Talk:Negligent discharge
![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Untitled
[edit]I changed the comment about the US Army using the term accidental discharge and moved it into the list of organizations who do in fact use that term. The United States Army now considers an Accidental Discharge to be a Negligent Discharge, and the term has entered its operational lexicon. In fact, its the fastest way for soldiers to be charged under Article 15 and be struck for cause from their post (particaully officers).
Accidental and negligent discharges
[edit]The WP article on Accidental discharge was deleted because it was a copyright violation. I sat down to write a new, clean version. However it seems to me that there's no clear distinction between accidental and negligent discharges and so it'd be best to cover them in one article. I'm not sure which title should be used however. Does anyone have any views on the matter? Rezin (talk) 21:14, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
- I turns out that it wasn't a copyright violation after all. (The other source had copied from Wikipedia instead.) However I still think it'd be best to merge these two articles. Rezin (talk) 17:56, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
- Redirect-Class military history articles
- Redirect-Class military science, technology, and theory articles
- Military science, technology, and theory task force articles
- Redirect-Class weaponry articles
- Weaponry task force articles
- Redirect-Class Firearms articles
- NA-importance Firearms articles
- WikiProject Firearms articles