TexasCHLforum.com

KD5NRH wrote:
Or directly into firing chambers, for us wheelgun guys:

Yup, love Full Moon Clips.

ScottDLS wrote:

Obviously I was a little "tongue in cheek" in my initial post.

Yes, I got that. However this is a serious matter and a subject worth correcting/repeating until people get it right.

I understand the terminology "negligent discharge", but I don't necessarily buy into the religious fervor demanding its use in all cases.

I do not apply it to ALL cases, just where it is reasonable (as in this case). Though… most firearms mishaps involve some degree of negligence.

An accident is by definition something that is unintentional. It can be the result of negligence, as in this case, but the term accident is still accurate.

I think we need to be very careful where firearms are concerned NOT to relieve the actor of accountability, responsibility, culpability ….simply because He/She “didn’t mean to”.

No responsible person leaves home intending/expecting to have their firearm discharge (un-manipulated). But, if a person…fails to take precautions to secure their firearm against the former, they are clearly guilty of negligence. I think you’ll find in the forthcoming civil suit that the jury clearly understands what IS and what ISN’T an “accident”.

Many, if not most, car accidents are the result of negligence (distracted, speeding, drunk, etc.).

Agreed.

We still call them accidents unless someone intentionally hit someone.... Car negligents?

No, call it what it is: A wreck (they vary in severity). The fact that a person might not have wanted the resulting outcome, intended it to happen, or expected it, is too easily afforded them. What we need to look at is:
Did the actor know (or should know) that his/her actions could significantly increase the likelihood of an unwanted event. If yes, then let’s NOT let them hide behind “I didn’t mean to”/ accident.

I understand the distinction that is trying to be made. I just don't feel compelled to force change in the vernacular to make a political point...that is probably lost on most people anyway.

If you truly understand…then join in and help change the misuse of the term “Accidental Discharge” (most are not).

And there is nothing “political” about my position on this. I want to see Gun Owners more actively “policing our own” instead of seeking to dilute or excuse our infractions.

Now…I am not saying that legitimate accidents don’t happen, just pointing out… that when closely examined… most of these events could reasonably have been expected, avoided, circumvented.

“Unintentional” (by itself) will be a hard sell ….if I’m on the jury.

ScottDLS wrote:

Chrispy wrote:I just saw this on the local news.

http://www.khou.com/news/local/HPD-Woma ... 43634.html

The terminology police here will soon be berating you for not titling your post "negligent" discharge. Whatever... Tomato, tom-ah-to...(For fans of my current Avatar.... TOE-MAY-TOE). Clip, magazine... Verbal, oral...

Interestingly the story says the woman was shot in the "bu--". Not the most professional reference to the posterior. What's with people carrying these junk guns that go off when you drop 'em? My Raven and Jennings .25's, just have the CLIP fall out of them when I drop them. They never go off (so far).

The reason for that is because many folks casually dismiss the event... and apply the all encompassing definition of "accidental" : An unintended event!

The purpose of CORRECTLY calling an avoidable incident like this one a "Negligent Discharge" is to assign responsibility to the person(s) involved. It is an important distinction!

Any weapon not secured in such fashion that it will not drop from clothing/concealment is clearly negligence. It is THIS kind of nonsense that really gains traction with the anti's, and rightfully so.

BTW, why are you dropping your Raven and Jennings?