Man who accidentally shot himself gets over 8 years in prison

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jeff White

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
38,020
Location
Alma Illinois
Too bad Lautenberg, Kennedy, Schumer, Feinstein et al won't fund the provision in the law that allows felons to have their rights restored.

If the federal prosecutor thought it was so bizarre, why did he prosecute it? There is discretion built into the system at all levels.

Jeff

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/ne...FFD7473BA9DAF47086256FD80044041D?OpenDocument


Man who accidentally shot himself gets over 8 years in prison
By JIM SUHR
The Associated Press
04/03/2005


CAPE GIRARDEAU, Mo. - Larry Martin's illegal ownership of a gun may not have become known had he not done what has some authorities scratching their heads - accidentally wounding himself with a shotgun while on his riding lawnmower.

But the 38-year-old southeast Missouri man paid a hefty price Thursday, when he was sentenced in federal court in Cape Girardeau to eight years and four months in federal prison on a felony charge that he was a previously convicted felon in possession of a gun.

"It's a bizarre case from start to finish," said Keith Sorrell, the case's federal prosecutor. "I don't know if we can ever know the true reason of why he had the shotgun while mowing."

Hogwash, says Martin's wife, Vickie.

"I'll go to my grave saying it was a trumped-up charge," she said. "I could see if he hurt or shot somebody else. But he didn't hurt anybody but himself. It blows my mind they could put somebody in jail for hurting themselves. It's stupid."

By federal law, Martin was forbidden from having a gun in light of his 1986 burglary convictions in Bollinger County.

But Martin's wife says it wasn't even her husband's gun that got him in trouble on their land near Advance, Mo., on Aug. 4, 2001, when one of the couple's youngest boys, now 9, came running, talking of a snake in the woods.

"Go tell your dad," Vickie Martin said.

So off Larry Martin went on the riding lawnmower, snake-hunting with a .410-caliber shotgun belonging to the oldest boy, now 14.

"The snake probably would have been gone anyway by the time he got up there," Vickie Martin said.

About 30 minutes later, she said, "Here my husband comes walking down the hill, bleeding real bad. He said, 'I shot myself.' I plum freaked out."

An ambulance was summoned and whisked him to the hospital.

"I thought he was going to bleed to death on me," Vickie Martin said.

Workers who treated Martin at the hospital reported the gunshot wound to police, who say Martin admitted that he shot himself in the hand while on his riding mower.

Sheriff's deputies later found the .410-caliber shotgun on Martin's lawn. Martin escaped with little more than a "big scar" on the back of the hand, Sorrell said.

"In a report, he indicated he just shot at a snake and hit himself in the hand," the prosecutor said.

Vickie Martin says the case has taken a toll on the family, requiring the family to sell their trailer home to pay legal costs. "We lost it all over this stupid charge," she said.
 
Waits patiently for all the people who'll offer up some variation of "Don't do the crime if ya can't do the time..." *hums*
 
Yea yea 8 years of life altering terror and rape, yada yada, travesty... And if he gets out early it's leftist liberal's fault for taking it easy on a violent criminal, yada yada....

But how do you shoot your hand when aiming at a snake? That's what I don't get.
 
What really makes me mad is that I had a joint case with the Feds on a guy that was making short barreled rifles and full autos in trade for cash and meth, and he got 2 years. What's worse is that I didn't get to keep any of the rifles to "decorate" my office! Imagine an AR-15, with a 12 inch barrel hanging behind my desk, thirty round mag...empty, of course. ;)
 
Umm... he was a convicted felon, and he had a firearm in his possession. Why are some people rushing to defend this guy from the Big, Bad Government? And on top of that, he's one of the stupidest people in existence... how the hell do you accidentally shoot yourself with a shotgun?

IMO, everybody is better off with him in jail.
 
Sure he broke the law, of that there is no doubt. But I wonder what else there is that we aren't hearing? On the surface, it sure looks like 8 years in the slammer is plumb nuts.
 
Guy certainly wasn't the sharpest knife in the drawer, to admit to a felony . . . or, in fact, to admit to anything whatsoever. (You'd think with a previous conviction under his belt, he would've known that.)

Sometimes, silence is golden.

:rolleyes:
 
I understand the part about a felon not being able to own/possess a firearm. But I wonder if Missouri law prohibits anyone in the household from possessing one as well. Even so, it's a snake for crying out loud. If you gotta kill it, go get a hoe or something you're not prohibited by federal law from wielding.
 
Yeah, he shouldn't'a had a gun in the house.

Yeah, he shouldn't'a taken a lawn mower to a gun fight.

Yeah, he shouldn't'a assumed the snake needed killing.

But, sheesh, what a punishment! Eight years explaining to hardened felons why he is in prison. Oh, the humanity!

Kidding aside, it's way too much punishment. There should be a way to restore rights, especially for felon convicted of property crime. Violent crime against people maybe not. Now, no way to support family, mom & kid homeless, we all pay.

Regards.
 
My thoughts...

He's a felon, he had a gun, he's not supposed to have a gun. A convicted felon knows he shouldn't have a gun, he has a gun, he's so stupid he shoots himself, he needs to go to jail. Eight years sounds like a lot to me but, he's a felon with a gun, he played the odds and lost.

I don't care about his family. Lots of bad guys leave behind families. Lots of victims of felons with guns leave behind families. I care about my family and don't want them exposed to felons with guns.

Besides it's just burglary. Not like a real crime right? Wait until you're the victim, with kids that are afriad to go to sleep at night because some dirtbag was in their house and might come back. No big deal my a**!

Who we kidding anyway, he behaves himself, he'll be out on parole in three years, not eight.
 
It appears, in the eyes of many, the government just can't get it right ... in some threads, folks complain about criminals being given their freedom too soon ... in others, folks complain about the courts and the too-lenient sentencing ... then there are the threads where people are yelling about the need to enforce all the gun laws already on the books, or insure we hammer the felons who don't get rehabilitated ...

Besides it's just burglary. Not like a real crime right? Wait until you're the victim, with kids that are afriad to go to sleep at night because some dirtbag was in their house and might come back. No big deal my a**!

I agree. Burglary is as heinous a crime as there is. Give someone back their gun rights because he's "only" stolen from others, not committed a violent crime? I think not.

And the question still remains ... why on earth would anyone feel compelled to go hunting a snake in the woods that never harmed anyone?
 
Why should felons not have all their rights restored after they've done their time?
 
Why should felons not get all their rights back after they've paid their debt to society?

I don't necessarily have a problem with felons having rights restored -- after a sufficient probationary period -- upon petition. I do, however, have a problem with the mindset that it should be automatic, or that some crimes are less serious than others, hence, restoration of rights for some crimes (i.e., property crimes) should be a given. Break the law, lose your freedom and some rights for a time, earn them back, after you prove that you're rehabilitated.

And yes, eight years does seem like a rather long sentence ... perhaps there's more to the story than was documented in the article. Either that, or that part of Missouri is not a good place to break any laws ...
 
No problem here for me. I am on record as thinking if a criminal gets out of jail, he should have all his rights back. If he is dangerous he should still be locked up. BUT he broke the law. It is right that he goes to jail, and we support him to the tune of 35,000$ a year or so for the next eight years, and while he is in we can support his wife and kid on welfare, another 20,000$ per year(plus food stamps, and any needed medical). It is too bad that he lost his trailer to pay the lawyer bills too.

So, this was his second felony conviction. When he gets out, if he is LUCKY, he can get a job at minimum wage. Or maybe he can get some lessons while he is in prison, and be a successful robber when he gets out.

It is my personal opinion that this is a total waste of a quarter of a million dollars of Missouri tax money.
 
I understand the part about a felon not being able to own/possess a firearm. But I wonder if Missouri law prohibits anyone in the household from possessing one as well. Even so, it's a snake for crying out loud. If you gotta kill it, go get a hoe or something you're not prohibited by federal law from wielding.

I don't think so. However the felon isn't suppose to have access to them.

-Bill
 
i find burglary to be a pretty seriuos crime, but eight years sure does seem like a real lot of time. that guy is gonna be way screwed.

i mean guy was prohibited, he should have known better.

i do also think it has been a heck of a long time since he was busted, and perhaps restoring of rights would be in order by now, but i am totally in support of keeping felons prohibited from guns for a period., honestly i think if a guy goes ten years without any trouble, he's shown he's changed.
 
Well, I gotta admit, I've always supported the idea of incarcerating Stupid People.

Also, no one picked up on the weak excuse of the gun being 'owned' by his 14 y.o. boy? Last I knew, 14 years old was about 4 years to young to buy a shotgun....so, why didn't he say it was the wife's?

I bet she's a felon too. And I bet his burgulary charge was an Armed Bugulary charge at that.

But you know what they say about assuming.... ;)
 
Yes, silence is golden. NEVER TALK TO A FED WITHOUT CONSULTING AN ATTORNEY! Avoid dealing with them if at all possible. They are not there to help you--EVER, and they are not your friend. Do not trust them. DO NOT TRUST THEM!

That's legal advice you can take to the bank and deposit.
 
Old Dog, some crimes are less serious than others. Some crimes are just silly, in some states it's illegal to possess sex toys.

MikeIsaj, I think it's wrong to play the 'he'll be paroled, don't worry' card. It's wrong because no-one on this board has ever said anything good about early parole before! Too late to start now.
 
It appears, in the eyes of many, the government just can't get it right ... in some threads, folks complain about criminals being given their freedom too soon ... in others, folks complain about the courts and the too-lenient sentencing ... then there are the threads where people are yelling about the need to enforce all the gun laws already on the books, or insure we hammer the felons who don't get rehabilitated ...

You're attempting to draw an example of hypocrisy where none exists. This goober was a criminal. He paid his debt to society(they let him out, afterall). Now he's simply an idiot with the scars to prove it. And in remaining consistent with our prior opinions some of us are wondering why he's doing time again if his debt was already paid? If it was this is wrong. If it wasn't then why is he out? He's obviously too stupid to be an asset to society. :D
 
Well, I gotta admit, I've always supported the idea of incarcerating Stupid People.

No need. Being stupid is it's own punishment, as this example shows.

I personally believe that convicted felons should get all their rights back upon release. Why? For the very simple reason that felons, despite their labelling, are still people. And people have equal rights (you know that Constitution thing).

The situation is exacerbated when we have a society that convicts people of felonies for even the most minor offense.

Even if you have no sympathy for someone that commits a crime, out of purely selfish reasons you should support equal rights. First, you might actually find yourself flying a kite on public land someday. Second, a freedom-loving American would not want to live in a caste society. The fact that we have created a caste society is the underlying reason for so much infringement on our liberties (example - Brady Law).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top