Pammy's First Bouncy for the '12 Ballot

[Revolution]

A friend has to take her son off of life support tomorrow.

He is in his twenties, married with 2 year old twin girls. Their birthday was Saturday.
 
Nathan and his brother were on their way to work. They had been hunting the day before and had not unloaded their hunting gear...including a shotgun. They swerved to avoid a deer rolled their vehicle, somehow the gun went off and the driver was shot in the leg. He was able to keep his leg with a lot of new hardware to go with it. Nathan however had severe head injuries and has been in a coma almost two weeks. The family will be meeting with the team of doctors tomorrow but the probability is that they will remove life support sometime tomorrow.
 
There are a lot of things that could have been done differently, but that is moot at this point. Please send comforting thoughts and prayers to my friend. No parent should EVER have to bury their children.
 
http://www.democraticunderground.com/100210609

Not only does this smell like a bouncy, it stinks of a horrible attempt at humor in what is supposed to be a sad thread. Pathetic, IMO. Now, if this is really true, I'll remove the thread, and simply say I'm sorry for the family's loss. However, until I hear of any further evidence to the contrary, I'm saying

[Minky]

There was a wreck and this kid got severe head injuries that could possibly result in death. Very sad.

As I read it though, I feel a tinge of hate because they were out hunting poor, defenseless animals with guns. It's almost as if this person is saying, "Had they not been hunting, this never would've happened."

He wasn't killed while hunting and he wasn't killed with a gun. So what exactly could've been done differently? Is the message that we should all stay home, unplug the toaster, and do our very best to avoid accidental death? I don't get it.

[Boudicca]

Yeah, Rev, I know that if the story is true I am devastated for the family's loss.
Unfortunately, as with any post over there, one cannot be assured of reading the truth.

[JakeStyle]

If the story is true, it is quite sad and I have nothing but compassion and sympathy for the families involved.  Coming from the compulsive liar Pam though, it's most likely complete bullshit intended to earn her some DUmp love.

[GOBUCKS]

Yeah, Rev, I know that if the story is true I am devastated for the family's loss.
Unfortunately, as with any post over there, one cannot be assured of reading the truth.

Don't forget that Pam is a reflexive, pathological liar. She is incapable of truth.

She posts her lies, then scurries back and forth between the DUmp and here to see what people are saying about them.

Pam's dishonesty is made more obnoxious by her abysmally low intelligence.

People who boycott nadin because she's such a despicable character should be aware she's a lovable babushka
compared to Pam Dawson.

[Revolution]

Oh dammit, Bucks. Now ya done it! Are you going to let him talk about you like that, Pammy? Sign up, and match your obviously far superior wits with his in a battle of words. To the death of the fingers, I say!!!

[catsmtrods]

"They swerved to avoid a deer"

[diesel driver]

"They swerved to avoid a deer"

That's what I was thinking. 

They're out hunting (deer, I presume).

They swerve to miss, a deer.

Both are injured, one severely (the non-shot one).

In DUmmiespeak, she should be HAPPY!  Mother Nature got revenge on a couple of EVIL hunters!

[miskie]

So, the short of it is Pam the Demented Jeep took an unfortunate accident involving a deer on the road and made it into an anti hunting thing because there was a shotgun that was apparently left loaded and unlocked in the back of the hunter's truck. (even though Pam doesn't say it was a truck, I'm going to assume it was - foolish to strap a deer to the top of a Prius) And somehow, the gun went off, shot through the back of the bed, the back of the cab, and the seat, to lodge a bullet into the drivers leg.

Let's assume this is 100% true;

A ) The gun discharged after the deer ended up in the road. has nothing to do with the accident itself.
B ) The gun would have discharged after the vehicle rolled. It isn't responsible for the accident.
C ) The driver ended up shot after the vehicle rolled, meaning that his passenger would have still been injured, and in the coma he is in now.

[franksolich]

I bet she read a story in the newspaper similar with this, but with fewer details, and so rewrote it to make it more personal, and to add some "details."

The primitives are known to do, especially with news-stories on Drudge.

I give you Oscar Wilde, the large-proboscised primitive Cyrano, as the prime practitioner of that.

[JohnnyReb]

Let's assume this is 100% true;

A ) The gun discharged after the deer ended up in the road. has nothing to do with the accident itself.
B ) The gun would have discharged after the vehicle rolled. It isn't responsible for the accident.
C ) The driver ended up shot after the vehicle rolled, meaning that his passenger would have still been injured, and in the coma he is in now.

So now we use DUmmie logic...

1-We encourage an increase in the deer population by banning hunting.

2-We outlaw guns.

3-We discontinue the manufacting of cars.

Problem solved.

[NHSparky]

I think she's still pissed off the cat is a better shot with the Glock than she is.

And the likelihood of hitting JUST the leg?  Unless the barrel of the shotgun was right up against the leg, not friggin likely.

[GOBUCKS]

I think she's still pissed off the cat is a better shot with the Glock than she is.

And the likelihood of hitting JUST the leg?  Unless the barrel of the shotgun was right up against the leg, not friggin likely.

The likelihood of a shotgun discharging in a wreck, with no finger on the trigger: virtually zero.

99.9999% of accidental discharges occur with a careless finger on the trigger.

Lots of stories are fabricated to deny that responsibility.

[delilahmused]

Are most hunters that cavalier with their weapons? I don't know any, but then I don't know any DUmmie hunters.

Cindie

[thundley4]

Are most hunters that cavalier with their weapons? I don't know any, but then I don't know any DUmmie hunters.

Cindie

I don't know, but I'm beginning to suspect that dogs don't like hunting.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/nationnow/2011/12/dog-shoots-utah-hunter-in-the-butt-with-his-own-gun.html

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/12/10/9356615-another-dog-shoots-hunter-this-time-in-florida

[NHSparky]

Are most hunters that cavalier with their weapons? I don't know any, but then I don't know any DUmmie hunters.

Cindie

The answer to that question would be an unequivocal HELL NO.

[TVDOC]

The answer to that question would be an unequivocal HELL NO.

I would tend to agree with you (for those of us that were raised around guns and hunting), however, here in my neck of the woods, every year we have a decent number of "city folks" wandering around in the fields and woods climbing fences, and charging through the underbrush (round in the chamber, and finger on trigger)........promptly shooting either themselves or a companion in the process.....

doc

[jukin]

Might just be me but the only hunting I have done with a shotgun was for foul and bird shot. I do know of game marshals that carry shotguns with slugs in case of bears. Maybe the shotgun was just hanging around in the vehicle waiting to shoot by itself.

[BlueStateSaint]

The answer to that question would be an unequivocal HELL NO.

Definitely.  H5.

[jukin]

Man, little under the weather today, foul s/b fowl with bird shot. 

[miskie]

The likelihood of a shotgun discharging in a wreck, with no finger on the trigger: virtually zero.

99.9999% of accidental discharges occur with a careless finger on the trigger.

Lots of stories are fabricated to deny that responsibility.

Indeed -

Just the part of the story where a hunter would leave a loaded weapon in the back of a truck is suspect to me- but honestly, WAY too many things would have to go wrong for the accidental shooting to occur as described.

[marv]

I would guess that they were hunting from the vehicle (illegal almost everywhere). The gun was being held by the passenger, and "Nathan" was driving. The deer bolted from the side of the road, and passenger tried to get off a quick shot. Passenger couldn't shoulder the gun properly in time, but deer crosses road. "Nathan" panics, swerves and loses control as shotgun discharges. End of story, and start of embellishment.

After all, DUmmies aren't supposed to be that stupid........or are they.

[miskie]

I would guess that they were hunting from the vehicle (illegal almost everywhere). The gun was being held by the passenger, and "Nathan" was driving. The deer bolted from the side of the road, and passenger tried to get off a quick shot. Passenger couldn't shoulder the gun properly in time, but deer crosses road. "Nathan" panics, swerves and loses control as shotgun discharges. End of story, and start of embellishment.

After all, DUmmies aren't supposed to be that stupid........or are they.

This is the most probable interpretation of this story I have read. ^5

[Freeper]

I saw an episode of Mythbusters where they tested the myth of a rifle shooting all by itself if the car gets in an accident. None of the guns fired.

[vlad335]

Who goes deer hunting with a shotgun?