Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com

Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/)
-   Training & Safety (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f55/)
-   -   Negligent Discharge. This is not a rare occurrence. (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f55/negligent-discharge-not-rare-occurrence-31374/)

Shihan 09-05-2010 11:47 PM

Negligent Discharge. This is not a rare occurrence.
 
Police Recruit Accidentally Shoots Self - News Story - WSB Atlanta

And yet again...

Okaloosa deputy shot in leg after his gun discharges | okaloosa, county, sheriff - News - Crestview News Bulletin

Can you guess the sidearm?

Dillinger 09-05-2010 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shihan (Post 345132)

Can you guess the sidearm?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reporter
“While attempting to reholster, Deputy Rojas’ finger accidentally caught in the trigger guard, causing the pistol to discharge.

I am going to take a wild assed guess and say it wasn't a revolver of any type. :rolleyes:

M14sRock 09-06-2010 03:40 AM

Let me guess. Two more officers can't keep their fingers off the trigger, but the guns are to blame?

You guys continue to make the same argument that the Anti-Gunners make. They blame the gun, and you blame the gun.

I blame carelessness, complacency and either poor training or poor retention of training.

spittinfire 09-06-2010 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by M14sRock (Post 345250)
Let me guess. Two more officers can't keep their fingers off the trigger, but the guns are to blame?

You guys continue to make the same argument that the Anti-Gunners make. They blame the gun, and you blame the gun.

I blame carelessness, complacency and either poor training or poor retention of training.

Is the officer at fault? Sure he is but the weapon of choice in this case didn't do him any favors. Engage a manual safety and the likelihood of that happening are slim to none.
You can talk about how great they are, how they go bang every time, they're accurate or whatever else. They still have a serious design flaw in my mind.

canebrake 09-06-2010 01:26 PM

Here it comes..........wait for it..........another chance for cane to flame.........wait......Psych!

Not this time, albeit a "careless" design, I agree with Rock,

"Blame the FOOL, NOT the Tool!"

It's the inexperience, and the training leading up to this level of talent!

Negligent Discharge should read Negligent Supervision/Training.

freefall 09-06-2010 05:03 PM

I forget who said it but "Keep your booger-hook off the trigger!".

Gatekeeper 09-06-2010 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by M14sRock (Post 345250)
Let me guess. Two more officers can't keep their fingers off the trigger, but the guns are to blame?

You guys continue to make the same argument that the Anti-Gunners make. They blame the gun, and you blame the gun.

I blame carelessness, complacency and either poor training or poor retention of training.

Indeed! Well said M14's:cool:

Poink88 09-06-2010 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by M14sRock (Post 345250)
Let me guess. Two more officers can't keep their fingers off the trigger, but the guns are to blame?

You guys continue to make the same argument that the Anti-Gunners make. They blame the gun, and you blame the gun.

I blame carelessness, complacency and either poor training or poor retention of training.

Quote:

Originally Posted by spittinfire (Post 345371)
Is the officer at fault? Sure he is but the weapon of choice in this case didn't do him any favors. Engage a manual safety and the likelihood of that happening are slim to none.
You can talk about how great they are, how they go bang every time, they're accurate or whatever else. They still have a serious design flaw in my mind.

Both have valid points.

I agree with spittinfire 100% though.

M14sRock 09-06-2010 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spittinfire (Post 345371)
Is the officer at fault? Sure he is but the weapon of choice in this case didn't do him any favors. Engage a manual safety and the likelihood of that happening are slim to none.
You can talk about how great they are, how they go bang every time, they're accurate or whatever else. They still have a serious design flaw in my mind.

When LAPD transitioned to Beretta 92F's MANY years ago, they had so many officers holstering COCKED 92F's that the holster policy was revised. It mandated that the holster include a feature that would de-cock the pistol in the event it was holstered while cocked. And my old friend Ken Blocker (Ted Blocker Holsters) was the guy who designed that mechanism for their LAPD holsters.

Point being, that a manual safety or de-cocker is only as useful as the level of it's implementation by the end user (officer).

LAPD issued DA S&W revolvers for years before they went to the Beretta. All their DA revolvers had been neutered and could only fire DA. "Why?", you may ask. One of the reasons was because too many officers were re-holstering COCKED revolvers, often with disastrous results.

The old S&W DA only pistols have the shortest, lightest, smoothest DA trigger I've ever seen. WAY lighter, smoother and shorter than a Glock trigger, but without even as much as a trigger safety. But they were hailed as the "Holy Grail" of trigger systems when they came out. They were vaunted for their "as safe as a DA revolver" design. Did any of you slam THOSE pistols as unsafe?

Poor gun handling is poor gun handling, no matter how many safeties are included on the weapon. Period.

I have un-holstered and re-holstered Glock pistols thousands of times. Fast, slow, strong hand, weak hand, open top, thumb break, duty holster, CC holster, shoulder holster, IWB holster, Mexican carry, blah blah blah. Never had any kind of an issue with it because I PAY ATTENTION to what I'm doing.

Many of my students are pretty serious "gun people". But a few of them have 92F's, Sigs and 1911's. It never fails during class that at some point they stop de-cocking, or stop engaging the manual safeties prior to re-holstering their pistols. These are people who are gun people, and understand how their gear works. One of them practices in front of a full length mirror for at least two hours a day. He is a Black Belt in several Martial Arts and is focused on his task. But he still neglects/forgets to de-cock his P220 at least a couple of times each class he takes. And in every class I catch at least one person re-holstering an unsafe pistol. One guy with a Nighthawk 1911 believed his grip safety would be good enough if he forgot to re-engage the thumb safety.

Many years ago I had a guy show up with his beautiful Belgian Hi-Power (with the tiny little thumb safety). He did not use his thumb safety because it was "too hard to engage one handed".

Take a 1911 with a worn (or poorly fitted) thumb safety. Engage the safety, point in a safe direction and squeeze the trigger. The gun will fire. I've seen it with many military 1911's, with many "home built" 1911's, and with quite a few stock, but well used 1911's. That was the first test I would run on used 1911's when people would bring them into the shop. The second test would be to engage the thumb safety, squeeze the trigger and THEN dis-engage the thumb safety and see if it would fire. Many would bypass the half cock notch and the hammer would drop all the way. But you guys want people to rely on a manual safety as a hedge against unsafe gun handling? That is IDIOTIC.

There was a Deputy US Marshall in Texas (?) many years ago who carried a 1911. One day he had to use the bathroom and did not want his pistol on the floor, so he hung it by the trigger guard on the hook on the back of the stall door. When he was done, he grabbed his cocked and locked 1911, and as he lifted it off the hook, the hook hit the trigger. That fired a round up through the ceiling, between the legs of the person sitting at their desk on the next floor, and the bullet lodged in the desk. By the time the Deputy was done he had fired a couple more rounds up through the ceiling. This Deputy was an experienced gun guy who had used 1911's all his life.

How many 1911's are still out there with pinned grip safeties? Lots.

Relying on any mechanical safety is a recipe for disaster. Instead, rely on keeping your trigger finger off the trigger, and stop making excuses for poor gun handling.

This isn't even a rant FOR Glocks. This is a rant against gun owners using the same argument as the Anti-Gunners, then blaming the gun. It is a rant against those who so blindly trust a manual safety that they think it is perfectly acceptable to handle guns irresponsibly as long as they have a manual safety.

So, let me get this straight. You think that an (careless) Officer can be taught to de-cock another pistol before they re-holster, or engage a manual safety on another pistol before they re-holster, but learning to simply take their trigger finger off the trigger is a skill far beyond their abilities? Seriously? Listen to your own "logic".

The irony here is that Shi posted these links with an inference that Glocks are unsafe, while he is the self ascribed "Sigma Fanboy" on FTF. The very same Sigma that got S&W sued by Glock because the Sigma was essentially the same design as the Glock. Am I the only one who thinks that is ironic?

Blind faith in a manual safety will get someone killed. Seeing "gun people" parrot the same arguments as the Anti Gunners makes me a little sick to my stomach.

The Glock is a terrible design, but the Sigma, DA S&W's, DAO Sigs, DAO HK's, DA Revolvers, and all the other DAO pistols are all awesome.

Or MAYBE, people who feel the Glock is unsafe should man up and admit that they believe that poor gun handling should be perfectly OK, as long as they have a scapegoat?

Nah, you are right and I am wrong. Guns are bad. Blame the gun. The gun did it.

M14sRock 09-06-2010 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spittinfire (Post 345371)
Engage a manual safety and the likelihood of that happening are slim to none.

This is EXACTLY the kind of blind faith that gets people killed. Faith in a manual safety, at the expense of safe gun handling, is idiotic.


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:10 PM.

Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.