My new student/wife experienced an AD... the lessons learned

[Kosh75287]

Three times to the range without understanding the part about keep your trigger finger off the trigger?

Are you telling me that you didn't violate rule #4 at least once in YOUR first 3, 5, or even TEN range sessions?

If I read the OP right, she was aware the firearm was loaded (all of them are, until locked open), so Rule #1 was being observed. She kept the muzzle in a place such that, if a discharge occurred, nothing of value was destroyed, so Rule #2 was being observed. She was trying to put the shotgun on "safe" before she moved, so safety was still her intention, even if it didn't get translated into her finger remaining outside the trigger guard.

It's ALWAYS a shattering experience to have a firearm fire before the handler is ready. But if it was simply DESTINED to happen, the lady seems to have done about as well as anyone COULD do, to minimize the after effects of such an event. She went into it, thinking to act safely, got fumble-fingered, and STILL weathered the event without harm to herself or others. She should be commended for doing everything ELSE right.

 

[keithlard]

AD....ND, semantics really don't matter.

They really do. No disrespect to the OP or his wife, both of whom have admitted that the discharge was negligent, but calling something an 'accident' implies that it was unavoidable, or nobody's fault.

Unintentional discharges are absolutely avoidable, and they are entirely the shooter's fault, as in this case, unless (and this is why the semantics matter) they are accidental.

I'd be disturbed by an attitude of "hey, sometimes guns just go off, you know?" I don't care to shoot alongside anybody who thinks like that.

 

[45_auto]

Unintentional discharges are absolutely avoidable, and they are entirely the shooter's fault

So why did Remington recall millions of their 700 series rifles?

http://www.remington.com/pages/news...all-notice-remington-model700-modelseven.aspx

DESCRIPTION OF THE HAZARD: Remington has determined that some Model 700 and Model Seven rifles with XMP triggers could, under certain circumstances, unintentionally discharge. A Remington investigation has determined that some XMP triggers might have excess bonding agent used in the assembly process.

Why are they recalling Model 887 shotguns?

http://www.remington.com/pages/news...warning-recall-notice-Remington-model887.aspx

Remington has determined that some Remington Model 887™ shotguns manufactured between December 19, 2013 and November 24, 2014 may exhibit a defect causing the firing pin to bind in the forward position within the bolt, which can result in an unintentional discharge when chambering a live round.

You really believe that someone who purchased a brand new 700 is responsible for disassembling their trigger mechanism and removing excess glue, or that someone who purchased a brand new 887 is responsible for disassembling their bolt and correcting a manufacturing defect? That it's the buyer's fault if their brand new gun goes off without them pulling the trigger?

 

[g.willikers]

Are you telling me that you didn't violate rule #4 at least once in YOUR first 3, 5, or even TEN range sessions?

Nope, never did.
Grew up with a pump rimfire rifle and a DA revolver.
Got very much in the habit of keeping finger off the trigger with my trusty Daisy Red Ryder.
Any notion of ADs were resolved with that.
Because it was so hard to pump, I walked around with it mostly cocked.
Airguns are good trainers.

 

[JohnKSa]

Unintentional discharges are absolutely avoidable, and they are entirely the shooter's fault, as in this case, unless (and this is why the semantics matter) they are accidental.

Unintentional simply means it happened when the shooter didn't intend it to.

That could mean that the gun malfunctioned and fired by itself or it could mean that the shooter made an error and caused the gun to fire without meaning to.

I'm not saying that semantics don't matter, only that when a discussion like this turns into a dissection of the meanings of accidental, negligent, and unintentional, the ACTUAL lesson often ends up taking second place to the arguments about the fine shades of meanings of words.

Whether it's accidental or negligent, or accidental AND negligent, the important lessons to be learned really don't change. It's not like we need a different set of safety rules for one type of unintentional discharge vs. another one

 

[buck460XVR]

but calling something an 'accident' implies that it was unavoidable, or nobody's fault.

.........that's your definition, Merriam-Webster has a different one tho, one I tend to regard higher than that from a random poster on the internet.

2.
a : an unfortunate event resulting especially from carelessness or ignorance

Get over the Grammar Nazi-ing and put things in perspective. The wife knows she make a mistake. It was a mistake she made unintentionally, by accident. Why the need to rub her nose it it with negative connotations?