TexasCHLforum.com

Beer, Poker, 3:00am, a revolver, and dry skin

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent ... a31c3.html

Don't even know where to start on this one...

Stupidity knows no bounds. At least the itch was on his back and not... oh, nevermind.

A darwin award runner up.

He should have used a shotgun.

It's interesting that whenever someone has an accident with a household appliance, a car, a propane tank, an electric lamp, a kitchen knife, a pair of siccors, a radio near a bathtub, or some other potentially dangerous item it is simply an accident that can happen to anybody or it is some fool not thinking about what they are doing. (which happens far more often than accidents involving guns) However, if somebody has an accident with a gun...then it makes headlines and demands that legislation be passed to control these dangerous items.

Doug.38PR wrote:It's interesting that whenever someone has an accident with a household appliance, a car, a propane tank, an electric lamp, a kitchen knife, a pair of siccors, a radio near a bathtub, or some other potentially dangerous item it is simply an accident that can happen to anybody or it is some fool not thinking about what they are doing. (which happens far more often than accidents involving guns) However, if somebody has an accident with a gun...then it makes headlines and demands that legislation be passed to control these dangerous items.

Yeah, but us gun folks are just as bad. Just let someone call such an "accidental shooting" , and someone will start screaming "Negligent Discharge!".

Liberty wrote:Yeah, but us gun folks are just as bad. Just let someone call such an "accidental shooting" , and someone will start screaming "Negligent Discharge!".

Yep. As well they should. I get to be an example of your point!

'Cause it does gun owners a disservice for we, the media, or anyone else to imply that guns can periodically "accidentally shoot" anything, and that it's just something we'll have to live with--like periodic fender-benders on the freeway--unless the government removes guns from our possession.

Any time someone touches a gun, he may have an accident that causes it to fire unintentionally, but the action that caused the discharge is the result of negligence. Plain and simple.

A gun ain't never goin' off while it's locked in the safe. A car ain't never gonna cause a fender-bender on the freeway if it's parked in the garage.

But to insist that it is a "negligent discharge" is to imply that it's somebody's fault and they hence need to be sued, charged or banned(or the instrument they used needs to be banned). The fact is that accidents do happen in life. Sometimes somebody is to blame, sometimes they are not. We are only human. An accidental discharge is a valid statement. An accident is an action that took place which had unintended results or consequences.

Doug.38PR wrote:But to insist that it is a "negligent discharge" is to imply that it's somebody's fault and they hence need to be sued, charged or banned(or the instrument they used needs to be banned). The fact is that accidents do happen in life. Sometimes somebody is to blame, sometimes they are not. We are only human. An accidental discharge is a valid statement. An accident is an action that took place which had unintended results or consequences.

Skippr wrote:Any time someone touches a gun, he may have an accident that causes it to fire unintentionally, but the action that caused the discharge is the result of negligence. Plain and simple.

I can see understand both of your positions, but I don't think that it's that plain and simple. Since the guy shot himself, it was an accident. Since he can't sue himself, it wasn't negligent.

In a different set of circumstances I can see how someone could accidently discharge a weapon without it being negligent. What if a BG draws has a gun and you draw and tell him to "drop it" and he does. You are still pointing the gun at him and try to decock your pistol and in the stress of the encounter your finger accidently pulls the trigger and you shoot him. Accident or Negligence?

Doug.38PR wrote:But to insist that it is a "negligent discharge" is to imply that it's somebody's fault...

It is somebody's fault.

...and they hence need to be sued, charged or banned(or the instrument they used needs to be banned).

No. They need to be more careful.

The fact is that accidents do happen in life. Sometimes somebody is to blame, sometimes they are not.

Can you provide us with a realistic example of a gun discharging unintentionally and no one being at fault?

We are only human. An accidental discharge is a valid statement. An accident is an action that took place which had unintended results or consequences.

The key word there being "action". Someone had to take an action in order for the unintended consequences to result. Was the action in question a careless one, or a reasonable prudent one?

WildBill wrote:Since the guy shot himself, it was an accident.

Since when is that the definition of an accident? You can't shoot yourself intentionally? You can't shoot someone else accidentally?

Since he can't sue himself, it wasn't negligent.

"Negligence" has meaning outside of civil law. In this context it simply means carelessness. I'd call grabbing a gun and scratching your back with it pretty careless, and therefor a negligent act.