"We have no indication that there was anything other than a negligent discharge on his part."
Finally, they get it right.
But how come when an "Only One" is involved, the discharges always seem to be "accidental," or better yet, "the gun went off"?
Thursday, November 01, 2007
A Negligent Discharge
Finally, they get it right.
But how come when an "Only One" is involved, the discharges always seem to be "accidental," or better yet, "the gun went off"?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Concerning the Only Ones, for a lot of them, a negligent discharge is something their fathers' engaged in about 9mos before they were born. Knew a Sgt. in West Germany, support troop, never around or handled guns much, except when required to. You know the type, marking time, drawing a check, about as interested in the Army as a bureaucrat can be. Saw the movie,"Dirty Harry". Just had to go out and buy a .44 Magnum. While "cleaning" it, shot his 4 month old daughter in the head, who had been sleeping peacefully in the next room. His wife divorced him in record time, the Army discharged him almost as fast, (BCD) and that was pretty much the end of him. Guy at the insurance place got off easy. Relatively speaking.
See, Sean, if only there were no guns, that would have never happened.
QED and I rest my case.
Now you're killing ME. But I get it. If there really were no guns, I could actually walk into my walk in closet, and park my car in my two-car garage. Hell, with the money not spent on ammo and cleaning and reloading supplies,assault vests,jungle packs, radios,range fees,targets,teaching as many people to shoot every year as I can, I could,,,,carry the three,,,, add the six,,,,uh,,,a Masseratii?
Surely I misread that article. I must have. That could be the only reason I thought I saw his name released for publication.
'Cause we know they don't release the names of negligent Only Ones shooters.
Not even when they fatally wound someone else.
Post a Comment