Teen Paralyzed by ND of Illegal CCW


PDA






JCF
December 19, 2006, 06:06 PM
http://www.modbee.com/local/story/13127108p-13774253c.html


Beauty college shooter sentenced
Rubalcava admits to 'really bad decision,' gets 270 days in jail
By SUSAN HERENDEEN
BEE STAFF WRITER


Last Updated: December 19, 2006, 05:55:53 AM PST


Everyone who has been affected by the tragic accidental shooting of 17-year-old Michelle Dalrymple wants to turn the clock back, according to statements they gave Monday afternoon in Stanislaus County Superior Court.
But there are no do-overs for Mick Vito Rubalcava, 23, of Modesto, who tucked a loaded handgun into his backpack even though he knew it was illegal to carry a concealed weapon or bring a gun onto school grounds.

And though Michelle loves soccer, softball and volleyball, she never will walk or run again.

Rubalcava's gun discharged on Aug. 4 as he set the backpack on the floor during a class at California Beauty College in downtown Modesto. The bullet lodged in Michelle's back and severed her spinal chord, paralyzing her from the waist down.

She addressed the court, saying every day brings a new difficulty, such as needing help to bathe, being taunted by people who assume she is developmentally delayed, and being unable to squeeze through doors.

"Being a teenager in a wheelchair really stinks," Michelle said.

Rubalcava, an off-duty secu-rity guard who graduated from the police academy, said he is ashamed of a mistake that will haunt him.

"I made a really bad decision," he said. "I never even thought in my wildest imagination that a gun could go off without pulling the trigger."

A large crowd gathered in Judge Donald Shaver's courtroom, so many that some spectators had to wait in the hallway while Rubalcava was sentenced on one felony and two misdemeanor charges.

He threw himself on the mercy of the court by pleading guilty early in the legal process, acknowledging that he deserves to be punished. But he also asked for leniency, saying he needs to work, to support his wife and two young sons.

Rubalcava was charged with bringing a loaded firearm onto school grounds, a felony, and carrying a concealed weapon as well as carrying a loaded gun in public, both misdemeanors.

He faced up to four years in state prison, but attorneys agreed that county jail would be sufficient.

Deputy Public Defender Marcus Mumford asked for commu-nity service or 60 to 180 days in jail. He said the shooting was an accident with tragic consequences.

Deputy District Attorney Michael Houston asked for one year in jail, saying Rubalcava must have learned about the dangers of guns at the police academy.

The judge said Rubalcava must serve 270 days and must report to jail on Feb. 20 if the Sheriff's Department does not let him serve his time in a work-release program.

"This case is a tragedy for all involved," Shaver said. "There's nothing I can do that would change that."

Rubalcava's sentencing hearing stretched over three hours, with family members telling of Michelle's new reality and Rubalcava's remorse. Many in the audience choked back tears as they listened.

Carrie Rubalcava said her husband was carrying a gun because he had been threatened a few days earlier. He works as an armed security guard and thought he might have to defend himself.

Joe and Michelle Williams said their son made a mistake but is not a dangerous person.

"Mick is not a criminal," said Joe Williams, associate pastor at Shelter Cove Church in Modesto. "He doesn't have a criminal mind."

Jeanne Dalrymple, a registered nurse, said her daughter wouldn't know if her legs were burned by hot coffee or crushed in a fall.

She recalled a lively young woman who had just gotten her driver's license and was fondly referred to as "the energizer bunny" because she liked to jog well ahead of her parents and siblings on family outings.

She said Michelle won't be able to crawl under the Christmas tree this year to inspect her presents. She said she couldn't quite express her grief over her daughter's lost opportunities.

"Life used to be so easy for Michelle, who moved so swiftly and gracefully," Jeanne Dalrymple said. "And it all changed with one bullet."

Terry Dalrymple said he watched his daughter struggle through 45 days of rehabilitation at Shriner's Hospital in Sacramento when she should have been starting her senior year at Big Valley Christian High School.

He said Michelle went to beauty college so she could learn a skill and help pay her way through college. Now her options are limited and a painful new reality has taken hold.

It's hard to hug a person in a wheelchair, Terry Dalrymple said. The family has watched the teenager tumble out of her chair more than once when the wheels hit a snag.

Michelle's father said he can forgive Rubalcava. But he reminded the court about something the young man told police: Rubalcava knew it was illegal to carry a concealed weapon, but he thought all would be forgiven if he had to use the gun to protect himself.

"If Mr. Rubalcava had not broken the law, she would be well today," said Terry Dalrymple, the international coordinator for Medical Ambassadors, a Christian missionary group that works in developing countries.

Bee staff writer Susan Herendeen can be reached at 578-2338 or sherendeen@modbee.com.

If you enjoyed reading about "Teen Paralyzed by ND of Illegal CCW" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Stiletto Null
December 19, 2006, 06:12 PM
Geez...how much do you want to bet it was a condition zero "carry"?

made2cut
December 19, 2006, 06:14 PM
I'd be interested in what kind of gun it was and whether it was in a holster or not. My sympathies for all involved :(

geekWithA.45
December 19, 2006, 06:16 PM
This is a tragedy, no doubt or question about it.

Let us also consider that part of the fault which lays on the state of California, whose policies are such that honest citizens, evaluating themselves to be in danger, have little recourse other than to carry illegally, which in turn promotes deep, unsafe concealment.


edited to add:

uh...aren't CA handguns certified to be drop safe by the AG?

Stiletto Null
December 19, 2006, 06:19 PM
Ehh.

Not to sound like a party-pooper, but the guy f***ed up and someone else is paralyzed because of it.

They should throw the book at him.

CountGlockula
December 19, 2006, 06:29 PM
Let us also consider that part of the fault which lays on the state of California, whose policies are such that honest citizens, evaluating themselves to be in danger, have little recourse other than to carry illegally, which in turn promotes deep, unsafe concealment.

+1.

Mick was a police academy graduate, but didn't have a CCW permit. CA residents: call your local politician in support of CCWs!

Outlaws
December 19, 2006, 07:00 PM
Californias's fault?!?!?! This has nothing to do with the California CCW law, or lack there of. This is 100% the fault of someone who didn't properly care for a loaded firearm.

Has anyone seen those purses they sell for women to CCW with? They seperate compartments for the pistol with a somewhat hard lining to prevent anything (like a pencil or lipstick or keys etc etc) from getting into the trigger guard and causing a discharge.

This guy might not have been legally allowed to carry for stupid reasons, but there is no reason he couldn't have broken the law while still using proper gun handling. :fire: There is no reason a holster cannot be used inside a backpack.

MechAg94
December 19, 2006, 07:01 PM
I was just thinking that some basic firearms education should have prevented this. What do they teach at the police academy?

He should have known better. Not sure he should be punished a great deal criminally, but there should be a hefty fine payable to the victim.

Dan M.
December 19, 2006, 07:08 PM
There is a growing number of Californians who are learning that they CAN carry legally in CA. And licensed California CCW'ers enjoy some of the most lenient carry laws in the country.

http://californiaccw.org/forums/list.page

Boona
December 19, 2006, 07:23 PM
"who graduated from the police academy, said he is ashamed of a mistake that will haunt him.

"I made a really bad decision," he said. "I never even thought in my wildest imagination that a gun could go off without pulling the trigger."

My Forensic Science teacher has a few revolver pistols that will fire and cycle just by tapping the bottom of the handle onto a surface. For some reason, I don't buy his statement and think that someone has to be a complete idiot to think this way or believe it.

Rachen
December 19, 2006, 07:27 PM
on the floor and making the gun go boom? Just how in the world? Did he drop the bag or something?

benEzra
December 19, 2006, 07:39 PM
on the floor and making the gun go boom? Just how in the world? Did he drop the bag or something?
The big question is, what else was in the bag? My personal theory would be that it was a gun with no manual safety, or one with the safety off, and something else in the bag got inside the trigger guard and pulled the trigger when he set the bag down hard. The corner of a heavy book could do it, for example.

kungfuhippie
December 19, 2006, 07:55 PM
Dan M. +1

You can get a ccw in PRK, it's a little difficult to get, and some counties (L.A. Riverside) will only grant ccw to LEO, and former violent crime victims (so they can be ready for the next time:banghead: ) If he were in these counties he'd never have gotten a ccw, it's up to the County Sherriff's discretion.

Rachen
A pencil could get in the trigger guard and lever against the trigger with a simple movement of the bag. if it were a glock (I'd bet something with a trigget safety) it'd go boom. I like glocks, don't want to start a war, just saying in PRK glocks are at the cheaper end of guns and their "safety" is easy to self disengage in said scenario. Also if parts were worn in an older gun it could fire from a drop.

dang benEzra beat me to it!

earplug
December 19, 2006, 08:09 PM
I once was a rent a cop and we had cheap Hunter holsters, the retention strap went over the trigger guard, leaving the hammer exposed.
Twice I looked down to see my revolver cocked.

CountGlockula
December 19, 2006, 08:17 PM
Please show me proof.

-If you drop a loaded Glock, it will NOT discharge. Only your trigger finger can set it off.
-Even if there was a "pencil" on the trigger, it would have to manuever around the safety trigger.
-Also, there are the secondary and third safeties to consider.

If it were a Glock, then I'll eat a lifetime of SPAM.

There are still a lot of questions unanswered to the case. Please keep the handicapped teenager in your thoughts.

Car Knocker
December 19, 2006, 08:22 PM
Let us also consider that part of the fault which lays on the state of California, whose policies are such that honest citizens, evaluating themselves to be in danger, have little recourse other than to carry illegally, which in turn promotes deep, unsafe concealment.
FWIW, there were 646 CCW permits in Stanislaus County as of 2005.

wacki
December 19, 2006, 08:31 PM
honestly, stuff like this makes me wonder why so many people insist on carrying one in the chamber.

Outlaws
December 19, 2006, 08:33 PM
-Even if there was a "pencil" on the trigger, it would have to manuever around the safety trigger.

Around? The safety is right on the trigger. If the pencil is in the trigger guard the safety is essecially "off".

A Glocks safety is a drop safety, not be-all end-all safety. There is no safety to a moron with a gun.

Euclidean
December 19, 2006, 08:37 PM
I would like to know what kind of gun it was... I can't imagine any of my handguns doing that unless I had a taut rope or something through the trigger guard.

whatbrick
December 19, 2006, 08:40 PM
Please show me proof.

-If you drop a loaded Glock, it will NOT discharge. Only your trigger finger can set it off.
-Even if there was a "pencil" on the trigger, it would have to manuever around the safety trigger.
-Also, there are the secondary and third safeties to consider.

If it were a Glock, then I'll eat a lifetime of SPAM.

I'm a disciple of Gaston myself, but anything that can get inside the trigger guard is capable of making one discharge. Give an object the proper leverage inside of a jostling backpack and it'll make a Glock go off.

honestly, stuff like this makes me wonder why so many people insist on carrying one in the chamber.

By itself, carrying with a round chambered isn't a problem, but add in enough stupidity and no margin of safety is going to keep a tragedy from happening.

grimjaw
December 19, 2006, 10:00 PM
Has the type of handgun in question been identified, before everyone assumed it was a Glock? I couldn't find it in the thread or the article.

<what my lawyer told me to say>"I never even thought in my wildest imagination that a gun could go off without pulling the trigger."</what my lawyer told me to say>

Stupidity not being a punishable offense under the law . . . What an idiot, and way to try to misplace the blame. This guy was obviously the only one professional enough in the room that he knew of to carry.

"If Mr. Rubalcava had not broken the law, she would be well today,"

If Mr Rubalcava had taken proper care with the weapon and ensured that he had a safe weapon to carry, he still would have been in violation of the law but at least not a complete idiot guilty of neglect.

jm

Idano
December 19, 2006, 10:20 PM
I would like to know what kind of gun it was... I can't imagine any of my handguns doing that unless I had a taut rope or something through the trigger guard.

If it was a Beretta 92F then the safety wasn't on. I bought the Beretta because of it's safety after having my Springfield Armory 1911A go off once while it was on my hip out hunting and dented a primer on a second occasion. I want to pack loaded, but I want to be safe!

Leanwolf
December 19, 2006, 11:41 PM
IDANO - " I bought the Beretta because of it's safety after having my Springfield Armory 1911A go off once while it was on my hip out hunting and dented a primer on a second occasion."

Idano, how did that happen???

I've carried a Colt's Govt. Model some, and a Colt's Lightweight Commander a LOT, cocked & locked, out in the hunting fields in all kinds of country and weather, although in a good holster.

Never have had the safety pushed down even once, much less a Kaboom!.

L.W.

kungfuhippie
December 19, 2006, 11:50 PM
I thought that 1911A1 had a grip safety too? On a star you can carry cocked and locked, empty chamber, or there is a position 1/3 cocked that the hammer will not fall if the trigger is pulled, you must pull it back first. (this may have been ommitted in the newer star model B pistols, mine's from 1943) I carry with one in the pipe and the hammer at this spot with the safety on. If safety gets bumped off (won't happen with my holster) the hammer won't fall.

I still don't trust a safety much and keep it pointed away from everything. Having the hammer down on a round is not safe in my gun since the firing pin is not an "inertia pin"

brerrabbit
December 20, 2006, 12:22 AM
This is a tragedy through and through for all involved.

It rains on both the sinners and the saints, but sometimes it just rains. Bad stuff happens to good people and no amount of legislation or punishment will fix it.

Is there any doubt that the owner of the pistol is not a good man? What purpose is then served by him serving a prison sentence other than illegal carry onto school grounds.

I do wonder if he had the weapon holstered in any way.

308nato
December 20, 2006, 12:33 AM
CountGlockula:
If it ever comes to pass y'all need my book 365 ways to prepare Spam.
you can fry, it you can grill it ,you can broil it, bread it and chicken fry steak
it etc. etc .:D

Idano
December 20, 2006, 12:50 AM
Leanwolf You asked a damn good question that no one has been able to answer. I carried my Springfield Armory 1911A loaded at 1/2 cock position and supposedly it was not suppose to be able to drop the hammer until it was fully cocked and the the safety in the back strap depressed, but it did, not once but twice and now it is gone. It's from this experience that I will no longer carry a loaded auto that doesn't have a decock safety and a external hammer that physically can not touch the firing pin with the safety on like the Beretta 92F or the Ruger P95DC. I like my SIG, but I will not carry it loaded, if that hammer drops it can go off.I no longer carry an auto in the field my new pack gun is a 44 mag Colt Anaconda and I carry it on an empty cylinder.

rbernie
December 20, 2006, 12:52 AM
stuff like this makes me wonder why so many people insist on carrying one in the chamber.Because a pistol that isn't loaded is an unergonomic club, and a pistol that's loaded but doesn't have a round chambered isn't much better.

Let's not pretend that these things aren't dangerous. They are. And anyone who carries one knows that, because that's the very reason that they carry it. They want it to be dangerous to whomever is on the business end. Sometimes, tho, they don't stop to take stock of the responsibility that comes with that. And sometimes, bad things happen as a result.

Is that the pistol's fault? No. Is that the gunnie community's fault? Probably not. Is it the fault of the moron who failed to think through his approach and implementation? Pretty much.

Mick Rubalcava got careless and somebody else is going to pay the price of that for the rest of her life. This is no different than if he was driving under the influence and plowed his vehicle into hers and caused a similar injury. He was stupid, the object was simply the implement of his stupidity, and the bystander was caught up in the luck of the draw. Crappy, but it's the way life is.

Do we blame cars for DUI accidents? Should we consider it the responsibility of Ford to teach people 'when to say when'? Maybe people should drive cars with 10mph speed governers, to help render tham 'safer'. That would be pretty much analagous to carryin' a pistol with an empty chamber, in my view. :rolleyes:

I carried my Springfield Armory 1911A loaded at 1/2 cock position and supposedly it was not suppose to be able to drop the hammer until it was fully cocked and the the safety in the back strap depressed, but it did, not once but twice and now it is gone. The thumb safety prevents movement of the trigger/sear, not the hammer. If the hammer pushes off half-cock, it's defective. The grip safety can't help you with that; getting the pistol fixed would.

carebear
December 20, 2006, 01:21 AM
I carried my Springfield Armory 1911A loaded at 1/2 cock position and supposedly it was not suppose to be able to drop the hammer until it was fully cocked and the the safety in the back strap depressed, but it did, not once but twice and now it is gone.

"Half-cock" is not a recommended or safe carry position for the 1911. It is ONLY a safety shelf if, for whatever reason, you are lowering the hammer on a loaded round (also not a recomended carry technique) and your thumb slips off the hammer. If you have released the trigger after beginning to lower the hammer the "half-cock" should catch the hammer. But it might not, which is why you don't carry 1911's that way.

1911's are safe to carry in only two carry positions, empty chamber (hammer in any position) or cocked and locked. Not loaded chamber half- or un-cocked.

Check the manual.

my new pack gun is a 44 mag Colt Anaconda and I carry it on an empty cylinder.

Assuming the innards haven't been monkeyed with, you can hit the Anaconda's hammer with a 5 pound sledge and it can't set off a chambered round.

Carry how you like, it's your choice, but you're blaming the Colt for a human-caused problem and protecting the Anaconda from a statistical impossibility.

Derby FALs
December 20, 2006, 01:40 AM
FWIW, there were 646 CCW permits in Stanislaus County as of 2005.

That is about 1% of the population isn't it?


"If Mr. Rubalcava had not broken the law, she would be well today," said Terry Dalrymple, the international coordinator for Medical Ambassadors, a Christian missionary group that works in developing countries.

God only knows. She may have walked out the school door only to be killed by a drunken motorist. :rolleyes:

Car Knocker
December 20, 2006, 01:53 AM
That is about 1% of the population isn't it?
Less.

Gordon
December 20, 2006, 02:06 AM
Stanislaus county is actually about mid way in the availabilty of CCWs in Kali. The guy was an off duty armed guard. If Kali. had constitutional Shall Issue, instead of the corrupt and unconstitutional system it has had imposed by drooling socialist buggerers , this man would be using a proper holster instead of sneaking. Therefore it is the antigun people of the state that caused this tradgedy and the ACLU should sue all the legislators who passed such rubbish:banghead:

Outlaws
December 20, 2006, 02:15 AM
Stanislaus county is actually about mid way in the availabilty of CCWs in Kali. The guy was an off duty armed guard. If Kali. had constitutional Shall Issue, instead of the corrupt and unconstitutional system it has had imposed by drooling socialist buggerers , this man would be using a proper holster instead of sneaking. Therefore it is the antigun people of the state that caused this tradgedy and the ACLU should sue all the legislators who passed such rubbish

Just pass the blame somewhere else, thats what everyone else does...

This guy used POOR gun handling and is 100% to blame. No one forced him to put a gun in a backpack. He could have concealed it on his hip like thousands of other people do every day. If its concealed, no one would know. Otherwise its not "concealed". You can still use a holster even in a backpack.

salvador31c
December 20, 2006, 02:33 AM
who graduated from the police academy

Well he should have known better, they do teach safety right?

"I made a really bad decision," he said. "I never even thought in my wildest imagination that a gun could go off without pulling the trigger."


He threw himself on the mercy of the court by pleading guilty early in the legal process, acknowledging that he deserves to be punished.

At least he was man enough to take some of the blame and plead guilty even though he should take all of it

ndh87
December 20, 2006, 02:36 AM
"I never even thought in my wildest imagination that a gun could go off without pulling the trigger."

:scrutiny:

sounds like he didnt know too much about guns...

RevolvingCylinder
December 20, 2006, 02:36 AM
Rubalcava showed complete disreguard for the safety of others in his reckless weapon handling. He could not be bothered to but it even in a pistol rug or holster before placing it in the backpack. So yes, it's entirely his fault and he should be punished for it.

And a Colt Anaconda is not a Colt SAA. Your fear of the loaded cylinder in the Anaconda is irrational but its yours so carry as you like.

Idano
December 20, 2006, 02:38 AM
carebear I just checked the manual and you are correct, it is not safe to carry the 19911A1 at 1/2 cock position. The only safe way to carry a 1911A1 is unloaded, not my words the manufacturer;"Do not carry the pistol with either of the safety stops engaged. Always keep and carry your pistol with an empty chamber and with the hammer forward until you intend to shoot, so your pistol cannot be fired unintentionally." http://www.springfield-armory.com/Manuals/1911man5.pdf
So I still stand by my statement that a loaded auto that doesn't have a decock safety and a external hammer that physically can not touch the firing pin with the safety on like the Beretta 92F or the Ruger P95DC isn't safe to carry.

However, you comments about the Anaconda are incorrect. The Anaconda has stair stepped trigger and a disconnecting rod must be in place for the hammer to engage the firing pin; that's from the factory. So there is no way the hammer, when at rest, can come in contact with the firing pin regardless of the amount force it is smacked with unless it busts the hammer .I have attached a picture of the hammer, firing pin and disconnecting rod below.

SilverBomber
December 20, 2006, 02:43 AM
He should just lose the right to own a firearm. For his own safety included, he is a danger to himself.

carebear
December 20, 2006, 02:50 AM
Idano,

The "check the manual" was overly sarcastic. I apologize for that.

Empty chamber is, as written, perfectly safe. The advantage cocked and locked has over half-cock is the half cock position takes all the safeties out of the equation, the hammer is just resting on that shelf, free to move.

I trained to carry cocked and locked and consider it perfectly safe. In the holster it takes the thumb safety working itself off (admittedly not unknown) and then the grip safety being depressed at the same time the trigger is pulled (which really can't happen in a decent holster).

In your cases I'd question the mechanisms of the individual pistols rather than blame the basic design.

But the key is to do what you have done, figure out what works for you to carry comfortably. :)

spartan55
December 20, 2006, 02:53 AM
The first and most important safety is sitting on your shoulders.......This man's must have beed disingaged or does not have one!!!!!!!!

Carebear,
I carry my 1911 two ways, both with a round in the chamber, 1) cocked and locked 2) Hammer down, always have always will

I realy do not recommend the 1911 for the novice or inexperienced CCW.

carebear
December 20, 2006, 03:00 AM
Carry how you will. :)

I've never seen a reason for chamber loaded, hammer down. It's not the easiest gun to thumb cock and if I could carry it that way I could always just carry it C&L.

Pretty much the only time any of mine aren't C&L are when they are in the safe, and then they're empty.

Hook686
December 20, 2006, 03:04 AM
Yesterday, 06:16 PM #4
geekWithA.45


wrote:

This is a tragedy, no doubt or question about it.

Let us also consider that part of the fault which lays on the state of California, whose policies are such that honest citizens, evaluating themselves to be in danger, have little recourse other than to carry illegally, which in turn promotes deep, unsafe concealment.


...
__________________
....



Comments putting the blame on another, be it a person, institution, or the 'government', always intrigue me. It is as though, I cannot drive as fast as I want, or carry the weapon I want, or drink as much as I want, or .... I want ....

Yup it is tough to get a CCW in California, but not impossible. The guy did not have a CCW, though I do not see how this would have ameliorated the current incident. The guy carried a loaded gun in a backpack that he dropped on the floor. Try, as folks do, to make excuses, to avoid the guy's own personal responsibility, escape me. I do not understand this.

The state of California had absolutely nothing to do with this incident. The ease, or difficulty, in obtaining a CCW, in California, had absolutely nothing to do with this incident. The guy acted, with disregard to the law, which he seemed aware of, and, with what seems to me. careless behavior, with a loaded firearm. A major negative in a young life resulted. Why so much effort to shift responsibility, and find fault with the choices of the people of California ?

Idano
December 20, 2006, 03:07 AM
spartan55 I have question, if you carry you 1911 loaded and with the hammer down is it not possible that the gun could go off if the hammer was struck? I am thinking if you fell or a something fell against you. I ask this because the Springfield 1911A1 I had the trigger would rest against the firing pin, do some of the 1911 have a detent in the hammer so a blow to the hammer wouldn't discharge the gun?

ArchAngelCD
December 20, 2006, 03:27 AM
Nobody here knows what gun was involved!
Nobody here knows if it was in a holster or not!
Nobody knows if the weapon was defective or not!
Nobody here should judge another!

IMO, this thread should be in "Legal and Political" but what do I know, I only go by facts instead of conjecture.

Warbow
December 20, 2006, 09:16 AM
Even if he did have a CCW, does CA law allow legal CCW on school grounds? Don't forget that's where this happened. I know here in Texas and many other shall-issue states it's still not legal with a CCW to carry on school grounds.

And it's 100% Rubalcava's fault. Because of his ignorance and stupidity, a young woman most likely will never walk ever again.

Euclidean
December 20, 2006, 09:23 AM
What I find amusing is that no one seems to care about the fact he messed up someone's life, but rather that he was breaking an unconstituitional law.

Bubbles
December 20, 2006, 09:32 AM
Maybe this is more important for the S&T forum, but... if you're carrying a handgun for self-defense, isn't a backpack the LAST place you'd want to put it? Most aren't designed to keep a handgun easily accessible and isolated from everything else in the bag so that you don't have to dig around for it in case you really need it.

And while this guy does need to spend some time in jail to drive home that he was a dumba$$, he also needs a big civil judgement against him to help pay for this girl's care and medical expenses.

Warbow
December 20, 2006, 09:37 AM
That is about 1% of the population isn't it?

And what percentage of the population within counties in shall-issue states hold permits?

Here in Dallas County, TX there were 2.3 million people as of the 2005 census. According to TX DPS, there are a little more than 20 thousand active CCW permits in Dallas County -- a little less than 1% of the county's population.

I doubt it's much different elsewhere.

TexasRifleman
December 20, 2006, 09:38 AM
I really do not recommend the 1911 for the novice or inexperienced CCW.

I do.

The fact that it's operation is such that you MUST pay attention makes it perfect for new folks.

The 1911 does not lull you into complacency with marketing of "safe action" and "decockers" and "foolproof" this and that.

You must learn to pay attention to the details with a 1911 and that's a good thing.

A Delta Elite was my very first handgun and I learned more than if I'd had just about anything else.

The safety is between your ears, nowhere else. On ANY manufacturers firearm.

buzz_knox
December 20, 2006, 09:42 AM
So I still stand by my statement that a loaded auto that doesn't have a decock safety and a external hammer that physically can not touch the firing pin with the safety on like the Beretta 92F or the Ruger P95DC isn't safe to carry.

I think that's a bit of a sweeping statement. A firing pin safety would go a long way to mitigating what is, really, an incredibly low probability risk but even then, the safety will not work if it has been bypassed as you did by carrying at half-cock. An LA SWAT officer died by dropping his Sig (which effectively meets your criteria) which discharged on impact. He'd apparently bypassed the internal safeties by manually lowering the hammer.

No weapon is safe to carry if one does not carry in a safe manner. If carried in a safe manner, Glocks and 1911s without firing pin safeties are as safe as Berettas and Rugers; and all of them are only safe as the person carrying them.

JCF
December 20, 2006, 11:38 AM
The guy was an off duty armed guard.

FWIW... this guy was not actually an "armed" guard. The gun was a personal weapon.

pharmer
December 20, 2006, 11:44 AM
My bet is a Glock, not in a holster, condition 1. Or maybe a loaded revolver with a cocked hammer. Joe

Gordon
December 20, 2006, 12:06 PM
I am a Calif. CCW holder, and I DO have to work at it.I really didn't and shouldn't have to work at it in the other 31 states I am licensed in. I still stand my ground that unfair Ca. laws hold some culpability in the situation.A gun is much less likely to 'go off' in a proper holster, the law forbid him holster carry! This was a tragic accident however and a violation of Calif storage laws and unlawful possesion that should be prosecuted. The reality of the situation is the coming civil judgement he deserves that will no doubt be life crushing.

carebear
December 20, 2006, 01:26 PM
The law apparently kept him from legal, on body holster carry.

But he then chose to carry off body in what turned out to be a patently unsafe manner, and someone was horribly injured.

Whatever sympathy he may have earned for being deprived of his chance to legally carry, turns into absolute criticism for illegally carrying stupidly. He could have holstered, or gunrug-ed the gun in the backpack and not negligently shot anyone. Instead he chose to put it in there carelessly and someone else paid the price.

He needs to do some paying too, for his poor choices.

EttenBoom
December 20, 2006, 01:31 PM
What does it say about us that most people here seem most concerned with what he was carrying?

Does the fact that he ruined some young woman's life affect anyone?

Idano
December 20, 2006, 01:38 PM
buzz_knox the only way according to the manual that I by-passed the safety was by having a loaded round in the chamber. The manual clearly states Do not carry the pistol with either of the safety stops engaged. I also carried as spartan55 recommend with the hammer down and that is when it dented a primer. So called experts told that either way should have been safe as long as the thumb safety was engaged. I have shot rifle competition for many years and one of the cardinal rules is that if you don't have faith in your weapon get rid of the weapon because you will never achieve excellence. The same should be said should be said about safety. I tried carrying the gun two different ways unsuccessfully and I didn't want to end up a static like both the people in this event. By the way your recommendation of carrying fully cocked and locked also is in direct conflict with the safety instruction of the manual.

kungfuhippie
December 20, 2006, 01:46 PM
646/446,997=.001445 OR 0.145% CCW
That's a tenth of Dallas County. IN many parts of PRK ccw is only given to retired and current LEO and to politicians and their "friends" (can you say bribe)

In Riverside County according to packing.org a county with 1,545,387 population there are only 712 permits and their idea of "good cause" to issue is;
1) Life has been threatened. Documented proof with police report along with recommendation letter from police or sheriffs department that you obtain a permit.
2) Are an active/retired/reserve law enforcement agent.
3) Are a family member of an active/retired/reserve law enforcement agent with documented proof that your life has been threatened.
4) A city employee with a need to carry a firearm.

This is only 0.046% of their population or 1 in every 2144 people have a ccw.:banghead:

Oh and Riverside County Sherriff has over 2200 employees, and then there are police departments in the larger cities too.

So yeah, our state isn't corrupt:fire:

Sindawe
December 20, 2006, 01:53 PM
Does the fact that he ruined some young woman's life affect anyone?I think "ruined" is a bit of a strech. Irrevocably changed from what she had envisioned, yes. For that the fool with the gun in the backpack should be penalized and for the rest of his life a portion of any money he gets diverted to help pay for medical costs this girl will have. I'd toss in ten years penance as her personal assistant 24x7.

darkknight
December 20, 2006, 01:57 PM
The only person here to blame is the guy. Even if California was a shall issue state on school grounds it still would have been illegal as it should be IMO. He could have made a lot of diffrent choices, number one knowing he was breaking multiple laws he should have had it in a good holster. He probably should not have had one in the camber for just this reason cause accidents do happpen and anything that can go wrong will go wrong. also if he had a vehicle why not leave it in there, i live in a big city in california and never had my car broken into at any school. And the academys to teach u about gun saftey and they warn of things like this but yet they all carry locked and loaded on duty. i passed the guard card course at a local academy and am able to carry on duty and i know my instructors would have washed us out of the academy for such stupidity/negligence. I feel horrible for said little girl and hope a miracle can happen for her but it probalby wont. And for him having to support his family well he will have a lot problems with that due to the civil suit he will pay out. He was responsible for his actions he knowingly broke the law and he may lose his house for it and more possible due to family strain. That being said i hope that doesnt happen to him but its a very real possibility. But dont knock the state for enforcing it laws.

spartan55
December 20, 2006, 02:03 PM
Thumbing through my 1911 manual I come across The safety Features........

"Number 5: Inertia Firing Pin : The firing pin is designed to operate on the principal of inertia, with its length shorter than the overall length of breechlock. It REQUIRES a blow from a fully cocked hammer to strike a persuss the cartridge primer."

That being said MURPHY is out there.

The man had good intentions but lacked good judgement. We all take a risk when we carry however we carry.........Same as driving a car, boat, going to work and just plain leaving the house. As men we need to take responsiblity for all our actions.

EttenBoom
December 20, 2006, 02:12 PM
I think "ruined" is a bit of a strech. Irrevocably changed from what she had envisioned, yes

At the age of 17,she has PERMANENTLY lost the ability to WALK. Maybe you should ask her whether "ruined is a bit of a stretch". Ask her family too.

This is one of those threads that really makes me embarrased to be part of the gun community.

Outlaws
December 20, 2006, 02:20 PM
I think "ruined" is a bit of a strech.


:fire:
I have said some things that pissed people off, even I think you should be banned from this site for that one.

Joe Demko
December 20, 2006, 02:30 PM
I think "ruined" is a bit of a strech. Irrevocably changed from what she had envisioned, yes. For that the fool with the gun in the backpack should be penalized and for the rest of his life a portion of any money he gets diverted to help pay for medical costs this girl will have. I'd toss in ten years penance as her personal assistant 24x7.

What, in your estimation, would constitute ruined? It's more than simply not being able to walk. She has no sensation from where her spinal cord was severed on down. She most likely has tubes and bags to collect her wastes as she can't even feel it when she needs to piss! All this at age 17. I think the assclown in question did a rather fine job of ruining her life.

kungfuhippie
December 20, 2006, 02:37 PM
First off, the girl's life has been ruined, but she may, and hopefully will rebuild from the broken pieces

even I think you should be banned from this site for that one.


wow outlaws, I didn't know your opinion was so important. People say dumb things but unless he makes a habit of it or starts attacking people and not their arguements I think a banning is irrational.

on school grounds it still would have been illegal as it should be IMO

Ask the 15 students at Texas A&M that died in 1966 if they'd of prefered good guys to be armed on campus.

from wikipedia:
On August 1, 1966, Charles Whitman, an architectural engineering major at the university, barricaded himself in the observation deck of the tower of the Main Building with a sniper rifle and various other weapons. In a 96-minute stand-off, Whitman killed 15 people and wounded many more

Allowing legal carry on college and university campus by law abiding students and faculty will allow the innocent to prevent bad people, like Mr. Whitman, from killing random people because those law abiding people will be able to protect themselves. Arming good people results in safer enviornments.

Mr. Whitman did not care about a no-gun on campus law any more than he cared about the 15 people he murdered.

Sean Dempsey
December 20, 2006, 02:42 PM
I think it's horrible that this girl was injured so bad, it's really a true tragedy.

but, I think the interest in the gun isn't for hee-haw gawking, but more to determing if it was

a) a defective gun
b) a pencil/pen/chapstick in the triggerguard of a cocked semi,
b1) a cocked glock
b2) a cocked, unsafed 1911
b3) a cocked XD
c) a cocked revolver (see b.)
d) none of the above


I think we all know that guns are meant to only be fired intentionally. But there are alot of little parts and widgets inside semi's, and you won't be able to convince me that a defective, broken part can't allow a gun to discharge unintentionally.

Say it was a Glock, and there was a 1 in a million defective part inside the mechanics, and it suddenly gave way due to bad metallurgy or a oversight in Q&A in the factory. So even if it was holstered, safed, and properly stored, it still might have dischared. thats only if it was a BROKEN, DEFECTIVE gun. Just like brakes going out from a mechanical error, its not the drivers fault, sometimes brakes DO fail and people are killed, and there's no one to blame.

If the gun was 100% working, then we move to the idea that this gun did something very stupid which changes the equation. This is now killing someone when you are racing down the street at 120mph trying to prove to your friends your new beamer is awesome.

So anyways, flame away. I think the interest in the gun is to discern whether the guy had a gun that went defective and had a mechanical error, or if he put it in his backpack filled with finger shaped objects.

Idano
December 20, 2006, 02:42 PM
kungfuhippie that was University of Texas in Austin not A&M. I have been there, below the tower it is eerie to stand there and know what happened.

kungfuhippie
December 20, 2006, 03:24 PM
Whoops, well the point is the same, haven't been to Austin yet, just through Amarillo. Thanks for the correction so I won't sound like such an idiot next time I mention this. So just to clarify, no famous shooting incidents at Texas A&M?

MechAg94
December 20, 2006, 03:37 PM
What does it say about us that most people here seem most concerned with what he was carrying?

Does the fact that he ruined some young woman's life affect anyone?
Go back an read the first page again. Some were, but like many technical minded people, we tend to go straight to causes and fixes, and not dwell on the injuries.


I have never attempted to carry a 1911 in anything but cocked and locked. Sometimes there is a round in the chamber, sometimes not. With the thumb safety up, the slide is locked so I know it won't inadvertently pick up a round if unloaded. I have never heard of anyone depending on a half cock or hammer-down condition. (I have an SA loaded and a mil-spec 1911.)

To be honest, I don't ever attempt to decock a 1911 either. I just eject the mag and rack the slide to empty it. Much, Much safer way to unload.

All that said, no pistol should ever be stored or carried loaded without some sort of holster or case to protect the trigger well and mechanism. The only exception I make occasionally is my Kel-Tec P32 in my back pocket, and that only because there is nothing else in there and it is flat.

MechAg94
December 20, 2006, 03:43 PM
One other related lesson: Always check the function of the safeties on your gun every (safe) chance you get.

Flopsy
December 20, 2006, 05:53 PM
What does it say about us that most people here seem most concerned with what he was carrying?

Does the fact that he ruined some young woman's life affect anyone?

Yes. But that's not the point of the questioning. The fact is that there are details here about the incident that are missing from this report, and we want to know. That doesn't make us discompassionate. Our desire to know EXACTLY how the tragedy occurred is a good thing - greater understanding of these bad mistakes makes us all better able to prevent them.

I want to know: did he use a holster, did his holster fail, was it a cheap holster, did he have pencils smacking his trigger, was it a badly designed gun, was it a malfunction. Knowing these things can help us increase our vigilance accordingly.


I've said some things that pissed people off, even I think you should be banned from this site for that one.

You might be jumping to conclusions here. I bet if you went around telling people in wheelchairs that their lives are ruined, they might take a little exception. This is a terrible tragedy, but I'd think that it would be pretty cruel to think of all wheelchair-bound people as having ruined lives. It's not our place to say her life is ruined - think of what your "compassion" is doing here. From the limited info, she seems to have a pretty strong spirit and I have faith she'll do better than "ruined."

MrTuffPaws
December 20, 2006, 06:23 PM
My bet is a Glock, not in a holster, condition 1. Or maybe a loaded revolver with a cocked hammer. Joe

That or any other gun not in a holster with the safety off. Though, if the guy was stupid enought to put a cocked revolver in a backpack, then he should have shot himself for his stupidity.

EttenBoom
December 20, 2006, 06:43 PM
From the limited info, she seems to have a pretty strong spirit and I have faith she'll do better than "ruined."
I hope so. Maybe it's not our place to declare someone's life ruined, but the victim does a pretty good job of explaining her position here.

She addressed the court, saying every day brings a new difficulty, such as needing help to bathe, being taunted by people who assume she is developmentally delayed, and being unable to squeeze through doors.

"Being a teenager in a wheelchair really stinks," Michelle said.

It's a terrible tragedy and I find the cavalier attitude exhibited by some towards something as serious as this sickening.

I hope every responsible gun owner has the occasional nightmare about being responsible for something like this. That would do a whole lot more than wondering what gun he had.

Hook686
December 20, 2006, 07:12 PM
Today, 08:06 AM #53
Gordon
Senior Member



Join Date: 12-26-02
Location: central Kali.
Posts: 3,111 I am a Calif. CCW holder, and I DO have to work at it.I really didn't and shouldn't have to work at it in the other 31 states I am licensed in. I still stand my ground that unfair Ca. laws hold some culpability in the situation.A gun is much less likely to 'go off' in a proper holster, the law forbid him holster carry! This was a tragic accident however and a violation of Calif storage laws and unlawful possesion that should be prosecuted. The reality of the situation is the coming civil judgement he deserves that will no doubt be life crushing.



Gordon ... "Unfair" California laws ??? The laws of California are the voice of the people. California has a republican form of government. There is nothing "Unfair" about the Ca. laws. The people speak, some just refuse to listen, or comply. What Ca. law are you referencing, as forbiding the guy carrying in a holster ? I carry in a holster in Ca. I am really concerned if there are laws here that forbid my carrying in a holster. Please disclose your information.

Juna
December 20, 2006, 07:28 PM
honestly, stuff like this makes me wonder why so many people insist on carrying one in the chamber.


The issue was not whether there was or was not one in the chamber. The issue is that he carried presumably without a holster with a loaded gun in a backpack (presumably with other things inside the backpack). Had the gun been in a proper holster on his hip OWB or IWB (or maybe even in the backpack in a holster), this would not have happened. He's an idiot for carrying the way he did.

Gun safety is priority #1 for any responsible firearm owner--it must be. The instant it's not, something like this happens and gives ammo and air time to the antis posting pics of some paralyzed girl to win bleeding heart anti votes.

I still stand my ground that unfair Ca. laws hold some culpability in the situation.

I see your point in that if he were legally allowed to carry OWB or IWB or something like that, then *hopefully* he would have opted to carry in a holster like that instead of unholstered in a backpack full of junk. However, that said, I think that despite the crappy CA laws, this guy made a stupid, unsafe decision. Would you have done the same thing? Probably not. I doubt any of us here would think about carrying a loaded firearm with one in the chamber inside a backpack (presumably with other things in it) without a holster. Heck, even the people who pocket carry on here use a holster! All the guy needed to do was use a dang holster.

kungfuhippie
December 20, 2006, 07:29 PM
He meant open carry when he said holster carry, come-on:rolleyes:

He is refering to the sherriffs that are left to their discretion weither or not you have "good cause" to ccw.

In my county "good cause" is that you want to protect yourself and your family.

In the county to the south, Riverside Co. good cause is;
1) Life has been threatened. Documented proof with police report along with recommendation letter from police or sheriffs department that you obtain a permit.
2) Are an active/retired/reserve law enforcement agent.
3) Are a family member of an active/retired/reserve law enforcement agent with documented proof that your life has been threatened.
4) A city employee with a need to carry a firearm.

These "good causes" wern't voted on in an election, they are the opinion of one man who, bless his socialist heart, thinks that guns are for the elite and not the pesants and thinks he'll stop crime by disarming the people of his county.

HiroProX
December 20, 2006, 07:54 PM
This mouthbreather belongs to the same category as Mr. Glock .40

Only it's not funny because someone besides the mouthbreather got hurt because of it.

Flopsy
December 20, 2006, 11:33 PM
I hope every responsible gun owner has the occasional nightmare about being responsible for something like this. That would do a whole lot more than wondering what gun he had.

I guess I'll have to respectfully disagree. I'd like to know technically what real circumstances resulted in the discharge so I can get some real knowledge of another mistake. Then take real steps in the real world to avoid those circumstances. I simply think that would be more effective than shrinking away from nightmares.


Edit: And I'm seeing the law as rather extraneous here, I don't think it was a big factor. He could have been carrying legally and still be an idiot who has an AD, or he could be carrying ILLEGALLY and still be an idiot who has an AD. This is a result of his negligence and I fail to see where the law contributed to his failure.

Derby FALs
December 20, 2006, 11:42 PM
It may even have been a faulty firearm.

rbernie
December 20, 2006, 11:44 PM
I fail to see where the law contributed to his failure.
The theory is that if he had been allowed to carry legally, he'd likely have had the gun in a holster or some other means of appropriate carry.

I don't buy into that, myself. I just can't see how getting a hall pass from .gov to legally carry would have somehow motivated him to put the weapon in a holster on his person instead of in his bag.

SFvet
December 21, 2006, 12:49 AM
You can drop a Sig off of a 2 story building and it wont go off. Firing pin blocks prevent such. That said, if the weapon were to be cocked, the corner of a book like one of our members cited, could fire the mechanism.

srtboise
December 21, 2006, 04:49 AM
buzz_knox the only way according to the manual that I by-passed the safety was by having a loaded round in the chamber. The manual clearly states Do not carry the pistol with either of the safety stops engaged.

i have not read the manual you refer to but a properly maintained 1911 with correct, and correctly installed, parts is perfectly safe cocked and locked as long as the user exercises proper gun handling.

I also carried as spartan55 recommend with the hammer down and that is when it dented a primer.

my bet is the act of lowering the hamer on the live round in the chamber is what dented the primer. if the gun remained holstered on your hip the whole time and you didnt fall or bump into anything with tremedous force i dont think it could have happened any other time. i believe carrying a 1911 with the hammer down on a live round is an accident waiting to happen. you have to disengage both safeties and pull the trigger on a live round to put a 1911 in that condition. not a problem if you are at the shooting range with the muzzle pointed down range. if the gun goes off then no harm no foul but if you are readying your ccw for carry you are likely doing this in your house and it is only a matter of time before you put a hole in something that shouldnt have a hole in it. i know many carry this way and some have done it for years and years without incident but i still believe it is unsafe.

imo, there are 2 safe ways to carry a 1911, assuming proper gun handling of course. empty chamber or cocked and locked. anything else is a potential tradedy waiting to happen. i do not wish to start a discussion on the pros/cons of various carry conditions, i am just stating my opinion :neener:

So called experts told that either way should have been safe as long as the thumb safety was engaged. I have shot rifle competition for many years and one of the cardinal rules is that if you don't have faith in your weapon get rid of the weapon because you will never achieve excellence. The same should be said should be said about safety. I tried carrying the gun two different ways unsuccessfully and I didn't want to end up a static like both the people in this event. By the way your recommendation of carrying fully cocked and locked also is in direct conflict with the safety instruction of the manual.

this sounds like good advice to me. if you dont have any faith in your 1911 then do what you need to do. if getting rid of it is what you need to do then that is the right thing to do. i believe the manual's recommendation to not carry cocked and locked (i believe you mentioned in an earlier post the manual recommends chamber empty carry?) is simply a disclaimer the company's lawyers made them put in there.

spend some time at m1911.org (http://forum.m1911.org/index.php?). i strongly recommend reading the stickies in the gunsmithing forum. i think your faith in 1911's will be renewed.

here (http://forum.m1911.org/showthread.php?t=14401&page=1&pp=10&highlight=half+cock) is some good info about the half cock that was discussed earlier.

as to the original post, very tragic incident. my heart goes out to the injured girl and her family. i too would like to know what kind of gun the guy had in his pack.

steve

Manedwolf
December 21, 2006, 06:00 AM
honestly, stuff like this makes me wonder why so many people insist on carrying one in the chamber.

Because I carry a DAO Taurus PT745 with a manual safety on the side. It was the safest "pocket" auto I could find, and, I believe, far safer than the newer SA/DA version. When chambered, it's NOT cocked.

Some people believe in such things. Like seatbelts.

benEzra
December 21, 2006, 09:06 AM
What does it say about us that most people here seem most concerned with what he was carrying?

Does the fact that he ruined some young woman's life affect anyone?

...

I hope every responsible gun owner has the occasional nightmare about being responsible for something like this. That would do a whole lot more than wondering what gun he had.
You can only do something to prevent such tragedies if you know exactly what caused this tragedy. Knowing the type of gun tells you a lot about what could have caused it, and rules out a lot of things that couldn't have.

FWIW, when I hear that a plane has gone down, I (1) grieve for those who died, and their families, and (2) want to know WHY the plane went down. They are not mutually exclusive. FWIW, I have cried over a few CVR transcripts (http://www.iasa.com.au/folders/Safety_Issues/FAA_Inaction/wrongrigging.html). Grieving over a tragedy, and trying to come to grips with how it was allowed to happen, are compatible endeavours.

honestly, stuff like this makes me wonder why so many people insist on carrying one in the chamber.
Because if you need to use it, it's useless without a round in the chamber unless you have both hands free. And if you carry a double-action revolver, that's pretty much the only way to carry, anyway.

I personally carry a DA/SA 9mm with a manual safety AND internal firing pin blocks, always in a holster, and NEVER in a container or a pocket with loose stuff that could get into the trigger guard.

wacki
December 24, 2006, 07:16 AM
rbernie,

thanks for the response. It was informative.

>SHOCK<^>WAVE<
December 24, 2006, 09:39 AM
I wonder if the FED's will prosecute him for breaking
the gun free school zone thing ??

kungfuhippie wrote:Ask the 15 students at Texas A&M that died
in 1966 if they'd of prefered good guys to be armed on campus.


I don't think that law existed then so it has no relevance to that incident, the
good guys chose not be armed on that day in 1966 they weren't prevented from
being armed. I'll add that I certainly don't support the gun free school zone law
brought to us by the Clinton administration.

kungfuhippie
December 25, 2006, 12:47 AM
shockwave
yeah I guess so, another reason to love clinton:barf:1966 was a different era.

I guess the point is that a bad guy will break little laws while commiting a big law. Having law abiders armed would just limit evil people's rein of terror.

The famed LA police chases are a good example, they always result in a shopping list of charges; speeding, running lights, wreckless driving, illegal lane change, dui, etc. The cops will throw the book at them hoping that at least a few things stick. This way when a crazy does something, if the jury deadlocks or turns up a not-guilty they can then try them for lesser offenses.

gunsmith
December 25, 2006, 08:14 AM
would rather have a field day then report what kind of gun and if it was
in a holster.
in anyrate the guy was a moron...

Now that girls friend and family are anti's for life.

And she is paralyzed? If that was my sister I would want him in jail for ever...
what I would really want I cant say on thr

>SHOCK<^>WAVE<
December 25, 2006, 01:13 PM
yeah I guess so, another reason to love clinton1966 was a different era.

I guess the point is that a bad guy will break little laws while commiting a big law. Having law abiders armed would just limit evil people's rein of terror.






If they had the gun free school zone law back then do yah suppose Bill &
Hillary's Hippy buddies would have been shot at Kent State ?? :what:

Katigroszek
February 25, 2007, 01:23 PM
I think some guys are missing the point here. It is not that carrying loaded gun is dangerous - it can be useful in situations, where one has to defend himself from sudden attack. That I agree with. But how the poor stupid guy wanted to defend from sudden attack with a loaded gun in the bacpack (that is where he was carryig it, right?)???

Did he think that in such a case he will reach with one hand to his bacpack, draw a gun (lightning speed) and shoot the bad guys??? He would have to be a f*****g Flashman or something!

If he decided that he no longer needed the gun on him for self defence he should unload it and than put it in the bacpack. EMPTY CHAMBER (and a magazine too - imo). Otherwise why not start dragging the gun on a rope tied to beltloop...

Type and model of a firearm and type of trigger (SA,DA,DAO, Glock SafeAction) makes no difference here.

skud_dusty
February 25, 2007, 01:58 PM
It's probably been said, but this point needs to be made

GLOCK OR NOT, A SAFETY IS A MECHANICAL DEVICE THAT CAN AND WILL FAIL.

If you enjoyed reading about "Teen Paralyzed by ND of Illegal CCW" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!