Machine gun bullets hit home near mom, girl

[jpak]

http://www.journalgazette.net/article/20120426/NEWS07/120429651

GALVESTON, Ind. – Local authorities have contacted federal investigators after police said stray gunfire from a northern Indiana gun store’s shooting event narrowly missed a woman and young child inside their home more than a mile away.

A Cass County Sheriff’s Department report says the .308-caliber bullets from a Russian-made machine gun struck two homes and a garage in the town of Galveston. No injuries were reported from the shootings and no arrests were made, the Pharos-Tribune reported Thursday (http://bit.ly/I76bXD ).

A prosecutor didn’t immediately return a phone call Thursday seeking comment about possible charges. Investigators contacted the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives concerning the incident, but a spokesman for the ATF office in Fort Wayne didn’t immediately return a phone call seeking comment Thursday.

Lori Stout told the newspaper she was sitting at the dining room table at her mother’s home April 14 while her 5-year-old daughter ate lunch nearby when she heard the glass break in a window above the front door. At first she thought someone was throwing rocks, but when she heard a popping noise she realized it was gunfire and called 911.

<more>

machine gun moran fail

yup

[ileus]

1. Machine guns bullets kill people.

[CokeMachine]

3. About as often as JPAK

and his gang has anything relevant to add to any discussion.

[Remmah2]

2. No such thing as a .308 caliber Russian made machine gun.

.30 caliber or a 7.62 maybe.

7.62x39 maybe a 7.62x54R but not a .308.

A .308 is a 7.62x51 NATO cartridge.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62_mm_caliber

Media fail.

[Hoyt]

4. So they got the caliber wrong -- I guess that makes point of article wrong.

Who gives a crud what caliber it was -- I'd focus on the fact that some dumb asses who should know better, don't.

[gejohnston]

5. it could make a big difference

depending on who told the reporter ".308".

[Hoyt]

6. In this case, I suspect Mom and little girl don't care about caliber. Bullets are bullets.

[gejohnston]

9. no, but I'm sure they care

where the bullets came from. If it didn't come from the machine gun, where did it?

[Hoyt]

28. Well, let's hope the police have the right info

A news article really doesn't have to be accurate on caliber and stuff. The only ones that really care about that are law enforcement and those who care more about guns than potential victims.

[gejohnston]

29. I'll give you some credit

Well, let's hope the police have the right info

for the title.

[Remmah2]

8. The problem with the anti-2A media is their lack of technical accuracy.

Credibility is really thin, stories are transparent.

How are they going to make a case if they can't get the facts right?

When the facts are not complete and correct it falls apart in court.

Epic anti-2A fail.

[Hoyt]

10. Anything to obfuscate improper and dangerous use of a gun.

[AnOhioan]

11. Fail

Fail #1...missing the point of the post...it is not caliber measurement...Fail #2, using the term "Epic"

[ileus]

12. The media reports what they understand....typically guns kill people type stuff.

Their job is to sell fear of guns to a willing sheeple.



In this case someone probably told them 308 and Russian so they run with it not knowing anything.

They don't know brass from projectile I'd bet. To those types any component is a bullet...

[iverglas]

22. are the media generally in charge of prosecutions?

If not, one wonders what you are on about.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

26. They certainly drive any number of them in the US

[iverglas]

30. non-responsive

Try reading the post I replied to, if you're as confused as you appear to be.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

31. I did...and my response was quite inline with your question

Media frenzy, often egged on by pundits, regularly creates climates that drive legal authorities to do things that they might not otherwise do. Senior law enforcement officials are often elected politicians in the US. The US legal system is as suspect as others in that regards

[iverglas]

34. bizarre

The thing said was:

How are they going to make a case if they can't get the facts right?

The media do not make any case.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

35. They whip up feelings and set expectation, forcing pols into action, appropriate or not

May not happen where you are, but it certainly does here.

[iverglas]

36. for the love of fucking fuck

Whatever the media put in their news reports HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH the evidence presented at a trial.

For the love of fucking fuck.


You and who knows who else may not actually be aware, but "make a case" means something. You could always look it up. Hint: it has to do with presenting evidence.

[gejohnston]

37. they poison jury pools

and create lynch mobs.

[iverglas]

38. what in god's name are you not getting?

The whining and bleating was all about how some media outlet may have got the calibre of the bullet in question wrong -- as if it fucking mattered.

Here is the post I replied to:

The problem with the anti-2A media is their lack of technical accuracy.

Credibility is really thin, stories are transparent.

How are they going to make a case if they can't get the facts right?

When the facts are not complete and correct it falls apart in court.

Epic anti-2A fail.

WHO IS THEY? WHAT THE HELL WAS THIS SUPPOSED TO MEAN?

The "they" who "make the case" are the police and prosecution.

The "they" who may have not got the facts right are the media.

THE MEDIA DO NOT MAKE THE CASE.

It doesn't matter a pinch of pooping poop what calibre the media says a bullet was. The police and prosecution HAVE THE BULLET.

The calibre of the bullet HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH the fact of a bullet striking a home off the property where it was shot.

It has to do with proving where the bullet came from, and that will be the job of the police and prosecution (one dearly hopes, anyway).

NOT THE MEDIA.

How in the fucking hell the media could "poison jury pools" or "create lynch mobs" by mistaking the calibre of a bullet by .008, my good god, is just beyond me. Even if it had anything to do with anything I had said or replied to.



formatting fixed

[gejohnston]

39. the eight mill is not the actual caliber

But that does not matter. But my answer was related to PP's answer. Which is what we described. While the media does not effect evidence at trial, it does affect public perception. If the facts that come out in trial doesn't match what the media claims (which is not uncommon) cries of "injustice" are loud and sometimes violent. Like the many death threats the Casey Anthony jurors received. Or in NYT's Judith Miller's case, whip up support for an invasion.
Sometimes the media will distort facts or just make shit up. Doctoring 911 tapes come to mind. Vigilante lynch mobs? put "spike lee zimmerman twitter" and "roseanne barr zimmerman twitter" in a search engine and see what you get.

Note to jurors: Some may have a problem with the word "lynch" because of its history in the South. There is no other word to describe summery execution by vigilantes. By the dictionary definition Lee and Barr were both vigilantes, knowing Tweeting an address would in result in violent mobs would show up at that address. Mobs did show up, and death threats were made. Lee only apologized for sending them to the wrong house. That is not to say I "support Zimmerman", I only support due process and the truth.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

40. To claim that the media does not impact the legal system and the outcomes is inane

To think that a prosecutor or defense attornies only "make their case" in court is quaint, foolish, and not true. Its called trying the case in the media for a reason and it works.

[Remmah2]

41. Many cases are tried in the court of public opinion (ie: bullshit the media writes.)

In addition, media bias is used to sway voters and plant the seeds of opinions.

But then again there's no "truth" requirement mandated by the First Amendment.

[Glaug-Eldare]

19. Is it illegal to re-chamber a machinegun?

Would that be considered manufacturing under the NFA?

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

21. Not sure if it would be considered manufacturing...

...but I do believe that it is illegal.

[oneshooter]

24. I do not believe it is. Many 1919's are rebarreled in 7.62 X 51

simply because the ammo is easier to find, and cheaper when you find it. Also many MG42 (8mm Mauser)owners have barrels for the same caliber, and for the same reason.
Note: The MG42 rocks through ammo at 1200RPM. While the 1919 series is a much more sedate 700RPM or so.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

32. IMHO...

...a simple barrel change is not "manufacturing"; a change of/to the receiver may be.

[Kaleva]

27. If the article said the machine gun was Soviet made, I'd agree with you.

But I do believe that Russian gun manufacturers offer weapons in a wide range of calibers. Including the common .308 round.

[Glaug-Eldare]

33. The end of machinegun registration occurred before the breakup

There's no such thing as a legal, pre-ban machinegun in the USA that was manufactured in the Russian Federation

[Kaleva]

44. Didn't think of that! Thank you for making me look ignorant of some basic facts. LOL!

[Glaug-Eldare]

45. I don't trust anybody who knows it all

Last time I did, she turned out to be a robot. I swear, once the circuits came out I got dressed faster than I ever had my whole life

[ManiacJoe]

7. A 4x5 foot backstop?!?!?!

That ought to qualify as willful negligence.

[AtheistCrusader]

43. Exactly.

If the bullets came from the range, they done fucked up.

[Xela]

13. No mention of urban sprawl

Not one word about urban sprawl in the article....hmmm...

If the gun range(s) where there before homes, I would blame the freaking developers.


Xela

[gejohnston]

14. that is why I'm glad

FWS bought everything surrounding the one I go to. Some of the dimmer RWs don't like that the feds turned it into a wildlife refuge. I should send this link to them. Oh wait, they still think computers require punch cards.

[petronius]

15. The article doesn't mention a range, though - it talks about

a shooting event at a rural property using a 4' x 5' backdrop. Sounds more likely a woefully under-planned event at an informal shooting area; as described, I'd say some penalties need to apply...

[Xela]

17. Good point.

If it turns out to be an improvised range, I see your point.

Xela

[ProgressiveProfessor]

42. Given the rest of the report's obvious errors, why should that part be believed?

If rounds were getting off the range, there was clearly a serious problem but a 4*5 as the only safety means seems suspiciously like media idiocy

[AndyTiedye]

18. If Your Bullets Are Going onto Someone Else's Property, that is Reckless Endangerment

The shooting range should own enough property so the bullets stay on it.

[slackmaster]

20. Trespassing at a minimum

[iverglas]

23. really

So as long as the surrounding area is not built up, it's just fine for a property owner to take no reasonable steps at all to prevent bullets from flying off their property?

If the surrounding area is farmland, screw the farm worker out in the fields. If it's publicly owned park or forest, screw the family out for a hike ...

[Glaug-Eldare]

16. Thank God nobody was hurt

This could've easily (and in other cases, has) caused a tragic, pointless death. There's definitely a civil liability for the shooter a/o event host, and very possibly a criminal case. If you are not capable of following gun safety rules, you need to wise up, fast, or not be permitted to operate a firearm. I'm reminded of a case not far from here where a hunter fired uphill at a deer, missed, and nearly killed an infant a mile away. I'm loath to seek prosecution when nobody was actually hurt, but this sort of action MUST have consequences. I'm firmly in favor of individual gun rights, but I will not accept "oops, my bad" where firearms are concerned. Yes, honest mistakes happen, but the consequences are too high to let them slide. Perhaps the court could order the shooter and host to attend a safety class and be barred from discharging firearms for a year?

That is, assuming it was them that fired the shots. If not, well, that's a whole new problem, ain't it!