TexasCHLforum.com

In the Grand Rapids, Michigan, area, in July, some machine-gun enthusiasts had what the newspaper describes as a "demonstration" of machine guns. The police signed off on the safety of the range.

Later, residents up to a mile away reported having their houses and vehicles hit by .50-caliber machine-gun bullets.

Two men, one of them a county commissioner, have been charged with misdemeanor negligence.

Newspapers often misuse the term machine gun, but this was the real thing.

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/ ... _kent.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/ ... ean_3.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

- Jim

I question that this article was written by a "real journalist". The term "assault weapon" wasn't used even once.

Isn't that ironic?

You could e-mail the writer or leave a comment on the web site. BTW, some of the comments are bizarre. I don't know what kind of moonshine they brew around there.

- Jim

They were using woods as their backstop???



What's sad is that a number of people thought that was a good idea.

Those retards need the book thrown at them.... ignorance like that is just the ammunition the Brady Bunch needs. Right out of the hat an NRA member makes the statement that "guns like that" should be locked up. You see folks, the problem is that the majority of gun owners are hunters and many of them feel there is no "need" in having ____-gun (insert any weapon not used by the hunter to hunt with). Then along comes sir stupid with his over priced toys and with his rich friends, they make us all look bad.

I have to stop there or I am going to get offensive.

Actually I don't have as much issue with the gun enthusiasts as I do with the police that signed off on the event.

That's kinda what I was wondering. How could they have signed off on this without a proper backstop? I wonder if any of those that did sign off on that will be held responsible for anything?

Agee said he and Rinzler did not believe the gun's bullets could escape the wooded area into which they were shooting. The thick woods and a ridge behind it should have stopped the bullets, he said.

They may have had a sufficient natural backstop for shooting horizontally. Bullets landing a mile or two away suggest to me that the gun had some elevation when fired.

Somebody else is going to have to do the math.

In any case, stupid is as stupid does, and these guys should be down on their knees giving thanks that they're not facing manslaughter charges.

- Jim

CompVest wrote:Actually I don't have as much issue with the gun enthusiasts as I do with the police that signed off on the event.

I didn't think about it but your RIGHT...what the heck is that all about? The police had reports of stray bullets already and they did not check for the back stop at that point. Wow....there is plenty of dumb to go around on this one.

I just hate it when stuff like this happens because it threatens all of us. The last thing we need is one more issue for the anti gun crowd to pump out of shape....one more time...

Considering the strict requirements for NFA weapons, which make getting a CHL seem like getting a library card, it is distressing.

Fortunately no one got hurt and it was in the middle of nowhere.

- Jim

I am glad no one was hurt, and I wonder about the person who owned the .50 cal shooting it like that. I gathered from the one story that they thought they had adequate backstop (it did mention a ridgeline also besides just the woods). Most people would think of the lower powered rifle and pistol rounds being stopped by the woods, but the50 cal owner should have known it needs a beter backstop.

As for the deputies, I think this just shows that the average cop is not a gun enthusiast and doesn't know enough for things like this. He probably thought about his pistols and rifles and the backstop was adequate for them.

Without knowing the local laws, I have to wonder if it is negligent to fire a weapon at a range after the local police have cleared it and said it was safe. It seems to me that this would provide proof that even a negligent mental state was not there, but I based that on Texas law.

I don't buy the idea that the police can relieve a person of legal or moral responsibility.

Every range has backstops or berms that are maybe 20 to 40 feet high at most. If someone shoots over the berm, particularly with a rifle, that bullet is going to land a mile away or more.

Few ranges have no development within a mile. Obviously this one was in such an environment.

- Jim

There was case within the last year or 2 where a woman was relaxing in her
RV parked on the Texas Motor Speedway property in Fort Worth when a .50 round came through
the side of her RV and struck her in the arm.

Scary, yes, but apparently most of the bullet's energy was spent by the time it hit her.

Unbelievably, they found the shooter. He had shot 6 rounds and thought they were all
going in a safe direction - he was 5/6 correct.

SIA

I grew up about 60 miles from there and my Dad had a deer hunting camp maybe 30 miles NE of there. The wood are very thick, thicker than anything you find in Texas although some places in East Texas might come close. On the other hand, there is no such thing as a "ridge line" in that part of Michigan. Rolling hills, yes, ridge line, no. So maybe they had a 100 foot hill in or beyond the woods. And while it is rural, there are a lot of people still living in the area. I don't think you can deer hunt with a rifle in Kent County for that reason. This was not good range management by any standard.

Charges were dropped after the shooter paid for the damage and apologized.

http://www.wwmt.com/articles/kent-13664 ... s-0in.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That guy is really lucky that he didn't hit a person.

- Jim