Snub Training – DAO vs. Accusations of Negligent Discharge

Posted · Add Comment

There have also been cases where the shooter has been accused of cocking the weapon and creating a hair-trigger condition when no such action took place.  The ability to cock the revolver creates two post shooting dangers. 

First the shooter has to prove he did not cock the weapon in order to preserve his claim of self-defense.  As Massad Ayoob has said “The cocked revolver can and has been viewed by the court as being in a condition of hair-trigger single action status.”  This alone can be argued as proof of negligence and can negate a claim of self-defense.”

The second danger comes from the civil attorney representing your attacker. Many civil case attorneys knows that your home owner’s policy is not liable for an intentional act (deliberate shootings) but they are liable for any at home accident.  You attacker’s attorney is motivated to try and make the argument that you cocked the hammer and the snub went off accidently.  You will be again in the position of having to prove you never cocked the snub.  Would it not be better to have rendered the snub double action only ahead of time and avoid both problems?

 
 
X