Thread: Wtf

It was interesting to read a wee bit more about Chris,s other problems, some people just continue to surprise you

his surname certainly seems to be quite adequate

Originally Posted by Tahr

Agreed. He has displayed random behaviour in more than one facet of his life. It's mainly been kept below the horizon since the shooting. Now though, on the back of the inquest and on what others' know about him, he should be protected from himself.

This does does not make him a bad man, nor should it vindictive. It's a simple thing really; bar him from firearms to keep him safe, others safe, and to preserve the reputation of shooting sports.

It may be true what you say... but the outcome you think is appropriate for this individual case is based on personal knowledge and information, other behaviours and proclivities, that is not true of other people that may be in exactly this situation. I don't deny that he may not be suitable to be allowed a firearm licence ever again and outside information may well be pertinent to that decision which is made as to suitability. In fact I would suggest that if this is the case, and the information is genuine and there is genuine concern, I would suggest that the people that have personal knowledge (not 3rd party) should write and clarify their concerns to the police directly.

But is it sufficient that an error made in the blink of an eye, that is non-intentional and is isolated in terms of general behaviour, should have punitive life time punishment? It is unlikely that this should be the sole reason that a person can never do or be eligible to have a firearms licence again. The criteria to be eligible to hold a firearms licence is suitability, but if the likelihood of transgression or error in future is less than others without the history, is he then unsuitable?

While our emotive response to a persons desire to return to his previous lifestyle is understandable, because of the trauma associated.... what we don't understand is the absolute loss of identity of a person who can no longer do that thing that formed a massive part of their life. People in those situation also have the right to try and move on and for some maybe a return to hunting can aid in that, despite the close associative effect with the actual event that we find hard to understand.

Our lack of understanding of that is not the measure by which a decision should or shouldn't be made.

I would hate to think that someone like this could be roaming public land with a firearm. An absolute slap in the face for the family. Extremely selfish behaviour at best thinking
its a good idea to go hunting again.

He should be serving a minimum of 5 years for manslaughter.

About a month after the shooting I spoke to a guy who was on a hunt trip with this Dummer. The hunters had divvied up where they were going to go the night before and when setting out to his allotted area the next morning this guy smelled Dummers cigarette smoke in the area where he wasn't meant to be - when caught up with he said he'd changed his mind and thought it wasn't a big deal.

I've heard other rumours about this guy but that's the only one I know that I trust the speaker to be telling true.

I've worked way too hard to get my licenses to have my sport endangered by a dangerously foolish person like Dummer (with his road rage conviction)

To me he's like a recidivist drunk driver on the road - he's had his chances and fucked them up so it's time to take his toys away

Never made a mistake, hell I once fired eighty rounds at two of our guys and completely missed them both.

So many rounds, that should be a lifetime without a FAL for me.

Originally Posted by Scribe

Never made a mistake, hell I once fired eighty rounds at two of our guys and completely missed them both.

So many rounds, that should be a lifetime without a FAL for me.

seriously?

I actually felt really sorry for the guy, What a thing for anyone to have to live with. That is untill I heard some of his reported comments at the inquest.
Seems like he is living with it just fine, can even manage hunting and Firearms again. Disrespectful to the Family and the poor young guy whos life he ended.
Just sad

Originally Posted by Scribe

Never made a mistake, hell I once fired eighty rounds at two of our guys and completely missed them both.

So many rounds, that should be a lifetime without a FAL for me.

With all due respect i disagree, this guy didnt have other people trying to kill him or his buddies - he didnt identify his target and ended a man's life!

Originally Posted by Sidney

It may be true what you say... but the outcome you think is appropriate for this individual case is based on personal knowledge and information, other behaviours and proclivities, that is not true of other people that may be in exactly this situation. I don't deny that he may not be suitable to be allowed a firearm licence ever again and outside information may well be pertinent to that decision which is made as to suitability. In fact I would suggest that if this is the case, and the information is genuine and there is genuine concern, I would suggest that the people that have personal knowledge (not 3rd party) should write and clarify their concerns to the police directly.

But is it sufficient that an error made in the blink of an eye, that is non-intentional and is isolated in terms of general behaviour, should have punitive life time punishment? It is unlikely that this should be the sole reason that a person can never do or be eligible to have a firearms licence again. The criteria to be eligible to hold a firearms licence is suitability, but if the likelihood of transgression or error in future is less than others without the history, is he then unsuitable?

While our emotive response to a persons desire to return to his previous lifestyle is understandable, because of the trauma associated.... what we don't understand is the absolute loss of identity of a person who can no longer do that thing that formed a massive part of their life. People in those situation also have the right to try and move on and for some maybe a return to hunting can aid in that, despite the close associative effect with the actual event that we find hard to understand.

Our lack of understanding of that is not the measure by which a decision should or shouldn't be made.

Sydney, no personal offence, i know your a lawyer or about to become one, but that is total shite.....this man had his chance, he blew it, i dont give two fucks about his civil liberties, tell that to the dead mans widow and children....

Originally Posted by Sidney

It may be true what you say... but the outcome you think is appropriate for this individual case is based on personal knowledge and information, other behaviours and proclivities, that is not true of other people that may be in exactly this situation. I don't deny that he may not be suitable to be allowed a firearm licence ever again and outside information may well be pertinent to that decision which is made as to suitability. In fact I would suggest that if this is the case, and the information is genuine and there is genuine concern, I would suggest that the people that have personal knowledge (not 3rd party) should write and clarify their concerns to the police directly.

But is it sufficient that an error made in the blink of an eye, that is non-intentional and is isolated in terms of general behaviour, should have punitive life time punishment? It is unlikely that this should be the sole reason that a person can never do or be eligible to have a firearms licence again. The criteria to be eligible to hold a firearms licence is suitability, but if the likelihood of transgression or error in future is less than others without the history, is he then unsuitable?

While our emotive response to a persons desire to return to his previous lifestyle is understandable, because of the trauma associated.... what we don't understand is the absolute loss of identity of a person who can no longer do that thing that formed a massive part of their life. People in those situation also have the right to try and move on and for some maybe a return to hunting can aid in that, despite the close associative effect with the actual event that we find hard to understand.

Our lack of understanding of that is not the measure by which a decision should or shouldn't be made.

What a load of shit.

Originally Posted by wsm junkie

With all due respect i disagree, this guy didnt have other people trying to kill him or his buddies - he didnt identify his target and ended a man's life!

Experience has shown me over the years that the more times you go to the well the closer you are to falling in.

It could well be claimed that I never identified my target.

Originally Posted by possummatti

seriously?

Yep its a bit of a war-y story but it happened.

Originally Posted by Nathan F

What a load of shit.

I deleted my post but it was similar to yours

Originally Posted by Gibo

I deleted my post but it was similar to yours

Well its just a whole lot of justification for inexcusable behaviour!