Since it was my question, let me guide the discussion, a bit. And thank you for all the replies so far.
I am referring to describing the gun's state, at the moment of discharge. Who/what is damaged or injured by the bullet is not relevent to the point I wish to discuss. Saying an "accident" was negligence because someone was hurt is not the point under discussion.
I would like to also exclude the train of thought that says "negligent owner, a good cleaning or inspection would have revealed the problem..etc..."
While that may well be true, I hardly think it fair for us to expect ordinary gun owners to be able to recognize a sear worn to the point where it may fail, or safety engagement surfaces....the majority of gun owners never see these parts. I would put it akin to saying the driver was negligent for not noticing a hole in the seal of his master cylinder the last time he cleaned his car.
Here's one example, a personal friend had one of the later model Walthers (PP Super, I think, but the exact model doesn't matter, really). Bought the gun used, but in apparent good shape from a shop. Shot it a bit, carried it for several months, before finding out there was a serious problem.
He was at the range, and let a friend try the gun. Friend points gun downrange, cycles it, and then, wheh he puts the safety ON, the gun fires! It does this repeatedly. Gun owner takes the gun, and it does the same thing. BUT, when the gun owner puts the safety on the way he always did, with the gun tilted over sideways (so he could reach the safety lever) hammer drops, gun does NOT fire (normal operation). Holding the gun upright, working the safety drops the hammer, and the gun fires!
He takes the gun back to the shop, and after careful checkout, the smith says, parts were broken, in just such a way that when the gun was laid over sideways, they still worked, but when upright, normal shooting grip, the didn't work anymore. Never seen one do just that...etc..
In this unusual incident, I would consider the discarge accidental, and through no fault of the user. Nor do I hold the owner negligent for not disassembling the pistol to inspect all the parts. Nor would he likely have known what he was looking at, had he done so.
Maybe the factory was negligent, but not all breakage or malfunctions of mechanisms are the fault of the factory, either.
Now, something like the famous internet video clip of "only one here trained to handle the GLock FOU-TAY....I hold that to be negligent.
I don't think we are giving the antis more ammo when we discuss negligent discharges, as such. I actually think we are doing a greater disservice to ourselves when we act/speak to cover up or minimize these things. Sure, we all ought to be perfect gun handlers and owners, but we aren't. Simple truth is that there are a lot of people who, while they have the right, don't have the responsibility to be good gun owners. And I think that not pointing that out, because it makes us all "look bad" is false economy.
I don't care what subject you look at, safe, sane, responsible people SHOULD be able to be distanced from the irresponsible idiots. (and no, I don't think we should have to be made to pay for their actions, either)
Not calling a spade a spade and saying (when the evidence is clear) that "X happened because you did something stupid with a loaded gun" , but rather to have to say manual earth moving device; "you had an accident" is not going to make any of the antis (who already hate us) not like us any more....
Perhaps negligent is not the best word, but if not, what would suit better? And I mean for those times where a gun is fired because of a finger on the trigger when it shouldn't have been?
Some models of guns have unique manual of arms for proper operation, some are even exactly opposite of others.
Another example, again from personal knowledge;
Security agent gets trained on newly issued UZI smg. Is showing some fellow agents the gun and has "accidental" discharge. Now this was entirely a case of operator error, but was not truely "negligent", as the user conciously did exactly what he was used to doing to ready his weapon for service. He opened the bolt, checked to make sure the chamber was empty, then inserted the magazine, and released the bolt to load it. Exactly what he had been doing with all the guns he had used for well over a decade.
BUT EXACTLY the WRONG thing to do with an Uzi SMG. Or any other open bolt weapon. Root cause? While he had been trained on the Uzi, he hadn't been trained enough to overcome a decade of conditioning. Negligent in the sense that the user did the wrong thing, thinking they were doing it right.
and btw, the official report said it was an accident.
I think negligent is a fair term to use when we limit the discussion to what specifically made the gun discharge. What set up the conditions leading to the discharge is not relevent, it should be a separate part of the discussion. Likewise, what results from the discharge is also outside the scope of the discussion. Again, a separate discussion for that, please.
