Two Police Shootings...Are Striker-Fired Pistols Cupable?

[Telekinesis]

This isn't a gun issue (and definitely not a striker fired/hammer fired/manual safety issue).

It's pretty hard to claim you accidentally shot someone FOUR times (and none of the cops are claiming that it was an accidental discharge to my knowledge).

When you train with a gun (and by train, I mean an actual combative type training, not going to a square range and shooting a bullseye) it doesn't matter what type of trigger you have on your gun, you simply figure it out and get over it. It doesn't matter if it's a Glock style striker fired trigger or a DA/SA, DAO, or SAO. You will think "I need to shoot" and your finger will pull through whatever type of trigger distance or weight you have until the gun goes bang. And then it will do it again as long as you're thinking "keep shooting".

On the manual safety issue, I doubt that matters either. In current practice, the safety comes off as part of the draw stroke, so if you're pointing a gun at someone the safety is already off.

 

[Drail]

For some time now I have felt that we need to take a close look at how these officers are being trained and who is training them. Most officers and other people will do exactly what they were trained to do when placed under stress, whether perceived or real. I don't think the gun is the reason - it's the finger discipline. As a former instructor I have always been stunned by how many guys seemed to have skipped class that day and most do not know or even realize where their finger actually is when they handle a weapon. Couple this with dumb people who won't do what they're told and won't stop reaching into pockets and the "accident" rate will keep going up.

 

[Sam1911]

I don't think the gun is the reason - it's the finger discipline. As a former instructor I have always been stunned by how many guys seemed to have skipped class that day and most do not know or even realize where their finger actually is when they handle a weapon.

While I'd completely agree with that, I don't see anything in these incidents that points to a finger-discipline problem here any more than a trigger-function problem.

Again, you don't ACCIDENTALLY shoot someone four times, even if your finger was on the trigger when it wasn't supposed to be.

Once? Sure. Four? Nope.

 

[Coop45]

Minnesota wasn't an accidental shooting. Here is an update on that shooting. Clicky

 

[dogtown tom]

Confederate Quote:

Originally Posted by dogtown tom View Post
The best safety is between your ears. If you follow common sense safety rules you won't put your finger on the trigger until ready to fire and the amount of "take up" in the trigger won't matter in the least. If you rely on "take up" as a safety feature you have no business handling firearms.

Which means that you might be great carrying Glocks.

Sorry bub.....that advice is valid for carrying ANY firearm.

It's all part of the IF canvas: Everything will be fine IF the gun/ammo is in good working condition, and IF the person has been adequately trained, and IF they can operate well under stress and IF they like and appreciate guns and can spend the time training and reading.

It's just not part of the real world, alas!

Whut?
This may be your most nonsensical argument yet!
If, If, If..............doesn't apply. Either you are trained in the proper and safe handling of firearms or you are not.

As you've provide absolutely zero evidence that any officer involved in any shooting was untrained, poorly trained or simply had a booboo you are merely posting internet tripe.

Quote:
What's your source for this claim?

Study. No one's ever questioned it before. The early articles I kept from when major police forces w went to Glocks. NewYork, Washington, D.C., Federal agencies. Soon I just stopped collecting articles.

So basically you have nothing other than anecdotal information? No FBI data? No actual studies? No statistics from reliable sources?
Oh brother.

Quote:
And BTW.....Very few discharges are accidental, the vast majority of unintended discharges are the result of negligence or poor training.

Exactly my point, sir!

No, your point seems to be to blame striker fired guns, when it's negligence or poor training at fault.

Quote:

Really? Four shots and you think they were accidental?

Unless the cop really hates black people (unlikely). He stops a guy, asks for ID, then shoots him four times. Why would he do that?

From what video I've seen..... the officer appeared to be in fear of "the guy" pulling a firearm out of his pocket.

I think if he'd had a Beretta 92, he would not have fired..

Oh good grief. And I mean oh good grief in the most I can't believe what I've just read kind of way. :banghead:

When the officer's brain decided to pull the trigger do you think his trigger finger knew what type of firearm he was holding?

.unless he just didn't like black people!

So..........let's get your thoughts straight on this:
1. It's the fault of the striker fired Glock.
or
2. The officer is racist.


Again........Oh. Good. Grief.

 

[Robert101]

I agree that the discharge of 4 rounds was intentional. It leads me to believe that the officer saw (or perceived that he saw) a threat to his life and decided to shoot to protect himself and others. Not a gun issue in my opinion based upon the little reporting I have seen. Also there has been no evidence of racism here only claims of such by certain people not wanting to acknowledge the circumstances in this case.

 

[azrocks]

How hard is it to NOT PUT YOUR FINGER ON THE TRIGGER UNLESS YOU'RE READY TO FIRE?

If a cop can't train to the point where they keep their bugger-picker off the trigger, they're not going to train to disengage a safety. So either way - someone gets dead. The only difference is who.

 

[Drail]

Gun handling safety is not given much priority in most police training programs. I am not an LEO but I have trained them and had a lot of them on our range for their qualification shoots. It was pretty scary. Unfortunately Instructors are not allowed to put "trainees" face down in the gravel at a high rate of speed like my Drill Instructor did when one guy got careless with his muzzle. It was crude - but it WAS effective. Nobody got sloppy after that.

 

[Yo Mama]

This is getting a bit silly. Motives placed on events unknown to most of us, makes me think a few people are clairvoyant.

Striker fire actions are just as safe as single action, just as safe as double action, just as safe as any action if used correctly.

 

[danez71]

... Not 4 times. That's deliberate.

I could see a much better chance of a cop meaning to say 'Keep your hands where I can see them' but actually saying 'Let me see your I.D.' just out of habit.

Something like that would explain it, IMO. Unless he's just looking to shoot a black guy. But if that were true, I would think he'd pick one that wasn't with his fiancé and little girl.

Sad.

 

[BigJakeJ1s]

I have never had an AD (thank God!) I am not a peace officer or security guard, so I don't have the training or experience they have.

I have witnessed one AD where the person was not immediately aware that the discharged firearm was the one he was holding.

I've often wondered about the following potential scenario:

If I am a trained police officer, and I believe a person has a firearm (out of sight, but on his person), and I have my gun on him already, then I commit an AD, is it plausible that I would not recognize my own AD, but that I would believe that the other person had fired at me, and therefore I would proceed to intentionally shoot him, in presumed self-defense, multiple times immediately thereafter?

Robert J. Hanlon — 'Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.'

Andy

 

[Old Guy]

Please excuse my claim to be an expert. But having been the first non Police trainer, in Ontario Canada, to have been granted the right to train Police and Security, and ran my own training Company for over 20 years, I have some credentials.

Problem Number 1. Young cops can not fight! They perceive any kind of a threat, to them, out comes the duty handgun!

All you can do with a Hand Gun in your hand? Is shoot it!

Just say for instance, the Cops did not have issued handguns on the belt?

Question to Cop. Perceived threat to his/her physical well being? What are you going to do?

Go nuts! Punch/kick/grapple. What do I know about that? I spent 5 years as a Bouncer, on Clubs in Liverpool UK. 1960 to 1965.

Go nuts! Punch/kick/grapple When required I did that on a few occasions.

Cops now have ASP Batons/OC Spray, and sometimes Tasers, electric shock devices. Highly effective fight stopping turning muscles to water hi voltage tools.

But guess what? You can not use any of these, if you have a Bloody Gun in your dominant hand.

Solution... TRAINING!

 

[JTQ]

It may not be an issue with either of these two shootings, but here is an article on the advantages of a trigger that requires more deliberate movement and a gun with a hammer for visual reference.

The LEM as a Street Trigger http://pistol-training.com/archives/8549

 

[jmorris]

When you draw your gun, aim it at someone and place your finger on the trigger, you should expect that a bullet will be going into said person.

Firearms 101: all guns are loaded, never point them at anything you do not intend to destroy and keep you finger off the trigger until your ready to destroy said object.

That said you would be a hell of a lawyer to convince a jury that your client AD'ed into someone FOUR times...

Also, saying that is the fault of the tool not the operator plays right into the anti gun crowds argument, as well as being false.

 

[Plan2Live]

Confederate said:

I'm not advocating we take a step backwards to that degree,

Who says moving back to DA/SA pistols is a step backward? Just because something is newer and more popular doesn't necessarily make it better.

 

[X-Rap]

Too much speculation IMO, aside from a few fairly obscure sources the justification aspect of these shootings remains out of the media.
These cops didn't assert themselves into the roll of executioner's, there was a threat whether real or perceived.
If the threat was a deadly one there is no training issue or that of an accident.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[oss117]

What concerns me about the unfortunate event in Minnesota is the breakdown in communication between the policeman and concealed carry permit holder. I can't say whether or not the cop was extra nervous based on Mr. Castile's race or other factors. Maybe it was the other way around and Mr. Castile was nervous about interacting with a white cop. I hope neither case was true, but even so a lack of very clear communication and understanding was an issue.

We have too much variation in laws, CCW holders, and individual cops with regards to how an interaction should safely take place. It would be nice if basic "benefit of the doubt" and trust between CCW holders and police would be enough to avoid a situation like this. Unfortunately that doesn't always seem to be the case.

Perhaps it would help if the NRA could work with a similar professional law enforcement association to come up with a standardized CCW traffic stop protocol that fits the laws in all states. Crystal clear non-threatening communication between both sides would need to be key to the protocol. Both organizations could then use their respective channels to communicate it to their members. Eventually it would be taught in carry permit classes and generally become common knowledge like the 4 basic rules of firearm safety.

 

[BJJ223]

The guy on the ground should have submitted to the officers. They tried tazing him. He continued to resist. He had a gun. The officers were in fear for their lives. To me, it looked like a ND of the officers weapon.

It would have never had happened if he would have done what he was told.

It would have never had happened if the officers knew how to fight on the ground. I am a Brazilian Jiu Jitsu black belt. They could have easily choked him and put him to sleep with a "papercutter choke". I do it to my opponents about once a class.

This whole thing is an effort to create chaos and Federalize police in America. BLM is run by G. Soros and others that want to destroy the USA.

Less than 500 people were shot by cops this year. 238 of them were black. The biggest threat to black people is their gangster culture, victimhood mentality, victimhood leadership, and lack of fathers growing up.

 

[Tirod]

but there's very little take up in the trigger and there's no safety.

We're discussing whether striker fired pistols are the issue - not the interaction of the individuals in the encounter.

The threads going off the deep end when the OP made an assumption that's not based on fact. Claiming the SAFE action trigger has "no takeup" is contrary to the reality - that trigger requires a lot to get the gun to fire.

First, depressing the small safety finger alone will not cause the firearm to discharge - it still requires depressing the trigger further to release the striker. Per Glock the trigger has to travel about 1/2 inch to release the sear. That's not insignificant.

In comparison a Kahr CW380 is a tenth of an inch longer - a pocket carry gun with no safety at all, and considered about average for travel.

Glocks don't use hair triggers - most guns don't, especially carry guns which may be used during dynamic situations like grappling with someone.

The OP's statement it's the gun has no basis in fact. The Glock was designed to emulate most of the manual of arms of a REVOLVER which was the firearm it was to replace, to minimize retraining issues. Revolvers have about the same trigger travel and weights, too. Would we be blaming this incident on the gun the officer used if it had been a Colt or S&W .38 Special?

Four shots is four shots. It's NOT a gun design flaw.

 

[danez71]

These cops didn't assert themselves into the roll of executioner's, there was a threat whether real or perceived.

Well, lets not give the cops a free pass either.

Ive heard from the few police I personally know that they feel a lot of the newer recruits have the mind set of 'enforcer of authority' rather than 'peace officers'.

There was the guy in NY selling loose cigarettes. The cops confronted him and at one point reached for his hand; Presumably to cuff him.

The guy pulled his arm away.

There was about 10 police officers there and 5 of them gang tackled him, pinned him down on his neck and body, and choked him out.

He died.


All that for selling loose cigarettes? What was their perceived threat?.... the video doesn't show one that I can see.

 

[Old Guy]

It would have never had happened if the officers knew how to fight on the ground. I am a Brazilian Jiu Jitsu black belt.

Cops watch TV, all cop shows show at the first possible chance, gun out.
And again, master hand, tied up. Silly.

If they were secure in the ability to draw from from a secure holster, mayhap they would leave duty pistol holstered till it was to be fired.

A friend of mine Frank ;; Was a Firearms Instructor, years ago, long retired of Orlando PD. When a new holster was introduced to the rank and file, with secure device to stop gun grabs, showed them how to draw (unloaded Pistol) and timed the draw (Training!) and dry fire. He had set a time, self built.

When they had met that standard, they could go to the new holster.

I set a standard procedure for our interaction with Police, as far back as 1980.

Pull tight to right, wind window down, into park, engine off, keys on dash, hands at ten to 2, on wheel.

Respond politely (don't argue!) no problems for twenty plus years.

When you like to fight! It is easy to learn.

 

[sgt127]

It would have never had happened if the officers knew how to fight on the ground. I am a Brazilian Jiu Jitsu black belt. They could have easily choked him and put him to sleep with a "papercutter choke". I do it to my opponents about once a class.

I've been a street cop for over 32 years. I've choked out alot of people. It works. So do saps, slappers and alot of tools.

All tools we can no longer use. Why? Because somebody violently fighting died. It's not the meth running through his system, or the enlarged heart, or the 200 extra pounds of fat he's carrying around. No, it was determined that the cops must have done "something" to cause his death.

The Rodney King case was a perfect example. Prior to that incident, an LAPD Officer simply would have choked him out and cuffed him. However, that was no longer authorized by LAPD.

Or, they would have simply pig piled him, no, also no longer allowed. Somebody died from positional asphyxia or a compressed thorax. It was also thought the suspect could get an officers weapon in a pile.

So, the current doctrine at the time was to apply baton strikes to pain centers until compliance was achieved. Our man Rodney was dusted on PCP. And was merely annoyed by baton strikes. And, you wind up with a video of cops whacking a guy until their arms get tired with little effect.

Every single tool we have ever used has, and will be, turned into the reason for an in custody death. Except the real cause escapes question. A suspect that refuses to comply.

 

[X-Rap]

Don't get me wrong, I don't want to give them a free pass.
Police rank and file have taken a hit over the years when they were forced into the Law Enforcement roll rather than Peace Officer and became a revenue stream for government.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[Old Guy]

[QUOTEEvery single tool we have ever used has, and will be, turned into the reason for an in custody death. Except the real cause escapes question. A suspect that refuses to comply. ][/QUOTE]

Right Sarge. Especially when we have President weaned on Black Panther ideology, never had a fight since he was 12, and smokes!

OOPS! Take that back!

 

[Zaydok Allen]

I thought this was a thread about whether or not a Glock type gun could be contributing to unintended police shootings due to its design, not about choke holds, jiu jitsu, and the philosophy of police takedowns.