There's no reason for this to EVER happen.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Zerodefect said:
I would have walked away while pointing at someone else. Maybe scream hysterically like a girl for added effect.

Malltards can't tell who.
Click to expand...

Better hope they don’t notice the smoking hole in your pants. Can’t blame that on Taco Bell.

.455_Hunter said:
The model of the gun in question would be useful for that assessment.
Click to expand...

As would the model of the holster. I won’t hazard a guess as to the maker of the gun but I do have a pretty good idea of the firing mechanism it probably uses :) And I would also guess the offending holster is as floppy as...well, something really floppy.
 
JohnKSa said:
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.
Click to expand...

99% agree. My best holster is a kydex IWB thing that was moulded directly from my own gun by black rhino, it is a good sturdy holster with good retention and 2 belt hook (if that's what the right term is). My need for adjustment on that one is minimal but if I go from sitting to standing I'll have to nudge the holster back into position sometimes. I think this has to do with body shape too. I'm 6'1" & 180# but lean and no butt meat to speak of, no matter how tight I make my belt things move a bit sometimes and I do need to move them back for comfort and concealment . kydex (even textured) is slippery and I've tried a little mole skin on the side toward my body to help hold things from slipping , with minimal success . I do use a couple hybrid type holsters (kydex on leather- king tuk / cross breed), but find they move more than kydex. I have tried a full leather (not horsehide ) holster for IWB use but found reholstering a challenge , likely other designs may work better.

My most fidgety holsters are shoulder holsters, the belt loops move and pull but are generally the most comfortable but not the quickest or most concealable - they're a compromise .

I do use a very ridged belt , primarily because all "belt guns" I carry are heavy.

This topic will always exist and I've never found any system that I'd consider perfect. Like most guys, I'm still looking for what may be best. Needless to say I do some adjusting .
-sorry for the long response .
 
I do use a very ridged belt , primarily because all "belt guns" I carry are heavy.
Click to expand...
Well, there is a practical limit of what can be hung off a belt and expected to stay in position.

I had to run some errands today after making the post you quoted and was out of the house with my carry rig. I tried to pay attention to see if I was having to adjust things. As far as I can tell, I never had to adjust it at all. That included getting in and out of the car 4 times and walking around at different locations for a total of maybe 45 minutes.

I can see that if I were trying to carry something that weighed 3-4lbs loaded instead of a firearm like my carry gun that weighs under a pound unloaded, occasional adjustments would likely be required.
 
Zerodefect said:
I would have walked away while pointing at someone else. Maybe scream hysterically like a girl for added effect.

Malltards can't tell who.
Click to expand...

a) Not a very responsible way to deal with such a situation
b) What possible good is served by labeling a group of bystanders whatever-***** ?

For me : da mechanism , Bianchi IWB w/ thumb break , so stable and secure I forget it's there , even when active.

Regarding "To what end?" - One can be benefit by learning from the mistakes of others.

Edit : Interesting that the program edited my derogatory slang word that was allowed to stand in print in the quote I posted...?
 
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.
Click to expand...

Picking nits here but if the gun goes off w/o pulling the trigger..I'd call that an accidental' discharge..if the trigger is squeezed unintentionally, to ME, that's a negligent discharge. In a video I just saw with a Sig bolt, )Cross?) rifle..trigger problems and when the guy raised to bolt to open the chamber, the gun fired..THAT's 'accidental', IMHO..no negligence involved(except maybe the designer or the person that assembled the rifle)...
 
FFGColorado said:
Picking nits here but if the gun goes off w/o pulling the trigger..I'd call that an accidental' discharge..if the trigger is squeezed unintentionally, to ME, that's a negligent discharge.
Click to expand...

In the linked article, there is no statement of the poor guys finger ever touching the trigger. There's no statement of the police even seeing a gun. Only a guy adjusting his pants and supposedly a gun goes off. We don't what kind of gun, nor do we know how the guy was carrying, yet folks are making assumptions that A.) the gun is somehow unsafe to carry, B.) somehow how the guy was carrying was sub-standard and C.) the guy must be a dumb&*% because he must have had an assumed ND.

In Hunter Safety we teach the fourth rule of gun safety is "Always be sure of your target and what is beyond." Taking a shot without doing this is what I call a ND, even tho it is intentional. We read all the time about kids finding loaded guns and shooting their friends by accident. While there is negligence involved, it this too a ND? We could pick nits forever, but the only thing we really know from the information in the linked article is that the discharge was not intentional.......thus by all accounts of the definition....an accident.

Am I giving the poor guy in the article a break? Yes, I am, because he is a fellow gun owner than made a mistake of some kind. Bashing him on public media is more anti-gun than anything in the linked article, yet folks here are bashing the article too. Sometimes we are our own worst enemy. Easy to claim he was carrying a cheap gun in a cheap holster or no holster at all, but we really don't know this. Easy to say the guy should have spent a few more bucks and got something better, but how do we know he could afford even one more dollar in times like these. Nope, just a slow day on a gun forum and a good day to chastise others I guess.
 
One suspects that if one can afford to shop at Neiman-Marcus (unless it's no longer considered an up-scale store?), one can afford a decent belt and holster.

This is a common occurrence almost everywhere. Not everyone who decides to carry a loaded firearm gets on the internet, discovers THR and asks questions about how he/she should carry their firearm. Plus... TV and the movies. Mel Gibson in Lethal Weapon, stuffing his 92FS in the waistband of his Levi's. I've personally witnessed, or come on the scene soon afterward, this type of ND (usually in public restrooms or restaurants) at least five or six times over the past fifteen years or so.
 
A local BIG gun store offers gun safety courses on Saturdays and at least in my county our sheriff office offers gun safety courses, I know there is a lot of new gun owners that needs to take advantage of something like these. In GA open carry is legal but I believe that mall has a no firearms sign (I don't shop in malls). I wouldn't shop anywhere downtown without carrying if for nothing more than piece of mind. I see a lot of people that print or half cover locally and just ignore them and I try to separate myself from them and people that open carry due to the looks from others.
 
Old Dog said:
TV and the movies. Mel Gibson in Lethal Weapon, stuffing his 92FS in the waistband of his Levi's.
Click to expand...

I was a fan of the Sons of Anarchy show when it was on TV and I noticed that all those guys carried small of back without a holster, they just shoved the gun in their waistband. So now you're telling me that's not a good way to carry my gat? Who knew? Next thing I know you'll be telling me that holding the gun sideways isn't the best way for accuracy.
 
In the linked article, there is no statement of the poor guys finger ever touching the trigger. There's no statement of the police even seeing a gun. Only a guy adjusting his pants and supposedly a gun goes off. We don't what kind of gun, nor do we know how the guy was carrying, yet folks are making assumptions that A.) the gun is somehow unsafe to carry, B.) somehow how the guy was carrying was sub-standard and C.) the guy must be a dumb&*% because he must have had an assumed ND.
Click to expand...
Well, let's break that down.

If the gun went off without him ever touching the trigger then either the gun is unsafe and will fire without the trigger being pulled, or the way he was carrying allowed something to manipulate the trigger. If it was the gun that was unsafe, that might not be his fault, assuming that he didn't know that the gun would fire without the trigger being pulled. If he was carrying in a way that allowed something to manipulate the trigger then he was carrying in a substandard/unsafe manner.

If he did touch the trigger unintentionally, then the way he was carrying was substandard because a properly carried gun should protect the trigger so it can't be manipulated unintentionally and/or he was being unsafe and intentionally put his finger on the trigger when he didn't intend to.

There's a small chance that this was truly not his fault, that the gun malfunctioned unexpectedly and fired. However the police indicate that he was adjusting things when the gun went off suggesting that something got on the trigger somehow.
Bashing him on public media is more anti-gun than anything in the linked article...
Click to expand...
That is absolutely ridiculous. Nobody here is suggesting that guns need to be restricted or banned, this is about how to make sure that we don't have the same thing happen to us and about trying to educate others so they can avoid the same mistakes this guy apparently made.

The idea that we shouldn't say anything negative about someone because they're a "fellow gun owner" is pure nonsense. Some guy unintentionally shoots himself and his wife at church and we're supposed to defend him and pretend it's all ok? Absolutely NOT! Some guy fires a gun at a mall while adjusting his pants and then runs away and pointing out that he almost certainly did something very irresponsible is anti-gun? Ridiculous!
Easy to say the guy should have spent a few more bucks and got something better, but how do we know he could afford even one more dollar in times like these.
Click to expand...
The bottom line is that we have to be safe when we are carrying. It's a responsibility. Just like it's irresponsible to drive a car without brakes--EVEN if you can't afford to get them fixed, it's irresponsible to carry a gun in an unsafe manner or to carry an unsafe gun.
Nope, just a slow day on a gun forum and a good day to chastise others I guess.
Click to expand...
This forum's stated goal is that it is "dedicated to the discussion and advancement of responsible firearms ownership." That includes pointing out irresponsible conduct and providing ways to avoid making the same mistakes.
 
buck460XVR said:
n the linked article, there is no statement of the poor guys finger ever touching the trigger. There's no statement of the police even seeing a gun. Only a guy adjusting his pants and supposedly a gun goes off. We don't what kind of gun, nor do we know how the guy was carrying, yet folks are making assumptions that A.) the gun is somehow unsafe to carry, B.) somehow how the guy was carrying was sub-standard and C.) the guy must be a dumb&*% because he must have had an assumed ND.
Click to expand...
After reading John's post, I realized I hadn't read this one through. All of the above. It's simply unacceptable that this happened. For whatever reason. Handguns just don't "go off" by themselves. Whatever caused the negligent discharge -- and it was NEGLIGENT -- is solely on the the guy who was carrying it.

We can certainly make assumptions here. And one thing is for certain: yes, the guy is a dumb ***. This sort of thing should NEVER happen. We have to police our own ranks. Otherwise, our credibility is nil. And the other side wins.
 
Old Dog said:
Handguns just don't "go off" by themselves.
Click to expand...
99.99% of the time it is user or equipment error. However, IMO there have been credible reports of SOME partially cocked striker fired designs causing an AD without the trigger being touched. It’s one of those things that “gun guys” don’t like to think about.
 
JohnKSa said:
https://www.foxnews.com/us/man-accidentally-fires-gun-in-atlanta-mall-sends-shoppers-fleeing



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
Click to expand...

4. Carry a gun with an external, manual safety that must be deliberately disengaged prior to firing. And carry with the safety on. Or carry a DA revolver.
 
bearcreek said:
But what difference would that make? Every day, thousands of people successfully carry...
Click to expand...

Yes, this is true. But when there is an accidental/negligent discharge, it's rarely a revolver or a firearm with an engaged, manual, external safety.

It's kind of like dogs, really. Every day, millions of Americans walk their dogs without incident. But when a dog rips the face off a small child, it's always the pit bull.

Glocks and pit bulls are the usual suspects for a good reason.
 
I have heard it said that there should be a mandatory training class for all new gun owners.

I do not agree, and doing so is an infringement on a persons 2nd amendment rights.

it sounds like a great way to create a gun owner registry and could deny access to an arm by someone (such as a battered women) who is under threat from a previous lover etc. etc. Also many rural people already know perfect firearms handling from their upbringing and would not benefit, and would be one more bureaucratic hoop they (or anyone else) would be forced to go through before they could exercise their 2nd.

it is true that Hollywood and electronic games teach many new gun owners some bad habits, but rarely is a new gun owner truly reckless or a danger to others from lack of training.
 
I have heard it said that there should be a mandatory training class for all new gun owners.

I do not agree, and doing so is an infringement on a persons 2nd amendment rights.
Click to expand...
I'm not in favor of giving the government more power over gun owners--to force them to get training for example. It would be easily abused and could be manipulated into a way to simply deny people the right to own guns by making the training too expensive or too difficult.

That doesn't mean, however, that it is in the best interest of new gun owners, or in the interest of the gun community for new gun owners to forgo training. There are certainly benefits to good training--it just needs to be done voluntarily--just a normal part of taking personal responsibility.
But when there is an accidental/negligent discharge, it's rarely a revolver or a firearm with an engaged, manual, external safety.
Click to expand...
Based on a poll done here that garnered almost 600 responses, the single most common reason for an unintentional discharge was for the person to intentionally pull the trigger thinking that the gun was unloaded. In other words, the person intended for the action to be operated, they just didn't think the gun would fire because they thought it was unloaded. Pretty hard for a manual safety to stop a person from firing a gun if they go through all the motions to fire one thinking that nothing will happen because they believe it's unloaded.

https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/how-did-your-unintentional-discharge-happen.114287/

For whatever it's worth, I've seen one unintentional discharge in person. It was with a DA revolver fired with a long DA pull, not from a cocked hammer. I personally know another person who has had two. One with a DA/SA pistol that had an external manual safety and another with a rifle that had an external manual safety. What it boils down to is that unintentional discharges are almost inevitably the result of bad decisions on the part of the person handling the gun, and much less commonly due to the specific design of the firearm.

The poll showed that about 66% of the time an unintentional discharge results from someone having their finger on the trigger when they shouldn't. Can a manual safety prevent unintentional discharges in cases like that? Well, if a person can't be bothered to follow one of the three cardinal rules of gun safety (keep your finger off the trigger if you don't intend to shoot), why should we expect them to use a manual safety properly? The manual safety argument has always struck me as contradictory. We can't expect people to do something as simple as keep their fingers out of the trigger guard, but don't worry, if we put a manual safety on the gun those same people can be expected to use it properly. Like saying the way to keep a person from forgetting to lock their door is by adding another lock on the door.

That's not to say I believe manual safeties have no purpose or place. They do have uses--but they won't "cover" for people who don't follow the rules of gun safety.
 
IMHO gun safety have everything to do the the individual handling the firearm and not whether firearm has a safety.
Safety with firearms should be a state of mind, not something we strap with the firearm.
No mechanical safety will save us from that person the OP is talking about.
 
JohnKSa said:
This forum's stated goal is that it is "dedicated to the discussion and advancement of responsible firearms ownership." That includes pointing out irresponsible conduct and providing ways to avoid making the same mistakes.
Click to expand...

I am not trying to justify the actions of the guy in the linked article. Again, I helped teach Hunter Safety for 20 years, so I do endorse responsible gun ownership. There is a big difference between the "pointing out irresponsible conduct and providing ways to avoid making the same mistakes" and some of the bashing here. The "do it the way I do" or "if he only would have had my gun" accompanied by posed pictures from so many that have never made a mistake in their life. This is no different than the oh so popular "dumb guy in the LGS" and "the stupid clerk at Walmart" threads that generally abound on this forum. Not any useful information, just an attempt to make some posters feel superior somehow by belittling others.....and yes, the belittling/condescending of fellow gun owners to others does nuttin' to display a positive image of gun owners. While your OP was a good example of trying to educate and inform, it soon took the turn down whining hill. Still is going downhill with the bashing and condescension now towards fellow forum members. Yep, just the slow time of year for gun forums.
 
I, on the other hand, believe that keeping us aware of the risk of becoming complacent is one of many reasons a community like ours has value and relevance. Some of the news isn't welcome, but it reminds us that we don't live in a fantasy world where there are no consequences and we can hit reset when things go sour. I am a couple years shy of 40 years teaching hunter safety courses, and I have witnessed amazing lapses during field exercises, while hunting, and by very experienced shooters. One such experience two months ago shut down a local club range that had been open for more than 60 years.

We live in an era in which we can select the news we get and disregard or ignore the news that doesn't fit our desire or expectation. IMO failure analysis is still essential to reducing the risk of bad outcomes, and we need to continually tune our ability to separate the beef from the byproduct. Yes, the dialog takes a few twists and turns, but it helps me resolve and take extra caution to do better. For that, I am thankful.
 
I really enjoy striker fired weapons like my Glock 19 or Kahr K9. A nice long deliberate trigger pull makes an AD/ND even harder to accomplish. Trigger control still paramount and still #1 line of Defense.
Quality holsters whether paddle, leather IWB or OWB all have excellent coverage as to cover the trigger guard when holstered.
Please dont call me complacent, but an AD is the last thing im worried about when my gun is holstered. Practicing good trigger control is important. This incident is rediculous.
 
#4:
If you leave the house packing a firearm do not ++++ with it for any reason. If'n you need to "adjust" while out, you didn't start out "properly armed." Joe
 
D.B. Cooper said:
Yes, this is true. But when there is an accidental/negligent discharge, it's rarely a revolver or a firearm with an engaged, manual, external safety.
Click to expand...
Obviously your statement is true. That would be like me saying that cars that are parked are involved in crashes less than ones that are moving. If the safety is engaged, the gun won't fire, if it's working properly. Now, I have no idea if your statement is true if we remove the part about the safety being engaged. My experience as a concealed carry instructor has been that guns with manual safeties are hazardous in the hands of a novice and should only be carried after a person gains a good deal of experience and competence. Too easy to forget to engage or disengage the safety at the right times or to accidentally engage or disengage it. Also, see post #68.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

E
  • Locked
The Danger of Pocket Carry (IMPD)
2 3
Replies
63
Views
3K
#shooter
S
D
  • Locked
Heat, sweat, primers and ccw
Replies
3
Views
548
ny32182
N
TimboKhan
  • Locked
A question for Massad Ayoob.
2
Replies
41
Views
4K
30 cal slob
3
P
  • Locked
One Problem with Pocket Carry (an ND in the news today)
Replies
4
Views
418
Larry Ashcraft
Larry Ashcraft
mrbladedude
  • Locked
Travelling with a firearm. No Chp question.
Replies
9
Views
701
[email protected]
B
Back
Top