Man shot 34 times with nail gun!
Ow? Assuming he was alive at the time, I doubt he would have felt any after the first one.
I'm just wating for someone to chip in with "quake-pwned", or something along those lines.
I'm just wating for someone to chip in with "quake-pwned", or something along those lines.
There's also the story of the man that shot himself with his nail gun... without noticing it. Then he goes to see the doctor and he's told: "everything's fine... oh wait, no... there's this one thing, you have a nail in the head." 
I bet that was a bit uncomfortable.
Poor man, rest in peace.
Poor man, rest in peace.
Hand guns don't kill people. Nails guns do.
But hey, what a way to go.. Better than being stabbed by a drunked 16 year old anyway.
But yeah, bloody hell that's horrendous..
But yeah, bloody hell that's horrendous..
That must have been a nail-biting experience.
Amd no one has came up with easiest one 'he got nailed'
A nail gun though, nasty, lethal weapons in the wrong hands which is shown well in that article.
A nail gun though, nasty, lethal weapons in the wrong hands which is shown well in that article.
So, what, all you gun banning freaks want to ban nail guns now? If it were a regular hand gun, you all would be crying how they should be outlawed.
owch thats an easy pun
" it was a nail gun, theirs no doubting that "
well...
you try manually nailing 34 nails into a guys head...
Saw this in the news too, dats like ... WTF 
Another distasteful joke: I heard the guy never flinched or winced throughout the whole experience. He must be hard as...
wow, defensive much.
I think he hit the nail on the head.
The primary purpose of nail guns is to put nails into surfaces. The primary purpose of a hand gun is to shoot people.
Ouch, man this worls is getting more messed up as days go on.....
But nails get hammered
I think the primary use for most guns is intimidation. Their secondary purpose is for reassurance of the person carrying it that they are in control of whatever situation they find themself in. Their tertiary purpose is to kill people.
It's the same with all weapons, I actually find people holding weapons less intimidating because they are not expecting violence because of their faith in the power of their weapon, facing a weapon be it a knife or a gun is no different to facing somebody who makes threats, it's all about bark and not bite.
The more deadly the weapon the less likely the person holding it is to use it, as it's not easy to pull a trigger when somebodies head is on the other end of the barrel, it takes quite low self esteem to kill somebody, you have to believe your life is already worthless and that you cannot be saved.
Guns are just a substitute for self confidence.
Banning anything like that ... Its so pointless.
If u think a bit, of course ... those freaks dont choose theyr weapon - they use everything what they have in reach of theyr hand. So, they gotta ban all the screwdivers, remote controls, batteries or what ever? Almost every item in the world is usable for taking life. Thats just so stupid if they would ban this. Now they kinda think that everybody will use this as theyr murder weapon? Whah ...
If u think a bit, of course ... those freaks dont choose theyr weapon - they use everything what they have in reach of theyr hand. So, they gotta ban all the screwdivers, remote controls, batteries or what ever? Almost every item in the world is usable for taking life. Thats just so stupid if they would ban this. Now they kinda think that everybody will use this as theyr murder weapon? Whah ...
I disagree, logic only comes into it in a situation where everyone is perfectly clear-headed. In a confrontation when both sides are pumped up on adrenaline, people do stupid things without thinking. Any kind of weapons up the ante to a ridiculous degree, so that when someone lashes out, instead of a bloody nose or bruise, someone gets a bullet in their face or a knife in their ribs.
Violence is not logical and on this point I completely agree, but in regards to intent to injure or kill I am not in complete agreement.
I think it's a question of the personalisation of an attack. In an impersonal situation such as being mugged or unfortunate enough to be in the vicinity of an armed robbery, weapons are almost exclusively for intimidation. I have never feared weapons in an impersonal confrontation.
In a personal confrontation I think the scenario you describe is more likely to occur, though last year an old friend of my ex was killed by her boyfriend, shot several times with a pistol, but it was the second attempt he had made on her life and clearly was premeditated (she was in hiding from him at the time).
So whilst I accept your point of view as being in part accurate, I still hold that the majority of the time the decision to injur or kill is a conscious one and does not relate to the presence of a weapon. Weapons don't kill, people do.
Whilst death can result in the heat of the moment decision, such as self defence, it is still a conscious decsion to cross the line. There is a gulf between causing harm and causing death, and you don't cross it accidentally. You can cross it unwillingly, but not by accident.
The conscious decision to cross the line occurs when you leave the house carrying said weapon.
It really doesnt, you are referring to premeditated murder, and even then i'd argue that somebody setting out to murder will pause for thought before the final act, atleast for the first time.
In most cases however people carry weapons for the reassurance of having them to hand if things get ugly, and have not thought as far ahead as actually pulling the trigger.
Does a policeman starting his shift intend to kill somebody today? Does he close his front door and think, "Today is a fine day to shoot up some druggies" ?
I agree that carrying an offensive weapon is a very pointless exercise, and in principle i'm more or less on the same hymn sheet as you. However my feeling is that weapons themselves are little more than comfort blankets for the socially innept.
My thoughts exactly.
People these days seem to carry these kind of items without necessarily having the intention to hurt someone, or more importantly, the bottle to use them at all.
These individuals seem carry such things as a status symbol, or even as some kind of warped fashion statement in some cases, as they seem to think that it makes them look 'tough' or 'cool' being all tooled up.
It doesnt, well, not really.
Yes, it would put the shitters up me if someone was waving a blade or the barrel of a gun in my face, fair enough, as it would anyone, as they obviously have the upper hand against an unarmed person.
However, in reality the aforementioned person carrying the weapon would in fact be the total opposite of tough to be honest if he or she needs a weapon of some kind to fight their battle for them.
It was an accident! :hide:
1
2
Man shot 34 times with nail gun!
(40 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG