guns aren’t toys, yutz.

Arizona State senator Lori Klein (R) is a pro-gun politician. She carries a purple-framed Ruger LCP in her purse. During an interview with an Arizona Republic reporter, she took it out of her purse and aimed the loaded pistol at the reporter’s chest to show off the red dot of the Ruger’s laser sight. When the reporter objected, she said that he wasn’t in danger because "she didn’t have her hand on the trigger."

I don’t need to tell my responsible gun-owning friends that this is monumental gun safety fail. It violates one of the cardinal rules of gun handling, which are:

RULE I: All guns are always loaded.

RULE II: Never let the muzzle cover anything you’re not willing to destroy.

RULE III: Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target.

RULE IV: Be sure of your target, and what’s behind it.

Senator Klein needs a serious refresher in safe gun handling, and shouldn’t be handling firearms until she has internalized those rules. You don’t point a loaded gun at anyone outside of legitimate defense of your life, ever. There are no exceptions to this rule, or any of the other ones on the list.

For those readers waiting to jump in and claim this incident as evidence that the majority of gun owners are yahoos like Senator Klein: none of my gun-owning friends would ever think about pointing their loaded guns at someone without emergency, and none of them would tolerate that kind of action from someone else. If you showed up at the range or the Northeast Bloggershoot, for example, proceeded to point your loaded gun at people intentionally or accidentally, and then shrugged it off with "My finger wasn’t on the trigger," getting ejected and asked not to return would be the most gentle thing that could happen to you.

About these ads

21 thoughts on “guns aren’t toys, yutz.

  1. Plblark says:

    http://thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/07/daniel-zimmerman/senator-lori-klein-gives-ttag-her-side-of-the-story/

    “During the interview, she didn’t whip out her gun to show it off. The reporter specifically asked to see it. He then wanted her to demonstrate the Crimson Trace laser. Senator Kline complied, pointing the gun toward a wall and activating the laser.

    The reporter then approached her, momentarily getting himself between the gun and the wall. The Senator said that as soon as she realized the laser was on his chest, she immediately lowered it. She also made a point of saying that she doesn’t know whether or not Ruelas got in front of the gun intentionally or not.

    Klein went on to say that there’s no excuse for allowing the gun to laser the reporter. She knows she was wrong and reiterated that at no time was her finger on the trigger. There wasn’t a round in the chamber. And while all that may be true, she fully realizes that she was responsible for where the gun was pointing.”

    • Marko Kloos says:

      People tend to paint themselves in the best possible light when telling their side. Maybe the reporter had an agenda, but there’s no excuse for her to point a loaded firearm at the wall (did she know what was behind it?), and then not INSTANTLY drop the muzzle when the reporter strayed close to it. How did that work, anyway? Was he jumping in front of the muzzle or something?

      • Good point, Marko. I read the above linked story at Robb Allen’s place, and got a similar impression (3 Sides To Every Story, and all). I hope that the truth is closer to her side of the story, and I’m glad to see that she’s attempting to take responsibility for her monumental Fail. She still should never have allowed that muzzle to cover a person.

        tweaker

  2. Mad Shoeshiner says:

    Here’s audio of the interview: t.co/83GYDWw. Draw your own conclusions.

  3. Jay G. says:

    There’s only one reason why a CONCEALED weapon should come out of concealment.

    This ain’t it.

  4. [...] blogosphere is abuzz about the story of Arizona State Senator Lori Klein, who is under fire for allegedly pointing her [...]

  5. Rusty says:

    Oh stuff it. What in hell i s the matter with your head Munchkin? Do you have yo r pull up diapers on?

    Here is something for you to fret over tonight. When that gun disappears into a purse or pocket it can point anywhere. Big deal.

    Be a bed wetter if you want, but guns don’t magicly cock and fire themselves. People piss and moan about something like that and will think nothing of crossing a street crosswalk in front of stopped cars. You are in the same kind of danger everytime you go through an intersection. If the lady was conscentious about the trigger and hammer there was no real danger. Get a grip

    • Mike S says:

      The difference between a holstered pistol and this is that a holstered pistol can’t go off and shoot someone. Yet here you are, tearing into Marko WHEN HE’S RIGHT.

      Guns don’t magically cock and fire themselves? Exactly! Which is why they’re safe in a holster, but need to be pointed somewhere safe when they’re being handled.

      Rusty, you come off like a pinhead…

    • abnormalist says:

      Let me quote
      “RULE I: All guns are always loaded.

      RULE II: Never let the muzzle cover anything you’re not willing to destroy.

      RULE III: Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target.

      RULE IV: Be sure of your target, and what’s behind it.”

      Break any one and you’ve done bad.

      These are rules, not suggestions. If you cannot follow the rules, you do not get to participate.

    • Tam says:

      Rusty,

      Cordially, fuck you, right out loud.

      Point that thing at me and I’ll feed it to you. You’ll be shitting gun safety for a week.

      • Mike S says:

        Exactly. I won’t put up with guns pointed at me, even if they are “unloaded” and even if your finger “isn’t on the trigger.”

        Here in Texas, pointing a gun at someone is called justification… Even if you insist that it’s unloaded.

        There’s an instructor at the range I shoot at that will tell you exactly that if you handle firearms during a ceasefire… with his hand on his holstered pistol.

    • Kristopher says:

      The proper response to being muzzle by a gun in hand ( as opposed to one in, say a horizontal shoulder holster, but not in hand ) is to buttstroke the retard who did it.

      Guns in your hand are dangerous. Guns securely in a holster are not.

      Figure it out, idiot.

      • Rick Randall says:

        BTDT, in high school ROTC, actually. Since it was buttstroke to the gut (enroute to knocking the offending muzzle out of line), the consensus of the adminstration was, “Ve see NUT-TINK! (You’re lucky he didn’t break your jaw instead, stupid.)”

        Of, course it was a supposedly demilled M1903A3. . . but I was the cadet armorer the previous year and fully aware that AT LEAST one of those rifles was 100% functional. (Over the years, different demilitarization methods were used, which disabled different components — so, by swapping parts between rifles, or simply replacing parts that got damaged with decades of clumsy teenagers, it was easy to find a couple of rifles that were “de-demilled”.) Plus, it’s a nasty habit, like picking your nose, or publicly reciting your own unpublished poetry.

  6. Windy Wilson says:

    If she says the gun did not have a round in the chamber, this was still a Rule 1 violation. We already recognize the Rule 2 violation when she let the muzzle cover the journalist, and if she pointed it at the wall, that was a rule 4 violation, as she did not know what was behind it. I’m not sure if she violated Rule 3, it is unclear if she had her finger on the trigger at the time or not, but considering she found it necessary to say she had no round in the chamber, I have my doubts.
    I think this violated all four rules, but with a non-lethal outcome.

  7. I’m with Jay G on this one. If it’s a real concealment piece and not just a prop, no way is it coming out of the safety device I call a holster in response to a sophomoric “can I see it?” question from a stranger (and on tape no less). Absolutely no good can come of that.

    (On the other hand, remember: this is no mere mortal–this is an elected official. Taken in that light, maybe it’s not so surprising after all.)

    I do think it’s important to say this: I do not–do not–buy into the “if you don’t follow the rules, you do not get to participate” logic. That’s not how liberty works, friends–it’s either for everyone, or it’s for no one. Inelegant exercise of a right, even damnfool abuse of a right, does not disqualify it if it is indeed a right, and not a privilege.

    The way liberty works is that anyone who does not follow the rules, runs the risk of an appropriate response.

  8. Glamdring says:

    Maybe she was used to hunting with Cheney?

    Though seriously I am not understanding why you would draw a weapon in this type of situation.

    If you really want to show them the real gun vs a blue inert trainer, a gun range or similar would be the proper place.

    But then I don’t go to many gun stores anymore because I really don’t like people pointing “unloaded” guns at me.

    • Kristopher says:

      She is now taking some safety classes … hopefully the “stop fiddling with it” mantra will be beaten into her.

      I also get annoyed by retarded gunstore customers covering me … I would dearly love to see one of them corrected.

      You can show someone a firearm … you position the person next to you, unload it, and show it to them while it is pointed in a safe direction. If the person tries to move downrange, you restrain them, or turn away to keep them up range. If they persist, holster immediately, and explain to them what they were doing wrong.

    • Windy Wilson says:

      Glamdring, Gun Stores!
      Once I went to a gun store to see about a peep sight for my Win 94 30-30, and when I was putting it away, I hesitated and told the clerk I was looking for a way to avoid wiping a customer. He said something about “It’s like a gun class, we just deem it to be not pointing at a customer”, or something llike that, but I think he appreciated my caution.

      • Tam says:

        It’s like a gun class, we just deem it to be not pointing at a customer”

        I have taken a few gun classes. I can guarantee that pointing a weapon at a fellow student, loaded or not, would get you deemed out of the class and sorry about your non-refundable tuition.

  9. Doug Weaver says:

    Marko I believe the senator. We know what the media brings to the table with regards to firearms. I believe she should have unloaded her weapon (on the reporter) before showing the lefty her piece but I’m gonna’ agree with the rules you’ve posted from the 101 class, give her the benefit of the doubt and move on.

    Great discussion y’all.

Comments are closed.