Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
PSA
Member Login

Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 6/1/2010 7:36:10 PM EDT
http://vuurwapenblog.com/2010/06/01/negligent-discharges-vs-accidental-discharges/

Unfortunately, the topic of “unwanted firearm discharges” comes up quite often online, either when a news story about such an incident is being discussed, or when a member of a firearm-related forum has an “insert word here” discharge.

The topic can be contentious and is riddled with half truths and misunderstandings. I’m not claiming to be the final source of information on the topic, but I do believe that I have a well-grounded opinion. Now, some people say that there’s no such thing as an accidental discharge, and others say there’s no such thing as a negligent discharge. I disagree with both camps.

In my opinion, an accidental discharge is the result of a mechanical malfunction. Something is physically wrong with the weapon, specifically, one or more of its internal components.

Also in my opinion, a negligent discharge is the result of a shooter malfunction. Either the person holding/carrying the weapon was not trained in the safe handling of firearms, or the person knowingly ignored said training for some reason. Any external influence that causes the firearm to discharge also falls under the category of negligent discharges. This includes, but is not limited to, allowing the thumb strap of certain holsters to enter the trigger guard of a pistol while reholstering.

The vast majority of “unwanted discharges” are negligent discharges. I don’t know how many times I’ve heard something along the lines of “It was an accident, I didn’t mean for it to ‘go off’”. Intent has no bearing on this. Obviously, both accidental and negligent discharges are unwanted, hence me lumping them in together. Nobody wants for their weapon to have a dangerous malfunction, and nobody wants to “accidentally” shoot someone. Unfortunately, without an element of negligence, large or small, the latter case just doesn’t happen.

One other common phrase is “I didn’t know the gun was loaded” – that’s a sure sign of a negligent discharge. An accidental discharge can occur during the normal, safe handling of a loaded firearm, when all firearms safety rules are being carefully observed, although such incidents are exceedingly rare. An example would be the decocker on surplus CZ-52 pistols, which can cause the weapon to fire when engaged if certain components are worn, or certain weapons that will fire when dropped (it could certainly be argued that dropping a firearm is a form of negligence, however, it is nice to know whether your firearm will discharge or not in the unlikely event that it is dropped). These situations are generally known to the shooting world and appropriate precautions can be taken to mitigate risk. The vast majority of shooters will never encounter a true accidental discharge.

On the other hand, a negligent discharge occurs as a result of the violation of at least one and sometimes two or three safety rules. Every violation of a weapons safety rule is an occurrence of negligence. It doesn’t matter if you think the firearm is unloaded – you should always treat it as if it was loaded. This is basic stuff, but it is ignored way too often.

However, not all negligent discharges occur when the shooter chooses to ignore that first rule. As mentioned previously, another common cause is when a pistol is being reholstered. Sometimes, the trigger finger is caught by the holster, and other times, a retention strap can enter the trigger guard. Either case is not the result of a mechanical malfunction of the weapon, but of the negligence of the shooter in failing to ensure that nothing entered the trigger guard.

It can be a personal affront to the person whose negligence caused the discharge – and admitting fault in such a situation can be a hefty blow to a sometimes fragile ego – but identifying and acknowledging the situations by which a negligent discharge can occur will hopefully prevent them from happening again, if not in the first place.
Link Posted: 6/1/2010 7:45:17 PM EDT
negligent is a legal term of art which shouldn't be applied unless you are attempting to undermine the entire group that the label can be attached to, in the case gun owners. You never hear about car negligence, but instead car accidents because no one wants to malign all car owners.
Link Posted: 6/1/2010 7:47:40 PM EDT
Ask the Detroit Police.
Link Posted: 6/1/2010 7:47:41 PM EDT
Originally Posted By DKing:
You never hear about car negligence, but instead car accidents because no one wants to malign all car owners.


"At fault" discharges?
Link Posted: 6/1/2010 7:50:18 PM EDT



Originally Posted By DKing:


negligent is a legal term of art which shouldn't be applied unless you are attempting to undermine the entire group that the label can be attached to, in the case gun owners. You never hear about car negligence, but instead car accidents because no one wants to malign all car owners.


Using the term 'accident' in most car crashes is as lame as using 'accidental discharge', it is done to assuage the feelings of the party who is at fault.  The idea of "personal responsibility" dies a little bit everytime somebody does it.
 
Link Posted: 6/1/2010 7:51:41 PM EDT
There are no "accidental" discharges as every single one of them can be prevented by exercising due diligence in all safety precautions.



All "accidental" discharges are in fact negligent.





CJ


Link Posted: 6/1/2010 7:54:37 PM EDT
some of you don't understand what the word 'accident' means.  the terms are interchangeable.  if you just have a hard-on for not using the term AD, use the term ND.
Link Posted: 6/1/2010 7:55:58 PM EDT
What about a mechanical failure that cause's a discharge?
Link Posted: 6/1/2010 7:57:44 PM EDT
Originally Posted By DKing:
negligent is a legal term of art which shouldn't be applied unless you are attempting to undermine the entire group that the label can be attached to, in the case gun owners. You never hear about car negligence, but instead car accidents because no one wants to malign all car owners.


obviously not an auto insurance claims adjuster
Link Posted: 6/1/2010 7:57:55 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/1/2010 7:58:36 PM EDT by 87GN]
Originally Posted By cmjohnson:
There are no "accidental" discharges as every single one of them can be prevented by exercising due diligence in all safety precautions.

All "accidental" discharges are in fact negligent.


CJ


Way to not read what I wrote.


Originally Posted By Losing_Streak:
What about a mechanical failure that cause's a discharge?


Originally Posted By 87GN:
In my opinion, an accidental discharge is the result of a mechanical malfunction. Something is physically wrong with the weapon, specifically, one or more of its internal components.

Link Posted: 6/1/2010 7:59:40 PM EDT
Originally Posted By cmjohnson:
There are no "accidental" discharges as every single one of them can be prevented by exercising due diligence in all safety precautions.

All "accidental" discharges are in fact negligent.


CJ


If you chamber a round in a weapon you've handled before and it fires, there was a mechanical malfunction.  AD.
Link Posted: 6/1/2010 8:00:49 PM EDT



Originally Posted By 87GN:



Originally Posted By cmjohnson:

There are no "accidental" discharges as every single one of them can be prevented by exercising due diligence in all safety precautions.



All "accidental" discharges are in fact negligent.





CJ





Way to not read what I wrote.






Originally Posted By Losing_Streak:

What about a mechanical failure that cause's a discharge?





Originally Posted By 87GN:

In my opinion, an accidental discharge is the result of a mechanical malfunction. Something is physically wrong with the weapon, specifically, one or more of its internal components.





You missed my joke.......







 
Link Posted: 6/1/2010 8:02:17 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Losing_Streak:

Originally Posted By 87GN:
Originally Posted By cmjohnson:
There are no "accidental" discharges as every single one of them can be prevented by exercising due diligence in all safety precautions.

All "accidental" discharges are in fact negligent.


CJ


Way to not read what I wrote.


Originally Posted By Losing_Streak:
What about a mechanical failure that cause's a discharge?


Originally Posted By 87GN:
In my opinion, an accidental discharge is the result of a mechanical malfunction. Something is physically wrong with the weapon, specifically, one or more of its internal components.


You missed my joke.......

 


ok
Link Posted: 6/1/2010 8:16:23 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/1/2010 8:18:01 PM EDT by Milquetoast]
Originally Posted By DKing:
negligent is a legal term of art which shouldn't be applied unless you are attempting to undermine the entire group that the label can be attached to, in the case gun owners. You never hear about car negligence, but instead car accidents because no one wants to malign all car owners.


I agree.  We are hurting ourselves when we get all smug with the term "negligence."
Here's an example:
A couple months ago, local cops get a call from homeowner; he thinks there is an intruder in the house.  It's 2:00 a.m.  Canine officer goes in to clear the house with his dog on a leash in his left hand, and a Glock .40 in his right hand.  Stress level is high.  Suddenly the dog starts to go berserk, and he knocks his handler down.  Now this cop happens to be a good gunhandler, keeps his finger alongside the frame –– not one of thos "profeshunal enuf" type cops.  But, as he is falling, his finger gets inside the trigger guard, and he shoots his own dog.  The dog dies in his arms.  Understand, this dog is the officer's best friend.  The cop is devastated.
Accidental, or negligent?  If we say that "any unintended shooting that does not involve mechanical malfunction is negligent," then we have to say it was negligent.  There was no mechanical malfunction; the gun worked as designed.  Should this cop go to jail?  Lose his job?  Be punished somehow?
As DKing pointed out, "negligence" is a legal term.  It means you go to jail (criminal negligence), you pay money (civil negligence), or both.
Stuff happens.  It's possible to have a car accident, or a bicycle accident, or a chainsaw accident, or a gun accident, that does not involve mechanical failure, but does rise to the very serious legal verdict of "negligence."

I offer a compromise.  Why don't we just all agree to say "unintentional"?  "UD."  That is an accurate term that doesn't involve any legal conclusions.

Link Posted: 6/1/2010 8:25:06 PM EDT
Originally Posted By cmjohnson:
There are no "accidental" discharges as every single one of them can be prevented by exercising due diligence in all safety precautions.

All "accidental" discharges are in fact negligent.


CJ


YEP!!!  + 1000

Link Posted: 6/1/2010 8:28:06 PM EDT
Originally Posted By cmjohnson:
There are no "accidental" discharges as every single one of them can be prevented by exercising due diligence in all safety precautions.

All "accidental" discharges are in fact negligent.

CJ


This is not true.

http://www.drinnonlaw.com/Texas-Defective-Remington700.php

Now, if the bullet hits something or someone valuable, that is negligent, but the discharge itself can be accidental (no finger on the trigger,gun discharges anyway).  Exceedingly rare, but it can happen.

Link Posted: 6/1/2010 8:31:02 PM EDT
Originally Posted By cmjohnson:
There are no "accidental" discharges as every single one of them can be prevented by exercising due diligence in all safety precautions.

All "accidental" discharges are in fact negligent.


CJ


I completely disagree with this.  I will say that there are no accidental injuries due to discharges.

If a gun has its lockwork fail and releases the firing pin, thus firing the round, while pointed safely down range, would that not be an accidental discharge?  And yes, it has happened (with and without the 'downrange' part)

Which safety precaution would prevent this?  I can't think of one that would stop the firing pin, but I can think of some that would avoid someone being hurt as a result.
Link Posted: 6/1/2010 8:31:04 PM EDT
Originally Posted By cmjohnson:
There are no "accidental" discharges as every single one of them can be prevented by exercising due diligence in all safety precautions.

All "accidental" discharges are in fact negligent.


CJ


incorrect.  I have had an accidental discharge with an SKS.  Firing pin got stuck forward, bolt slammed home on cartridges after reloading it with a stripper, and 2 rounds into the berm.  Safety was on, no hands even near the trigger.
Link Posted: 6/1/2010 8:47:56 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/1/2010 8:51:41 PM EDT by Hoppy]
Originally Posted By cmjohnson:
There are no "accidental" discharges as every single one of them can be prevented by exercising due diligence in all safety precautions.

All "accidental" discharges are in fact negligent.


CJ



Never had an AR double?


Maybe "unintended discharge" would be a better description for some situations.
Link Posted: 6/1/2010 8:49:16 PM EDT
Originally Posted By 21BoomCBTENGR:
Originally Posted By cmjohnson:
There are no "accidental" discharges as every single one of them can be prevented by exercising due diligence in all safety precautions.

All "accidental" discharges are in fact negligent.


CJ


incorrect.  I have had an accidental discharge with an SKS.  Firing pin got stuck forward, bolt slammed home on cartridges after reloading it with a stripper, and 2 rounds into the berm.  Safety was on, no hands even near the trigger.


OK,OK ya may have me on that one!!

Link Posted: 6/1/2010 8:56:19 PM EDT
Originally Posted By cmjohnson:
There are no "accidental" discharges as every single one of them can be prevented by exercising due diligence in all safety precautions.

All "accidental" discharges are in fact negligent.


CJ



Negatory.  I've had a handgun slam fire when I released the slide.  Finger nowhere near the trigger.  Bullet went in a safe direction.
The same thing could happen when chambering a soft primer round in an M1 Garand.

Accidental discharge.
Link Posted: 6/1/2010 9:29:12 PM EDT
I had a ar15 fire when loading a round of soft primer blackhills ammo. The safety was on, the firing pin slapped the primer hard enough it went off.  I loaded the same round a few times.

I call that a mechanical malfunction, sometimes shit happens

I rotate out the top round in the magazine if i load it more than once to prevent it, and use harder primer military ammo.
Link Posted: 6/1/2010 10:11:21 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/1/2010 10:12:17 PM EDT by GaryM]
Why don't we just ban the word "accident" since it seemingly applies to nothing.  


This whole negligent vs. accident crap reeks of nanny state bs I can't stand the damn word anymore.

ETA; I hereby submit both these words be stricken from the language and replaced with the phrase "Shit happens".
Link Posted: 6/1/2010 10:16:24 PM EDT
I have the simplest explanation.



If the 4 rules are being observed when the gun discharges, it's an accidental discharge.



When any or all of the 4 rules are NOT being observed when the gun discharges, it's a negligent discharge.




Simple as that.

Link Posted: 6/1/2010 10:30:06 PM EDT
I went to a hunter safety class where we were all informed it was unsafe to carry a gun where the muzzle was pointed anywhere near a person (even unloaded). The instructor proceded to explain how the muzzle could not be horizontal since there was no way to tell who might be on the other side of the wall. So the obvious question is what if you live on the second floor of a three story building? Seriously, sometimes this "safety" crap is so overblown and ridiculous.
Yeah, I don't always wear a seatbelt and yeah, i ride a two wheeled death machine (motorcycle). I load my own ammo and have a loaded gun in my house. I work in a bad part of town, drive a soft top jeep and participate in dangerous sports. I even learned to ride a bicycle and never wore a helmet! I will let the rest of you lock yourselves in your gated communities in your padded rooms and fully airbagged cars.
Common sense is the key....
Aww, to hell with it. Some of you already understand, some of you will eventually get it and some are just hopeless. I have ranted enough. You fellers have fun showing how awesomely super safe you are. G'night all!
Link Posted: 6/1/2010 10:41:42 PM EDT
Link Posted: 6/2/2010 4:49:16 AM EDT
Operator Caused Discharge (OCD) vs. Equipment Caused Discharge (ECD).  There.
Link Posted: 6/2/2010 4:57:12 AM EDT
I thought an accidental discharge only happens during sex
Link Posted: 6/2/2010 5:08:13 AM EDT
Neglegence leads to accidents.
Link Posted: 6/2/2010 5:10:03 AM EDT
Call a spade a spade.  This discussion is brought about by the Glock type non safety, safety. Mah finger is mah safety, Ah ahm the only one professional enugh to handle this badass Glock.  Ah cain't fumble with a safety.  So, we need a way to call someone an idiot, when they shoot themselves or someone else, because only a true badass can handle a Glock type safety, and everyone else is a pussy. Right.

Link Posted: 6/2/2010 5:14:11 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Bloencustoms:
I have the simplest explanation.

If the 4 rules are being observed when the gun discharges, it's an accidental discharge.

When any or all of the 4 rules are NOT being observed when the gun discharges, it's a negligent discharge.


Simple as that.


well put
Link Posted: 6/2/2010 5:39:50 AM EDT
No such thing as an accidental discharge.

Through an individual's negligence in maintaining a firearm, parts can become worn and a physical malfunction can cause the firearm to discharge.

If you are not inspecting your firearms to ensure their safe function, you are definitely negligent in your duties as a firearm owner.
Link Posted: 6/2/2010 5:41:59 AM EDT
This:




Originally Posted By Bloencustoms:


I have the simplest explanation.



If the 4 rules are being observed when the gun discharges, it's an accidental discharge.



When any or all of the 4 rules are NOT being observed when the gun discharges, it's a negligent discharge.




Simple as that.


+




Originally
Posted By TxSgt1911:



Operator Caused Discharge (OCD) vs. Equipment Caused Discharge (ECD).  
There.


=



Win



 
Link Posted: 6/2/2010 5:48:25 AM EDT



Originally Posted By cmjohnson:


There are no "accidental" discharges as every single one of them can be prevented by exercising due diligence in all safety precautions.



All "accidental" discharges are in fact negligent.





CJ



Jut because it can be prevented does not mean it is not an accident or that it is negligent.



 
Link Posted: 6/2/2010 5:57:33 AM EDT
Originally Posted By jon7400:
No such thing as an accidental discharge.

Through an individual's negligence in maintaining a firearm, parts can become worn and a physical malfunction can cause the firearm to discharge.

If you are not inspecting your firearms to ensure their safe function, you are definitely negligent in your duties as a firearm owner.


I've heard this one before...What do you say to the respected forum member (and NYC police officer) who had a slam fire with a brand new Glock the very first time he loaded it?
Link Posted: 6/2/2010 6:01:21 AM EDT
Link Posted: 6/2/2010 6:05:24 AM EDT
Glock's negligence in releasing a defective weapon.

He would get a mulligan in my view as far as the ND goes.

Originally Posted By 87GN:
Originally Posted By jon7400:
No such thing as an accidental discharge.

Through an individual's negligence in maintaining a firearm, parts can become worn and a physical malfunction can cause the firearm to discharge.

If you are not inspecting your firearms to ensure their safe function, you are definitely negligent in your duties as a firearm owner.


I've heard this one before...What do you say to the respected forum member (and NYC police officer) who had a slam fire with a brand new Glock the very first time he loaded it?


Link Posted: 6/2/2010 6:13:08 AM EDT




Originally Posted By cmjohnson:

There are no "accidental" discharges as every single one of them can be prevented by exercising due diligence in all safety precautions.



All "accidental" discharges are in fact negligent.





CJ



Not in the case of mechanical malfunction. That is an accident. However, if all four laws are being obeyed, there would be no injury beyond some soiled underwear.

Link Posted: 6/2/2010 6:15:27 AM EDT




Originally Posted By Milquetoast:



Originally Posted By DKing:

negligent is a legal term of art which shouldn't be applied unless you are attempting to undermine the entire group that the label can be attached to, in the case gun owners. You never hear about car negligence, but instead car accidents because no one wants to malign all car owners.




I agree. We are hurting ourselves when we get all smug with the term "negligence."

Here's an example:

A couple months ago, local cops get a call from homeowner; he thinks there is an intruder in the house. It's 2:00 a.m. Canine officer goes in to clear the house with his dog on a leash in his left hand, and a Glock .40 in his right hand. Stress level is high. Suddenly the dog starts to go berserk, and he knocks his handler down. Now this cop happens to be a good gunhandler, keeps his finger alongside the frame –– not one of thos "profeshunal enuf" type cops. But, as he is falling, his finger gets inside the trigger guard, and he shoots his own dog. The dog dies in his arms. Understand, this dog is the officer's best friend. The cop is devastated.

Accidental, or negligent? If we say that "any unintended shooting that does not involve mechanical malfunction is negligent," then we have to say it was negligent. There was no mechanical malfunction; the gun worked as designed. Should this cop go to jail? Lose his job? Be punished somehow?

As DKing pointed out, "negligence" is a legal term. It means you go to jail (criminal negligence), you pay money (civil negligence), or both.

Stuff happens. It's possible to have a car accident, or a bicycle accident, or a chainsaw accident, or a gun accident, that does not involve mechanical failure, but does rise to the very serious legal verdict of "negligence."



I offer a compromise. Why don't we just all agree to say "unintentional"? "UD." That is an accurate term that doesn't involve any legal conclusions.







Your name is fitting.



Said officer didn't have his finger in the appropriate place if it went into the trigger guard under sympathetic reflex. Negligence.
Link Posted: 6/2/2010 6:25:16 AM EDT
Originally Posted By cmjohnson:
There are no "accidental" discharges as every single one of them can be prevented by exercising due diligence in all safety precautions.

All "accidental" discharges are in fact negligent.
CJ


The only time I might call it an accidental discharge is if a part in a well-maintained firearm fails.  

Rust buckets and heaps that have never been cleaned or disassembled don't count.  Neither do guns with poor trigger work.  I'm talking about a spring or sear or something just breaking, causing the hammer/striker to fall on a loaded chamber.  Of course, the gun shouldn't be pointed at someones head.  Maybe if a CCWer had a holstered firearm that "failed" and ended up with a bullet in the leg, I might call that an accident.

Link Posted: 6/2/2010 6:38:04 AM EDT
Originally Posted By FreeFloater:
I thought an accidental discharge only happens during sex


I thought a negligent discharge only happens during sex.
Link Posted: 6/2/2010 6:39:11 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/2/2010 6:47:27 AM EDT by Torf]
All accidental discharges are negligent.  Not all negligent discharges are accidental...





How negligent you are in discharging, will determine just how badly the result ends.



ETA - I am not a fan of the philosophy that just because there was negligence, someone must pay.  One time, I was hunting birds and went to cross a fence.  I had been shooting right before, and was going to shoot again once the fence was crossed, so I did not flip the safety (mechanical safety not being a part of the 4 rules).  As I was crossing, I hooked the trigger on a barb on the wire fence.  It went off in a safe direction.



Sure it was negligence, but I intentionally followed the 4 rules, and so nothing happened or would have happened.  Big deal.  It's just a learning experience.

Link Posted: 6/2/2010 6:42:13 AM EDT



Originally Posted By Torf:


All accidental discharges are negligent.  Not all negligent discharges are accidental...





You have that backwards, by definition.



 
Link Posted: 6/2/2010 6:42:58 AM EDT
"Negligence is the failure to use such care as a reasonably prudent and careful person would use under similar circumstances" - that is about the most simple legal definition I could find.  What it really means is whatever 12 people sitting on a jury think.  Pretty nebulous concept really.  

Better than arguing over semantics might be learn and live the 4 rules of gun safety, and use our failures, or the failures of others to do so, as an opportunity to teach them/learn them better so somebody doesn't get hurt.
Link Posted: 6/2/2010 6:46:41 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/2/2010 6:47:01 AM EDT by vaughn4380]
I think the term Negligent Accidental Discharge is more appropriate. While it takes negligence to cause the discharge, it is still an accident.

So everyone should start using the term NAD when talking about such things.


For example: "Officer Smith just had a NAD in his hands in the locker room while getting ready for his shift."






Link Posted: 6/2/2010 6:51:09 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/2/2010 6:53:45 AM EDT by DogWizard]
Originally Posted By RenegadeX:

Originally Posted By cmjohnson:
There are no "accidental" discharges as every single one of them can be prevented by exercising due diligence in all safety precautions.

All "accidental" discharges are in fact negligent.


CJ

Jut because it can be prevented does not mean it is not an accident or that it is negligent.  




What? Can you please explain your though process on that one? The very fact that "it" WAS preventable implies negligence - if an otherwise preventable "unexpected discharge" isn't negligence, then what is?


I love it when these arguments over the semantics of this issue crop up - especially in a group that should know better. It always seems to boil down to the people who have had a ND trying to avoid the stigma or looking for an excuse to call it something else because "they" couldn't possible have been negligent. The only possible definition of an "accidental discharge" would be a actual, confirmed mechanical failure and even then if the safety rules were being followed it should result in nothing more than an unexpected hole and a hell of a surprise. Even a mechanical failure in a brand new firearm is negligent - it just passes the negligence farther up the food chain. If someone was unintentionally  injured it was a negligent discharge - period. Nut up, take responsibility, and assuming you survive, do your damnedest to ensure that it doesn't happen again.



Link Posted: 6/2/2010 6:51:18 AM EDT



Originally Posted By RenegadeX:





Originally Posted By Torf:

All accidental discharges are negligent.  Not all negligent discharges are accidental...





You have that backwards, by definition.

 


I don't think so.  Barring mechanical failure, which may not be accidental or negligent, and accidental discharge results from negligent handling, technically.



If I am negligent in not identifying a target, and intentionally shoot a girl scout through a door, or perhaps set up my target with a playground as a backstop, then that is hardly accidental.



 
Link Posted: 6/2/2010 6:57:36 AM EDT
Originally Posted By BatcaveSouth:
Originally Posted By cmjohnson:
There are no "accidental" discharges as every single one of them can be prevented by exercising due diligence in all safety precautions.

All "accidental" discharges are in fact negligent.


CJ


If you chamber a round in a weapon you've handled before and it fires, there was a mechanical malfunction.  AD.


So, if you skip the PMCS on a piece of mechanical equipment, you get a pass.  I see.
Link Posted: 6/2/2010 7:00:21 AM EDT
PMCS?  What, are you going to clean a weapon until it becomes safer?

That's a new one.

What exactly are you talking about?
Link Posted: 6/2/2010 7:02:59 AM EDT



Originally Posted By jwr6:



Originally Posted By BatcaveSouth:


Originally Posted By cmjohnson:

There are no "accidental" discharges as every single one of them can be prevented by exercising due diligence in all safety precautions.



All "accidental" discharges are in fact negligent.





CJ





If you chamber a round in a weapon you've handled before and it fires, there was a mechanical malfunction.  AD.




So, if you skip the PMCS on a piece of mechanical equipment, you get a pass.  I see.


Look.  If you skip all basic function tests and you grab a gun and it doesn't work, then you have a problem.  You are negligent.



HOWEVER, there are things that can break during normal operation, and things that can be broken and not caught without a complete strip and rebuild, if even then.  You are setting up an awfully high bar for yourself to live up to.  If something happens, don't think of yourself as a failure.  Just learn and move on.  No one needs to go to jail.

 
Link Posted: 6/2/2010 7:09:49 AM EDT
Originally Posted By BatcaveSouth:
Originally Posted By cmjohnson:
There are no "accidental" discharges as every single one of them can be prevented by exercising due diligence in all safety precautions.

All "accidental" discharges are in fact negligent.


CJ


If you chamber a round in a weapon you've handled before and it fires, there was a mechanical malfunction.  AD.


This.  One of my AKs slamfired about a month ago when being chambered.  The gun was being used for its intended purpose in the intended manner.  It was an AD, not an ND.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top