. Randy Weaver. Joan Little.
The general reaction to these acts in the U.S. is one of horror. The person who did the killing is usually reviled as a thug, a psychopath, a traitor, or an extremist. But we have this Minuteman mythology; we're taught to believe that someday it may be necessary for "patriotic" people (read: organized, politically centrist to conservative, civic-minded white male adults) to pick up weapons and fight off agents of a tyrannical government. In fact, this kind of thing is usually done by someone who is an outsider, belongs to no "organized militia", is not thinking in political abstractions, and may be in a state of uncontrollable rage or panic while wielding the gun or knife. The person who gets killed may really be an abuser -- or may just be the hard-working cop on the beat, assigned to the wrong place at the wrong time.
No doubt about it -- we're in denial somewhere.
Hey Julie, I initially was all for the deal down in Waco but as things developed I found out that the nice lady Atty General was the same nice lady who prosecuted the cops down in Florida for the beating death of a not so nice insurance salesman. The Miami Herald whipped up the black community and then the trial got moved to Tampa. The trial was black and white on the jury and you know, its all about what you charge them with. The guy was a pimp (MH said insurance salesman), made him out to be MLK when in fact he had a rap sheet about as long as Rodney Kings. He had run from them on a m.cycle and pissed them off. Then when he wrapped his bike around a car and a palm tree and was unconscious, the cops arrived and with over 50 witnesses they beat the slimey sonovabitch to death. Then our nice lady Janet Reno charged them with manslaughter, not murder one. They went back to their car to get their billy's so they COULD beat him to death. Murder 1 and she charged them with Murder 2 knowing full well they would get off and when they did they burned Liberty City to the ground.
So fast forward to two weeks (I think thats right) and the newly appointed Attorney General decides that its time to take on Koresh in Waco with the ATF charging in there. We wouldnt want Billy C. to have blood on his hands now would we. So in they went and they got handed their asses back to them and a couple of casualties. No warrant was ever issued that anyone could find out about. They also stormed in rather than announcing themselves and they got shot for their efforts. Then they used a tank, and knocked a hole thru the compound wall. Then the brigtht SOB's decided to use tear gas and concussion grenades which set fire to the facility with children in there. CX tear gas when heated to high temps becomes a nerve gas. Most of those chidlren didnt die in the fire, they died from inhalation of the agent which caused their muscles to seize in the back. It literally broke their backs in half.
Now once it was all over the anti-gun nuts under oath skated and ran and got away with murder. But the facts were that the ATF was supposedly going in because there were illegally owned weapons there. In fact there werent. So lets not go left wing crazy here. This is the reason you keep weapons so that the government knows that with proper motivation and in accordance with the rights afforded you under the Constitution you can defend yourself from an overbearing and unbalanced government. Sure they died, but so did agents of the government. From this you no longer see anyone storming in unless they have clear and credible evidence that a violent crime is being committed or the persons involved HAVE prior violent records. They are also required to immediately start blaring away on bull horns that they have a warrant.
Like I said. I always want my government wary of me and not the other way around.
Amending the above since it cut a line or two. Add in. "Hailing the arrival of the Clinton Administration and Janet Reno a definite sense of combativeness was apparent in the new Administration." Fast forward two weeks.....
Not to mention that the ATF could've picked up Koresh at the local Walmart any ol' day they wanted to. Easy, completed, and successful. But nooooooo...
it is a p198 gun the shoting sukes and the cocking sucks