Those who've had a ND, and those who are going to.


PDA






Dnaltrop
July 10, 2011, 07:24 PM
Joined the Club today.. #%$%$$#.

Old man's Taurus Tracker 9 shot .22 still having cycling problems, cylinder locks up in DA, dumped it, reloaded it... was chatting with the other folks and emptied it again.. turned to dump the brass, was stopped by a question.

turned back towards the range, pointed at a downward angle, intending to use the spent.22's as snap caps to demonstrate the easily reproducable problem.

3 clicks and there goes a divot on the floor. Lost count of rounds fired, and one of the cylinder locks apparently managed to cycle enough to skip the round.

Nobody injured. but holy hell I'm angry at myself today... 29 years of a perfect record down the tubes.

Thankfully 3 other folks on the line (after everyone checked for wounds) shared their own ND stories, and worse ones than mine... but minor as it is I'm going to be kicking myself for a while.

Side note, 2 trips to Taurus service and this damn revolver still won't complete a full load without the screwed up timing locking the cylinder up. I know lots of folks here have flawless Taurus, I don't seem to be laying hands on the good ones .

Off to clean the guns and beat myself up some more. Feh.

If you enjoyed reading about "Those who've had a ND, and those who are going to." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
luigi
July 10, 2011, 07:41 PM
That sounds more like a genuine malfunction than a ND

Dnaltrop
July 10, 2011, 07:47 PM
The cylinder problems yes.

My pulling the trigger having miscounted the rounds, with the barrel pointed at the floor downrange... That's ND. Just glad I was at least pointed close to the right direction. 45 degrees up and it would have just gone downrange.

Clifford
July 10, 2011, 07:47 PM
He-he.... I bet you nearly pooped yourself.

Many have made similar mistakes. Some will chime in like me and say "bet you won't do that again" or "did you learn your lesson?" then you will get the " I have never and will never make that mistake" folks. Let the fun begin!

FWIW, I've had one ND and one near ND. The short of both of them is I got too comfortable with my gun handling routine and the first time I put a .45 into a steel basketball backboard. The second time I nearly blasted my loading bench but as I squeezed the trigger on my revolver I thought "ya know I only see 4 rounds on the bench and my Smith holds 5" I eased back off of the trigger and when I opened the cylinder back up I found one of my rounds still in the cylinder and lined up to fire had I finished pulling that trigger.

EddieNFL
July 10, 2011, 09:26 PM
I have never and will never make that mistake" folks.

Only way to be 100 percent certain of never experiencing an ND is to never pick up a firearm.

David E
July 10, 2011, 09:27 PM
The two loudest sounds in the world are:

1) A BANG when you're expecting a click.

2) A CLICK when you're expecting a bang.

orionengnr
July 10, 2011, 09:28 PM
Thank you for sharing, and for "manning up" and taking responsibility for your actions. It's becoming a lost art.

I had one about 25 years ago, long before I ever heard of the Four Rules. The only things standing between me and a recurrence are good habits and dilligence. Complacency is the enemy.

Dnaltrop
July 10, 2011, 11:57 PM
I grew up in a household where "lying by omission" is as bad as any other lie.

Even worse, my old man was standing over my shoulder... one of the most safety conscious shooters you'll ever meet. I'll be hearing about this for years

It's still just sticking in my gut, I think I'll have to hit the range again tomorrow just to reassure myself that i'm suddenly not some uncontrolled Yahoo.

GLOOB
July 11, 2011, 12:01 AM
Regarding the title, I disagree. I'm sure there are plenty of people who handle guns frequently that will go their entire lives without an ND.

But I think you're doing fine, OP. I tend to think my revolver is empty when it stops shooting, too. At least, enough to try dryfiring it while pointing downrange at a hot gun range. I bet you'd a put eyes on the empty cylinder before trying that at home. Being on a hot gun range you took a liberty and had a freak malfunction. You had the gun pointed at something you were willing to destroy. Just a divot in the floor, and I bet you won't even receive a bill for the damage. :) You did good.

Dnaltrop
July 11, 2011, 12:50 AM
I agree... and I used to think that I'd be one of those who'd never screw up.

I was lucky. but yea. It wasn't a round through my foot (or a family member), a wall in my home... A screw up for me is minor in perspective compared to far worse incidents we've all read (and watched youtube) about.

Years ago, had 2 different (ex)friends pass rounds within 2 feet of my stomach when they made their semi's safe... by pulling the slide to show the empty chamber... dropping it and THEN removing the mag... and then pulling the trigger to prove me wrong when I shouted they'd chambered a round. The only time I've wished for a magazine safety in any pistols.

EddieNFL
July 11, 2011, 09:09 PM
I'm sure there are plenty of people who handle guns frequently that will go their entire lives without an ND.

A certain percentage will beat the odds, be it NDs or auto crashes.

SaxonPig
July 12, 2011, 11:02 AM
From the FAQs:

AD vs ND.

26. An accident is an unintentional event. When a gun is discharged inadvertently it is an accidental discharge. The use of the term negligent discharge has become popular but in my opinion it is a bad idea. Yes, the vast majority of ADs involve negligence on the part of the operator but negligence is a legal term that assigns responsibility. Describing your unintentional discharge as negligent is admitting guilt to any cop or lawyer who happens to be listening. Until I am certain that I am not being charged with a crime or sued in civil court I prefer to not admit guilt.

---------------------------

I have had two ADs. One was a mechanical malfunction and the other was negligence on my part. No injuries and minimal damage in both cases. To err is human. Nobody is immune.

GLOOB
July 12, 2011, 06:15 PM
A certain percentage will beat the odds, be it NDs or auto crashes.
That's not completely wrong, but I don't like the wording.

Once you've learned good gun handling procedures, you should be out of the woods forever after.

Some people never learn. They're bound to have an ND, eventually.

So by "beating the odds" you mean certain people were born with the ability to learn, understand, and practice safe gun handling and most are not, then I can agree with you.

EddieNFL
July 12, 2011, 08:34 PM
Yes, the vast majority of ADs involve negligence on the part of the operator but negligence is a legal term that assigns responsibility.

So, who is responsible for the "accidental" discharge?

EddieNFL
July 12, 2011, 08:35 PM
Once you've learned good gun handling procedures, you should be out of the woods forever after.

So by "beating the odds" you mean certain people were born with the ability to learn, understand, and practice safe gun handling and most are not, then I can agree with you.

And some will just be lucky.

duns
July 12, 2011, 08:51 PM
It's a very large club, welcome. I had an ND with a recently purchased gun that I'd never fired (apart from dry firing). One day, I pulled the trigger without checking its status -- after all, it was new and had not yet been to the range. Bang and a crater in the kitchen floor tile. I had loaded it but still have no recollection of doing so. Never trust to memory, always check and double check a gun is clear before dry firing. If there is any gap in your dry firing practice, check the gun again before resuming.

GLOOB
July 13, 2011, 03:08 AM
This (dryfiring) is one of those things that isn't covered in the universal gun rules.

If you're going to dryfire (other than at a hot range) you need to add some more rules to prevent an accident. Obviously, you should chamber check before you pull the trigger, every time you pick up a gun. But you already knew that, and it happened anyway.

One of my things is I never load a new firearm except at the range. In fact, I only have the same 2 guns that are ever loaded, and they're always in the same place.

I'm not a spy/cop/assassin. No one's trying to kill me. I know my new firearm is a toy, first and foremost. I know I'm going to play with it. And I wouldn't depend on an untested firearm, anyway. I have a Glock for that. It works out great, because Glocks are so boring that I wouldn't pick one up to dry fire it, even if it was unloaded.

nortexeric
July 13, 2011, 09:40 AM
Dnaltrop - Ya know, as far as NDs go, yours wasn't too bad. Redundant measures seem pointless until one or multiple fail. As someone else mentioned, you were pointing downrange as oppose to at someone, when it happened. That is far better than some of the ones I have seen. During my time overseas, I saw my fair share of NDs. The ones that were the worse were where the individual had no regard for what they were doing, nor the discipline required to insure safe handling of a firearm. I see this more as not an example of 'what not to do', but a successful example of why you should take extra precautions. My Dad who drilled firearm safety into my head way before the Army did had a ND due to a malfunction, yet it only punched a hole in the wall as oppose to a hole into any of the people standing in the room with him. Why? You just don't point loaded guns at people. Redundant measures. We are human, we make mistakes, but we try to make sure we minimize them as much as possible. So don't beat yourself up too much, chalk it to a life experience and get that Taurus fixed!

-Eric

orionengnr
July 13, 2011, 11:37 PM
Years ago, had 2 different (ex)friends pass rounds within 2 feet of my stomach when they made their semi's safe... by pulling the slide to show the empty chamber... dropping it and THEN removing the mag... and then pulling the trigger to prove me wrong when I shouted they'd chambered a round.
I think I would have had two ex-friends who would have had to take advantage of their dental insurance. :)

AD vs ND.
See my previous post about taking responsibility for your actions being a lost art, and then sugar coat it any way you want. The example above is a perfect one.

By the accepted definitions of every gun board I've been on:
--if the discharge was due to a repeatable equipment malfunction, it was an AD.
--if your finger was on the trigger when the round discharged, it was an ND.

chriske
July 14, 2011, 08:11 AM
I killed a perfectly good couch once .
And with my GF & 2 cats in the room at the time, too.
I doubt I'll ever forget THAT lesson.

Rexster
July 14, 2011, 07:31 PM
I had a safe-direction ND before, when one live round remained stuck in a chamber of the cylinder, and the five cartridges in my hand looked like six. I now always stroke the ejector rod, AND look into every chamber. I no longer trust myself to count correctly.

I was always bad at math, anyway. ;)

Of course, keeping the muzzle pointed in a safe direction is paramount. :)

Loosedhorse
July 14, 2011, 07:40 PM
Shouldn't that phrase read:

"Those who will have an ND, and those who will have another"?

If nothing can be done to prevent the first ND, then nothing can be done to prevent the next. If we're going to try "extra hard" to prevent that second ND, we should be trying at least that hard to prevent the first.

They are preventable. They are always preventable. As soon as everyone feels that down to their toes, then I think we'll be a long way toward accepting responsibity--all of the respoonsibility--for every ND.

"Those who will have an ND in the future, and those who will be vigilant enough not to." Independent of whether they've already had one (or more). Those are my two groups.

And yes, accidents (and being negligent) are part of being human. We're going to have to rise above ourselves on this item.

1KPerDay
July 14, 2011, 07:53 PM
Shouldn't that phrase read:

"Those who will have an ND in the future, and those who will be vigilant enough not to." Independent of whether they've already had one (or more). Those are my two groups.

+1.......

GLOOB
July 15, 2011, 08:37 AM
the five cartridges in my hand looked like six.
Good grief. :banghead: You counted the rounds to figure out if your gun was loaded? I wouldn't do that with a single shot.
I now always stroke the ejector rod, AND look into every chamber
How about you just do the latter. That's the only one that means anything. Stroking the ejector rod is just confusing the issue. Reminds me of the guys that rack the slide 5 times without ever looking at the chamber. Just look at the chamber/cylinder for pete's sake (and verify the mag well is empty).

Rexster
July 15, 2011, 09:07 AM
Stroking the ejector rod IS a step of unloading a revolver. It is actually more thorough than counting rounds, because it is a mechanical action. Merely looking at the chambers can be deceptive, as plenty enough folks have looked at the rear of a cylinder, closed it, and then stroked the trigger after thinking they saw empty holes, when the chambers were actually loaded. In my opinion, during the days when revolvers were the standard duty handgun at my PD, most officers' NDs were of this type.

I can see the brass of a chambered round in a SIG, in the small gap in the extractor cut, and see the rim of a chambered round in the small slot in the slide of my Seecamp, but I still run the slides to be really sure. So, I will perform the comparable act of stroking the
ejector rod. (No, I do not run the slide of an auto five times; once is sufficient.)

I don't remember the terminology, but human beings can be distracted while performing a routine task, and see that which is not there, or fail to see that which is there. That is exactly what
happened with my ND. I was angry about something, and decided to relax a bit by dry firing. I
glanced at the rear of the cylinder and at the rounds in my hand, rather than carefully looking at the chambers and THEN carefully looking at the rounds in my hand. Stroking the
ejector rod would have been the mechanical fail-safe, but I did not do it. Now, I do.

Edited to add: I no longer dry fire while angry, no matter how relaxing it may be.

Loosedhorse
July 15, 2011, 02:13 PM
How about you just do the latterThe principle of double-checking, because we humans make mistakes. You check and have someone else check. If no one else is around, check twice: once visually, once by feeling the empty charge holes with your finger, or by pushing the ejector.

It is harder to mess up a double-check than a single-check. I prefer double-checks to unexpected loud noises.

klutchless
July 15, 2011, 03:58 PM
Not always true but my jeep shot itself with a 357 when I was dove hunting last year.I was driving across a field with my 357 in the center console it managed to move the hammer enough to set of the primer and take a nice chunk out of the console and lodge itself in the dash.I'm glad it was aimed straight forward and I was alone .To this day I cannot figure out how it happened.but I learned my lesson got a cheapo holster with a thumb break and super glued it into my new console so the gun cannot move.http://www.thehighroad.org/images/smilies/uhoh2.gif

mgmorden
July 15, 2011, 04:22 PM
Only unexpected bang I've ever had was with a Mauser that had a faulty safety. Had it on target, pulled trigger. The gun didn't go off and I realized I still had the safety on. Flipped the safety off and the gun went off. No real harm - the gun was still pointed downrange and the round shot in a harmless direction, but I did have to have some work done on that gun.

youngda9
July 15, 2011, 04:23 PM
"Those who've had a ND, and those who are going to."

So you think that since you were careless and had a ND that all other gun-owners are going to do the same. Not gunna happen.

rolandedwinjohnson
July 15, 2011, 04:37 PM
I've had one AD and one ND. The AD was trying to get the mag out of my kids 22 - not being familiar with the gun and its operation, and accidentally got the bugger hook on the bang switch.

The second was simply negligence on my part, screwing around with my revolver after cleaning it.

Fortunately in neither case was any one harmed.

W.E.G.
July 15, 2011, 04:41 PM
Malfunctioning guns are always ripe for an ND.

Don't use it as an excuse though.

Ogie
July 15, 2011, 06:19 PM
The title of your thread is BS. Keep that attitude and you will have another one.

00__LUGER__00
July 15, 2011, 06:48 PM
Let's take it easy now, folks.

Dnaltrop
July 16, 2011, 01:10 AM
I rather enjoy the indignant responses from those offended by the title. Kindly Come back on your deathbed with a perfect record before you gloat. (if indeed posting on the internet is your final urge) Pride goes before the fall.

The "I'll never make a mistake" attitude used to be mine for 29 years, all it took was a malfunctioning gun and a momentary distraction. Only good habits still had it pointed where it wouldn't harm anyone.

GunByte
July 16, 2011, 01:53 AM
I had my first UD (unintentional discharge) after 34 years of shooting. We are all human and make mistakes and have mental lapses. Like you my UD did no harm other than make a hole in my bedroom wall. I had it pointed to the unworked farm next to my house so no one was in danger. It startled me so much that I almost pulled the trigger again. I was disoriented and somehow thought I may have shot a round into our guest bedroom where we had guest staying. The noise of the .45 had my ears ringing until I woke up the next morning.

It is often said that there are those that have had ND and those that are just waiting to have them. When I told others I was surprised that alot of members in my gun club had them also and it is not very rare in competitions either. When someone who never had one gets all preachy about it I just tell them that perhaps they do not shoot enough because if you handle a gun thousands of times the odds are that you will have an accident. Even professionals have them. Telling others to simply keep your finger off the trigger is like telling someone to drive safe. Does nothing to reduce the number of accidents.

For me the most important rule of safe gun handling is to always make sure that when I pull the trigger the gun is pointed in a safe direction. I also now keep all my guns loaded at home (no children and live in a retirement community with no kids around). I found, for me at least, there is a difference in treating all guns as if they are loaded and actually being dead sure they are loaded.

klutchless
July 16, 2011, 04:06 AM
Gunbyte welcome to the forum.And accidents happen

GLOOB
July 16, 2011, 04:59 AM
Telling others to simply keep your finger off the trigger is like telling someone to drive safe. Does nothing to reduce the number of accidents.

If you can't figure out a way for YOU to safely handle guns, then there's not much anyone else can do about it. But for you to believe that no one else on earth has figured out how to handle firearms safely, then you're mistaken. But it's more than 4 rules. It's also about knowing yourself and how you are going to be most likely to break them.

Dryfiring is a perfect example. You're breaking the universal gun safety rules when you dryfire. If you want to play with your guns, you need to figure out a protocol that works for you.

Freak accidents happen. But getting an unexpected bang when you willfully pull the trigger is something that SOME people can avoid.

shockwave
July 16, 2011, 09:15 AM
"Those who will have an ND in the future, and those who will be vigilant enough not to."

The word "vigilant" is a nice choice here. Every time you pull the trigger, you are testing your knowledge of whether or not there is a round ready to be fired from the gun. "I'm pretty sure" is not the standard. The vigilant owner will know for certain.

Here's an example:

Yesterday I removed the magazine disconnect safety from my LC9, and wanted to show the result to my neighbor, who works on guns as a hobby. He was curious. So I did this:

1. Took the magazine out of the gun
2. Worked the slide, ensured the chamber was empty
3. Inspected the box where I'd stored the rounds - counted 8

Then I took it over to show him. When I handed him the gun, it was pointed in a safe direction. I told him it was unloaded. As usual, he:

1. Removed the magazine
2. Worked the slide and ensured the chamber was empty

Then he kept the muzzle pointed in a safe direction and tried a dry fire to see how the mag disconnect procedure had been accomplished.

In other words, it isn't "just checking." You layer safety in successive procedures and habits, doing them religiously, regardless of "common sense." Even when you know for sure the gun is empty, you still check the chamber one more time before pulling the trigger, because it's an automatic habit.

The primary way that NDs happen is through carelessness. Getting sloppy. Being complacent. Yet, familiarity does not have to breed contempt. Every time you handle a firearm, you have a Golden Opportunity to yet again ingrain good habits and institutionalize in your memory the rules of safety.

It is wrong and insulting to say that people who spend a lot of time with guns are more likely to have an ND, because they are firing 100,000 rounds, or a million, or whatever. If anything, the more you shoot, the better your procedures should be.

We don't expect the airline pilot to occasionally crash the plane.

EddieNFL
July 16, 2011, 09:21 AM
When someone who never had one gets all preachy about it I just tell them that perhaps they do not shoot enough because if you handle a gun thousands of times the odds are that you will have an accident.

Some will go though life without having an ND for a number of reasons, but anyone who handles a firearm is potentially one "opps" away. A person who religiously follows all four rules has an excellent chance of going out with a clean record, but all it takes is one lapse in memory, one distraction, one moment of confusion and, BANG. Unfortunately, we are all subject to all of the above.

Loosedhorse
July 16, 2011, 10:16 AM
When someone who never had one gets all preachy about it I just tell them that perhaps they do not shoot enough because if you handle a gun thousands of times the odds are that you will have an accident.No: dead wrong. NDs are not a function of length of exposure; they are a function of carelessness (even if it is infrequent carelessness).

This is reminds me of the (hypothetical) teenager's objection to a parent telling them not to do something, like smoke marijuana. Either the parent never smoked marijuana (in which case they don't know what they're talking about) or he/she did smoke (and is being hypocritical in setting the rule). So either way, the teenager can feel justified in ignoring the parent!

Well, I have shot enough to have an ND; and I am extremely "preachy" about the fact that, since completely changing my gunhandling and attitude, I haven't had another. Not "braggy" as in I'm better than you, but "preachy" as in "if you've had one, please change your ways!"

So, people can ignore me on both counts! :D
For me the most important rule of safe gun handling is to always make sure that when I pull the trigger the gun is pointed in a safe directionI agree, but I would say that should NOT be the only rule you care about. We are human, as you point out. Depending on only one rule is like depending on only one feature of a firearm to make it "safe." I think we need several rules, even if they overlap, and we need to follow them all scrupulously.

The central features of successful safety systems are redundancy and consistency, IMHO. Redundancy especially, since we humans are not known for our perfect consistency. :o

fedlaw
July 16, 2011, 11:28 AM
In addition to Col. Cooper's 4 Rules, double cycling of the slide on semi's, manually inserting a finger into the chamber to make certain the firearm is safe, and opening the action before handing someone else a gun, etc., I take several other precautions:
-Holstering/reholstering: Making sure nothing interferes with the trigger or is inside of the trigger guard (i.e. part of the holster, shirt tail, jacket drawstring, etc.); keeping my thumb between the hammer and slide (on 1911's) or on the back of the slide (striker fired);
-One caliber at a time on the shooting bench at the range;
-Snap caps when dry firing;
-Inspection and safety checks when cleaning, paying particular attention to make sure the firing pin moves freely, there are no unusual wear points and the safeties are functioning properly;
-One type of firearm: I carry, compete and train with only one type of firearm with a common manual of arms. I started with revolvers, went to SA/DA, 1911's and for the last year striker fired handguns. Sure, I like to switch off, but I only do it occasionally and only at the range.
Obviously, YMMV, but so far, so good.
Steve

GLOOB
July 17, 2011, 12:47 AM
There are some good bits in there.

-Inspection and safety checks when cleaning, paying particular attention to make sure the firing pin moves freely, there are no unusual wear points and the safeties are functioning properly;
I like this one. This is one benefit of a hammer fired over striker, IMO. I find myself pressing on the exposed firing pin of my hammer-fired pistols after any dry fire session, to ensure the FP spring and/or FP block are still working.

Here are a couple more I have.
1. I never drop the slide after a chamber check. Dropping the slide is how I LOAD a gun. After it's unloaded, I ride the slide home, slowly, while watching the chamber. If there was anything in the mag well, which I just checked, I would see and feel it.
2. I never leave a loaded gun lying in the open unless it's holstered. There's no inherent problem with this for others. I do this because I dry fire my guns. Yes, I still check the chamber any time I pick a gun up to dry fire it. But I don't pick up a holstered gun until I need to.

For me the most important rule of safe gun handling is to always make sure that when I pull the trigger the gun is pointed in a safe direction
I agree, but I would point out that should NOT be the only rule you care about. We are human, as you point out. Depending on only one rule is like depending on only one feature of a firearm to make it "safe." I think we need several rules, even if they overlap, and we need to follow them all scrupulously.
I completely agree that there should be one or two rules that are considered the most important. Especially when teaching newbies. The other dozens of rules we pick up along the way are too much for the new guy.

For me it's 1. Muzzle control. Actively point the firearm in a safe direction at all times. 2. Finger out of the trigger guard unless I'm shooting.

I also try to drill into newbies to pick up a handgun like they mean it. I tell them to pretend they're a mall ninja SWAT guy. How would they hold it? Yeah, hold it like that. Wrist straight. Gun inline with the forearm. Because when you pick up a gun as if you're going to shoot it, you will be actively pointing it at something. Picking up a gun like an object of curiosity or fear puts your focus on the gun, not on what it's pointed at. Sometimes new guys are self-conscious that they'll appear like they've watched too many action movies, so I put that point at ease from the start. Go ahead and pretend you know what you're doing in that one regard.

1. Took the magazine out of the gun
2. Worked the slide, ensured the chamber was empty
3. Inspected the box where I'd stored the rounds - counted 8

Then I took it over to show him. When I handed him the gun, it was pointed in a safe direction. I told him it was unloaded. As usual, he:

1. Removed the magazine
2. Worked the slide and ensured the chamber was empty
I have argued with friends for not doing this. It's not a matter of trust or respect. It's a matter of personal responsibility for gun safety.

GunByte
July 17, 2011, 01:05 PM
I am certainly glad to see a few peope so certain that it will never happen to them. Heard it before from shooters ranked in the top ten in the world, gun testers for magazines and a few spec ops friends of mine not to mention LEOs in my family. Apparently some are better than they are and not subject to mistakes just because they have not happened yet. Good for you.

Are you familiar with some of the studies done on this One in particular showed that if you check your chamber a few thousand times and it is empty your mind gets trained to see it empty. Then when there is a round in it your mind sees it empty. This is much like what I experience after my dog died and I kept thinking I saw him in certain places where I was used to seeing him. Other studies show that trained professionals "seek the comfort of their trigger" during high stress and do not even know it until they watch the video tapes. A recent study showed that for some people they just cannot help it, in other words, their mental makeup will give them higher odds that they will seek their trigger under stress more than others. We are all different so we differ in the kind and frequency of mistakes we make.

For fun someday just search the internet and see how many professionals, even those who teach gun safety, have had NDs.

duns
July 17, 2011, 01:19 PM
Are you familiar with some of the studies done on this One in particular showed that if you check your chamber a few thousand times and it is empty your mind gets trained to see it empty. Then when there is a round in it your mind sees it empty.

Other studies show that trained professionals "seek the comfort of their trigger" during high stress and do not even know it until they watch the video tapes.Great information, thanks for posting it.

I wonder if those who claim it is inconceivable that they would have an ND tend to be less careful about muzzle control. Whereas those who have had an ND may tend to be more careful to control the muzzle so that even if there is an ND, it is unlikely to cause any harm. It would not surprise me if those who deny the possibility of having an ND are more likely in the long run to injure themselves or somebody else.

Ogie
July 17, 2011, 02:22 PM
Quote:

"I wonder if those who claim it is inconceivable that they would have an ND tend to be less careful about muzzle control. Whereas those who have had an ND may tend to be more careful to control the muzzle so that even if there is an ND, it is unlikely to cause any harm. It would not surprise me if those who deny the possibility of having an ND are more likely in the long run to injure themselves or somebody else."

Or on the other hand perhaps it is just human nature for people that screw up to think that everyone else is destined to screw up as well.

PowerG
July 17, 2011, 02:58 PM
My take on it is that if you can handle a firearm one time without an negligent discharge, you can handle it one million. If the proper procedures are followed rigorously each and every time, then an ND is impossible. Sure a lot of people have it happen, but it's realistic to say that a mental lapse occured when it did, which is a lapse of discipline, which can (and should be) corrected. If no damage is done, then it can be counted as a learning experience, if it is treated as such; if it's laughed off without a serious reconsideration of the failure to follow procedure then perhaps another hobby might be advisable.

I have witnessed shots fired as a result of a malfunctioning firearm, it can and does happen. Muzzle control is a big part of proper procedure, which is why a firearm is NEVER pointed at something you don't want to get shot, including your own body parts.

That saying is similar to the one about motorcycles-"those who have went down, and those who will"-which is bullcrap.

Remo223
July 17, 2011, 03:20 PM
Before I comment on my experience, I have a question:

If you believe your gun to be empty, and you aim it at something safe to shoot, and you pull the trigger expecting a "click", and it shoots, is that a true negligent discharge?

PowerG
July 17, 2011, 03:22 PM
I would say yes.

Remo223
July 17, 2011, 03:24 PM
My take on it is that if you can handle a firearm one time without an negligent discharge, you can handle it one million. If the proper procedures are followed rigorously each and every time, then an ND is impossible. Sure a lot of people have it happen, but it's realistic to say that a mental lapse occured when it did, which is a lapse of discipline, which can (and should be) corrected. If no damage is done, then it can be counted as a learning experience, if it is treated as such; if it's laughed off without a serious reconsideration of the failure to follow procedure then perhaps another hobby might be advisable.

I have witnessed shots fired as a result of a malfunctioning firearm, it can and does happen. Muzzle control is a big part of proper procedure, which is why a firearm is NEVER pointed at something you don't want to get shot, including your own body parts.

That saying is similar to the one about motorcycles-"those who have went down, and those who will"-which is bullcrap.
motorcyclists are not in control of every variable on the road. Therefore that saying is NOT bullcrap, your sentence is. The only motorcyclists that do not go down are the ones that die before their time comes or that quit riding before their time comes. Same is true of driving a car.

orionengnr
July 17, 2011, 03:43 PM
I've had one AD and one ND. The AD was trying to get the mag out of my kids 22 - not being familiar with the gun and its operation, and accidentally got the bugger hook on the bang switch.
The second was simply negligence on my part, screwing around with my revolver after cleaning it.
Actually, they were both NDs. If your finger is on the trigger, and the weapon discharges, it is operating as it was designed to do.
If you believe your gun to be empty, and you aim it at something safe to shoot, and you pull the trigger expecting a "click", and it shoots, is that a true negligent discharge?
Yes. Your finger was on the trigger, and the weapon operated as designed.

Dnaltrop
July 17, 2011, 03:44 PM
Remo, Personally, I've tried to hold myself to the utmost standard... too many scary moments from other people.

If I was still at the line running the cylinder through on target, and the skipped round had discharged in the second, or third cycle it would have been fine.

Once I had that cylinder open, I should have finished the dump rather than answering the other shooter's questions, and then demonstrating the problem to them.

"Malfunction-induced operator error resulting in accidental discharge"... Too many words. I'll stick to using a short profanity, redouble my vigilance and keep this in my mind to prevent Number two.

PowerG
July 17, 2011, 03:50 PM
Got something against motorcycles? I know several people who have had long riding careers, and are still riding, and who have never been down. In some cases several hundred thousand miles. I must confess to going down once on the street, on a dirt bike, in 1981...since then, never, and I ride 12-15,000 miles per year; motorcycles are my primary transportation. The principle is the same: the unwary doesn't recognize that he is in the progression that can lead to an accident. Accidents are rarely the result of a single mistake, but the culmination of a progression of them. If you get far enough into the progression, an accident may be likely or inevitable (going into a curve to fast on a motorcycle, racking the slide before dropping the magazine and considering the gun unloaded); the trick is to recognize that you may be in it, and get out of it. The poster who told the story of the ND due to the wrong procedure in unloading the gun recognized the progression, but couldn't act fast enough to stop it. Same on a motorcycle, you must be able to identify a progresssion that is developing that is leading to an increased or likely chance of an accident. It requires you to be alert, aware, and have the requisite degree of skills and/or knowledge.

Remo223
July 17, 2011, 04:04 PM
Ok, my experience was about 15-20 years ago with a 22 revolver, 6 shot. I emptied it and closed the cylinder and set it down for about 3 seconds. (The cylinder had had some fired and some unfired cartridges in it) Then I saw a bug and snatched up the revolver, cocked, aimed, and pulled trigger expecting a click and a "pretend" dead insect. It fired. I thought I was hallucinating. I fully expected to open the cylinder and see a completely unloaded gun and then I would conclude either a) I am insane, or b) the gun is demonically possessed. I am not joking on this. These were literally the two options that went through my mind at that instant. I was actually scared to know which one it was. With hands trembling, I slowly opened the cylinder and saw an empty cylinder except for one fired cartridge. I closed the cylinder without ejecting, and set it down and just rested for a few minutes thinking, trying to figure out what just happened and how reliable my ability to figure out what happened could be.

Then came the test.

Unloading the gun and checking maybe 5 times to make sure the gun was in fact unloaded, I wanted to dry fire it once to make sure it didn't magically load itself and fire. I wasn't 100% sure what this test would prove, either that I wasn't insane or that the gun wasn't possessed, or maybe none of the above. It didn't fire. And after checking, it was indeed still unloaded.

So I rested a few more minutes and thought about what kind of logical conclusions I could make from this test. eventually I decided there is no way to prove to myself that I am not insane. I was over thinking it. Most probable I was not insane or in possession of a demonically possessed handgun and that the simplest explanation is usually the correct one.

operator error. Had to be.


My final judgement was this...when I ejected the cartridges, I short stroked it and one didn't fully eject. then when I closed the cylinder, the partially ejected unfired cartridge hit the frame in just the right way that is slid home into the cylinder. Being unfired, it would fall into the chamber easy if muzzle was pointed down. The odds of this happening seem so extremely small to me but it's all I can come up with. And even more astounding is that the one loaded chamber was the one that lined up when I drew down on that insect.

Remo223
July 17, 2011, 04:25 PM
Got something against motorcycles? I know several people who have had long riding careers, and are still riding, and who have never been down. In some cases several hundred thousand miles. I must confess to going down once on the street, on a dirt bike, in 1981...since then, never, and I ride 12-15,000 miles per year; motorcycles are my primary transportation. The principle is the same: the unwary doesn't recognize that he is in the progression that can lead to an accident. Accidents are rarely the result of a single mistake, but the culmination of a progression of them. If you get far enough into the progression, an accident may be likely or inevitable (going into a curve to fast on a motorcycle, racking the slide before dropping the magazine and considering the gun unloaded); the trick is to recognize that you may be in it, and get out of it. The poster who told the story of the ND due to the wrong procedure in unloading the gun recognized the progression, but couldn't act fast enough to stop it. Same on a motorcycle, you must be able to identify a progresssion that is developing that is leading to an increased or likely chance of an accident. It requires you to be alert, aware, and have the requisite degree of skills and/or knowledge.
not sure if this is directed at me.

I have been riding nonstop for over 30 years. I have nothing against motorcycles. I recognize that we do not have in our control every variable out there. We can be struck by lightning out of the blue and be killed. Heck, we can be struck by a meteorite and be killed. You are guilty of extreme arrogance if you believe your skills and wits are the only reason you are alive. Random luck plays a part in every single second of our lives. It is a mathematical certainty that every single motorcyclists will eventually be killed on a motorcycle if he/she rides long enough. How long it takes to reach death is hard to determine. it could be a million years to kill off every last rider. I don't know and I'm not about to sit down and try to do the math.

firearms is a little bit different. We are in control of much more of the variables. but we do not check everything. Only arrogant fools would claim to be in control of every variable. How many people tear down their gun after every shot, and run tests on every part to ascertain parts integrity?

We are not gods and we are not infallible. We WILL make a mistake eventually if we live long enough. The thing is, people are too stupid and/or dishonest to accurately determine their own limits. That applies to all of us. we are all making decision every minute of every day of our lives based partly on ignorance. No one has all the answers or a complete data set.

Imagine this test:

A higher power grants you everlasting life. The catch is you are required to perform a simple task over and over for eternity. The task is to locate a coin on the table in front of you and recognize that it is "heads" up...then pick up the coin with your right hand, transfer it to your left hand, then transfer it to your right hand, then put it back on the table heads up. You are not allowed to make a mistake or to drop the coin.

How many years do you think you can do this simple task without making a mistake?

If you answered infinity, you are an idiot.

This little mental exercise should be all the proof you need to conclude that everyone will have a negligent discharge eventually if they live long enough.

00__LUGER__00
July 17, 2011, 04:30 PM
What really amuses me- guys who say they will never have a negligent discharge.
Next time I run into one maybe I'll ask to use their ability to forsee the future to give me some winning lotto numbers. That would be nice!

Remo223
July 17, 2011, 04:45 PM
I think I can understand why they are being so stubborn about their claim that they will never have a negligent discharge though. Once you surrender to the inevitability(provided you live long enough) of a negligent discharge, you could become less vigilant in preventing it and you are, in a sense, pre-excusing yourself for the negligent discharge that is yet to happen. That could be considered a cop out.

Ogie
July 17, 2011, 05:07 PM
Here's a question for those of you who have had NDs: Are you going to have another one? If your philosophy is that everyone is destined to have an ND, why not two, or three, or more NDs during your lifetime?

Remo223
July 17, 2011, 05:18 PM
I don't think it works that way, ogie.

We all have different skill levels. We all have different levels of determination and abilities to block out distractions. There are surely many more personal attributes that effect our likelihood of making a mistake.

Call it our personal failure rate. we don't know what it is for sure. But we all know or have known people that seem to have a pathetically poor failure rate for making mistakes. Lets say the joe shmo has been evaluated and scientifically determined that he will have a NG once every 50 years.

We don't know if his first NG will occur early in that 50 year span or late. Also, we don't know if the next NG in the second 50 year span will occur early in that time span or late in that time span. He could have one NG in the 49th year and one NG in the 51st year.

There's no way to tell.

GLOOB
July 17, 2011, 05:48 PM
Imagine this test:

A higher power grants you everlasting life. The catch is you are required to perform a simple task over and over for eternity. The task is to locate a coin on the table in front of you and recognize that it is "heads" up...then pick up the coin with your right hand, transfer it to your left hand, then transfer it to your right hand, then put it back on the table heads up. You are not allowed to make a mistake or to drop the coin.

How many years do you think you can do this simple task without making a mistake?

If you answered infinity, you are an idiot.

This little mental exercise should be all the proof you need to conclude that everyone will have a negligent discharge eventually if they live long enough.
Of course you'd make a mistake. Your life would be so miserable, you'd WANT to screw up to end it.

Checking a chamber isn't a terrible, rote, chore. And you don't have to do it nonstop till the end of days. If it's too much of a chore, all you have to do is not pick up the gun in the first place.

So in your example, if you got bored of picking up quarters, all you'd have to do is get up from the table and do something else that has nothing to do with quarters.

Some people have to handle guns daily, perhaps even under stress and/or distractions, whether they want to or not. Some are cut out for it. Some aren't. And there's also the fact that no matter how much you like something, once you do it for a living it becomes a chore. But the rest of us can choose when and how we handle firearms. Yes, some of us will make bad choices.

One in particular showed that if you check your chamber a few thousand times and it is empty your mind gets trained to see it empty.
First of all, I bet this study they do the chamber check 3000 times in a row. IOW, in a rote, meaningless fashion that has nothing to do with most of our real worlds. That is, unless it's your job to chamber check a pile of 3000 weapons where you have no personal responsibility for what happens if you screw up.

Most firearms owners may not even chamber check a weapon that many times in our lifetime. And that figure will be stretched over a lifetime, not one day in an artificial environment.

When you get to the point where you are just going through the motions, it's time to stop handling firearms.

I was at a match where this young nub raced to show clear at the end of each stage.* I don't know whether he was an idiot and thought that it was part of his time. Or whether he was an even bigger idiot and thought it looked cool. When you unload a gun, you have all the time in the world.

*He also got called for "trigger" twice. Scary thing was an old fella ran around with his finger on the trigger of his 1911, twice, and no one called him for it.

PowerG
July 17, 2011, 05:56 PM
I would be the first to concede that there have been several instances where nothing more than luck has kept me from crashing. Luck definitely counts. There are many ways to lessen the chances though, and I utilize every one of them.

I most emphatically do not subscribe to the idea that a crash (or ND) is inevitable. I've never had a ND...is it possible I could have one? Of course it is. That's why I make sure, every time, because I know full well I am absolutely capable of doing something dumb.

GLOOB
July 17, 2011, 06:28 PM
I would be the first to concede that there have been several instances where nothing more than luck has kept me from crashing. Luck definitely counts. There are many ways to lessen the chances though, and I utilize every one of them.
I agree, luck has some aspect. But once you realize how close you have come to an ND, it should change from luck to change in protocol. I'd expect someone who's handled firearms for a long time to have passed beyond the luck stage.

gvf
July 17, 2011, 06:40 PM
SCARY STUFF this. Never had an ND, but I fear them. Good heads up thread.

Remo223
July 17, 2011, 06:49 PM
I agree, luck has some aspect. But once you realize how close you have come to an ND, it should change from luck to change in protocol. I'd expect someone who's handled firearms for a long time to have passed beyond the luck stage.
sheesh, you just don't get it.

what was luck for you and a second chance to gird up your safety checks was a NG for the next guy.

duns
July 17, 2011, 09:25 PM
Quote:

"I wonder if those who claim it is inconceivable that they would have an ND tend to be less careful about muzzle control. Whereas those who have had an ND may tend to be more careful to control the muzzle so that even if there is an ND, it is unlikely to cause any harm. It would not surprise me if those who deny the possibility of having an ND are more likely in the long run to injure themselves or somebody else."

Or on the other hand perhaps it is just human nature for people that screw up to think that everyone else is destined to screw up as well.I didn't say that "everyone else is destined to screw up as well". You totally missed my point, which was that someone who claims it is inconceivable that they will have an ND may well be careless about muzzle control -- after all, why bother controlling the muzzle if an ND is inconceivable? Putting it another way, those who recognize the distinct possibility of an ND will probably be the ones to take all the precautions to minimize the risk and, vice versa, those who deny the risk will probably be the people one should stay well away from.

GLOOB
July 18, 2011, 03:51 PM
sheesh, you just don't get it.

what was luck for you and a second chance to gird up your safety checks was a NG for the next guy.
I get it. I'm lucky that when I was the first of my family and friends to be interested in firearms, I didn't put a hole in my wall on the second day. I had a close call where I had my finger on the trigger to dryfire in a safe direction, but then realized I had done something wrong. I don't fault anyone for having an ND and learning from it, as long as they were adhering to all the other basic gun safety rules.

But there are too many people relying on luck and memory after years of bad safety procedures. To hear the belief that an ND is a matter of time is kind of saddening. I believe it's a matter of experience and understanding.

Heck, some people have bad memory or are easily distracted. Even here, they should be able to figure out that they just can't trust themselves to dry fire a gun. If you never pull the trigger unless you WANT it to go bang, your problem will be solved.

My "something wrong" was deciding to see what my Glock felt like to hold with a loaded magazine, when I had just been dryfiring it all day. Now I know that because I allow myself to dryfire at home, I personally need to avoid intentionally handling a loaded firearm at home, as well. If it's loaded, it stays in the holster. I also now know that a pistol doesn't feel much different with a loaded mag. :)

Loosedhorse
July 18, 2011, 04:26 PM
if you check your chamber a few thousand times and it is empty your mind gets trained to see it empty. Then when there is a round in it your mind sees it empty.Let's suppose that's true. Is there a companion study that says that when you then put your finger in the chamber, you will feel an empty chamber if it's filled; or, if you stroke the ejector rod, rounds will not fall to the floor?

If you're not paying attention to what you're doing, then sure, you won't notice a thing. So pay attention.
Next time I run into one maybe I'll ask to use their ability to forsee the future to give me some winning lotto numbers.I have no control over the lottery numbers, but I have complete control over how I handle guns. Every single time. Responsibility accepted.

NDs are not random, probability-driven events. It is NOT your number comes up, and you have one. I have no sympathy for the attitude, "it was just my turn to have one."If you believe your gun to be empty, and you aim it at something safe to shoot, and you pull the trigger expecting a "click", and it shoots, is that a true negligent discharge? Describes mine to a T. Yes.

BTW, I have no problem with calling that an accidental or unintentional discharge...as long as we're all clear IT WAS MY FAULT.I wonder if those who claim it is inconceivable that they would have an ND tend to be less careful about muzzle control.First, of course it is conceivable I will have another ND...if I do not pay attention and don't do double-checks. And, yes, it is inconceivable to me that anyone who just did a double-check that his firearm is completely unloaded while paying attention to what he was doing will have an ND in the next couple of seconds.

As to muzzle control, perhaps one day if we meet, I can clear a firearm, close the action, hand it to you...and you can try to point it at me to see what happens. Then we can talk about how lax I am about muzzle control. :)

Cop Bob
July 18, 2011, 06:52 PM
To those who say they have NEVER had a ND or an AD.... the Jury is still out, as you are still alive and still own and handle firearms... Never say never... They are not common, but they can happen to ANYONE....

To those that Ride motorcycles and have NEVER been down... See above statement...

I'm glad you are ok... safety rules are in place for a reason, one to prevent from happening, and others, for when they do happen, nobody gets hit...

Lessons learned... Your not the only one that it has happened to.. Good Luck to you...

1KPerDay
July 18, 2011, 07:01 PM
To those that Ride motorcycles and have NEVER been down... See above statement... Apples and oranges. There are a lot of external variables over which one has no control when riding motorcycles. Mechanical/tire failure, road hazards, wildlife, other drivers, etc.

With an ND, the only person pulling the trigger on a loaded chamber is you. It is 100% avoidable if you follow all the rules and double-check the chamber 100% of the time. Nobody makes you pull the trigger.


IMO.

GLOOB
July 18, 2011, 09:09 PM
Exactly. On a motorcycle, you are sometimes put into unpredictable situations that require complex responses. And sometimes other drivers cause accidents that are unavoidable. Riding a motorcycle also requires the use of both feet and both hands, while making constant calculations of position, speed, and upcoming road conditions and curves.

A firearm is much simpler. If you want to compare an ND to a motorcycle accident, lets make a better comparison. It would be like saying you accidentally gunned the throttle when you actually wanted to stop. Or you accidentally turned the key when you didn't mean to start your bike.

If you ever pull the trigger on a gun in a hurry, it should be because you need a bullet to exit the muzzle in a hurry. I wouldn't fault the guy that accidentally squeezed off a round too fast with a bear charging him. But sitting around in your bedroom with other people in the house and putting a hole in the wall ain't the same thing as having a motorcycle accident.

I've been down on a motorcycle. Car didn't see me and gunned it into the street, trying to cross to turn left. Right in front of me. My only (slim to none) chance was to swerve hard right and hope his tail cleared before it took off my leg. Meanwhile he saw me as he was already more than halfway into the road and slammed the brakes, skidding to a complete stop - in a perfectly executed road block, just a split second before I T-boned him. I know what it feels like to fly like Superman... except for the landing.

The other problem with the analogy is that a motorcycle rider puts only himself at risk. The moron who caused the accident wasn't the one that broke his leg. When you have an ND in an urban environment, you may be putting other people at risk.

Yes, the more years you drive, the more likely you are to be involved in an accident. But the less likely that you will be the one to cause it. Insurance rates drop dramatically past the age of 25 for a good reason. Saying an ND is a matter of time is backwards. If you make it past the learning stage, there's no reason you shouldn't be free and clear. At least until the Alzheimer's kicks in. If everyone under the age of 25 was restricted from driving on Sundays, the accident rate on Sunday would be almost nil.

duns
July 18, 2011, 09:39 PM
GLOOB, most people who have NDs know the rules. Some of them had an ND because they broke a rule that they fully understood. Others followed the rules but were somehow still caught out (we have had a couple of examples of how that is possible). Perhaps also the rules as commonly understood do not cover every eventuality. I bet everyone who had an ND thought it most likely would not happen to them. Perhaps some, like you, were certain it would never happen to them.

When people bring up the inevitability in the long run, they just mean that we are all fallible and liable to mistakes in every aspect of our lives, gun handling included. That doesn't mean every single person will have an ND in their lifetime, skill, self-discipline and luck all play a part.

I applaud the OP and everyone else who owns up to an ND because they provide lessons for everyone else.

bergmen
July 18, 2011, 10:00 PM
Hmmm. Fifty years of shooting hundreds of firearms with several hundred thousands of rounds and not a single ND and never even close to one.

I handle firearms safer today than I ever have (not that I ever handled them in an unsafe manner, but my skills have improved with better techniques and more knowledge).

I wonder what is in store for me in the future especially as regularly diligent, without exception, that I am?

Also, fifty years of motorcycling and forty years of sport parachuting. Take the "those who are going to..." position to a drop zone and see how far it gets you.

Dan

EddieNFL
July 18, 2011, 10:04 PM
If you make it past the learning stage, there's no reason you shouldn't be free and clear.

Just gotta find a way to eliminate the human factor.

duns
July 18, 2011, 10:07 PM
Hmmm. Fifty years of shooting hundreds of firearms with several hundred thousands of rounds and not a single ND and never even close to one.As we get older, some of us become less competent. Some people have to give up driving, for example.

I am suspicious when you say you are now safer than before though you were never unsafe before. Either safety is absolute or it is relative. You can't have it both ways. Any reasonable person of course believes it is relative. No one is infallible.

GLOOB
July 18, 2011, 10:21 PM
Yup. I agree it's relative. But you can create and follow a safety procedure so darn safe that the chance is negligible. The number of occurrences is far higher that it need be.

The problem with ND's is that people are taught the universal gun safety rules. Then they are told that it's ok to dry fire firearms. NO. You can't dry fire without willfully breaking at least 2 rules. And one of the rules is permanently, irreversibly thrown out the window - 1. Every firearm is loaded. When you allow yourself to dry fire, rule 1 becomes "Every firearm is loaded... except when it's not loaded." If you can't figure out how to dry fire safely, you ought to stick to the 4 rules. Dry firing should not be done without extra, carefully considered precautions.

bergmen
July 18, 2011, 10:36 PM
As we get older, some of us become less competent. Some people have to give up driving, for example.

I am suspicious when you say you are now safer than before though you were never unsafe before. Either safety is absolute or it is relative. You can't have it both ways. Any reasonable person of course believes it is relative. No one is infallible.

Criminy, do we have to beat this to freakin' death? Let me be very specific. I am using more comprehensive, safer techniques with layers of safety that I didn't apply before. I was NOT less safe, just less comprehensive.

When I started shooting, there was not the "stick your finger in the chamber to physically make sure the chamber is empty" routine, we did visual.

I'll stop shooting before I become unsafe in handling. I stopped sport parachuting because of a slight degradation in my depth perception that my glasses correct for by I don't want to jump with them.

Dan

duns
July 18, 2011, 10:46 PM
[QUOTE=bergmen;7450926] I am using more comprehensive, safer techniques with layers of safety that I didn't apply before. I was NOT less safe, just less comprehensive./QUOTE]That does not add up. Less layers of safety in the past must translate to less safety in the past.

Loosedhorse
July 18, 2011, 11:11 PM
Just gotta find a way to eliminate the human factor.As you imply, we can't eliminate the human factor. But we can plan for it, factor it in, and adjust for it. Redundancy.

Oh, and the human factor is not always bad: getting Apollo 13 home, the heroism of Alvin York, Beethoven's 9th Symphony. All examples of the human factor. We do not only fall short--we also rise above.

Ogie
July 19, 2011, 01:34 AM
Quote:

"I didn't say that "everyone else is destined to screw up as well". You totally missed my point, which was that someone who claims it is inconceivable that they will have an ND may well be careless about muzzle control -- after all, why bother controlling the muzzle if an ND is inconceivable? Putting it another way, those who recognize the distinct possibility of an ND will probably be the ones to take all the precautions to minimize the risk and, vice versa, those who deny the risk will probably be the people one should stay well away from."

By reading your other posts it seems that is exactly what you meant even if you didn't use those words.

It just seems to me that some people who have had NDs just want to rationalize their error by lumping everyone else in the same category. It's as if not having an ND has the same value attached to it as someone who has had one, the only difference being that in the first instance they haven't had it yet. Sorry, but that's crap! The two categories are NOT the same. If you had an ND, you screwed up. Hopefully you won't screw up again! Just don't expect sympathy or empathy for your lack of safe gun handling.

EddieNFL
July 19, 2011, 07:48 PM
As you imply, we can't eliminate the human factor. But we can plan for it, factor it in, and adjust for it. Redundancy.

Oh, and the human factor is not always bad: getting Apollo 13 home, the heroism of Alvin York, Beethoven's 9th Symphony. All examples of the human factor. We do not only fall short--we also rise above.
Absolutely.

The human factor also includes Mr Murphy.

WinThePennant
July 19, 2011, 11:17 PM
In my early 20's I had a ND with a 10/22 Ruger.

I was CERTAIN that it was empty. Shot a hole through the ceiling.

That WAS the LOUDEST gunshot I've ever heard! :)

ArmedOkie
July 20, 2011, 01:31 PM
#1, the only taurus I ever bought was a 357 revolver, and i too couldn't cycle an entire cylinder without locking the weapon up. The problem is that the bullets are scraping the barrel as fired, and the lead shavings are wedging between the cylinder and barrel. I sent it in, it still jams.


as far as ND's go, i firmly believe the best lessons in life are the ones that scare the hell out of you but don't cost you anything- not that you need told that because I believe you have a few years on me

#2 MY ND story is scarier.I had a hi-point 9mm (worst gun ever made ever ever ever). It FTF in every magazine i tried to run through. I had to finish my ccw course with another student's weapon. the instructor "cleared" my weapon and made me finish with a different one. i forgot to check it before leaving. i got home and attempted to figure out the problem, racking the slide and what have you. my fiancee was sitting about 3 feet to the left in my chair. She bent down to tie her shoe and the stupid operator in conjunction with the stupid handgun caused a 9mm to play tag with the wall right where her head was a moment before.

Thats the closest I've ever come to death. I don't know if I'd have been able to not commit suicide if that had happened the way it should have.... horrifying.

duns
July 20, 2011, 03:09 PM
It just seems to me that some people who have had NDs just want to rationalize their error by lumping everyone else in the same category. It's as if not having an ND has the same value attached to it as someone who has had one, the only difference being that in the first instance they haven't had it yet. Sorry, but that's crap! The two categories are NOT the same. If you had an ND, you screwed up. Hopefully you won't screw up again! Just don't expect sympathy or empathy for your lack of safe gun handling.Totally agree with you. The point I had made, however, was that people who are confident they could never have an ND are the people to stay well away from because their complacency makes them dangerous, IMO.

Loosedhorse
July 20, 2011, 04:39 PM
Complacent?

What about folks who are the opposite of complacent, diligent with the 4 Rules and double-checking if the gun is loaded to the point of apparent obsession, and are therefore confident they won't have an ND? They are dangerous?

More dangerous than the guy who says, "Yep, I could have an ND any moment. Happens to everyone who handles their gun a lot--so, having one is like the mark of experience, you know? Nothing we can do about it. Pure probablility and inevitable human error"--this is the guy to feel safe around?

Well, some folks like chocolate, and some folks like vanilla.

duns
July 20, 2011, 04:58 PM
Complacent?

What about folks who are the opposite of complacent, diligent with the 4 Rules and double-checking if the gun is loaded to the point of apparent obsession, and are therefore confident they won't have an ND? They are dangerous?

More dangerous than the guy who says, "Yep, I could have an ND any moment. Happens to everyone who handles their gun a lot--so, having one is like the mark of experience, you know? Nothing we can do about it. Pure probablility and inevitable human error"--this is the guy to feel safe around?It's complacency when someone asserts they could never have an ND. It's OK to be confident that the probability is low but not zero. The probability is never zero because we are all fallible. It's hard to follow rules rigidly every single time for a whole lifetime. We have already heard how even if one manages to adhere strictly to the rules one can still be caught out.

PowerG
July 20, 2011, 09:46 PM
I would say following the rules diligently, every time, is the exact opposite of complacency. The rules are followed because the person handling the gun knows that not following them can lead to a Negligent Discharge...the operative word here is negligent, which means "failure to take proper care when doing something". So you do follow the rules, every time. Without fail. Always. Doing it right takes no longer than doing it sloppy, and it's not that complicated. If a ND does happen, you don't say "it could happen to anybody", or "it will happen to everybody eventually", in effect trying to lessen the fact that YOU SCREWED UP. Yes, it happens, but you owe it to yourself and everybody else to identify what caused it, and correct the failure.

It happens to a lot of people. It's not the end of the world, hopefully, but it could be. That may be a hard-ass way to look at it, but read ArmedOkie's story above; if you're doing something wrong that can very well happen, and it might not turn out so well next time. That story made the hair on the back of my neck stand up, and I would wager large that's one person that will never have it happen again. ND's can kill people, and that's why you have to be so careful.

I got a wake-up when I was about 13 years old, got into a pickup with an older guy deer hunting, and he was gonna unload a 30/30, the muzzle was on the drive shaft hump. You can guess what happened. I wasn't sure for a minute, it felt like somebody hit me in the head, my ears rang the rest of the day. I didn't find it the least bit amusing, it scared me. This guy was ex-Army, and not an idiot, he just screwed up, a seconds' inattention. I knew (and still know) if it could happen to him, it could happen to me, IF I don't follow the rules, every single time.

ArmedOkie
July 21, 2011, 04:02 AM
you've got it right 100%, Ogie.


the main issue is that people aren't perfect, even if the machine IS. We get too used to things working properly and things going smoothly that we get lax in our routines, and lose our fear of the weapon. Maybe not so much a fear, but definitely a respect. Respect that guns ability (be it a .22lr or a 44 magnum) to take life in less than a heartbeat. ALWAYS. Respect a weapon nearly as much as God, if you're a believer (even if you aren't, you understand the seriousness i'm conveying)- because the gun has made man as close to God as can be in our ability to choose between life and death, and that is a SERIOUS SERIOUS responsibility...

GLOOB
July 21, 2011, 05:43 AM
It's complacency when someone asserts they could never have an ND.
I've yet to see anyone here make that assertion. OTOH, some have made the assertion that anyone who handles firearms long enough will more than likely have an ND at some point.

Sure, many of us - maybe even most of us - will have an ND. But there are still some of us that are not at the same risk level, because of various reasons. Better gun handling? Maturity? Patience? Level headedness? Attention span? Memory? Better mechanical competence? Better understanding of our own deficiencies? Distrust of our own competence and/or great enough respect for firearms to where we won't even dry fire a gun, at all?

We have already heard how even if one manages to adhere strictly to the rules one can still be caught out. If you adhere strictly to the rules, you will never intentionally put your finger on the trigger unless you want the gun to go bang. You will never intentionally pull the trigger for any other reason, including to dry fire the gun. There would be no "I swear it was unloaded" stories. That takes out 50% of the ND's, right there. This rule 1 is the one that most people ignore. The other 49.9% of ND's are solved with the finger off the trigger until the gun is on target rule, which is the one that everyone thinks they follow, but many actually mangle in practice.

Loosedhorse
July 21, 2011, 09:20 AM
We get too used to things working properly and things going smoothly that we get lax in our routines, and lose our fear of the weapon. Maybe not so much a fear, but definitely a respect.Who is this "we"? :D

I teach gun safety and basic handgun, and whenever I encounter a hesitant pupil I say, "You seem to be scared of guns. Good. So am I. We're going to get along just fine." :)

hd5
July 21, 2011, 11:01 AM
When I was 15, 38 years ago. I had developed a stupid habit of clicking my safety off and on while I was walking thru the woods. Normally, Toby my collie would have been walking right in front of me. The day I bumped the trigger and it went off he was behind me. I sat down sick at my stomach, knowing what I had almost done. Scared the crap out of me. I was crazy about that dog. Sure straightened a bad habit out.

TCU
July 21, 2011, 11:25 AM
I have a hilarious story kind of falls under the category. So me and my buddy were at 500 yard line i was on like target 22 and he was on target 3. So it was our relay to shoot and we go up to the firing line and they tell us we are in our prep time and snap in down range, so we do so. Well his coach had walked up to him and said kill roberts kill, so without thinking he put his weapon in condition 1 snapped to semi and took a shot. Cease fire was called then you see target 2 drop and mark the shot. Then due to his personality he looked at the rest of the range like we were all wrong. The best of it all though is he shot during prep time and shot the wrong target, i dont know if i will ever let him live that one down.

If you enjoyed reading about "Those who've had a ND, and those who are going to." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!