Yes, I know that some guns have more safety features than other guns. The tradeoff is a more complex manual of arms required to fire the gun. Taken to the extreme, you could carry with a trigger lock cable run through the barrel, locked in a gun case with ammo stored in a separate locked case. That would decrease the likelihood of an ND, while requiring a more complex manual of arms, to put it mildly. And even that would not guarantee that some yahoo can't have a ND.WTR wrote:It is never a weapons " fault " for a ND. However ,the design and features of a gun ( or lack there of) may make a weapon more prone to a ND.Soccerdad1995 wrote:Somehow I don't think it was the gun's fault.Liberty wrote:I wonder what kind of safety free striker fired gun it was this time. Agencies are unwilling to even discuss how much more accident prone this cheap crap is. Are there any studies or statistics? comparing NDs with Hammered Safe guns with Striker fired
The secret service isn't what they used to be. They used to be considered highly trained and disciplined. What happened? They don't seem to be the same quality people that stopped Hinkley and Squeaky Fromme. Today they seemed to be more involved in whoring, drunken parties and Shooting themselves than protecting our president.. Our most elite aren't what they used to be, maybe it's a reflection of the entire downfall that the rest of the country is going through.
The point is that no amount of safety precautions will make up for a careless human operator, and no modern properly functioning gun is going to have an ND if the operator follows the 4 rules of gun safety.
In this case, we have a supposedly trained professional who violated at least one of the 4 rules. Would the ND have been prevented if their gun had a couple extra safeties? Maybe. Maybe not. But it definitely would have been prevented if the operator had been less careless. And it is also possible for additional safeties to foster a false sense of security, which can lead to one being more careless.