This Gun Has No Safety!
BY Herschel Smith
7 years, 6 months ago
Attorneys for an undocumented immigrant facing charges in the high-profile death of a woman on San Francisco’s Pier 14 contend it may be the gun’s fault.
Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, 45, a Mexican national with at least five deportations under his belt, contends he shot Kathryn Steinle by accident with a found gun now tied to the U.S. Bureau of Land Management. California Superior Court Judge Brendan P. Conroy on Friday found there is enough evidence for Lopez-Sanchez to stand trial on charges of second-degree murder for his alleged involvement in the woman’s death.
However, his legal team contends that the man never pulled the trigger and claimed the type of handgun involved is documented for having accidental discharges.
“This gun has no safety,” said public defender Matt Gonzalez as reported by the Associated Press. “There is no evidence that he put his finger in the trigger.”
The gun was discharged by the perpetrator, therefore he put his finger on the trigger and pulled it. Quod erat demonstrandum.
Actually though, you can’t blame the lawyer for this – he’s doing what lawyers do. He is only following the road LEOs pave for him concerning guns that just discharge, as if guns have some sort of will and volition all their own and can decide to “go off” without human action. If police departments all over America buy into that line of crap for the sake of saving careers, then so should the courts.
It’s dirty and scurrilous top to bottom, side to side, front to back, not the least of which is allowing a border that invites people like this across anyway. What’s one more pile of mud?
|
|
On September 11, 2015 at 7:29 pm, Horatio Bunce said:
Myself and a group of fellow shooters have had several thousand firearms and not a single one has just “discharged” without someone pulling the trigger . Even the cheapest firearms we have don’t go off , even loaded for extensive periods of time .
Must be some special lefty gun . The kind that has a mind of it’s own and the owner has no control over it . We should have a law against those .
On September 12, 2015 at 10:32 pm, UNCLEELMO said:
So…. the gun was inherently unsafe. That’s why they were issued to the same BLM law enforcement agents that confronted the Bundy family. Got it. And for all we know, the idiot that had this gun stolen was at the Bundy Ranch. But we won’t know that unless the feds tell us who he/she is, which they won’t do.
And yes, I can blame THIS lawyer for attempting this stunt. Matt Gonzales is an anti-gun lunatic leftist who would stop at nothing to get this crimmigrant off the hook (and validate his city’s ‘Sanctuary’ status). If you don’t believe me, just Wikipedia ‘Matt Gonzales’.
On September 16, 2015 at 1:44 am, TSA_TheSexualAssault said:
There are some vintage weapons that when off safe, allow the firing pin to rest on the primer before pulling the hammer back. These weapon can “just go off” if dropped, and the hammer hits the floor “just right”. An empty chamber under the hammer of a revolver cures this, and using the safety that puts a block between the firing pin and the primer cures the rest. These are technical issues for weapons no newer than the 1970’s and technology of the 1920’s.
Guns that go off unintentionally are always “User Error” due to poor handling.
Gun control is not selling your unpapered private weapons to idiots.