Thai Senator negligently discharges machine gun in a restaurant

There seem to be a growing number of people killed by “negligent” handling of a gun in a public place where a gun should never have been handled, let alone be discharged. CNN reports on a Thai Senator who killed his secretary during dinner at a restaurant when he “negligently” fired his 9mm Uzi submachine gun …

Senator Boonsong Kowawisarat was dining with Chanakarn Detkard and four others on Sunday when he took out an Uzi 9mm sub-machine gun, police said.

“Senator Boonsong’s gun was accidentally fired off while he was trying to keep his pistol into its case. The shot went straight into his secretary who was having dinner,” Police Lt. Colonel Choosak Pulsawat told CNN.

The police officer said that Boonsong had been separated from his wife for a while but they were currently living together.

He added that Boonsong had permission to own such a weapon.

Police have initially charged Boonsong with causing death by negligence but he cannot be arrested while the Thai parliament is in session — unless the parliament rules otherwise.

Like the recent death of a woman who was shot at a party, this death seems very suspicious.

[ Many thanks to WhaleOil for the link. ]

Steve Johnson

Founder and Dictator-In-Chief of TFB. A passionate gun owner, a shooting enthusiast and totally tacti-uncool. Favorite first date location: any gun range. Steve can be contacted here.


  • armed_partisan

    CANNOT BE ARRESTED while parliament is in SESSION? What kind of bullshit is that?!!!

    • Calvin

      Lots of countries have such limited immunity laws to prevent the Executive/Army/Police/Judiciary from harassing or interfering with the legislature. It varies from country to country just how much immunity is conferred.

      • S O

        There’s usually an exception for people caught in the act, though.

    • lex

      I don’t get the emphasis. Would you prefer “can only be arrested while Parliament is in session”?

    • Komrad

      Even Illinois has a rule that state congressmen cannot be arrested going to, at, or returning home from a legislative session.

    • I think that this is common and the legal concept dates back a very long time. It prevents anyone from preventing a member of parliament from going about their duties (voting). Parliament can have him arrested, so he is not above the law (I don’t know about Thailand, but parliament is considered the defacto highest court in some countries).

      The elected Tribune of Rome was powerful because inside the city of Rome anyone who interfered with him in anyway would be executed – he could literally use his body to prevent just about anything from happening because so much as touching him would be grounds for execution.

      Personally I don’t think it is a bad concept for any legal system, as long as the justice system can kick in after a brief period of time (such as when parliament’s session ends). It prevents the unelected guards of the state from interfering with the elected representatives of the people.

      Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

  • Burst

    It’s just amazing the way “accidental discharges” happen around authority figures.

    I don’t know enough about Thai laws to know whether a normal person could acquire an Uzi legally. But the presence of a clearly labelled safety switch seems rather damning.

  • lex

    Why the scare quotes? Are you really implying this guy decided to get rid of his secretary by shooting her in a public place with an Uzi? It’s not even like Thailand treats NDs as a misdemeanor or something.

    Firearms not politics, please.

    • lex

      That is “NDs that lead to someone dying” not NDs in general.

  • Lance

    Got to watch out for those armed Senators 😉

  • Tinkerer

    To hell with the politic mumbling, I want to know about the gun-related issue itself. What kind of “UZI” -if it actually WAS an UZI: remember that for many journalists all SMGs or large pistols are UZIs- was it? A regular UZI? A Mini, Micro or Pistol UZI? Semiautomatic or select-fire capable? Regular UZIs are all open-bolt designs, but if it was another model: was it an open- or closed-bolt design?

    • Tinkerer

      And what happened to both the manual and grip safeties?

    • 6677

      The article mentioned trying to put a pistol in its case, so its either not an UZI at all or its a UZI pistol model if such a thing exists (I don’t really know the UZI line-up that well)

  • Sardaukar

    No need for public excuses for the Thai Clinton…
    Come on! you “accidentaly” discharge a pistol (a mofo UZI) right in your secretary (they don’t say if male or female, but with a little fantasy…), while handling a loaded gun, with safety off and bypassing grip safeties. Cool story, bro.

  • Mechman

    Just to make it extra suspicious, the secretary was also his estranged wife.

  • S O

    Would you please refrain from calling a machine pistol / submachinegun a “machinegun”?

    Such sensationalist errors are to be expected by laymen journalists, not by writers of firearms-specific publications…

    • Tahoe

      SO – “machine gun” is the generally accepted “official” term for a fully-automatic weapon. Seems difficult for those of us with military backgrounds where a “machine gun” is something more specific, but gun laws here use the term more loosely.

    • Other Steve

      According to US laws all select fire guns are machine guns, it’s a proper enough term if you are accustomed to US laws.

      • John

        But a Jericho 941 isn’t select fire.

    • RocketScientist

      If you want to get nit-picky (as it seems you do), it is my understanding that the generally accepted definition of a “machine gun” includes one main aspect: being fully-automatic (or ‘burst’) fire-capable. It is a broad classification with qualifiers or modifiers used to sub-divide this categorization depending on various aspect of the gun in question (size, weight, length, intended purpose, caliber used, etc). Thus all submachine guns and light machine guns and heavy machine guns and machine pistols and auto cannons and assault rifles and full-auto-PDWs (etc. ad nauseam) can be accurately (if with less-than-ideal specificity) referred to as machine guns. Steve may even have been INTENTIONALLY ambiguous in his wording, as the information he posted does not indicate which of the many varieties of UZI was used and he did not want to identify it incorrectly by being too specific. Or maybe he just used the term machine gun to describe it as that is what it is (a machine gun) and didn’t foresee someone (who is consuming the free information he goes out of his way to share) would criticize every nuance of the wording of his post (incorrectly, I might add).

    • In my opinion, any fully automatic gun is a machine gun. If it fires a pistol round it is either a submachine gun (Uzi, MP5) or, if it is pistol sized, a machine pistol (Micro Uzi, Glock 18C).

  • Travis

    Sounds like the Hangover 2!

  • Tahoe

    I hope that, as soon as Parliament is out of session, this guy is nailed to the wall. This sounds like a pretty damn cut-and-dry case to me.

  • claymore

    It’s Not an Uzi submachine gun it’s a “Jericho 941, an Israeli pistol sometimes marketed as an “Uzi Eagle”

    check this for attribution and photo:

  • mosinman

    hey! you got a fly on ya, stay still! im gunna get that lil bugger

  • junyo

    Note to Bill Clinton:
    THIS is how you clean up after you’ve diddled the help.