There's no reason for this to EVER happen.

[JohnKSa]

https://www.foxnews.com/us/man-accidentally-fires-gun-in-atlanta-mall-sends-shoppers-fleeing

...a male was walking through the store and adjusting his pants when the firearm he had in his waistband discharged.

1. Carry in a holster and with a belt that together provide a solid platform for your firearm so that you don't have to adjust your gun in public. If you carry in a pocket, use a pocket holster that holds the gun securely in the pocket so it doesn't shift around. This will keep you from having to adjust it and it will also keep it positioned so you don't have to fish around for it if you need it.

2. Carry a firearm that is safe and will not fire unless the trigger is pulled and carry it in a holster that covers the trigger and thus prevents it from being fired while holstered.

3. Try your system out at home with an unloaded gun to make sure that everything works as intended.

Unintentionally discharging a firearm in public is not just embarrassing, it's also probably illegal. It is also potentially deadly for others or for the person carrying the gun depending on where the muzzle is pointed.

From the article--a quote by local police: "Instances like this are unacceptable and we expect more from those who choose to carry firearms."

Couldn't have said it better myself.

 

[Ru4real]

Agree. But you may be preaching to the choir here.

I suppose there a limited ways to disseminate this message. I’m not a social media person, but I suspect merely bringing up gun owner responsibilities on those platforms would get you shunned?

 

[JohnKSa]

You'd be surprised. I've run into folks on the forums who swear that holsterless waistband carry, even chamber loaded with a gun that has no manual safety is perfectly safe. Folks who have no trouble with the idea of pocket carrying a gun loose in a pocket with nothing protecting the trigger.

Also, not everyone here has a lot of experience carrying a handgun. Never hurts to provide some basics for people just getting started, or thinking about getting started, carrying.

And other people read this forum besides the members. Maybe they will learn something--or maybe the only thing they will get out of it is that some gun owners do feel very strongly about carrying responsibly.

 

[Alex Clayton]

The one constant that really irks me about stories like this. Almost every time there is some line about the "gun went off". The gun did not just go off 99.99% of the time. What happened was the guy with the red face pulled the trigger when he did not mean too. So that becomes the gun just went off. As if it was just some thing that could happen to anyone. No it happened because they pulled the damn trigger and the gun did what it was made to do, fire when trigger is pulled.

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

Seventh time this year there has been a firearm discharged in that mall........and it IS Atlanta.
Something tells me there are probably a whole lot of guns being waistband carried in that mall daily.

 

[SharpDog]

Seventh time this year there has been a firearm discharged in that mall this year.........and it IS Atlanta.
Something tells me there are probably a whole lot of guns being waistband carried in that mall daily.

IMHO there are a lot of new gun owners in the past year. I would guess that many of them have no idea what they are doing re: firearm safety.

If he's in Nieman Marcus he's likely not you're run of the mill street thug.

I wonder if there is a firearms organization that offers firearm training

Firearm Training | NRA Explore

 

[CDW4ME]

The man ran away.
Was he old enough to legally carry? Might not be.
Was it legal for him to conceal carry? Questionable.
This is not a reflection on legal concealed carriers anymore than a car thief wrecking a car reflects on legal drivers, IMO.

 

[FFGColorado]

What kinda of gun? It's winter..time to argue thumb safety vs non...again...

Accidentally discharging a firearm in public is not just embarrassing, it's also probably illegal.

Wasn't an accident but a negligent act. IMO.

 

[rust collector]

The Mall of America in Minnesota has had issues with gangs and has taken extensive measures to get that in check. Seven "accidental" discharges makes me wonder if something similar isn't going on where this happened. A mini precinct office in the mall tells me trouble is not unexpected.

Every such event tends to put serious carriers in a bad light and puts pressure on property owners and govt to do something, of course. Running away indicates that carrier probably was prohibited for other reasons--age, record, etc.

 

[JohnKSa]

This is not a reflection on legal concealed carriers anymore than a car thief wrecking a car reflects on legal drivers, IMO.

1. There's nothing in the article that hints that the person was underage or breaking any laws. Why speculate that he was? Because he did something stupid and discharged a firearm in a public place? A person doesn't have to be a criminal to make poor decisions, they don't have to be breaking laws just because they did something foolish.

2. I didn't post this with the idea of making concealed carriers look bad, I posted it because it was something that could easily be avoided. But it does make concealed carriers look bad. The idea that we can speculate about an incident--say, assume that the guy must have been breaking some kind of law--and feel better about dismissing it ourselves doesn't mean that's how everyone else sees it. I seriously doubt anyone here is going to go out and oppose concealed carry because they read about this incident. But you can bet that there are some people out there who will seize upon this as a reason that people shouldn't carry guns in public--and they won't care even the tiniest bit that someone on a gun forum somewhere decided to speculate that the guy was breaking laws and then based on that speculation decided that no one should hold the incident against concealed carriers.

3. Even if he were carrying illegally, there's still a good lesson to be learned. Like the guy in TX some years ago who tried to commit a home invasion but accidentally shot himself when he drew his gun and died right there on the spot. Obviously a criminal, obviously stupid, but still a good lesson to be learned.

Running away indicates that carrier probably was prohibited for other reasons--age, record, etc.

Or that he was afraid of being charged with discharging a firearm in a public place. Or that he just plain panicked. Scared people do stupid things. If a person is both stupid and scared, the odds of them doing something stupid go to just about 100%. But yes, it is possible that he ran because he was breaking a law before the gun went off. Even if that's the case, the lesson is still there for us--we can learn even from a bad situation--even by looking at what criminals do wrong.

Wasn't an accident but a negligent act. IMO.

I've edited it to try to keep this from descending into the typically ridiculous argument about the difference between accidental and negligent. An accident may be either negligent or not negligent. Something negligent may or may not be an accident. The fact that something is negligent does not mean it's automatically not an accident. At least not unless we're going to make up our own definition for 'accident'. I don't know where the idea got started that something can't be both negligent and also accidental, but it is simply wrong. The two concepts are absolutely NOT mutually exclusive using the standard definitions for each word.

If the guy did not intend to fire the gun (and it's pretty clear he did not), then it was, using the standard definition of 'accidental', fired accidentally. Was it also negligent? Well, in my opinion it was--there are simple steps that could have been taken to prevent it--that was the whole point of my posting this thread.

 

[lemaymiami]

Are there folks with firearms that are a danger to themselves -and everyone around them? Oh yeah... Do they hurt honest careful gun owners - absolutely...

Solutions? Must admit that even after 22 years as a cop I don't have any... The antis will have plenty of "solutions" I'm afraid....

 

[Obturation]

Wow. Be careful out there folks.

Carry in a holster and with a belt that together provide a solid platform for your firearm so that you don't have to adjust your gun in public

Anyone who has ever carried any gun for any amount of time will say this isn't realistic. Every carry method requires adjustment of one sort or another. Even shoulder holsters , pocket holsters , anything. Heck I can't carry a pen in my pocket without it needing to be adjusted from stabbing my leg every now and then. Point is to make a conscious action while doing so and for the love of god wear a good holster , you can be safe with a junky belt but you won't be comfortable .

 

[bikerdoc]

I agree with John!
There is no reason for this to happen.it is irresponsible
I spend a lot of time in my classes on responsible carry options.
And to add to stupidity may I add unholstered purse carry.
With the amount of junk some gals carry it is surprising there are not more A D's

 

[Zerodefect]

I would have walked away while pointing at someone else. Maybe scream hysterically like a girl for added effect.

Malltards can't tell who.

 

[JohnKSa]

Anyone who has ever carried any gun for any amount of time will say this isn't realistic. Every carry method requires adjustment of one sort or another.

I suppose.

If you're wearing a good rig, when things really do need adjusting, it can be done by taking hold of the belt, instead of the holster or the gun.

But if you're having to adjust things on a regular basis, something needs changing/improvement. If the holster fits the gun and is good quality, and the belt is the right width for the holster loops/slots and is good quality, suitable for supporting the weight of the gun and holster and fits the person too, then things shouldn't be shifting around very much, if at all. If a person tries to carry a really heavy or large gun, then the whole job gets a lot harder and it could be taken to the point that it might not be possible. If a person tries to carry in a holster that isn't a good fit for the gun or with a flimsy belt that is much thinner in width than the holster loops, then they will be adjusting much more than they should. If they carry without a holster with the gun in their waistband, they're going to be adjusting it all the time--likely with an occasional wild grab to catch it when it slips.

My main carry rig is a horsehide belt that fits me well, is very stiff, and is a very tight fit for the holster loops on my carry holster. The holster is positioned so the belt loops, which are only just a hair over half an inch apart, are on either side of a pants belt loop so they can only slide a fraction of an inch in either direction--and they are so tight on the belt that once the loops are snapped it takes a serious effort to get the holster to slide on the belt at all. The holster is good quality hard leather made specifically to fit the model of gun that I carry. The gun can't shift in the holster, the holster can't shift on the belt, and the belt isn't going to shift very much on me. If I do need to make some kind of an adjustment--which is not at all common, I can do it by taking hold of the belt--there's never any need to touch the gun or the holster.

 

[kcofohio]

For a new to me holster, I will carry unloaded until I know the holster secures the gun with different movements.

 

[daniel craig]

I’m always skeptical of these stories. It usually takes, in my experience, a decent amount of effort to get most unmodified factory triggers to go off. There are always exceptions, sure, but I have a feeling this guy was finger bleeping his gun while adjusting his pants.

Be safe people and don’t be afraid to ASK for advice before just doing something firearm related. Even “just” carrying.

 

[bearcreek]

There are a lot of stupid people out there. There is an even larger number of ignorant people out there. Lots more people are owning and carrying guns these days and in the vast majority of cases they have insufficient or no training. Those facts combine to mean that we're going to see more negligent discharges. It's inevitable, unfortunately. About all we can do about that is to encourage and promote good training.

 

[buck460XVR]

Always amazes me whenever an article like this is posted, how folks jump on the bandwagon and attempt to discredit the article by using semantics, as if this is somehow going to change the outcome of the events in the article or make them go away.

The one constant that really irks me about stories like this. Almost every time there is some line about the "gun went off". The gun did not just go off 99.99% of the time.

Whenever a bullet leaves the muzzle of a firearm under the power of the propellant in the cartridge, then gun, technically "goes off". 100% of the time. No where in the article does it say anything about the gun going off by itself. There are also the terms "discharged" and "fired" used in the same article and in the same context. Does the video say anything differently? I did not bother to watch it. The written article was enough for me.

Wasn't an accident but a negligent act. IMO.

ac·ci·dent
/ˈaksədənt/

Learn to pronounce

noun
noun: accident; plural noun: accidents
1.
an unfortunate incident that happens unexpectedly and unintentionally, typically resulting in damage or injury.

In reality, virtually any so called "accident" could be related to some form of negligence, whether it be falling off a ladder, going in the ditch or just hitting yourself in the thumb with a hammer. Yet, we generally describe them all as "accidents" because we did not do them deliberately. I see no difference here. Many times I see the term ND used here to try and distance the rest of us from someone who has not been a responsible with their firearms as we imagine we ourselves are.

I thought the article was pretty valid. It does not tell us what kind of gun, nor how the individual was carrying. We want to insinuate the article is making assumptions, yet it is the members replying here I see making assumptions. A gun going off in a Mall is news and in understandably something the media is going to report. I think the linked article did a good job of this without giving any of the redundant negative gun bias. I agree with John tho, this never should have happened. What I did glean the most from the article was not semantics, but that thankfully, no one was injured and that there have been 7 other shots fired in that Mall, this year alone.

 

[.455_Hunter]

I wish these stories would include the model of the firearm. My guess is that it wasn't a 642.

 

[Hokkmike]

I had a friend who pulled an unflustered derringer out of his front pocket. It had a double hammer that could have gotten snagged....
And then on the other side some people object to putting safes onPD weapons.
Kind of two extremes in my mind.

 

[bearcreek]

I wish these stories would include the model of the firearm. My guess is that it wasn't a 642.

It's mainstream news. You'd be lucky if they get the color of the firearm correct, let alone the model. It's also rather difficult for them to get the model of the firearm if the user runs away and isn't apprehended.

 

[bdickens]

I wish these stories would include the model of the firearm. My guess is that it wasn't a 642.

To what end?

 

[bearcreek]

To what end?

So people can use the story in the endless revolver vs semi auto or striker fire vs double action or thumb safety vs none and other highly important internet forum debates. C'mon man!

 

[unclenunzie]

Without evidence to the contrary, it just had to be a 642 with chap stick stuck in the trigger guard.

First thoughts are always safety in my mind, firearms, power tools, ladders, anything with potential for harm. Sound judgement and sound equipment makes for good outcomes of the every day variety, going home not to hospital or jail. Millions practice this successfully every day in the USA, a few fail to do so and this is the result.

The article reveals nothing about the person responsible, but reporting "adjusting his pants" means someone saw it, and I'd speculate a phone picture may help the police find him and what actually happened beyond the obvious.