Why would you want to put a bullet in the barrel?
Technically the chamber is part of the barrel, so that statement was technically correct.
I don't see what all the discussion is about. We are all aware that guns do not just "go off." The officer had a round in the chamber, which is a violation of his departments policy. He heard the gun rattling around and tried to make and adjustment while on the move. He couldn't see what he was doing while watching the road and his finger slipped into the trigger guard and discharged a round. He will be disciplined by his department.
Yes that sounds logical, but maybe it is not what happened.
For all you know the rifle was carried correctly
under departmental policy but somehow the carrier was damaged and caused the rifle to load and fire. Maybe not likely, but certainly within the realm of possibility. I think it was probably negligence, but there is always the chance it was not at all on the part of the officer, or maybe just partly his fault. It well could have been all on the part of his department which may have ordained that the rifle be carried action open, magazine in, safety off. Don't be so sure this was not departmental policy. You can bet it was departmental policy to have the weapons' carrier placed horizontally behind the driver's head (imagine that - simply beyond the realm of reason that the weapon would almost always be pointing in an unsafe direction). I have heard of other such instances of less than safe departmental firearms policies, and in fact have actually been ordered to carry weapons in almost as unsafe a manner by at least one of my agencies at one time or another in my 28 1/2 year career to date.
Just imagine carrying a Remington 12 gauge in your vehicle: safety on or off, slide/bolt forward, on an empty chamber, trigger has been pulled, four in the tube. If you know your Remington 870s, tell me is this safe in your opinion. Not in my personal opinion, but this is how some people have decided is the correct way to carry an 870 in a vehicle. It would be quite easy for soemthing to knock the slide back and forward again, such as a faulty shotgun carrier in a vehicle traveling on a very bumpy road, and easier still to fire the shotgun because as you should know, the Remington 870 (at least older models) do not need to have the trigger pulled to make them fire. Yet someone, in their infinite wisdom, has chosen this as the preferred method of carry in a vehicle in a law enforcement agency. Even if a round were not soemhow chambered, just the slide coming open means that when you pick up the 870, it is very likely you would inadvertatly chamber a round in the heat of the moment in which you might need the weapon. Scary, isn't it. But yet law enforcement officers are trained in such unsafe methods, and they are trained that such is safe. So how would an officer who followed such policy, one that he was instructed was the safe way to carry, be negligent if there was an unintended discharge of such a weapon that was caused by this type of policy in combination with a bumpy road and possibly faulty carrier? My bet is though, if you heard of some officer carrying like that, many of you would condemn the officer, as you just did the other officer, without knowing the facts. Sure someone is probably wrong, and while it may be the officer, it also may not be the officer, or it could just simply be a malfunction that caused the discharge.
As for you others who just cannot wait to bash a law enforcemnt officer, once again you spout off without all of the information. Sure he was probably wrong, but it simply galls me how some of you rush to judge with scant information, yet you most certainly would want to receive the benefit of the doubt if in a similar situation.
All the best,
Glenn B
Oh my...
