Thread: Pot shots with a 308

Originally Posted by systolic

Why? Do you think his family should suffer for bad decisions made by him?

@systolic Do you think all of society should suffer so that his family does not?

His bad decisions have repercussions. (or at least they should) Does his family deserve to suffer because of him- Probably not. Will they? Probably. Why? Because, unfortunately for them, someone who is connected to them made some very stupid / dumb / moronic decisions. If he cared for his family perhaps he should have thought about it sooner, say, BEFORE he did something that would affect them.


His family will suffer, but not because of what the judge did or did not do, but because of one single, individual persons actions; That person is Dwayne Stubbings. He is wholly and completely responsible for his actions and the consequences that will befall his family.

Problem is that by the judge waving a wet bus ticket at him, now the rest of society gets to feel the consequences as well. If it was your family in the house, would you want him to be let go with no restraint on a repeat???????


On a different note, notice the media posted a picture of what is almost certainly NOT the firearm involved....Now ask yourselves why..... Why would they possibly do that?

Originally Posted by timattalon

@systolic Do you think all of society should suffer so that his family does not?

His bad decisions have repercussions. (or at least they should) Does his family deserve to suffer because of him- Probably not. Will they? Probably. Why? Because, unfortunately for them, someone who is connected to them made some very stupid / dumb / moronic decisions. If he cared for his family perhaps he should have thought about it sooner, say, BEFORE he did something that would affect them.


His family will suffer, but not because of what the judge did or did not do, but because of one single, individual persons actions; That person is Dwayne Stubbings. He is wholly and completely responsible for his actions and the consequences that will befall his family.

Problem is that by the judge waving a wet bus ticket at him, now the rest of society gets to feel the consequences as well. If it was your family in the house, would you want him to be let go with no restraint on a repeat???????


On a different note, notice the media posted a picture of what is almost certainly NOT the firearm involved....Now ask yourselves why..... Why would they possibly do that?

Because the .22 looks way more dangerus cooler than his .308 bolt action and could be passed off as an MSSA, though I notice they avoided the precise term MSSA. Misdirection? Yes. Outright lying? No. Moral distinction? No.

His shooting spree would have been slightly less dangerous if he'd used the dangerous looking gun depicted.

I still can't get over the sentence. Can any on this forum imagine he'd have that sentence if he'd done what he did when sober? Alcohol remains the great excuser --- no matter how much judges flap their lips and say it's not.

Originally Posted by Cordite

Because the .22 looks way more dangerus cooler than his .308 bolt action and could be passed off as an MSSA, though I notice they avoided the precise term MSSA. Misdirection? Yes. Outright lying? No. Moral distinction? No.

His shooting spree would have been slightly less dangerous if he'd used the dangerous looking gun depicted.

I still can't get over the sentence. Can any on this forum imagine he'd have that sentence if he'd done what he did when sober? Alcohol remains the great excuser --- no matter how much judges flap their lips and say it's not.

Probably wont matter, but I thought it was an Sks / Skk. Gas tube on top etc but still not the 308.

As for the Alcohol- Yes people do dumb stuff when drunk, but that is not an excuse, I agree with you there. He chose to drink. So those actions are his responsibility. The victims will have noticed no difference between being shot at by an angry drunk or an angry sober person. Their lives were still at risk.

That is certainly going to qualify for the neighbour from hell. On that note, how did the judge think putting the offender in Home detention make sense when as a result, the victims live next door to the perpetrator? I personally feel that this is not on.

Originally Posted by timattalon

Probably wont matter, but I thought it was an Sks / Skk. Gas tube on top etc but still not the 308.

As for the Alcohol- Yes people do dumb stuff when drunk, but that is not an excuse, I agree with you there. He chose to drink. So those actions are his responsibility. The victims will have noticed no difference between being shot at by an angry drunk or an angry sober person. Their lives were still at risk.

That is certainly going to qualify for the neighbour from hell. On that note, how did the judge think putting the offender in Home detention make sense when as a result, the victims live next door to the perpetrator? I personally feel that this is not on.

The victims don't live next door to Stubbings. They moved away after the shooting. So there's no reason he can't do home detention at his home.

Originally Posted by systolic

The victims don't live next door to Stubbings. They moved away after the shooting. So there's no reason he can't do home detention at his home.

Oh! That is just fine then. Glad you cleared that up

Originally Posted by Cordite

Because the .22 looks way more dangerus cooler than his .308 bolt action and could be passed off as an MSSA, though I notice they avoided the precise term MSSA. Misdirection? Yes. Outright lying? No. Moral distinction? No.

His shooting spree would have been slightly less dangerous if he'd used the dangerous looking gun depicted.

I still can't get over the sentence. Can any on this forum imagine he'd have that sentence if he'd done what he did when sober? Alcohol remains the great excuser --- no matter how much judges flap their lips and say it's not.

The photo is of a SKS or SKK 7.62x39mm rifle in a Dragunov stock. Not a .22. IT IS a MSSA.

The photo was taken from Stubbings' Facebook page. That's why they used it.

Originally Posted by systolic

The photo is of a SKS or SKK 7.62x39mm rifle in a Dragunov stock. Not a .22. IT IS a MSSA.

The photo was taken from Stubbings' Facebook page. That's why they used it.

Not really. That is WHAT they used and WHERE they found it - not the same as answering WHY they used it.

We don't know for certain WHY they used it, but it may be reasonably deduced from the (intentional) effect of the article.

The use of the image in this article, with its MSSA caption, has the effect of suggesting a guy used a .308 MSSA against his neighbours.

The motivation behind this could be just because the journalist's integrity has been prostituted to sensationalism... or because of some Australian type gun control agenda which no inconvenient fact must stand in the way of... or both.

Originally Posted by Cordite

Not really. That is WHAT they used and WHERE they found it - not the same as answering WHY they used it.

We don't know for certain WHY they used it, but it may be reasonably deduced from the (intentional) effect of the article.

The use of the image in this article, with its MSSA caption, has the effect of suggesting a guy used a .308 MSSA against his neighbours.

The motivation behind this could be just because the journalist's integrity has been prostituted to sensationalism... or because of some Australian type gun control agenda which no inconvenient fact must stand in the way of... or both.

Probably just easier to cut and paste the photo. Just like the photo of Stubbings is taken from Facebook too.

Makes more sense than a conspiracy against guns, gun owners or shooting in general.

Originally Posted by systolic

Probably just easier to cut and paste the photo. Just like the photo of Stubbings is taken from Facebook too.

Makes more sense than a conspiracy against guns, gun owners or shooting in general.

You could be correct. It may not be a conspiracy against guns. You may have inadvertently stumbled onto the truth. Its a millennial conspiracy against having to make an effort to find the truth....if its in face book it must be true, besides it's too hard to actually find out facts.....The true conspiracy of presenting poorly edited and written articles in the hope that we will accept the lower standards and reward them for doing half the job they are supposed to be doing.

Originally Posted by timattalon

You could be correct. It may not be a conspiracy against guns. You may have inadvertently stumbled onto the truth. Its a millennial conspiracy against having to make an effort to find the truth....if its in face book it must be true, besides it's too hard to actually find out facts.....The true conspiracy of presenting poorly edited and written articles in the hope that we will accept the lower standards and reward them for doing half the job they are supposed to be doing.

"Conspiracy" is a word I did not use, and I agree with you, Systolic, that it would not fit.

It is more, as @timattalon says, sloppiness. Maybe deliberate when it suits? A lot of very clever people hide behind fake poor use of the English language to mislead rather than outright lie.

As for motivation, the spirit of our time, the Zeitgeist, has it as the popular and "the done thing" for many (but not all) journalists to poop on gun owners.