Man Shoots and Kills Wife While Using Gun to Drill Holes

In Missouri, prosecutors are considering criminal charges against Ronald Long after he shoot his wife, Patsy, in the chest while using his .22-caliber handgun to try to put holes in a wall.

Ronald Long appears to have been frustrated after several unsuccessful attempts to to put a hole in the exterior wall of their house. It was the second shot that hit and killed his wife. It is often hard to decide whether criminal charges are warranted. I tend to take the view that this is negligence and he is already paying dearly for his mistake. For a column on other such cases, click here. The big difference here is the fact that it was an exterior wall where someone might have been hit on the other side.

Notably, this follows a number of police officers who have killed their wives in such accidents, though none involved home improvement projects. Click here

For the full story, click here

42 thoughts on “Man Shoots and Kills Wife While Using Gun to Drill Holes”

  1. Deeply Worried wrote:
    ROFL! We’re Laff Riots tonight, Mespo!

    Darn, and I missed all the fun on this discussion thread last night. I hate it when that happens. lol

    On a more serious note, I agree with what you said about what tends to happen to Republicans when they “aggregate in groups,” a phenomenon you referred to as the “giant hive mind.” (Fantastic analogy, by the way, which I’m sorely tempted to borrow.) This may account for most of their angry buzzing whenever an opponent dares to question or disagree with their long-held beliefs. Beliefs which are not necessarily facts.

    I also agree with Mespo that we cannot and should not judge ALL Republicans for the narrow-minds of many, such as Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly and the dreaded Ann Coulter, to name just three of the worst. Thanks, Mespo, for that important reminder. 🙂

  2. 🙂

    We’re Laff Riots tonight, Mespo!

    but I’m heading to bed…before I fall asleep on the keyboard!


  3. Deeply:

    LOL. I’m working on “Effects of Combat Stress and Republicanism on Vietnam Era Aviators resulting in Greed-induced Paranoia.” I subtitle it the “Duke Cunningham Story.” I think it actually makes a better screenplay.

  4. Such a good idea!

    I will get my single beleagured post-doc student to start hammering out a grant proposal! This has possibilities!

    My last proposal “Clinical Effects of Sudden Cash Windfalls on the Lower Brain” got turned down by those tightwads at NSF. They probably didn’t like the fact that I was restricting the population for tissue sampling to Jack Abramoff largess recipients, practically the entire Republican Caucus!

  5. Deeply:

    A better title, if I might suggest one, would be “House Republicans and Hooters Girls: A cross-species comparison of reproductive strategies in high stress environments.” It’s sure to be published.

  6. Be sure you attribute so I may receive proper credit. I am under a little strain here: haven’t published successfully in 15 years and my department chair in addition to the Faculty Senate is getting restive!

    My next paper may meet with more success.

    “House Republicans and Hooting Simians, a cross-species comparison of mobbing strategies in high stress environments.”

  7. Deeply,

    Now I see subtraction by addition. I like it, and will plagiarize freely!

  8. Mespo!

    Just my kind of question! All Republicans are not to be stereotyped! No! They are individuals with varying backgrounds and life experiences! Yes, indeed.

    But something happens when they aggregate in groups.

    Something amazing!

    They all tend to start speaking and thinking and dressing and voting the same. Almost identically in fact! They become a R-Human, a hitherto unknown variant of Homo Sapiens. A giant Hive Mind.

    Yes, the Hive Mind is anti-intellectual. And it always has been. Just look how it treated Adlai Stevenson! Or Senator Paul Simon for that matter. It has a lab-roven antipathy toward science, scientists, universities, academicians, and egg-heads of all stripes and conditions.

    And no, scientists have not yet isolated any individual Republicans for intellectual testing, so we can’t say there are any “bright” ones with any certainty. Republicans are a lot like ants. Single specimens removed from the nest, seem to wander around aimlessly and show no purposive behavior or sign of intelligence. Only when they aggregate does the emergent phenomena of the group mind emerge! Then we can say, by the use of various metrics, that their collective intelligence is low, low indeed.

    Indeed, a low cunning seems to exemplify the Republican Party, but no real sign of higher cerebral functioning.

    Professor DW Pumperflugel
    Wheelbarrow State Normal College

  9. Deeply:

    As a Virginian, I am gratified to see this bill advance especially as my kids now apply to college. I will take a competitive advantage wherever it shows and if Floridians want to shoot themselves in the foot (like our citizens from Kansas temporarily did), I say fire away. I also think Florida teachers should also teach, as an alternative to evolution, that Poseidon rules the waves and Zeus the heavens. By the way, would you know if all Republicans are anti-intellectual, or just the “bright” ones?

  10. Well you caught me out..of course like you I choose my words carefully and “custom” is in there deliberately.

    The court has time and again used established practices of long standing to get around facing separation questions squarely. You know them as well as I, since they get cited over and over. My feeling is that even though O’Connor, bless her heart, has gone, the Court if presented with litigation on this would rule on the custom of it and it would pass the Lemon test.

  11. @ DW

    “what is your opinion about the Naval Academy’s custom of dipping the national Colors when they pass before the Cross? Does this raise a separation issue?”

    Might I emphasize “custom” in your word choice. Depending on the length of time of such a practice it may have lost any sincere belief or religious purpose from its origination. Maybe, it’s more of a historical tradition now. (The usual O’Connor inquiry I guess.) I suppose the question is whether this practice advances religion? I doubt that it does, and so I’m voting “no” separation issue here.

    What do you think?

  12. Thank you, Mespo, for such a nice compliment, which to me means a lot. Being here has really helped in that regard, and I thank JT for writing these posts and providing a great opportunity for civil yet spirited discussion, even when there is disagreement. I’ll continue to practice though, as I think there’s always room for improvement. 🙂

  13. Susan:
    I think that you are a sincere passionate advocate and I think you walk the tightrope quite well. Nothing crystallizes our beliefs like pressure from an opponent since it forces the flaws out in the open, and makes us see our own shortcomings as an advocate. I had a judge tell me many years ago that two articulate advocates always produce a diamond because the heat and pressure always inures to the benefit of the understanding of the listener. I heartily agree with that metaphor.

  14. Jay,

    Darn it. I was thinking you might be Jay S. But even if you are not, you are most welcome here! By the way, what is your opinion about the Naval Academy’s custom of dipping the national Colors when they pass before the Cross? Does this raise a separation issue?


    No harm, no foul… I feared it was I that had said something slighting somewhere in my heavy handed way. You are witty as ever and I had the pleasure of visiting your DailyBinx site today. Delightful! Highly recommended.


  15. DW: I have apparently lost my ability to be witty. I was joking that Mespo had lumped Jay into the small group – and I was hoping Jay would pop in for some banter. I should have been more clear.

    Jay: Indeed you are the original and only with reference to my remarks.

    Very sorry if my miserable attempt at humor caused any consternation. I need more fiber.

  16. I must apologize, because it appears that Jay Sekulow and myself may have been used confused here at this blog. If that is that case, I’ll consider it a compliment, but I hope you are not too disappointed to know that I am just “Jay.” No hard feelings, and I hope we shall continue to have great dialogue every time we cross paths.

  17. I, for one, have never maligned Jay, Vince. He is always thoughtful and his presence here pre-dates the recent influx of partisan talking-points posters. Any criticism of them, does not include him.

    Did you spot a post criticizing him on this thread? Mespo mentioned him with some other conservatives, but the Mespo/Jay interchanges have always been carried on with wit and mutual respect of each other’s abilities.

Comments are closed.