Lost a finger with a bang stick

[dumpsterDiver]

No one used them in N.J. that I know of. Not just me.

You know someone who uses them there?

Beco (the powerhead manufacturer) does not even have a Dealer in N.J.

They must be a Florida thing

Seriously, dumb to buy them, and dumb to use them (even for the well trained).

Rebreather is another topic already covered in this board.

I never heard of anyone ever blowing off a finger with a rebreather.. they just die.. they are too dangerous.. They should not be sold to anyone.

 

[Superlyte27]

Does not the use of a powerhead destroy and taint unnecessarily the fish meat (in addition to the inherent risks you mention of such rudimentary weapon)?

No, we generally don't eat fish heads in America.

 

[gianaameri]

No, we generally don't eat fish heads in America.

Brain is delicious.

I shoot deer in the head too, but they are easier to hit than a moving fish in the water.

You must be a very good shot!

Dive Safe.

 

[Superlyte27]

LOL, you think shooting a deer is easier than shooting a fish? Have you ever shot either?

10 out of 10 shots in the ocean are head shots (by me). Can anyone say that about deer hunting? And I'm a guy who's been trained to shoot 1000+ yards. Deer hunting is infinitely harder than spearfishing. If you haven't done both, quit talking right now. If you have done both, delete your above post, because spearfishing is quite easy. My 12 year old daughter can shoot fish in the head.

Now, owning a bang stick is dumb? Perhaps it's beyond your ability to utilize one effectively. However, we are commercial fisherman (or at least we were). And if I can shoot 4 fish in 10 minutes without a bangstick, but can shoot 10 fish in 10 minutes with a bangstick, guess which one I'm going to use? Especially since I get paid BY THE POUND.

Should everyone have bangsticks available? Of course not. Just like not everyone should have access to the internet. But, this is america, home of the free, and protector of the dumb.

 

[gianaameri]

LOL, you think shooting a deer is easier than shooting a fish? Have you ever shot either?

10 out of 10 shots in the ocean are head shots (by me). Can anyone say that about deer hunting? And I'm a guy who's been trained to shoot 1000+ yards. Deer hunting is infinitely harder than spearfishing. If you haven't done both, quit talking right now. If you have done both, delete your above post, because spearfishing is quite easy. My 12 year old daughter can shoot fish in the head.

Now, owning a bang stick is dumb? Perhaps it's beyond your ability to utilize one effectively. However, we are commercial fisherman (or at least we were). And if I can shoot 4 fish in 10 minutes without a bangstick, but can shoot 10 fish in 10 minutes with a bangstick, guess which one I'm going to use? Especially since I get paid BY THE POUND.

Should everyone have bangsticks available? Of course not. Just like not everyone should have access to the internet. But, this is america, home of the free, and protector of the dumb.

What a killer you are!

I bet you use 50 cal bangsticks (to catch a fish)

Just don't hang those fishes on your body, and you do not have to worry about sharks... and glad they don't let YOU fish with explosives.

Last post on the topic.

 

[Superlyte27]

Last post on the topic.

What a blessing.

---------- Post added November 25th, 2013 at 10:23 AM ----------

What a killer you are!

Not a killer. A provider. I have a wife and 4 children that I had to clothe, feed and shelter. We were getting as much as $4/lb for fish. I'd be silly not to do that as efficiently as possible.

---------- Post added November 25th, 2013 at 10:24 AM ----------

I bet you use 50 cal bangsticks (to catch a fish)

Actually, it was .357 bang sticks.

---------- Post added November 25th, 2013 at 10:25 AM ----------

Just don't hang those fishes on your body, and you do not have to worry about sharks... and glad they don't let YOU fish with explosives.

I never worry about sharks. As I stated above, I think using a bang stick to ward off sharks is dumb.

 

[obelix]

It's actually called a Negligent discharge... Not a "misfire". Misfire is something that happens when you intend to fire but something goes wrong..

We call that a "misfire" and it can happen on any Firearm (including a bang stick).

There are special procedures to follow in case of a misfire (none of which were adopted here).

I am currently putting my first two kids through all the required courses for the safe use of a Firearm so that at least they know what to do if they find one or one of their friends brings one around.

Sorry to hear about your son, but glad it was not something more serious for him and his friends.

 

[gianaameri]

It's actually called a Negligent discharge... Not a "misfire". Misfire is something that happens when you intend to fire but something goes wrong..

Definitely a misfire from the incident description possibly due to a poorly designed or faulty firing mechanism (wet primer being also a possibility).

Did not the accident occurr after the untrained/unwary user tried to fire the rudimenrary firearm, but it failed to fire?

 

[obelix]

Fits the description of a ND. So from the story we know that whatever the circumstances the they didn't fire the gun under water. The bullet was still a live round, because of what we learned later.

Back on board the boat, with a gun, loaded with a live round. The kid broke several rules of firearm safety. They didn't know that the round was live or dead, it was live. He put it politely by saying "slightly tapped the bullet", however what that actually means is that he did fire the gun again, or did willfully "tap", "strike", whatever the firing pin of the gun, and discharged it, negligantly. Every gun is to be treated as if it were live.

He broke rule number 1 by not pointing the gun in a safe direction ie, his finger. He broke rule number 2 by not unloading the gun when onboard the boat. Broke rule number 6 by not treating a misfired gun with care.

I agree it started out by a simple misfire underwater, but what occurred on the surface was a violation of several rules of firearm safety, and thus is a ND as a result. If he had followed rules 1, 2 and 6, there wouldn't have been a discharge on the surface..

---------- Post added January 1st, 2014 at 07:43 PM ----------

an accidental discharge becomes a negligent discharge when the shooter looses control of his firearm and it discharges. Given that he had it back on board the boat after a misfire and didn't handle it properly, through lack of training, doesn't change what it is. A pure accidental discharge or is say, having a really old fire arm that has a mechanical failure while not interrupted by anything else and fires. A misfire has nothing do with an a AD or ND. A misfire in this instance happened before the chain of events that lead to the ND.

Just like in scuba, there are no really "accidents", just failure to handle the situation properly for some reason or another. With guns, it can be just as deadly..

 

[gianaameri]

Fits the description of a ND. So from the story we know that whatever the circumstances the they didn't fire the gun under water. The bullet was still a live round, because of what we learned later.

Back on board the boat, with a gun, loaded with a live round. The kid broke several rules of firearm safety. They didn't know that the round was live or dead, it was live. He put it politely by saying "slightly tapped the bullet", however what that actually means is that he did fire the gun again, or did willfully "tap", "strike", whatever the firing pin of the gun, and discharged it, negligantly. Every gun is to be treated as if it were live.

He broke rule number 1 by not pointing the gun in a safe direction ie, his finger. He broke rule number 2 by not unloading the gun when onboard the boat. Broke rule number 6 by not treating a misfired gun with care.

I agree it started out by a simple misfire underwater, but what occurred on the surface was a violation of several rules of firearm safety, and thus is a ND as a result. If he had followed rules 1, 2 and 6, there wouldn't have been a discharge on the surface..

---------- Post added January 1st, 2014 at 07:43 PM ----------

an accidental discharge becomes a negligent discharge when the shooter looses control of his firearm and it discharges. Given that he had it back on board the boat after a misfire and didn't handle it properly, through lack of training, doesn't change what it is. A pure accidental discharge or is say, having a really old fire arm that has a mechanical failure while not interrupted by anything else and fires. A misfire has nothing do with an a AD or ND. A misfire in this instance happened before the chain of events that lead to the ND.

Just like in scuba, there are no really "accidents", just failure to handle the situation properly for some reason or another. With guns, it can be just as deadly..

Briefly, cause going diving, I am not familiar with bang-sticks (i.e. never used them, nor ever will), but I suspect they require loading and unloading (or firing) in the water only.

Anyone carrying one such bang-stick on the surface loaded, or loading or unloading it on the surface, or handling it on the surface, around or near me would be treated as a potential serious threat to my life.

As to misfire, once a misfire takes place, and one did occur underwater from my understanding of the incident description (i.e. did they try to fire it underwater, or not?), you have a misfire and what follows is the misfire procedure (all ultimately terminates with a safely unloaded and clear firearm).