One month after Dayton vetoes bill, Linwood man nearly kills himself with illegal fireworks

Categories: Accidents
Fireworks.jpg
Saturday night, a bomb squad had to remove a live firework from a Linwood man's torn-open heart.
Sometimes the governor really does know best, apparently.

Late last month, Gov. Mark Dayton vetoed a bill that would've allowed for the sale and use of a wide array of consumer fireworks in Minnesota, including aerial rockets and firecrackers. In his veto letter, Dayton wrote that it's "government's foremost responsibility to protect the safety and well-being of its citizens."

Well, last Saturday night, a 31-year-old Linwood Township man could've used a little protection. He blew his heart open and is in critical condition after injuring himself with an illegal firework.

According to the Pioneer Press, around 9 p.m. Saturday, the man placed two rounds in a mortar tube and was holding it when the first round shot up and exploded in the air as intended. The other round, however, shot out the back of the tube and ripped open his chest.

Said Anoka County sheriff's spokesman Paul Sommer: "It was almost like it was fired out of a gun."

Witnesses called 911, and the man was transported to Regions Hospital in St. Paul. While medical staff was operating on his wound, they noticed that the unexploded round was still lodged in his chest. Eventually, the bomb squad was called in to remove the live round from the man's somehow-still-beating heart.

The horrible accident is presumably exactly what the governor was worried about when he said "no thanks" to the legislature's attempt to legalize powerful fireworks.

My Voice Nation Help
21 comments
Rescuesaint
Rescuesaint

There's smart and there's stupid. There's strong and there's weak. There's passive and there's aggressive. There's a drip and a ripple. Sorry Kirk, your in over your head. Taxpayers are tired of paying for the uncivilized behavior of their neighbors. Cheers to a better future for all. Dang, I'll never get that 5 minutes back.

mnanimator
mnanimator

I think that this just shows that despite legislation, idiots will still be idiots. Perhaps we should enact legislation to protect us from morons?

Kirk the Conservative Jerk
Kirk the Conservative Jerk

Dayton folded to "special interest" plain and simple.  Per Mark Dayton’s own comments, he said he was undecided on whether he wouldsign the bill just days before the bill landed on his desk.The bill was supported by a vast majority of Minnesota citizens per a public poll, but opposed by a selected few lobbies including the Minnesota State Fire Chiefs Association, the Minnesota Chiefs of Police Association, the City of Minneapolis and the Mayo Clinic.  It appears as if Mark's pockets were padded and endorsements were implied. 

Special interest Mark Dayton; doing what’s right for Minnesota.

As for this article; Hey dumb ass (Dayton), It looks as if you cant legislate "safety" and "common sense".

I find it ironic that there was even a fight for independence and liberty to use and possess fireworks in a celebratory fashion for "Independence Day"...

Joe
Joe

 YES!  Then we could have Kirk the Jerk arrested!!!

webcelt
webcelt

Given most people's ability to handle gunpowder, and that accidents could harm others, not just the moron --- yes please, protect us from morons. This guy could easily have inflicted this injury on someone else. Of course it should be illegal.

Big Government Insider
Big Government Insider

I'm assuming your comment is a joke. I would hardly group the Fire Chiefs Association and the Police Chiefs Association, the City of Minneapolis, and the Mayo Clinic together with business lobbies. The "interest groups" probably don't profit from a fireworks ban. Again, no way you aren't joking.

Albatross
Albatross

Yeah, because what the heck to Fire Chiefs, Chiefs of Police, and the Mayo Clinic know about health and safety? C'mere kid, put down that doll, lemme give you this M80...  FOR LIBERTY!

Kirk the Conservative Jerk
Kirk the Conservative Jerk

 Is this your big government/authoritarian side shining through?  "do it for me, I'm to stupid to do it for myself".  Is this the popular view of the average democrat?  "Protect me mr. government official.  I may hurt myself or others."And "protect us from morons"  I thought that was the unspoken intention behind legalized abortion.  Ya know the whole "eugenics" thing.  Eliminate the "undesirable".  There is a reason extension cords have warning labels on them when they are purchased. They say, "do not use in or near water".  Somehow people still still do.  Some people even use them as rope or a means of strangulation.  Perhaps we should make them illegal. 

Kirk the Conservative Jerk
Kirk the Conservative Jerk

 You said - "And of course an elected official should never do what he thinks is right if public opinion is otherwise, right?"

He expressed little to no opinion as to what was "right" just days before making the decision to veto. In other words, the decision was not his own, it was made for him by "special interest".

This is a perfect example of how an elected official can be bought by special interest and therefor make decisions to circumvent the will to the people. 

Kirk the Conservative Jerk
Kirk the Conservative Jerk

you say ,"Unions are not publicly funded. Union members, who pay into the unions, are government employees. But the organization itself does not directly receive public money."

Really?I used to work for the City of Saint Paul and I'm telling you have NO choice in paying some union dues.  You can "opt out" of paying 85% of the dues thus forgoing all union workplace representation.   Your dues can be spent for lobbying and other thing like mailings.  My ENTIRE wage was payed by the taxpayer. So go figure...You come forth with the name "Big Government Insider", but apparently you haven't a clue to the inside working of big government.

Here is some big government lobbing facts for ya-

Eleven states, Alaska, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Louisiana, North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas, Utah and Virginia, prohibit state agencies from using public funds to retain a lobbyist.  

Alaska has this prohibition for 13 state agencies that are listed in the statute;Connecticut includes state agencies and 9 quasi-public agencies in its prohibition;Florida allows full-time employees of the executive branch and universities to register as a lobbyist and represent their employer; however, these entities may not use public funds to retain a lobbyist to represent them before the legislative or executive branch.In Illinois, registered lobbyists cannot accept compensation from agencies for lobbying on a legislative action. The law provides an exception for full-time state agency employees who receive a portion of their salary in order to lobby an executive, legislative, or administrative action or for those who are contractually retained by certain state agencies.Louisiana's law prohibits an entity of state government or an employee from using state funds to lobby any matter being considered by the legislature. In practice this also includes a ban on contract lobbyists, though the law is not specific. State employees may give factual information.North Carolina allows agencies to designate two employees as liaisons to lobby;South Carolina's ban is by executive order and applies to 13 agencies in the governor's cabinet;In Texas, a state agency may not use state funds to hire anyone who is required by law to register as a lobbyist.Utah bans agencies from using public funds to pay contract lobbyists.Virginia’s law prohibits officers, boards, institutions, or agencies from employing lobbying for compensation.Other restrictions on using state funds to lobby:In Hawaii, individuals and organizations that receive grants may not use state funds for lobbying activities;In Iowa, a state agency may not use public funds for a paid ad or public service announcement 30 days prior to or during a legislative session to encourage specific action on a bill. Additionally, many senior state executive and legislative employees and public officials cannot lobby, unless they are designated to represent the official position of the agency or office;New Hampshire prohibits a recipient of a grant or appropriation from using state funds to lobby or influence legislation. If the recipient wants to lobby, funds that are used must be segregated from the state money;In Washington, lobbying with state funds is limited to providing information, which includes advocating an agency's official position. No state bans the executive branch or other agencies from actually providing information on a bill or information in response to a request.

Kirk the Conservative Jerk
Kirk the Conservative Jerk

 Wow, you say; "Plus I'm gonna goahead and guess that it is illegal for publicly-funded organizations to lobbylawmakers"Teachers unions and other public unions like AFSCME (state,county,municipal employees), commonly lobby at the capital and provide vast amounts of money for election campaigns.  Unions are the largest lobbyists and campaign contributors by far.Think man think!

Kirk the Conservative Jerk
Kirk the Conservative Jerk

What does "profit" have to do with the lobbing efforts of special interest?And what about the overwhelming will of the citizen?85+% said they SHOULD be legalized for the 3-4 week period around the 4th.

Kirk the Conservative Jerk
Kirk the Conservative Jerk

What is to keep you from riding your bike into traffic?Perhaps Dayton should ban bikes.  LOTS of deaths and a VAST number of injuries occur because of them.Skate boards; oh no, we can't have that!  Just think of the head injuries caused by them.WON'T YOU PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!

Think man think!It's not that difficult to see you're choosing to take the side of a fool, and choosing to control a hyped problem which is dwarfed by the ill effects of many others. (as I just listed)

webcelt
webcelt

 Wow, you really do live in your own little bizarro world. That this fool who badly injured himself could just as easily have injured someone else not participating in his stupidity doesn't even register with you. I'm pretty sure that if hit you instead of himself, you'd have a completely different opinion.

Andy H.
Andy H.

you keep using examples of legal things that are useful and necessary in the daily lives of people as an argument for legalizing something that, while mildly entertaining, has no useful purpose.  Why is it that your arguments are always so obviously obtuse?  Perhaps you might want to use a gun analogy...

Big Government Insider
Big Government Insider

Mr Conservative Jerk, the "special interests" that you listed were likely not paying Dayton to veto the bill, because they aren't making money from it. Plus I'm gonna go ahead and guess that it is illegal for publicly-funded organizations to lobby lawmakers. Dayton probably didn't express an opinion earlier because he didn't know much about the issue at hand. Then once several health and safety organizations warned against it, he vetoed it.

I agree that fireworks shouldn't be banned outright. But you're making crazy assumptions. Think man, think.

Big Government Insider
Big Government Insider

I finally figured you out Kirk. You're no conservative jerk, you are a businessman. The only reason you can afford to spend so much time with these ridiculous posts is because it's your job. You say the most right-wing, absurd, conspiracy-theorist thing you can think of in hopes of getting the attention of some testosterone-saturated dumbass, so they will click on your name and go to your crappy bumper sticker website. You wanna sell bumper stickers, that's it. I'm quite confident you don't give a fuck about any of these issues. You even have a protocol for responding to other comments - A quote and then some unrelated BS that goes off on a tangent, giving you endless material to work with. Genius.

Secondly, my screen name is pure sarcasm.

Third, you just supported my argument. More evidence that you don't actually think or care about this, you are just doing business. You're good, we should go into business together.

Big Government Insider
Big Government Insider

Unions are not publicly funded. Union members, who pay into the unions, are government employees. But the organization itself does not directly receive public money.

I'm seriously starting to think you aren't a conservative jerk at all, you seem to just enjoy playing devil's advocate. But then again, what are modern-day conservatives besides just devil's advocates who like to stop anything from getting done?

webcelt
webcelt

And of course an elected official should never do what he thinks is right if public opinion is otherwise, right?

Andy H.
Andy H.

more people are hurt by riding a bike than personal explosive devises... That is your argument?  More people are killed by alcohol than rocket attacks...so, I think we found your next platform.  Think man, think...

Now Trending

Minnesota Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...