Lodi cop shot by young child in disturbing accident!

page: 1
2

log in

join

posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 12:32 PM
link   
This one shocks me. It isn't some rookie out of POST training. It isn't some old timer so close to retirement, he doesn't care anymore. It's a SWAT Officer, who is supposed to be a little better trained and a little more responsible (we'd HOPE) than the rest of the pack.

It seems, that wouldn't be an accurate assumption.


LODI (CBS13) — A Lodi Police SWAT officer had a Glock 35 with a flashlight in his thigh holster at a children’s reading event when a boy managed to pull the trigger and shoot the officer.

“It doesn’t have an external safety or anything like that,” said Lt. Sierra Brucia with the department. “The gun functioned how it was supposed to. When the trigger was pulled, the gun went off.”


First, I'll say this is why I will never own a Glock handgun. Someone could give me one as a gift and I'd be pricing it for resale out the door right after they left. The lack of any positive safety system on that gun is why. My 1911 .45 automatic has SEVERAL safeties which each prevent firing unless that is precisely what you intend to do, on purpose and at that moment. Not so, the Glock. Obviously.


“A small child, witnesses tell us was 6 to 8 years old, was able to walk up to the officer and was able to pull the trigger.”

The bullet hit the officer’s leg. He was taken to the hospital for a minor injury and released.
Source

I'm glad to hear no one was seriously hurt, least of all the children. However, I'm appalled that it happened at all. My Father and EVERY cop I ever met in less than 'official' conditions has been the same on this, was VERY protective and paranoid (would be the word) about his right side. It was ingrained, bone deep and impossible to get out of his personality after a decade and a half of living it. That was 100% about maintaining control over his weapon, no matter what, without exception...ever.

Of course, he also had a CLOSED holster which didn't display the trigger for a kid to walk up and trip with a finger.

I also wouldn't put a flashlight on a handgun for anything but a toy to show off and look neat. It's a GREAT way to die as a cop though. One might notice, when cops enter a building or other high tension situation with flashlights and guns? They hold the flashlight up and AWAY from their own center mass. Why? Bad guys shoot AT THE LIGHT. So, if a cop wants to LIVE awhile....he doesn't place the target directly in line to the open sights of the weapon. In reverse? That literally puts the bad guy's point of aim right into his eyeball.

If this hot dog had considered all that and wasn't a modern Garrett Trooper with a civilian uniform, a bunch of kids may not have had to see a man get shot by his own stupidity?

What does everyone else think? Cops fault? Kid's fault? Pure dumb luck and no one's fault?




posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 12:37 PM
link   
reply to post by wrabbit2000
 


I agree. I own two 1911's and you'd have to be really stupid to accidentally discharge that weapon. They may be old but they're all I need.



posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 12:39 PM
link   
I'd say negligence on the part of the LEO. Reminds me of this guy:



posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by NavyDoc
 

Haha, beat me to it.

He's the only one in that room professional enough that he knows of qualified to *BANG*.

Glock 40? That some new super secret model?

edit on 3-9-2013 by gladtobehere because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 12:41 PM
link   
You'll never own a Glock because when you pull the trigger it goes bang?

Many years ago I was naive in the ways of safeties and shared your feelings. In short, unfounded.

I've never seen a thigh rig that didnt cover the trigger guard. So was the kid fiddling with the holster for a period of time and the cop didnt notice?

Of course why was the cop playing dressup while reading to a bunch of children at a school. Oh, those cops and their costumes. I thought the sight of guns was supposed to be traumatic for children. That's what I keep hearing.

The best:

what the child’s intent may have been


Gotta love'em. It's always somebody else's fault. That menacing homicidal six year old.
edit on 3-9-2013 by thisguyrighthere because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 

People swear by Glocks. They'll eat any ammo you put through them.

If someone is that worried about a negligent discharge, dont chamber a round. Simple.

Plus hickok45 loves Glocks. Enough said.

edit on 3-9-2013 by gladtobehere because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by wrabbit2000
 





It doesn’t have an external safety or anything like that


That is the one and only thing that I dont like about my Glock .There is no reason for a pistol that is so well made to not have at least a thumb switch to lock the trigger.
edit on 2112pmTue, 03 Sep 2013 12:47:21 -050047912pm9 by Sharingan because: (no reason given)
edit on 4912pmTue, 03 Sep 2013 12:47:49 -050047912pm9 by Sharingan because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 12:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Sharingan
 


You know, that is the crime of it, too! I had a Springfield XD 9 for quite some time and as I'm sure you know, it's Springfield's version of the Glock...with one BIG difference. You can't fire the Springfield without having a firm and deliberate hold of the gun first. That grip safety was a serious one for how it was set up on mine. Just relaxing the grip a bit (Like the weak hold of a child) was often enough to block the trigger......as designed.



posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 12:57 PM
link   
I own and like both. There are arguments pro and con both. Regardless, proper gun handling will avoid negligent discharges, external safety or not.



posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 01:48 PM
link   
Must have been one horrible holster design, any responsible gun owner knows to never use a holster that doesn't cover the trigger completely. Suppose he's ordered a proper holster yet?



Police say because the gun was in a holster to accommodate the attached flashlight, the trigger was more accessible.


I'm calling B.S.

Plenty of holsters designed to accommodate flashlights still cover the trigger completely. They're covering with this statement.

Also just to throw it out there, another reason not to put a flashlight directly on the weapon is that in order to have a look around, you're by default going to "sweep" everyone in the room. Bad form, to say the least.



posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 03:57 PM
link   
Idiot was probably wearing a competition holster!

Hope he's fired!





new topics
top topics
 
2

log in

join