If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Omaha World Herald)   You'd think a firearms instructor and former police officer would know better than to accidentally shoot himself in the leg while parked outside of a school, waiting for his son   (omaha.com) divider line 136
    More: Dumbass, Glenwood, St. Vital, Winnipeg, police officers, firearms instructor, elementary schools, firearms, teachers  
•       •       •

2637 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Jan 2014 at 4:11 PM (47 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



136 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-25 08:08:07 PM  

gund: forgotmydamnusername: craigdamage: Amusing and interesting fact......


Back in the late 1800s during the so called "wild west" era:


....more people were killed or maimed by accidental discharges than actual "gun fights" or encounters with hostile Indians/bandits etc.

Rifles, handguns and shotguns had exposed hammers and many times it would snag when pulled out from a saddle bag or whatever and BOOM!!!

Still a good number of revolvers and pistols with exposed hammers, and several million Marlin and Winchester lever action rifles, all with exposed hammers. Doesn't seem to be a problem.

That's because modern revolvers and pistols and rifles, even those made to look like old firearms, have additional safeties built in. Like transfer bar safety, firing pin block safety, etc,

Old revolvers are still recommended to carry with one chamber empty.


Even in the old guns I've handled without any of that, a lot of which are still around and in use, there was a "quarter cock" notch on the hammer. That would prevent a good number of drop fires, and assorted other clumsy handling-related accidents. The problem being, one had to remember to engage it. To be ultra-safe, of course, yeah, don't leave a live round under the hammer. The sketchiest thing about SAAs, and 3-screw Ruger Blackhawks, etc, is the loading procedure. This requires the hammer to be placed at half-cock, and when you're done, you draw the hammer back a bit further and pull the trigger to lower it. If your thumb slips during that process, you could have an accident, should you either fully load it, or not get the cylinder indexed right to be on the empty chamber.
 
2014-01-25 08:11:14 PM  
noitsnot
If you don't have a round in the chamber you can't fire the weapon when  needed.  It has nothing about making someone's genitalia seem larger.
Weapons are only useful if they will work immediately when needed.  If someone wishes to do you harm, they will not wait for you to chamber a round.  Loaded guns are safe as long as the finger stays off of the trigger.
 
2014-01-25 08:31:23 PM  

StoPPeRmobile: School property. Wtf are you talking about?


The relevant line of the story:

Good, the parent of a student at the school, was inside his vehicle when the gun fired,

For the purposes of possession, "in your car" is on  your property.  Bans on guns in schools only apply to places that are legally  school property.  So school bans aren't relevant here, his carrying of the weapon was legal (barring other disqualifiers like a criminal record), the issue is the  discharge of the firearm within a residential zone.  In which case intent matters.

Your car being "your property" legally for the purposes of possession/carry has been very thoroughly tested in the court system, mostly with regard to hospitals where it comes up a lot more often (e.g. someone accidentally gets shot on a hunting trip, his buddies drive him straight to the hospital and park in the lot without stopping to carefully move all the firearms and ammo to a different vehicle), but the law is pretty clear that it applies to other "no-gun zones" as well.

// Came up at my workplace at one point because someone asked whether they could leave their gun in the car when it was in the university garage, and the answer was "yes", along with the usual stuff about not leaving it in plain sight because people will steal it and so on.

// Why am I the *The More You Know* law guy in this thread?  It's not even really a gun thread, more a "ha, ha, dumbass" thread.
 
2014-01-25 08:32:17 PM  

d23: I've perfected a method of preventing mis-fire.

I don't buy guns.


I approve.  More available for the rest of us.
 
2014-01-25 08:45:35 PM  

lonerancher: noitsnot
If you don't have a round in the chamber you can't fire the weapon when  needed.  It has nothing about making someone's genitalia seem larger.
Weapons are only useful if they will work immediately when needed.  If someone wishes to do you harm, they will not wait for you to chamber a round.  Loaded guns are safe as long as the finger stays off of the trigger.


Have you checked your fire extinguishers this year?  They should be checked annually.

You do have fire extinguishers, don't you?
 
2014-01-25 08:47:29 PM  
Sure do have fire extinguishers!  I check them twice a year when I change the clocks and put new batteries in the smoke detector.
 
2014-01-25 08:52:05 PM  

forgotmydamnusername: craigdamage: Amusing and interesting fact......


Back in the late 1800s during the so called "wild west" era:


....more people were killed or maimed by accidental discharges than actual "gun fights" or encounters with hostile Indians/bandits etc.

Rifles, handguns and shotguns had exposed hammers and many times it would snag when pulled out from a saddle bag or whatever and BOOM!!!

Still a good number of revolvers and pistols with exposed hammers, and several million Marlin and Winchester lever action rifles, all with exposed hammers. Doesn't seem to be a problem.


Load one, skip one, load 4.
 
2014-01-25 09:01:52 PM  

lonerancher: Also carrying a gun without a round in the chamber is pretty much worthless.


Oh don't worry, our resident firearms training idiot will be along shortly to tell us that since someone thought it was a nifty idea to train military troops to carry with an empty chamber in 1942, that's how it should be done today... even though no one actually teaches that.

From my experience as in an instructor, law enforcement officers often have the works skills and safety attitude.  I've removed several from class before.
 
2014-01-25 09:44:23 PM  

Click Click D'oh: lonerancher: Also carrying a gun without a round in the chamber is pretty much worthless.

Oh don't worry, our resident firearms training idiot will be along shortly to tell us that since someone thought it was a nifty idea to train military troops to carry with an empty chamber in 1942, that's how it should be done today... even though no one actually teaches that.

From my experience as in an instructor, law enforcement officers often have the works skills and safety attitude.  I've removed several from class before.


What a weird world you guys live in - that you think you need to be constantly ready for a gunfight.  What bizarre priorities you must have.
 
2014-01-25 09:48:00 PM  

noitsnot: What a weird world you guys live in - that you think you need to be constantly ready for a gunfight


Nonsense, I leave my rifle at home most days.
 
2014-01-25 10:12:29 PM  

Jim_Callahan: StoPPeRmobile: School property. Wtf are you talking about?

The relevant line of the story:

Good, the parent of a student at the school, was inside his vehicle when the gun fired,

For the purposes of possession, "in your car" is on  your property.  Bans on guns in schools only apply to places that are legally  school property.  So school bans aren't relevant here, his carrying of the weapon was legal (barring other disqualifiers like a criminal record), the issue is the  discharge of the firearm within a residential zone.  In which case intent matters.

Your car being "your property" legally for the purposes of possession/carry has been very thoroughly tested in the court system, mostly with regard to hospitals where it comes up a lot more often (e.g. someone accidentally gets shot on a hunting trip, his buddies drive him straight to the hospital and park in the lot without stopping to carefully move all the firearms and ammo to a different vehicle), but the law is pretty clear that it applies to other "no-gun zones" as well.

// Came up at my workplace at one point because someone asked whether they could leave their gun in the car when it was in the university garage, and the answer was "yes", along with the usual stuff about not leaving it in plain sight because people will steal it and so on.

// Why am I the *The More You Know* law guy in this thread?  It's not even really a gun thread, more a "ha, ha, dumbass" thread.


724.4B CARRYING WEAPONS ON SCHOOL GROUNDS -- PENALTY
-- EXCEPTIONS.

1. A person who goes armed with, carries, or transports a firearm
of any kind, whether concealed or not, on the grounds of a school
commits a class "D" felony. For the purposes of this section,
"school" means a public or nonpublic school as defined in section
280.2.
2. Subsection 1 does not apply to the following:
a. A person listed under section 724.4, subsection 4,
paragraphs "b" through "f" or "j".

b. A person who has been specifically authorized by the
school to go armed, carry, or transport a firearm on the school
grounds, including for purposes of conducting an instructional
program regarding firearms.

...
f. A person who for any lawful purpose carries or transports
an unloaded pistol or revolver in a vehicle inside a closed and
fastened container
or securely wrapped package which is too large to
be concealed on the person or inside a cargo or luggage compartment
where the pistol or revolver will not be readily accessible to any
person riding in the vehicle or common carrier.

Good luck with that.

/not a lawyer
 
2014-01-25 10:17:23 PM  

noitsnot: Click Click D'oh: lonerancher: Also carrying a gun without a round in the chamber is pretty much worthless.

Oh don't worry, our resident firearms training idiot will be along shortly to tell us that since someone thought it was a nifty idea to train military troops to carry with an empty chamber in 1942, that's how it should be done today... even though no one actually teaches that.

From my experience as in an instructor, law enforcement officers often have the works skills and safety attitude.  I've removed several from class before.

What a weird world you guys live in - that you think you need to be constantly ready for a gunfight.  What bizarre priorities you must have.


There are two sorts of people that contribute to these discussions. One is paranoids who watch too much TV, and assume that the fairly rare events that result in shootings are imminent in their day-to-day existence. The other is people who have led such a sheltered existence they can't even imagine a circumstance where they might need a gun. Personally, I just do what makes sense at the time, which usually isn't carrying.
 
2014-01-25 10:28:46 PM  
My job requires me to go into dangerous places.  I am responsible for the safety of others.  There are people that still hold grudges from when I arrested them.  I'd rather have my gun and not need it, than need it and not have it.  In this economy people have become pretty desperate.  Areas where I never used to see violent crime are seeing it.  If you don't feel the need to carry, that's awesome.  I don't recommend everyone carry but if people feel the need and get trained, then good for them.
 
2014-01-25 10:31:59 PM  

forgotmydamnusername: craigdamage: Amusing and interesting fact......


Back in the late 1800s during the so called "wild west" era:


....more people were killed or maimed by accidental discharges than actual "gun fights" or encounters with hostile Indians/bandits etc.

Rifles, handguns and shotguns had exposed hammers and many times it would snag when pulled out from a saddle bag or whatever and BOOM!!!

Still a good number of revolvers and pistols with exposed hammers, and several million Marlin and Winchester lever action rifles, all with exposed hammers. Doesn't seem to be a problem.


No kidding. craigdamage might as well have posted more people get a disease from fapping to Katy Perry than Beiber.

NTTIAWWT
 
2014-01-25 10:55:47 PM  
Bellevue Masters.

Baptist degree is an oxymoron!
 
2014-01-25 11:27:35 PM  
wichitaleaf


>>> OnlyM3: Remember kids.
>>> Police officers are hired if they meet the requirement of FAILING an I.Q. test.

>>> Keep that in mind and you'll never be surprised at their stupidity again.

FAKE

You sound stupid enough to be a cop.

A Federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit by a man who was barred from the New London police force because he scored too high on an intelligence test.

In a ruling made public on Tuesday, Judge Peter C. Dorsey of the United States District Court in New Haven agreed that the plaintiff, Robert Jordan, was denied an opportunity to interview for a police job because of his high test scores.

Judge Dorsey ruled that Mr. Jordan was not denied equal protection because the city of New London applied the same standard to everyone: anyone who scored too high was rejected.
 
2014-01-26 12:53:16 AM  

BMulligan: Some folks around here think of me as a "gun grabber" because I favor broad local authority to regulate firearms, but I seem to be missing the point of this submission. Accidents happen. People have bad luck. Everyone suffers lapses in judgment from time to time. But no one was killed, and none of the children were hurt, so what's the big deal?


The big deal is that this douche-bag pointed a loaded gun at his leg, put his finger on the trigger, and pulled the trigger.  That's a HUGE farking deal.  He's a moron.  He should be stripped of his badge and weapon and summarily dismissed for being so farking stupid.
 
2014-01-26 02:03:04 AM  
Isn't the first rule of gun safety something like "The gun is always loaded"?
 
2014-01-26 02:21:08 AM  

Ex-Texan: It makes me wonder sometimes that those of us with a ccp should carry arms in public to defend ourselves against cops. Seems to me, a lot of cops carry guns just like a wallet. My brother in law is a retired cop, bet he carries one as well. It's like a penis extension for them.


...because shootouts with cops always end well for the not-a-cop participant, right?

lonerancher: My job requires me to go into dangerous places.  I am responsible for the safety of others.  There are people that still hold grudges from when I arrested them.  I'd rather have my gun and not need it, than need it and not have it.  In this economy people have become pretty desperate.  Areas where I never used to see violent crime are seeing it.  If you don't feel the need to carry, that's awesome.  I don't recommend everyone carry but if people feel the need and get trained, then good for them.


This sounds remarkably sane. Get out of here.
 
2014-01-26 02:25:06 AM  
You're average sport shooter spends way more time at the range than 90% of cops do.  Most cops shoot twice a year to qualify and are only shooting while standing still at non-moving paper targets.  Civilian shooters tend to shoot way more often.  Civilian sport shooters have to shoot on the move at moving targets.  Sad but true.
 
2014-01-26 02:38:53 AM  

forgotmydamnusername: gund: forgotmydamnusername: craigdamage: Amusing and interesting fact......


Back in the late 1800s during the so called "wild west" era:


....more people were killed or maimed by accidental discharges than actual "gun fights" or encounters with hostile Indians/bandits etc.

Rifles, handguns and shotguns had exposed hammers and many times it would snag when pulled out from a saddle bag or whatever and BOOM!!!

Still a good number of revolvers and pistols with exposed hammers, and several million Marlin and Winchester lever action rifles, all with exposed hammers. Doesn't seem to be a problem.

That's because modern revolvers and pistols and rifles, even those made to look like old firearms, have additional safeties built in. Like transfer bar safety, firing pin block safety, etc,

Old revolvers are still recommended to carry with one chamber empty.

Even in the old guns I've handled without any of that, a lot of which are still around and in use, there was a "quarter cock" notch on the hammer. That would prevent a good number of drop fires, and assorted other clumsy handling-related accidents. The problem being, one had to remember to engage it. To be ultra-safe, of course, yeah, don't leave a live round under the hammer. The sketchiest thing about SAAs, and 3-screw Ruger Blackhawks, etc, is the loading procedure. This requires the hammer to be placed at half-cock, and when you're done, you draw the hammer back a bit further and pull the trigger to lower it. If your thumb slips during that process, you could have an accident, should you either fully load it, or not get the cylinder indexed right to be on the empty chamber.




Ruger's new blackhawk (new as in since the 70s) has fixed that problem. The loading gate frees the cylinder. The hammer can be left at full rest
 
2014-01-26 03:11:51 AM  

snocone: There should be a special class for the idiot that loves his Glock w/o a safety.
I suggest Ermey Class.


My thoughts too, Glock.  Hate those trigger "safeties".  Ought to be against the law IMHO
 
2014-01-26 03:22:56 AM  

dukwbutter: BMulligan: Some folks around here think of me as a "gun grabber" because I favor broad local authority to regulate firearms, but I seem to be missing the point of this submission. Accidents happen. People have bad luck. Everyone suffers lapses in judgment from time to time. But no one was killed, and none of the children were hurt, so what's the big deal?

The big deal is that this douche-bag pointed a loaded gun at his leg, put his finger on the trigger, and pulled the trigger.  That's a HUGE farking deal.  He's a moron.  He should be stripped of his badge and weapon and summarily dismissed for being so farking stupid.


And you know that he put his finger on the trigger how exactly?  It's not in the article.  The reality is that we don't know that it wasn't a malfunction.  We don't know that it wasn't a defective holster.  We don't know that a piece of clothing didn't get caught on the trigger.

Considering that the gun was most likely a defective-by-design Glock with no safety, it's entirely possible that it was an accident.
 
2014-01-26 03:23:43 AM  

dforkus: forgotmydamnusername: gund: forgotmydamnusername: craigdamage: Amusing and interesting fact......


Back in the late 1800s during the so called "wild west" era:


....more people were killed or maimed by accidental discharges than actual "gun fights" or encounters with hostile Indians/bandits etc.

Rifles, handguns and shotguns had exposed hammers and many times it would snag when pulled out from a saddle bag or whatever and BOOM!!!

Still a good number of revolvers and pistols with exposed hammers, and several million Marlin and Winchester lever action rifles, all with exposed hammers. Doesn't seem to be a problem.

That's because modern revolvers and pistols and rifles, even those made to look like old firearms, have additional safeties built in. Like transfer bar safety, firing pin block safety, etc,

Old revolvers are still recommended to carry with one chamber empty.

Even in the old guns I've handled without any of that, a lot of which are still around and in use, there was a "quarter cock" notch on the hammer. That would prevent a good number of drop fires, and assorted other clumsy handling-related accidents. The problem being, one had to remember to engage it. To be ultra-safe, of course, yeah, don't leave a live round under the hammer. The sketchiest thing about SAAs, and 3-screw Ruger Blackhawks, etc, is the loading procedure. This requires the hammer to be placed at half-cock, and when you're done, you draw the hammer back a bit further and pull the trigger to lower it. If your thumb slips during that process, you could have an accident, should you either fully load it, or not get the cylinder indexed right to be on the empty chamber.

Ruger's new blackhawk (new as in since the 70s) has fixed that problem. The loading gate frees the cylinder. The hammer can be left at full rest


That's why I mentioned "3-screw". The newer pattern Ruger single-action that's loaded with the hammer down has two pins through the frame securing the mechanism, instead of the 3 screws seen on unmodified old ones. Lousier out-of-the-box trigger pull seems to be a side-effect of the change, unfortunately, but it really is much more convenient.
 
2014-01-26 03:43:32 AM  

DarkVader: dukwbutter: BMulligan: Some folks around here think of me as a "gun grabber" because I favor broad local authority to regulate firearms, but I seem to be missing the point of this submission. Accidents happen. People have bad luck. Everyone suffers lapses in judgment from time to time. But no one was killed, and none of the children were hurt, so what's the big deal?

The big deal is that this douche-bag pointed a loaded gun at his leg, put his finger on the trigger, and pulled the trigger.  That's a HUGE farking deal.  He's a moron.  He should be stripped of his badge and weapon and summarily dismissed for being so farking stupid.

And you know that he put his finger on the trigger how exactly?  It's not in the article.  The reality is that we don't know that it wasn't a malfunction.  We don't know that it wasn't a defective holster.  We don't know that a piece of clothing didn't get caught on the trigger.

Considering that the gun was most likely a defective-by-design Glock with no safety, it's entirely possible that it was an accident.


I don't think it's fair to call it defective, it's just that it almost certainly wasn't designed to be carried with a chambered round. That's well and good for the military users for which the design was originally intended, I suppose, but for street use, it's suboptimal. People like to ignore that little issue, and pretend that they couldn't make a mistake, and nothing unexpected would ever happen, until they somehow fark up and blow their kneecap off.
 
2014-01-26 03:46:54 AM  
Why are glocks "defective by design?"
Hundreds of thousands of glock owners manage to handle their weapon without ever discharging the weapon unintentionally.
Revolvers don't have external safeties.
Just about every manufacturer makes models that do not have external safeties.
H&K, S&W, Springfield, Sig Sauer..... The list goes on.  If you keep your finger out of the trigger guard and wear a proper holster, so things can't get in the trigger guard, the weapon wont discharge.
 
2014-01-26 04:08:09 AM  

lonerancher: Why are glocks "defective by design?"
Hundreds of thousands of glock owners manage to handle their weapon without ever discharging the weapon unintentionally.
Revolvers don't have external safeties.
Just about every manufacturer makes models that do not have external safeties.
H&K, S&W, Springfield, Sig Sauer..... The list goes on.  If you keep your finger out of the trigger guard and wear a proper holster, so things can't get in the trigger guard, the weapon wont discharge.


Except for Glocks fitted with the "New York trigger", the trigger pull on DA revolvers is a great deal stiffer than that found on a Glock. Ditto a lot of double action trigger pulls on other automatics. That alone will cut down on issues like getting your shirt tail caught up in the process of trying to holster the weapon and discharging it, because  you need to exert a lot more force to make the trigger pull happen.
 
2014-01-26 04:17:59 AM  
As far as trigger pull goes my Glock, Springfield, and H&K with LEM trigger are all just about as light.  Also heavy trigger pulls also throw off accuracy. Worse yet are the DA/SA guns where you have an initial heavy pull then subsequent light pulls.  All in all, if you can't keep your booger hook off the boom switch, leave it in the safe.
 
2014-01-26 04:44:36 AM  

lonerancher: As far as trigger pull goes my Glock, Springfield, and H&K with LEM trigger are all just about as light.  Also heavy trigger pulls also throw off accuracy. Worse yet are the DA/SA guns where you have an initial heavy pull then subsequent light pulls.  All in all, if you can't keep your booger hook off the boom switch, leave it in the safe.


No one ever manages not to do something stupid in the course of their life. This includes their handling of firearms. I wish you continued good luck, but don't fool yourself. Everything is tradeoffs. My preferred tradeoffs are different. I like HiPowers and 1911s, myself. I've been using them since age 10. I don't think I could forget to disengage the safety even if I wanted to, at this point, although you never know, I could make that mistake at crunch time, just as you could suffer a moment of absent-mindedness, and BLAMMO!
 
2014-01-26 06:17:21 AM  
I get what you are saying. I love my Sig 1911.  I am just saying that your opinion doesn't make the engineering bad.  People should handle weapons properly.  Just as you doubt that you would forget to disengage the safety, I doubt I would ever let anything enter the trigger guard or any weapon.  The only weapon I engage the safety on is my 1911s.  When I carry it I have a round chambered, hammer back and safety on, as intended by its design.
Effective safe firearms handling comes down to discipline and practice, practice, practice.  If I relied on the whopping 40 hours of firearms training I got in the police academy as my only training, I would have no business handling a firearm.  If you ever want to see poor firearms training, go to your local police academy.  It makes it seem as if those Steve Gutenberg movies were reality based.
 
2014-01-26 06:34:17 AM  

TheVeryDeadIanMartin: Isn't the first rule of gun safety something like "The gun is always loaded"?


No, it's probably a Glock so we blame the weapon's lack of an external safety.
 
2014-01-26 09:51:12 AM  
I guess this pwoves the wiberal idea that only police and gubmint have the wight to beaw arms.
 
2014-01-26 01:01:42 PM  
TheVeryDeadIanMartin

Isn't the first rule of gun safety something like "The gun is always loaded"?

The first rule of gun safety is: "Bring a gun. Preferably, bring at least two guns. Bring all of your friends who have guns. Bring their friends who have guns."
 
2014-01-26 01:29:36 PM  

StoPPeRmobile: TheVeryDeadIanMartin: Isn't the first rule of gun safety something like "The gun is always loaded"?

No, it's probably a Glock so we blame the weapon's lack of an external safety.


No, I blame the idiot carrying the wrong farking tool.
You can't pick your relatives, but you can pick a decent tool.
 
2014-01-26 01:33:53 PM  

lonerancher: noitsnot
If you don't have a round in the chamber you can't fire the weapon when  needed.  It has nothing about making someone's genitalia seem larger.
Weapons are only useful if they will work immediately when needed.  If someone wishes to do you harm, they will not wait for you to chamber a round.  Loaded guns are safe as long as the finger stays off of the trigger.


Fool.
First rule of Gunfight is find cover.
Not concealment, cover.
Until covered, keep that weapon in holster.
Quick Draw McGraw is a fantasy, IRW.
 
2014-01-27 12:13:57 AM  

snocone: lonerancher: noitsnot
If you don't have a round in the chamber you can't fire the weapon when  needed.  It has nothing about making someone's genitalia seem larger.
Weapons are only useful if they will work immediately when needed.  If someone wishes to do you harm, they will not wait for you to chamber a round.  Loaded guns are safe as long as the finger stays off of the trigger.

Fool.
First rule of Gunfight is find cover.
Not concealment, cover.
Until covered, keep that weapon in holster.
Quick Draw McGraw is a fantasy, IRW.


First off, calling someone names when you know nothing about them speaks volumes.
Second, the rules of a gunfight depend entirely on what your role is.  In my line of work we are tasked with aggressively charging the threat and neutralizing it.  Your scenario would be great for someone who is only dealing with their own safety but the people I serve have much different expectations.
Third, name calling? Really?  Sad dude, sad.
 
Displayed 36 of 136 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report