On the day his newborn arrived home from the hospital, Justin Ayers was shot through the head and instantly killed. Chris Hicke wants to know what more it will take for this nation to come to its senses.
—-
In the latest edition of ‘America Has a Gun Problem,’ there has been another shooting incident in Florida. While that’s probably not surprising (it is Florida, after all), the circumstances of this tragedy place it above and beyond perhaps any other fatality covered in the US for quite some time.
The Ayers family had just returned home from the hospital. They were celebrating the birth of their first child with friends and family, when the father, Justin Ayers, was struck in the back of a head by a stray bullet.
According to Raw Story:
“The bullet came from the house next door, where 62-year-old Charles Edward Shisler picked up a .9 mm pistol by the trigger, causing it to discharge. When sheriff’s deputies arrived, they found Shisler standing on his porch, although he initially was “belligerent” and uncooperative.
“The damn gun doesn’t usually shoot,” said Shisler, according to his arrest report. “You have to squeeze the hell out of the trigger to shoot it.”
Raw Story also reported that Shisler, in addition to having a blood alcohol level of .079 (the legal limit for driving in Florida is .08), panicked and attempted to hide the weapon under his mattress. Due to a previous felony weapons conviction, Shisler was not even supposed to own a firearm of any kind, and is being charged with manslaughter, as well as being a convicted felon in possession of a weapon.
There is so much wrong with this that I’m not sure where to start. Here we have a man who, due to previous misconduct with a weapon, is not supposed to own one, in possession of a firearm. We have a state, Florida, where gun laws are so lax that convicted felons are able to get their hands on firearms with apparent ease; it’s a wonder he didn’t claim ‘Stand Your Ground’ when the police came. We have a man, overjoyed at the birth of his child, who will never see his child grow up. We have a mother who has to raise said child alone, and come to terms with the loss of her husband. Most tragically of all, we have a child who will never know his or her father, who will come to understand that he died a senseless, pointless death because the United States continues to choose fear over love.
This even is exactly why I propose treating firearms like motor vehicles in regards to training, licensing, and ownership. All vehicles are entered into a national database, the DMV, which tracks ownership of said vehicles, including sales/transfer of ownership between persons, provides testing and training, as well as licensing, and mandates that all owners have their vehicles insured should something happen to themselves or someone else. There is no reason why we cannot apply the same process to firearms.
With a similar setup in place, all firearms owners would be required to undergo a minimum amount of training and testing to receive a license. Tracking firearm sales and thefts would make finding illegally owned weapons much easier, and would make it more difficult for people like Shisler to get their hands on one.
Additionally, requiring gun owners to undergo testing to renew their licenses would help ensure that they actually know how to use, maintain, and store their weapons safely. And, of course, all weapons would need to be insured against damage caused to persons or property should they be used for anything but self defense; making gun owners financially liable for any damage their weapon causes, be it by accidental discharge or negligence (including use in a crime by another party) further encourage gun safety; not all gun owners are “responsible,” regardless of what they claim to the contrary.
And to anyone who thinks that this comparison somehow doesn’t pan out (aside from those special people who think Obama is waiting to send men in black helicopters after them), that guns are “specially protected” under the Constitution, or that we should ban cars because they also kill thousands of people, consider this: the overwhelming majority of car-related deaths are from vehicles not performing properly. Be it mechanical failure, road conditions, or operator error, cars only injure and kill when they are not used as intended. Guns, by contrast, are designed only to kill, regardless of if they’re well maintained, who they’re handled by, or what they’re aimed at.
–
Photo: Facebook
Sounds good to me lets treat just like cars. That way I can get that automatic weapon I want, and carry it with me everywhere I go. I am not being sarcastic.
This man was killed because a felon was in possession of a gun. Clearly no amount of laws would have prevented an already lawless man from breaking more laws. Only liberals think that laws will fix men, but if that is the case, how to you fix lawless men? Let’s talk about how many laws this man broke when he killed this father. 1. Felon in possession of a firearm. This is a felony. 2. Possession of a firearm by someone intoxicated or under the influence. This is a felony. 3. Discharging a firearm within city limits not in self-defense.… Read more »
Looking at the majority of comments so far, I can gather that we all agree on a couple of things. Tragic and freak accident? Yes. No doubt there. It’s not one of those random unavoidable accidents you hear about (hailstone coming through the roof and killing a new father,) or those Darwin Award ones (new father gets crushed trying to shake loose a Twix from the hospital vending machine.) This was a crime of flagrant negligence committed by a drunken ass-hat who had clearly demonstrated his ineptness and criminality on prior occasions. Sorry for the ad-hominem, but if it walks… Read more »
There seem to be some folks out there that have NOT figured out that drive for “gun control” laws have nothing to do with guns – it’s about CONTROL. One of the fine gun grabbers up in New York got himself arrested by carrying a gun into an elementary school; his cronies are saying “he made a mistake, he shouldn’t be charged with a crime.” But let an NRA memnber do the same thing (which I don’t believe any would because we NEVER forget the fact we are armed at any given point in time) and they’d be hollering for… Read more »
This is all about politics- pass a measure that restricts my political opponents. You never hear gun control advocates talk about restricting minority communities but should a white person/ southerner/suburb dweller do something they at up in arms. If they don’t vote Dem the gun control folks are up in arms. I doubt Mr. Hicke will ever talk about the violence in the minority dominated communities that surround him in SoCal but he sure likes to denigrate people outside the liberal bastions of the coastal urban areas. Check out his previous articles.
Gun control is not the only answer to reduce gun violence, but reducing criminals’ access to guns is an important part of the equation. Gun control laws should also treat guns like the constitutionally protected and potentially dangerous objects they are. I’d attach responsibility to the gun’s owner, so that if your gun is used in a crime and you have not reported it stolen, you could be an accessory to the crime. That would make all the straw purchasers potential accessories to the crimes the guns they illegally transfer are used in while having very little effect on the… Read more »
The fact of the matter here is that the number of accidental deaths caused by a firearm have been declining for years, the number of gun-related crimes has been declining for years, the firearms industry is heavily regulated, and almost all states in the US have adopted concealed carry laws for civilians. The US Secret Service and the US Department of Education has stated in its own report on school violence: “To put the problem of targeted school-based attacks in context, from 1993 to 1997 the odds that a child in grades 9-12 would be threatened or injured with a… Read more »
Something else just struck me about this commentary and I can’t believe I didn’t notice it the first time around. It is this line from the last paragraph: ” … the overwhelming majority of car-related deaths are from vehicles not performing properly.” This statement is absolutely incorrect and it’s really quite amusing that you would even make such a bold statement without doing some research first. Don’t believe me Mr. Hicke? If actually do a little research on the topic, you will see that driver inattention, reckless operation, driving under the influence, excessive speed, and other similar driver errors are… Read more »
As tragic as this story is, the pitiful attempt of the author to argue his point fails miserably. Although i agree that gun owners must be educated on gun safety and usage, i totally disagree with a futile attempts to make guns “safer” and try to regulate outlaws. Responsibility of gun owner should be absolute which is the case i assume. Arguments that most car related deaths caused by “vehicles not performing properly” is just a false argument because in next sentence “operator error” is an example of that 😉 Car related deaths are still much more common then gun… Read more »
Here in SC all I need to buy a used car is cash. No license check or proof of insurance or anything. Registering the vehicle (for which you get a tag) is for the state and county to collect their taxes. No law would stop me from buying and using the vehicle to commit a crime. So I’m not sure why this analogy keeps getting used. Laws merely define the criminal, not limit behavior. This is an incredibly tragic story. Riding on that emotion, the author’s suggestions hint at a common liberal theme, in which the individual is not responsible… Read more »
Indeed, that is a very good point. No cries to close up that pesky “car lot” loophole where people can buy a vehicle without a license check or criminal background check. Maybe we should also prevent people from driving a car if they are mentally ill as well since that is being tossed around as a reasonable “common sense” measure to prevent gun crime.
Here in SC all I need to buy a used car is cash. No license check or proof of insurance or anything. Registering the vehicle (for which you get a tag) is for the state and county to collect their taxes. No law would stop me from buying and using the vehicle to commit a crime. So I’m not sure why this analogy keeps getting used. Laws merely define the criminal, not limit behavior. This is an incredibly tragic story. Riding on that emotion, the author’s suggestions hint at a common liberal theme, in which the individual is not responsible… Read more »
What about all the people killed by police and Federal Agents? I have yet to see one GMP article that even suggests this. No one ever calls for “gun control” on them.
Why would people call for “gun control” for those that have dangerous and life threatening jobs that put them in situations where they have to protect themselves and innocent bystanders? Police Officers and Federal Agents go through rigerous training and practice gun stewardship in ways that the general public simply doesn’t.
I really don’t see where you’re coming from here.
Jason, most of the murders committed with a gun are with guns that were illegally obtained. I don’t understand why people can’t understand that no matter what restrictions are placed on legal gun ownership people will continue to be murdered with “illegal” guns.
This poor guy was a victim of a stray bullet by a drunk with an illegal gun yet this is an example that’s being used to support stronger gun laws? Ya gotta do better then this.
So far this month, Chicago has had 13 murders using illegal guns.
All of the conditions you wish to place on weapons are already in place on vehicles. The item you chose to compare weapons to. However, more people kill others with vehicles every year than they do with guns, EVEN with all those regulations, and requirements. This case involved a FELON who illegally obtained a gun. How do you suppose that happened? ILLEGALLY. Is this case sad? Of course it is. Does it have ANYTHING to do with legal RIGHT to own firearms? Not at all.
This story doesn’t make sense. The author is basically saying we need to pass laws to outlaw something already unlawful. Huh?