Well, Now, Isn't This Interesting...

Skidmark sends in a very interesting story for consideration...

Gun accidents down, but other home accidents on the rise

Contrary to what you might expect from all the news about gun violence, accidental deaths from guns in the home are relatively uncommon, and have actually gone down slightly in recent years, according to a new study. But other deadly accidents at home, including poisonings, falls, and burns, are far more common, and on the rise. The good news: some simple measures can help prevent most of them.

The study, published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine, looked at data from 2000 to 2008. More than 30,000 people die from accidents in the home each year, the study found. The three leading causes of accidental deaths were poisonings (43 percent), falls (34 percent), and fire or burn injuries (9 percent). Firearm mishaps accounted for just 1 percent of all accidental deaths in the home.

The number of actual accidents involving firearms is surprisingly low; only a few hundred a year. Considering the sheer number of firearms out there, and the large number of gun owners in America, it's actually rather surprising the number is as low as it is (IIRC, it's a couple hundred incidents a year). Now, I'd sure like to see that number even lower, but considering that people manage to injure and kill themselves through accidental falls, poisonings, and fire at a rate more than an order of magnitude mode than firearms, there are many other things around the house that pose greater dangers.

This is unsurprising to those of us in the gunnie community. Safety - both in the handling of firearms as well as the storage thereof - tends to be up front and center in any discussion amongst gunnies. The Four Rules are hashed, re-hashed, and visited repeatedly; the virtues of keeping one's firearms secured, while mandatory in some areas, is just a plain good idea in general - heck, guns are 'spensive, and keeping them from getting stolen is a good thing, right?

The nightmare scenario where a child happens upon an unsecured firearm is prominent, yet exceedingly rare - and this is an area where education really is a lifesaver. Programs like the NRA's much maligned "Eddie Eagle" teach kids the proper way to handle finding a firearm - Stop, don't touch, leave the room, find an adult - and can help keep an already low number of accidents even lower.

Of course, that's assuming you believe such an obviously right-wing site like Consumer Reports...

That is all.

What He Said...

Linoge reminds us why we should wear safety equipment.

Let me add to it:

That's from .22LR brass this past weekend. Bounced off the partition of the indoor range into my nose, just enough to take a little chip out of my schnozz. Now imagine if I hadn't been wearing eye protection and it had hit my eye instead... You can get a decent pair of shatter resistant (*NOTHING* is shatter proof) lenses for under $10 from about a billion places, including WalMart, Amazon, and every industrial supply company on the planet.

Protect your eyes (and ears) - they're the only ones you get.

That is all.

Everyone Has Them...

Even the very best of us.

OldNFO had an ND.

I've shot with NFO. I've been RSO on a shooting line with NFO as a shooter. I cannot say enough good things about the man's professionalism with a firearm (nor his prowess as a shooter). If it can happen to him, it can happen to any of us. Go read his account - it's something that folks might not consider; I know I certainly wouldn't, not given the kind of rifle shooting I normally do. I will typically re-chamber ejected rounds and such - in a handgun. It wouldn't necessarily occur to me that a rifle might be different.

FWIW, I've posted about my own ND before. There's a saying about motorcycle riders: There's two types of bikers, those that have crashed and those that are going to crash. It's applicable to shooters as well - if you haven't already had your ND, you will. Handle enough guns enough times and something is quite likely to come up that results in an ND - which is precisely why there are four rules. Obey at least two of them and the ND will only result in ringing ears and wounded pride.

And mad props to NFO for sharing this story.

That is all.

Juggling Kids and Guns

Well, not literally - most kids are *heavy*, and you'd hate to mar the finish of your favorite Blast-o-matic if you dropped it, right?

Daniel in Brookline e-mailed me with a simply excellent set of questions that I thought might be applicable to many folks. He writes:

Hi Jay,

As a concealed-carrier and a father, are there times at home when you put away the gun for safety's sake?

(I'm not carrying right now -- my wife is still averse to me keeping my guns at home. I'll keep working on that. In the meantime, I've adjusted my wardrobe, bought a Dragon Leatherworks holster and a blue gun, and from time to time I carry it concealed at home; call it practice. Tonight I became uncomfortable with it when I was tucking the boys into bed; they're toddlers, and they were crawling all over me. Yes, Dennis is no slouch; yes, the holster covers the entire trigger guard; and yes, chances are that neither of my boys are yet strong enough to pull a gun out of the holster, to say nothing of pulling a Massachusetts trigger. I nonetheless had nightmare visions of them finding it, of it being not a blue gun but my Beretta, and having to deal with my toddler holding a gun.)

Am I being ridiculous here? Is the answer simply that, while tucking the boys in, I'd (a) make sure it's cocked and locked (or a revolver with an empty chamber), (b) move it to the small of my back, and (c) forget about it?

I'm also thinking of a relative who frequently comes to visit. She carries an S&W .38 snubby, all chambers loaded, tucked into her waistband (no holster). They boys don't generally crawl all over her, and I believe she carries at 4 o'clock or thereabouts, but still...

I welcome your advice. I honestly don't know if I'm right to be concerned. (I also wonder at what age I can begin educating the boys about guns. One is three, the other is one and a half.)

Wow. Where to begin?

First off, no, you are not being ridiculous at all. Your kids are your most prized possession; never make any excuses for looking out for them in all possible ways. My kids were the reason I got back into shooting and carrying a firearm - it dawned on me that I was the first line of defense for them, and that I should have the best tools for that job. If I never have to draw my firearm I will go to my grave a happy man; however, I could not live with myself if something happened to my kids and my actions could have prevented it.

Secondly, my dirty little secret is that I'm not always carrying a gun in my house. The entry is pretty secure; anyone coming in through the front door is either going to be slowed down enough for me to make it to a safe or they're coming in so hard and fast that having a .38 in my pocket ain't gonna help much. That said, there's a lot of times where I'll come home from errands or something and have my CCW piece on my belt. The kids are at the point where they'll hug me and not even notice the holster.

Education is the key; I recommended the NRA's Eddie Eagle program for at least the three year old. It's never too early to start teaching kids gun safety, and even if you hate guns with every fiber of your being and won't let your kids have even a squirt gun, you can't watch them 24/7/365. Give them the knowledge to be safe rather than try to shelter them from things. End sermon. Make sure they know the Four Rules. Make sure they understand that daddy's guns are not toys.

Teach them, like my dad taught me as a wee sprog, that daddy's guns are not forbidden fruit but a tool that a grown-up needs to help them with in order to be safe - that is, if they want to look at a gun, use it as a learning experience. Show them how to safely handle a firearm, checking to make sure it's unloaded, keeping their finger off the trigger, the gun pointed in a safe direction. Heck, letting them dry fire it is a great idea - you'll know immediately if they are capable of pulling the trigger should the worst happen.

That said, a quick and easy suggestion I had was to get a pair of "tactical" pants like the 5.11 Covert Tactical that have a zippered inside pocket. LCP/P3AT/J-frame etc. in a good pocket holster zipped inside the pants is not going to fall out under any circumstance. And there's always the option of tossing the gun in the safe before playing with the kids - that's usually what I do. Heck, TheBoy is getting close to my size, and when he wants to wrestle, he's playing for keeps now... ;)

As for the relative, well, my first thought was, "wow, you know Plaxico's sister!" Since he knows this person and has the best assessment of her situation awareness as well as his kids' level of activity, it's his call - personally, I'd tell her to get a holster just because Mexican carry is the dumbest way to carry a firearm possible, and it's only a matter of time before she shoots herself in the leg... If it's one of those Clipdraw deals, that's a little better, but still best to keep the kids away if there's any doubt.

So, any other thoughts/ideas/suggestions?

That is all.

This is Frightening, and No, It's Not in MA...

From PISSED, something to make us all live up to his name...

"No refusal" DUI checkpoints could be coming to Tampa

Tampa, Florida-- With New Year's Eve only days away, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration expects this to be one of the deadliest weeks of the year on the roads.
...

Florida is among several states now holding what are called "no refusal" checkpoints. It means if you refuse a breath test during a traffic stop, a judge is on site, and issues a warrant that allows police to perform a mandatory blood test.

If this doesn't scare the holy hell out of you, it should. Oh sure, on its face it doesn't sound too bad - I mean, folks have gotten out of OUI charges because they refused the breathalyzer. They lose their license for a period of time, but beat the OUI charge. It's not a perfect system, but it sure beats folks having to get their blood drawn forcibly. It will be very interesting to see the test cases - you know someone's going to push this, and I'll donate to their legal defense fund.

Just one (of the many) things they've failed to consider - what happens when the person in question is dragged, against their will, to a hospital for the blood test? Some poor phlebotomist is going to have to try to get sufficient blood for a legal ethanol while dealing with someone in police custody and, most likely, being combative. What then? Getting blood from a compliant patient can be challenging enough; procuring sufficient sample for a legal ethanol while the patient is fighting you is another challenge entirely.

Aside from that, this is a frightening blow for personal liberties. It's another step down the slope; another hit to the fourth amendment. It will be interesting to see how this fares in court - forcing someone to have their blood drawn strikes me as "unreasonable search and seizure", but then again, I'm not a legal scholar. I just hope that one of the judges responsible for this ruling finds themselves on the wrong side of this...

You know what the most frightening line in the article was, for me? This:

"We don't want to violate people's civil rights. That's the last thing we want to do, but we're here to save lives," Unfried said.

That scares the living hell out of me, folks. They're perfectly willing to violate our civil rights in the interest of "saving lives". And we know what ridiculous lengths the nanny state will go to in order to whip up a crisis to save us from - please see Borepatch's diatribes on global warming for proof positive of that. Alternately, track where the money from the tobacco lawsuits went - hint, it wasn't for treatment of lung cancer like they swore it was.

When someone proposes we trade our civil rights for safety, be afraid.

That is all.

And, Once More, Not in MA...

Mopar sent me a link to this story, with the expressed intent of rivalling PISSED for raising my blood pressure...

Teen using indelible marker at OKC school arrested

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) — Mark this down, using an indelible marker in school in Oklahoma City can get you arrested.

A police report says a 13-year-old student at Roosevelt Middle School was arrested last Friday after a seventh-grade math teacher said the marker bled through paper onto a desk and that the student was seen writing on the desk with the marker.

A city ordinance aimed at graffiti says no one is allowed to possess spray paint or a permanent marker on private property without the permission of the property owner or the person in control of the property.

The best part of the entire story? The teacher made a "citizen's arrest" of the student. Yeah. Sure am glad there are no other issues in that school that "arresting" students over arcane laws is the best choice of action. Now, the child did cause a school desk to be defaced; no one is arguing that. Make the parents pay for cleaning, certainly. But to have a 13-year old arrested over possession of a permanent marker? Are you kidding me?

They would have had to call the SWAT team if the kid had a pack of Sharpies...

That is all.

Massachusetts: Making Hard Choices So You Don't Have to Think...

SJC Ruling On Snow Removal: What It Means For You

BOSTON (CBS) — A new ruling by the state’s highest court applies to the Bay State’s new fallen snow. The Supreme Judicial Court’s ruling says you have a duty to use “reasonable care” to remove snow and ice from your property.

That applies to commercial property owners, such as stores and shopping malls, as well as residential property owners.

Yes, you read that correctly. The state of Massachusetts has so thoroughly settled all other issues in the state that they're devoting time to making people shovel their driveways. No more wondering if leaving three feet of snow in your driveway is okay - it's not, and the MA Supreme Court has issued a ruling.

At least they're honest at the end of the article:

He said he expects an uptick in residential lawsuits.

Bingo. Follow the Benjamins. Anytime lawyers and judges agree on something - especially in MA - it means hold onto your wallet. The MA Supreme Court just paved the way for every ambulance chaser in the country to reach John Edwards-like status suing private homeowners and commercial establishments for failing to properly clear their property.

MA: Because living as a slave is easier than thinking.

That is all.

Eco-Nazis...

By now, most everyone has seen and/or commented on that video making the rounds. It's the one put out in support of the 1010 project, which as far as I can surmise consists of empty-headed feel good BS wrapped in neon colors and marketed to the feeble-minded. The video is violent, gory, and, to be quite honest, pretty damn frank in exposing the loons behind this project as, well, loons. In a series of vignettes, a person in an authority position tells a group of subordinates about participation in the 1010 program, then violently murders those that fail to show sufficient zeal.

I don't think this was satire. I think this was a stark look at the way they'd ideally like to implement their "Save the planet" bullshit - kill those that aren't on board. The folks responsible would like us to believe that this was a lighthearted, over-the-top parody, but it's really a road map for the only plausible way they can get their message across - pure, violent brute force. They've been exposed as the charlatans that they are, with the cratering "climate change" being shown more and more every day for the fraud that it is.

Well, fuck that shit. I'm calling for our own 10/10 folks.

On October 10th, go to the range. Send a shitload of lead right into the goddamn ecosystem. Raise your carbon footprint by burning a bunch of it in the form of gunpowder. Go to the range. Shoot up a bunch of dead trees. Think of your favorite hippies crying as you piss all over Mother Gaia by defouling her with eeevil lead and desecrating precious paper products. Best of all, you'll be honing a skill you might need if these sick, sadistic fucking fascists ever get into power - they want to kill you, you better train to kill them first.

"No pressure, no pressure" a got-damn .308, motherfucker.

That is all.

Thanks to reader Jeremy for sending along this infuriating piece of liberal enviroloon claptrap...

Reaping... Sowing...

City may curb sales of sugary beverages

First, it was smoking in restaurants and bars. Then, artery-clogging trans fat in fast food joints and bakeries. Now, Boston health regulators have their crosshairs fixed on soft drinks and other sugar-sweetened beverages sold in city buildings.

Concerned about the girth of employees and visitors to government agencies, Boston officials are weighing — gingerly — whether to restrict or even prohibit the sale of calorie-laden refreshments on city-owned property.

Welcome to ConsequencesLand. Population: You. For years you stood idly by as the government took greater and greater whacks at our freedoms. You didn't speak up when they passed laws against our guns - guns are icky, you think; they're dangerous and the news always has stories of people getting shot. You kept quiet when they started going after the cigarette companies - after all, didn't those cigarette companies lie about the health effects of cigarettes? If you felt even the slightest twinge of doubt or remorse it wasn't obvious when you remained silent as they banned trans fat, assuming that the tales they told about the deleterious health effects were true and that it was "for our own good" - we didn't know that trans fats were being used, right?

Well, the thing is, with the health nazis, you give them an inch, they want a marathon. Once you cede your personal responsibility over to them, you are subject to their whims and predations no matter how high and noble their goals may sound. Sure, they're only taking the soda vending machines out of City Hall. Today. Who knows what they'll be taking out tomorrow? Who's to say that - given the bully pulpit of the House of Legislators - they won't
decide to ban sales of soft drinks within a 5 mile radius of t he State House? Who knows where it even will end - will we see an "Approved Beverages Roster"? I'm sorry sir, I can't sell you that Mountain Dew, it's a $5,000 fine under the Beverage Consumer Protection Act...

At some point it will come to a head - and it will end badly no matter what happens...

That is all.

MA: Saving Us from Ourselves One Thing At A Time...

Oh, Massachusetts, whatever would we do without your overbearing nanny state?

Bicycle Helmets: Why Adults Should Wear Them Too

BOSTON (WBZ) ―For Lisa Hoffman, strapping on a bike helmet has always been automatic.

It's a habit that saved her life.

"A rollerblader cut me off while biking. I braked really quick," Hoffman says "I flipped over my bike."

Well, then you're an idiot. Don't pass laws affecting me because you don't know how to properly stop a bicycle. The story here doesn't get into laws for adults, but still mentions that no states require adults to wear helmets (22 states mandate helmets for minors). This video here has the call for MA to mandate helmets.

Why stop there?

Why not full bubble wrap from birth to death? Maybe a protective cocoon we can all walk around wearing so that nothing bad ever happens, and if something does happen it's not our fault? At some point, the overbearing, overreaching government intrusion is going to mandate this sort of Nerf™ World; why not get in on the ground floor? Let's get a Nerf­™ Suit into production, get a bunch of idiots to make teary testimonials about how the Nerf­™ Suit ZOMG TOTALLY SAVED MAH LIFE, and agitate to have them made mandatory?

Gah. I probably just gave some Beacon Hill politician a boner just thinking about this...

That is all.

Gotta Be More To This Story...

Stretch sent me this mystifying story in e-mail. I can't quite figure out what's going on.

Fire-breathing bartenders arrested, face 45 years

Two fire-breathing bartenders face up to 45 years in prison each for performing flaming bar tricks.

Jimmy's Old Town Tavern owner Jimmy Cirrito said his bartenders have been entertaining his customers -- by juggling bottles of alcohol and spitting out streams of flames using matchbooks and lighters -- for more than a decade and no one's complained. But shortly after midnight on July 24, two of his longtime employees were hauled out of the Herndon bar in handcuffs and charged with three felonies each plus other misdemeanors

Three felonies with a possible 45 years in jail for flaming shots? Is this for real? I mean, this is what they're charged with:

Fairfax County fire investigators charged Tegee Rogers, 33, of Herndon, and Justin Fedorchak, 39, of Manassas, with manufacturing an explosive device, setting a fire capable of spreading, and burning or destroying a meeting house. They also were charged with several state fire code misdemeanors.

For doing flaming shots. That means anyone that has ever downed a shot of Everclear, then lit a cigarette afterwards to impress their date (heh) is guilty of being a terrorist in VA. There has GOT to be more to this story than what's being reported here, there just has to. The bar owner's gotta be nailing the fire chief's wife or something, or maybe he shut off one too many fire captains at closing call...

First off, maybe it's just my poor understanding of the law, but how can a fire investigator charge anyone with anything? Wouldn't they report to a DA or somesuch who would then do the charging? Secondly, to call this a stretch (no relation) would be an offense to anything with tensile ability - going from a flaming shot to "manufacturing an explosive device" is just about the biggest leap of faith I've ever seen. And "setting a fire capable of spreading"??? Wouldn't that be, oh, EVERY FIRE EVER SET?

In any case, be careful with your Bacardi 151 in VA, folks...

That is all.

Teh Stoopid, It BURNS!

Actually, in this case, it kills.

Wedding photographer shot dead as couple pose with guns

Guests were horrified when the firearm went off accidentally, killing photographer Calogero Scimeca, a 45-year-old married man with children.

The bullet hit him in the head, killing him instantly, police said.

Hmmm. I think we've violated all Four Rules at once. Gun was loaded. Finger was on trigger. Gun was pointed at something it shouldn't have been. Target was not secure.

1. All guns are always loaded. Period.

2. Keep your damned finger off the trigger until you are ready to shoot. Period. Stop.

3. Never point your firearm at anything you are not prepared to shoot. Period. Stop.

4. Be sure of your target and what's beyond it. Stop.

Obey these four rules and there will never be a problem. Start breaking them and there will be problems. Break multiples and there will be tragedies like this one. It's infuriating that this happens; that someone handed a loaded gun to someone otherwise preoccupied; that the person receiving the gun didn't perform even the most basic of checks; that ignorance of firearms is so rampant that no one thought twice about pulling the trigger of a firearm they hadn't checked while it was pointing at someone.

I've made a point to duck when someone swings a muzzle my way. I don't care if the action is open - it's just a good habit to get into. If you train yourself to move out of the way when a muzzle sweeps you, you're a lot more likely to move out of harm's way in that one-in-a-million time when something like this happens. I will most often politely but firmly request that the offender not point their firearm at me (almost always resulting in the bleat of "but it's not loaded!"; sometimes I get the mortified "Sorry!"). If I am outside of the shooting range, I check any firearm I'm about to hand someone it to make sure it's unloaded; I make sure they check it as well - once again, it's just a good habit to get into.

Guns are tools, dangerous tools to be certain but nothing more. They're no more dangerous by themselves than a hammer, a circular saw, or a toaster - they require a human hand to function, and it is that human hand - and the brains (or lack thereof) behind that hand about which we should concern ourselves. Regulating trigger pulls or requiring loaded chamber indicators or magazine disconnects or fifteen independent safeties or biometric lockouts will never replace a rock-solid understanding of the Four Rules of Gun Safety for reducing accidents and tragedies.

I hate having to repeat this, because it almost invariably follows a tragic accidental shooting.

That is all.

Link sent by PISSED - thanks for the safety reminder. Also note a new category called "Safety Nazi" - I hope to not add any more stories like the above to it, but I fear I will...