TexasCHLforum.com

Excaliber wrote:

WildBill wrote:

Excaliber wrote:

WildBill wrote:

bronco78 wrote:It's a frame of mind as well as semantics...

I think the "frame of mind" on the forum may be skewed compared to the general public. Most of us [CHL Forum members] are very careful with firearms and try to follow the safety rules 100% of the time. So I think that we tend to be overly critical of the people who don't have the same frame of mind that we have.

We should keep in mind that those folks who are receiving the critical comments here weren't chosen at random. They are individuals whose poor knowledge of or attention to the basic requirements for safely using firearms got them the bad and sometimes tragic results that good safety practices are designed to prevent.

I agree that the comments are critical, but they are deservedly so, and we ourselves would receive and deserve the same if we earned them the same way.

They are folks who's actions got news coverage, which are probably a small sample of all incidents involving firearms. This is a case where most everyone agrees that the shooting is suspicous and all of the facts are not known. My peeve is that some forum members call every unintentional discharge negligent and refuse to concide that there are actually accidental discharges. That's all I have to say about that.

Bill,

I agree with you on your last point. There are "shades of grey" cases as well as clear cut negligence, and I can see calling such cases accidents. An example would be when a dog causes a discharge by managing to get his paw into the trigger guard of a resting firearm while bouncing around. That's not a circumstance that one would easily anticipate, but one could argue that there's an element of negligence because the gun was ready to fire and not in the immediate control of the owner.

Jumping Frog wrote:Negligent. Shouldn't have had the finger on the trigger if you weren't going to shoot.

Actually, I've read of very similar lawsuits for LEO shootings in other states that were ruled negligent for those very reasons.

WildBill wrote:

Jumping Frog wrote:Negligent. Shouldn't have had the finger on the trigger if you weren't going to shoot.

Actually, I've read of very similar lawsuits for LEO shootings in other states that were ruled negligent for those very reasons.

Just like a frog, quickly jumping to conclusions.

A-R wrote:

WildBill wrote:

Jumping Frog wrote:Negligent. Shouldn't have had the finger on the trigger if you weren't going to shoot.

Actually, I've read of very similar lawsuits for LEO shootings in other states that were ruled negligent for those very reasons.

Just like a frog, quickly jumping to conclusions.

Quickly jumping to correct conclusion. Police are trained to keep finger off trigger until ready to shoot. Finger on trigger while covering suspect is a big NO NO and a predictable cause of preventable negligent discharge by LEOs.

Case in point:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDfNV9bJ ... ata_player" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

gras wrote:I'm not trained to do heart transplants. If I do one and botch it, am I negligent?

WildBill wrote:Excaliber - I think that the scenario with the dog is pretty far fetched, but please consider this:

You and another unit respond to a burglary in progress. Upon arrival you spot a suspect climbing out a window with a pillowcase full of loot. You draw your weapon and point it at the suspect and tell him to put his hands in the air. He drops the bag and puts his hands in the air. You continue to keep the BG in your sights. Right now, I am not sure about your training, but I assume you have your finger on the trigger.

Unknown to you, your partner spots a second suspect out of your field of view. This suspect points a gun at your partner, who pulls the trigger of his shotgun and shoots the BG.

The noise and concussion from your partner's shotgun causes you to flinch and pull the trigger and shoot the BG who is standing with his hands in the air.

What is the ruling on this shoot?

Excaliber wrote:

WildBill wrote:Excaliber - I think that the scenario with the dog is pretty far fetched, but please consider this:

You and another unit respond to a burglary in progress. Upon arrival you spot a suspect climbing out a window with a pillowcase full of loot. You draw your weapon and point it at the suspect and tell him to put his hands in the air. He drops the bag and puts his hands in the air. You continue to keep the BG in your sights. Right now, I am not sure about your training, but I assume you have your finger on the trigger.

Unknown to you, your partner spots a second suspect out of your field of view. This suspect points a gun at your partner, who pulls the trigger of his shotgun and shoots the BG.

The noise and concussion from your partner's shotgun causes you to flinch and pull the trigger and shoot the BG who is standing with his hands in the air.

What is the ruling on this shoot?

If I or anyone I know were the investigator, it would be ruled negligence on the part of the officer who had his finger on the trigger when he hadn't made a decision to shoot.

Reflexive hand clenching in response to a loud noise, a loss of balance, or other causes is well known and has caused many negligent discharges in the past. Keeping the finger outside the trigger guard until the decision point was being taught in good firearms training programs (including in my agency) since the late 1980's. There isn't much of an excuse for creating such a hazard 25 or so years after the issue was well understood.

The dog causing the gun to fire is not at all far fetched. There have been a number of accidents like this, primarily among hunters who had put the gun down in a pickup bed, leaned against a fencepost, etc. without unloading the chamber first. A fairly typical incident of this type can be found here.

WildBill wrote:

Excaliber wrote:

WildBill wrote:Excaliber - I think that the scenario with the dog is pretty far fetched, but please consider this:

You and another unit respond to a burglary in progress. Upon arrival you spot a suspect climbing out a window with a pillowcase full of loot. You draw your weapon and point it at the suspect and tell him to put his hands in the air. He drops the bag and puts his hands in the air. You continue to keep the BG in your sights. Right now, I am not sure about your training, but I assume you have your finger on the trigger.

Unknown to you, your partner spots a second suspect out of your field of view. This suspect points a gun at your partner, who pulls the trigger of his shotgun and shoots the BG.

The noise and concussion from your partner's shotgun causes you to flinch and pull the trigger and shoot the BG who is standing with his hands in the air.

What is the ruling on this shoot?

If I or anyone I know were the investigator, it would be ruled negligence on the part of the officer who had his finger on the trigger when he hadn't made a decision to shoot.

Reflexive hand clenching in response to a loud noise, a loss of balance, or other causes is well known and has caused many negligent discharges in the past. Keeping the finger outside the trigger guard until the decision point was being taught in good firearms training programs (including in my agency) since the late 1980's. There isn't much of an excuse for creating such a hazard 25 or so years after the issue was well understood.

The dog causing the gun to fire is not at all far fetched. There have been a number of accidents like this, primarily among hunters who had put the gun down in a pickup bed, leaned against a fencepost, etc. without unloading the chamber first. A fairly typical incident of this type can be found here.

Sorry, I was thinking about a K9 officer, not a hunting incident.

What about a person not trained as an LEO about the hazards of keeping the finger outside the trigger guard? Should they be held to the same standard as an LEO?

WildBill wrote:What about a person not trained as an LEO about the hazards of keeping the finger outside the trigger guard? Should they be held to the same standard as an LEO?