Woman dies from gunshot wound caused by a hug.

[diamondd817 828]

 

 

If you are not a fan of manual safeties, why would you want one on a ccw

 

What part of my statement confused you?

[High Exposure 5,674]

The whole thing.

 

Why would you want a mechanism that you are not a fan of, installed on a weapon you carry for self defense?

 

How many times have you heard of this type of thing happening? Is this one instance the "straw that breaks the camels" back for you?

 

Why would you make an argument that manual safeties should be on all concealed pistols?

 

Why just pistols and not revolvers then?

 

Should we just prohibit the use of all pistols without a manual safety from CCW or should they all be retrofitted to have one?

 

What about issued pistols, like a cops duty weapon, that may serve dual purposes - external holster while in uniform and concealed in street clothes?

 

How could a reporter spin that statement? How about an Anti 2A or gun grabber? - "See! Even experienced and legal gun owners believe that ALL pistols should have a manual safety"

 

You were painting with a pretty broad brush is all.

 

If antis/grabbers knee jerked to this tragedy like that, and made a blanket statement that "all concealed pistols should have a manual safety" you would rightly jump all over them.

[Old Glock guy 1,127]

First and foremost, this is a tragic story. But it definitely sounds like one of those where there's more to it than is being told. Oh, and BTW, Sandy, it sounds like you've been to a lot more exciting parties than I have.

[leahcim 680]

Isn't the onus on the guy carrying? Isn't he ultimately responsible for every bullet that is fired from his weapon? This is most probably an accident, or at worst a possible "crime of passion" if say his wife grabbed it in a jealous reaction. But isn't the guy who is CCW completely responsible to maintain control of the weapon? Unless of course it is taken by force, say in a hostage or home invasion scenario.

[Sandy 44]

First and foremost, this is a tragic story. But it definitely sounds like one of those where there's more to it than is being told. Oh, and BTW, Sandy, it sounds like you've been to a lot more exciting parties than I have.

 

A few Frank , a few . 20 years ago

[Wojo 98]

Heart / lung shot? Apex carry while getting a hummer sitting reclined. Miss Peacock, in the kitchen, with a candlestick...

[diamondd817 828]

The whole thing.

 

Why would you want a mechanism that you are not a fan of, installed on a weapon you carry for self defense?

 

How many times have you heard of this type of thing happening? Is this one instance the "straw that breaks the camels" back for you?

 

Why would you make an argument that manual safeties should be on all concealed pistols?

 

Why just pistols and not revolvers then?

 

Should we just prohibit the use of all pistols without a manual safety from CCW or should they all be retrofitted to have one?

 

What about issued pistols, like a cops duty weapon, that may serve dual purposes - external holster while in uniform and concealed in street clothes?

 

How could a reporter spin that statement? How about an Anti 2A or gun grabber? - "See! Even experienced and legal gun owners believe that ALL pistols should have a manual safety"

 

You were painting with a pretty broad brush is all.

 

If antis/grabbers knee jerked to this tragedy like that, and made a blanket statement that "all concealed pistols should have a manual safety" you would rightly jump all over them.

 

Let me explain this as if I were talking to a child.

 

Im not a fan of manual safeties, which means I do not like them on anything.

 

I am not making the argument that ccw pistols should have manual safeties, but I can see how one in this situation would have been useful. Assuming it happened as reported. You should keep an open mind about guns and gun ownership.

 

Don't take you anti gun / pro gun fustrations out on me. Nothing I say will ever have any effect on your gun rights, period. There are no star ledger reporters on NJgunforums just waiting to see what I say, so they can use it againts all gun owners. Your rant just sounds ignorant to me.

[Soju 153]

If I were to bet on it, it didn't happen as reported.

[Smokin .50 1,907]

If I were to bet on it, it didn't happen as reported.

 

+1

[High Exposure 5,674]

 

 

Let me explain this as if I were talking to a child.

 

Im not a fan of manual safeties, which means I do not like them on anything.

 

I am not making the argument that ccw pistols should have manual safeties, but I can see how one in this situation would have been useful. Assuming it happened as reported. You should keep an open mind about guns and gun ownership.

 

Don't take you anti gun / pro gun fustrations out on me. Nothing I say will ever have any effect on your gun rights, period. There are no star ledger reporters on NJgunforums just waiting to see what I say, so they can use it againts all gun owners. Your rant just sounds ignorant to me.

 

Whoa guy - "talking to a child" That's a little condescending don't you think?

 

Don't know what your problem is but it's not my fault that you made an initial broad reaching statement that doesnt make sense. You got called on it, act like a man and get over it. But since you can't:

 

I'm not a fan of manual safeties but this is a good argument for them on concealed pistols.

 

Let's read your statement and dissect, shall we?

 

"I am not a fan of manual safeties" ok good. I agree, on anything but a SAO pistol a manual safety is a nuisance and unnecessary.

 

"but this is a good argument for them" uhhhh, wait a minute, I thought you just said you were not a fan. You just contradicted yourself. Make up your mind. Why would you think this single particular instance would make a good argument in favor of them? We don't know if a manual safety would have helped here or not.

 

"on concealed pistols" if you think there should be manual safeties on pistols, why only on concealed pistols? Why make that distinction?

 

In addition to the above, all those other questions I asked in my clarification post are valid, based on your initial statement.

 

Now if you would made this statement first:

 

"I am not making the argument that ccw pistols should have manual safeties, but I can see how one in this situation would have been useful. Assuming it happened as reported."

 

I would have agreed with you with just the minor quibble about changing would to could or perhaps may because we don't know of it would have been useful, because we don't know what happened.

 

So, I called you on a statement you made that doesn't make sense as you stated it. On a discussion board such as this, that is appropriate as we are all responsible for the statements we make here, don't you think?

 

You asked for clarification:

 

 

What part of my statement confused you?

 

And I explained to you why I said what I said. I said it like and adult, speaking to an adult. I didn't insult, I wasn't condescending, so what's your damage?

 

As far as keeping an open mind about gun ownership - You don't know me and I don't know you, however, we are both here at this site so we obviously have something in common. I won't pretend to know what is going through your mind, that's why I made the statements and asked the questions I did. I wanted clarification. Please don't presume to tell me how I should keep an open mind. Nothing, in anything I said, was anything but open minded, in fact, that is why I was posting. Too many people were jumping to conclusions based off of a newspaper story containing NO real facts.

 

Now, if you type "NJ" and "gun" into Google guess what the first site that pops up is? That's right, NJGF. If you don't think that the NJSP, staff from the Star Ledger, Asbury Park Press, Home News Tribune, are not here you are crazy. You dont even have to be a registered member to read threads. Always assume EVERYTHING you say on the internet to be permanent and public.

 

I have no gun/anti gun frustrations, let alone so much that I have to "take it out on you". Yes, I think the gun laws in this state could use some work. I think education on the topic would go along way to making things better here, and statements like your initial one, are things we can do without.

 

Finally if you truly believe this: "Nothing I say will ever have any effect on your gun rights, period." Then you are lost. Every lawful gun owner is an advocate for our 2A rights. Every lawful gun owner is an ambassador to the masses about proper, safe gun ownership and use. When one of us makes a mistake, misspeaks, or has an accident, it reflects poorly on all of us. You should know that.

 

Your rant, sir, comes off as defensive, weak, and pedantic and I bid you good day

[Sandy 44]

I won't comment either way on the little two way diatribe going on here , but I will agree with one point. I do think this forum is widely read and not just by gun enthusiast. Almost any type of gun search you type in , questions about laws , this forum pops up in a search on the first page of hits. Even if you don't type NJ half the time. I did a search looking for lightening trigger pull ( which I did decide against) and the Yahoo search showed hits on this page. It has happened with a lot of things I searched .. which just means this place is awesome for info ..but it also means that if some toe rag wants to throw out an accusation that someone who had a ND like what happened here in this case may have had his trigger pull too light because he is trigger happy , they PROBABLY will find this forum.

 

Now this has nothing to do with this topic but - everything I type here , I keep in mind it is totally public. If God forbid any of us did have to use a weapon in SD and was subsequently charged , if you think pages and pages of your online "enthusiast" posts won;t be dragged into court by the prosecutor , think again.

 

That is also why I don't copy and paste articles right into the body of the post . Links are better. If the victim's family searches that girl's name , there is a chance it will come up in a search here , and it will show all the gun enthusiasts making jokes about BJs and such...which is human nature and I'm sure anyone who has never even held a gun in their life would have that particular scenario cross their mind...but we will be scrutinized here because we are one of "them" . Just sayin'!

[Malsua 1,422]

If the victim's family searches that girl's name , there is a chance it will come up in a search here , and it will show all the gun enthusiasts making jokes about BJs and such.

 

It looks like that might have been exactly what she was going for or at least simulating it.

 

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/07/daniel-zimmerman/detroit-pd-shooting-story-continues-unravel/

 

The Detroit PD’s official version of events surrounding the shooting of Adaisha Miller continues to unravel – or become clearer – depending how you look at it. From the beginning, the story fed to the media stank worse than the dumpsters at the Fulton Fish Market during a summer garbage strike. Detroit Police Chief Ralph Godbee, Jr. showed almost Clintonian chutzpah yesterday standing before the press and continuing to push the tragic, hug-from-behind, the gun just “went off” scenario. We wouldn’t have been surprised to hear him stridently affirm that Officer Parrish didn’t have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Miller. Finger wag and all. But even notoriously firearm-ignorant mainstream media types knew enough to wonder how a backside embrace can result in a downward shot to the thorax. The answer: she was in front of him, on her knees . . .

 

Which is what plenty of those who commented here after our initial IGOTD post speculated. This, from bostonherald.com:

Miller was dancing behind Officer Isaac Parrish at his home in Archdale and was on her knees and tugging at Parrish’s waist when his holstered gun fired, striking her in the chest, a police official familiar with the investigation said Tuesday.

What could she have been doing on her knees at the fatal fish fry?

The official said the angle of the gunshot is possible because Miller was not standing and described it as some type of “exotic dance.”

You usually have to put down at least a Benjamin for that kind of exotic entertainment. Or so we hear.

As Richard Nixon (or Eric Holder, for that matter) will tell you, it’s not the crime so much as it’s the cover-up that gets your areolas firmly clamped in the old wringer. Chief Godbee’s blown any credibility he may have once had by attempting to cover up an awkward fatality with such a transparently bs laden story. Can you keep your job as a big city top cop after something like this? Maybe only in Detroit.

Best guess: it really was an accident. Officer Parrish was at a party being serviced by a woman who was inconveniently not his wife when the “exotic” Ms. Miller became a little too demonstrative and yanked on his gun in its POS soft holster. He may have been drunk, too, not that we’ll ever know for sure since his brothers in blue didn’t administer a breathalyzer test. Cause that could have been awkward, what with the dead body there on the floor and e’rything. Say what you want about the Motor City, but their thin blue line sure sticks together.

[Wojo 98]

Well, I wasn't too far off.