IT can happen to anyone....

[hammAR]

JOEY MOOZ

Mind over matter................there is no spoon...........................

[Fast351]

So is that a ND?

Fair point. Precisely speaking, shooting at the target an instant before you intend to is an ND. However, with all four rules followed, it's a no-harm-no-foul ND of the most technical sort.

In more realistic terms, let's call an ND an event where you shoot or shoot at or toward something or someone that shouldn't get shot -- a "malum in se" offense, not a technical violation.

Ahh yes, when the arguement isn't going your way, change the definition. Always a useful tactic.

[Fast351]

Once again, for the cheap seats:

A negligent discharge is a discharge ANY TIME you didn't intend for the gun to go off. If you're transitioning between two targets, and you cook off a round DURING the transition, even though it goes harmlessly into the backstop, that is a NEGLIGENT DISCHARGE, as you didn't intentionally pull the trigger. Anytime the trigger gets pressed when you didn't intend it to, it is a negligent discharge. If you're reholstering, and a piece of t-shirt goes into the trigger guard and presses the trigger, that is a negligent discharge. I could go on and on, but most of you get the idea.

To think it can't happen to you is simply a fallacy. We should all strive to have a perfect record with regards to gun safety, especially concerning the boom switch, but to think you will be perfect, as I stated before, is sticking your head in the sand.

[David]

I guess I don't agree with the premise implied by "anyone," at least as it applies to law enforcement. The fact that the guy is a police chief means nothing to me. Despite the fact that cops use guns for a living, I have yet to meet many that know how to shoot better than, say, a lot of non-cops on this board. In fact, in every class I've ever taken, the cops are the ones goofing-off and not paying as much attention as the "regular" folks. Obviously this doesn't apply to all cops, but it's a general rule that in my experience is accurate.

[cobb]

A negligent discharge is a discharge ANY TIME you didn't intend for the gun to go off. If you're transitioning between two targets, and you cook off a round DURING the transition, even though it goes harmlessly into the backstop, that is a NEGLIGENT DISCHARGE, as you didn't intentionally pull the trigger. Anytime the trigger gets pressed when you didn't intend it to, it is a negligent discharge.

So you agree with my point.......

My revolver fired at a precise time because I pulled the trigger, even though I did not intend it to fire at that exact instant. It is an unintended discharge, a negligent discharge, an accidental discharge, or what ever you want to call it.

So it will have to go back to what a person's perception or definition is.

[Aceq2jot]

I like to look at is we are all Human and to Err is only human, that is why a computer does not make an Error as the Error sits between the screen and the seat

[DeanC]

Strike #1 taking a loaded gun out of the firing range and not in a holster into a conference room
Strike #2 taking a gun with a jammed live round off the firing range and into a conference room
Strike #3 trying to dislodge jammed round with an audience watching

Yer outta' there chief. Please drop off your instructor credentials at the door. And try to not to bleed on the new carpet.

[JoeH]

Once again, for the cheap seats:

A negligent discharge is a discharge ANY TIME you didn't intend for the gun to go off. If you're transitioning between two targets, and you cook off a round DURING the transition, even though it goes harmlessly into the backstop, that is a NEGLIGENT DISCHARGE, as you didn't intentionally pull the trigger. Anytime the trigger gets pressed when you didn't intend it to, it is a negligent discharge. If you're reholstering, and a piece of t-shirt goes into the trigger guard and presses the trigger, that is a negligent discharge. I could go on and on, but most of you get the idea.

To think it can't happen to you is simply a fallacy. We should all strive to have a perfect record with regards to gun safety, especially concerning the boom switch, but to think you will be perfect, as I stated before, is sticking your head in the sand.

+1

You beat me to this as I was taking a forum break

A ND has NOTHING TO DO WITH muzzle direction. Good muzzle direction can keep a ND from people getting hurt.

[Pat]

Some of our more schooled brethren will tell you (after a few beers...) that they have experienced an ND inadvertantely (otherwise known as an AD). It happened to me ONCE, some thirty years ago, and I have never forgotten the shock and freight I felt when my Ruger Single-Six went off, dropping one about 2 inches from my right big toe.

Such learning experiences are expensive, but good. Something like that sticks with you.

[Andrew Rothman]

Whatever. Let me revise my statement, then. I will never have a harmful ND. I may at some point have a harmless ND where I shoot at a target a split-second before I intend to.

Better?

So is that a ND?

Fair point. Precisely speaking, shooting at the target an instant before you intend to is an ND. However, with all four rules followed, it's a no-harm-no-foul ND of the most technical sort.

In more realistic terms, let's call an ND an event where you shoot or shoot at or toward something or someone that shouldn't get shot -- a "malum in se" offense, not a technical violation.

Ahh yes, when the arguement isn't going your way, change the definition. Always a useful tactic.

[Fast351]

I have never had an ND, and I never will. That's not me with my head in the sand, that's me with my eyes wide open, and a single-minded determination to follow ALL of the safety rules, ALL the time.

... and...

Whatever. Let me revise my statement, then. I will never have a harmful ND. I may at some point have a harmless ND where I shoot at a target a split-second before I intend to.

OK, so now you're admitting that it's possible that you will break one of the four rules of gun safety. (That being keeping your finger off the bang switch until you're on target).

Pretty soon you'll be at the point where you can admit to yourself that it could happen, regardless of how remote the possibility is.

[princewally]

I have never had an ND, and I never will. That's not me with my head in the sand, that's me with my eyes wide open, and a single-minded determination to follow ALL of the safety rules, ALL the time.

... and...

Whatever. Let me revise my statement, then. I will never have a harmful ND. I may at some point have a harmless ND where I shoot at a target a split-second before I intend to.

OK, so now you're admitting that it's possible that you will break one of the four rules of gun safety. (That being keeping your finger off the bang switch until you're on target).

Pretty soon you'll be at the point where you can admit to yourself that it could happen, regardless of how remote the possibility is.

Except nothing has changed except the fact that your are both using the same definitions, now.

[BRIT_in_the_weeds]

The first step is admitting you have a problem, MILLLLARrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

[Aceq2jot]

The first step is admitting you have a problem, MILLLLARrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

The second is admitting a power greater than yourself, can HELP YOU

[Andrew Rothman]

Whatever. Let me revise my statement, then. I will never have a harmful ND. I may at some point have a harmless ND where I shoot at a target a split-second before I intend to.

OK, so now you're admitting that it's possible that you will break one of the four rules of gun safety. (That being keeping your finger off the bang switch until you're on target).

Pretty soon you'll be at the point where you can admit to yourself that it could happen, regardless of how remote the possibility is.

I cannot be responsible for your lack of reading comprehension.