JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
The military (or at least the Army) got away from using the term "Accidental Discharge" (AD) is such instances and went to calling it Negligent Discharge. Theory being, you train, practice, and are expected, as a professional Soldier, to manage your firearm at all times. Ergo you cannot have an accident.
 
The military (or at least the Army) got away from using the term "Accidental Discharge" (AD) is such instances and went to calling it Negligent Discharge. Theory being, you train, practice, and are expected, as a professional Soldier, to manage your firearm at all times. Ergo you cannot have an accident.
That reminds me, I believe that dog was negligent too:)
 
Some of the things I read about situations like this REALLY make me wonder but what is in this story is beyond compare:

carrying it in a green grocery bag

with a plan to ask the officer to clean it for him.

He "pulled the trigger to make sure the handgun was empty

"he then realized he had forgotten to eject the ammunition magazine before clearing the firing chamber."

"It was an accident," Motola told the Miami Herald repeatedly

Motola was "exceptionally cleared" in an incident report.
There is NOTHING here that suggests any 'serious' or 'responsible' gun ownership.

I wager this guy is 'new gun owner' bought it as part of the recent 'fad' with all the rest and has zero experience.

I don't know the answer but it really disturbs me when I read something like this and I wish new owners would take a more active role in educating themselves in the basics but I don't see this as ever happening.
 
It just bewilders me how all of the gun forums detest the use of "accident" as if a negligent discharge must be intentional. A discharge can be both accidental and negligent. Does anyone think that if it was a negligent discharge that it was not an accident?
Does everyone think that these sloppy gun owners wanted to fire those rounds? "Dear God, don't dare call it an accident!"

Just because it was an accident does not mean it was justified, or that the person who caused the accident can't get charged with a crime or sued for civil liability.
 
It just bewilders me how all of the gun forums detest the use of "accident" as if a negligent discharge must be intentional. A discharge can be both accidental and negligent. Does anyone think that if it was a negligent discharge that it was not an accident?
Does everyone think that these sloppy gun owners wanted to fire those rounds? "Dear God, don't dare call it an accident!"

Just because it was an accident does not mean it was justified, or that the person who caused the accident can't get charged with a crime or sued for civil liability.

Always wondered this myself. Is it a "car accident" or "driving negligence". Seems to me a bit of wordplay.
 
It just bewilders me how all of the gun forums detest the use of "accident"
While you have a point I believe in the case of guns it seems most agree if the basics of gun safety were applied at all times there would be no 'negligent' or 'accidental' discharges. However because it does happen and usually because of one or more of the basics of gun safety not being applied it is, in effect, negligence.

Maybe the term 'negligent' should be applied to the safety rule not being applied which resulted in the discharge as opposed to the discharge of the firearm itself.
 
Negligence can never be an accident? So if someone fails to use the caution and attention that a reasonable person would, and doesn't check that the car is in park, they intended for it to roll down the hill? It wasn't an accident?
 
It just bewilders me how all of the gun forums detest the use of "accident" as if a negligent discharge must be intentional. A discharge can be both accidental and negligent. Does anyone think that if it was a negligent discharge that it was not an accident?
Does everyone think that these sloppy gun owners wanted to fire those rounds? "Dear God, don't dare call it an accident!"

Just because it was an accident does not mean it was justified, or that the person who caused the accident can't get charged with a crime or sued for civil liability.
Negligence conveys a level of irresponsibility…an event in which you have some level of control over its outcome. An accident is the result of something out of your control or over which you have no influence. While the "intent" for the gun to discharge was not there, the negligence on your part made it so.

Give me an example of what you think would be an accidental discharge?
 
Negligence can never be an accident? So if someone fails to use the caution and attention that a reasonable person would, and doesn't check that the car is in park, they intended for it to roll down the hill? It wasn't an accident?
Thats an accident as a result of negligence.

If the car never rolled its still negligent to not put it in park. Negligence doesn't mean accident.

(I might confuse myself before this is over but Im trying... :p )
 
Negligence conveys a level of irresponsibility…an event in which you have some level of control over its outcome. An accident is the result of something out of your control or over which you have no influence. While the "intent" for the gun to discharge was not there, the negligence on your part made it so.

Give me an example of what you think would be an accidental discharge?

This is a fun argument.

If an accident is something out of one's control, how can there be a car accident when the driver makes a mistake?

The definition of accident:


I can't seem to find anywhere it mentions "out of your control" or "over which you have no influence".

I think some people need to read and learn a little more.
 
An accident is when a deer jumps out of the forest and hits my wife's car (this actually happened).

A negligent is hitting a tree.

Based on the report, sounds like a bit more of the second one and not so much of the first.

I would offer that the terms are not mutually exclusive.

In fact, I would go out on a limb and say - All NDs are accidents, but not all Accidents are NDs
 
An accident is when a deer jumps out of the forest and hits my wife's car (this actually happened).

A negligent is hitting a tree.

Based on the report, sounds like a bit more of the second one and not so much of the first.
I say the deer was negligent.

What is it called when the tree jumps out in front of your car?
 
It's called individual interpretation of the definition of a word without knowing the true definition.

Of course, High speed low drag Operators don't make mistakes or have accidents. So the term Negligent Discharge was invented because it makes the person that discharged the gun sound like an untrained idiot.

Although in the OP story I'm gonna say this is accurate. :D
 
I witnessed this:

Small group of shooters on an established line with established direction of fire and targets.
Had been shooting and chatting for almost an hour.
AR15 malfunction occurs.
Shooter disassembles rifle.
Shooter carries lower half (no mag) down the line to experienced person (EP).
EP examines lower. A spring was cut on one side, in the common trigger-pull-reduction method. The pin below the spring was a cheap pin that only had a spring-arm engagement slot on one side (not both sides). The cut side of the spring was aligned with the slotted side of the pin, thus the shortened spring-arm did not perform the normal pin retention function, thus the pin started to work out and was off-kilter, thus the trigger pull weight began to increase dramatically.
EP fixed it by reversing the pin and showing the owner what happened.
3rd person brings disassembled upper to EP.
EP installs charging handle and bolt carrier in upper.
EP assembles upper to lower. No mag.
EP disengages safety and pulls trigger.
Bang!

A round was in the chamber of the disassembled upper when it was handed to the EP.

No question - the EP failed to perform the required procedures.
EP was not happy with himself or the other persons. Just not happy about any of it.

It was his fault, but still, you can see how stuff happens.

When I was young, I did not have decades of experience with, or the accompanying respect for, total compliance with all safety steps, every time, all the time.

Years later, I put my kids through a year or so of USPSA competition, and the boy thru a series of 3-gun matches.
Duals goals: rigid, unfailing, habitual respect for and compliance with every conceivable safety procedure; and awareness of just how fast a firearm can be used accurately in a gun fight.

IMO, the value of practical shooting exposure is that the really fast guys become little mini-rockstars in the local scene, and it's good for kids to see the rockstars demonstrate complete respect for the extensive safety protocols developed for those sports. And also to understand that immediate reaction is necessary the instant an unexpected gun appears anywhere.

Safety threads are good threads. :cool:
 

Upcoming Events

Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR
Arms Collectors of Southwest Washington (ACSWW) gun show
Battle Ground, WA

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top