TexasCHLforum.com

http://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/fl ... t/4447699/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Imagine if the PIC said, "I’m a pilot. It happens." Would anybody really be defending that attitude?

gringo pistolero wrote:http://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/fl ... t/4447699/

Imagine if the PIC said, "I’m a pilot. It happens." Would anybody really be defending that attitude?

Not if I was on the flight and that imbecile caused me to miss an important business appointment.

Piloting is probably a better analogy to firearms than automobiles anyway.

There are practically NO PILOTS who would say, "Hey I am a pilot, crashes happen."

Planes are MUCH more likely to malfunction than either cars or firearms, but pilots EXPECT to be able to DEAL WITH IT.

HerbM wrote:Piloting is probably a better analogy to firearms than automobiles anyway.

There are practically NO PILOTS who would say, "Hey I am a pilot, crashes happen."

Planes are MUCH more likely to malfunction than either cars or firearms, but pilots EXPECT to be able to DEAL WITH IT.

A lot of good pilots have died in accidents.

jmra wrote:

HerbM wrote:Piloting is probably a better analogy to firearms than automobiles anyway.

There are practically NO PILOTS who would say, "Hey I am a pilot, crashes happen."

Planes are MUCH more likely to malfunction than either cars or firearms, but pilots EXPECT to be able to DEAL WITH IT.

A lot of good pilots have died in accidents.

Weather
Machinery fatigue
Birds
Murphy's law.

Stuff happens. Thats why twin engines are preferred over single enginess for civilian planes.

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

jmra wrote:

HerbM wrote:Piloting is probably a better analogy to firearms than automobiles anyway.

There are practically NO PILOTS who would say, "Hey I am a pilot, crashes happen."

Planes are MUCH more likely to malfunction than either cars or firearms, but pilots EXPECT to be able to DEAL WITH IT.

A lot of good pilots have died in accidents.

Weather
Machinery fatigue
Birds
Murphy's law.

Stuff happens. Thats why twin engines are preferred over single enginess for civilian planes.

One of the reasons my son is learning to fly gliders before he moves to powered. Never know when a single engine plane is going to turn into a glider.

03Lightningrocks wrote:Here's one for you that wasn't covered in the Glock manual (I found out by TESTING not by firing it): One of my Glocks (maybe all for all I know) when cocked and placed in the included (tupperware-like) case would "fire" if pressure was placed on the case (e.g., by sitting on it). The place holding pin in the center was DESIGNED to go through the trigger guard in what I believe is a defective design.

Moral: Don't place a loaded Glock in the STOCK CASE.

This is a well known issue. A Glock should be empty and uncocked before being placed into the case. A chamber loaded pistol can be fired by pressing it onto the locating stud alone.

Excaliber wrote:

Lightningrocks03 wrote:Here's one for you that wasn't covered in the Glock manual (I found out by TESTING not by firing it): One of my Glocks (maybe all for all I know) when cocked and placed in the included (tupperware-like) case would "fire" if pressure was placed on the case (e.g., by sitting on it). The place holding pin in the center was DESIGNED to go through the trigger guard in what I believe is a defective design.

Moral: Don't place a loaded Glock in the STOCK CASE.

This is a well known issue. A Glock should be empty and uncocked before being placed into the case. A chamber loaded pistol can be fired by pressing it onto the locating stud alone.

That should be common sense.....

I do believe in some AD's..... One for example was a co worker on a border operation. The heavy brush caught the trigger of the Mp5 and he took a round in the leg. No negligence there, just bad luck. Safety was off for a reason.

I had one ND in my life and it was carelessness. Thankfully no one hurt, and no damage, but scared me. Happened because I reached into a rifle case to pull out a rifle and bumped the trigger inadvertently. Months earlier I had apparently racked the bolt with a loaded mag and didn't check it. I probably would have checked it after pulling it out of the case, but I didn't get that far. Basically, carelessness months prior and inadvertently bumping the trigger led to an ND. Don't think it can't happen to you. Take care always.

Negligence is defined as doing something a reasonable prudent person would do under the same or similar circumstances or not doing what a reasonable prudent person would not do under the same or similar circumstances. Note that the definition is not a strict liability concept, that is one in which liability attaches solely because the event occurred without consideration of culpability or lack thereof.

So in the case of unintended discharges, the question becomes "do reasonable prudent people act in the manner the defendant acted on the occasion in question?" Sometimes the answer is "no" and sometimes the answer is "yes." It could not be reasonably argued that a "reasonable prudent person" would ever point a firearm at someone unless deadly force or the threat of deadly force would be justified. Terrifying your buddy by pointing a gun at him as a joke is negligence.

Remember, the focus is on the act or omission, not the subjective intent. For example, my hunting buddy never had an intent to walk around with his finger on the trigger of his shotgun while we were dove hunting. In fact he never had an intent to put his finger on the trigger at all unless he was tracking a bird with the intent to fire. Nevertheless, it was a hot afternoon and his sweaty finger was properly indexed on the side of the trigger guard when he stumbled on something in the field and fell. His sweaty finger slipped off the trigger guard, hit the trigger and the shotgun went off. No one was hurt and the only injury was to his pride, but that was a matter of luck. The gun could have been pointed at any of us in the hunting party. He was not negligent, although two well-accepted firearm safety rules are 1) never point the muzzle at anything you are not willing to destroy; and 2) keep your finger off the trigger until you are ready to shoot. At least the second rule was violated, yet it was an accident not negligence. Note also that it was an accident even though he could have done things differently to prevent the unintended discharge, such as keeping his trigger finger on the stock while walking.

Here's another example. Do "reasonable prudent people" who are hunting or defending themselves ever shoot blindly at movement or noise? No, of course not! "Reasonable prudent people" identify their targets before firing. Are "reasonable prudent people" ever mistaken about the identity of a target while hunting or engaging in self-defense? Yes, sometimes they are mistaken in spite of making the best effort they can under the exiting circumstances. Whether this mistake in perception rises to the level of negligence will depend upon the surrounding circumstances, but, again, this is not a strict liability situation that dictates "it happened, therefore it was negligent."

There are countless examples that I can list, but I think these two exemplify my point. Mere occurrence does not equate to negligence. Again, everyone can set their personal standard to a strict liability level, but I choose to stick with Texas law.

Chas.

While I have said in the past that an AD was an ND, there are times that accidents happen and negligence was not in play.

We do accident investigation analysis at safety seminars for ballooning. There are some where negligence was a factor, and some where it was just an unexpected outcome of the event.

Examples are a pilot who lost his life a couple of years ago after he failed to look at the radar and launched in the face of a thunderstorm. The inflow sucked him into the storm, the balloon collapsed in the turbulence and he rode the basket and streamered balloon to the ground. He was negligent in not looking at weather conditions which had been in place all day.

Another is friend who had taken a couple of sponsors for a flight during a balloon festival. The wind was a little faster that day, but totally flyable. He went over the preflight with both people, had them review and sign the waiver. During the flight the winds picked up a little to around 10 kts. Still perfectly flyable, but on the edge of not. On landing the lady ended up with a broken ankle due to a little firmer landing. It was found out that she had a tendency to break bones, but that was not told to the pilot. The other passenger was fine. The pilot was not negligent in his planning, flying and landing, but unexpected circumstances lead to an accident between the slightly faster unforecasted winds and the lady's bone structure.

These two posts have definitely made me rethink my perception on AD vs ND.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:There are countless examples that I can list, but I think these two exemplify my point. Mere occurrence does not equate to negligence. Again, everyone can set their personal standard to a strict liability level, but I choose to stick with Texas law. Chas.

Charles - Thanks for the examples. I wouldn't mind reading a few more.

Charles L. Cotton wrote: <Clipped for brevity>

There are countless examples that I can list, but I think these two exemplify my point. Mere occurrence does not equate to negligence. Again, everyone can set their personal standard to a strict liability level, but I choose to stick with Texas law.

Chas.

Charles,

Those are some pretty good examples that I hadn't thought of before. Mechanical failure was one I had thought of.

Marty

The safety philosophy of my employer is that all accidents are preventable. This all encompassing philosophy covers a lot of responsibility from all engineering and operations disciplines.

Even though all accidents are preventable not all accident causes are negligent.

Some causes can and do get attributed to unsafe conditions but the majority are a result of unsafe behaviors.

Most accidents can be traced back to multiple causes and/or behaviors that contribute to the event. In almost all cases, if only one of the unsafe behaviors or conditions had been removed or corrected the accident would never have happened.

For the most part, we as a group are reasonable people and strive to be accident free because our chosen passion can very easily lead to serious injury and death if we do not stay vigilant.

Anygunanywhere