Unintentional Discharges: ADs or NDs?

[cosermann]

Came across this post on John Farnam's blog recently (yes, I'm behind), and thought it was an interesting way to look at it.

Terms and Language! | Defense Training International, Inc.

 

[pudly]

That fits what I've been trained on.

ND = violation of Cooper's four rules
AD = mechanical failure

NDs happen far more often than ADs, particularly with modern firearms.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

While I'm sure this will devolve into a gigantic semantic debate that doesn't amount to a hair in a bear's backside, I largely agree. For the purposes of censure, there must be a delineation.

However, I'd tweak it a bit. Anything you didn't mean for the gun to go off is an AD. It was accidentally discharged. An AD can ALSO be an ND if negligence was involved. In short, I just cut out the concept of "UD".

I had an AD last Friday. Another officer gave me a CZ P07 to try at the range. The first shot was intentional. I then shot a second time before I was ready to do so. The trigger breaks much further forward than my Sig, and with no noticeable indication it's about to break (a very smooth, short, and light SA pull...I was rather impressed). I fired the second time when my intent was to take slack out of the trigger. As I was not intending to shoot yet, my second shot was an AD. It was into the target and then into the berm and I *did* intend to shoot...just not quite so soon, so I would not consider it an ND.

 

[ATM]

While I'm sure this will devolve into a gigantic semantic debate that doesn't amount to a hair in a bear's backside...

Mmm...

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Mmm...

 

[Expat]

I like donuts...

 

[Expat]

That fits what I've been trained on.

ND = violation of Cooper's four rules
AD = mechanical failure

NDs happen far more often than ADs, particularly with modern firearms.

How about when a guy drops a pistol and it goes off...

 

[ATM]

How about when a guy drops a pistol and it goes off...

Depends, did he keep it pointed in a safe direction throughout the drop and subsequent discharge?

 

[natdscott]

It's not entirely semantics.

Unless you've operated firearms and ALWAYS sent the round you intended to send, EXACTLY when and where you intended to send it (ie: you've never missed), then the argument can be made that you have had an AD.

I can speak from experience that 4 ounce triggers will result in a lot of ADs in the field until you become very accustomed to them. In no way are they necessarily NDs, because all 4 rules may have been followed, but the shot was sent a helluva lot earlier than intended.

And no mechanical failure has occurred.



Inforthebearfight.

-Nate

 

[USMC-Johnson]

That fits what I've been trained on.

ND = violation of Cooper's four rules
AD = mechanical failure

NDs happen far more often than ADs, particularly with modern firearms.

This pretty much sums it up for me. with the caveat that most mechanical failures can be traced back to negligence on someone's behalf although not always the shooter's. As most people talk about it (non mechanical) there is no such thing as an accidental discharge in my book.

 

[BugI02]

Depends, did he keep it pointed in a safe direction throughout the drop and subsequent discharge?

 

[NHT3]

I see both sides and it WILL devolve into a semantic debate. Personally I consider anything other than a mechanical failure an ND. As I've stated in another thread, it's not an accident when the trigger is pressed and the gun fires. Operator error, ND what ever description you want to give it I don't see how it can be perceived as any sort of an accident. I worked on a Glock a few months ago that tended to "run wild" on an irregular basis and the only negligence involved was the guy had let and idiot work on the trigger. Mechanical problem but still negligence on the operator's part. What was it BBI said about the hair on a bear?
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT][FONT=&quot]NRA Life Member[/FONT][FONT=&quot]-- [/FONT][FONT=&quot]GSSF member[/FONT]
Certified Glock & M&P armorer
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]NRA Basic pistol instructor[FONT=&quot] /[/FONT][FONT=&quot] RSO[/FONT]

 

[russc2542]

While I'm sure this will devolve into a gigantic semantic debate that doesn't amount to a hair in a bear's backside, I largely agree. For the purposes of censure, there must be a delineation.

However, I'd tweak it a bit. Anything you didn't mean for the gun to go off is an AD. It was accidentally discharged. An AD can ALSO be an ND if negligence was involved. In short, I just cut out the concept of "UD".

I had an AD last Friday. Another officer gave me a CZ P07 to try at the range. The first shot was intentional. I then shot a second time before I was ready to do so. The trigger breaks much further forward than my Sig, and with no noticeable indication it's about to break (a very smooth, short, and light SA pull...I was rather impressed). I fired the second time when my intent was to take slack out of the trigger. As I was not intending to shoot yet, my second shot was an AD. It was into the target and then into the berm and I *did* intend to shoot...just not quite so soon, so I would not consider it an ND.

This. and I can relate, traded a bike for an AR and a savage, first time shooting the savage I didn't realize just how insanely light the aftermarket franken-trigger was tweaked.

 

[Excalibur]

I'm sure others have point it out, but for me an ND has always been if a person didn't follow the safety rules and the gun went off when it could have easily been avoided. Example if you stuff a live gun down your pants and it goes off and blows a hole through your butt...that's negligent on your part. Same if you don't keep finger off trigger until you are ready to fire. I don't call any of them accidents. All could have been avoided if the person was actually following the rules of the gun

 

[JettaKnight]

Safety rules and UDs == Apples and oranges.

I can be completely safe and have an UD (AD or ND).

Scenario #1:
Sitting at shooting bench, gun pointed down range, close bolt on rifle - BAM!
I call it an AD if my finger is off the trigger; it's a mechanical malfunction.
All the safety rules were followed, so the UD did not result in tragedy.


Scenario #2:
Before cleaning my pistol, I need to field strip it which requires pulling the trigger. I pull open the slide and eject the live round, engage the takedown lever, close the slide, remove the magazine so it's unloaded, make my way to my sand barrel and pull the trigger - BAM!

Oh yeah, I should remove the magazine first.

So, I was completely safe, there was never a threat of a tragedy, yet I'd call that a ND - human error.

Scenario #3:
I'm out at the range with my SKS. Darn thing keeps acting up so I step away from the line and work on it. And since I'm completely engrossed in my task at hand I don't notice where the muzzle is pointed. As the bolt with a sticky firing pin closes on a live round - BAM! This time a tragedy occurs because I violated the safety rules. It's still an AD as far as I'm concerned (others may argue).


I think I've proved that ND/AD is completely separated from the safety rules. The safety rules are what keeps an UD from turning from a surprise to a tragedy.

 

[JettaKnight]

IBKF870

 

[pudly]

Scenario #3:
I'm out at the range with my SKS. Darn thing keeps acting up so I step away from the line and work on it. And since I'm completely engrossed in my task at hand I don't notice where the muzzle is pointed. As the bolt with a sticky firing pin closes on a live round - BAM! This time a tragedy occurs because I violated the safety rules. It's still an AD as far as I'm concerned (others may argue).

I would certainly argue this one. Based on how you described it, you clearly violated rule #2 (muzzle discipline). Also, I can think of almost no situations where you should back away from the line (assuming this is practice of course) with a loaded gun (rule #1 violation). Yes, a mechanical problem caused it to fire, but you were still negligent in at least those two ways.

 

[HoughMade]

The English language can be confusing, but in this case should not be. Especially when there have been, roughly 8.632 threads on this topic since I joined in 2012.

Accident- sudden, and unexpected event causing (generally) negative consequences.

Negligence- the failure to exercise that degree of care that a reasonably prudent person woul under the same or similar circumstances.

Negligence can be accidental. An accident can result from negligence or not.

The two concepts are not mutually exclusive.

Apparently being a gun guy/trainer/writer(?!) doesn't render you able to master this concept. Whatevs.

Are we trying to change the English language or simply be accurate users of it? I prefer the latter. Are we so lazy that we have yo twist meanings to avoid saying "accidental discharge caused by mechanical failure"?

 

[cosermann]

Per the original article (as I read it anyway), #1 and #2 would be ADs (since safety rules were followed), while #3 would be a ND (since muzzle not pointed in a safe direction). All are UDs when there's a discharge we don't intend for, regardless of the cause.

That's per the original article anyway. Folks may think of it a bit differently, but I thought it was a helpful framework/context from which to approach the subject and get folks thinking.

Appreciate everyone's comments.

 

[LEaSH]

IBKF870

Yes, but... Will he ever consider it negligence on the part of Rem, or himself, or ANYONE that may have been responsible for keeping it clean or well maintained? Hell, he's never even said what may have caused it or even attempted to discover why it happened.

Not trying to sound like a critical jerk, though I know I might come across that way. Just trying to further the conversation.

I don't believe car accidents exist, either.