A Parody

[Toad]

Three killed when van crammed with people rolls over on I-70
By RICHARD ESPINOZA - The Kansas City Star
Date: 08/07/00 22:15

Two women and a man died Monday morning when their van, packed with 15 persons, crashed on Interstate 70 near Russell, Kan., throwing 13 passengers from the vehicle.

Fernando Garcia, 56, of Yonkers, N.Y., was driving 14 passengers east on I-70 about 7 a.m. when his Ford minivan went into the median and rolled at least twice about 13 miles east of Russell, the Kansas Highway Patrol said.

Thirteen persons were thrown from the van; none wore seat belts.

The two who were not ejected -- Garcia and a woman who had been seated at the back of the van -- were wearing seat belts. That woman died, as did another woman and a man. None of the dead was identified.

The 1994 nine-passenger van was built with two front seats and two rear benches, but the middle bench had been removed, according to a Highway Patrol report. The van was registered in Yonkers.

At least seven of the passengers were from Mexico, but troopers did not know Monday evening where their trip had begun or where they were headed.

Because only one survivor spoke English, the Immigration and Naturalization Service was helping the patrol interview victims. The patrol said there were five women and 10 men in the van.


To reach Richard Espinoza, Johnson County police reporter, call (816) 234-7714 or send e-mail to respinoza@kcstar.com


The Associated Press contributed to this report.

All content © 2000 The Kansas City Star


Now, to use this incident the way the anti-gun folks use a gun accident......


1. Mr. Garcia illegally modified his Ford van to carry more passengers than the manufacturer intended.

2. Mr Garcia knowingly operated his van with more passengers than the manufacturer intended.

3. Mr. Garcia may well have been involved in an illegal activity, transporting illegal aliens across state lines.
 
4. Mr. Garcia's passengers violated Kansas state law that requires all occupants of a vehicle to have their seat belts on.
 
5. Mr. Garcia, despite obviously passing the NY state driver's license written and practical tests, failed to excercise his responsibility as driver to operate the vehicle safely, driving into the median, rolling the van and killing 3 of his passengers.

THIS CAN'T BE ALLOWED TO HAPPEN AGAIN!

We must register all cars! whoops..we had that.

We must train, test and license all drivers! whoops, we had that.

We must make sure all drivers and vehicles are insured so innocent victims get their due! whoops, we had that.

Ford! That's it, Ford! We must sue Ford for making the minivan seats removable thus enabling Mr. Garcia to get 15 people into a minivan. Ford HAS to be forced to make minivans safer! We must have seat belt interlocks!

Kansas! We must sue Kansas for having a median on I-70. Had it all been concrete, the van would not have rolled! The state must bear some resonsibility!

Most importantly, however, it is now perfectly clear that despite registration, training, testing and insuring, some infinitesimally small percentage of American drivers are going to abuse the use of the automobile. This fact is inescapable.

Therefore, we must urge the government to confiscate all automobiles from private hands. The police and military would of course be exempt. To paraphrase another individual in another thread...."car owners, especially AAA members are Mentally incabable of being responsable for a vehicle. They are simply not that bright."


 

Punish the Group for the mistakes of a tiny minority of criminal group members!

Yah, that's the ticket!

[This message has been edited by Toad (edited 08-08-2000).]

[Naso]

I agree with you, we need to negate the use of cars, except police and military (mmm, maybe police only).

AND...

shoot a bullet in mr Garcia's head.

 

[Maniac]

An gun is made for killing people.

An car is made for transporting people.



------------------
AH : Maniac
WB : -nr-1-

[blur]

 

Originally posted by Maniac:
An gun is made for killing people.

An car is made for transporting people.

Maniac, what are we going to do with you?
You're not playing by the rules!
You're not supposed to introduce common sense into these threads!  

"From my cold dead hands!"
    - Chuck Heston

[hitech]

Very rarly get into these but this is NOT a true statment.

A gun is made for killing people.

Thats like saying a knife is made for killing people. Or a hand becuse it can be made into a fist is used for killing people. Infact a car can be used as a weapon so it to can be used for killing people.

I shot my first gun when I was 3 years old.
Have been around guns all my life. Used to take my shot gun to school every fall , check it in at the principles office, and pick it up after school to go hunting.

We used to shoot skeet on the edge of the school yard with our biolgy teacher.

In all my life I have never wanted to use a gun to kill someone, just like a car,knife,or my fist. If the need ever arose where I have no other option I would use any tool at my disposle to defend myslef.

Point is gun's have many purposes just like most tools.

HiTech

[Udie]

HT for president!!!  Pyro for Veep!!!!!

 "Umm Mr. President, these income taxes seem to be WAY overmodeled, could you lower their destructive value?"

VP Pyro.. "Send us a screen shot of your paycheck and we'll look into it."

Udie  

[StSanta]

Awright, HiTech, I see where you are coming from. I hope I will be able to allow you to see it from a different perspective.

Knives are great utility tools; we use them for cutting meat, sawing off ropes and what not. The sharp edge makes it very useful.

A few knives are made specifically for the purpose of either detterance (new word, look it up in the Scandinavian-English dictionary)   ) or killing/maiming. These knives usually have a very high carbon %, making them very sharp, but also brittle. Normally used by special forces people, or by wannabe special forces failures   . Or collectors of knives. But 90% of all knives can easily kill a person. The intent behind making the knives is, in all but the few special forces cases, not to aid in the maiming or killing of a human being.

The same can be said about cars; cars aren't made to deter others from attacking you. Primarily, they are a transportation tool, and secondarily, a tool used to express status. Under the right circumstances, it is quite easy to kill a person with a car. On the other hand, it takes a lot of setting up, and even then the result isn't given. Hard to kill a guy living on the second floor in an apartment building while he is at home with a car. Much easier with a knife. Or a gun.

Now, most mainstream handguns, with the exception of those specially constructed to be extremely accurate and used to precision shooting, can be said to be constructed for two or three purposes; one is for the fun of shooting them. Another one is to deter others from attacking you. The third is to kill, be it human beings or other animals.

As I've argued in the past, I'll argue that the ability to deter is proportional to the effectiveness of the gun in terms of killing power (and not just calibre, but overall effectiveness). A .22 gun doesn't scare me as much as a .45 Colt. The .22 will kill me if I am hit in the head, possibly, or if something vital like the liver takes a direct lucky hit. The .45 does a much better job.

So, according to this line of argument, most mainstreams guns are built to kill/maim. They deter by their ability to do so.

Or they are built to be amusing to handle, at which points we have to weight in the fun they produce and compare it to the grief it causes.

Caveat: this post has *nothing* to do with the right to bear arms, which I am confident you Americans are capable of handling. After all, you are the ones suffering the consequences of *either* decision. With the term hand gun, I am not referring to hunting rifles, but guns like the Colt .45, Glock 17 and so forth. I am also myself a gun owner, owning a 12 gauge shotgun I use for skeet and trap shooting.

Knives are much more versatile, and its killing power more of a sideeffect. When was the last time you used your gun to slice a piece of bread?  

Just my views.

------------------
StSanta
JG54 "Grünherz"
"If you died a stones throw from your wingie; you did no wrong". - Hangtime

[This message has been edited by StSanta (edited 08-09-2000).]

[Naso]

I vote for StSanta  

[Tac]

Bah, give a group of people any kind of object and ask them to tell you 10 things it could be used for.

The word "weapon" will always appear. Its just how people think.

Now guns on the other hand, are a RANGED weapon. That's the part I hate about them. I can run from a knife, I have a good chance of fighting someone with a knife..but a gun? Hmm.. Matrix time-slow-down I wish I had  

[hitech]

StSanta I agree with your evaluation. If you re read your post I see in it the same thing im saying Guns are built for multiple purposes To argue your point ,you had to pick spefic gun types. This is far from the oringnal statment guns are made "implying all guns" to kill people.

I allso agree if your purpose for a gun is deternent bigger is better.

As far as the exact number's produced i.e. mainstream I realy have no idea of % of all types "non military" guns produced and hence can't argue the mainstream point.

And I do agree we are not debating anything to do with 2nd ammendment is more that we are debating inflamitory statements to validate ones ideals.

HiTech

[Udie]

 

Originally posted by hitech:
As far as the exact number's produced i.e. mainstream I realy have no idea of % of all types "non military" guns produced and hence can't argue the mainstream point.

HiTech

 There's ALOT of non military guns out there. When I was in college, in Kileen, Tx,  I worked at a pawn shop.  Our biggest selling item was the Lorcin .25 cal. I sold at least 1 a day, at $49.99.   Sold them mostly to women too, I'd say about 75% to women.  That doesn't count all the Taurus .45's I sold, at least 2 or 3 a week.

 This was in a small town, granted an Army town so most of my sales were to military personel, or their wives.  But I'm sure that the big cities sell MANY MANY more guns in a day than in Killeen, Tx.  I don't see any way to get guns off the street other than the gov. going house to house and search every square inch of our country.  That aint gonna happen, at least at my house  

 I do admit though, that it is scarey how many freakin guns are out there, at least to me. But I am in NO way willing to give up any rights or freedoms for security (false security at that)


Udie

"Those that would give up freedom for security, deserve neither freedom nor security" -Benjamin Franklin

[StSanta]

Rgr that HiTech, understand your position.

Udie, my guesses is that HT refers to the same guns I do, i.e guns not sold and used for defense or detterrent; i.e specialized precision shooting guns and so forth.



------------------
StSanta
JG54 "Grünherz"
"If you died a stones throw from your wingie; you did no wrong". - Hangtime

[Ripsnort]

My weapons have duel purposes, they can kill you, they can change the babies diapers, they can flip you the bird, they can feed you.

Hands should be outlawed!

BTW, can anyone tell me the last time time a gun jumped up off a table and killed someone by itself? Santa?  

[This message has been edited by Ripsnort (edited 08-09-2000).]

[Toad]

In my profession, we joke that we sneak our two deadliest weapons through airport security every day.

Our right and left hands!

[StSanta]

Rip: Well, sort of thought I made my argument about purpose and intent sort of clear.

To really paint it out in black; nuclear weapons haven't jumped up and killed someone by themselves. Neither has normal biological weapons, or chemicals weapons.

The intent and purpose behind these two sorts of weapons is quite clear cut; they are not multi purpose tools. The primary function of hands is not to kill, or to deter from attack.

As I've argued, the primary purpose of handguns is either fun, detterence through ability to kill, or thirdly ability to kill.

Handguns facilitate killings and make them viable and easy. There are several factors involved when you are to attack a person; one is intent. Second is chances of success. How great a chance do you have to succesfully carry through the attack? A third would be ability to get away unscaved. Will the attack be risky, and will it have serious physical consequences to yourself? A fourth is consequences for the target - will he or she be a little sore, a bit beat up, seriously injured or killed?

Now, a normally trained person in a normal fight with fists and legs can cause serious injury to his enemy. On the other hand, as we see in most fights, the injuries aren't permanent. Intent is there, chances of succes depends on relative size and skill, and in the case of skill it takes at least a moderate amount of dedication to get good at it. Chances of getting away unhurt is fair, but not good; in a fist fight, the other guy can hit ya hard.

With a knife, you have an edge (no pun intended). Chances of success are greater but due to the close proximity required, you're still in the range of the other guys main weapons. Consequences for the other guy are serious; internal bleeding and possible death.

The handgun is the real equalizer in terms of skill and size, and allows you a standoff approach; effectively putting yourself outside the opponents effective range, and within your own. The chances of getting away unscaved are very good, and the chances of death or serious injury to the bad guy very high.

Most fights and so forth are spur of the moment things - it happens out of passion and strong emotional surges. With fists, a sore jaw and a wounded ego is normally the result. With knives, it begins to turn ugly. With handguns, it turns really deadly.

I feel I must reiterate that I in no way am advocating for the right to bear arms or against it - this is more of a low level common sense argument.

So, having said this, I hope I've answered this:
 

BTW, can anyone tell me the last time time a gun jumped up off a table and killed someone by itself? Santa?  (Image removed from quote.)

i.e that this is a bit simplistic, if amusing  .

<S!>

------------------
StSanta
JG54 "Grünherz"
"If you died a stones throw from your wingie; you did no wrong". - Hangtime