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”.
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”.