Hiker shoots himself in the A..

[Tom Rankin]

I guess it could happen to anyone, and I know of a gun dealer whose pistol discharged in his front pocket, and scarred his leg pretty badly...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100831/ap_on_fe_st/us_odd_rear_shooting

 

[Jay H]

Some pretty funny comments to the story....

Jay

 

[Paradox]

If you're going to rip'em a new one, it seems to me that you shouldn't try it on yourself first.

 

[JohnL]

Wrecked him? Damn near killed him!

 

[TomD]

This is a funny story, but the lesson isn't. This moron could just as easily shot someone else while mishandling his gun. A 40 cal. at close range would probably kill someone in most instances. This guy is just lucky he didn't hit a femoral artery and bleed out in a couple of minutes.

The idea that this idiot had a loaded weapon with a round in the chamber and no safety on is not a pleasant thought. Where's Darwin when you really need him?

 

[Will]

This is a funny story, but the lesson isn't.

I have a relative who keeps insisting that I don't understand the culture and should buy a gun, learn to aim it, and carry it on the trail as is my right. My obligation as a citizen, he seems to be implying

I try to explain to him that not everyone (and certainly not me) is temperamentally suited. That a number of my fellow citizens who blundered noisily into my camp after dark, in my awaken-from-sleep-panic, would most certainly be dead now, mistaken in my momentary fright for bears or other even more dreaded creatures who go bump in the night.

I believe all citizens have the right to bear arms on the trail. Except me.

 

[SAR-EMT40]

The idea that this idiot had a loaded weapon with a round in the chamber and no safety on is not a pleasant thought. Where's Darwin when you really need him?

There are many handguns, like the Glock that don't have an active safety like you are probably referring to, like the type found on the M1911, which technically has three. The Glock has a striker/cocker device and the only safety is a mechanical lock that is deactivated when the finger (or anything else) touches the trigger. The only other safe making part of the gun is the long cocking stroke that must be done by the pull of the trigger. So, just pushing the weapon into the pocket hard with the trigger caught on something could make it discharge. As a very fervent M1911 user I find the Glock very simplistic, very rugged and accurate to use but I would never use any force on placing the weapon anywhere (holster, pocket, etc.) without finding out why it is binding. The result could be a discharge. I wouldn't consider him a moron. But, I also believe that he will not force that weapon into any holder again and fortunately no one else was hurt. I don't consider the Glock to be an inherently dangerous weapon but it is one you need to take extra care with. I can't be certain it is a Glock, but that would be my first guess.

And with the exception of old design (pre-transfer bar) single action designs. All handguns are designed to be used with a round in the chamber or cylinder. A semi-automatic handgun without a round in the chamber is not a weapon, it is just a piece of pipe with a handle.

I have a relative who keeps insisting that I don't understand the culture and should buy a gun, learn to aim it, and carry it on the trail as is my right. My obligation as a citizen, he seems to be implying

I try to explain to him that not everyone (and certainly not me) is temperamentally suited. That a number of my fellow citizens who blundered noisily into my camp after dark, in my awaken-from-sleep-panic, would most certainly be dead now, mistaken in my momentary fright for bears or other even more dreaded creatures who go bump in the night.

I believe all citizens have the right to bear arms on the trail. Except me.

First, you don't need to buy a gun to try one out at a range. You can rent them at most ranges and receive proper instruction. Second, you are correct that certain people, who can legally own a gun still might not want to have one and that is fine. Third, while technically I understand what your relative is saying his approach is wrong. No one should be attempting to brow beat someone into carrying a gun. I believe that everyone should know how to properly handle a firearm. Just like I believe everyone should know how to use a wrench, hammer, screwdriver, knife and a myriad of tools.

Regards,
Keith

 

[TomD]

I told this story to a friend of mine who has a 9mm auto. Not a Glock, but I can't remember the brand. His has several safeties, including one that requires you to actually have your hand wrapped around the handle before it will fire.

One poster on another board surmised that this was a short barreled revolver, not an automatic based a description of the incident.

Sorry to disagree, but anyone who manages to shoot themselves in the butt is just plain stupid.

 

[FedEx]

job security in this recession!

As I'm a paramedic, this guy, and others just like him keep me employed - job security!

(Sound like another local owner of a gunstore near me who somehow shot himself in the hand in his own shop)

stuff happens, but......Duh!

 

[sardog1]

+1 All of what Keith said (including the Glock ID -- this was the first thought that I had as well after reading the report. There are very, very few .40 S&W revolvers in circulation, and they are surely outnumbered by the .40 S&W semiautomatics by a gazillion to one.)

And this at Is the Glock Inherently Unsafe?:

The Glock, with its light trigger pull, MUST be carried in a holster that completely covers the trigger guard. Those who don’t cover the trigger guard risk negligent discharges. Those who foolishly use cheap holsters, carry inside the waistband [deleted] style without a holster, or try pocket carry are a negligent discharge waiting to happen. The occasional self-inflicted groin- or buttocks-wound attests to this. Glock users’ propensity to disregard the manual’s injunction to always use a [proper] holster contributes to the risk.

 

[BlackBuffalo]

I believe in the right to own. But I think the trail isn't the right place to be carrying.

Maybe if I were in the bush in Alaska, I might feel safer with a cannon.

I da know. Too many out there with their right to carry can be very dangerous.

My 2 cents.

 

[David Metsky]

Moderator Note
I'd prefer this didn't turn into a gun vs no gun thread, but if it is going that direction please keep it respectful and discuss the issue, not the people.

 

[Bob]

why is this thread even here?

smells like someone trolling...

 

[David Metsky]

Moderator Note:

smells like someone trolling...

If you feel that way, please report the post using the little triangle icon under the poster's name and do not accuse someone of trolling in the thread.

 

[Tom Rankin]

smells like someone trolling...

I have no agenda here. I post news items that are related to hiking, that I feel would be interesting reading.

 

[David Metsky]

Let's move on from that aspect of the thread.

 

[Mike P.]

Darwinisn tried....

I agree everyone over the age of probably 12-14 should know some basic safety. (So if a friend goes to show you where Dad keeps his gun, you can safely take control of the situation and really make sure it is empty before they start waving it around. too many senseless deaths from "empty" guns with the safety on.)

Should you carry one? I'd be tempted in the land of Griz but not here. I'm not attractive to human predators either, in fact, I probably have a greater chance of being mistaken as a predator. I own a shotgun but I haven't had it at home in years. Hunted first with Dad & later on my own from 12-25 or so, decided I liked the walking part better.

 

[Peakbagr]

Might we agree that the thread lived its useful life before it takes the usual firearms turn?

 

[SAR-EMT40]

I have been attempting to keep to the high road.

Keith

 

[Peakbagr]

Keith,

Noted and appreciated.

Alan