Charges won't be filed in Raleigh gun show shooting

Raleigh, N.C. — Wake County's top prosecutor will not file charges in a weekend shooting at a Raleigh gun show that injured three people.

District Attorney Colon Willoughby said Tuesday that he found no violation of law in what authorities said was an accidental shooting at the Dixie Gun and Knife Show at North Carolina's state fairgrounds on Saturday.

Investigators said Gary Lynn Wilson, 36, of Wilmington, brought a 12-gauge shotgun to the event to sell but that it went off when Wilson removed it from its case at a security checkpoint around 1 p.m.

Three people who were hit by shotgun pellets were treated and released from a local hospital the same day.

The shooting prompted event organizers to close for the rest of the day, but it reopened Sunday without private gun sales.

The Dixie Gun and Knife Show has been held at the fairgrounds for more than 30 years and has had an excellent track record for safety, state fairground police said Saturday.

"If we thought that it was a problem or a hazard or was dangerous, we would not have this show," state fairground Police Chief Joel Keith said.

211 Comments

WRAL.com welcomes your comments on this story. All comments are moderated prior to publication based on our posting guidelines. Please review them prior to posting and if your message is not approved.

VIEW ALL 211 COMMENTS

This story is closed for comments. Comments on WRAL.com news stories are accepted and moderated between the hours of 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. Monday through Friday.

Latest Comments

Yes, I agree that gun deaths would go to zero if guns magically disappeared. But to state that homicide/suicide rate would immediately and permanently drop by the amount currently attributed to firearms today is naive...where there is a will, there is a way.

Hence my continuation as to what other "ways" you suggest we outlaw. We saw how well the 21st amendment worked...you cannot legislate social behavior.

Instead, how about we focus on parenting and personal responsibility.

Should there be more oversight into the sale and ownership of guns?...probably. I would go so far as to state you must have appropriate training, licensing and proof that your have the means to adequately protect a firearm to legally operate/own one (similar to vehicles and CCP).

Here's my "thought experiment"...Apply the same requirements on becoming a parent...appropriate training and proof of means to care and support for said children. Criminalize having children without meeting these requirements....hmmm

CaryEngineer
January 24, 2013 12:14 p.m.

"Your conclusion is that if we could (magically) remove every firearm from every person that 10's of thousands of lives will be spared? Sorry, but the data is not there"

Let's do a little thought experiment, shall we? Imagine that for one day there were zero guns in America. How many gun deaths would there be that day? We know what the rate is at 300,000,000 guns. Do you think the rate goes down if we add more guns to what we have now? What's the ideal number of guns for the fewest number of gun deaths?

And regarding "past tense" on the engineering thing - retired, is that a problem?

junk999
January 24, 2013 11:33 a.m.

"the conclusion is that these restrictions did nothing (statistically) to improve the situation. So more laws will improve the situation because...why?"

You appear to have a significant reading comprehension problem. The CDC paper allows no such conclusion. It allows no conclusion at all on anything, since it could only say there was insufficient evidence for a conclusion. How is that unclear?

"Obviously your "presumption" was wrong...no, you cannot "follow a link" to the source papers"

You can follow the links to the titles and authors of the referenced papers, and with a little effort find the papers. Are you sure you're an engineer?

"Stop living in fear"

I actually don't have enough fear to feel that I need a gun to feel safe. You should be giving that advice to gun owners. If we could lessen the fear in our society the feeling of a need for guns for protection would diminish, and everyone would win.

junk999
January 24, 2013 11:21 a.m.

"At the very least it puts the lie to the claim of your study that all the evidence clearly points in one direction"

Uh, no, it does no such thing. The CDC paper was a review of gun laws. The studies I linked looked at gun ownership versus violence. At the very most the CDC paper reaches no conclusion, so how does it "put the lie" to anything, let alone relationships that it didn't even consider? Your statement is utter nonsense.

junk999
January 24, 2013 10:55 a.m.

junk999- "past tense" on the engineering thing...yeah we have to be pragmatic. Umm...the conclusion is that these restrictions did nothing (statistically) to improve the situation. So more laws will improve the situation because...why? You are advocating to create laws that don't exist...so yes, YOU are trying to push your beliefs on ME.

Obviously your "presumption" was wrong...no, you cannot "follow a link" to the source papers (very convenient).

Your conclusion is that if we could (magically) remove every firearm from every person that 10's of thousands of lives will be spared? Sorry, but the data is not there...and I can point to as many legitimate studies as you can.

Should we remove knives? Should we remove ANFO and it's components from availability? Should we prevent personal ownership of aircraft? Cars? Hammers? A firearm is a tool, and like any tool can be misused.

Stop living in fear, parent your children, hold people responsible and punish those that commit the crime.

CaryEngineer
January 24, 2013 10:48 a.m.