Kentucky Cop Sues Gun Store After Accidentally Shooting Finger Off
- Thread starter bofh
- Start date
I can see 50/50 negligence on this one, both the employee and the former police officer were equally negligent. I wonder if the former police officer's "high level of training" will be considered by the jury? Funny how police and badge fluffers tout "high level of training" as one reason why they should be exempt from firearms restrictions that regular Joe is subject to - but I bet the plaintiffs won't be saying a word about "high level of training" in this one.
Personally I blame the bullet! It was obviously in the wrong place, at the wrong time. Other than that, what this remarkably careless officer did while he was holding that SIG (?) is a flagrant violation of Cooper's Second Rule of Safe Gun-Handling:
'NEVER ALLOW A GUN'S MUZZLE TO EITHER POINT AT - OR, SO MUCH AS, SWEEP ACROSS - ANYTHING YOU ARE UNWILLING TO SEE DESTROYED.'
Obviously that cop has been spending too much time on internet gun forums! (Where all the gun-handling mistakes and subsequent injuries always happen to someone else, and ain't never going to happen to you!)
'NEVER ALLOW A GUN'S MUZZLE TO EITHER POINT AT - OR, SO MUCH AS, SWEEP ACROSS - ANYTHING YOU ARE UNWILLING TO SEE DESTROYED.'
Obviously that cop has been spending too much time on internet gun forums! (Where all the gun-handling mistakes and subsequent injuries always happen to someone else, and ain't never going to happen to you!)
BC1
,
I'm laying this one squarely on the cop. A gun store keeping a loaded gun for protection is smart. Having it in the display case or handing it to someone without unloading it is negligent on the part of the store. But the cop? He's trained at a much higher level. One NEVER accepts a gun from anyone without seeing the action or cylinder is open and unloaded.
.
I guess the cop gave him the finger.
candyjurgerson
New member
LOL I blame the bullet too. Joking. But seriously, I'm really sorry the police officer was injured, but what kind of gun safety courses are they required to take these days?
BluesStringer
Les Brers
As to the part in bold, I seriously doubt you could provide proof of that premise in action. NDs by cops and/or collateral damage by cops and/or shoot-first-determine-level-of-threat-later by cops all happen at least as, if not way more, frequently than by average citizen gun owners/carriers.
That said, surely the store is liable for part of the incident. I'd be OK with a 50/50 split regardless of the supposed advanced training of the cop.
As to your last line, BC..............
Blues
bofh
Banned
Same goes for the gun store employee who thought that storing a loaded firearm in the display case in C3 was a good idea. He, apparently, listened to those Internet gun experts arguing that C3 is so much safer and will prevent negligent discharges. After all, someone has to rack the slide to chamber a round. And someone did.
This is yet another Swiss Cheese example, where a number of chances were missed to prevent this tragedy. This time, it likely took three people to violate basic firearms safety. The person who put a loaded firearm in the display case, the person that took that weapon and handed it over to another person without performing a safety check, and the person receiving the weapon without performing a safety check by himself (and violating a number of other safety rules).
mwhals
Member
The police officer violated several safety rules:
1. He did not treat the gun as if it was loaded.
2. He failed to not point at something he didn't want to destroy.
3. He failed to keep his finger off the trigger without knowing the condition of the gun.
4. He failed to perform a safe check of the gun.
The store salesman is partly responsible, but the policemen is mostly responsible. I would say it is 25/75 on responsibility where the salesman missed point 4 and the policeman missed points 1 through 4.
1. He did not treat the gun as if it was loaded.
2. He failed to not point at something he didn't want to destroy.
3. He failed to keep his finger off the trigger without knowing the condition of the gun.
4. He failed to perform a safe check of the gun.
The store salesman is partly responsible, but the policemen is mostly responsible. I would say it is 25/75 on responsibility where the salesman missed point 4 and the policeman missed points 1 through 4.
Wow, the idiot cop did rack the slide....
So, in direct opposition to N R A's claims, Condition 3 is apparently only safer to those WITHOUT firearms training who probably do not know that you must rack the slide in order to load the chamber. In this case, condition 3 posed more danger to the "highly trained" police officer because if he had racked the slide and the round in the chamber popped out, hopefully (no guarantees) that would have caused him to pause before pulling the trigger.
Well, bofh, I see nobody’s ever rightfully accused you of being a precision thinker. Your buddy just got through telling me that I don’t answer other people’s questions, and immediately resort to insults, instead. (Which is, I suspect, his way of being insulting without appearing to be so; but, whatever.)
Look, other board members like you and him really don’t leave someone like me with too many options. I tell you the truth; by any pragmatic measure of public safety I’m, hands down, correct; but, my superior reasoning and more realistic approach to, what is actually, a very common problem with guns in America today, doesn’t fit in with your own self-centered and myopic, ‘me, me, me first and what I want’ view of the world.
So, whenever I’m confronted with one of you guys and your, ‘knee jerk’ reactions, what are my options? (A) I can remain silent; and some deep thinking, ‘gun bozo’ is going to take offense; or (B) I can resort to being facetious, and the, 'gun bozos' are,still, going to throw every ill-advised, imaginative argument they can think of back at me; or (C) - the reply that I really don’t want to make - I can take the time and make the effort to write a cogent, highly detailed, logical, and correct response THAT the close-minded, ‘gun bozos’ are going to immediately, flat-out reject.
I’ve tried being reasonable; I’ve tried being logical; I’ve tried sharing the acquired wisdom the years have added to me; and I’ve even tried being civil and polite; but, civil and polite is taken for weakness; acquire wisdom is wasted on fools; and the most logical, factual reply in the world becomes a complete waste of time (Sort of like trying to dress a pig in a mink coat!) for people who: (1) won’t listen, (2) won’t consider, (3) refuse to even imagine that their closely-held personal prejudices might be wrong, and (4) (Truth be told) simply haven’t been, ‘gifted by God' with the ability to know any better.
All men think they are wise; but, sadly, this popular supposition isn’t anywhere near being universally true. If I’m giving you the impression that my years have caused me to be cynical and distrustful of my fellowman’s ability to reason - and, especially, to reason with equity, and fairness - well, what can I say? The intellectual dilemma from which I presently suffer appears to apply equally to all, but the most obtuse and obdurate of men - Life in today's modern world is, for most men, very disappointing.
What happened in that gun store is NOTHING of the assumptions you’ve put forth. Instead it’s just one more random example of the fact that PEOPLE TEND TO BE CARELESS, SELFISH, AND STUPID. I don’t think, 'C-ANYTHING’ would have saved that officer from the consequences of the mistake he made; however, this event DOES HIGHLIGHT THE NEED for increased gun safety! In order to reduce the incidence of accidents like this every shooter/carrier should give himself every scintilla of advantage that he’s able to provide himself with; and, 'C-3' carry is one of those, 'scintillas'!
Anyone who asserts that, ‘He is an absolute master of his gun; and he is an absolute master of his gun all of the time’ is either a liar, a fool, or both. The way you’re going I suspect that you will continue to, ‘keep your head in your butt’ about gun safety and public civilian carry, probably, for the remainder of your life, as well as through one tragic shooting mishap after another.
Some guys don’t learn; you and your buddy appear to be two of them. Me? If I weren’t old; if I didn’t anticipate, ‘standing in judgment’ sooner rather than later, I might be inclined to be more of a politician, and tell the general gun-owning public only what the, ‘cowboys’ in the group want to hear; but, at my age, I’d rather tell the unvarnished truth. I know right from wrong; and, in the time that remains to me, I’m only going to be given so many opportunities to testify to the truth of things. Are fools going to come after me? Are small minds and narrow intellects going to take umbrage, and, ‘snap at my heels’? Yes, and yes, again. Whether it’s the truth about safe gun-handling and use; or whether it’s about God and His accurate worship, stupid men on the one hand, and evil stupid men on the other are certain to take exception to whatever I have to offer.
With publicly carried handguns it’s a serious mistake for any and all branches of government to allow the general American public to carry C-1 semiautomatic pistols, around, all day long. No good can, or will come of it; and, sadly, I strongly suspect that the enemies of our Constitution and Second Amendment - PEOPLE WHO ARE MUCH MORE CLEVER AND MUCH MORE SUBTLE THAN EITHER OF THE TWO OF YOU - are only too well aware of it!
C-1 semiautomatic carry does not act within American society as any sort of, ‘goodwill gesture’. It’s needlessly risky; it’s needlessly dangerous; and it will, inevitably, continue to get people maimed and killed - All widely reported public acts that aren’t going to win any friends from among the huge crowd of sheeple who are presently standing back watching and waiting for simple minds like yours to finally screwup once and for all.
Does a pistolero really need to be in C-1? Sometimes, and that, ‘sometimes’ is a very small percentage of the time. (Might not even happen to you in your lifetime!) C-1 is ideally suited, even necessary, for making an instantaneous response to a CQB ambush event. The rest of the time it’s not really needed. C-3 actually is a training issue; and it can be practiced and worked around in such a way that (at my best guess) 98% of the time it’s no disadvantage at all.
It’s for certain that the likes of you, and older shrewder gunmen like me are going to continue to disagree; it’s also for certain that more rather than fewer people are going to be maimed or killed by their C-1 semiautomatic pistols. That’s, all, ‘part and parcel’ of life in an evil and imperfect world full of close-minded, stupid, and immoral people who insist upon having their own way regardless of any adverse consequence to others.
Firefighterchen
OC for Tactical Advantage
Age does not equate to wisdom...it does look like it plays a major role in ego though.
Superior reasoning hahaha Pro gun control old fool.
Sent from my D6616 using USA Carry mobile app
r1derbike
New member
Lots of negligence may be passed around for this incident. Will be interesting to see the results @ final gavel fall.
I'd like to share a story, when I was first getting into firearms years ago, that only involved a sidearm. I would "touch" the trigger (to make sure it was still there?) subconsciously sometimes, and instantly realize the stupidity of my mistake, and immediately yell, "WHAT-THE-HELL ARE YOU DOING?"
That negative feedback quickly changed my trigger habits, after a few stupid touches.
It's unfortunate a cop lost part of a digit. It's even more unfortunate that safe firearm handling wasn't followed.
I'd like to share a story, when I was first getting into firearms years ago, that only involved a sidearm. I would "touch" the trigger (to make sure it was still there?) subconsciously sometimes, and instantly realize the stupidity of my mistake, and immediately yell, "WHAT-THE-HELL ARE YOU DOING?"
That negative feedback quickly changed my trigger habits, after a few stupid touches.
It's unfortunate a cop lost part of a digit. It's even more unfortunate that safe firearm handling wasn't followed.
CharlesMorrison
Banned
You bet your ass!!
You need to work on the grammar and syntax of what you just tried to say. (It's screwed up!) It, also, amuses me to see that you went ahead and took it upon yourself to join in on an argument that, actually, was not your own; but (A correct use of the conjunction!) in doing so have, inadvertently, revealed both who and what you are. (Sad, fella, really sad!) :wacko:
PS: 'Memorialize' this one for me, too. Will ya! :biggrin:
BluesStringer
Les Brers
While it is true that bofh and I have never locked horns (that I recall), and likewise true that I have clicked the "Like" link on several of his posts over the months/years, he will likely be as surprised as I was to find that we are "buddies" according to the antagonistic, brain-dead ol' fart that just referred to me as such.
By the way ya ol' fart, I turn 60 in a couple of weeks. I'll put my level of training up against anyone's except for Special Forces/Navy Seals operators' training. I don't know your exact age, and really couldn't care less, but chances are you were still wetting the bed when I was born, so climb down off of that undeserved pedestal you've put yourself on and join in the discussions around here, or really, just get lost, because no one but one or two other arrogant knuckleheads are ever going to agree with you, especially not just because of your seasoned-citizen status. We have more than one member here over 80, and I've never seen them or any other older members of this or any other forum expect deference to their age as often or in as ridiculously of a manner as how you demand it all the time. Respect is generally earned around here, and you've not only got dues yet to pay, but you've dug yourself a deficit from which you must now climb before you even start paying on principal.
I was raised with my Grandmother who used to say about her older brother almost every time they talked, that there's no fool like an old fool. My Granny has never been proven wrong in the 35 or so years since I last heard her say that. Calm your arrogant ass down, and maybe you can be the first.
Blues
By the way ya ol' fart, I turn 60 in a couple of weeks. I'll put my level of training up against anyone's except for Special Forces/Navy Seals operators' training. I don't know your exact age, and really couldn't care less, but chances are you were still wetting the bed when I was born, so climb down off of that undeserved pedestal you've put yourself on and join in the discussions around here, or really, just get lost, because no one but one or two other arrogant knuckleheads are ever going to agree with you, especially not just because of your seasoned-citizen status. We have more than one member here over 80, and I've never seen them or any other older members of this or any other forum expect deference to their age as often or in as ridiculously of a manner as how you demand it all the time. Respect is generally earned around here, and you've not only got dues yet to pay, but you've dug yourself a deficit from which you must now climb before you even start paying on principal.
I was raised with my Grandmother who used to say about her older brother almost every time they talked, that there's no fool like an old fool. My Granny has never been proven wrong in the 35 or so years since I last heard her say that. Calm your arrogant ass down, and maybe you can be the first.
Blues
Firefighterchen
OC for Tactical Advantage
That must be your "superior reasoning", so superior it couldn't tell an auto correct and fix it like the rest of the readers with "inferior reasoning" that understood the simple message. Your superiority complex is pathetic.
Old fool.
Sent from my D6616 using USA Carry mobile app
New Threads
-
-
-
-
-
Mystic Seaport Museum, Shelburne Museum Vermont
- Started by Harry45255
- Replies: 0