The “dangerous” part is illustrated by the section of the Washington Post headline that reads “Mich. woman who shot at shoplifters gets 18 months probation….” Then there’s the part that briefly made me think that the Post was becoming a hoax site: “…vows to ‘never help anybody again.”
A Michigan judge sentenced concealed carry permit holder Tatiana Duva-Rodriguez to 18 months of probation and took away the permit, as punishment for her shooting several rounds at a shoplifter’s fleeing auto outside a Home Depot on October. 6. Disillusioned that the law took a dim view of her playing amateur “Starsky and Hutch,” she wailed, “I tried to help. And I learned my lesson that I will never help anybody again.”
1. What an idiot. There is more stupidity packed into that statement than you will find in a room full of Ben Carson fans. She “tried” by shooting a gun at shoplifters? What she tried to do is irrelevant. Good intentions matched to moronic conduct mitigates nothing. Now, because she was properly punished ( I would say leniently punished) for irresponsible vigilante use of her weapon and what would have been excess force even if she had been Starsky, she’s going to punish humanity by never helping anyone ever again, so there!
2. Everyone is arguing about how to prevent insane people from getting their hands on guns. What about stupid people? It is hard to tell who is likely to snap and go postal, but it should be easy to identify cretins like Tatiana. Surely it would be constitutional for there to be a baseline level of intelligence required before allowing a citizen to carry a concealed weapon.
3. I guess the reason nobody’s talking about limiting the idiot shooters is that it isn’t going to stop mass shootings, but then none of the measures being demanded by anti-gun hysterics (or proposed by President Obama) will have any effect on mass shootings, terrorism, or most criminals. But honest, well- intentioned idiots? We can stop them cold, can’t we?
4. This is where at least part of the car analogy favored by some NRA-bashers makes sense. Why can’t there be a required minimum competence written test for gun owners? Why is that unreasonable? Make it easy, so only the dumbest of the dumb won’t pass. Or have a minimum IQ limit before someone can own a gun. Below the cut-off, give them a toy that goes BANG!—they probably won’t notice the difference. Maybe there needs to be a special psychological test to weed out mothers who think it makes sense to take their loaded pistols to Walmart and leave them in their purses where their 2-year olds can grab them, or Home Depot shoppers who see a shoplifter and think, “It’s up to me!” as they draw their guns. It can’t be that hard to identify the real mouth-breathers like Tatiana, can it? Are they drooling? Do they think The View is edifying? Do they think the Kardashians are cool? Were they disappointed when Lincoln Chaffee dropped out of the race? Do they get excited about professional wrestling? Do they spring for extended warranties? Talk to phone psychics?
5. But seriously, folks…I wonder why the NRA doesn’t support a mandatory gun safety course, if not for all gun ownership, at least for a concealed carry permit. I assume it’s the camel’s nose argument; the rhetoric of the anti-gun lobby is so transparently aimed at incrementally making private gun ownership impossible that even minimal limits are seen as laying the groundwork for confiscation. Like so many things, it all comes down to trust. It is in everyone’s interest, including the idiots themselves, to be able to keep idiots like Tatiana Duva-Rodriguez from “helping” us by drawing guns. The fact that this appears to be beyond our political system’s ability to accomplish is as depressing a symptom of dysfunction and a leadership void as I can think of right now.
Meanwhile, my message to Tatiana is “Good, don’t help us. Don’t help anyone. The best way for people like you to help is to try to go about daily life without walking into walls and setting your hair on fire.