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.

(CBS Miami)   Shooter shoots Shooter's, shrapnel shared   (miami.cbslocal.com) divider line 64
    More: Scary, corrections officer, concealed handgun, Miami-Dade  
•       •       •

3527 clicks; posted to Main » on 17 Feb 2014 at 7:08 AM (22 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-17 07:14:29 AM
In before "all gun owners are bad and all guns should be banned"
 
2014-02-17 07:14:54 AM
FTFA: "The officer's name has not been released. "

Do you think they would extend the same courtesy to a citizen?
 
GCD
2014-02-17 07:19:36 AM

Whole Wheat: In before "all gun owners are bad and all guns should be banned"


He was carrying a concealed, loaded handgun with the safety off.

The guy's an idiot.
 
2014-02-17 07:22:19 AM

GCD: Whole Wheat: In before "all gun owners are bad and all guns should be banned"

He was carrying a concealed, loaded handgun with the safety off.

The guy's an idiot.


This was my first thought.

Also-the restaurant stayed open?
 
2014-02-17 07:33:22 AM
Loaded, safety off, flopping around in his pocket. Top-flight police work there Lou.
 
2014-02-17 07:34:28 AM

GCD: Whole Wheat: In before "all gun owners are bad and all guns should be banned"

He was carrying a concealed, loaded handgun with the safety off.

The guy's an idiot.


Apparently you're not familiar with modern handguns; many have no manual safety.  Generally, they have several internal safeties, including but not limited to something designed to prevent the gun from going off if it gets dropped, but any time you pull the trigger with a round in the chamber, it's going off.  That emphatically does NOT make carrying them loaded idiotic, as long as a holster that covers the trigger guard is used.  Seems that the officer in question may have been pocket carrying w/o a holster, which *is* idiotic.

Regardless of the particular reason why he should be classified as an idiot, he injured 6 innocent bystanders in an incident which had nothing to do with "in the line of duty."  IMO he should be held personally liable for their medical bills, etc, just as any private citizen would.  Also, of course, most metro areas have statutes forbidding discharging a firearm inside city limits except in a circumstance requiring it for self defense, etc.  Seems like some sort of negligence charge would also be reasonable.
 
2014-02-17 07:36:46 AM
Alliteration ain't always amusing.
 
Rat
2014-02-17 07:36:54 AM

GCD: Whole Wheat: In before "all gun owners are bad and all guns should be banned"

He was carrying a concealed, loaded handgun with the safety off.

The guy's an idiot.


For the record, most modern concealable handguns don't have external safeties.  Now, there's the 1911's that have them, and the higher ends guns, but for the most part, the glocks, small .380's and small 9's et al have heavy trigger pulls or some sort of 'finger on trigger in the right spot' sort of safety.

Now, the more expensive handguns, like the sig 229 for example, can come equipped with a decocker, essentially making them like a double action (similar to a revolver for the first shot).

So, the double action heavy trigger pull along with the finger safety are usually all thats necessary.  This guy managed to take the fun out of being safe while carrying, and any AD is a bad AD.

 
Rat
2014-02-17 07:37:52 AM
Or yeah, what Olstyn said.

©
 
2014-02-17 07:39:13 AM
Oh goody this is already turning into a gun porn thread!
 
2014-02-17 07:56:59 AM

GCD: Whole Wheat: In before "all gun owners are bad and all guns should be banned"

He was carrying a concealed, loaded handgun with the safety off.

The guy's an idiot.


Exactly.

/CCW holder
//Proper holster user
 
2014-02-17 07:58:45 AM
Try saying that fast 6 times.
 
2014-02-17 07:59:37 AM

GCD: Whole Wheat: In before "all gun owners are bad and all guns should be banned"

He was carrying a concealed, loaded handgun with the safety off.

The guy's an idiot.


Corrections officer. Glock. No external safety.
 
2014-02-17 08:04:33 AM
This is why only highly trained, sworn law enforcement officers should be allowed to carry a firearm in public.
 
2014-02-17 08:05:01 AM
They don't call that place Shooters for nothingl
 
2014-02-17 08:17:15 AM

fluffy2097: GCD: Whole Wheat: In before "all gun owners are bad and all guns should be banned"

He was carrying a concealed, loaded handgun with the safety off.

The guy's an idiot.

Corrections officer. Glock. No external safety.


Yet another reason I'll never own glocks.

Seriously, why people cream themselves over those things is a mystery to me.
 
2014-02-17 08:19:08 AM

Kit Fister: fluffy2097: GCD: Whole Wheat: In before "all gun owners are bad and all guns should be banned"

He was carrying a concealed, loaded handgun with the safety off.

The guy's an idiot.

Corrections officer. Glock. No external safety.

Yet another reason I'll never own glocks.

Seriously, why people cream themselves over those things is a mystery to me.


Well, that and each one made is anointed by Hitler's blood and contains a sprinkling of ashes from the ovens at Auschwitz.

/yes, I know they're austrian.
//So was Hitler.
///Study it out.
 
2014-02-17 08:30:15 AM

Kit Fister: fluffy2097: GCD: Whole Wheat: In before "all gun owners are bad and all guns should be banned"

He was carrying a concealed, loaded handgun with the safety off.

The guy's an idiot.

Corrections officer. Glock. No external safety.

Yet another reason I'll never own glocks.

Seriously, why people cream themselves over those things is a mystery to me.


The three internal safeties are more than adequate.
But if course the ultimate safety is your brain matter. The brain controls your booger hook, which at factory conditions requires 6 pounds of force to pull the trigger.
A glock just doesn't go boom by itself, it requires human input. Unless the idiot tried his hand at kitchen table gunsmithing.
 
2014-02-17 08:34:52 AM

Kit Fister: fluffy2097: GCD: Whole Wheat: In before "all gun owners are bad and all guns should be banned"

He was carrying a concealed, loaded handgun with the safety off.

The guy's an idiot.

Corrections officer. Glock. No external safety.

Yet another reason I'll never own glocks.

Seriously, why people cream themselves over those things is a mystery to me.


Glocks are extremely dependable. It's a hard gun to kill, and rarely, if ever, will the thing jam.
 
2014-02-17 08:36:41 AM

Abe Vigoda's Ghost: Kit Fister: fluffy2097: GCD: Whole Wheat: In before "all gun owners are bad and all guns should be banned"

He was carrying a concealed, loaded handgun with the safety off.

The guy's an idiot.

Corrections officer. Glock. No external safety.

Yet another reason I'll never own glocks.

Seriously, why people cream themselves over those things is a mystery to me.

Glocks are extremely dependable. It's a hard gun to kill, and rarely, if ever, will the thing jam.


Also the gun pictured in the article is a beretta, and a Glock is never mentioned as the weapon.
 
2014-02-17 08:43:45 AM

olstyn: GCD: Whole Wheat: In before "all gun owners are bad and all guns should be banned"

He was carrying a concealed, loaded handgun with the safety off.

The guy's an idiot.

Apparently you're not familiar with modern handguns; many have no manual safety.  Generally, they have several internal safeties, including but not limited to something designed to prevent the gun from going off if it gets dropped, but any time you pull the trigger with a round in the chamber, it's going off.  That emphatically does NOT make carrying them loaded idiotic, as long as a holster that covers the trigger guard is used.  Seems that the officer in question may have been pocket carrying w/o a holster, which *is* idiotic.

Regardless of the particular reason why he should be classified as an idiot, he injured 6 innocent bystanders in an incident which had nothing to do with "in the line of duty."  IMO he should be held personally liable for their medical bills, etc, just as any private citizen would.  Also, of course, most metro areas have statutes forbidding discharging a firearm inside city limits except in a circumstance requiring it for self defense, etc.  Seems like some sort of negligence charge would also be reasonable.


Qualifies immunity u can not haz.
 
2014-02-17 08:45:01 AM

olstyn: GCD: Whole Wheat: In before "all gun owners are bad and all guns should be banned"

He was carrying a concealed, loaded handgun with the safety off.

The guy's an idiot.

Apparently you're not familiar with modern handguns; many have no manual safety.  Generally, they have several internal safeties, including but not limited to something designed to prevent the gun from going off if it gets dropped, but any time you pull the trigger with a round in the chamber, it's going off.  That emphatically does NOT make carrying them loaded idiotic, as long as a holster that covers the trigger guard is used.  Seems that the officer in question may have been pocket carrying w/o a holster, which *is* idiotic.

Regardless of the particular reason why he should be classified as an idiot, he injured 6 innocent bystanders in an incident which had nothing to do with "in the line of duty."  IMO he should be held personally liable for their medical bills, etc, just as any private citizen would.  Also, of course, most metro areas have statutes forbidding discharging a firearm inside city limits except in a circumstance requiring it for self defense, etc.  Seems like some sort of negligence charge would also be reasonable.


Apparently you are not familiar with the Beretta 92FS shown in the photograph. It has a manual safety/hammer release lever. This firearm was not intended to be carried with the hammer in the cocked position. For now I'm going to assume it was because I've fired these pistols and I don't see how reaching for some change can exert enough force on the trigger to fire a round when the first shot would be double-action. I'm assuming you know what that means but others may not. It means the trigger has a mechanism to pull the hammer back before it fires. Modern revolvers are double-action.
 
2014-02-17 08:49:15 AM
Captain Frank Sousa told the paper the police deemed the shooting accidental.

Of course you do. All criminal gangs protect their own.
 
2014-02-17 08:49:43 AM

wildlifer: Kit Fister: fluffy2097: GCD: Whole Wheat: In before "all gun owners are bad and all guns should be banned"

He was carrying a concealed, loaded handgun with the safety off.

The guy's an idiot.

Corrections officer. Glock. No external safety.

Yet another reason I'll never own glocks.

Seriously, why people cream themselves over those things is a mystery to me.

The three internal safeties are more than adequate.
But if course the ultimate safety is your brain matter. The brain controls your booger hook, which at factory conditions requires 6 pounds of force to pull the trigger.
A glock just doesn't go boom by itself, it requires human input. Unless the idiot tried his hand at kitchen table gunsmithing.


Good for them. I'll take a gun with a manual safety.
 
2014-02-17 08:51:31 AM

Rat: GCD: Whole Wheat: In before "all gun owners are bad and all guns should be banned"

He was carrying a concealed, loaded handgun with the safety off.

The guy's an idiot.

For the record, most modern concealable handguns don't have external safeties.  Now, there's the 1911's that have them, and the higher ends guns, but for the most part, the glocks, small .380's and small 9's et al have heavy trigger pulls or some sort of 'finger on trigger in the right spot' sort of safety.

Now, the more expensive handguns, like the sig 229 for example, can come equipped with a decocker, essentially making them like a double action (similar to a revolver for the first shot).

So, the double action heavy trigger pull along with the finger safety are usually all thats necessary.  This guy managed to take the fun out of being safe while carrying, and any AD is a bad AD.



The gun in the photo (which doesn't look like a stock image BTW) is a Beretta 92. It has a manual safety/decocking lever. It should not have been carried with the hammer raised. The 1911 on the other hand only has a single-action trigger and is meant to be carried with the hammer in the cocked position. Unlike the Beretta 92, the 1911 has a manual safety that can be engaged with the hammer raised. Firearms are designed to be carried a certain way depending on how the mechanisms work. Striker fired pistols don't have an external safety. Hammer-fired pistols usually do.
 
2014-02-17 08:51:40 AM

Abe Vigoda's Ghost: Glocks are extremely dependable. It's a hard gun to kill, and rarely, if ever, will the thing jam.


To be fair, I would point out that glocks aren't as godly dependable as people like to suggest without some maintenance, especially when it comes to magazines.
 
2014-02-17 08:56:44 AM

numbquil: The gun in the photo (which doesn't look like a stock image BTW) is a Beretta 92. It has a manual safety/decocking lever. It should not have been carried with the hammer raised. The 1911 on the other hand only has a single-action trigger and is meant to be carried with the hammer in the cocked position. Unlike the Beretta 92, the 1911 has a manual safety that can be engaged with the hammer raised. Firearms are designed to be carried a certain way depending on how the mechanisms work. Striker fired pistols don't have an external safety. Hammer-fired pistols usually do.


Not true. There are plenty of striker-fired pistols which can have an external safety. The Glock and Walthers do not. The Springfield XDs have, or had, one as an option (thumb safety, they all have the grip safety). The FNX striker-fired pistols don't have one, the hammer-fired ones do. The M&P pistols have one as an option. The Ruger SR pistols have them. The Taurus pistols have them.

Even Glocks now have a mod to add one if you so wish to have a manual safety on it.
 
Rat
2014-02-17 09:04:07 AM

numbquil: Rat: GCD: Whole Wheat: In before "all gun owners are bad and all guns should be banned"

He was carrying a concealed, loaded handgun with the safety off.

The guy's an idiot.

For the record, most modern concealable handguns don't have external safeties.  Now, there's the 1911's that have them, and the higher ends guns, but for the most part, the glocks, small .380's and small 9's et al have heavy trigger pulls or some sort of 'finger on trigger in the right spot' sort of safety.

Now, the more expensive handguns, like the sig 229 for example, can come equipped with a decocker, essentially making them like a double action (similar to a revolver for the first shot).

So, the double action heavy trigger pull along with the finger safety are usually all thats necessary.  This guy managed to take the fun out of being safe while carrying, and any AD is a bad AD.



The gun in the photo (which doesn't look like a stock image BTW) is a Beretta 92. It has a manual safety/decocking lever. It should not have been carried with the hammer raised. The 1911 on the other hand only has a single-action trigger and is meant to be carried with the hammer in the cocked position. Unlike the Beretta 92, the 1911 has a manual safety that can be engaged with the hammer raised. Firearms are designed to be carried a certain way depending on how the mechanisms work. Striker fired pistols don't have an external safety. Hammer-fired pistols usually do.


Actually, I believe that's a stock photo ( the URL is gun-handgun-generic.jpg ) but you're preaching to the choir here.  I have a well organized gun safe, and shooting soothes me.

©
 
2014-02-17 09:10:50 AM
The best way to carry any gun is with the chamber empty, the extra 2 seconds it takes to jack a round into the chamber are a price you should be able to pay if you keep aware of your surroundings.
 
2014-02-17 09:16:27 AM

Mad-n-FL: The best way to carry any gun is with the chamber empty, the extra 2 seconds it takes to jack a round into the chamber are a price you should be able to pay if you keep aware of your surroundings.


No thanks. I'll stick to Condition 1 as my 1911 was designed, and as every sane instructor, be they LEO or civilian, instructs.
 
2014-02-17 09:25:23 AM

olstyn: GCD: Whole Wheat: In before "all gun owners are bad and all guns should be banned"

He was carrying a concealed, loaded handgun with the safety off.

The guy's an idiot.

Apparently you're not familiar with modern handguns; many have no manual safety.  Generally, they have several internal safeties, including but not limited to something designed to prevent the gun from going off if it gets dropped, but any time you pull the trigger with a round in the chamber, it's going off.  That emphatically does NOT make carrying them loaded idiotic, as long as a holster that covers the trigger guard is used.  Seems that the officer in question may have been pocket carrying w/o a holster, which *is* idiotic.

Regardless of the particular reason why he should be classified as an idiot, he injured 6 innocent bystanders in an incident which had nothing to do with "in the line of duty."  IMO he should be held personally liable for their medical bills, etc, just as any private citizen would.  Also, of course, most metro areas have statutes forbidding discharging a firearm inside city limits except in a circumstance requiring it for self defense, etc.  Seems like some sort of negligence charge would also be reasonable.


A Corrections Officer is considered to be Law Enforcement, you know, the "Only Ones" who are well trained and responsible enough to be allowed to have a gun. As such they are immune from the Laws that would destroy any mere peasant and he will get a stern lecture and be told not to do that again or they might have to give him a few days off with pay. Unless he had pockets like "Captain Kangaroo" the picture in the article had nothing to do with what he was carrying, I'm a little surprised they didn't use a stock picture of an AR15 pistol.

Yeah I'm that old, so what, get off my yard.
 
2014-02-17 10:05:18 AM

Mad-n-FL: The best way to carry any gun is with the chamber empty, the extra 2 seconds it takes to jack a round into the chamber are a price you should be able to pay if you keep aware of your surroundings.


That may work out for you but I'd rather keep a round in the chamber. A holstered 1911(type or variants) in Condition One is my choice, unlike the staple gun trigger on a Glock there is nothing to "play with". My situation, my opinion, YMMV.
 
2014-02-17 10:16:46 AM

numbquil: olstyn: GCD: Whole Wheat: In before "all gun owners are bad and all guns should be banned"

He was carrying a concealed, loaded handgun with the safety off.

The guy's an idiot.

Apparently you're not familiar with modern handguns; many have no manual safety.  Generally, they have several internal safeties, including but not limited to something designed to prevent the gun from going off if it gets dropped, but any time you pull the trigger with a round in the chamber, it's going off.  That emphatically does NOT make carrying them loaded idiotic, as long as a holster that covers the trigger guard is used.  Seems that the officer in question may have been pocket carrying w/o a holster, which *is* idiotic.

Regardless of the particular reason why he should be classified as an idiot, he injured 6 innocent bystanders in an incident which had nothing to do with "in the line of duty."  IMO he should be held personally liable for their medical bills, etc, just as any private citizen would.  Also, of course, most metro areas have statutes forbidding discharging a firearm inside city limits except in a circumstance requiring it for self defense, etc.  Seems like some sort of negligence charge would also be reasonable.

Apparently you are not familiar with the Beretta 92FS shown in the photograph. It has a manual safety/hammer release lever. This firearm was not intended to be carried with the hammer in the cocked position. For now I'm going to assume it was because I've fired these pistols and I don't see how reaching for some change can exert enough force on the trigger to fire a round when the first shot would be double-action. I'm assuming you know what that means but others may not. It means the trigger has a mechanism to pull the hammer back before it fires. Modern revolvers are double-action.


I've not personally shot a Beretta 92 series, but I am familiar with their manual of arms.  I am also familiar with pockets and the fact that there's no way, short of the officer in question being some sort of giant, that there's any way a Beretta 92 could be pocket carried, ergo it was almost certainly not the gun in question.  Also, I was originally viewing the article on a break at work, and my job's internet setup filters out the images from that site for some reason, so I didn't even see it anyway. :P
 
2014-02-17 10:34:47 AM
Looks like a CZ 75.  Is that what the Beretta 92 is based on?  Maybe the pic isn't even of the actual gun?
 
2014-02-17 10:36:39 AM

olstyn: I've not personally shot a Beretta 92 series, but I am familiar with their manual of arms. I am also familiar with pockets and the fact that there's no way, short of the officer in question being some sort of giant, that there's any way a Beretta 92 could be pocket carried, ergo it was almost certainly not the gun in question. Also, I was originally viewing the article on a break at work, and my job's internet setup filters out the images from that site for some reason, so I didn't even see it anyway. :P


I'm not just trying to be a jackass because I misread the article too but it doesn't say anywhere in the article that he was carrying the firearm in his pocket. It just says it was concealed. I've heard of people carrying full size 1911 pistols concealed. I thought he was reaching for change but according to his story (which I question) was that the firearm went off while he was reaching for his check. Even if the firearm was a Glock which has only a passive trigger safety, I don't see how the firearm could have gone off under those circumstances. My point is, I'm relatively certain there was some type of negligence involved. If his version of the story is true it would make a lot more sense if he was carrying a hammer-fired pistol. Even though this shouldn't happen theoretically, he could have put enough pressure on the hammer by leaning over to cause it to disengage and strike the firing pin. This brings me back to my first point. If a hammered-pistol has a decocking lever which when used properly would require you to fire the first shot double-action, it should be used. If it doesn't have such a lever, a 1911, for example it is meant to be carried with the manual safety on.

The problem is that there are many forums and other sites where one can find internet lore, where concealed carriers swear by the idea that you should carry a firearm without any type of safety mechanism engaged, even if the firearm was designed to use one. The idea is that disengaging the safety takes up valuable time and will get you killed. It seems logical and one might say "Well a Glock doesn't have a manual safety so my firearm will be fine if I just don't use it." I'm simply trying to point out that is not the case. There are many modern firearms that do have manual safety devices and you should consult the owner's manual or the manufacturer if there is any doubt about how the firearm is supposed to be operated. To say that one is not acting irresponsibly by carrying a firearm without the safety engaged because modern firearms don't have safety devices is inaccurate at best.
 
2014-02-17 10:39:59 AM

Big_Fat_Liar: Looks like a CZ 75.  Is that what the Beretta 92 is based on?  Maybe the pic isn't even of the actual gun?


Even if it's not, after rereading the article, the story doesn't seem consistent with the way firearms operate. It sounds like he is saying that he leaned over and it went off. I'm just trying to point out that you can't make a generalized statement about modern firearms not having manual safety devices. Many do and they are all meant to be used a certain way. Spreading false BS on the internet causes dumbasses to get hurt.
 
2014-02-17 10:43:05 AM

wildlifer: Kit Fister: fluffy2097: GCD: Whole Wheat: In before "all gun owners are bad and all guns should be banned"

He was carrying a concealed, loaded handgun with the safety off.

The guy's an idiot.

Corrections officer. Glock. No external safety.

Yet another reason I'll never own glocks.

Seriously, why people cream themselves over those things is a mystery to me.

The three internal safeties are more than adequate.
But if course the ultimate safety is your brain matter. The brain controls your booger hook, which at factory conditions requires 6 pounds of force to pull the trigger.
A glock just doesn't go boom by itself, it requires human input. Unless the idiot tried his hand at kitchen table gunsmithing.


Those internal safeties are so much more than adequate that there's a phrase for their more than adequacy.
Maybe you've heard of it: Glock leg.


/And 1911s are so much less than adequate there is no analogous term for the inadequacy of their manual safeties.
//You can't negligently discharge a firearm with an empty chamber, either.
 
2014-02-17 10:48:27 AM

Big_Fat_Liar: Looks like a CZ 75.  Is that what the Beretta 92 is based on?  Maybe the pic isn't even of the actual gun?


Also both pistols began in 1975 so it's unlikely. Although they are similar the CZ-75 was designed to be carried either double-action or single-action with the hammer raised. It does appear to be a generic photo so this is irrelevant to the article but the Beretta 92 is meant to be carried with the hammer decocked and must be fired double-action on the first shot. Some people who are idiots may carry it with the hammer raised and the safety off because they think it's going to give them a speed advantage over the "bad guys".
 
2014-02-17 10:53:23 AM

Mad-n-FL: The best way to carry any gun is with the chamber empty, the extra 2 seconds it takes to jack a round into the chamber are a price you should be able to pay if you keep aware of your surroundings.


No revolver is ever carried with an empty chamber.
 
2014-02-17 10:55:46 AM

numbquil: olstyn: I've not personally shot a Beretta 92 series, but I am familiar with their manual of arms. I am also familiar with pockets and the fact that there's no way, short of the officer in question being some sort of giant, that there's any way a Beretta 92 could be pocket carried, ergo it was almost certainly not the gun in question. Also, I was originally viewing the article on a break at work, and my job's internet setup filters out the images from that site for some reason, so I didn't even see it anyway. :P

I'm not just trying to be a jackass because I misread the article too but it doesn't say anywhere in the article that he was carrying the firearm in his pocket. It just says it was concealed. I've heard of people carrying full size 1911 pistols concealed. I thought he was reaching for change but according to his story (which I question) was that the firearm went off while he was reaching for his check. Even if the firearm was a Glock which has only a passive trigger safety, I don't see how the firearm could have gone off under those circumstances. My point is, I'm relatively certain there was some type of negligence involved. If his version of the story is true it would make a lot more sense if he was carrying a hammer-fired pistol. Even though this shouldn't happen theoretically, he could have put enough pressure on the hammer by leaning over to cause it to disengage and strike the firing pin. This brings me back to my first point. If a hammered-pistol has a decocking lever which when used properly would require you to fire the first shot double-action, it should be used. If it doesn't have such a lever, a 1911, for example it is meant to be carried with the manual safety on.

The problem is that there are many forums and other sites where one can find internet lore, where concealed carriers swear by the idea that you should carry a firearm without any type of safety mechanism engaged, even if the firearm was designed to use one. The idea is that disengagi ...


For the hammer to drop, the sear would have to physically break in all hammer fired guns. It would take a few hundred, if not a few thousand, pounds of pressure and has literally never happened without a flaw in a part.
 
2014-02-17 10:57:04 AM
numbquil:

I'm not just trying to be a jackass because I misread the article too but it doesn't say anywhere in the article that he was carrying the firearm in his pocket. It just says it was concealed. I've heard of people carrying full size 1911 pistols concealed. I thought he was reaching for change but according to his story (which I question) was that the firearm went off while he was reaching for his check. Even if the firearm was a Glock which has only a passive trigger safety, I don't see how the firearm could have gone off under those circumstances. My point is, I'm relatively certain there was some type of negligence involved. If his version of the story is true it would make a lot more sense if he was carrying a hammer-fired pistol. Even though this shouldn't happen theoretically, he could have put enough pressure on the hammer by leaning over to cause it to disengage and strike the firing pin. This brings me back to my first point. If a hammered-pistol has a decocking lever which when used properly would require you to fire the first shot double-action, it should be used. If it doesn't have such a lever, a 1911, for example it is meant to be carried with the manual safety on.

The problem is that there are many forums and other sites where one can find internet lore, where concealed carriers swear by the idea that you should carry a firearm without any type of safety mechanism engaged, even if the firearm was designed to use one. The idea is that disengagi ...


Those of us who have mentioned pocket carry were inferring it from the rest of the circumstances put forth in the article.  Just moving your body/reaching for something sure sounds like something got into the trigger guard while the gun was loose in a pocket to me.  I suppose he could have simply shoved it in his pants with no holster as well, with the same possible consequences.  Either way, not using a holster leads to the trigger being exposed, which creates a MUCH higher probability of a negligent discharge with any combination of manual and passive safeties.  I think we can all agree that somewhere along the way, some poor decision-making occurred, and the officer in question is 100% responsible for what happened.

Regarding the other part of your post, generally speaking, I agree with you about using a gun as its design indicates it should be used.  (1911s are intended to be carried cocked & locked, DA/SA guns are intended to be carried decocked, etc.)  That said, with something like a Beretta 92 or 3rd gen S&W, which has both a manual safety *and* is DA/SA, IMO the manual safety is optional as long the weapon is decocked.
 
2014-02-17 10:57:39 AM

AngryDragon: No revolver is ever carried with an empty chamber.


Except, you know, up through the 1980s due to the fact that the firing pin was attached to the hammer and with the hammer down it could very easily be knocked forward, causing the primer to be pierced and the cartridge to fire.

This is why there are no revolvers made this way anymore, and they all have several types of transfer bars or other mechanisms to make this impossible.
 
2014-02-17 11:00:37 AM
Two things:

This jackass didn't "accidentally fire" his weapon.  It's a negligent discharge.  He should be tried to the fullest extent of the law, and if found guilty, punished to the max.  Millions of CCW permit holders, and it's always dumbasses like this that have ND's.  This leads me to the second...

POCKET HOLSTER.  You can get one for pretty much ANY pocket concealable pistol for about $10 at Wal-Mart, maybe a touch more at your local gun shop.  I pocket carry a Bersa Thunder .380 and use an Uncle Mike's holster.  My piece doesn't flop around and I CANNOT grip the trigger until I've extracted it from the holster.  Unless you're pants on head stupid, you ALWAYS get a holster.  It really is the second safety device (first safety is your own common sense, which lots of people seem to disable.)
 
2014-02-17 11:00:45 AM

numbquil: Big_Fat_Liar: Looks like a CZ 75.  Is that what the Beretta 92 is based on?  Maybe the pic isn't even of the actual gun?

Also both pistols began in 1975 so it's unlikely. Although they are similar the CZ-75 was designed to be carried either double-action or single-action with the hammer raised. It does appear to be a generic photo so this is irrelevant to the article but the Beretta 92 is meant to be carried with the hammer decocked and must be fired double-action on the first shot. Some people who are idiots may carry it with the hammer raised and the safety off because they think it's going to give them a speed advantage over the "bad guys".


As far as I know, the Beretta pistol designs are based on the Walther P38 design, and started from that pistol.
 
2014-02-17 11:02:23 AM

IvanTheSilent: Two things:

This jackass didn't "accidentally fire" his weapon.  It's a negligent discharge.  He should be tried to the fullest extent of the law, and if found guilty, punished to the max.  Millions of CCW permit holders, and it's always dumbasses like this that have ND's.  This leads me to the second...

POCKET HOLSTER.  You can get one for pretty much ANY pocket concealable pistol for about $10 at Wal-Mart, maybe a touch more at your local gun shop.  I pocket carry a Bersa Thunder .380 and use an Uncle Mike's holster.  My piece doesn't flop around and I CANNOT grip the trigger until I've extracted it from the holster.  Unless you're pants on head stupid, you ALWAYS get a holster.  It really is the second safety device (first safety is your own common sense, which lots of people seem to disable.)


Im not a fan of pocket carry.
 
2014-02-17 11:07:55 AM

demaL-demaL-yeH: wildlifer: Kit Fister: fluffy2097: GCD: Whole Wheat: In before "all gun owners are bad and all guns should be banned"

He was carrying a concealed, loaded handgun with the safety off.

The guy's an idiot.

Corrections officer. Glock. No external safety.

Yet another reason I'll never own glocks.

Seriously, why people cream themselves over those things is a mystery to me.

The three internal safeties are more than adequate.
But if course the ultimate safety is your brain matter. The brain controls your booger hook, which at factory conditions requires 6 pounds of force to pull the trigger.
A glock just doesn't go boom by itself, it requires human input. Unless the idiot tried his hand at kitchen table gunsmithing.

Those internal safeties are so much more than adequate that there's a phrase for their more than adequacy.
Maybe you've heard of it: Glock leg.

/And 1911s are so much less than adequate there is no analogous term for the inadequacy of their manual safeties.
//You can't negligently discharge a firearm with an empty chamber, either.


You can't negligently discharge a fist either. Personally, I own several firearms but I choose not to carry one. My worst fear is that if I ever had to use it, the police arriving on scene would mistakenly shoot me 30 times before they've had a chance to assess the chaos of what is happening. Instead, I've trained myself to become so much of a badass that if anyone threatens me with a gun, I will take it from them and bludgeon them to death with it.
 
2014-02-17 11:15:17 AM

numbquil: You can't negligently discharge a fist either. Personally, I own several firearms but I choose not to carry one. My worst fear is that if I ever had to use it, the police arriving on scene would mistakenly shoot me 30 times before they've had a chance to assess the chaos of what is happening. Instead, I've trained myself to become so much of a badass that if anyone threatens me with a gun, I will take it from them and bludgeon them to death with it.


You assume the police would make that mistake only if you have a gun!
 
2014-02-17 11:15:56 AM

Kit Fister: IvanTheSilent: Two things:

This jackass didn't "accidentally fire" his weapon.  It's a negligent discharge.  He should be tried to the fullest extent of the law, and if found guilty, punished to the max.  Millions of CCW permit holders, and it's always dumbasses like this that have ND's.  This leads me to the second...

POCKET HOLSTER.  You can get one for pretty much ANY pocket concealable pistol for about $10 at Wal-Mart, maybe a touch more at your local gun shop.  I pocket carry a Bersa Thunder .380 and use an Uncle Mike's holster.  My piece doesn't flop around and I CANNOT grip the trigger until I've extracted it from the holster.  Unless you're pants on head stupid, you ALWAYS get a holster.  It really is the second safety device (first safety is your own common sense, which lots of people seem to disable.)

Im not a fan of pocket carry.


I'm not either, but due to dress code at work, it's either pocket carry, ankle carry or no carry, and if your gun is on your ankle, it might as well be on the moon.  I do IWB with a full sized Bersa Thunder 9 Pro HC when I'm in jeans and a t-shirt, or can wear any sort of jacket.
 
2014-02-17 11:22:20 AM

IvanTheSilent: Kit Fister: IvanTheSilent: Two things:

This jackass didn't "accidentally fire" his weapon.  It's a negligent discharge.  He should be tried to the fullest extent of the law, and if found guilty, punished to the max.  Millions of CCW permit holders, and it's always dumbasses like this that have ND's.  This leads me to the second...

POCKET HOLSTER.  You can get one for pretty much ANY pocket concealable pistol for about $10 at Wal-Mart, maybe a touch more at your local gun shop.  I pocket carry a Bersa Thunder .380 and use an Uncle Mike's holster.  My piece doesn't flop around and I CANNOT grip the trigger until I've extracted it from the holster.  Unless you're pants on head stupid, you ALWAYS get a holster.  It really is the second safety device (first safety is your own common sense, which lots of people seem to disable.)

Im not a fan of pocket carry.

I'm not either, but due to dress code at work, it's either pocket carry, ankle carry or no carry, and if your gun is on your ankle, it might as well be on the moon.  I do IWB with a full sized Bersa Thunder 9 Pro HC when I'm in jeans and a t-shirt, or can wear any sort of jacket.


I'm a big guy, but I have no troubles with the right IWB holster making a full-size 1911 disappear.
 
2014-02-17 11:28:15 AM

Kit Fister: numbquil: You can't negligently discharge a fist either. Personally, I own several firearms but I choose not to carry one. My worst fear is that if I ever had to use it, the police arriving on scene would mistakenly shoot me 30 times before they've had a chance to assess the chaos of what is happening. Instead, I've trained myself to become so much of a badass that if anyone threatens me with a gun, I will take it from them and bludgeon them to death with it.

You assume the police would make that mistake only if you have a gun!


Great point.
 
Displayed 50 of 64 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report