Yup, dog apparently steps on a shotgun blasting a hole in the side of boat and injures hunter.

A Tillamook man sustained a leg injury when his 12-gauge shotgun accidentally discharged during a duck-­hunting trip on Tillamook Bay, and his dog is the prime suspect.

Matthew Markum, 23, and his younger brother were using an aluminum boat to go from land to their decoys Saturday morning. When the men left the boat, a shotgun blast put a hole in the side of the boat before striking Markum’s leg, said Oregon State Police Sgt. Todd Hoodenpyl.

Anybody with a news report of a life saved via use of gun against a thug, post it here.

From the Register-Guard:

BEND — A horse found wandering in the Three Sisters Wilderness area after it was shot and wounded is getting a new home.

The 6-year-old Arab gelding named Nikko was one of about three dozen horses that belong to Camp Tamarack near Sisters before it was shot in the head last month.

A former camp employee, Russell Daniel Willeford, 27, of Banks, is facing animal abuse charges in the shooting.

Ok, ok, what kind of a person shoots a horse in the head? Accidential?

I know I'm piling it on here, but I want to know more -- was it a hand gun, did he have a permit? Hmm?

We'd better outlaw dogs.

Here's the whole story not just part of it to demonize guns.

PORTLAND, Ore. — Henry Marcum has nothing but kind words for the dog that shot his 23-year-old son this weekend.

Marcum says his son, Matthew, was standing in Tillamook Bay at the start of duck-hunting trip when his dog jumped into the boat, setting off a 12-gauge shotgun.

The blast blew a hole in the aluminum boat before hitting Marcum, who is recovering from injuries to his legs and buttocks at Portland's Legacy Emanuel Hospital.

Henry Marcum says he's not angry with the dog, and neither is his son.

The elder Marcum says the Labrador named Drake is a good dog and the shooting is "just one of those things."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,456546,00.html

Skep,

Definitely NOT accidental!

Here's the whole story, this jerk used a 9mm to shoot Nikko in the head and left him to die.

http://www.pet-abuse.com/profiles/14850/

http://www.nuggetnews.com/main.asp?SectionID=5&SubSectionID=5&ArticleID=15134&TM =8918.692

I say shoot him in the head and leave him to die.

No excuse for a waste of skin like that.

When I lived in St. Louis, there was a place called Grant's Farm (it really was Ulysses Grant's farm) and it is/was where Budweiser kept their Clydesdales.

Someone came along one night and shot and killed 2 or 3 of them. I don't remember if they ever caught them, but I say we should put them in a field and let others take shots at them!

Skep, Here's one; I've posted this one before)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NJQK2BscIg

I'll gladly find more tomorrow.

Another former law abiding gun owner.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27874881/

Another former law abiding gun owner.

Please show me where in the article it says he was a law abiding gun owner and obtained his gun legally.

Oooops. Can't do that now, can you.

Maybe I'll start posting about "Former Law Abiding Drivers" every time there is someone killed by a drunk driver.

And unlike driving, gun ownership is protected by the constitution.

Lets see who racks up more deaths.

Guns are just an easy target for the libs.

Just like you, every gun owner claims to be law abiding.

Please don't put words in my mouth (or on my screen as the case may be).

I've never said that all gun owners are law abiding.

What I dispute with your line of thinking is that all gun owners are whackos.

There are many idiots that own guns.

EDIT ADD: And there are many idiots that have guns but shouldn't.

The other point I try to make is that if the morons in the court system would just ENFORCE the existing laws on the books, there would be no need for new laws.

Even as a CCP holder, I can't go waving my firearm around in public. In fact, the LAST thing I want to do is to draw it.

I'd rather avoid any situation or place where the need might arise.

I think you'll find that most gun owners feel the same way.

Now, that being said, I don't consider the crack heads and the gang bangers to be "gun owners".

Sure, they might "own" a gun, but there is a 99.99% chance they stole it or bought it from someone who stole it.

They don't count and they should spend the rest of their life in jail if they (or anyone) uses a firearm in the commission of a crime.

Don't assume they're all crackheads and gangbangers. Many of them are normal red blooded Americans until they have a bad day or make a bad choice.

Bill, you had to go Missouri to find a self defense gun story. I guess I wasn't clear, but we're tallying incidents occuring around here and I was hoping there are positive stories around here as well. If we want to go nationwide with gun-gone-haywire stories, we'll overload Dan's server again.

But I agree with you about DWI-related deaths. I'm more pissed about that than haywire guns. We have a 9/11 every THREE WEEKS in the DWI-related death dept. I've brought this up in this forum at least a half a dozen times and raised hardly an eyebrow (from either the pro or con gun people).

Anyway, back to guns . . . there was an "accidential" shooting yesterday up north . . . in the reserves or something.

http://crass.on.ru/flash/aaa-1.html

LOL!

Perhaps this explains how the Americans shot down the Iranian jetliner some years back.

Here is an interesting article/forum that talks about the terrorists in India and Plaxico Burress' arrest.

http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/12/02/jlott_guncontrol/

It makes some good points.

Remember, when seconds count, the police are only minutes away!

India has way more people than the US. So how many Indians died from guns last year compared to the US? Wanna make a bet that the US outpaced India by an incredible margin?

As for Burress, it appears to me he would have been safer without a gun. Get a bodyguard if you don't feel safe.

This fantasy world that the gun lobby lives in where everyone is armed would do nothing but lead to more deaths by guns, not less, since there would be more accidents and more idiots with the capability to kill someone on the spot.

He was a complete fool to carry a gun. Didn't know how to use it either. Double fool.

If he did know how to use it, he would not have shot himself. And protection would have been cheap ass compared to the losses he will suffer over this. Suspended season of play, loss of potential, lost endorsements.

Idiot.

And as for the gun owners are whackos, my beef is that there are simply too many of them that are. Makes the rest look bad. That's harsh, but that is how it is.

Instead of pushing back on that, why not push toward the common goal of gun safety and good norms. Education and increased controls will diminish the problem.

If it's hard to get guns, hard to move guns and hard to use guns, then there will be fewer idiots, morons and whackos with them available. This will take a while, but it will absolutely happen.

Wouldn't hurt to set some norms surrounding, "just why do you need a gun anyway?" Way too many answers to that question don't make a whole lot of sense.

They should make sense, or people should question. It's that simple.

"Wouldn't hurt to set some norms surrounding, 'just why do you need a gun anyway?'"

Gentlemen, I believe it's the Bill of Rights not the Bill of Needs.

Exactly!

There is no question about just having a gun because you want one. That isn't a defense for doing stupid stuff with it, and that's the point of the question.

Just because a thing can be done, doesn't mean it should.