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.
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.
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”.
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.
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.
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”.