Off Duty Police Officer Shoots Himself

[Speedo66]

"I don't think anyone here expects the police to be perfect, nor anyone else to be so. It is utterly fair for us to expect -- nay, DEMAND -- that no one handle firearms in that way and endanger people. It is our duty to demand that, and require it from ourselves and everyone who carries a gun in public."

Nice sentiment, yet many here and in the general public scream when asked to take training as a prerequisite to carrying. The police are trained by law. So it's newsworthy when one makes a mistake, I understand that. Again, I maintain that most mistakes by the public are not given time on TV or in the press.

 

[Sam1911]

Nice sentiment, yet many here and the general public scream when asked to take training as a prerequisite to carrying.

As they SHOULD!

Being forced to take training as a condition to exercising a right is a very bad thing.

Knowing, and educating yourself, how to avoid negligent actions is still your own responsibility.

I didn't have to take a class to purchase a chainsaw, or a can of gasoline. It is still utterly fair for the world to demand that I do not set someone's house on fire, or drop a tree on my neighbor.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

I don't think anyone here expects the police to be perfect, nor anyone else to be so. It is utterly fair for us to expect -- nay, DEMAND -- that no one handle firearms in that way and endanger people. It is our duty to demand that, and require it from ourselves and everyone who carries a gun in public.

I would also add that the cop should suffer the same legal consequences for his actions that any of the rest of us would likely suffer for such a discharge.

 

[tipoc]

The police are trained by law. So it's newsworthy when one makes a mistake, I understand that. Again, I maintain that most mistakes by the public are not given time on TV or in the press.

Neither the forum as a whole nor me in particular are responsible for the tone of some on this forum and certainly not the tone of the media or how they choose to cover things.

The media may cover mistakes of this type, and other mistakes, by the police more than by the regular community. They should.

The police are armed by the people as a whole and serve in their name and with their power. The police are armed representatives of the state and as such they have extraordinary powers. Society needs for them to be held to a higher standard. At the same time it tends to give them a great deal of leeway, way too much sometimes.

The policeman's lot is a hard one. No one is drafted into the job though, it is taken on voluntarily. In this case Officer Jouett is receiving extra notoriety, more so than a private citizen, because there is a clear video and because the public expects policemen and women to not be careless with their firearms. People have a right to demand that.

tipoc

 

[tipoc]

Nice sentiment, yet many here and in the general public scream when asked to take training as a prerequisite to carrying.

I agree with others...that would be a really bad idea.

50 states, 50 different mini Department of Motor vehicles/gun licenses! Large staffs to draw up the tests, conduct them, grade them, qualify the teachers and courses and of course the fees. Fees up the wazoo! Oh the horror, the horror!

tipoc

 

[coloradokevin]

This is just another example of poor gun handling from someone who should know better. Complacency probably played a role in this accident, as it so often does in these cases. I'm not sure why this person decided to move his handgun when he did, but it's obviously a bad idea to do so when you have to do it quickly (because you're in a public elevator) and you're already carrying other things in your hands.

Remember:

1) Being a police officer does not make one a gun expert. I'm a career LEO, and a POST certified firearms instructor. Trust me, there are plenty of officers who have only novice-level experience with their firearms (at least in my opinion). Just within the last month we've had someone add an extra peep hole to the gun cleaning area at my agency's range.

2) The gun doesn't "just go off". The trigger was pulled, one way or another.

3) An accident involving a police officer is not proof that guns are dangerous. It's merely proof that accidents can happen when people mishandle their firearms, and don't follow proper safety procedures.

 

[Trent]

I am always deeply appreciative that some members of this forum are such skilled practitioners with firearms, in all their many years of experience, as to have never made a mistake with one.

Thankfully, an AD, sweeping someone with a muzzle, etc. is something that never has, or will ever happen to them. It's comforting to know that they have never removed their firearm from a holster except to intentionally shoot it. Have never shown a weapon to anyone else. Must give you warm feeling to have never had a moments lapse.

They are quick to find fault with anyone, especially a peace officer, who has, and quick to begin the finger pointing and name calling. Thanks to the holier than thou here for showing the rest of us the proper way to deal with something like this. They will no doubt be beatified in firearms heaven.

Speedo-

There are people on this forum who have absolutely ZERO tolerance for safety violations, regardless of the actor involved (police or otherwise).

I am among them.

I have personally suffered a great and tragic loss due to "complacency" with firearms.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=563448

With due respect, your sarcasm has been noted and dismissed.

There is no room for mistakes with firearms, people... and no amount of "that'll never happen to me" chest thumping internet bravado will ever change that.

If you get complacent you very well might find yourself being carried to your final resting place by a group of your assembled peers. I have once served that very role myself, carrying a family member to their final resting place, because they got careless with a handgun.

Whether I'm running a firearms class, out shooting with friends, or running a competitive shooting match, if someone screws up, they are sent home.. There are no warnings issued, because the stakes are just too damn high. Your only "warning" is in my safety briefings prior to whatever event I've organized.

When someone publicly mishandles a firearm, and it results in injury or death, as we had in this case, whether police officer or not, they *do* make themselves a pariah of sorts. The community at large should, and generally will, go to great lengths to spread word of such mishap, so that *PERHAPS* others won't repeat the same mistake.

When I am running NRA classes, the story of my departed Uncle *always* gets told during the safe gun handling portion of said class. Usually right before a break - because it's difficult to speak about it, to this day.

You say we act as though we are "Holier than thou?"

Yes, perhaps, but you should also perhaps examine your own attitude, to find out if it is really appropriate. You have chosen to fight this battle, you picked a side, and seem to have a specific grudge against people who advocate safety.

Why is that?

 

[herrwalther]

Yes, unfortunately, it does. Not only are we paying him to carry a gun, but we (as the public) are placing a special trust in him. And expecting him to live up to a certain standard.

I was speaking from a training standpoint but your statement is valid. I just have an ire for statements such as "15 year law enforcement officer shot self" (example) as this some sort of LEOs are infallible. Wheras a 15 year CCW probably has more practice.

 

[Speedo66]

You see what you wish to see. I am very much for safety. I'm not for bashing police which is all too common here. This particular cop was foolish. Don't paint every officer with the same brush.

Too many times I've seen remarks like the one above, "they should be held to a higher standard". In the next breath they complain because police have certain rights they don't have. Can't have it both ways. If you want the rights, get on the job.

They're all for safety, but don't feel training is necessary. Guess they're all born with the innate ability to handle a firearm safely.

I'm done here, time for a donut.

 

[george burns]

The more people carrying guns, the more accidents you will have. It's just simple logic. A handgun requires only one step to cause a death or injury, a can of gas, or a chainsaw require several steps in order to get yourself in trouble. You have to fill it, start it, and then screw up, with a pistol, just being carless will do it.
I understand the point you are trying to make, but with a handgun, you only need one screw up to hit that trigger, or catch it on something. That's why you should never take it out of the holster unless you have a reason that's valid, even when retiring for the night, you don't have to remove it from the holster if you are just going to put it back on in the morning.
Unless it's time to clean it or fire it, there are not many reasons to be fooling with it.

 

[Sam1911]

You see what you wish to see. I am very much for safety. I'm not for bashing police which is all too common here.

I assume this must be the only forum you EVER visit, if you think there's pretty much ANY "cop bashing" allowed here.

This particular cop was foolish. Don't paint every officer with the same brush.

No one's painting "every officer" with any brush except an expectation that they do not act like this. Just as we'd condemn the behavior of any OTHER person who did.

Too many times I've seen remarks like the one above, "they should be held to a higher standard". In the next breath they complain because police have certain rights they don't have. Can't have it both ways. If you want the rights, get on the job.

Oh good grief. Holding up one fool as an example does not have anything to do with a debate over indemnification, arrest powers, or other job perks. An officer owns his mistakes just as an average joe does. (Sometimes they happen to not get prosecuted for a few of them, but that's a whole different discussion.)

They're all for safety, but don't feel training is necessary. Guess they're all born with the innate ability to handle a firearm safely.

Totally obtuse non sequitur. No one says training isn't the best thing since sliced bread (here), or even that it isn't "necessary." We said it should not be REQUIRED, as in, forced by a government entity. As it clearly SHOULD NOT BE. But training is a fundamental tool to safe and responsible action in a great many pursuits.

I'm done here, time for a donut.

Now who's "cop bashing?"

 

[Sam1911]

The more people carrying guns, the more accidents you will have. It's just simple logic.

Sure. Of course, we should also point out that statistically speaking firearms accidents are really QUITE rare, and getting less common all the time. The problem will never completely go away, but we seem to be doing better each decade.

A handgun requires only one step to cause a death or injury, a can of gas, or a chainsaw require several steps in order to get yourself in trouble. You have to fill it, start it, and then screw up, with a pistol, just being carless will do it.

Read that back to yourself and I think you'll see that you totally blew the analogy.

Chainsaw without gas? Gun without ammo? Never seen anyone hurt with a gun that (REALLY) wasn't loaded. So, yeah, multiple steps there. Maybe if it fell on them or something! Wanna guess which tool is responsible for more accidents each year? (Chainsaws: 40,000-90,000, firearms: 14,000 - 19,000) Not sure of the mortality rates there, but 80% of gun shot victims survive, so...

That's why you should never take it out of the holster unless you have a reason that's valid, even when retiring for the night, you don't have to remove it from the holster if you are just going to put it back on in the morning.
Unless it's time to clean it or fire it, there are not many reasons to be fooling with it.

Certainly pretty good words to live by. Ones I've repeated MANY times myself. And yet another reason I'm against "gun free zones."

 

[ApacheCoTodd]

Here's the deal.

Fella has a firearm legally.

Fella has it unholstered and sorrily controlled for no apparent reason.

Fella shoots his-own-damn-self - thank God he did not shoot someone else.

Fella is un-arguably a fool.



Fella in point of fact happens to be a police officer.
Holding donuts is just grist for the mill.


I will not back off holding him to a higher standard as regards general firearms safety if not necessarily usage. He/they are in fact expected to take firearms to hand on a possibly regular basis and render them safe - even theoretically unfamiliar ones.

Noting the act and ignoring the profession is a form of biased-protection. It's not like he's a truck driver with a pistol.

If other law enforcement take exception as to the noteworthiness of his profession - that's an individual sensitivity issue as it is in no way an indictment of law enforcement in general. A generalized indictment I will note, which is quite lacking here on THR - this, either through self imposed moderation and discretion or administrative moderation.

Todd.

 

[Field Tester]

You see what you wish to see. I am very much for safety. I'm not for bashing police which is all too common here. This particular cop was foolish. Don't paint every officer with the same brush.

Too many times I've seen remarks like the one above, "they should be held to a higher standard". In the next breath they complain because police have certain rights they don't have. Can't have it both ways. If you want the rights, get on the job.

They're all for safety, but don't feel training is necessary. Guess they're all born with the innate ability to handle a firearm safely.

I'm done here, time for a donut.

You mean the guy who said he is a CAREER LEO?
And yes, you can have it both ways. There's no reason we shouldn't. Even the career LEO above agrees.
You are held to a higher standard because of what you represent. You also get preferential treatment in several areas. I don't think it's too much to ask that you handle yourself in a safe manner.

 

[Warp]

A striker fired pistol with no safety (Glock and others )is an accident waiting to happen.

You could not be more wrong.

 

[notaglockfanboy]

He was shot in the stomach.

 

[alsaqr]

Yep, folks from all walks of life have negligent discharges with handguns. Negligent discharges happen when someone irresponsibly fondles or mishandles a handgun.

If this policeman had not fondled his handgun we would not be having this discussion.

 

[notaglockfanboy]

I 100% agree with you about Yeager. I would call him more than a loudmouth, but I will refrain from it because some of his lapdogs may start yapping. =)

 

[notaglockfanboy]

James Yeager, Really?!?!?!? You mean the "YouTube tacticool" loudmouth who threatens to start shooting people like a child throwing a temper tantrum when their mommy wont buy them a toy??? The same one who trains people to shoot at targets with other people standing next to said targets?? He is hardly a "expert" on anything, other than loving to hear himself talk and believing what he says. SMH

 

[jroddz]

He broke two (possibly three) of Jeff Cooper's four safety rules resulting in getting himself shot.

• All guns are always loaded.
• Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy.
• Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target.
• Be sure of your target and what is beyond it.

 

[leadcounsel]

All guns are always loaded.

I have ALWAYS HATED the wording of this rule. To someone unfamiliar with guns this is so badly worded and easily misunderstood and misinterpreted. I'd suggest changing it to "TREAT all guns as though they are loaded."

Reminds me of the horrible wording on military ranges, listening to the Range Officer continually yell, "Point guns UP and DOWN range."

Oh, okay. Can we be more ambiguous? That can be read,
1. Muzzle up, weapons pointed down range. OR
2. You can point the weapon UP range and/or DOWN range.

Keep in mind a lot of those Soldiers (some with IQs of 80) on that range have never held a weapon, are stressed under those circumstances, and rattled at having some DI or RO or 1SG yelling at them. I've seen/heard of NDs on ranges too. And given plenty of them are yelled at for pointing the weapon UP range it clearly is misunderstood. So why not give a clear instruction?

Same with "All guns are loaded all the time." To a novice or dumb person, that is a dangerously vague statement.

 

[bobmcd]

I TREAT guns as if they are loaded. The are NOT always loaded.

If guns are always loaded, why do I keep having to buy ammunition?

 

[Panzerschwein]

I like to act as if there is a deadly laser beam coming from the muzzle of each firearm.

They are never to be swept across anything, as the beam would hurt someone or something. They also are stored with the "laser beam" in a safe direction. If you act like there is constant danger from the muzzle (there very well could be) then it helps with muzzle discipline.

 

[RustyShackelford]

Stomach wounds....

The fact that the cop shot himself in the stomach is bad enough, .
As any medical professional or combat medic can tell you, a stomach or lower torso wound is extremely painful.
Many gun shot victims can't eat certain foods or digest large amounts of foods, for the rest of their lives.
This veteran officer made a big error but I hope his wounds are not serious or life changing.
The PD reprimands or punishments will be rough too.

 

[tipoc]

If this policeman had not fondled his handgun we would not be having this discussion.

Well, yeah and it was all caught on pretty clear video. That tends to promote discussion as well.

To be fair there was also alot of discussion about the firearms instructor who shot a student in his class awhile back with no video. Oh yeah... he was also a trainer for law enforcement.

tipoc