Brickbat: Shop Class

|

Washington County, Tennessee, sheriff's deputies have charged Manueal Ernest Dillow with 12 felony counts of brandishing a firearm on school property. Dillow, who teaches welding at the William H. Neff Center, gathered about 12 students in front of a garage door and pulled out a handgun that fired blanks, aimed it toward them and fired several times.

Brickbat Archive

Advertisement

NEXT: Huffington Post Reporter Asks Eric Holder Why Obama Was Less Than Truthful to Rolling Stone About Marijuana Laws

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I think something is missing from this story.
    He gathered their attention by telling them what?

  2. Now all the government employees want to get in on the act.
    The Police Unions objected – only they get to shoot randomly at the subject masses.

  3. Looks like a lifetime of petty humiliations was purged in a brief glorious moment of terrifying children. He might have gotten less comeback if he’d followed other teachers’ example – getting drunk and doing amateur porn.

  4. Yeah it looks like he’s pretty fucked:

    http://law.justia.com/codes/vi…..2-282.html

    Dunno where they are getting “12 counts” from (one for each student?) but it looks like it’s a felony that no lawyering will make go away.

  5. What kind of dimwit fires even blanks at people?

    1. Evidently the public school teacher type. As a bit of a gun nut myself, I have no problem with him being charged. The only place he should find sympathy is in the dictionary.

      1. Well, and maybe people who think blank guns just go pop.

        1. I’m not a gun nut but I am of the opinion that, were I to ever wield a firearm, it would only be for the purpose of defending my life.

          IOW, you should only ever shoot to kill. Otherwise, you’re just trying to scare to death convince someone into you couldn’t otherwise convince into “respecting” you.

          You earn respect, dipshit welding teacher. Or you renounce your choice to be respected. You chose poorly.

          1. Well, you should shoot targets, old washing machines and logs too, because it’s fun. But yeah, what this guy did was stupid and dangerous.

          2. You only shoot to kill for two reasons. The first is that you always treat a gun like it’s loaded and ready to fire real ammunition. The second, is that practically, you put yourself in a load of risk if you try to threaten someone with a gun because they are going to assume you are trying to kill them.

  6. Only in America can someone go to prison for scaring kids with a cap gun.

    1. A blank is not a cap. Not even close. Blank cartridges are essentially full-sized ammunition that lack the slug. They can be dangerous too. People have been killed with them.

      1. It goes “pop” and nothing comes out.

        1. You should probably do some more research on what comes out of blank guns.

          1. Agreed. I’m no expert, but I do know that blanks > caps, and can be dangerous.

          2. No projectile comes out. Excuse the fuck out of me.

            “The ‘report’ of the firearm was similar to that of a firearm that fires a projectile, thus placing the students in fear, according to statements. No students were physically injured as a result of the incident.”

            He scared them. Big fucking deal.

            How can someone who loves liberty want to lock someone up in a cage for the crime of scaring someone?

            1. that’s the premise for imprisoning bank robbers who wave guns in tellers’ faces

              1. Did this guy rob anyone?

                1. no, but the legal system generally is more likely to imprison someone who steals 100 bucks using a gun than guile. Why? Because someone was scared. Because someone thought they might die. And because, even with blanks, there’s a risk someone might die. And I’m not sure I have a major problem with this, because it’s a species of physical coercion

            2. 1. You believe assault should be legal?

              2. Shooting a blank gun at someone is dangerous.

              3. If the teacher were a marksman and used a real gun to shoot the wall and hot didn’t the students, would you be OK with that?

              1. hot didn’t? WTF. Make that “didn’t hit.”

              2. But it wasn’t assault. Was there any physical harm done?

                How would you differentiate this from a practical joke from the point of view of the victim, even if there was no malicious intent at all?

                The punishment should be proportional to the crime. In libertopia, we’d use the theory of restitution. What good is locking him up? It just costs the taxpayers. It gives nothing back to the victims.

                The theory of restitution as opposed to incarceration is more ethical for both offender and victim. The offender makes it up to the victim, afterwards the “debt” is settled, as opposed to spending a decade+ in prison, coming out with a felony record. The restitution itself can be and usually is harsher than incarceration (thus more of a deterrent), but not permanently ruin your life afterwards.

                In cases of property damage or financial liabilities, it is simpler. The victim as part of restitution, instead of mere compensation can demand the offender use not just his money but his own sweat labor in repairing property damage; or in fraud of paying up and serving as butler, worker, etc for a period.

                In this case, we’d approach it first by principle, in that we’d want to “undo” the act, however we can’t. So this would have to be settled by whatever the victim deems to make up for the act, to their psychic satisfaction of alleviating that act.

                1. .. cont’d

                  There could be a nominal guideline to induce the same psychic state the victim experienced in the offender, that’s offered as a form of restitution. So if they opt for this, then he could at some unknown point later on be “faked-mugged” later. Or threatened with fake man-rape, etc. (I know what you’re thinking; if he shoots back, that’s additional debut; negative karma if you will; he would have to get shot in return) Then reminded of his crime. And that’s it. Done. All debts settled, everyone moves on with life. No wasted money on incarceration.

                  1. There doesn’t have to be any actual physical harm for it to be assault. I Agree though, locking this guy up really serves no purpose. There was an article out a few months ago about how our legal system is more procedure oriented rather than “justice*” oriented. At first I thought it was a little crazy, but the more I’ve thought about it the more a agree.

                    *Not liberal squishy justice but punishments to fit the crimes and less ridiculous outcomes etc.

                2. Sure it was assault. You don’t need physical harm for assault, you need a reasonable apprehension of harmful or offensive contact.

                  How would you differentiate this from a practical joke from the point of view of the victim, even if there was no malicious intent at all?

                  You can’t. Intent doesn’t have to be malicious, it just has to be intent to cause a reasonable apprehension of harmful or offensive conduct. A practical joke that does this technically would be considered assault if the target wanted to push the issue.

                3. I don’t think jail is really a good idea here, either. Nor do I think a later “fake mugging” is even remotely sane.

                  Hell, make him apologize and attend a gun safety class. Depending on his record and how the people involved — students, parents, etc. — feel, maybe fire him or maybe don’t. Most likely, the liability if he ever did something like that again means he’d have to be fired.

            3. He also risked injuring their hearing. Guns are a little louder then they are on TV.

            4. You are factually incorrect. Stop while you’re ahead.

              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon-Erik_Hexum#Death

        2. It goes “pop” and nothing comes out.

          Nope. Please research that assertion. I first became aware of the fact when Freddie Prinze (Sr) managed to commit accidental suicide with a blank in the mid to late ’70s. The shock wave is enough, but there’s also a wad that holds the powder in the cartridge.

    2. Only in America can someone go to prison for scaring kids with a cap gun.

      Without doing much legal research I would happily bet:

      And all jurisdictions in Australia.
      And New Zealand.
      And the United Kingdom.
      And Canada too.

      1. Fucking lame.

    3. Nah dude, that’s assault.

    4. If you pull a trigger of a gun pointed at someone, you better be prepared for them to die. Even if you’re sure you put in blanks and you have the safety on.

  7. Isn’t this a rerun from a few weeks ago?

    Happy May Day!

  8. Not sure this is very deserving of a brickbat…. thats a pretty fucked up thing to do

    1. That’s kind of the point. Sometimes they involve the state doing something ridiculous to a citizen and sometimes they involve a minion of the state doing something retarded.

  9. Don’t screw around in shop class. You all screw around too much.

    1. You know, if you fire blanks at students it reflects on your parents.

  10. The event took place in Washington County, Virginia, it did not take place in Washington County, Tennessee.

  11. Jack Frap is the man dude, Wow.

    http://www.Deep-Web.tk

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.