Guns don't kill people . . .

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

Fair enough you are using mishap for skydiving in the same manner as negligence for a gun. You skipped the car part - I am pretty sure that nearly all car accidents are the direct result of someone's negligence but we still call them car accidents.

A safety course is a good suggestion. My personal experience with gun accidents is that the guys who have had them are extremely careful afterwards!

I didn't want this thread to spiral down into semantics, but there is a difference between an accident and a negligent action. Negligence is specifically related to the level of care expected of someone. If a person is driving on a clear open road paying close attention at a reasonable speed and a deer runs out of some trees and strikes the car and the car slides off the road into a tree, no one would call that negligence. But have that driver doing 70 mph through a neighborhood (35 mph zone) at dusk after an ice storm and the driver pulls a hard turn and slides off the road into a tree nearly hitting a child, and no one doubts negligence. See the difference?

Quote

"Negligence" is not the same as "carelessness", because someone might be exercising as much care as they are capable of, yet still fall below the level of competence expected of them. They could also be aware of the issues, yet choose to put the issue aside because they underestimated the importance. It is the opposite of "diligence". It can be generally defined as conduct that is culpable because it falls short of what a reasonable person would do to protect another individual from foreseeable risks of harm.

If I have a gun with the safety on in a holster on my hip and I trip, without touching the gun, and the gun goes off when I hit the ground, that is an accident, and good cause to lok at the mechanics of the gun and any care the gun has or hasn't received. If I am holding and playing with a loaded gun, keeping my finger on the trigger while trotting through a crowded school auditorium, and I trip and fall and the gun goes off, that is not an accident. That is negligence.

And just an FYI, the people charged with investigating and preventing vehicle "accidents" don't call them that. They call them collisions, or another appropriate term. Just because ignorant or lazy people call them that doesn't make it the correct term.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

Well, I think you're part way there. The word "negligent" also carries the connotation that it only happens to people that are careless. In other words, "Sure, it could happen to THAT buffoon, but certainly not somebody as careful as me." Which, of course, history proves over and over is wrong. Even highly trained professionals have accidentally discharged their gun, but using the word "negligent discharge" is the gun user's "industrial haze."

Not really. But it was a nice slam against responsible gun owners who frown on people who cause negligent discharges.

Negligence according to wiki

Quote

"Negligence" is not the same as "carelessness", because someone might be exercising as much care as they are capable of, yet still fall below the level of competence expected of them. They could also be aware of the issues, yet choose to put the issue aside because they underestimated the importance. It is the opposite of "diligence". It can be generally defined as conduct that is culpable because it falls short of what a reasonable person would do to protect another individual from foreseeable risks of harm.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[Kennedy 0]

http://www.myfoxla.com/dpp/news/local/gardena-high-shooting-20110118

Quote

Los Angeles School Police Department Chief Steve Zipperman said students and teachers were interviewed, and grief counselors were sent to the campus.

It was unclear how the student got the backpack onto the campus, where metal detectors are manned by school staff, not police. There was an armed school police officer on campus when the shooting occurred, Zipperman said.

Asked if the weapon was cocked, which might explain why it went off, Zipperman said, "In the issue of a gun that accidentally discharges, it would have to be an automatic weapon instead of a revolver. It was an automatic, although I do not have the make

Aparently the LAPD Chief doesn't know fuck all about firearms, and doesn't have good enough advisors to educate him for a press release.

edit to add: or the reporters got the quote very, very wrong.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[normiss 622]

In an example such as this, sure.
Some fuck nut allowed a 10 year old access to a deadly weapon and that gun was then discharged.
The gun(s) should be confiscated and the owner should be charged with felony reckless endangerment of a minor at the least.
The results of which should result in a felony conviction or a weapons charge, either of which should disallow any future weapons possession.

There ARE laws currently in place in support of this incident.

[nigel99 143]

Thanks for the detailed reply.

I guess that I believe normal people have accidents and gun owners are no different. I agree that people do stupid things that are negligent - it doesn't stop me being amused at the vehemence shown regarding use the term "accidental discharge".

There are probably hundreds of examples where people react badly to what they perceive as the wrong use of terminology (look how excited we all get when the media say the parachute failed to open on a swooping accident as a close to home example).

Anyway I am pretty sure this debate is largely polarised and much more discussion is only for shits and giggles on both sides.

Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

Quote

Negligence by the gun owner, period.

So only non-negligent people should have guns? Fair enough.

Or we could respect the rights and freedoms of citizens, and punish those who exhibit negligence related to firearms. You know, that whole prior-restraint thing doesnt sit too well with me. However, if someone has shown they are negligent when responsible for firearms, they need to be corrected. Here in NC, in addition to common civil torts and criminal charges for reckless endangerment, we have NC GS 14-315.1 the Safe Storage/Child Access law.

Quote

Any individual who resides with a minor, who owns or possesses a firearm, and stores or leaves that firearm in a condition that the firearm can be discharged, and in a manner that the individual knew, or should have known, that an unsupervised minor would be able to gain access to the firearm, is guilty of a misdemeanor

So, since we have laws and courts and systems to punish folks who do things wrong, what else do you want? Short of asking for a government that prevents the possibility of anything bad happening/being done to you, what's missing? (in your opinion)

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[PiLFy 0]

Quote

Quote

So tell me quade, since you are making negative statements about people opposed to overzealous testing that costs tens of thousands of dollars, was the gun involved in your article a gun that never passed California's drop test?

I have a comment up on the LA Times web story asking the make and model of the gun involved. I've looked at a number of stories, but so far none seem to have reported it.

Either way it's a lose-lose to anti-California testing folks. If it's a gun that wasn't on the list of approved guns, it kind of proves the California system works. If the gun is on the list, then it kind of proves the California system doesn't go far enough.

I'm too tired to read all the way through both articles. Glocks are very popular & pervasive guns in the 'hood. If it was a Glock. Ignorant people tend to carry them without a proper fitting holster. Glocks need a form-fitting holster which completely encloses the trigger guard. If carried loose in waistband or bookbag? It would be very easy for anything to put five pounds of pressure on the trigger, & cause it to fire. This is a separate issue from the drop-testing that these guns easily pass. The little lever in the trigger is the only safety on a Glock. It's actually one of their greatest features. If, however, someone is a Dumb_*ss, & ignores basic safety practices. It can be a problem.

[quade 3]

Quote

I'm too tired to read all the way through both articles. Glocks are very popular & pervasive guns in the 'hood. If it was a Glock. Ignorant people tend to carry them without a proper fitting holster. Glocks need a form-fitting holster which completely encloses the trigger guard. If carried loose in waistband or bookbag? It would be very easy for anything to put five pounds of pressure on the trigger, & cause it to fire. This is a separate issue from the drop-testing that these guns easily pass. The little lever in the trigger is the only safety on a Glock. It's actually one of their greatest features. If, however, someone is a Dumb_*ss, & ignores basic safety practices. It can be a problem.

A more recent article mentioned it was a 9mm Beretta, but didn't specify which model.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[PiLFy 0]

Quote

Quote

I'm too tired to read all the way through both articles. Glocks are very popular & pervasive guns in the 'hood. If it was a Glock. Ignorant people tend to carry them without a proper fitting holster. Glocks need a form-fitting holster which completely encloses the trigger guard. If carried loose in waistband or bookbag? It would be very easy for anything to put five pounds of pressure on the trigger, & cause it to fire. This is a separate issue from the drop-testing that these guns easily pass. The little lever in the trigger is the only safety on a Glock. It's actually one of their greatest features. If, however, someone is a Dumb_*ss, & ignores basic safety practices. It can be a problem.

A more recent article mentioned it was a 9mm Beretta, but didn't specify which model.

Beretta doesn't make a comparable action. Their trigger pulls are still .

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Beretta doesn't make a comparable action. Their trigger pulls are still .

A 92FS with the safety off and the hammer back - it may not be so hard to jostle it in the pack. But we're talking rather stupid behavior (shock!).

[vanair 0]

Guns don't kill people, Husbands that come home early kill people.

[futuredivot 0]

Take some time and look how long it's been since you've been relevant. I used to look forward to you posts to point me in another direction, now it's just far left drivel.

You are only as strong as the prey you devour

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

I'm too tired to read all the way through both articles. Glocks are very popular & pervasive guns in the 'hood. If it was a Glock. Ignorant people tend to carry them without a proper fitting holster. Glocks need a form-fitting holster which completely encloses the trigger guard. If carried loose in waistband or bookbag? It would be very easy for anything to put five pounds of pressure on the trigger, & cause it to fire. This is a separate issue from the drop-testing that these guns easily pass. The little lever in the trigger is the only safety on a Glock. It's actually one of their greatest features. If, however, someone is a Dumb_*ss, & ignores basic safety practices. It can be a problem.

Where did you get any of that? Specifically, in what "hood" are glocks "very popular & pervasive" guns? They are expensive and rare in the hood. The most common gun in the hood is a POS snubbie revolver and boat anchor pistols like lorcin, raven, and bryco. And what makes you say glocks need a good holster more than any other gun? What makes you say five pounds? You do realize glock sells parts that range from three and a half pounds up to twelve or fifteen pounds, right? Finally, glocks have three passive safeties, not one. They are the trigger lever you mentioned, the trigger disconnect, and the drop safety.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[Nightingale 0]

A gun will go off if the trigger is depressed, whether that is intentionally or not. It's a machine and can't read minds. Part of the function of a holster is to ensure that nothing will snag the trigger and cause this unintentionally.

It's logical to conclude that this kid:

1. Threw a loaded gun into his backpack.
2. The gun was not in a holster, or it was not in a secure holster and fell out.
3. The gun probably either a) didn't have an external safety switch, b) the safety was not on, or c) the safety was on but due to the motion of the backpack had become turned off.

If you just drop a modern loaded gun, if it's been properly maintained, it should not go off if nothing depresses the trigger.

The obvious solutions:

1. be responsible parents and don't let your kids access guns unsupervised.
2. don't put a loaded gun into a situation where it can move around unpredictably. If you need to carry a gun in a backpack/waistpack/purse, there are items made specifically for this purpose with a built in holster to secure the weapon safely.

[PiLFy 0]

Quote

Quote

Beretta doesn't make a comparable action. Their trigger pulls are still .

A 92FS with the safety off and the hammer back - it may not be so hard to jostle it in the pack. But we're talking rather stupid behavior (shock!).

It's actually do-able w/the hammer down. Like I said, though. Standard trigger pull is something like 9#s. Cocked is only 2-3#s, plus the idiot factor.

[PiLFy 0]

Quote

Quote

I'm too tired to read all the way through both articles. Glocks are very popular & pervasive guns in the 'hood. If it was a Glock. Ignorant people tend to carry them without a proper fitting holster. Glocks need a form-fitting holster which completely encloses the trigger guard. If carried loose in waistband or bookbag? It would be very easy for anything to put five pounds of pressure on the trigger, & cause it to fire. This is a separate issue from the drop-testing that these guns easily pass. The little lever in the trigger is the only safety on a Glock. It's actually one of their greatest features. If, however, someone is a Dumb_*ss, & ignores basic safety practices. It can be a problem.

Where did you get any of that? Specifically, in what "hood" are glocks "very popular & pervasive" guns? They are expensive and rare in the hood. The most common gun in the hood is a POS snubbie revolver and boat anchor pistols like lorcin, raven, and bryco. And what makes you say glocks need a good holster more than any other gun? What makes you say five pounds? You do realize glock sells parts that range from three and a half pounds up to twelve or fifteen pounds, right? Finally, glocks have three passive safeties, not one. They are the trigger lever you mentioned, the trigger disconnect, and the drop safety.

Jeeze... A lot of "What makes you?" Lessee: Glock's prevalence in 'hood = reading news stories about shootings. Glocks are excellent weapons that have been around for a long time. You don't really think they're limited to white suburbia, do you? Glock's don't need a proper holster completely enclosing the trigger guard? Read the owner's manual. You can argue w/Glock. Apparently, a lot of 'hood denizens aren't into holsters of any kind. Stickin a Glock in your waistband isn't a great idea. It makes it easier to dump the gun pre-arrest, but also makes it easier to shoot yourself somewhere sensitive. As you mentioned. The trigger pull can be changed from something like 3.5#s, on up to 12+#s. Unless they changed in recent years. The standard trigger pull on a Glock is 5#s. Their brand of DAO is one of the reasons they became so popular. Finally, Safeties: Compare a Glock to something like a Centennial or a 1911. There is no rear grip safety. Glock added an internal safety requiring a key to disable, a few years back. Other than that. If you pull the trigger? It goes bang. Dunno why you're in a tizzy. This is common knowledge to anyone who has shot these guns.

[PiLFy 0]

Quote

Guns don't kill people, Husbands that come home early kill people.

OK,
A Blond suspects her husband is having an affair. So, she goes off to work one morning, & sneaks back in the door a few hours later. Sure enough, Hubby is in bed w/another woman. The Blond storms into the bedroom w/a gun to her head, & rage in her eyes. The husband jumps out of bed, onto his knees. He pleads w/her not to do it. She shouts back "Shut up, Asshole! You're next!!"

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

I thought guns weren't supposed to be able to go off accidentally when dropped or wasn't that supposed to be the reason so many people are against the testing guns in California?

Depending on the design, a gun can go off if dropped. Examples include weapons without a hammer block (old revolvers and derringers), and open bolt designs (MACS, UZI). Both designs are older and not common anymore in modern firearms.

Other examples of a ND can include an object manipulating the trigger. Say a pen pulled the trigger back. That is not the fault of the firearm.

Other possibilities involve a damaged weapon.

The California "testing" program involves more than just testing. The actual testing is not actually bad, it is all the other BS that is bad.... High costs, permits that expire... Etc.

Quote

So how DOES that happen?

How do people have AAD fires?

More importantly....
How did a kid get a gun (Illegal)
How did the gun get into a school (Illegal)

Quote

Either way it's a lose-lose to anti-California testing folks. If it's a gun that wasn't on the list of approved guns, it kind of proves the California system works. If the gun is on the list, then it kind of proves the California system doesn't go far enough.

Or it shows the testing is mostly BS and never did anything.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

So only non-negligent people should have guns? Fair enough.

Why don't we just pass laws that:

1. Do not allow a person under 21 to have a handgun
2. Not allow a handgun on a school.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

The little lever in the trigger is the only safety on a Glock.

False. The Glock has THREE internal safety's

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

The little lever in the trigger is the only safety on a Glock.

False. The Glock has THREE internal safety's

None of which prevent the gun from going off once the trigger safety is depressed.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[PiLFy 0]

Quote

Quote

The little lever in the trigger is the only safety on a Glock.

False. The Glock has THREE internal safety's

I already covered this. Do try & keep up.

[PiLFy 0]

Quote

Quote

So only non-negligent people should have guns? Fair enough.

Why don't we just pass laws that:

1. Do not allow a person under 21 to have a handgun
2. Not allow a handgun on a school.

1- laws are already in effect in many states. Bad people don't obey laws, Einstein.

2- Most states already have this law as well. That's why schools are referred to as "Free-Fire Zones..." Hey, who wants pesky return fire when you're out to shoot defenseless people???

[PiLFy 0]

"Or it shows the testing is mostly BS and never did anything."

"More importantly....
How did a kid get a gun (Illegal)
How did the gun get into a school (Illegal) "

Now, you're openly admitting that increased legislation is a fatally flawed approach. You're contradicting yourself between posts. Let's try something different. How did you like my Blond joke?

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

I already covered this. Do try & keep up.

Your comment is still incorrect.

BTW, I am a Glock armorer.

They are:

• Trigger Safety: An external lever mechanism contained within the trigger that prevents the trigger from moving unless the lever is depressed.

• Firing Pin Safety: A spring-loaded pin attached by an extension bar to the trigger assembly blocks the striker from striking the primer of the cartridge until the trigger is pulled.

• Drop Safety: The far end of the same extension bar locks the striker into place from the rear until the trigger is pulled.