British scientist visiting Atlanta suburb killed by stray bullet while lying in bed

[Old Crank]

Source: Washington Post



A British astrophysicist visiting his girlfriend just outside Atlanta was killed by a stray bullet on Jan. 16 that struck him while he was lying in bed. Matthew Willson, 31, died of a single gunshot wound to the head after being transported to a hospital, local law enforcement said Thursday.

Willson, who was from Chertsey, a London suburb, was next to his girlfriend when he was shot in Brookhaven, Ga., around 2 a.m. The couple heard a heavy round of gunshots when she suggested calling the police, she told British media, which reported they had met when he worked as a researcher at Georgia State University.

“His last words were, ‘Sure, I’m sure they are just messing around,’ ” said his partner, Katherine Shepard, who saw him slumping over in the dark, only to realize he had been hit. She recalled trying to stop the bleeding from his head with a towel, urging him to “stay with me” as his eyes closed and he struggled to breathe.

Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/01/22/matthew-willson-shooting-brookhaven-atlanta/

---

More on guns make a polite society front. Guns are going to criminals faster than ever these days.

[bahboo]

1. welcome to America....jesus christ....

[rockfordfile]

2. I agree

[Anti-Racist Hero]

3. Trump Republicans 100% responsible

We need to go after gun fetishers hard. That's the only way this carnage will stop.

[Dial H For Hero]

6. What legislation do you suggest?

[Orrex]

8. That's a trap

I've been on DU a long time, long enough to know that any sensible measure of gun legislation will be immediately poo-poo'ed by DU's resident gun advocates, who claim that it's a "non-starter" or "it'll never pass" or some variation of the above, all of which boil down to "you can't have my precious guns guns guns."

Here are a few sensible measures:
1. a gun owner must at all times know the location and status of all of their firearms
2. a gun owner is responsible for the use or misuse of any firearms they own, even if another adult is borrowing such firearms
3. a gun that is stolen must be reported to police within 24 hours
4. failure to report the theft of a gun that is later used in a crime shall make the owner an accessory to the crime
5. any gun that is transported on, over, or across public property must be registered, licensed and insured in the manner of a motor vehicle, and the license must be plainly visible
6. the NRA must be formally declared a terrorist organization, and continued membership in or financial support of the NRA shall constitute aiding & abetting a terrorist group
7. any crime committed while in possession of a firearm shall be treated as a firearm-related offense
8. firearms can only be bought or sold through licensed & registered retail outlets with full background checks, no exceptions, and background checks must be filed permanently.
9. of course, the best one would be to declare that "arms" as described by the 2nd amendment refers to firearms extant at the time of the drafting of the amendment; all weapons & related technologies subsequent to that date are not considered "arms" in terms of the 2nd amendment and are therefore readily subject to legislation at the local, state & federal level

A few caveats: Saying "It'll never pass" is simply a declaration that society at large is fine with thousands upon thousands of gun homicides and suicides annually.

"I have a constitutional right to K&BA." I don't give a shit. No right is absolute, and all rights are subject to reasonable boundaries.

Gun worshipers have enjoyed full control of the debate for at least a century, so we've long since heard enough from them, and we know what they think. The gun worshipers should shut their mouths for a while and let the grownups talk for a few decades.

[Tommymac]

14. Thank You. nt

[EarnestPutz]

15. Nicely put. Making owners culpable is my favorite. I've been telling my gun lover friends....

....for years that if their kid finds their gun and shoots the neighbor kid, they should strap you in an electric chair, make you idiot wife sit in your lap and let ME pull the switch. This after they complain that stronger gun laws will do no good.

[momta]

16. Trap, indeed.

Thank you, Orrex for an excellent response!

I might add that any "law" that forbids people from suing gun manufacturers when they make their arms easy to manipulate (i.e. turn it into a fully automatic weapon), and even assist in doing so, should be declared unconstitutional.

[NNadir]

17. +++ times two or three million, or for that matter, billion. n/t.

[oldsoftie]

18. If you go with #9, then what about the 1st Amendment?

I mean, there wasn't an internet or TV back then, so do we also restrict free speech?
Some of those other ones should've been done long ago, some are just plain unconstitutional on different levels & some are kind of silly

[Orrex]

22. That also is a trap

Nothing at all in the constitution or elsewhere demands that all amendments must be treated equally. The first can apply to technologies ongoing, while the second can be restricted to historical arms.

Your right to a speedy and public trial isn't applied to the second amendment, but perhaps it should be. When someone seeks to purchase a firearm, let them enter the court system, with all attendant fees and delays and reviews and appeals and so forth. Even a straightforward trial can take months or years; let's apply that same speedy process to firearm purchases.

[oldsoftie]

47. That would fall under violating a persons civil rights.

You cannot hinder someone from exercising their rights under the constitution. That's part of the arguments against some of these targeted voter laws; hindering some voters from exercising their right to vote.
Most people support reasonable gun laws. But going off the rails with crazy ideas just turns people away from realistic ones.

[Orrex]

53. LOL! People most certainly can be hindered from exercising their rights.

It happens constantly, because no right is absolute, nor should it be.

Go shout fire in a theater. Carry a gun into the courtroom next time you dispute a parking ticket. Run for president at age 24. The list goes on and on.

The notion that "gun rights" are somehow sacrosanct and impervious to regulation is the result of 100+ years of propaganda.

[oldsoftie]

56. There already ARE regulations in place. Several.

but some of these ideas I see here are just plain silly. But on the other end of the spectrum, so is so-called "constitutional carry".

[Orrex]

57. Numerous deliberately ineffectual regulations are in place, I agree

And even these tepid measures are bitterly contested at every level by "constitutional carry" zealots, by their ilk, and by their enablers.

If gun advocates had anything helpful to contribute to the discussion, one supposes that they would have done so during the 100+ years that they've entirely controlled the debate. Their relative silence--that is, their failure to propose substantive, effective measures to reduce gun violence--demonstrates very clearly that they really aren't interested in safety, not if it means that somewhere, someone might not be able to own military grade assault weapons.

[oldsoftie]

58. IMO if you would be denied a license you shouldn't HAVE one.

Their biggest objection to the license is usually "I shouldn't have to pay to exercise my right". So I wonder what they'd say if a state said "your gun license is free. After you pass a background check". Since they always SAY they don't want criminals to have guns, they should support it. Bet they'd still oppose it

[treestar]

27. A legal interpretation that the words in the Second Amendment

mean the weapons available at the time would be perfectly reasonable. It limits the amendment to what it meant at the time.

It would not require the court to hold that therefore the advances in technology regarding communication have to be limited to the methods of that time. Communication is different from gun.

[Dial H For Hero]

31. You know that's not going to happen.

[LT Barclay]

41. Well, you know that is what a strict constructionist or originalist would do right?

[treestar]

63. Say that free speech could be restricted on the internet?

We've agreed with that right here, saying Twitter is a private company and can cut TFG off as it pleases.

[oldsoftie]

46. Its a different "thing" but the standard would be exactly the same.

Sorry but you open that can of worms and its straight downhill. Especially with the current SCOTUS. You want THEM to interpret what constitutes "free speech" mediums?
No words in the 2nd mention any particular type of firearm and no court could ever rule that it does.

[treestar]

64. So do you agree we all have a right to a nuclear bomb?

If we could make one?

The subjects of the two amendments are different. Even Amy Dummy Barrett would not be able to argue that since video didn't exist then, that the government can restrict what goes on video. Although we do let it restrict it if it involves child porn.

None of it is that simple.

[oldsoftie]

73. A nuke isn't a gun. Yes, we regulate automatic weapons.

But trying to regulate guns back down to the the types available 200+ yrs ago is just barking at the moon. And even if you DID, there are 300+ million here. And they're not going anywhere

[treestar]

77. No one's arguing that, only stating that

the intent of the amendment was for conditions that no longer exist. The Founders could not have known about automatic weapons and the shootings we experience. If they could have, they might say they didn't mean anything like that. They just referred to conditions where say the British said a people could have no weapons so they could tyrannize over them. That's moot now. The government has nukes and tanks.

I learned in martial arts that the Japanese were not allowed weapons, so they developed these arts to get around that. It's never that simple.

[Dial H For Hero]

29. Gun control won't happen without legislation, and proposing something which has no chance of

being enacted is pointless.

[Tumbulu]

34. Thank you!

It will happen, but it will take the sort of dedication the anti abortion crowd used for 49 years.

[NickB79]

39. I have a question about #6

Under what statute could that occur? We don't even list the KKK as a terrorist group yet, and they used to lynch people.

Also, what would stop all NRA members from simply migrating to another gun group, such as the GOA, or reforming a new one?

[Dial H For Hero]

44. Watch your perfectly reasonable question be called a trap.

[Polybius]

49. The KKK was declared a terrorist group in 2020

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8774267/Trumps-designates-KKK-Antifa-terrorist-organizations.html

[NickB79]

51. He wanted to, along with Antifa

I never saw any evidence afterward that either were done legally. It appeared to be just another of Trump's usual empty speeches.

Is Antifa a recognized terrorist organization now too?

[Orrex]

54. Obviously the KKK should be designated a terrorist group as well

And if a new statute is required, so be it. I see that the process for designating a foreign group "terrorist" is more streamlined, but something analogous would seem appropriate.

Tell you what: funnel hundreds of millions of secret dollars to me, much of it foreign in origin, and I'll craft the legislation for you. That's how the NRA and gun zealots have done it for decades, so it seems only fair.

As to your second question: a group can't simply rename itself to escape a terrorist designation. If HAMAS one day decided to call itself "Totally Not HAMAS," would that free the group from any further accountability? Also, a group can't simply reconstitute itself with new t-shirts or whatever; if the new group, or the co-opted group, is substantially identical to the original, then it must be treated as the original.

[NickB79]

55. There are dozens of gun rights groups independent of the NRA now

You could definitely bring down the NRA based on the evidence we have against them for dirty money, and New York is already doing that. But they aren't operating on a terrorism claim, and for good reason. That takes substantial effort in DC to achieve, and they'd never be able to make their case without an act of Congress.

And, if you do not have the same evidence against other gun rights groups, you can't simply shut them down because they look similar in their goals and beliefs. That's why I mentioned the GOA; they're the competitor and likely successor of the NRA, growing rapidly and filing court challenges now. Unless you plan on prosecuting the millions of existing NRA members who aren't in the upper echelon of the group now, they'd be free to start a new gun rights group or move to a different one, as is their right under the 1st Amendment. So yes, a group CAN reconstitute itself if the members doing so were never charged with any crimes.

[treestar]

65. A bigger question too for 6 is

to take the statutory definition of "terrorist organization" and explain how it applies to the NRA. There's been no effort to do that.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2331

I doubt that it would qualify, any more than the right wing would like to declare NARAL or NOW to be "terrorist organizations."

I continue to be fascinated with the current idea that you have to put the worst label possible on a thing for it to be considered wrong.

[crickets]

61. Thank you, Orrex! *applause*

[hack89]

68. Grownups?

Grownups live in reality. Proposing a “solution “ completely divorce from American legal, cultural and political reality is not being grownup.

You go ahead a talk for a few decades. It will make no real difference if my 16 years on DU arguing gun control is any indication.

[Orrex]

69. Yeah, that's about what I figured

From my OP:

I've been on DU a long time, long enough to know that any sensible measure of gun legislation will be immediately poo-poo'ed by DU's resident gun advocates, who claim that it's a "non-starter" or "it'll never pass" or some variation of the above, all of which boil down to "you can't have my precious guns guns guns."

No gun advocate on DU has ever proposed anything substantive toward reducing gun violence or reducing the number illegal guns on the street. At most, they recite a few NRA-friendly slogans about "increased access to mental healthcare" and some trivial hand-waving about "universal background checks," and then they fall back into their standard contrarian posture.


LaPierre thanks you for your continued support.

[hack89]

75. I have made many reasonable proposals

The only gun control measures I oppose are AWBs and registration.

There is nothing reasonable about your list. It is merely virtual signaling.

[Irish_Dem]

21. We could stop gun violence if we wanted to do so.

It is not about specific legislation.

It is about the will to stop human deaths from guns.

[Dial H For Hero]

30. How?

[Tumbulu]

33. See Orrex's post above

I am also sick of the gun bumpers on this board!

[Dial H For Hero]

42. Given that being pro-gun rights is allowed here...shrug.

[Irish_Dem]

40. Other countries have done it.

You could study other countries who have the will to do it.

The point is, if you have the will to stop something, there is a way to do it.

The first step is to decide if the people and leaders of a country really wish to stop gun deaths.

[Dial H For Hero]

43. This country doesn't have the political will to do it.

And I would point out that plenty of anti-gun rights posters here share that opinion.

[monkeyman1]

24. legislation don't do shit ! It's easier to buy a hot gun than legal one ! get a grip !

[DBoon]

12. We need to change the culture about guns

Too many people own guns because:
- They think it is a cool fashion accessory
- They want to be "real americans", tough, rural and white rather than effeminate, urban and "multicultural"
- They think there will be some sort of social catastrophe where they will need guns to defend themselves (some sort of modern day slave revolt IMHO)
- They think they will be strong and powerful if they have guns
- They want people to fear them because they have guns
- They think if they have guns then they don't have to obey politicians they don't like

We cannot pass any reasonable restrictions on gun ownership and use because guns have become a religious fetish for a large part of the population.

[raccoon]

23. Great post. Nt

[Diamond_Dog]

4. But, we're exceptional ....

[tenderfoot]

5. The "defending their homes/business with guns" posters were unavailable for comment

You can dial that for sure.

[Karadeniz]

7. Unacceptable!

[Hekate]

9. California's gun-store COVID shutdowns ruled illegal. I swear our society is insane...

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10142856513

[IronLionZion]

36. They can always shoot the virus

[haele]

10. Just a bunch of good ol boys having fun shooting guns...

And they kill an Astro-physicist visiting his girlfriend in an apartment complex. Who knows how many other innocent people they could have killed or wounded irresponsibility exercising their "freedumb" to act like 6 year olds playing with deadly weapons.
Might as well be joy-riding drunk around an elementary school as it's letting out.

Who the hell would be shooting guns near an apartment complex for fun?

Haele

[DBoon]

13. Who the hell would be shooting guns near an apartment complex for fun?

Someone who believes that the 2nd amendment gives them that right, and human life be damned

[Progressive Jones]

28. Or it was gangbangers. They aren't exactly the "2nd Amendment" freaks. They're doing street battles

between themselves and rival gangs. No political posturing there. Ends the same way. "human life be damned".

[hack89]

67. Why are you assuming they were white and conservative?

AAs have a thriving (and violent) gun culture as well. Look at the demographics of gun violence. It is not purely white phenomena.

[haele]

76. Why are you assuming "good ol'boys" would be just white?

Hint on the use of "good old boys" - if the Georgia authorities thought it was gang activities or wanted to blame it on black, Hispanic, or SE Asian gangsters and thugs, they would have done so.
Instead, it was really clear from the article the going assumption is that it was an accidental shooting by someone or several someones who where improperly discharging firearms, a much lesser crime than "gangbanging".
I live near a big blue city "gang/hood" area. If it's a possibility that it's a gang member or mentally ill person shooting off a firearm, that's the first thing the local news leads with.

I suppose someone more familiar with Brookhaven GA could also let you know a bit more of the demographics of the area to help us understand if the shooters where more likely part of the criminal element, or some idiot teenager or 20-something from an "acceptable" demographic playing with his or her new Xmas long gun for fun in a random woodlot near an apartment complex.

Haele

[llashram]

11. damn

guns, guns, guns... in the wrong hands

[maxsolomon]

19. This shooting is part of American Gun Culture too.

"Responsible" Gun Owners who've saturated this country with firearms don't get to disown this.

RIP to another victim of our national shame.

[monkeyman1]

25. new motto - "tour America at your own risk ! "

[Sancho]

20. People Control, Not Gun Control

This is my generic response to gun threads where people are shot and killed by the dumb or criminal possession of guns. For the record, I grew up in the South and on military bases. I was taught about firearms as a child, and I grew up hunting, was a member of the NRA, and I still own guns. In the 70’s, I dropped out of the NRA because they become more radical and less interested in safety and training. Some personal experiences where people I know were involved in shootings caused me to realize that anyone could obtain and posses a gun no matter how illogical it was for them to have a gun. Also, easy access to more powerful guns, guns in the hands of children, and guns that weren’t secured are out of control in our society. As such, here’s what I now think ought to be the requirements to possess a gun. I’m not debating the legal language, I just think it’s the reasonable way to stop the shootings. Notice, none of this restricts the type of guns sold. This is aimed at the people who shoot others, because it’s clear that they should never have had a gun.

1.) Anyone in possession of a gun (whether they own it or not) should have a regularly renewed license. If you want to call it a permit, certificate, or something else that's fine.
2.) To get a license, you should have a background check, and be examined by a professional for emotional and mental stability appropriate for gun possession. It might be appropriate to require that examination to be accompanied by references from family, friends, employers, etc. This check is not to subject you to a mental health diagnosis, just check on your superficial and apparent gun-worthyness.
3.) To get the license, you should be required to take a safety course and pass a test appropriate to the type of gun you want to use.
4.) To get a license, you should be over 21. Under 21, you could only use a gun under direct supervision of a licensed person and after obtaining a learner’s license. Your license might be restricted if you have children or criminals or other unsafe people living in your home. (If you want to argue 18 or 25 or some other age, fine. 21 makes sense to me.)
5.) If you possess a gun, you would have to carry a liability insurance policy specifically for gun ownership - and likely you would have to provide proof of appropriate storage, security, and whatever statistical reasons that emerge that would drive the costs and ability to get insurance.
6.) You could not purchase a gun or ammunition without a license, and purchases would have a waiting period.
7.) If you possess a gun without a license, you go to jail, the gun is impounded, and a judge will have to let you go (just like a DUI).
8.) No one should carry an unsecured gun (except in a locked case, unloaded) when outside of home. Guns should be secure when transporting to a shooting event without demonstrating a special need. Their license should indicate training and special carry circumstances beyond recreational shooting (security guard, etc.). If you are carrying your gun while under the influence of drugs or alcohol, you lose your gun and license.
9.) If you buy, sell, give away, or inherit a gun, your license information should be recorded.
10.) If you accidentally discharge your gun, commit a crime, get referred by a mental health professional, are served a restraining order, etc., you should lose your license and guns until reinstated by a serious relicensing process.

Most of you know that a license is no big deal. Besides a driver’s license you need a license to fish, operate a boat, or many other activities. I realize these differ by state, but that is not a reason to let anyone without a bit of sense pack a semiautomatic weapon in public, on the roads, and in schools. I think we need to make it much harder for some people to have guns.

[Tumbulu]

35. I support your point and list

Thank you.

[Polybius]

50. I don't like 8 without exceptions

Like the owner of let's say a check cashing store, who carries $10,000 in cash back and forth. He or she needs a loaded weapon or the carry permit is useless.

[Sancho]

52. It's there...

"Their license should indicate training and special carry circumstances beyond recreational shooting (security guard, etc.)."

If you are carrying cash then you should have extended training and an extensive background check. Then your permit would allow a non-concealed, carry permit for the limited time to deposit money (and not other times).

Your insurance, etc. would reflect the special purpose.

It's just like a special license to drive a bus with school children or give out prescriptions in a drug store or any other employment-related circumstance.

Once the deposit is made, the gun goes back into a locked case or proper storage.

[birdographer]

26. A constant worry here

in our small town in WNC. We have one neighbor in particular who is constantly shooting a gun. We have no idea what he is shooting at all the time. I insist my husband and dogs all come in from the front yard when he is doing this--how do we know where those bullets are going. Even if he is shooting at squirrels in trees, those bullets have to come down somewhere. There are others around us, but they seem too far away to hit us.

[Demovictory9]

45. thats scary. is it legal to randomly shoot guns in your town?

[JanMichael]

32. That is awful. I wonder what the odds are for that happening....

....in France or New Zealand? Maybe Mogidishu 1994 or Bosnia in the 90's.

I am sick of stories like this. They happen too often.

[IronLionZion]

37. OP sounds gang related

although there is also an increase in crazy people losing their minds. A fellow in my neighborhood was arrested for randomly shooting out windows last year. But we also have more gang shootings, robberies, carjackings, etc.

[MrsCheaplaugh]

38. My god...

So horrible.

[Emile]

48. If only the British scientist would of had a gun to protect himself. Hell

if everybody had a gun, no one would get shot.

Judgemental people this is sarcasm, okay. .

[moondust]

59. Shot through wall.

Georgia Shooting: British man Matthew Willson shot through wall

Teen killed in California store after police officer's shot goes through wall of dressing room

Woman shot through apartment wall fights for life in hospital

If I lived in a sane country without a deadly gun culture, I'm not sure I would even want to visit the U.S.

[róisín_dubh]

66. My partner is Scottish and refuses to come here.

Thank god I’m moving soon and my family will travel.

[moondust]

71. Good luck.

I probably would have moved several decades ago if I could have.

[róisín_dubh]

72. It is not easy or cheap...

but the way universities in this country have show horrendous disregard for faculty, staff, and students, I figure now's as good a time as any to make a career move and all.

[Woodwizard]

60. Jan 2018 had a bullet go through the wall on my shop hitting my workbench.

I heard 3 rounds previous standard for sighting in a rifle. But it was closer than my comfort zone another 3 and I heard a metallic ping and saw tools on my workbench swinging. Well I had gotten new neighbors behind my shop up the hill. It was two brothers they had hung a paper target in a tree no backstop!

Well the gun was confiscated and I did press charges for that to happen. The rifle was a 308 their house was 600 feet away a 308 bullet can kill you from over a mile away. Just about everyone out here has firearms including me. But at least I was trained in the Army for weapon safety. To many idiots with guns.

[geretogo]

62. Just a normal day in Christian America . Praise GOD. Such a GOD fearing nation .

[LiberatedUSA]

70. They'll start warning their citizens before they come here. N/t

[raccoon]

74. If I lived in a civilized country where Everybody and their brother

Everybody and their brother Couldn’t buy a gun quicker than they can order a hamburger at a drive-through, I sure as hell wouldn’t come to this country.