Brisbane Court - Mother killed by loaded rifle left in a bag

[rc42]

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-05-19/ ... /100148712

Some key quotes:

"The court heard Mr Lawlor disassembled the gun to clean it the day before he placed it in the bag, but a live round was left inside the chamber."

"Mr Lawlor had been suffering from paranoia in the lead up to his mother's death and had previously shot the firearm in a public place, the court was told."

"He did make frank admissions in relation to consuming amphetamines and prescription drugs, to the point he can't remember things for days,"


You can't make this stuff up, no mention of whether he was licensed and the firearm registered so presumably he was and it was.

[K2bonsai]

I would love to know what sort of bag it was in, maybe a gun sock? I cant see a rifle in a padded rifle bag being able to be fired just by moving it....

[Patriot]

Nah I don’t think he is licensed cause he’s as mad a cut snake. Well known to the coppers apparently and I think the 22 has been cut down. The bloke is well known around the traps as a bit of a nutter...so l’ve heard.

[Robin]

I would love to know what sort of bag it was in, maybe a gun sock? I cant see a rifle in a padded rifle bag being able to be fired just by moving it....

Don't know why it matters about what sort if bag it was, the gun was loaded, and thats really a big no no.

I heard from shooters delight about a gun going off in a bag in there shop.

I have heard for some guns having a dodgy trigger and firing off a round without being touched.

[Blr243]

Years ago I was told that one gun shop found a loaded round in a rifle that was bought in for repair so they put that round aside but it did not stop there. Eventually over time they had a whole jar full of different ammo ( all from guns presented with one up the spout)

[InisBineest]

It is a bit of a quandary here. As shooters we don't like nutters like this chap having guns in the first place, because... well nutters do nutty things that are make worse with firearms.

But then there is a section of us that are also against the more invasive screening that would weed said nutters out. Sometimes because they are one, but more likely that the can see that the same screening could also be unfairly used to trash shooters with no issues whatsoever.

I'm not really sure how you strike the balance here.

[cz515]

Good point there mate.

We need more check ups but with people who actually understand, not burocrats paper pushers

[ZaineB]

InisBineest and CZ, I dont think you can put in better checks without giving undue power to the sort that already vilify us. they already have far too many bureaucratic loopholes to cause problems for innocent, well stable, and honest people, they dont need more. you will never weed out all the bad eggs, thats just human nature, its futile and pointless and downright insanity to think you can legislate away the outliers in society, the condoning of it is just encouraging the further persecution of the good among the populace.

[Larry]

I do kind of like one of the NZ checks. I think that asking the opinion of a wife or partner would be a good check. It seems it would have prevented a few incidents that have occurred recently.

[bah!]

Though being forced to lie to people because your husband might kill you or your kids is a real thing too.

[InisBineest]

InisBineest and CZ, I dont think you can put in better checks without giving undue power to the sort that already vilify us. they already have far too many bureaucratic loopholes to cause problems for innocent, well stable, and honest people, they dont need more. you will never weed out all the bad eggs, thats just human nature, its futile and pointless and downright insanity to think you can legislate away the outliers in society, the condoning of it is just encouraging the further persecution of the good among the populace.

I agree, hence the problem. But you have to remember that we are all bias here towards owning firearms, and many of us for enjoyment/recreation. From the other side of the fence people are challenging the value of firearms vs their perceived risk in society. We all know guns don't kill people, rather it is the Muppet with his finger on the trigger. BUT they do make it a simpler job for those who wish to do harm. Hence why it might come to a risky compromise for us, we may need to accept drastic measures one day to root out those amongst us unfit to have firearms, or face the prospect of all loosing our firearms. Society it seems has laws based on the lowest common denominator. If whack jobs with guns are that denominator you can be sure that laws will be brought in to root them out.
As shooters we need to respond rationally to this, rather than react.

I'm a member of a few different LAFO groups, but the Shooter's Union are one I particularly like for keeping their cool and responding well do issues and events. Just my 2c.

[yoshie]

One of the article salso mentions his father took the gun off him because he was concerned. But obviously he got it back. Maybe the father should've taken it to the police station. I also like how the author of this article doesn't mention if he's licensed or if the gun is registered, just simply leaves it vague. If it was registered or he was licensed, the title of the article would read quite differently

[ZaineB]

InisBineest and CZ, I dont think you can put in better checks without giving undue power to the sort that already vilify us. they already have far too many bureaucratic loopholes to cause problems for innocent, well stable, and honest people, they dont need more. you will never weed out all the bad eggs, thats just human nature, its futile and pointless and downright insanity to think you can legislate away the outliers in society, the condoning of it is just encouraging the further persecution of the good among the populace.

I agree, hence the problem. But you have to remember that we are all bias here towards owning firearms, and many of us for enjoyment/recreation. From the other side of the fence people are challenging the value of firearms vs their perceived risk in society. We all know guns don't kill people, rather it is the Muppet with his finger on the trigger. BUT they do make it a simpler job for those who wish to do harm. Hence why it might come to a risky compromise for us, we may need to accept drastic measures one day to root out those amongst us unfit to have firearms, or face the prospect of all loosing our firearms. Society it seems has laws based on the lowest common denominator. If whack jobs with guns are that denominator you can be sure that laws will be brought in to root them out.
As shooters we need to respond rationally to this, rather than react.

I'm a member of a few different LAFO groups, but the Shooter's Union are one I particularly like for keeping their cool and responding well do issues and events. Just my 2c.

Its not even really the gun issue either, as an archer also I think crossbow bans are tyrannical and unjust and pathetic overreach of government from muppets with no idea, same with a lot of car mods, 4x4 mods, boat mods, and whatever else they act like they know everything about, most muppets in parliament know nothing outside of what is the best ballpoint pen and brand of stapler, they should stick to that.

[on_one_wheel]

InisBineest and CZ, I dont think you can put in better checks without giving undue power to the sort that already vilify us. they already have far too many bureaucratic loopholes to cause problems for innocent, well stable, and honest people, they dont need more. you will never weed out all the bad eggs, thats just human nature, its futile and pointless and downright insanity to think you can legislate away the outliers in society, the condoning of it is just encouraging the further persecution of the good among the populace.

I agree, hence the problem. But you have to remember that we are all bias here towards owning firearms, and many of us for enjoyment/recreation. From the other side of the fence people are challenging the value of firearms vs their perceived risk in society. We all know guns don't kill people, rather it is the Muppet with his finger on the trigger. BUT they do make it a simpler job for those who wish to do harm. Hence why it might come to a risky compromise for us, we may need to accept drastic measures one day to root out those amongst us unfit to have firearms, or face the prospect of all loosing our firearms. Society it seems has laws based on the lowest common denominator. If whack jobs with guns are that denominator you can be sure that laws will be brought in to root them out.
As shooters we need to respond rationally to this, rather than react.

I'm a member of a few different LAFO groups, but the Shooter's Union are one I particularly like for keeping their cool and responding well do issues and events. Just my 2c.

Its not even really the gun issue either, as an archer also I think crossbow bans are tyrannical and unjust and pathetic overreach of government from muppets with no idea, same with a lot of car mods, 4x4 mods, boat mods, and whatever else they act like they know everything about, most muppets in parliament know nothing outside of what is the best ballpoint pen and brand of stapler, they should stick to that.

Yes but the government get their advice from "experts" none of whom have an ulterior motive