• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Accidental discharge at fair grounds gun show

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
Glosson, who has a concealed-carry permit, handed one of the unloaded guns to Lasonya Judd, who was sitting in the back seat, and he also handed her a loaded gun he already had in the truck. As Judd was looking at the guns, she accidentally fired one, and the bullet struck Alyssa Lewis Glosson, 29, in the back of the head while she was sitting in the truck's passenger seat.

Impossible, since Glosson received training to get a CHP he couldn't have done something so stupid.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
Why in the world might (((Lasonya))) have been doin' a deal away from the venue? Might this be an unintended consequence of the burgeoning gun show regulation?

Winston-Salem TV 12 news has just covered the ND at 0625.

from news blip and article, i got the impression the bloke was showing off his newly purchased, unloaded, gun show bargin to female individual, age & 'relationship' unk, in the back of vehicle, and then intro'd his 'olde, but loaded, every day carry piece' for comparison to someone who had even less firearm safety knowledge than the trained chp holder.

ipse
 

Va_Nemo

Member
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
654
Location
Lynchburg
NO such thing as an accidental discharge regarding a firearm. Negligent, yes. Intentional yes. No other options.

Nemo
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
NO such thing as an accidental discharge regarding a firearm. Negligent, yes. Intentional yes. No other options.

Nemo
Had an AD once in my distant youth. While on the range, I flicked the bolt home on a .22 rifle and blam = AD.

Still was an ND falling to the range armorer who had not properly cleaned the bolt face/firing pin channel - the pin was protruding forward, even after having just safely fired a number of rounds. What we might call a slam fire today.
 

Firearms Iinstuctor

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2011
Messages
3,431
Location
northern wis
Not true.

Negligent discharges are a subset (the predominant subset) of accidental discharges.

Having a discharge cause by a mechanical malfunction can hardly be placed on the shooter unless the shooter modified the firearm into a unsafe condition.

Firearms are simple machines and machines wear and can fail to do what they normally do.

If an unintentional discharge is negligent or not is all situational a round fired unintentional that hits nothing important is most likely not negligent. Or could be very negligent if causes great bodily harm or death.

Two extremes one says all unintentional discharges are negligent or the one that say only those that cause damage are negligent.

I would think that it is actually a gray area determined by the intent, actions of the shooter and results of what the bullet strikes
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
If all the safety rules are followed, and there still is a unintentional discharge it is unlikely it would be negligent. This would be most likely the case of a mechanical failure. OTH IMO any unintentional discharge that occurs because of ignoring safety is negligent whether anybody is hurt or not.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
I'm glad y'all are hashing out the "accidental vs. negligent" subject so thoroughly.

mister D, that be how us country folk glean exact information and nunances therein, so we can attempt to chat with you city slickers since ya'llll are so cornfused on a myriad of issues.:cool:

let'm be, i'm shure it'll be worked out shortly!

ipse
 

JoeSparky

Centurion
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,621
Location
Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
If all the safety rules are followed, and there still is a unintentional discharge it is unlikely it would be negligent. This would be most likely the case of a mechanical failure. OTH IMO any unintentional discharge that occurs because of ignoring safety is negligent whether anybody is hurt or not.

And here we get into two different situations of negligence... that of a negligent discharge and negligence causing injury. May be related but both are different. It seems some of the "discussion" is related to 2 different forms of "negligence" being intermingled.
 

Va_Nemo

Member
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
654
Location
Lynchburg
I stand by my original statement.

Properly and regularly inspected, maintained, cleaned and operated weapons will not fire unintentionally.

Cleaning or maintenance may not be the responsibility of the person holding it when the discharge occurs but that does not render something accidental. If it fires because of a "slam fire" based on carbon build up or anything similar, that occurs by negligence to proper maintenance/cleaning. The negligence may be the responsibility of the owner or adult rather than a young or new shooter.

I make sure mine are all in condition that I can and if necessary will trust my life to them. They will do their part, each time, every time. And as long as I do mine I am in pretty good shape.

If I cannot count on them they are out of service and separated from the rest of the herd until the problem is corrected.

Nemo
 
Last edited:

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
I stand by my original statement.

Properly and regularly inspected, maintained, cleaned and operated weapons will not fire unintentionally.

Cleaning or maintenance may not be the responsibility of the person holding it when the discharge occurs but that does not render something accidental. If it fires because of a "slam fire" based on carbon build up or anything similar, that occurs by negligence to proper maintenance/cleaning. The negligence may be the responsibility of the owner or adult rather than a young or new shooter.

I make sure mine are all in condition that I can and if necessary will trust my life to them. They will do their part, each time, every time. And as long as I do mine I am in pretty good shape.

If I cannot count on them they are out of service and separated from the rest of the herd until the problem is corrected.

Nemo

and apparently you just handed your trusty ~ serviced, inspected, maintained, cleaned, and impeccably smooth & crisp operating protector who's safety is off, yet loaded firearm to an individual, who doesnt know jack about firearms, sitting in the backseat of a vehicle.

Uhhhhhhh, OH you want to keep your finger offffff....boom!

bad bad gun!

ipse
 

Va_Nemo

Member
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
654
Location
Lynchburg
and apparently you just handed your trusty ~ serviced, inspected, maintained, cleaned, and impeccably smooth & crisp operating protector who's safety is off, yet loaded firearm to an individual, who doesnt know jack about firearms, sitting in the backseat of a vehicle.

Uhhhhhhh, OH you want to keep your finger offffff....boom!

bad bad gun!

ipse


Again, negligent discharge. On part of both. Owner for not making safe and and educating other prior to handing to him as well as uneducated handler for not requesting proper instruction before receiving.

Not accidental. Purely negligent.

Nemo
 

DrMark

Lone Star Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2007
Messages
1,559
Location
Hampton Roads, Virginia, USA
Not accidental.

Good grief... The misstatements continue.

Webster says

Main Entry: neg·li·gent
Function: adjective
1 a : marked by or given to neglect especially habitually or culpably b : failing to exercise the care expected of a reasonably prudent person in like circumstances
2 : marked by a carelessly easy manner

Webster also says

Main Entry: ac·ci·dent
Function: noun
1 a : an unforeseen and unplanned event or circumstance b : lack of intention or necessity : chance <met by accident rather than by design>
2 a : an unfortunate event resulting especially from carelessness or ignorance b : an unexpected and medically important bodily event especially when injurious <a cerebrovascular accident> c : an unexpected happening causing loss or injury which is not due to any fault or misconduct on the part of the person injured but for which legal relief may be sought d —used euphemistically to refer to an involuntary act or instance of urination or defecation
3 : a nonessential property or quality of an entity or circumstance <the accident of nationality>

All Negligent Discharges are Accidental Discharges, but not all Accidental Discharges and Negligent Discharges.

Negligent Discharges are a subset of Accidental Discharges. To suggest that that a Negligent Discharge is not accidental is to imply that it is intentional, as accidental and unintentional are synonyms. In fact Accidental Discharges are sometimes called Unintentional Discharges.

Most Accidental Discharges are attributable to negligence, and I like to describe those as Negligent Discharges, as it emphasizes what could have been done to avoid it. I'll typically stick with the Accidental Discharge descriptor for mechanical failure, etc.

People often say "Negligent Discharges are not Accidental Discharges" or "there are no Accidental Discharges," but then people refer to magazines as clips and refer to cartridges as bullets. People often don't understand the terminology they use, but get in the habit of repeating it because they've heard it a lot.
 

SFCRetired

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
1,764
Location
Montgomery, Alabama, USA
Negligent discharge: A discharge as a result of failure to follow safety procedures or to properly maintain one's weapon.

Accidental discharge: A discharge occurring because of a mechanical fault not readily discernible during the course of routine weapons cleaning and maintenance.

Most, not all, discharges seem to be of the negligent variety and either involved a finger on the trigger, an improper, or badly worn, holster, lack of a proper holster.

Now, I know I ain't the sharpest knife in the drawer and ain't got much edumacashun, but those definitions seem, to me, to fit both areas fairly well. There may be other reasons that can be attributed to one or the other of the two types of discharge, but I believe what I stated are the most common.
 
Top