A Texas man accidentally shot a child while officiating a wedding in Lancaster County on Saturday, the sheriff’s office says.

Chief Deputy Ben Houchin said deputies were sent to a wedding at Hillside Events near Denton on a report of a gunshot wound.

Deputies learned that 62-year-old Michael Gardner, the wedding’s officiant, fired a gun to get everyone’s attention.

“He was going to fire in the air, and as he did that, it slipped and went off,” Houchin said.

The gun was loaded with a blank that Gardner made with gunpowder and glue.

      • jackoneill@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Someone who makes their own blank and whips it out at a wedding near a child simply to get folks attention is so fucking dumb he’d find a way to hurt himself with his dinner fork

        The issue isn’t the tool, it’s the retard wielding it

          • jackoneill@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            The child didn’t die in this case, but yeah I think someone this dumb could easily have some similar damage with something more innocuous

            That’s not really the point though…. Guy like this should never have passed certification process to get a gun if we had proper controls in place. Something that I always argue for but because I’m arguing for good testing and controls and limits rather than outright banning and forcible confiscation all the privileged folks that have never had to defend their families come out of the woodwork to shit in my face, every time

            • Nudding@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              If you keep getting shit on, maybe stop acting like a toilet. Idk man every other country in the world figured it out, the US isn’t as special as you’re all taught it is. I’m all about sensible gun controls as well.

      • Nudding@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The problem is that gun companies have convinced half the population of a country that owning a gun is a “God given right” which is a fucking weird concept to begin with lol.

      • jackoneill@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah 100% if you want to own a class of gun (say a revolver) you should have to take a class on that specific type of gun and pass a written and practical test, and renew this regularly. Want a different type of gun? Better go take that class and pass that test.

        Rabid anti gun folks are just as bad as the rabid pro gun folks, but the regular ass folks in the middle all seem to agree that strong controls on who can purchase the dangerous tool is the most reasonable solution

        But this is lemmy, basically Reddit but more intense. I fully expect the folks here to be rabid anti gun without any rationale arguments for that stance

        • NotAnonymousAtAll@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Your comment seems needlessly inflammatory, almost aggressive. I did not vote on it at all, but I would not be surprised if the downvotes you received were mostly because of that and not due to disagreement with your points.

          • jackoneill@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah my bad. I’m tired of every single time a fun in mentioned seeing “just get rid of all of them it’s so easy” then when I reply with reasonable solutions, get shit on. Just tired of it. Shouldn’t have bothered to comment on this thread in the first place

            Copy pasted for like the 6th time now:

            Yeah 100% if you want to own a class of gun (say a revolver) you should have to take a class on that specific type of gun and pass a written and practical test, and renew this regularly. Want a different type of gun? Better go take that class and pass that test.

            Rabid anti gun folks are just as bad as the rabid pro gun folks, but the regular ass folks in the middle all seem to agree that strong controls on who can purchase the dangerous tool is the most reasonable solution

            But this is lemmy, basically Reddit but more intense. I fully expect the folks here to be rabid anti gun without any rationale arguments for that stance

      • Omega@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’d think the “don’t ban guns” people would be all for registration and background checks. After all, guns aren’t the problem, people are.

        • yeather@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m all for background checks, even mandatory safety classes, it’s the random banning of features that gets me. Banning firearms because they have a pistol grip or more than 10 round magazines makes no sense. The problem is most people who think like this get lumped in with the crazies.

          • PapaStevesy@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            If they actually out-and-out banned anything, I’m sure it was for monetary reasons, not for health and safety. But idk, it seems like a small price to pay, you still get to feel like John Wayne whenever you want. Sorry you can’t really fuck up that paper target like you want, but don’t worry, it’s dead.

            • yeather@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              The second amendment wasn’t made for plinking, hunting, or home defense. It was made to allow the common citizen to defend their rights by force against the government. In which case you should have every feature you can afford available to you.

              • Nudding@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                No. It wasn’t. I’ve seen you say this more than once in this thread. The right to bear arms was intended to defend the US against a foreign military, as the founding fathers did not want a standing army. Obviously that was retarded, but they were a bunch of rich slave owning assholes, so maybe you need a new set of guiding principles.