Thread: Another incedence of firearm misuse

The exerpt below is from a Hearald article:

A man taking potshots at swimming teenagers with an air rifle sparked an armed police callout in Northland. Police say it was fortunate no one was seriously injured after previous incidents involving high powered air rifles had proved fatal.

In the latest incident, Kaikohe police Acting Senior Sergeant Pat Davis said four youngsters aged 14-16 were at a popular swimming hole near Kaikohe about 4pm last Saturday. A man with an airgun is alleged to have shot at the teenagers, hitting two of them, one in the shoulder and chest and the other in the buttocks and head.

Armed police were called to the swimming hole and the man surrendered. A 23-year-old Kaikohe man appeared in court charged with reckless discharge of a firearm and two charges of injuring with intent to injure. He was given bail and will reappear in Kaikohe District Court on April 3

My comment again now. When will these idiots learn that even slug guns can kill (and have just this year in south Auckland)

would shooting at someone like that not count as attempted murder?

I think unless it can be proven that he wanted to kill the people, then it's just intent to injure? My thoughts anyway.

Originally Posted by Toby

would shooting at someone like that not count as attempted murder?

Not with a slug gun, I don't think.

Originally Posted by phillipgr

Not with a slug gun, I don't think.

I don't think the weapon matters tbh, if you wanted to kill someone with a candlestick and gave it a go, that would be attemped murder.

Should be put in a cell and have the key thrown away. Just me but if he had the knowledge to load and fire at people he knows its wrong.

Originally Posted by phillipgr

Not with a slug gun, I don't think.

The nature of the weapon shouldn't factor Phillip. Wouldn't matter if it was a blunt spoon if the intent was there.

aarrrrgghh..!! that makes me mad as hell hearing that shit..!!

Originally Posted by Rushy

The nature of the weapon shouldn't factor Phillip. Wouldn't matter if it was a blunt spoon if the intent was there.

They might have to prove what the intent was though - if the guy genuinely thinks the air rifle is incapable of inflicting serious injury (and apparently no injuries were caused) then his intent was merely to be a retarded pain in the ass.

I wish society would let Darwinism do its job, would weed out a lot of these moronic individuals.

I agree that weapon makes no difference in charge but the intent.

They must operate on a similar brain frequency to those spoons who point lasers at planes and choppers?
All fun and games till the shit hits the fan

grievous bodily harm /assault with a deadly weapon /take your pick.FFS you guys are right ,throw this prick before a judge who'd charge him for the steam off piss and lthrow the book at him. bloody idiot has less than half a brain -shouldnt be allowed off the chain!!

There are some right muppets out there. Even my old Chinese air rifle would put a pellet through the thick end of a nail box. Slam the thing shut on his delicates, pull the trigger and hopefully he wont be able to pass on the 'low brain cell count' gene.

Originally Posted by gadgetman

There are some right muppets out there. Even my old Chinese air rifle would put a pellet through the thick end of a nail box. Slam the thing shut on his delicates, pull the trigger and hopefully he wont be able to pass on the 'low brain cell count' gene.

i say old chap .a bit dam radical what.still nowt like thumping a peasents to show the rest whos in charge begad!. in fact didnt those russkies write about this -some dam thing"the nutcracker????"

Originally Posted by kotuku

i say old chap .a bit dam radical what.still nowt like thumping a peasents to show the rest whos in charge begad!. in fact didnt those russkies write about this -some dam thing"the nutcracker????"

Kotuku you forgot so I will say it for you. "Pip Pip old bean" it is a great accent you have. Comes right off the page.