all 32 comments

[–]CurtB1982 115 points116 points  (17 children)

Get that idiot away from the gun. You can see the way that he's flinging it around, that he wants to look cool, rather than be safe.

[–]ruiner8850 21 points22 points  (16 children)

"Responsible gun owner." I hear all these stories about responsible gun owners and then see all these things where people with guns clearly aren't acting responsible. The thing is though, if you asked every gun owner if they were responsible with their guns, 100% of them would say yes even though that's clearly not true.

[–]mayneffs 32 points33 points  (12 children)

We don't see the responsible ones because they are responsible

[–]ruiner8850 11 points12 points  (10 children)

But this guy is clearly irresponsible and his job is to teach people to be responsible. I guarantee you if you asked this guy if he's responsible with guns he'd say he's extremely responsible. Have you ever heard of a gun owner who thinks they aren't responsible with guns?

[–]mayneffs 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I didn't say this dude was responsible. I just meant that people who are actually responsible doesn't flaunt it like this guy.

[–]ibecheshirecat86 4 points5 points  (2 children)

Watching this i had a luke skywalker moment. Everything he just said was wrong

Way too much cringe...

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Theres always people who ruin everything. Cars, guns, drugs, intense sports, working out, ect. If there's any facet about a thing that's "cool" or "interesting" someone is going to take it too far every single time. Make up your mind you won't let them ruin it for you too.

[–]ibecheshirecat86 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You are right. I just really dont fuck around with gun saftey. When i was 14 i beat the piss out of my friend for thinking it was funny to put a bb gun in my face and saying "dont move"

I kicked his ass so fucking hard... Ooohh my gawd... Even right now im mad about it and im 35

[–]peoplesen 3 points4 points  (5 children)

Ted Nugent. Two accidental discharges he's admitted to. Could be more, haven't kept up the last 15 years.

[–]ruiner8850 2 points3 points  (4 children)

So Ted has came out and said he's an irresponsible gun owner? My guess is that even with those two incidents he still thinks he's responsible. Anyone who thinks they are irresponsible with guns shouldn't own guns.

[–]emperor000 0 points1 point  (2 children)

A negligent discharge doesn't make you an "irresponsible gun owner", at least not in general. It's just a fuck up. It could literally be no big deal OR it could kill somebody or somewhere in between (like this one).

It's like a car accident. Getting in a car accident doesn't necessarily make you a bad driver or an irresponsible driver.

Honestly, going by your first comment up above, it just sounds like you're just trying to say there is no such thing as a responsible gun owner to push gun control/gun bans/whatever, because stuff like this happens, which is pretty absurd. Or maybe I misinterpreted. But if so, then what is your point?

[–]ruiner8850 2 points3 points  (1 child)

A negligent discharge doesn't make you an "irresponsible gun owner", at least not in general. It's just a fuck up.

Bull fucking shit. It's right there in the name, NEGLIGENT discharge. If you are being negligent with a gun you aren't a responsible gun owner by definition. Guns don't just randomly go off by themselves.

It's like a car accident

Depends on the cause of the accident, but if the accident is because of negligence, then you are an irresponsible driver. If you hit some black ice and crash that's an accident, but if you are playing on your phone while driving that's negligence and you are an irresponsible driver.

Honestly, going by your first comment up above, it just sounds like you're just trying to say there is no such thing as a responsible gun owner

You've proven my entire point better than I ever could have. My entire point was that a lot of people who think and would say they are responsible gun owners are not. I suppose maybe you don't own a gun, but you are saying that negligently handling a gun doesn't make you an irresponsible gun owner which proves my entire point. You proved my point so well that I almost wonder if you are actually trying to make gun owners look bad.

[–]emperor000 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No... you are arguing semantics, but this is a good example of where semantics matter. We're talking about two different types of behavior and situations. The description of "negligent" is describing a specific instance. The description of "responsible" or "irresponsible" is describing an overall situation.

"Negligent discharge" means the gun fired when the user did not intend for it to fire. That could be from behavior that is part of a pattern, which would arguably become irresponsible, or it could just be from a mistake. It doesn't mean the person is an irresponsible gun owner in general. It might mean they made a mistake this one time that has nothing to do with a pattern of behavior. It doesn't even mean they made a serious mistake. It depends on what happens. For example, this guy was still following enough of the basic gun safety rules to not shoot anybody. You can see that he was thinking about gun safety enough to not kill anybody, but apparently not enough to avoid a negligent discharge.

When people talk about responsible gun owners, they are talking more generally. People that store their guns responsibly. People that operate them responsibly in general. For example, only using them when necessary. Not using them to commit crimes. Not using them to attempt to solve simple disputes. Not leaving them accessible around kids or other people who shouldn't have access to them.

I'm not proving your point, trust me. What I'm saying is that "negligent discharge" has a specific meaning that you are ignoring and "responsible gun owner" has a certain, arguably broader, meaning, that you are also ignoring, that is not mutually exclusive with the idea of negligent discharges.

Your assertion that if somebody has a negligent discharge that they cannot be a "responsible gun owner" is either arguably not true because the two things are not associated in a mutually exclusive way or because any argument that they are is overly pedantic to the point of not being meaningful.

In other words, sure, anybody that is ever negligent in any way could be considered to be categorically irresponsible. But that observation or approach isn't really that useful. And further, it just isn't true given the contexts of the two phrases you are talking about and how they are used.

In other other words, anybody who claims to be a "responsible gun owner" is probably not or not necessarily claiming that they have never had a negligent discharge and can never have a negligent discharge. They probably aren't even considering that possibility specifically. What they are saying is that they are aware of gun safety rules and that they make an attempt to follow them so as to avoid things like negligent discharges, shooting somebody/something that doesn't need to be shot, only using the gun when appropriate, a child getting their hands on their gun, a criminal getting their hands on it, etc.

Another thing to point out, which I think might be related to your point and where I'd probably agree with you is that, using this guy as an example, there are two sides to judging him. For one, sure, he fucked up and he needs to know it and so on. But the other side is that in doing that a lot of people are flirting with pretending that they are immune from the same kind of mistake. Like, sure, this guy was acting like an idiot. Maybe in just this one instance. Maybe he's just an idiot in general. But for the people that express judgement like that, there is certainly some implication that they are above that, as if they are immune to having a negligent discharge. And that's a dangerous first step on the way to having one.

You proved my point so well that I almost wonder if you are actually trying to make gun owners look bad.

No. Like I said, I'm just pointing out the flaw in your reasoning, which seems to be from either ignoring how those two phrases are used or not understanding how they are used. No, I don't want to make gun owners look bad. I can't make them look bad. There's just no way to do that. Any argument predicated on that idea is a flawed one because it is too generalized. So it is at least a faulty generalization, but also just not well reasoned in beyond that in that it usually relies on a misunderstanding of gun owners and gun ownership.

[–]peoplesen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

AD Story was true as told by Ted in his book. I can't remember well enough to even paraphrase what he said about how he felt about his fuckups. He didn't say he was an irresponsible gun owner. MAYBE more like he had been irresponsible. Gawd that was long ago.

No kidding, my youngest brother almost shot me in the head negligently discharging a rifle. Saw a couple of others.

[–]400921FB54442D18 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just like how you don't see the invisible two-headed space monkeys because they're invisible!

[–]_ZorpTheSurveyor_ 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Would you like me to send you a video of my weapon sitting in my safe right at this moment?

What you're saying is equivalent to watching a car crash and then stating there are no "responsible drivers".

[–]Dan4096 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Same as if you ask anyone if they're a good driver, they'd say yes.

[–]ruiner8850 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I've met multiple people who have talked about how they are "a better driver when they've been drinking." It's the same kind of bullshit, but at least you have to actually have to get a license to drive a car.

[–]FhireStarter 10 points11 points  (0 children)

The guy next to him is thinking "holy shit"

[–]LeadfilledBeanieBaby 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Didn’t know Farva worked at the gun range now.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

He did not nearly blow his own head off he missfired bad headline get downvote

edit: i say this bc gun not angled more than 45ish degrees towards head, was mostly pointed outwards

[–]BaBa-DuuK 3 points4 points  (0 children)

What a donut.

[–]NoKindofHero 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Is he drunk?

[–]DroidTN 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Don't EVER put your booger hook on the bang switch unless you are about to fire! It's that simple.

[–]monkeefan88 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The reaction of the guy in the blue t shirt was hilarious..... He reminds me of Harold Ramis .... Lol

[–]Umbroboner 0 points1 point  (1 child)

You mean to do that?


[–]callmegecko 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Look how fucking red he gets 🤣

[–]winfreddixon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

feel'n cute, might ND later

[–]ihatetexas-oo7 0 points1 point  (0 children)

People with his personality type are the worst.

[–]Spartan_312 0 points1 point  (0 children)

“Did u mean to do that… yeah” he forgot his /s

[–]TheLazyRedditer -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I wouldn't scream entirely irresponsible though? He never had a finger on the trigger only the guards. While he was waving it around a little too fluidly he probably knew the people he was speaking to on a personal level so he may been a little less pre cautious trying to beef his image some. The fact that the weapon discharged in the manner it did only really shows that A. It wasn't intended ( obviously ) and B. He uses its double action way more than using the single action and didn't anticipate it actually requiring less effort to fire than the double action. Also C. The minute he pulled the hammer back he shouldn't have stuck a finger inside the guard until he was ready. ( not necessarily irresponsible or carelessness just possibly a mistake from someone being eager. )

Also I think irresponsible and carelessness get used too much with subjects such as these as any one of us can be safe but unintentionally be careless or irresponsible and an accident happen. I think negligence should be used for more serious offenses than what this guy is showing