TexasCHLforum.com

http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?secti ... id=8761532" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Wife does not want gun in house. (at one am) so husband is in the process of removing the semi automatic hand gun from house, gun goes off and kills husband and critically wounds daughter in law with one bullet.

Is this stuff just made up, or are people really this ignorant in the operation of guns.

More ammunition for the anti's everyday.

What was the D-I-L doing with the husband taking the gun outside?

This just seems way to strange to me

Teamless wrote:What was the D-I-L doing with the husband taking the gun outside?

This just seems way to strange to me

It is freaky. It may be an accident, but there is a lot of missing information.

Seems fishy to me too. I would do much further investigating.

Very weird. Magic bullet? There have been a few of those lately. Remember the one that killed the girl who hugged the officer from behind at his party in his house for someone else?

My pet peeve is calling these kind of situations an "accident". It is either "negligent" or a "homicide", but it surely is not an "accident".

I get the idea behind zombie ammo., but have never seen magic bullets listed for sale on any site or store.

Do I need to get out more?

Jumping Frog wrote:My pet peeve is calling these kind of situations an "accident". It is either "negligent" or a "homicide", but it surely is not an "accident".

I understand why you are saying this, but I still disagree. At this point I don't think that are enough facts to determine negligence.

WildBill wrote:

Jumping Frog wrote:My pet peeve is calling these kind of situations an "accident". It is either "negligent" or a "homicide", but it surely is not an "accident".

I understand why you are saying this, but I still disagree. At this point I don't think that are enough facts to determine negligence.

Respectfully,l I disagree with your disagreement.

unless the gun was sitting on the ground or table by itself, with no human interaction AND it went off on it's own.. Is fired though intentional manipulation of the firing device or was negligently operated in such a way as to make it discharge. in any case, the gun firing was NOT an accident.

bronco78 wrote:

WildBill wrote:

Jumping Frog wrote:My pet peeve is calling these kind of situations an "accident". It is either "negligent" or a "homicide", but it surely is not an "accident".

I understand why you are saying this, but I still disagree. At this point I don't think that are enough facts to determine negligence.

Respectfully,l I disagree with your disagreement.

unless the gun was sitting on the ground or table by itself, with no human interaction AND it went off on it's own.. Is fired though intentional manipulation of the firing device or was negligently operated in such a way as to make it discharge. in any case, the gun firing was NOT an accident.

Have you or someone you know ever had something bad happen? Have you ever been in a car crash or dropped and broken a dish? Was there negligence involved in every incidence?

I believe you are arguing semantics and ignoring common usage of the word "accident." Pet peeves aside, it is what the common usage says it is, unless your campaigning to change common usage. In a court of law, negligence may certainly be determined in these cases, but the common usage of the word "accident" remains unchanged. IANAL.

"The word accident is derived from the Latin verb accidere, signifying "fall upon, befall, happen, chance." In its most commonly accepted meaning, or in its ordinary or popular sense, the word may be defined as meaning: some sudden and unexpected event taking place without expectation, upon the instant, rather than something that continues, progresses or develops; something happening by chance; something unforeseen, unexpected, unusual, extraordinary, or phenomenal, taking place not according to the usual course of things or events, out of the range of ordinary calculations; that which exists or occurs abnormally, or an uncommon occurrence. The word may be employed as denoting a calamity, casualty, catastrophe, disaster, an undesirable or unfortunate happening; any unexpected personal injury resulting from any unlooked for mishap or occurrence; any unpleasant or unfortunate occurrence that causes injury, loss, suffering, or death; some untoward occurrence aside from the usual course of events. An event that takes place without one's foresight or expectation; an undesigned, sudden, and unexpected event."

More here:

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/accident" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

G26ster wrote:I believe you are arguing semantics and ignoring common usage of the word "accident." Pet peeves aside, it is what the common usage says it is, unless your campaigning to change common usage. In a court of law, negligence may certainly be determined in these cases, but the common usage of the word "accident" remains unchanged. IANAL.

Yes, I am arguing semantics and don't think I am ignoring common usage of the word "accident". I think it's important to recognize that all mishaps with guns are not due to negligence.

G26ster wrote:
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/accident" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Since they don't have the definition or etymology of "Deep Six" right, I see no reason to trust the rest of their lexicon.

jimlongley wrote:

G26ster wrote:
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/accident" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Since they don't have the definition or etymology of "Deep Six" right, I see no reason to trust the rest of their lexicon.

I believe that Black's Law Dictionary is the standard for the legal profession.

http://thelawdictionary.org/negligence/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Accident may be a commonly used word, but it is an incorrect word (IMHO)to describe the unintended discharge of a weapon when a person is involved and intentional handling of the weapon occurred..

Accident is used when folks want to claim it was not there fault, they did not cause the discharge.. As most will agree, guns do not go off by them selves, they require some human interaction. Said human either intends for the gun to discharge, OR negligently caused it to discharge.

I agree there is an exception.. if no human interaction was intended for the weapon, and it fires through accidental contact with the trigger.. THAT would be an accidental discharge.

As weird as it sounds.. that dancing , hug, three way...shooting thing we read about a few weeks ago... IF it happened as described, that MAY be an accidental discharge.

So yes, I can see SOME, FEW reason to call the unintentional discharge of a weapon accidental... but rarely have I read about it happening in such a way that makes me call it anything BUT negligently discharge.

It's a frame of mind as well as semantics...