digg

Join DiggAbout

Introducing Digg Dialogg!
Check out the first Digg Dialogg with Nancy Pelosi. More guests to be announced soon!

Man drilling hole in wall with gun, shoots and kills wife.

kctv5.com — A Missouri man trying to install satellite TV at his house by drilling a hole in the wall with rounds fired from a .22 caliber handgun shoots his wife. As it turns out, sometimes Darwin's law is as ineffective as the justice system at getting the right man.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • SuperWinner, on 03/29/2008, -7/+592Hell I built my last house with nothing but a shotgun and some nails.
    • 10lbhammer, on 03/29/2008, -2/+71the right tool for the right job!
      • jackyyll, on 03/29/2008, -15/+4Buried as inaccurate, he was clearly shooting a hole in the wall, not drilling :p
    • doctechnical, on 03/29/2008, -0/+64Everybody knows the first salad shooter was a Colt .45.
    • unreg, on 03/29/2008, -13/+8Darwin shoots and misses
    • sjl127, on 03/29/2008, -50/+4Just making digg now? Are you diggbots high, or something?
      • caketank, on 03/29/2008, -3/+59"You diggbots"? You've had an account here for over a year, submitted over 130 stories, dugg over 850 stories and posted almost as many comments. Who are you kidding?
      • daizy82683, on 03/29/2008, -1/+6yes, I am high.
    • imikedaman, on 03/29/2008, -8/+24Wouldn't a house made of shotguns and nails be drafty in the winter? :(
      • TrainingName, on 03/30/2008, -1/+1Not to mention if this house collapses.
        Ouch.
    • Mootabolife, on 03/29/2008, -1/+99I used c4 to make my basement. How was I supposed to know you couldn't add a basement to an apt building?
    • gquaglia, on 03/29/2008, -2/+61Its known as the white trash drill bit.
    • inodes, on 03/29/2008, -2/+54The real question is did the wire fit thru the hole?
      • transitive, on 03/29/2008, -1/+9better question is this: do they have satellite TV in hell?

        Of course not! Its hell! Only basic cable!
        • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -0/+12Doomed to watch the Tyra banks channel for all eternity.
    • lamiaconfitor, on 03/29/2008, -27/+5Is anyone else disturbed that you are joking about this... according to the digg count, no. Well, I iguess this will get dugg down then.
      • Troy64, on 03/29/2008, -0/+14Some things even tragic things are so stupid it is hard not to make a joke.

        What happened to this lady was terrible and I am sure her husband will never get over it.
        • ThndrShk2k, on 03/29/2008, -0/+14At least he has high definition television now to distract him from it.
      • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -1/+3Boohoo, are you happy now.
        Buried.
      • scarper86, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3Tragedy and comedy are not mutually exclusive.
    • Ataxia2008, on 03/29/2008, -1/+25The article doesn't mention the important things, such as whether he got the satellite TV working?
    • h4mx0r, on 03/29/2008, -1/+7This reminds me of that one commercial where someone is trying to paint his house with a paintball gun
      • sephiroth965, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2"You're gonna paint your house with explosives? That's crazy." -Mythbusters
      • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -0/+4Thats probably where he got the idea. I say we ban commercials immediatly.
    • nerd1701, on 03/29/2008, -0/+15Funny thing is that there is a tool that uses a 22 cartridge (without the bullet) to fire a nail into concrete. It's used to secure internal walls to the floors in basements and slab foundations.
      • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -3/+2The glorious nail gun. Handy as *****, but they things scare the ***** out of me ever since I saw some guy on tv who shot himself up the nose and didnt even know it.
      • Nichevo, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3Hilti and Ramset make powder actuated fasteners. I am pretty sure that none of them will properly chamber an actual .22 round. (I tried it on a ramset once, just a little too small to accept a .22, likely on purpose).
    • Wakuko, on 03/29/2008, -1/+0Three bullets where fired and only two holes found...
    • timusca, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1BOOM Headshot!
    • herecomes, on 03/30/2008, -2/+2Most importantly, was it a *legally purchased* handgun? Because if not, this just proves the point that if guns are outlawed then only outlaws will accidentally kill their wives while trying to use them to install satellite TV.
    • theodenking, on 03/30/2008, -0/+5Does this qualify for a Darwin award? I mean he must be pretty much out of the gene pool now; nobody else is going to marry him.
  • Acidsniper, on 03/29/2008, -42/+19Where's the picture of the neighbor with the I'm with stupid shirt, mullet and budweiser in hand??
  • ballblogs, on 03/29/2008, -2/+464I'm sure we've all thought, "why pay for installation of a satellite system when I've got this perfectly good handgun."
    • 2bees, on 03/29/2008, -5/+13"A Missouri man trying to install satellite TV at his house by drilling a hole in the wall with rounds fired from a .22 caliber handgun shoots his wife"

      Yep that's excuse I'd make.
    • akkibaba, on 03/29/2008, -7/+3I expect you to pay for the coffee I snorted out of my nose onto my monitors, sir. This comment has too much win packed into it to be street legal.
    • mGARANDEUR1, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3I would think that at least he would be charged with discharging a firearm in an unsafe location.
  • DrivebyGroper, on 03/29/2008, -7/+162Man, all this time I've just been kicking things when I get frustrated. Clearly I'm a noob.
  • Zlorp, on 03/29/2008, -7/+236me thinks he'll pay the 50 dollar installation charge next time.
    • dafragsta, on 03/29/2008, -1/+103That's beer money.
    • 955701, on 03/29/2008, -0/+35Perhaps it was his wife that nagged him about the $50 installation charge last time.
    • DoTheFandango, on 03/29/2008, -0/+10Me thinks they don't have satellite TV in jail.
    • evan2024, on 03/29/2008, -2/+10'Methinks' is one word.
  • darlingt, on 03/29/2008, -21/+14Stupid guy. He should have known that those bullets were for the other side of the house.
    • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2I got it, but I guess no one else did.
      Lol.
  • eelgrassman, on 03/29/2008, -27/+16That's Missouri for you...
    • DuneChild, on 03/29/2008, -5/+4No, that's RURAL Missouri for you. Smarter people exist in the cities. Not sayin' they're all smart, but there are smarter people there.
    • zyryx, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2funny, I was sure this was going to be a texas story...
  • Gabberwok, on 03/29/2008, -41/+140I know that everyone on Digg is against gun control, but honestly, do you really want someone this stupid to own firearms?
    • joeanon, on 03/29/2008, -84/+8It takes mostly stupid people to form an army or militia. People obsessed with guns, explosions, killing and dying for national pride.

      We don't really expect nor want the intellectuals to fight our wars. Even the draft skipped teachers and such.

      Sad, but perfectly true. It's a small price to pay overall .. for us. Obviously he should be held accountable for manslaughter or at least some gross neglect charge. That and publicity should be good enough to continue handgun safety awareness.

      You might also consider the woman he killed was working in food service, not exactly contributing to society.

      So, it's not a good case for gun control really. In my opinion, you can't stop stupidity like this. You can limit violence though and that's the best argument for gun control I suppose.

      I see no practical or legal way of pushing gun control, so, give it up. Maybe offer more mandatory gun ownership classes or such.

      We ONLY have the right to bear arms in reference to a 'well regulated militia". It's meant primarily as a secondary army and defense to military coupe not for home invasion protection as most think.

      Look at the insurgency in Iraq, it sucks, but the US can't defeat an armed public that's willing to fight. While I don't expect an invasion, it may be smart to just accept random gun deaths and stick to the original plan of empower the public.

      Statistically though it will always look bad because we aren't being invaded. The most likely use of a handgun is to kill yourself or a family member. BUT, that's coming from a nation that hasn't faced a war on the home front since the civil war. Of course, that entire war could be an argument for gun control I suppose as it was pretty dumb and the south could never have perpetuated slavery no matter how much they killed their fellow Americans. The global trend was obviously to fade out slavery. The south was just being stubborn to not accept the civility of their own modern times and push for the traditional imperial force. They, like the citizens today, did not see the clear future, that the slavery they induced on people would grow into the same mindset that oppressed them and made the flee their homelands.

      Still, the founding fathers lived in a time of great oppression. A time that has never come again, though Hitler may have tried. They could see that gun ownership overall provided national security more than it threatened it. Many will say, that's a different time, but are you suggesting that in just 200 years mankind has evolved enough to not oppress and murder ?

      Humanity hasn't changed that much and neither should the Constitution when it comes to allowing individual freedoms.

      At the very least, we have some incentive for the wealthy to not ruin the working class because no army in the world can hold down an armed, angry public that has official had enough.


      Instead we should just DEMAND people obey the legal and just use of firearms or put them away forever. Severely violent crimes should simply get you put away for 20+ years every time. You knew the law and that's it, there is no excuse for murder or gun violence. Stop locking up drug users and federalize and regulate the drug trade and eliminate the majority of organized crime. Then gun deaths go way down.
      We'll never have an impact on domestic drug use without controlling the supply. However, we could pressure drug users if we were their suppliers and they have incentive to be enrolled in drug programs such as low cost access to their addiction of choice. On top of that offer non addictive drugs for regulated recreational. Lock the addictive drugs into their own category to ONLY be sold to addict. The result will still be cheaper heroin and coke than the public can via the black market get and the majority of drug addict will register. They will sell to a domestic black market, but availability will make gang violence pointless.

      So basically all stays the same, accept crime goes way down and non violent drug users merely need to register, no go to prison. People who don't want to register or who are not addicts can still purchase through the domestic black market, but you'll have to know someone you can't just try heroin or coke out for fun.

      Leave the fun for marijuana and other non or barely addictive drugs. Even LSD is probably safer than the physical addiction, impairment and poison of alcohol.

      It's not as if the intel agencies don't work with the drug suppliers already. Who thinks the CIA has never had a hand in helping one drug cartel while hurting another ? That more idiotic policy that just fuels crime and violence. Just supply your citizens with pharmacy grade well regulate drugs via doctors. DR are the perfect people to manage your addictions anyway and show your the health consequences.

      The only loop hole is demand corporations employ registered drug addicts so that people don't mass avoid registration. If was part of your medical conditions, they would have no right to say no in most cases, but rather judge you on work performance, as they should. In cases, such as bus driver or such, where medical conditions may risk the life of others, you would be forced to reveal your registered status. Just like a background check for gun owners.

      It's pretty ridiculous we are allowed to run wild with firearms using them as drills and such, but we can't smoke pot legally.

      If they found him smoking a joint, they'd certainly know what to charge him with.

      TERRORISM !!!
      • Iconoclast25, on 03/29/2008, -4/+33Apparently you are unaware of the fact the US military has a higher average IQ than the general populace, and of all the branches, the highest is the USMC? HANDDA
        • moonguidex, on 03/29/2008, -27/+6Higher IQ than the regular populace... Reread your comment idiot, then bury me.
          Stupid hicks.

          • cygnus2112, on 03/29/2008, -1/+13"In 1995, the average black enlistee scored at the 59th percentile on the AFTQ (the test used in the Bell Curve), compared to the 14th percentile for non-military black youths. The average white enlistee score at about the 81st percentile, compared to the 61st percentile for the average white young person."
          • moonguidex, on 03/29/2008, -19/+2That is what I meant. Of course any job that requires some skill will have a higher IQ score than a regular, physical job. It is nothing to be proud of.
            Were you trying to be racist with the inclusion of the black percentile results or does it come naturally?
          • ChristaMaria, on 03/29/2008, -3/+4I think he meant you to read it as..."the US military has a higher (average IQ) than the general populace"
            Higher IQ and higher average IQ is not the same thing, nor is general populace and regular populace, but I won’t dwell on the difference to the later as it is minute. Let me explain the difference to you...
            A higher IQ would be simply a score higher than all other scores being compared, yet a higher average IQ would be a score higher than the arithmetic mean of all IQ test.
            The ASVAB test is actually a very complex and lengthy test, it contains nine sections:
            General Science, Arithmetic Reasoning, Word Knowledge, Paragraph Comprehension, Mathematics Knowledge, Electronics Information, Auto & Shop, Mechanical Comprehension and Assembling Objects. Numerical Operations and Coding Speed were administered on ASVAB when I took it back in 2001, but have been since dropped. Your score determines what kind of job you are eligible to train for.
            Also, it should be public not populace. I just used it above to not create confusion.
          • cygnus2112, on 03/29/2008, -0/+15Wow. Just wow. I quoted some other source that compared IQ scores of military versus non-military and I get called a racist. You're completely unhinged.
          • tomgsmyth, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2are you saying somone who has skill has a high iq .... i dont think being skilled implicitly means a person has a high iq. what would make you even say that?
          • Gabberwok, on 03/30/2008, -0/+2The main reason the army has a higher average IQ than the general populace is because they screen their applicants. People with IQs below 70 are not supposed to be enlisted, which immediately bumps up the average. People with high IQs (> 130) may be less likely to enlist, but I suspect we have far more on the low end than on the high end, so the average army recruit will be brighter than the average citizen.
      • unreg, on 03/29/2008, -2/+38Wow, a half page of self serving rambling to show you don't know dick.

      • captric, on 03/29/2008, -0/+12I love the way you selectively quote the second amendment to the constitution. The part you conveniently left out QUALFIES the part you quoted with "the RIGHT of the people to keep and bear and arms shall NOT be infringed." Legal scholars disagree about what right is protected by the Second Amendment. Some scholars have concluded that this amendment affirms a broad individual right to gun ownership. Others interpret the amendment as protecting only a narrow right to possess firearms as members of a militia. Supreme Court decisions have not resolved the debate. However, the courts have held that the Second Amendment does not preclude certain government regulations on gun ownership, such as laws prohibiting ownership of firearms by felons, or ownership of machine guns without a license.
      • MrWally, on 03/29/2008, -0/+10tl;dr
      • Merlaak, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1"BUT, that's coming from a nation that hasn't faced a war on the home front since the civil war."

        Hmmm... forgetting about a little incident referred to as Pearl Harbor, maybe? And, stop me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that 9/11 occurred in America.
      • jenel, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1Wall Of Text crits you for 16HP.
    • dafragsta, on 03/29/2008, -42/+55I can summarize the dissent in fewer words: if someone managed to successfully kill someone else with an iPhone, should we not be allowed to have those either? I don't believe in the concept of "someone has to screw it up for the rest of us." That's what people with no spine say. Death is all around us and caused in many ways, we can't take all those ways away and still make everyone safe. The idiots always find ways to shorten their or someone else's stay among the living, and criminals will always find means of destruction. We should at least be able to meet them on equal footing, if need be.
      • CryRightardCry, on 03/29/2008, -25/+10Actually people with no spine say "i'm scared so I demand a gun even tho it puts everyone around me in danger".
        Get a spine, man up, and recognize that cowardice is bringing our country to the brink.
        The cowards who can't live without their guns are getting their way, and the country suffers for it.
        • Dimensio, on 03/29/2008, -4/+18I am curious. Do you have a rational argument to offer?
          • unreg, on 03/29/2008, -1/+13Rationality isn't a requirement to post on Digg.
          • lamiaconfitor, on 03/29/2008, -0/+5indeed, its a statistical anomaly.
        • offspring06, on 03/29/2008, -11/+5I agree. Only cowards carry guns around on them. I got mugged 2 years ago in the downtown area and I still don't feel the need to arm myself.
        • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -1/+2"I agree. Only cowards carry guns around on them. I got mugged 2 years ago in the downtown area and I still don't feel the need to arm myself."
          How many times do you plan on getting mugged before you feel the need to protect yourself? Or are you expecting the police to protect you with THEIR guns?
          Your the one who sounds cowardly.
        • RyanElston, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2robthom, I like your point but I don't think it turns the tide on the cowardice issue. I think it just shows that having a gun is a pragmatics and practical thing that any grown adult with a brain should have. All in all, gun control is not an issue of cowardice. Wepons are simply tools that can have serious consequences in there use. The man in this article is extremely stupid, that doesn't mean that the great majority of people don't responsibly and appropriately use there guns.
      • Optimus, on 03/29/2008, -18/+68Guns are designed to kill, iPhones not. Thank you, try again.
        • pintomp3, on 03/29/2008, -4/+12just wait until someone tries to make a call by putting a gun to his ear.
        • mcquitty, on 03/29/2008, -10/+6Correct, but cars kill more people every year than guns. So, what's your point? Should guns be outlawed? In 1999 over 42,116 people were killed. That's more than the 30,002 gun deaths in 2005. Of those 30002, over 17,000 were suicide.

          • maabus, on 03/29/2008, -8/+11Our country, as well as most of the modern world, was designed with cars in mind. Cars are absolutely essential to our current way of life. Guns are not a necessity at all.

            If perfectly safe public transportation was universally available and was as effective as car transport is now, it would only make sense to ban cars due to their inherent danger. Guns on the other hand, are not necessary, and so it it doesn't really make sense to make the comparison.
          • lamiaconfitor, on 03/29/2008, -1/+11and how many of those were drunk. Ill tell you over 40%. im not in the anti gun camp, but seriously your arguments are weak, at best.
          • mcquitty, on 03/29/2008, -6/+7Ask the founders if they thought that guns were absolutely necessary. They thought so much of it, they made sure it was in the Bill of Rights.

            And for those who say that gun ownership is a "collective right", prove to me there's another right that is for the government and not for the individual.
          • RetepNamenots, on 03/29/2008, -5/+5Guns are designed to kill, cars are not. Thank you, try again.
          • gbro, on 03/30/2008, -0/+4MY car is designed to kill. All I have to do is depress the accelerator and it moves 1.8 tonnes of steel forward at 100km/h in a path of my choosing. Anyone getting in the way will be killed.
          • NathanielJ, on 03/30/2008, -1/+1@gbro - Stuntman Mike, is that you?
        • NathanielJ, on 03/29/2008, -8/+16@ mcquitty - Yeah, except that cars are actually useful for something. If cars caused those 42k deaths and did nothing else, then yes, cars would be pretty useless and we could do without them, I'd say.
        • xXIrsotehkewlXx, on 03/29/2008, -13/+7Wrong. Guns are designed to protect people.
          • lamiaconfitor, on 03/29/2008, -3/+11by killing them. Kevlar vests are designed to protect people.
          • BossKey, on 03/29/2008, -3/+8A true defensive weapon acts as a benign shield, not a destroyer. Once you inflict remote damage, you have an offensive weapon.

            The "guns as defense" crowd is merely using an offensive weapon for defensive purposes. Using a tool for a purpose that is not its direct purpose. Like using a screwdriver as a hammer, or a gun as a drill...
          • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -1/+2Then why are Kevlar vests are illegal?
          • NathanielJ, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1@robthom - It's only illegal to own Kevlar vests if you are a convicted felon, and I think it should be fairly obvious why.
        • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -0/+12A gun can save your life if your threatened with violence, an Iphone cannot. Unless you count having enough time to call someone with a gun to come and save your ass.
          • DephexTwin, on 03/29/2008, -8/+2Yeah, it's not like you can call 911 or anything.
          • kenij, on 03/29/2008, -1/+8Let's see...
            * Robber points a gun at me *
            Me: "Um, yeah, mind if I call 911?"
            Robber: "Oh, sure, go ahead. Here, why not use my phone, since I know you don't have access to any other one."
            Me: "Thanks man." *calls police, robber gets arrested*
            Yeah, perfect plan.
          • kieranmaine, on 03/30/2008, -4/+2* Robber points gun at me *
            * I try to pull out my gun *
            * Robber doesn't want to get shot and shoots me *
            OR
            * Robber points gun at me *
            * I literally piss myself and give him my iphone and wallet *
            * Robber runs away *
        • RyanElston, on 03/29/2008, -1/+14Lol, i love the utter smugness in Optimus response. Lets all reflect on this phrase: "Thank you, try again." What the hell is that? Are you really trying to imply that your response actually shut down the point being made? How condescending, but lets take it further. Instead try "you lose, good day sir!" a Willy Wonka favorite. Or how about the ever annoying, "you are the missing link, goodbye!" or maybe you can be a bit more direct and just say "I'm a total tool!"
        • legendxx, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1Thank you - I can't believe how many people use the kind of argument that dafragsta just used. People like him should be banned from posting comments on digg if they're just going to make ***** for brains arguments like that.
        • Gabberwok, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1I bet there are several people working with the SDK right now trying to change that, so you may have to eat your words.
      • offspring06, on 03/29/2008, -15/+9Guns were designed for the purpose to kill. Thats what they are good for and are no good for any other reason. What other reason should a person have a gun? Some say self defense but the chances that the person will use a gun in self defense are slim. Odds are that the gun will kill a person you know more than they will be used for self defense.
        • mcquitty, on 03/29/2008, -2/+10I actually beg to differ. In 2005, according to the cdc, there were 30,002 deaths related to firearms. Over 17,000 were suicides. 749 were accidental (negligent discharges) and the rest were homicides. So, while many stories never make the news about how many crimes are prevented with guns, damn near every story about deaths is reported.
          • RyanElston, on 03/30/2008, -0/+2Dude, if your going to the trouble of looking up all that info you should at leased provide the link.
          • lamiaconfitor, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1sited from the nra, no doubt.
      • lamiaconfitor, on 03/29/2008, -2/+8successfully killing someone with an iphone is a feat, killing someone with a gun is an accident. BIG DIFFERENCE. Don't try to marginalize the danger of weapons. all weapons should be treated with respect and not strewn about the house for any idiot to play with. simply for using the gun as a toy, the man should serve time! I don't believe they should be "Banned," but anyone sho shows lack o respect for a weapon, or the rule of law should NEVER EVER hold one.
        • mcquitty, on 03/29/2008, -0/+4I agree. This idiot had no business using a firearm in that manner. That's what hammer drills are for.
      • UnWeave, on 03/29/2008, -4/+3If you to killed someone with an iPhone, you would pretty much have to actually intend it. Guns, on the other hand, allow for killing by accident, as this article shows. Your argument is flawed because you're mission the point - yes people die all the time, but guns make it possible for people to be killed unintentionally. iPhone's don't.
      • kinseyincanada, on 03/29/2008, -0/+19has everyone forgot that guns are also designed for drilling holes in the wall? how do you expect people to put up satellite dishes without a gun?
      • VinceNoir, on 03/29/2008, -1/+1Conversely, I don't want to live in a world where I have to constantly worry about what other morons are doing with dangerous devices. It's one thing for them to off themselves and their family members out of sheer stupidity, it's another when they affect me or my family. I honestly don't want to have to keep an eye out for morons 24x7.
        • Vizions, on 03/29/2008, -2/+3Yet you have no problem getting behind the wheel with all those morons and their 1 ton death machines called vehicles? Thousands of people die every year due to moronic driving behaviour. Id wager that more die per year due to moronic driving compared to the moronic firearm accidents that youre so conversely against living with.
          • VinceNoir, on 03/30/2008, -1/+1I do have a problem getting behind the wheel of car. Mostly due to idiotic SUV drivers. As it is, I try to avoid driving as much as possible. I take the rapid transit system in my city. Far less chance of death or injury there.
          • lamiaconfitor, on 03/30/2008, -1/+2Here is the flaw in that logic; cars are the most heavily legally restricted end-consumer or "common person" product in the US, and in fact the world. you have to be subjected to written tests and physical tests in order to prove to the state that you are qualified to drive a vehicle. A gun, on the other hand, you fill out a quick piece of paperwork, they make sure you aren't a felon, and you are on your way. The police routinely stop people on the street who fail to signal, fail to yield, or drive recklessly. have you taken a through state gun test to make sure you know to check above, below, to the left, right and BEHIND your target before you discharge a weapon? "Guns are as Cars" is a bad analogy, GUNS should be treated with RESPECT! End of argument.
    • doctechnical, on 03/29/2008, -3/+32I'd rather people this stupid had firearms instead of children. Alas, movements to license reproductive organs haven't been terribly successful. A pity, that.
    • Beowulf2112, on 03/29/2008, -2/+8No I want people like this to be removed from the gene pool
      • Gratefuldead, on 03/29/2008, -6/+2eugenecist
        • Gabberwok, on 03/30/2008, -0/+3This is the second time I've had to correct you. Eugenicist. If you have to keep repeating the word, learn how to spell it.
    • xcheats, on 03/29/2008, -3/+30Guess we should take cars aways from idiots too, seeing as probably over a hundred times as many people are killed by cars than guns everyday in America.
      • lamiaconfitor, on 03/29/2008, -9/+2moron, we already had this argument.
      • mcquitty, on 03/29/2008, -2/+19It's not one hundred times. It depends on how you look at it.

        In 2005, 47894 transportation related deaths
        Deaths by poisoning 32,691
        Deaths by Alcohol 21,081 (excluding accidents and homicides)
        There were 2,397,615 deaths overall in 2004.

        Accidental gun deaths, like this story, were 789.
        17,002 suicides by gun.
        And 30964 gun related deaths (including suicide and accidental).

        While the person in the story shouldn't have used his gun in this manner, and is a moron for doing so, guns are only related to 1.29% of all deaths. For unintended deaths, like the one in this story, represent 0.03% of all deaths nationwide. Excluding suicides, guns are related to .58% of all deaths nationwide.

        The number one killer? Heart Disease at over 652,000 deaths.
        • lamiaconfitor, on 03/29/2008, -5/+3your getting dugg down... why? oh, too many numbers. You didn't say second amendment anywhere.
        • psevium, on 03/29/2008, -0/+10Ban heart disease!
        • cquinnd, on 03/29/2008, -3/+2Ban heart disease!
          That smacks of *gasp* socialized medicine, which some people seem to think is worse than the gun debate. I say give a free gun permit to every eligible citizen who agrees to a yearly checkup.
      • xcheats, on 03/29/2008, -8/+1No offense here, but you can't use three and four year old data for something were talking about right now.
      • queenstarsha, on 03/29/2008, -9/+4yes, we absolutely should take cars away from morons. driving is not a right, and neither is gun ownership, outside of a well regulated militia.
        • captric, on 03/29/2008, -1/+5Gun ownership IS a right outside of a well regulated militia. Just about every court in the country has already ruled on that. And in addition, mane ONE "well regulated militia" for me.
      • jerbaker, on 03/29/2008, -1/+6Um, you have to take classes and pass tests to get a driver's license. Gun control doesn't mean taking away your guns, but it does mean registering them and making you take classes and pass tests to own and operate them. So, you've made the case for us.
      • captric, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2Gun control means many things to many people - including the outright banning of guns. Their is already gun control, in the form of requiring taking classes in order to carry a handgun concealed in 39 Sates, registration for owning a machine gun, registration for owning a silencer, ever new gun bought in the US from a dealer is required to registered with the ATF, etc., etc. And lets face it, the requirements to pass a driver license test in no way keeps drunks and idiots from behind the wheel of an automobile. I have NEVER heard of anyone not eventually obtaining a license to drive.
    • PingoLingo, on 03/29/2008, -9/+4Actually yes, I do want guys like this to have guns.. simply because they do stupid ***** and it makes me laugh. The risk is worth the reward I think
    • 955701, on 03/29/2008, -2/+5Well he pretty much eliminated his changes of reproducing. What woman would be with him now? So yes, I would prefer there not be an IQ test for handguns.
    • dumpyhumpy, on 03/29/2008, -10/+1I'm all for banning guns, like Australia, yes some people will still have them, but the fewer the better. Or at least have a difficult test. I bet over half of gun owners can't even pass the immigration exam. Maybe just an IQ test and you have to be in the top 20 percentile.
      • NnyCW, on 03/29/2008, -2/+6And while making it hard for most people to legally buy guns, somewhere someplace else props up that curiously sells them with no questions asked...
        • dumpyhumpy, on 03/29/2008, -8/+1I agree that would likely happen. As I mentioned, Im all for banning guns outright. Youre a moron to think that there is going to be some right-minded citizen's uprising against either the government, or against evil-minded citizens. Its ***** retarded. Ban them outright because the majority of the public are ***** morons.
          • NnyCW, on 03/29/2008, -2/+2Alright, let's even go with that. Guns don't exist, period. Never again shall another person be shot with a bullet or held at gunpoint.
            I fully expect stabbings, shootings via arrow, and sword wounds to increase dramatically statistically.
            And guns aren't just for complete revolutionary takeover of an established government you know. Just general protection for yourself, your loved ones, and your property is also something they can be good for.
          • dumpyhumpy, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2There'd be less collateral damage with stabbings and shankings than with shooting. Plus all the sword fighting would be awesome. Aside from that, you've never seen a really stupid aggressive person and thought to yourself "That person should not be allowed to own a firearm."?
          • NichowA, on 03/30/2008, -1/+1Regardless of whether you think guns should be banned, there are millions of them in the US. You cannot keep them out of the hands of criminals nearly as effectively as other countries with laws banning guns, so now you suddenly have a country full of unarmed citizens and armed criminals who know the citizens are unarmed.
      • captric, on 03/29/2008, -1/+1It looks like the only moron here is you. Guns will NEVER be banned because the majority of the population, most a lot smarter and educated than you obviously, would not support it and it will take a 3/4 majority of Congress, who represent the people, to change an amendment to the constitution.
      • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -2/+2I dont know about copying australia, since when did that backwater become a utopia?
        How about if we just ban guns for liberals since they think they're to smart to need one anyway.
        • dumpyhumpy, on 03/29/2008, -1/+1...alright, hick. A) Australia is a beautiful place, and a fairly modern civilized society. B) You "conservatives" - bush lovers - owe the Aus government a lot because until recently when the country woke up, John Howard was the only person aside from Tony Blair to back our stupid ***** president in your nation building experiments.
          • captric, on 03/29/2008, -1/+3Australia is a declining modern civilization, destined to an increasingly lower standard of living over time because of their disastrous environmental policies of past. Australia was used as a modern day example of how societies collapse in the Pulitzer prize winning author Jared Diamonds new book COLLAPSE - How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed!
          • NichowA, on 03/30/2008, -1/+2I read it in a book, must be true.
    • nicejai, on 03/29/2008, -1/+5couple gun education with gun purchases
      • captric, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1Couple analytic thinking with Digg commentary. What difference would gun education have done to prevent the stupidity in this case. Here is an individual who just simply made a tragic mistake in judgment that even highly trained police officers make on occasion.
    • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -1/+2Probley not. But I wouldn't want someone that stupid to do a lot of things. What if he brained somebody with a VCR, would that necessitate VCR legislation.
      As far as I'm concerned she married him. She should have known what she was getting into. And if she didn't, then thats just natural selection doing its job.
    • rheaume, on 03/29/2008, -1/+4When you say "this stupid" I imagine you waving your arms around to encompass the entire US
    • brainboy77, on 03/29/2008, -1/+1then where does it stop? the 2nd Amendment was well-thought out and it is a member of the Bill of Rights. People spent 4-6 years making the Constitution. 4-6 years to make 10 rights that cannot be revoked. and you're telling me that we should throw all of that in the garbage because of one mistake?
      • moviemadams, on 03/29/2008, -1/+1The Constitution was written in four months. The Bill of Rights are the first 10 amendments to the Constitution, and they were written very quickly by James Madison (as he based them on other documents; basically, the BoR covers rights that were so fundamental and traditionally protected, the Framers didn't think they had to be written down). The second amendment definitely is less than clear about authorizing individuals to own guns for person protection. In fact, it wasn't until Emerson v. US in 2001 that the courts ever recognized an individual's right to own guns (as opposed to a collective right to own guns for national defense, which is the historic interpretation of the 2nd).

        I'm just saying is all.
    • deadbaby, on 03/29/2008, -5/+2Yes. I do want him to have a gun. I'm just sad he didn't kill himself too. Better luck next time....

      Love,
      Darwin.
      • YellowSnowDemon, on 03/29/2008, -0/+4You are not Darwin. >:O You ***** liar.
    • mGARANDEUR1, on 03/29/2008, -1/+1I guess the constitution doesn't mean anything to you.
      • Gabberwok, on 03/30/2008, -1/+1Only the parts like make sense. I skip over the parts about black people being worth only 3/5ths of a person or about well-regulated militias. Honestly, the people who wrote those lines were clearly smoking too much opium or whatever was in vogue back in those days.
        • mGARANDEUR1, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1Yeah, the people don't need guns. We should just leave that up to the police, right? Because they are always just so honest and trustworthy. You should look back into history and maybe you would realize that Hitler disarmed all of his people when he took power. See a trend at all?
    • JCPahl, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1If he doesn't have a gun how is he going to kill himself? Do you think he knows how to tie a noose?
    • pipedreambomb, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1I'd say he should be prosecuted for incredibly reckless behaviour that led to the needless death of a human being. I'd say that, but I think the trauma of accidentally killing your wife will usually be punishment enough.
  • DarKnight90, on 03/29/2008, -3/+21Whats Digg's stance with him getting charged? I'd like to know.
    • 11oops, on 03/29/2008, -3/+219Charge him with manslaughter and give a sentence of a few years of probation. His children already lost their mother, and it seems foolish to take the father as well. This way he has a felony conviction so the dumbass can't own any guns in the future.
      • ExRe, on 03/29/2008, -10/+24Yes, but if somebody is that stupid I don't think keeping him around to watch over the kids is a good thing...
        • Edwaldo, on 03/29/2008, -1/+28I'm sure it was a tragedy that he'll learn from.
          • DarkSamus, on 03/29/2008, -5/+1clearly he needs more practice for a headshot
      • Beastyman, on 03/29/2008, -0/+7I agree with 11oops on this. There was no criminal intent. And he will do torture himself worse inside than any justice system
    • rhoffer21, on 03/29/2008, -10/+40Digg is an anonymous group of random people not a single entity, so it cant have a stance.
      • Beowulf2112, on 03/29/2008, -1/+30But as a whole its members can have an opinion... that's what he is asking. And since Digg is a public forum for such opinions I think his request is perfectly reasonable.
      • KayinAngel, on 03/29/2008, -12/+2YOUR'RE an anonymous group of random people
      • BossKey, on 03/29/2008, -1/+11It would have to be a pretty wide stance. Could be awkward.
      • apzdsx, on 03/29/2008, -1/+4We are the Digg collective. Resistance is futile.
    • punkcat, on 03/29/2008, -1/+23assimilate.
    • captric, on 03/29/2008, -6/+10It was an unfrtunate accident, give the guy probation.
    • CodeCobalt, on 03/29/2008, -2/+12I say arrest him. thats a pretty weak story.. I mean yea it'd be an elaborate murder and I don't think it was intended to kill his wife... but I mean anyone with the slightest bit of common sense should know better than to shoot a gun, head level in a neighborhood. He could have shot anybody, not knowing where the bullet would end up. He could have killed his children, neighbors, neighbors children, my grandmother. All because he's a complete idiot. I say throw him away, who knows what his next big breakthrough will be. He sure doesn't sound like a competent father, and regardless should have his children taken away..... or he should be on probation with a caretaker telling him what he can and can't do... wow... I mean I understand trying to save a buck, but damn.
      • NichowA, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1I don't think anyone has implied that this man has the "slightest bit of common sense."
        • CodeCobalt, on 04/06/2008, -0/+1but people have!!! Some on Digg have said let him be, "don't take the father away from the children, since they've already lost their mother"

          Implying he can take care of at least one other human being.. when I don't think he's able to take care of himself.
    • Wakuko, on 03/29/2008, -10/+0Electric chair. Intentional homicide. Guilty!
    • dumpyhumpy, on 03/29/2008, -1/+17I asked Digg, Digg said this guy's a dumb *****, he'll wind up with a darwin award, digg then listed 10 reasons why this guy should vote obama/paul and digg also added "fail, epic, lolz, facepalm, o rly"
    • rlbond86, on 03/29/2008, -0/+6This is why people need to take some sort of safety test before they are allowed guns. That's all we need. Like the lab safety test we all had to take for chemistry.
      • BriscoeJr, on 03/29/2008, -2/+0I know, he should have been wearing eye protection.
    • ingxia, on 03/29/2008, -0/+4I must say, it's quite ingenious to use a gun that way...but life isn't a video game (for example, where you can blow yourself up to get over a wall.) As far as the crime goes he, as the husband, is also a victim in the crime, so I say don't arrest him, a dead wife is punishment enough. On the other hand, for the safety of anyone near him, he should be barred from ever owning a gun...or at least ever getting a job in construction.
      • WallnutBoy, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3You mean I can't rocket-jump like in TF2? =(
      • NichowA, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1Your logic for not arresting him (i.e. "he is a victim") is retarded. With that argument any spousal homicide wouldn't be a crime.
    • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -1/+4At least negligence and some jail time. If he loved her I bet he's already torturing himself. And seeing as it must be a felony of some sort then legally he wont be able to play with guns anymore.
    • tcpip4lyfe, on 03/29/2008, -1/+3I'd say accidentally killing his wife and the embarrassment of how it went down will be punishment enough.
    • mddawso, on 03/29/2008, -1/+2but what if he was some sort of genius, and did this intentionally to kill his wife?

      I say you check around the house for other installation attempts.
  • doctechnical, on 03/29/2008, -2/+80Next on New Yankee Workshop: When safety glasses just aren't enough.
    • xcheats, on 03/29/2008, -0/+4Wow. Deff need some props for this comment. Literally made me laugh out loud.
    • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -0/+5Hehe.
      This old trailer.
    • TommyDeVito, on 03/30/2008, -0/+0The goggles, they do nothing!!
  • mentallyinhell, on 03/29/2008, -4/+182Yeehaw! Dat dere's how you drill a hole.
    • HoldenDapen0r, on 03/29/2008, -7/+3Well if you live in Missouri in a town of 507 people.....
      • DarkSamus, on 03/29/2008, -0/+5that's the sound of a bullet flying over your head
    • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1It drills, dices, slices, empowers and entertains.
      Along with ductape and Vicegrips a gun has to be one of the cornerstones of modern civilization.
    • ep53, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3"Dear, mind getting me some brewskies? Honey?? Oh GOD!!"
  • orenshk, on 03/29/2008, -2/+130So would this be a Darwin award? The only thing the wife did wrong was to marry the idiot.
    • theWaterboy, on 03/29/2008, -0/+35"So would this be a Darwin award? The only thing the wife did wrong was to marry the idiot."...

      Exactly!
      • orenshk, on 03/29/2008, -0/+8fair enough
      • Chordinator, on 03/30/2008, -0/+4Wait, so you get dugg up for quoting someone else and just tagging a word at the end? so it should work for me too!

        ""So would this be a Darwin award? The only thing the wife did wrong was to marry the idiot."...

        Exactly!"...

        Exactly!
    • TheLD, on 03/29/2008, -1/+15It would have been if he didn't already have children
      • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -6/+1What does that have to do with it?
        She wasn't an idiot because she had children?
      • cquinnd, on 03/29/2008, -0/+6robthom, he meant about it being a Darwin Award.
      • robthom, on 03/31/2008, -0/+2"robthom, he meant about it being a Darwin Award."
        Ah, my bad.
        I can digg it.
    • czeman, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2Sounds reasonable. She has my nomination.
    • HayString, on 03/29/2008, -4/+8I think she should get it for not staying the ***** out of the way while someone was trying to shoot a hole through a wall.
      • zeromancer, on 03/29/2008, -1/+12well. in her defense, she was on the other side of the wall, so she probably didn't know there was a gun pointed at her.
    • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -1/+1Correctamundo.
    • bethehammer, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1Darwin award: death by association of future Darwin nominee
      - lets hope he was drunk while doing this...
    • wh0c4re5, on 03/30/2008, -0/+0I bet she went to the other side of the wall to see if it would go all the way through.
  • sjps220, on 03/29/2008, -6/+21Darwin didn't make any laws
    • lamiaconfitor, on 03/29/2008, -0/+17and gravity is still a theory, but don't let people know, they will think that means it doesn't exist.
      • bxblox, on 03/30/2008, -2/+1Maybe one day..... we'll find out it doesn't. I just blew your mind.
        • lamiaconfitor, on 03/30/2008, -1/+1no, you are the one that is high :)
  • ledain, on 03/29/2008, -12/+10the guy must feel soooo guilty. if he loved his wife.
    • oooyooo, on 03/29/2008, -1/+2yeah, it's an accident
    • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -0/+7If he did love her he's in a world of pain right now.
  • FUR10N, on 03/29/2008, -6/+198I bet the cable companies use this in there next commercial. "Switch to cable, save lives"
    • Ovalteen, on 03/29/2008, -0/+15Hah. If he uses a gun to make a hole in a wall, imagine what he uses to dig trenches for cables....
      • elementfire, on 03/29/2008, -2/+14I just LOVE the smell of napalm in the morning.
    • diggn_it, on 03/29/2008, -1/+9"their"
    • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -6/+2Haha,Dugg.
      :)
  • offspring06, on 03/29/2008, -4/+22What a stupid idiot.
    • NathanielJ, on 03/29/2008, -0/+29He gives those smart idiots a bad name.
    • zeiben, on 03/29/2008, -0/+5OH, like you've never shot a gun into the house your wife and children were in. People in glass houses shouldn't shoot holes in them
  • fuckingusername, on 03/29/2008, -11/+6theirs where he went wrong should have used a 9mm instead

    hot dam uncle Jed
    • timlump, on 03/29/2008, -5/+2.22 is a tiny round, a 9mm would have guaranteed death.
      Im actually surprised she was killed by a .22 round, unless that was a head shot and they were very tiny walls.
      I ve fired .22 the recoil is almost non existent as the entire shell is about the size of the nail on your small finger.
      • NichowA, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1It said she was hit in the chest. The bullet probably hit her in the heart or an artery.
    • jeebus, on 03/29/2008, -2/+1No n00b, he shoulda used a deagle! .50 ftw

      SHAKALKASHAKALKA! DYNOMITE!
  • npcabral, on 03/29/2008, -1/+15tragic case of stupidity.
  • davidwasman, on 03/29/2008, -23/+51Gun lobbyists rushing to his defense in 3...2...
    • d4ni, on 03/29/2008, -14/+12Well just don't stand behind a wall when someone is trying to drill it. And obviously, he's using a gun for that. Kind of her own fault ofcourse, guns are harmless tools when everybody acts appropriately!
      /sarcasm
      • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -4/+3You were being sarcastic?! I was completely agreeing with you.
    • Lutremi, on 03/29/2008, -12/+8Well, yknow, if the wife had a gun herself, she could've reacted in time by also blasting a bullet back to meet his stray bullet.
    • Charun, on 03/29/2008, -7/+28If she was armed this would have never happened.
    • brad3378, on 03/29/2008, -3/+41Are you kidding me?
      Gun lobbies defend RESPONSIBLE gun ownership.
      This idiot clearly wasn't using his head. He's on his own this time.
      • blackjack75, on 03/29/2008, -1/+5Gun lobbies defends responsible gun ownership just like Alcohol lobbies defend responsible drinking. They are businesses. The more they sell the happier they are. They could care less if you are responsible or not, unless it leads to them selling less.
        • brad3378, on 03/30/2008, -1/+1Businesses also have to consider the implications of losing their credibility which is exactly why they won't defend this guy.
    • NnyCW, on 03/29/2008, -2/+17Rushing to defense of the gun. The gun did nothing wrong.
    • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -7/+2Here come the liberty bashing hippies to cry crocodile tears and try to use a tragedy to force their agenda on everybody.
    • transitive, on 03/29/2008, -1/+5hey, i'm not gun lobbyist but this is not a case for gun control. you could just as easily accidentally kill your wife with a meat cleaver, a lawnmower, or perhaps most likely your own automobile.

      this is an example where the person was so tragically stupid that he was bound to end up doing something awful eventually. taking his gun away wouldn't have really helped, in my opinion.
      • xbytes, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1somehow I'm not sure that it would be just as easy to kill someone with a lawnmower or a knife by mistake... a car well that happens all the time.
        • robthom, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1I have personaly seen an idiot almost chop his own hand off with a lawnmower. Should we make it easier to be stupid?
    • brainboy77, on 03/29/2008, -1/+2Guns are good, m'kay.
  • PatNolan, on 03/29/2008, -13/+64Let me introduce you to the most dangerous variation of the redneck family, the unsupervised hillbilly. You can identify the unsupervised hillbilly in the wild by the redneck similar to others in the redneck family, but more importantly by the alcohol-slurred speech and frequent references to "gubornment" being "a'gin" most every type of welfare except, his check. Additional, there are frequently Confederate flags and strangely drawn number "3" stickers plastered on any vehicle that moves. If you should come across a live unsupervised hillbilly in the wild, don't make any sudden moves and it is best not to stare.
    • ElAssoWipo, on 03/29/2008, -3/+10Copy/paste FTW.
      • PatNolan, on 03/29/2008, -0/+7yes - but from my own comment on an identical thread posted prior to this one.
    • theWaterboy, on 03/29/2008, -1/+5LMAO!! Classic -- thankyou for that. The only thing to add is that you should read this aloud whilst using 'The Crocodile Hunter's" voice.... it's 5x as funny that way.
    • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1If you come across 5 unsupervised hillbillies in the wild you better have a gun.
  • paulieman, on 03/29/2008, -3/+19Said moments before as he turned to his buddy, "hol' my beer a sec, i'll show dis wall whose boss"...
    • AMSRay, on 03/29/2008, -0/+6More like "Hey ya'll, watch this!"
    • nicheplayer, on 03/29/2008, -5/+1"theirs" for there's; "whose" for who's...wtf is this world coming to?
      • paulieman, on 03/29/2008, -2/+0"Your" so good!! Thank you for pointing out my typo! It wasn't obvious that I transposed the s for the ' and the e for the s? Jeez... Well, thank you again, SO MUCH, for all your wonderful help! :)
  • DoTheDru, on 03/29/2008, -6/+22Are you freakin kidding me!!! This is why idiots shouldn't own guns.
    • captric, on 03/29/2008, -2/+19A lot more idiots own cars than guns!
    • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -0/+6Idiots shouldn't do a lot of things. I propose idiot control.
    • pipedreambomb, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1THIS is why? This is the reason? Until now it was a good idea for idiots to own guns? Previous to this event you were completely in favour of idiots possessing lethal weapons? ...I'll stop now :0)
  • DODO101, on 03/29/2008, -8/+1How ?
    How did he do ?
    • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3Pure skill I suppose.
      Got her with a head shot too.
  • JorgeGT, on 03/29/2008, -0/+72And I thought Homer Simpson's use of guns was a parody...
  • Hadrieldragoon, on 03/29/2008, -16/+0Wait a minute...they performed CPR on a woman who was shot in the head? How the hell is that supposed to help?
    • Hadrieldragoon, on 03/29/2008, -3/+1Oops, the chest was hit not the head, nevermind.
      But still...
    • KawaiChik, on 03/29/2008, -2/+1She was shot in the chest not the head. (2nd paragraph)
    • HonestAbe, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2People have had all kinds of things go through their heads and survived.
    • t1t0, on 03/29/2008, -1/+1Honest question : I have heard that you should not perform CPR on somebody with an open wound because you just increase the loss of blood by continuing the blood circulation. Anybody knowledgeable know if this is true?
  • naterpoke, on 03/29/2008, -6/+13a 22 is a very small round too, which means the walls were thin and he hit her in a good spot
    • ridrifter, on 03/29/2008, -14/+3John Kennedy was shot with a 22. The weapon of choice for the US Army is an M-16 which is a 22. Get my point.
      • ubuwalker31, on 03/29/2008, -0/+16Don't be a frackin retard. There is a world of difference between a .22 rimfire and a .223 centerfire. The .22 rimfire is a tiny cartridge while the .223 is significantly bigger. The .22 hits with around 104 ft/lbs of force while the .223 hits with around 1,309 ft/lbs of force. Of course, your point is that either is sufficient to kill a human. Well, duh.
      • sigg14, on 03/29/2008, -1/+14this is why people who know absolutely nothing about firearms should not comment on the subject.
      • ronmac, on 03/29/2008, -5/+0I believe it was Robert Kennedy that was shot with a .22. A BB gun will kill you if you stick in someone's ear.
      • sphigel, on 03/29/2008, -0/+6"Get my point."

        Is your point that you don't know jack ***** about firearms. As ubuwalker said already the .223 round the military uses is much more powerful than a standard .22 round. It becomes quite obvious when you look at the size of the two cartridges.
    • anchondo, on 03/29/2008, -7/+0he didnt necessarily have to hit her in a good spot. 22 is the weapon of choice for killers as well because it usually will not do a through and through but will bounce around in your body thus killing you. not to mention much quieter than a lot of other guns
      • hatchetbearer, on 03/29/2008, -0/+9Actually this is an urban myth, your typical 40 grain lead round nosed bullet will enter a torso then flatten itself on the inside of your back. hollow points will flatten on impact and tumble inside you. while true they dont exit the body as most other rounds would, it isnt a pinball effect as you suggest.
    • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1Good shot.
  • RespectableGuy, on 03/29/2008, -16/+1HAHAHAHA great read.
    • supermajic, on 03/29/2008, -1/+5A real respectable guy wouldn't find that funny. I say you're an impostor.
    • bstew22, on 03/29/2008, -3/+3not really funny. i mean. we can make jokes about it. but i don't think anyone 'lol'd' about this.
  • TheThirdWheel, on 03/29/2008, -0/+59I install Satellite, never made any holes with a gun, but I have had a customer out in the sticks blow the top off a tree off with a shotgun so he could get service. Sattelite/cable installers see the craziest *****, try going in 3-8 random houses every day and you'll know what I mean.
    • nycmac247, on 03/29/2008, -8/+1hahaha thanks for my morning laugh - Diggrageous!
    • forsight, on 03/29/2008, -4/+1oh man! my dad works for fema...he foes to homes to inspect them....he has had some over the top stories!
    • bromac, on 03/29/2008, -0/+33I tried going into random houses, but usually I get chased off with those shotguns you speak of.
    • reelmkonol, on 03/29/2008, -0/+8I usually go into houses and check the pots, bookcases, and clocks for potions and the occasional elixir.
    • brad3378, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3more examples pretty please!
    • Hananda, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3That seems like a perfectly reasonable way to remove the top of a tree assuming that there was no housing or what have you in that general direction. Certainly cheaper than renting a chainsaw.
  • jeuhrn, on 03/29/2008, -0/+16This reads like one of those stories sheriff Ed Tom Bell talks about in No Country for Old Men.
    "You just can't make that stuff up".
  • debuggercll, on 03/29/2008, -1/+27This is gonna make for a great cable commercial. "FACT: More people have died while installing satellite TV service than cable. Protect your loved ones, get cable!"
  • EthylAdded, on 03/29/2008, -4/+85Hold on. This was a very clever plan to kill his wife and get away with it.
    • punkcat, on 03/29/2008, -0/+35and 100 extra channels to boot
    • captric, on 03/29/2008, -1/+3Right - well unless he had infrared heat sensing sights on that 22 rim fire pistol - how could he get a good shot at a target on the other side of a wall, get real.
      • hatchetbearer, on 03/29/2008, -0/+10I can easily see "honey, could ye tell me when i get through the wall, i dont want to shoot straight through the dale earnhardt tv tray, or the fuzzy picture of elvis yer momma gave us when we got hitched"

        (im from Appalachia, its common to get a velor painting of elvis or larry the cable guy as a wedding gift)
      • guinunez, on 03/29/2008, -1/+4EthylAdded and punkcat were using an encrypted method to tell you how the man did it, only a few of us are capable to decipher it, here is a website with guidelines to understand their complex words: http://www.answers.com/Joke
      • sroop, on 03/29/2008, -1/+4Hacks.
    • eje211, on 03/29/2008, -1/+5Elementary.
    • xXIrsotehkewlXx, on 03/29/2008, -1/+2That totally would have been my excuse too.
      "Officer I was shooting the wall, I swear"
    • pipedreambomb, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1That was my first thought. The second was I have to stop watching so much CSI.
  • styx31989, on 03/29/2008, -2/+2Stupidity should hurt...
  • flightcrank, on 03/29/2008, -14/+30Only in America
    • forsight, on 03/29/2008, -5/+2f'ing artards!
    • Zaggynl, on 03/29/2008, -0/+13***** yeah!
    • CarStan, on 03/29/2008, -3/+1Thats right, because here in europe our houses are made of something called solid STONE, so you cant just blast a hole through them.
      • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -0/+4You'd need a bigger gun.
      • blackjack75, on 03/29/2008, -0/+4But when we need a bigger gun we call the americans.
    • Scaryclouds, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3WHAT A COUNTRY!
    • brainboy77, on 03/29/2008, -4/+1Greatest Country in The World. tho, compared to others, we kind of are. that's scary. *slices at wrists*
      • pipedreambomb, on 03/30/2008, -0/+2You've never been to any other countries, have you?
  • paulieman, on 03/29/2008, -9/+0Searching for signal... Searching for signal... Searching for signal... click-click-boom! Fixed!
  • MadN, on 03/29/2008, -4/+4The hardest part was finding just the right place where he had duct taped her to the outside wall....
    Use 1002 for duct tape..
  • skews13, on 03/29/2008, -4/+3snap on tool company motto; "the right tool for the job"
  • indolin, on 03/29/2008, -6/+3This seems like a great idea, except for the killing part.
    Did it make a clean hole? I need to see a picture.
    How about a gun that shoots drill bits, even better.
    • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1I wonder how often he did this. Was his house and furniture bullet ridden or what.
    • pipedreambomb, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1He fired two shots... surely that's just going to make a mess? One clean shot, fair enough..
  • forsight, on 03/29/2008, -10/+29guns don't kill people. people kill people.
    • fancyj, on 03/29/2008, -4/+13no. "dangerous minorities with guns kill people." -family guy
      • RetepNamenots, on 03/29/2008, -4/+3Guns don't kill people - rabbits do.
        • bstew22, on 03/29/2008, -2/+5RUN AWAAAY!

          ...wait, the holy hand grenade!
    • rlbond86, on 03/29/2008, -2/+11"But I think the gun helps. I think if you just went up to someone and said 'Bang!' it wouldn't kill them."
    • CarStan, on 03/29/2008, -3/+11Chuck Norris kills people
    • jerbaker, on 03/29/2008, -3/+11So the solution isn't to ban guns, just ban people from having them?
      • transitive, on 03/29/2008, -10/+2yes! you hit the nail on the head. guns are for soldiers and cops, if you aren't one you shouldn't have one. just like you shouldn't have a bulldozer if you're not in the construction industry. let the professionals use their tools and everyone else who's too stupid and inexperienced to use them correctly should leave them the hell alone.
        • ordig, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1***** that, I'm not going to hire some one to cut me a new diveway, just because i don't work in the construction industry. that is the dumbest analogy i have ever read.
      • pipedreambomb, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1No, just ban people.
    • Pigeon, on 03/29/2008, -0/+4We shouldn't ban guns. Just ban stupid people. I know ethiclly and morally removing all of the "stupid" people from the earth would amount to genocide but its something to think about. We waste so much money and resources on complete morons who constantly effect other peoples lives (Looking at you Mr. Prick who ran me over on the pavement because he was on the phone -.-)..
      • SLockhart, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3But where do we draw the line? Are people who don't use affect and effect properly, morons?
    • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3Apparently cable television kills people also.
  • HonestAbe, on 03/29/2008, -10/+17If only she'd had been carrying, she could have shot back and defended herself! Down with gun control!
    • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -0/+4Hit the deck, incoming.
      She should have laid down some suppressing fire and and pulled back to the laundry room.
  • melcan, on 03/29/2008, -3/+7thats why idiots like this should not even have a gun, what does it take to walk down to the hardware store and purchase a drill and then refund it?
    • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2But who's to say someone this stupid wouldn't kill someone with the drill.
  • heavystone, on 03/29/2008, -4/+8What an idiot. Just hang him, we need to weed out the morons so they don't breed. Idiocracy anyone?
  • Biks, on 03/29/2008, -0/+13It says he fired the gun from INSIDE the house. (after trying to make a hole from the outside?) I gotta see this police diagram. Him: "Hey Ma! I'm gonna make the hole now!" Her: (outside, facing the wall) "OK, I'll see where she'll come through.."
    • b3owulf, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2It also said he thought everyone was inside... finish reading the article.
      • Biks, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3I did finish reading the ***** article. What was she doing outside? Was there ever a drill involved? Was he shooting from the outside first, THEN he went inside with the gun? I need to see that damn diagram.
    • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1I gonna go outside and make sure you dont mess it up.
    • bingobongony, on 03/29/2008, -2/+2Well, he's not going to discharge a firearm outside! That'd be STUPID!
    • mswope, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1No one's stopped to ask where the bullet would've gone if his wife wasn't, um, blocking the path. Could've popped a kid playing in his backyard or something...
  • SomeImagination, on 03/29/2008, -1/+25"Bad things happen to good people,” -Neighbor
    No bad things happen to stupid people, what the ***** were you thinking?! DIY+Guns = No
    • b3owulf, on 03/29/2008, -1/+4Perhaps the bad thing was that the woman got shot.... who's to say she did anything stupid? Heaven forbid going outside.
      • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1Warning: Do not insert neck under running chopsaw.
  • tEhKewleSt, on 03/29/2008, -4/+24Guns don't kill people, halfway retarded people with guns kill people.
    • queenstarsha, on 03/29/2008, -4/+1unfortunately, half the population has below-average intelligence. so, yay guns!
      • bigj480, on 03/29/2008, -0/+4So you get to decide who is smart enough to get RIGHTS? It's not a privilege, it's a right. The good thing is that people like you don't tend to own guns, that makes me feel safer. If you want less rights I suggest that you continue to vote for the constitution haters on both sides of the political spectrum, all is going as planned.
    • StandupShowcase, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1no, the combination kills people
  • FriniK, on 03/29/2008, -0/+26.... so i take it he made his hole?
    • slaystench, on 03/29/2008, -0/+12More holes than he planned on.
    • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3I guess it was a half success. Now he can watch himself on the news.
  • bermudianguy, on 03/29/2008, -2/+27You might be a redneck if .....
    • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1Mabey thats how she got shot. He was trying to run the hole up high to hit the little TV on top of the broken floor model.
  • OverkillTASF, on 03/29/2008, -0/+8My brother and I have joked before about how we only have a limited selection of diameter holes we can drill... .22 inch and .40 inch... To see someone actually take that "idea" to its completely illogical conclusion doesn't surprise me as much as it perhaps should. Wow.
    • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1We've all contemplated it at least once.
  • neo912, on 03/29/2008, -1/+4Yeah..............wow this guy is a total idiot. The scary thing is there are people like this on the road with you. Forget the gun, I don't want him behind the wheel of his pickup truck.
    • rikwakefield, on 03/29/2008, -0/+5He'd probably try to build an extension by driving it through his house.
    • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -1/+1They have pickups in LA?
  • Hobbers10, on 03/29/2008, -14/+2Thats great. We should give guns to more *****-tards and let them kill some more hillbilly ass. Worlds probably better off without her and he'll do well in prison. ha *****' ha!
    • StoicHitman, on 03/29/2008, -3/+1I agree, instead of allowing this moron to continue to take up space we should just give him the tools to destroy himself.
    • Mike23132, on 03/29/2008, -1/+1You're actually celebrating the fact that an innocent person was murdered...jesus
  • BassJunkie, on 03/29/2008, -11/+19Comcast cable subscription: $49 a month
    .22 caliber handgun to get cable through wall: $200
    Killing wife by "accident" so you don't get moaned at for watching to much cable: PRICELESS
    • HadBeans, on 03/29/2008, -3/+2Please someone, don't use the mastercard thing again....

      Oh god he did.... shoot me with the cordless
      • robthom, on 03/29/2008, -1/+1Okay stand still, here comes the cable guy.
    • EmitStop, on 03/29/2008, -1/+3He was installing satellite not cable.
    • isiahwheeler, on 03/30/2008, -1/+1Comcast cable subscription for $49/mo. ?!?!?!
      What planet do you live on?
      We all know Comcast is at least triple that per month
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 136 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.