The Glade 4.0

True. Of course, the risk of my gf yelling, "Jesus Christ!! What the f*ck are you doing?! It's just me!....F*ck!" and then making me sleep on the couch because she's royally ticked off at me for scaring the cr*p out of her is probably going to be lower if the gun is on the other side of the room.

**** her, she made you scared enough that you thought you had to defend her and your life.

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville

I can say that because that's my understand of Hopwin's question, given the phrasing.

Now, if he'd said:



Then of course the answer is yes, the risk must go up, as unloaded firearms literally cannot discharge.

He didn't ask that though. He asked about storing a firearm. Storage doesn't really involve people. It involves a box, or a shelf, or a safe, or some other storage device.



Potentially. The other option is you get bf-cred for trying to "protect her."

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine

Far too literal. You know exactly what he meant.

Whoa so a loaded gun with no people is no more likely to go off then an unloaded weapon with no people?

_________________

Exactly.

Guns don't just go off unless acted upon by some outside force.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

Ok, first of all "nerves" (whatever those are supposed to be) will not "get the better" of a well-trained individual very often. As for untrained or poorly trained people, they are actually more likely to simply not shoot out of nerves or simple inability to pull the trigger.

As for taking "more time to evaluate the situation", you're not "taking more time to evaluate the situation" when you're trying to dig your gun out to defend yourself. All this is doing is rendering the gun useless for self defense and calling it "reducing the chance of accident". Reducing the chance of accident by rendering the gun superfluous is like reducing the chance of vehicle accident by not driving at all. What you're doing is reducing risk by a small amount by greatly reducing utility.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

That's what he's trying to do, and what he's worrying the gun is going to interfere with.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Depends. If there is no round actually chambered and/or the weapon is not cocked, then no.

If it is loaded, and cocked, then it could go off if it has a mechanical defect. This is exceedingly rare.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

It's because that view (access to firearms corresponding with the amount of training) was implied by the content of the original post which you didn't read yet still felt necessary to comment on.

Furthermore, there are no "levels" of training involved in gun safety. There's only one level, and it's safely handling the gun. Anyone who owns, is around or may encounter a gun should have this training. It follows four cardinal rules in most philosophical schools, which give or take wiggle room on the wording and intent (the intent being the same, but the argument being over the best way to literally word it), it is universally the same. You will find all professionals or civilians who use weapons follow a protocol that observes these four basic principles because as long as these principles aren't violated, it is impossible to have what would be defined as a shooting accident. Any accident that occurs means one or more of these principles was violated. I personally think it can be reduced to three because the fourth is just a very specific case of the second.

_________________
"It's real, grew up in trife life, the times of white lines
The hype vice, murderous nighttimes and knife fights invite crimes" - Nasir Jones

When I was in Herlong...

Four man patrol in the area. They got out of the hummer to do a check of one of the igloos. When they were getting back in their vehicle, one idiot tossed his M-16. Tossed it into the truck.

It loaded a round and shot the driver.

_________________
Raell Kromwell

That would be a massive human error. The question I was responding to was regarding the likelyhood of an accidental discharge without human involvement.

The only way that could have happened with the M-16 is either if the bolt was locked to the rear with a magazine inserted, or if there were already a round in the chamber. Given the ease with which one can dislodge the bolt lock, the first is far more likely. This if course raises the question of why this fool had his bolt locked back, but since he decided to throw his rifle, the most obvious answer is: because he's an idiot.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

No. I read what he wrote. Which was talking about storage. Storage and usage of firearms are extremely different things.


So.... to be clear, you're just trolling at this point, then?

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine

DE...

Mag was in the weapon but that is it. They ended up testing that thing for a week. They were able to get it to do the same thing several times. It was a 25 year old rifle.

They were able to slam the weapon down, stock first. The bolt would travel back far enough to load a round.

_________________
Raell Kromwell

Everyone knows that the M-16 is a bit funny - if it wasn't there wouldn't be much need for a forward assist.

Even so thats pretty strange for it do that w/o the bolt already being to the rear, really really really defective spring I take it?

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville

Aye, I think that is what they blamed it on, the buffer spring.

_________________
Raell Kromwell

You're **** kidding me. Really? That's incredible.

It must have kicked like a mule with a recoil spring that weak.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

To be clear your such a gun-wanker that you'd say anything to support your view, right?

_________________

Where is anyone gun-wanking here?

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Which view is that? That guns, without human control, aren't inherently dangerous?

Or perhaps the view that without children in the home, there is nothing inherently unsafe about storing a gun loaded and/or chambered?

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine