Sheldon Pettibone, public FB photo, posted 2018.04.19
Public Information Officer Sam Clemens says the Sheldon Pettibone was cleaning a gun when it went off, striking a woman in the leg. She was taken to a Sioux Falls hospital for treatment.
…KSFY News has learned from Melanie Pettibone’s sister and a family friend that Pettibone was nearly 20 weeks pregnant and lost her baby after the accidental shooting.
We’re told by a family friend that the bullet went through her leg, into her stomach where it traveled through her uterus and intestines striking the baby [“Woman Loses Unborn Baby After Accidental Shooting,” KSFY, 2019.10.15].
People who mistakenly hold absolute the right to bear arms and mistakenly hold absolute the beginning of personhood at conception will have trouble reconciling their worship of guns and fetuses in this case. Do they shrug off the fetus and accept this loss as the price of Freedom™, or do they demand we up the charges from negligent discharge of a firearm to second-degree murder… and charge the mother for child endangerment for walking into a room where a knucklehead was fooling around with a loaded firearm?
Holy cow, Tom! The guy fires his weapon in public, endangering public safety, and he’s allowed to keep his guns? Now ten months later, he injures his wife and aborts her pregnancy—do we still allow him to handle firearms?
No such thing as an accidental shooting: perhaps we should hold every who handles a gun to that legal standard. Should we raise the stakes of gun possession: sure, you can bear an arm, but if someone is killed by the discharge of that arm, you will be prosecuted for murder. It seems that tougher legal standard wouldn’t infringe the Second Amendment at all; it would just hold people accountable for recklessly misusing their Second Amendment rights.
Realist
2019-10-16 12:53
Cory – I like the theory you are proposing – i.e. not directly infringing on rights. But under your hypothetical, people who are learning firearm safety (at a range or hunter safety course) would be charged with murder if someone was killed while at that course. There are instances of people trying to actually learn firearm safety harm others or themselves. If this avenue is pursued, it may dissuade from actually learning firearm safety in the first place.
mike from iowa
2019-10-16 12:57
Curious as to why report does not list her as Pettibone’s wife or significant other. I thought she was a stray woman in the wrong place whenever a firearm is mishandled.
Of courser with such a careless ammosexual Gomer, it might be best not to be known as an acquaintance of a nutjob with a gun.
Porter Lansing
2019-10-16 14:24
I don’t know what Catholic influenced personhood laws South Dakota has unconstitutionally dreamed up but the New American Standard Bible (NASB) renders Exodus 21:22-25 this way:
[And if men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no [further] injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband may demand of him; and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any [further] injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.]
~ This translation clearly states that if a miscarriage takes place and the fetus is lost, the antagonists are simply fined, but if the mother dies in the scuffle, then the penalty is “life for life.”
~ On this basis it is concluded that the fetus was not considered a soul or a person, and thus is not to be thought of as fully human.
*I’m kinda glad that Kurt Evans isn’t around because no one here wants to read as I successfully argue this issue with him, again.
Eve Fisher
2019-10-16 16:20
Nice to know that in South Dakota, you can keep your guns no matter who you shoot – including your own wife and unborn child. Of course, I’m fairly certain that if he were Native American, he’d be in jail and up on serious charges.
Realist, it’s only a quarter-baked idea, but I’d be intrigued to hear policymakers and gun safety instructors explore it. Imagine showing up for gun safety instruction and hearing the instructor say this:
“Welcome to class. On the table in front of you is the gun you will use throughout this training. You are 100% responsible for everything that happens to that gun and because of that gun while you are enrolled in this course. If a round from your gun hits any person or property other than the designated target or the barrier behind it, you will be charged with with a felony. If a round from that gun kills another person, you will be tried for murder. If you are sure you are responsible enough to prevent any such bad outcome from occurring, you may step forward and begin the course. If you cannot accept that responsibility, do not touch that gun or any other gun; turn around and walk out.”
Would that be an unreasonable beginning to a gun safety course?
Second degree manslaughter is based on a human dying. A fetus isn’t a human. Case closed!
~ Manslaughter in the Second Degree is what is referred to as a “Reckless Homicide.” What this means is that the prosecutor is not required to prove that the person actually intended to kill anyone, they just need to establish that the person’s conduct was so reckless that they knew, or should have known, that their actions caused a substantial risk of death, they acted anyway, and their actions led to a person dying. https://www.jeffreylichtman.com/manslaughter-in-the-second-degree.html
Porter, I encourage the defense to put that argument to work and take it to the Supreme Court.
Porter Lansing
2019-10-16 19:54
We both know it’s the Catholic Church that will be demanding that a fetus is a human and they’ve got a big pile of tax exempt money to fight a public defender, if that’s all this kid can afford. ACLU, maybe?
Debbo
2019-10-17 00:01
Porter, that big pile of RCC $ is dough they “protected” from going to children and women they molested, raped, abused, etc. 🤬🤬🤬
RCC has to have as many fetuses produced as possible–> more future victims.
Ryan
2019-10-17 16:52
porter hilariously uses new york law as a way to make his argument about a crime in the state of south dakota. How about you just spend thirty seconds on the internet and see how south dakota defines second degree manslaughter:
“SDCL 22-16-20. Manslaughter in the second degree. Any reckless killing of one human being, including an unborn child, by the act or procurement of another which, under the provisions of this chapter, is neither murder nor manslaughter in the first degree, nor excusable nor justifiable homicide, is manslaughter in the second degree. Manslaughter in the second degree is a Class 4 felony.”
Porter Lansing
2019-10-17 17:06
Since there’s no entity as an unborn child, I posted a constitutional law. What do you know about law, Ry baby?
Ryan
2019-10-17 19:55
You posted a link about a new york state law, pooter. There’s nothing about manslaughter or when a fetus becomes a human in the constitution, genius. Apparently I know a lot more about the constitution than you. States can determine for themselves what is manslaughter, and south dakotans apparently believe that a dead fetus can be a victim of manslaughter. You know how I know? It’s in the law I quoted for you. And not a law from somewhere else, a law that actually applies here, babe.
Not his first wild shooting incident. Should this guy have access to guns? Or does he have to kill someone else? [Read the January 7, 2019 news story in that Sioux Falls paper here.]
Sorry. There is no such thing as an “Accidental “ shooting.
Through the leg and into the stomach…magic bullet?
Holy cow, Tom! The guy fires his weapon in public, endangering public safety, and he’s allowed to keep his guns? Now ten months later, he injures his wife and aborts her pregnancy—do we still allow him to handle firearms?
No such thing as an accidental shooting: perhaps we should hold every who handles a gun to that legal standard. Should we raise the stakes of gun possession: sure, you can bear an arm, but if someone is killed by the discharge of that arm, you will be prosecuted for murder. It seems that tougher legal standard wouldn’t infringe the Second Amendment at all; it would just hold people accountable for recklessly misusing their Second Amendment rights.
Cory – I like the theory you are proposing – i.e. not directly infringing on rights. But under your hypothetical, people who are learning firearm safety (at a range or hunter safety course) would be charged with murder if someone was killed while at that course. There are instances of people trying to actually learn firearm safety harm others or themselves. If this avenue is pursued, it may dissuade from actually learning firearm safety in the first place.
Curious as to why report does not list her as Pettibone’s wife or significant other. I thought she was a stray woman in the wrong place whenever a firearm is mishandled.
Of courser with such a careless ammosexual Gomer, it might be best not to be known as an acquaintance of a nutjob with a gun.
I don’t know what Catholic influenced personhood laws South Dakota has unconstitutionally dreamed up but the New American Standard Bible (NASB) renders Exodus 21:22-25 this way:
[And if men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no [further] injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband may demand of him; and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any [further] injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.]
~ This translation clearly states that if a miscarriage takes place and the fetus is lost, the antagonists are simply fined, but if the mother dies in the scuffle, then the penalty is “life for life.”
~ On this basis it is concluded that the fetus was not considered a soul or a person, and thus is not to be thought of as fully human.
*I’m kinda glad that Kurt Evans isn’t around because no one here wants to read as I successfully argue this issue with him, again.
Nice to know that in South Dakota, you can keep your guns no matter who you shoot – including your own wife and unborn child. Of course, I’m fairly certain that if he were Native American, he’d be in jail and up on serious charges.
Realist, it’s only a quarter-baked idea, but I’d be intrigued to hear policymakers and gun safety instructors explore it. Imagine showing up for gun safety instruction and hearing the instructor say this:
“Welcome to class. On the table in front of you is the gun you will use throughout this training. You are 100% responsible for everything that happens to that gun and because of that gun while you are enrolled in this course. If a round from your gun hits any person or property other than the designated target or the barrier behind it, you will be charged with with a felony. If a round from that gun kills another person, you will be tried for murder. If you are sure you are responsible enough to prevent any such bad outcome from occurring, you may step forward and begin the course. If you cannot accept that responsibility, do not touch that gun or any other gun; turn around and walk out.”
Would that be an unreasonable beginning to a gun safety course?
Mike, the KELO Radio report identified them as married.
The authorities have upped the charge to second-degree manslaughter.
Second degree manslaughter is based on a human dying. A fetus isn’t a human. Case closed!
~ Manslaughter in the Second Degree is what is referred to as a “Reckless Homicide.” What this means is that the prosecutor is not required to prove that the person actually intended to kill anyone, they just need to establish that the person’s conduct was so reckless that they knew, or should have known, that their actions caused a substantial risk of death, they acted anyway, and their actions led to a person dying.
https://www.jeffreylichtman.com/manslaughter-in-the-second-degree.html
Porter, I encourage the defense to put that argument to work and take it to the Supreme Court.
We both know it’s the Catholic Church that will be demanding that a fetus is a human and they’ve got a big pile of tax exempt money to fight a public defender, if that’s all this kid can afford. ACLU, maybe?
Porter, that big pile of RCC $ is dough they “protected” from going to children and women they molested, raped, abused, etc. 🤬🤬🤬
RCC has to have as many fetuses produced as possible–> more future victims.
porter hilariously uses new york law as a way to make his argument about a crime in the state of south dakota. How about you just spend thirty seconds on the internet and see how south dakota defines second degree manslaughter:
“SDCL 22-16-20. Manslaughter in the second degree. Any reckless killing of one human being, including an unborn child, by the act or procurement of another which, under the provisions of this chapter, is neither murder nor manslaughter in the first degree, nor excusable nor justifiable homicide, is manslaughter in the second degree. Manslaughter in the second degree is a Class 4 felony.”
Since there’s no entity as an unborn child, I posted a constitutional law. What do you know about law, Ry baby?
You posted a link about a new york state law, pooter. There’s nothing about manslaughter or when a fetus becomes a human in the constitution, genius. Apparently I know a lot more about the constitution than you. States can determine for themselves what is manslaughter, and south dakotans apparently believe that a dead fetus can be a victim of manslaughter. You know how I know? It’s in the law I quoted for you. And not a law from somewhere else, a law that actually applies here, babe.