May 27, 2014 3:45 pm -

Indiana man Second Amendments a woman in Walmart after gun falls from his pants (via FreakOutNation)

A woman was accidentally shot in a Walmart store in Indiana and subsequently suffered  an injury to her arm after a holstered handgun fell from a man’s pants, causing the weapon to discharge inside the business located on the west side of Columbus…

D.B. Hirsch
D.B. Hirsch is a political activist, news junkie, and retired ad copy writer and spin doctor. He lives in Brooklyn, New York.

No responses to Woman Shot In Walmart When Gun Falls From Idiot’s Pants

  1. Shades May 27th, 2014 at 6:52 pm

    How dare she interfere with his constitutional right to drop a loaded weapon in a public place.

  2. granpa.usthai May 27th, 2014 at 7:17 pm

    WalMart (a ‘private’ company) allows shoppers to carry firearms, therefore, WalMart (the individual) is legally responsible for whatever happens on it’s turf per NRA definition of f the WELL REGULATED MILITIA part of the 2nd Amendment and go strictly for PROFITS.
    To the injured person: get a very good lawyer and go strictly for the cash.

    • Alan May 27th, 2014 at 8:47 pm

      Stores are people, my friend

      • Jaz May 28th, 2014 at 1:28 am

        In that case the women has a right to sue this walmart person, IMO.

    • Jaz May 28th, 2014 at 1:27 am

      Wouldn’t this hold Walmart liable for the shooting? Oh Ya, Please!

  3. Obewon May 27th, 2014 at 7:43 pm

    ‘Thank you for shooting shoppers at Wal*Mart’ Darwinism kills more customers with guns at Walmart than any other retailer. “It’s all Gods Plan!”-Palin in 2016~

    • Jaz May 28th, 2014 at 1:25 am

      Haha- I kinda agree with you about those Walmart pooper pants. 🙂

  4. Yeah way May 27th, 2014 at 11:47 pm

    Sounds like a case of negligence on the part of the gun owner, rather than an indictment of firearms in general.
    Walmart “allows” its shoppers to come and go by automobile as well, does that mean it is ‘responsible” for a drunk driver run amok in its parking lot?
    Boy, when it comes to firearms, it’s funny how quickly my liberal colleagues turn into right wing authoritarians.
    Civil disarmament is NOT a “liberal” solution to gun violence. It’s a right wing one.
    Want to address America’s gun carnage? Address her inequality, phony drug “wars” and inner-city poverty and despair…THOSE are liberal issues.
    Bubba ain’t the problem, as fun as he may be to pick on…

  5. uzza May 28th, 2014 at 12:28 am

    Guns don’t kill people, Walmart kills people.

  6. Ty Emzone May 28th, 2014 at 4:34 am

    Since I work at WalMart, I am thinking seriously of organizing workers to insist that the company ban firearms from its stores. Employees are strictly forbidden to carry them, it’s a firing offense. But we should allow customers … many of whom are clearly drunk, on drugs, mentally ill, and just generally unknown quantities … to carry in the store? It’s insane, and irresponsible. I don’t want firearms where I work, shop, or eat. Workers and customers will reject this idiocy and get firearms out of our stores, workplaces, and other public places. This wave of stupidity is going to end, soon enough, because a tipping point of disgust and outrage has been reached. Count on it, gun abusers. Count on it.

  7. Maxx44 May 28th, 2014 at 6:47 am

    To the gun nuts who keep repeating the inane BS that “guns don’t shoot people, people do”: this appears to be case that proves guns actually do shoot people.

    • EyeWonderY May 28th, 2014 at 10:07 am

      Yeah, and hammers smash thumbs, and tables reach out to trip people in the dark.

      Need to lay off the LSD, pal. You’ve lost your marbles.

      • Maxx44 May 28th, 2014 at 10:14 am

        Guns have one purpose and one purpose only: to KILL. You morons who keep rehashing the BS fed to you by your NRA handlers need to get d!ck enlargements so you don’t have to compensate for your shortcomings with dangerous weapons. Go fondle a steel pipe; it can’t shoot you.

        • EyeWonderY May 28th, 2014 at 10:35 am

          In the Olympics they have sport events that use guns for target shooting. I understand you believe (as you’ve mentioned before) that guns move, think, and execute all by themselves but I can’t help you with your mental illness, however, I have just busted your theory that guns are ONLY for killing.

          Well, unless you also believe that the paper targets are alive in which case those naughty guns killed them.

  8. Katina Cooper May 28th, 2014 at 7:08 am

    There is a valid reason why the guy with the gun won’t be charged. The police, the prosecutor and every judge is afraid that the NRA will come to the town and “female dog” slap each one of them.

  9. Jeremy May 28th, 2014 at 8:42 am

    Hey All… before we get all riled up, are we sure this not some “Onion” like satire? I hate to be conned into expressing outrage over non-stories. However, if this is real… the lady should sue every breathing soul in the Executive and Legislative branches of Indian’s Government and she should sue Wal-Mart and the property owner (if not Wal-Mart) and the local Law enforcement if they refuse to press charges on the dude for “reckless endangerment” or “depraved indifference” to human life.

  10. EyeWonderY May 28th, 2014 at 9:45 am

    My favorite thing about this site is how everything is totally cherry-picked to the taste of liberals. I understand this site is sort of like a Big Top Circus for liberal clowns, but why does every single article have to be tailor fashioned for easy liberal digestion?

    I’m not saying this idiot who dropped his gun doesn’t deserve to be sued, and personally if he’s that careless then he doesn’t need to be walking around with a gun.

    My question is why does every single article or viewpoint about guns have to be cherry picked? You only seem to find the bad stories. The ones that make gun owners look foolish and irresponsible.

    Is there a liberal out there with a mind of your own? Just one who doesn’t believe every single liberal brainwashed ideology? Or is every liberal molded into the same shape, a replica of each other?

  11. carol May 28th, 2014 at 12:45 pm

    The guy didn’t have the safety on the gun. Otherwise it wouldn’t have gone off. Very irresponsible! Gun safety 101. Keep you safety one till when not in use. Luckily the lady wasn’t hurt too bad. Was the man charged?

  12. Carolyne May 28th, 2014 at 4:05 pm

    Because yeah, I NEED to take my gun shopping!

  13. LightningJoe June 2nd, 2014 at 3:09 am

    “…handgun, for which he has a permit and kept in a holster, fell from his waistband while he was shopping…”

    So why didn’t this “responsible” gun owner ACT LIKE he was carrying a lethal weapon that must be treated with caution and respect. Why wasn’t it IN a holster, rather than in his waistband???