Article View: boulder.general
Article #169Re: Drivers here are better than average!
From: Captain Neon
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 04:22
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 04:22
60 lines
3714 bytes
3714 bytes
fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary) writes:
>In article <tarrall.724189741@qso> tarrall@Colorado.EDU (Captain Neon) writes:
>> OK, how's this then: I absolutely guarantee I can miss you with a
>>decent rifle. So: what if I set a target across the highway from me and
>>start shooting at it with, say, a nice Lee-Enfield bolt-action .30 caliber,
>>across all the lanes of traffic? I wouldn't hit anyone. I can say that
>>without a shadow of a doubt.
>You are, however, very wrong. You could easily hit someone. As a result
You could easily hit someone with your car, too. I say, I can do this
shooting just fine, coming rather close to cars without hitting them.
>I think this should be illegal (as it is) by the above mentioned logic.
>If, instead, you put your target against a hillside (e.g. a good backstop)
>and were not firing towards anyone, this really would be safe and is
>(again, as I think it should be) legal (at least on private property outside
>of city limits and on federal BLM lands.) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
You're not driving your car on private property, you're driving it on
public property. Driving your car while intoxicated is perfactly legal
too - at least on private property...
>That would be fairly easy: The prosecuter would ask you if there were
>any cars between you and your target; if you had ever missed your target
>(if you claimed no, an expert witness or two would make you look like
>a liar. The jury knows everyone would occasionally miss) and if you
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>could control where your missed shots went (by definition impossible: If
>they were going where you intended, they wouldn't have been misses.)
>From this, it would be clear (beyond any reasonable doubt) that there
>were people who could have been hit by your missed shots. That is, you
>were endangering them.
I claim I can keep all my shots from hitting the passing cars, and I'm
willing to place my target on a hillside so all bullets will be stopped
after they've crossed the highway. I want to do this on public land: the
right-of-way property associated with the highway. I can, without any doubt,
keep all my shots within a 10-foot diameter circle at a range of 50 feet
with the above-mentioned rifle. So, as long as I never shoot when a car
is within 5 feet side-to-side of the intended path of the bullet, I've
never endangered anyone. I can easily prove beyond a reasonable doubt my
ability to keep all the shots within that circle (court better buy the
ammo, though, or perhaps the prosecution... Would 10,000 rounds be
sufficient?)
What I want to do here is illegal.
Driving a car with a BAC > 0.05% is illegal too. If I protested
a drunk driving charge, saying that I wasn't endangering anyone, the
prosecutor might ask me if there was anyone else on the road. [Were
there any cars between you and your target?] He might ask me if I've
ever been in an accident [Do you ever miss your target?] As it happens,
I haven't ever been in an accident. However, I certainly can't claim
that I never *will* be in an accident; if I did an expert witness would
make me look pretty darn uninformed.
-Robert.-
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<tarrall.724306955@qso>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!boulder!tarrallReferences:
<tarrall.724189741@qso> <1992Dec13.185345.22908@ucsu.Colorado.EDU>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: boulder.general Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!boulder!tarrall From: tarrall@Colorado.EDU (Captain Neon) Subject: Re: Drivers here are better than average! Message-ID: <tarrall.724306955@qso> Sender: news@colorado.edu (The Daily Planet) Nntp-Posting-Host: qso.colorado.edu Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder References: <tarrall.724189741@qso> <1992Dec13.185345.22908@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> Date: 14 Dec 92 04:22:35 GMT Lines: 60