AD's don't just happen

[APynckel]

It will always be negligence of the 4 rules of firearms safety.

Thereby, negligence.

Where would you find negligence cases where the operator did everything right and the gun did not function as designed?

An example would be a slam fire like those that occurred in a few cases with the Springfield XDs before the recall when the gun was pointed in a safe direction and no one was injured? .

As long as the firearm was not modified in a way that would have caused it, then this would clearly be at fault of the manufacturer. Just like in engineering, if something you designed and signed off on fails and kills someone, it's your fault.

[Charles L. Cotton]

It will always be negligence of the 4 rules of firearms safety.

Thereby, negligence.

This is not the law in Texas, nor in any other state of which I am aware. However, as I posted earlier, it's now your higher personal standard and you will be held to it if you find yourself a defendant in a civil suit.

Chas.

[rotor]

I guess that people don't understand what Charles is saying. Your comments here can be used against you in legal proceedings. Be careful about what you say.

[Excaliber]

It will always be negligence of the 4 rules of firearms safety.

Thereby, negligence.

Where would you find negligence cases where the operator did everything right and the gun did not function as designed?

An example would be a slam fire like those that occurred in a few cases with the Springfield XDs before the recall when the gun was pointed in a safe direction and no one was injured? .

As long as the firearm was not modified in a way that would have caused it, then this would clearly be at fault of the manufacturer. Just like in engineering, if something you designed and signed off on fails and kills someone, it's your fault.

I think you have a valid point.

My question is: how do you reconcile this position with your earlier statement that all unintended discharges are the result of negligence stemming from a failure to adhere to the 4 rules of firearms safety? This would appear to place responsibility for all unintended discharges, including those caused by manufacturing missteps, on the operator of the gun at the time of the incident.

[APynckel]

I think you have a valid point.

My question is: how do you reconcile this position with your earlier statement that all unintended discharges are the result of negligence stemming from a failure to adhere to the 4 rules of firearms safety? This would appear to place responsibility for all unintended discharges, including those caused by manufacturing missteps, on the operator of the gun at the time of the incident.

I see your point, but if the firearm discharges because you had your finger on the trigger, or didn't clear the weapon, or if you harm / kill someone because it wasn't pointed in a safe direction and only at that which you intended to destroy, the operator is at fault. An UD should never result in the injury of another person, save if the gun's (and only if it can be proven that it's repeatable) mechanics are at fault due to design or manufacturing failure. Even then, it should never be another person.

[Deltaboy]

1. AD's generally happen when we fail to follow the basic rules that we were taught as children.
2. I believe others are simple acts of God as you will find in most insurance policy.

In the early 1950's my Dad's father had a friend shoot himself climbing a 2 wire fence using his auto 5 to balance himself he slipped and caught a load of high brass 7's in his chest . My Grandfather picked him up and carried him nearly 2 miles to the car and drove him to the Dr where he died the next day. Now Grandpa said he had watched the man do that 100's of times quail hunting over 20 years together. Growing up I was taught to break open the action and lay it on the ground take 3 steps away from the stock end and cross the fence.
That is and example of a Act of God.

[APynckel]

That is an example of a Act of Stupid.

Fixed that for you

[mojo84]

Deltaboy, I have read many insurance policies and have never seem the term "acts of God" used. Can you provide a specific example as I am very curious where this phrase originated with regard to insurance policies.

2. I believe others are simple acts of God as you will find in most insurance policy.

[jmra]

Deltaboy, I have read many insurance policies and have never seem the term "acts of God" used. Can you provide a specific example as I am very curious where this phrase originated with regard to insurance policies.

2. I believe others are simple acts of God as you will find in most insurance policy.

My Google fu found this link. Evidently it is common language for the insurance industry.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictiona ... act+of+God
act of God n. a natural catastrophe which no one can prevent such as an earthquake, a tidal wave, a volcanic eruption, or a tornado. Acts of God are significant for two reasons: 1) for the havoc and damage they wreak, and 2) because often contracts state that "acts of God" are an excuse for delay or failure to fulfill a commitment or to complete a construction project. Many insurance policies exempt coverage for damage caused by acts of God, which is one time an insurance company gets religion. At times disputes arise as to whether a violent storm or other disaster was an act of God (and therefore exempt from a claim) or a foreseeable natural event. God knows the answer!

[mojo84]

I know people commonly use the phrase "acts of God". However, I do not recall having seen that term in a policy as mentioned in the quoted comment. Many think that "acts of God" are impossible to insure against. That's not true. Tornado, wind, hail, flood and earthquake are all commonly considered "acts of God" and their resulting damage can be covered by insurance.

As stated in the quote you referenced, the term "acts of God" is commonly found in other contracts and damages from a delay such as in a construction delay due to "acts if God" are usually not covered.

[WildBill]

So if you were holding a gun and got hit by lightning and the gun went off, it would be "an act of God".

If you are standing under a lone tree on a hill during a thunderstorm and get struck by lightning, you could be viewed as contributing to the accidental discharge.

[jmra]

I know people commonly use the phrase "acts of God". However, I do not recall having seen that term in a policy as mentioned in the quoted comment. Many think that "acts of God" are impossible to insure against. That's not true. Tornado, wind, hail, flood and earthquake are all commonly considered "acts of God" and their resulting damage can be covered by insurance.

As stated in the quote you referenced, the term "acts of God" is commonly found in other contracts and damages from a delay such as in a construction delay due to "acts if God" are usually not covered.

Being from New Orleans I can tell you that floods are considered an Act of God and were excluded using that language in my homeowners policy. If you wanted to protect your home from rising water you had to purchase flood insurance.

[mojo84]

I know "flood" is excluded under the standard homeowners policy. That coverage is obtained by purchasing a flood policy not an "act of God" policy. In just saying I have not SEEN the phrase "act of God" in a policy. Not saying it's not there. I would like to see a sample of it as I've never seen it.

I am not saying a flood is not an act of God.

[Dragonfighter]

Negligence is defined as doing something a reasonable prudent person would do under the same or similar circumstances or not doing what a reasonable prudent person would not do under the same or similar circumstances. Note that the definition is not a strict liability concept, that is one in which liability attaches solely because the event occurred without consideration of culpability or lack thereof. <SNIP>.

Chas.

I pray God I have an attorney of your caliber should I need one. Your arguments couldn't be clearer.

[APynckel]

God forbid, even those of us who choose to show that we have "Justice" on our side take responsibility for our actions, instead of use legal jargon to weasel out of a negligence of the 4 basic firearm safety rules.


This thread is very telling.