• 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.

Kopel's Wall Street Journal column on Plaxico Burress

D

Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,180
Location
Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin,
imported post

Yes, a good article by one who may be an economist.

Unfortunately he makes two normative statements which value may not be as he expects. Alcohol is forbidden and a holster required for a gun carrier only by commonsensical neighbor-tyrants that would debate 'responsibility.'

Which part of 'shall not be infringed' is not understood? The collective's conspiracy of ignorance masquerades as common sense.
 
sccrref

sccrref

Regular Member
Joined
May 11, 2007
Messages
741
Location
Virginia Beach, VA, , USA
imported post

I only take exception to it being referred to as an accidental discharge. If he had used common sense when securing his gun upon his person, it most likely would not have fallen out of his sweat pants. If he had let it fall and then the Glock discharged, that could have been considered an AD as Glocks are not supposed to do that. I believe that this discharge was due to negligence. I do strongly agree that NY gun laws are draconian.
 
H

hsmith

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2007
Messages
1,687
Location
Virginia USA, ,
T

Tomahawk

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
5,117
Location
4 hours south of HankT, ,
imported post

sccrref wrote:
I only take exception to it being referred to as an accidental discharge. If he had used common sense when securing his gun upon his person, it most likely would not have fallen out of his sweat pants. If he had let it fall and then the Glock discharged, that could have been considered an AD as Glocks are not supposed to do that. I believe that this discharge was due to negligence. I do strongly agree that NY gun laws are draconian.
Click to expand...

Did he shoot himself on purpose? No?

Accident.

Accident caused by negligence, but accident nonetheless. Let's not rewrite English.
 
C

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

sccrref wrote:
I only take exception to it being referred to as an accidental discharge. If he had used common sense when securing his gun upon his person, it most likely would not have fallen out of his sweat pants. If he had let it fall and then the Glock discharged, that could have been considered an AD as Glocks are not supposed to do that. I believe that this discharge was due to negligence. I do strongly agree that NY gun laws are draconian.
Click to expand...

The source's understanding of the terminology, and the understandingof the audiencecomes into play.

In the gun world, we distinguish between the two terms in order to promote safety, factoring in the personal responsibility angle as part of it.

Non-gun people would not necessarily understand what a negligent discharge is, nor that it is distinguished from an accidental discharge. For years, accidental discharge was all there was under the heading unintentional.
 
sccrref

sccrref

Regular Member
Joined
May 11, 2007
Messages
741
Location
Virginia Beach, VA, , USA
imported post

Tomahawk wrote:
sccrref wrote:
I only take exception to it being referred to as an accidental discharge. If he had used common sense when securing his gun upon his person, it most likely would not have fallen out of his sweat pants. If he had let it fall and then the Glock discharged, that could have been considered an AD as Glocks are not supposed to do that. I believe that this discharge was due to negligence. I do strongly agree that NY gun laws are draconian.
Click to expand...

Did he shoot himself on purpose? No?

Accident.

Accident caused by negligence, but accident nonetheless. Let's not rewrite English.
Click to expand...
I believe that it was an accident that he shot himself and that the accident was due to a negligent discharge. I agree to disagree and do believe that I am rewriting English.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top