Accidental Discharge?

imported post

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/10/30/poland.us.navy.shoot/index.html


As if Poland hasn't had it bad enough, a swabbie let loose a few rounds into the town port while cleaning the USS Ramage's M40.

-_-

Is it fair to consider this an act of negligence or of accident? Are they the same? How accountable should this individual be?
Also, this article as of 220am, fails to mention if anyone was hurt, focuses way more on who is to blame, or specifically, who is NOT to blame.

imported post

Well at least the Polish can have a laugh for a change. I am waiting for my buddy from Poland to give me hell about this now...



-Gruu

imported post

I'm of the opinion that you own every bullet you fire. AD = ND. If you pulled the trigger then you take responsibility.

imported post

MudCamper wrote:

I'm of the opinion that you own every bullet you fire. AD = ND. If you pulled the trigger then you take responsibility.

Click to expand...

All AD=ND

????


But what if it's a good guy?

You know, a regular gun guy/patriot/pro-2A/conservative/white/Christian/Brady-hatin'/NRA trashin'/illegal alien hatin'/upstanding member of OCDO?


I mean....we gotta take these, you know, on a case-by-case basis.....

After all....you weren't there.....news reports can be misleading....man is innocent until proven guilty....dman antis caused the shot....

If it's a stoopid anti (or a cop) who accidently fires a gun, OK, I agree. Definitely, AD=ND then.



These things are not as simple as AD=ND.

imported post

Wear Depends for accidental discharges.

imported post

Just did a quick search and this is the first one I found. In an ironic way, the story's wording actually seems to support MudCamper's postulate of discharge equivalency (MPODE).

Still, the older brother was defniitely a goof with a gun. Possibly a parent, too.





Brother accidentally shoots brother, both okay
by KTAR Newsroom (October 30th, 2009 @ 10:12am)

PHOENIX -- A Phoenix teenager was accidentally shot by his older brother Friday morning, police said.

The 14-year-old boy, hit in the face, was taken to the hospital. He was expected to be okay.


Officer Luis Samudio of Phoenix Police said the incident happened near 48th Street and Baseline Road.


"The 20-year-old brother negligently handled the firearm, causing it to accidentally discharge," Samudio said.


He said the older brother was taken to a precinct station for questioning after investigators got conflicting stories at the scene. It was not known who owned the gun.


Names of the brothers were not released.


http://ktar.com/?nid=6&sid=1226467

imported post

MudCamper wrote:

I'm of the opinion that you own every bullet you fire. AD = ND. If you pulled the trigger then you take responsibility.

Click to expand...

+1

Generally, not all accidents are negligent, and not all negligence is accidental.

However, when it comes to firearms, I believe in "strict liability". Unless there is reasonable evidence of a mechanical malfunction, none of the blame can rest anywhere but upon the person handling the firearm. Simple observation of basic firearm safety rules should preclude the possibility of any accidental discharge.

imported post

HankT wrote:

MudCamper wrote:

I'm of the opinion that you own every bullet you fire. AD = ND. If you pulled the trigger then you take responsibility.

Click to expand...

All AD=ND

????


But what if it's a good guy?

You know, a regular gun guy/patriot/pro-2A/conservative/white/Christian/Brady-hatin'/NRA trashin'/illegal alien hatin'/upstanding member of OCDO?


I mean....we gotta take these, you know, on a case-by-case basis.....

After all....you weren't there.....news reports can be misleading....man is innocent until proven guilty....dman antis caused the shot....

If it's a stoopid anti (or a cop) who accidently fires a gun, OK, I agree. Definitely, AD=ND then.



These things are not as simple as AD=ND.

Click to expand...

First, I find your definition of a "good guy" to be insulting and ignorant.

Second, what difference does it make whether or not a person is a good guy or not of he "accidentally" shoots somebody? He acted negligently. If you follow basic firearms safety rules, you will not have an "accidental" discharge. If you don't, you might. That is negligence. It is that simple.

imported post

CA_Libertarian wrote:

MudCamper wrote:

I'm of the opinion that you own every bullet you fire. AD = ND. If you pulled the trigger then you take responsibility.

Click to expand...

+1

Generally, not all accidents are negligent, and not all negligence is accidental.

However, when it comes to firearms, I believe in "strict liability". Unless there is reasonable evidence of a mechanical malfunction, none of the blame can rest anywhere but upon the person handling the firearm. Simple observation of basic firearm safety rules should preclude the possibility of any accidental discharge.

Click to expand...

+1

I can't count how many times I've heard "but its not loaded" from people mishandling firearms on the range. I try, sometimes with no success, to explain that it doesn't matter, safe handling rules apply at all times and at all places.

imported post

CA_Libertarian wrote:

However, when it comes to firearms, I believe in "strict liability". Unless there is reasonable evidence of a mechanical malfunction, none of the blame can rest anywhere but upon the person handling the firearm. Simple observation of basic firearm safety rules should preclude the possibility of any accidental discharge.

Click to expand...

This gets slightly, but only slightly, more complicated with children or other incompetents getting their hands on a loaded gun. In such a case, it is not the handler who is responsible, it is the owner/keeper of the gun. The following isan example. Poor kid. I hope he makes it. And I hope the guardian or gun owner gets some jail time and loses his/her right to a firearm for 20-30 years.







3-Year-Old California Boy Shoots Himself in Face With Handgun
Sunday, November 01, 2009


RIALTO, Calif. — Police say a 3-year-old Southern California boy is hospitalized in critical condition after shooting himself in the face with a handgun.

Rialto police Sgt. Richard Royce says the boy apparently shot himself with the .22 caliber gun while his 41-year-old grandmother was caring for him.

Royce says the woman is the boy's legal guardian.

Royce says investigators are trying to determine how the boy got hold of the gun but he said the shooting was an accident.

He says the bullet entered the boy's nasal cavity and the child underwent about an hour of surgery after he was taken to a hospital.

Police would not immediately say whether any arrests or criminal charges were planned.

Rialto is a city of nearly 100,000 people in San Bernardino County.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,570950,00.html

imported post

proper upbringing of a child is key

imported post

Sionadi wrote:

proper upbringing of a child is key

Click to expand...

And keeping the guns away from the kid is even more important.

Kids cannot be negligent with guns. Only stupid adults can be negligent with guns.

This 3-year-old would have been MUCH better off in a gun-free home....

imported post

you sound like a pro gun-control guy.

just teaching the kid about guns, how to use them properly and safely, keeping them completely in the dark about guns will just end up into these stories.

imported post

Sionadi wrote:

you sound like a pro gun-control guy.

just teaching the kid about guns, how to use them properly and safely, keeping them completely in the dark about guns will just end up into these stories.

Click to expand...

I am a pro-guns and pro-gun rights guy. You sound confused. Very confused.

Did you read the (admittedly brief) news report? Kid shot himself in the face.

3 year old kids don't need to be handling loaded guns. Especially alone.

You sound....confused. Yes, that's it.

imported post

HankT wrote:

Sionadi wrote:

you sound like a pro gun-control guy.

just teaching the kid about guns, how to use them properly and safely, keeping them completely in the dark about guns will just end up into these stories.

Click to expand...

I am a pro-guns and pro-gun rights guy. You sound confused. Very confused.

Did you read the (admittedly brief) news report? Kid shot himself in the face.

3 year old kids don't need to be handling loaded guns. Especially alone.

You sound....confused. Yes, that's it.

Click to expand...

Which is exactly why they need to be taught proper gun handling from VERY early. I started teaching my grandkids from the time they could walk. The first thing it did was eliminate the curiosity factor. They know that any time they want to handle or shoot a gun, grandpa will do it with them and help them be safe.

We started out with cap guns. As far as safe handling, they are all the same. I don't care if the gun shoots rubber darts or 50 cal, they get treated the same.

imported post

rpyne wrote:

HankT wrote:

Sionadi wrote:

you sound like a pro gun-control guy.

just teaching the kid about guns, how to use them properly and safely, keeping them completely in the dark about guns will just end up into these stories.

Click to expand...

I am a pro-guns and pro-gun rights guy. You sound confused. Very confused.

Did you read the (admittedly brief) news report? Kid shot himself in the face.

3 year old kids don't need to be handling loaded guns. Especially alone.

You sound....confused. Yes, that's it.

Click to expand...

Which is exactly why they need to be taught proper gun handling from VERY early. I started teaching my grandkids from the time they could walk. The first thing it did was eliminate the curiosity factor. They know that any time they want to handle or shoot a gun, grandpa will do it with them and help them be safe.

We started out with cap guns. As far as safe handling, they are all the same. I don't care if the gun shoots rubber darts or 50 cal, they get treated the same.

Click to expand...

Did you ever let your kids play with a loaded gun at 3-years-old? Alone?

imported post

when did i say i would let them play with it? thats what the training is for, to stop all curiosity and only use it in emergencies or if they are allowed use the gun.

imported post

HankT wrote:

/illegal alien hatin'/upstanding member of OCDO?

Click to expand...

Excuse me, Hank, but some of us libertarians advocate free travel and open borders.

Do you?

imported post

marshaul wrote:

HankT wrote:

/illegal alien hatin'/upstanding member of OCDO?

Click to expand...

Excuse me, Hank, but some of us libertarians advocate free travel and open borders.

Do you?

Click to expand...

Well, I don't hate illegal aliens, if that's what you mean, marshaul....

Whats the libertarian (or your) stance on FTand OB? What's a summary of the issues?

imported post



MudCamper wrote:

HankT wrote:

MudCamper wrote:

I'm of the opinion that you own every bullet you fire. AD = ND. If you pulled the trigger then you take responsibility.

Click to expand...

All AD=ND

????


But what if it's a good guy?

You know, a regular gun guy/patriot/pro-2A/conservative/white/Christian/Brady-hatin'/NRA trashin'/illegal alien hatin'/upstanding member of OCDO?


I mean....we gotta take these, you know, on a case-by-case basis.....

After all....you weren't there.....news reports can be misleading....man is innocent until proven guilty....dman antis caused the shot....

If it's a stoopid anti (or a cop) who accidently fires a gun, OK, I agree. Definitely, AD=ND then.



These things are not as simple as AD=ND.

Click to expand...

First, I find your definition of a "good guy" to be insulting and ignorant.

Second, what difference does it make whether or not a person is a good guy or not of he "accidentally" shoots somebody? He acted negligently. If you follow basic firearms safety rules, you will not have an "accidental" discharge. If you don't, you might. That is negligence. It is that simple.

Click to expand...

And that, ladies and gentlemen,is the bottom line.

Ever heard of the concept of morality favoring the lucky? This incident exemplifies it. Since no one was injured, the guy involved will most likely get a slap in the wrist. If someone had been injured or worse, the guy would've faced very serious consequences. Most of us would be judging his "oversight" much more severely.

So, is our responsibilitylargely dependent on whether or not someone gets hurt, that is, largely dependent onluck? If so, should it be?