you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 38 points 1 month ago* (27 children)

So, fun fact: Alexander Hamilton may have killed himself.

He supplied the dueling pistols for the duel with Burr, and a few things about them.

  • He had them custom made with a larger, more deadly bore.

  • He had modified the trigger to require a much lighter pull than most pistols would have required.

  • The musical (of incredibly dubious historical value) even makes note of this, he was seen fiddling with the trigger prior to the duel, and selected his pistol first.

Accounts on Hamilton firing in to the air differ, but what is consistent are accounts of Burr seeming pretty shocked when his gun went off. Accounts also pretty universally indicate that he tried to rush to Hamilton after he'd been shot to lend aid before being escorted away.

Anyway, that's not at all meant to refute your claim. Guns generally don't just "go off".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 27 child comments
  • [–] 44 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Incredibly dubious historical battle

    Are you implying that the nation was not formed on the back of a rap battle my good sir?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 month ago*

    Firstmost, curse your lady and the Americas you claim.
    Westside on our steeds, come equipped with game.
    Ye claim to be a player, but I rode your wife.
    We disdain the English, Royalty fucked for life.

    Credit: The Right Honorable Tupac Shakur, Earl of the West

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 1 month ago (9 children)

    Yeah the only guns I know of that can just "go off" either have a hair trigger that's worn or are of exceptionally shit build quality like say the Ross Rifle.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    If you take the worst gun, modify it to have the lightest trigger possible, if you don't have it just sitting around with a round in the chamber it won't just "go off". It's wild that the simplest safety precaution save a lot of lives but nope these people need their dick extensions to always be ready to go.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago

    Oh I was just making note that there are ways for a gun to to fire by itself for one reason or another when loaded. Regardless making sure the gun is cleared is a pretty damned good way of ensuring it doesn't do that. Or alternatively leave a Ross Rifle behind for the Germans when you leave a trench so it's their problem.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    Or they are a Sig Sauer P320...... Which is of good quality but poor design.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (4 children)

    Wasn't one of the theories that it had tolerance stacking issues and part wear that made it worse?

    I'd count that as poor quality

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (3 children)

    I hadn't heard that one. The theory I've heard most was that they recycled a previous trigger from a different pistol but left out a drop safety mechanism when they changed it to a stricker instead of a hammer system.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (2 children)

    iirc that was the cause of the original drop safety issues and the more recent uncommanded discharges are still unknown

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    Yeah, the last time I checked there were a couple different running theories. I hadn't heard there were more issues separate from the drop fires. But, I was never a fan of sig in the first place. So I haven't been following it too closely. From what I remember it just seemed like the gun was a Frankensteined together money grab.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -4 points 1 month ago (13 children)

    Guns generally don’t just “go off”.

    They can and do. There's chapter and verse on gun safety - handling, cleaning, storage - to deal with the risk of accidental discharge.

    If you treat a gun like a toy (and this guy's testimony certainly sounds like he did), it's very possible to fire it by accident.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    Right, they have to be mishandled, uncleaned, and not properly stored, so like they said, guns generally don't just "go off".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago

    Some guns are just built like shit.

    Laws have been passed to shield gun manufacturers from liability for faulty products.

    Still, this case sounded like premeditated murder more than anything else. And that Texas grand jury, and prosecutor, were fine with it because the daughter hated Trump.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    they have to be mishandled, uncleaned, and not properly stored

    I don't see any evidence to suggest the guy was maintaining any of his kit properly.

    guns generally don’t just “go off”

    They can and do when mishandled, which is why gun safety exists to begin with.

    "Don't point a gun at anything you don't intend to shoot" is Rule 1 for a reason. And if he was playing with the gun like a toy, it's very easy to believe he fumbled it. The stories of children setting off guns by playing with them are more numerous than you can count.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Not sure what the downvoters are thinking. I was reading through this whole argument about whether or not guns can just "go off" and kept thinking a) obviously there are cases where people fire a gun they are handling unintentionally, whether because they are idiots or the gun malfunctioned. But b) it doesn't make a difference in whether he was negligent because he already was when he pointed it at her in the first place. That's all that should have been needed to get a negligent manslaughter charge to stick, accidental discharge or not, it hit her because he was pointing the gun at her.

    Though I don't buy it was accidental at all, given the circumstances. Heated argument about Trump just before she's supposed to leave but first he needs to show her his gun that just happens to accidentally fire while he was pointing it at her?

    Jury nullification goes both ways and that grand jury just condoned the murder of someone who opposed Trump.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Its mostly semantics. Dude is saying guns don't just go off because of X, Y, and Z. And people are pointing out that X, Y, and Z are the result of negligence.

    People neglecting gun safety is the cause. The gun goes off because of the negligence.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago

    I interpreted their comments as saying the guy was negligent on multiple levels. Like saying he probably was neglecting maintenance to the point where the gun can randomly fire doesn't sound like a defense of the guy to me but more like the gun going off could have occurred because he triggered it himself directly or because he didn't keep it in a condition to prevent it from being triggered indirectly.

    Though that last paragraph is the most important part IMO, because regardless of how the gun went off, if he had been following gun safety rules, it should have just resulted in an embarrassing hole in his floor, not the death of the person he was "showing the gun to".

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    No the fuck they don't.

    The only scenario where a gun just "goes off" would be if it were sitting somewhere untouched and and went off. If someone is holding it then they are solely responsible for what happens with it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 month ago* (3 children)

    The only scenario where a gun just “goes off” would be if it were sitting somewhere untouched

    That's not what we're talking about at all.

    People drop guns. People do stupid shit with guns, like using the butt as a hammer. People try to show off with pistol twirls and quick-draws. People just handle them wrong - tossing them, sitting on them, holstering them incorrectly, fiddling with them nervously.

    Plaxico Burress very famously shot himself in the thigh, because he decided to keep a Glock tucked into the waste band of his pants. Nothing about the story suggests it was intentional.

    they are solely responsible for what happens with it.

    That's got nothing to do with whether it was accidental.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (2 children)

    These are talking about fundamentally different things than guns just going off, people generally use that term to talk about stuff like the p320, not people being idiots and causing negligent discharges.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    people generally use that term to talk about stuff like the p320, not people being idiots and causing negligent discharges.

    I'll point you back to Burress, whose case was regularly and repeatedly described as such. Nobody was accusing Burress of shooting himself in the leg on purpose, much less as some kind of political act.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago*

    That's not the gun just going off, it went off because the trigger was pulled due to not being in a holster.

    Anyways, we're just arguing the semantics of uncommanded discharges vs accidental discharges

  • source
  • parent