Smith & Wesson Forum

Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > >


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-11-2017, 12:55 PM
Protected One's Avatar
Protected One Protected One is offline
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 1,891
Liked 2,741 Times in 1,133 Posts
Default Good intent...Bad outcome

This happened recently. A licensed concealed carrier was attempting to help his screaming neighbor who was being attacked by two dogs. In the process of drawing his gun he unintentionally fired an round, striking her in the lower back. She later died of the injury.

Unfortunately, he has to wait for the determination of whether he will face any charges. It looks like a case of poor trigger discipline, but I'm keeping an eye on the story.

Detroit man calls shooting death of dog attack victim an accident
__________________
Stay protected my friends.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #2  
Old 10-11-2017, 12:59 PM
NYlakesider's Avatar
NYlakesider NYlakesider is offline
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Northern NY-AdirondackMts
Posts: 3,682
Likes: 4,218
Liked 4,278 Times in 1,838 Posts
Default

Best intentions Vs the real world!
__________________
14 S&W Revs none with locks!
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #3  
Old 10-11-2017, 01:58 PM
snuffy51's Avatar
snuffy51 snuffy51 is offline
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Tennessee 38017
Posts: 1,568
Likes: 2,656
Liked 1,787 Times in 697 Posts
Default

The trigger was pulled, he had the gun in his hand. No excuse, ND, I would hate to be in his shoes.
__________________
"Only guns that spin" K.I.S.S.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-11-2017, 03:01 PM
bigggbbruce's Avatar
bigggbbruce bigggbbruce is online now
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Where this month?
Posts: 1,384
Likes: 74
Liked 1,200 Times in 553 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by snuffy51 View Post
The trigger was pulled, he had the gun in his hand. No excuse, ND, I would hate to be in his shoes.
Yep.. big trouble in the Motor City..
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #5  
Old 10-11-2017, 03:04 PM
mtgianni mtgianni is offline
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: SW MT
Posts: 2,992
Likes: 1,161
Liked 1,369 Times in 785 Posts
Default

AD while drawing. He fired twice but didn't hit the dog. I would consider that his training was a failure.
__________________
Front sight and squeeze
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #6  
Old 10-11-2017, 03:17 PM
ISCS Yoda's Avatar
ISCS Yoda ISCS Yoda is online now
US Veteran
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 4,032
Likes: 794
Liked 3,644 Times in 1,666 Posts
Default

That definitely sounds like a training problem. Whether that is a negligent discharge or not it doesn't have to be criminal to ruin his life - accidentally shooting someone will go straight to civil litigation. Very unfortunate.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-11-2017, 04:22 PM
cleans up cleans up is offline
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 196
Likes: 29
Liked 102 Times in 61 Posts
Default

A scary reminder or how far south good intentions can land. 2 lives ruined for sure.

Wasn't going to say anything against the gent, but on reading the news blurb there are some alarming statements. Knowing how far inital "news reporting" can be from the facts I'll reserve judgement. Still I hope I don't have anyone similar prowling my neighborhood!

Last edited by cleans up; 10-11-2017 at 04:30 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-11-2017, 04:22 PM
TomkinsSP's Avatar
TomkinsSP TomkinsSP is online now
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: May 2017
Location: E of America's Great Lake
Posts: 430
Likes: 39
Liked 371 Times in 165 Posts
Default

Prosecuted or not, sued or not, his life will never be the same again. I have seen situations in which unitentjonal homicides have completely destroyed the person who fired the fatal round (or was behind the steering wheel).

Hopefully this individual has a support system. I know of cases where there was a second fatality at a later date.

And to everyone else it is a concrete reminder of the awesome power each of us has at his or her disposal, and the equally important responsibility we have to use that power in a safe and responsible manner.
__________________
Certified Curmudgeon
Reply With Quote
The Following 7 Users Like Post:
  #9  
Old 10-11-2017, 04:25 PM
moosedog moosedog is offline
SWCA Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Michigan
Posts: 4,860
Likes: 2,561
Liked 4,632 Times in 1,299 Posts
Default

Williams sounds like he's not the sharpest knife in the drawer. Maybe some people shouldn't own a gun.
Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Like Post:
  #10  
Old 10-11-2017, 04:36 PM
2ndAmendmentNut 2ndAmendmentNut is offline
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Texas
Posts: 632
Likes: 25
Liked 300 Times in 178 Posts
Default

Dang. So, he accidentally shot his neighbor then went on to shoot two more times and missed? People like this do the most damage to our rights.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Like Post:
  #11  
Old 10-11-2017, 08:09 PM
Lobster Picnic Lobster Picnic is offline
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,196
Likes: 142
Liked 607 Times in 340 Posts
Default

Probably had a semi-auto pistol. I think the long DA pull of a revolver makes for safer handling when the adrenaline is flowing.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-11-2017, 09:02 PM
TomkinsSP's Avatar
TomkinsSP TomkinsSP is online now
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: May 2017
Location: E of America's Great Lake
Posts: 430
Likes: 39
Liked 371 Times in 165 Posts
Default

There was a case a few years back where a guy fought off a carjacker. Using a FN 5.7. He shot 20 rounds and missed 20 times. Really makes you think about where all of those 'loose rounds' are going to end up.
__________________
Certified Curmudgeon
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #13  
Old 10-11-2017, 11:55 PM
snuffy51's Avatar
snuffy51 snuffy51 is offline
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Tennessee 38017
Posts: 1,568
Likes: 2,656
Liked 1,787 Times in 697 Posts
Default

Article also stated he also "patrolled the neighborhood" to protect the children. LE wanna be I guess.
__________________
"Only guns that spin" K.I.S.S.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10-12-2017, 09:58 AM
stansdds stansdds is offline
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 59
Likes: 17
Liked 49 Times in 32 Posts
Default

From the article:
"Williams, who said he patrols the neighborhood in his car to protect children, says he wasn't aiming and doesn't know how the bullet hit his neighbor..."

Problem number one, he failed to properly acquire the target before pulling the trigger.


"After his neighbor was shot, Williams said he carried her to her porch and then went after the dog, firing about two shots but failed to hit it."

So after shooting his neighbor with the first shot, he decides to double down on his bad decisions and poor aim?

This is the sort of thing that gives the rest of us a bad rap.
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Like Post:
  #15  
Old 10-12-2017, 12:29 PM
Watchdog's Avatar
Watchdog Watchdog is offline
US Veteran
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 7,411
Likes: 12,211
Liked 16,016 Times in 4,252 Posts
Default

"As he stood between her and the dog, Williams said a gun that was in his left hand was discharged..."

A gun that was in his hand? Really? Like it just sorta happened to be in his hand?

"Williams, who said he patrols the neighborhood in his car to protect children, says he wasn't aiming and doesn't know how the bullet hit his neighbor..."

I'd hate to have a fool like that "patrolling" my neighborhood. And yeah, he obviously wasn't aiming...probably doesn't know how to aim a handgun. But he doesn't know how the bullet hit his neighbor. How about because it was pointing at her when he pulled the trigger? Hello??

And the photo caption says the gun "accidentally went off". No, it didn't. This idiot pulled the trigger, that's why it went off.

People like Michael Williams are a walking advertisement for anti-gun groups, not to mention being a danger to any person or animal in his immediate vicinity. Why isn't this clown in jail?

And of course, the Detroit Free Press has to try to spice up an otherwise poorly written article by tacking on a video of snarling drooling dogs in a bad attempt to make their tabloid worth reading. What a waste of time, ink, and bandwidth.
__________________
Klaatu barada nikto.
Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Like Post:
  #16  
Old 10-12-2017, 12:35 PM
iPac's Avatar
iPac iPac is online now
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 721
Likes: 814
Liked 776 Times in 331 Posts
Default

Sad thing to hear, and even sadder situation to be in. Poor judgment, and even poorer skills.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 10-12-2017, 12:39 PM
petepeterson's Avatar
petepeterson petepeterson is online now
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,051
Likes: 3,846
Liked 2,613 Times in 1,158 Posts
Default

It's good to post stories of bad decisions, too, as well as the good outcomes.
Me thinks this won't end up in next month's "Armed Citizen."
__________________
Because of the metric system?
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Like Post:
  #18  
Old 10-12-2017, 12:57 PM
Rpg Rpg is online now
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Denver area
Posts: 2,721
Likes: 5,165
Liked 3,690 Times in 1,454 Posts
Default

We all know to keep our finger off the trigger until the sights are on the target don't we?

Guess not!!
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #19  
Old 10-12-2017, 02:02 PM
keith44spl's Avatar
keith44spl keith44spl is offline
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,544
Likes: 7,050
Liked 14,875 Times in 3,125 Posts
Default

It's sad, but these things do happen........

Master Police Officer David Whitson lost his life to friendly fire while on duty.

My one experience with friendly fire was far less, with no injury.
Just a few bullet holes in my vehicle.

.
__________________
"IN GOD WE TRUST"

Last edited by keith44spl; 10-12-2017 at 02:04 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #20  
Old 10-12-2017, 02:15 PM
dben002's Avatar
dben002 dben002 is online now
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Triad Area North Carolina
Posts: 965
Likes: 674
Liked 1,133 Times in 472 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stansdds View Post
From the article:
"Williams, who said he patrols the neighborhood in his car to protect children, says he wasn't aiming and doesn't know how the bullet hit his neighbor..."

Problem number one, he failed to properly acquire the target before pulling the trigger.


"After his neighbor was shot, Williams said he carried her to her porch and then went after the dog, firing about two shots but failed to hit it."

So after shooting his neighbor with the first shot, he decides to double down on his bad decisions and poor aim?

This is the sort of thing that gives the rest of us a bad rap.
A concealed carrier roaming the neighborhood looking to protect someone.............Hummmmmmmmmmmm.....This is a concealed carrier trying to find trouble.
__________________
Hipcocked45
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #21  
Old 10-12-2017, 02:18 PM
Watchdog's Avatar
Watchdog Watchdog is offline
US Veteran
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 7,411
Likes: 12,211
Liked 16,016 Times in 4,252 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rpg View Post
We all know to keep our finger off the trigger until the sights are on the target don't we?

Guess not!!
The guy's obviously not a member of this forum.
__________________
Klaatu barada nikto.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #22  
Old 10-12-2017, 02:40 PM
Watchdog's Avatar
Watchdog Watchdog is offline
US Veteran
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 7,411
Likes: 12,211
Liked 16,016 Times in 4,252 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Protected One View Post
This happened recently. A licensed concealed carrier was attempting to help his screaming neighbor who was being attacked by two dogs. In the process of drawing his gun he unintentionally fired an round, striking her in the lower back. She later died of the injury.

Detroit man calls shooting death of dog attack victim an accident
I've read the linked article several times. I don't see anything that says there were two dogs involved, or that the idiot with the gun had a concealed carry license. And frankly, the more I read the article, the stupider Michael Williams sounds.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Protected One View Post
Unfortunately, he has to wait for the determination of whether he will face any charges.
He shouldn't have to wait too long. I can think of at least two charges right off the top of my head.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Protected One View Post
It looks like a case of poor trigger discipline...
No, really? But I suppose that's a polite way of describing it. I hope the cops confiscated his gun.
__________________
Klaatu barada nikto.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 10-12-2017, 02:49 PM
BB57's Avatar
BB57 BB57 is online now
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Eastern NC
Posts: 1,534
Likes: 634
Liked 3,116 Times in 998 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by keith44spl View Post
It's sad, but these things do happen........

Master Police Officer David Whitson lost his life to friendly fire while on duty.

My one experience with friendly fire was far less, with no injury.
Just a few bullet holes in my vehicle.

.
A couple years ago one of the local officers shot another officer during a training exercise while getting out of a vehicle.

When that happens, or when an officer in the course of an otherwise "justified" use of deadly force happens to shoot an innocent bystander, or has a mistake of fact shooting, the worst thing that usually happens is the officer gets fired. The department accepts all the liability and pays any settlements.

When an armed citizen has a mistake of fact shooting or hits an innocent bystander, the criminal courts are far less lenient in excusing that lapse in judgement and/or marksmanship. Even if the shooter avoids criminal charges, he or she will be held fully liable in civil court.

Armed citizens are playing for much higher stakes when they start skipping bullets all over the neighborhood.

In this case, the guy will be extremely lucky if he avoids being convicted of involuntary manslaughter. Then he'll lose whatever assets he has in the subsequent civil suit.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #24  
Old 10-12-2017, 04:34 PM
TomkinsSP's Avatar
TomkinsSP TomkinsSP is online now
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: May 2017
Location: E of America's Great Lake
Posts: 430
Likes: 39
Liked 371 Times in 165 Posts
Default

At the risk of appearing biased (23 years in LE), there is a rational basis for the fact that Police Officers recieve legal protections in situations where they accidentally or mistakenly use deadly force.

They did not appoint themselves to be guardians of others. The State or a subdivision therof did. Presumably with oversight responsibilities, training standards and fitness for duty standards.

If the municipality determined Officer Schmossifer was psychologically fit, properly trained, and ORDERED said officer to respond to an armed robbery at Garcia Grocery. AND the dispatch officer stated the robber had a gun and was wearing a red shirt, AND Officer Schmossifer mistakenly shot Mr Garcia who was holding his own gun and wearing a burgundy apron, that officer made a tragic mistake, but the municipality contributed to the tragic chain of events.

If Officer Schmossifer misses the perpetrator and tragically hits a bystander, one could question the officers situational response and marksmanship, training for both of which were determined by the municipality.

When Mr Jonh Q Public buys himself a 'George Zimmerman signature edition KelTek' and appoints himself guardian angel, his mistakes, his lack of training, his psychology, his four rejected applications are solely HIS responsibility.

I believe in the right of law abiding citizens to CCW and to use deadly force to defend themselves or innocent others any place they have the legal right to be. This is a great power, as Uncle Ben said, with it comes great responsibility.
__________________
Certified Curmudgeon
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Like Post:
  #25  
Old 10-12-2017, 04:53 PM
Old cop Old cop is offline
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 4,857
Likes: 813
Liked 6,393 Times in 2,030 Posts
Default

Does anyone know if he used an auto loader or a revolver? If it’s mentioned in the article I missed it and am another who believes this might have made a difference, depending on which auto loader (if that was the case) was being deployed.
__________________
Old Cop
LEO (Ret.)
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #26  
Old 10-12-2017, 05:09 PM
wingriderz wingriderz is offline
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,362
Likes: 746
Liked 886 Times in 499 Posts
Default

Wow very sad indeed prayers for family's
__________________
Spin The Wheel
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 10-12-2017, 05:10 PM
CalmerThanYou CalmerThanYou is offline
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Titletown USA
Posts: 42
Likes: 58
Liked 83 Times in 27 Posts
Default

^^I do not even care what kind of gun it was, would distract from the fact he had no business even drawing the firearm.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #28  
Old 10-12-2017, 05:38 PM
Muley Gil Muley Gil is offline
US Veteran
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: The SW Va Blue Ridge
Posts: 9,490
Likes: 20,754
Liked 6,367 Times in 2,689 Posts
Default

"When that happens, or when an officer in the course of an otherwise "justified" use of deadly force happens to shoot an innocent bystander, or has a mistake of fact shooting, the worst thing that usually happens is the officer gets fired. The department accepts all the liability and pays any settlements."

Not always. I have seen police officers hung out to dry if the powers to be didn't like the guy.
__________________
John 3:16
WAR EAGLE!
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Like Post:
  #29  
Old 10-12-2017, 06:16 PM
JDBoardman JDBoardman is offline
US Veteran
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 230
Likes: 37
Liked 223 Times in 84 Posts
Default

As an armed citizen, we all need to be aware that every bullet we fire has a lawyer attached to it, In this case, the man's motives might have been as pure as the driven snow, but his judgement appears to have been seriously flawed. Had he hit and killed the dog, would anyone be less likely to pillory this poor schmoo, or would we still in our self-rigorousness hang him out to dry? I would hope I would respond to a cry for help as he did, and I would also hope my response was more tempered with judgement than his.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #30  
Old 10-12-2017, 06:24 PM
ContinentalOp's Avatar
ContinentalOp ContinentalOp is offline
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,906
Likes: 2,978
Liked 2,011 Times in 812 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CalmerThanYou View Post
^^I do not even care what kind of gun it was, would distract from the fact he had no business even drawing the firearm.
While it's not entirely clear from reading the article, and hopefully the investigation will clear things up, but generally speaking I would think that having a gun at the ready when trying to protect a dog attack victim from continued aggression would be prudent and justifiable under most circumstances.

Any conclusions drawn from this article is speculation, at best.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #31  
Old 10-12-2017, 07:57 PM
BB57's Avatar
BB57 BB57 is online now
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Eastern NC
Posts: 1,534
Likes: 634
Liked 3,116 Times in 998 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomkinsSP View Post
At the risk of appearing biased (23 years in LE), there is a rational basis for the fact that Police Officers recieve legal protections in situations where they accidentally or mistakenly use deadly force.

They did not appoint themselves to be guardians of others. The State or a subdivision therof did. Presumably with oversight responsibilities, training standards and fitness for duty standards...
That's exactly why the courts extend a great deal of latitude to officers in terms of criminal liability when a mistake of fact shooting occurs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomkinsSP View Post
If the municipality determined Officer Schmossifer was psychologically fit, properly trained, and ORDERED said officer to respond to an armed robbery at Garcia Grocery. AND the dispatch officer stated the robber had a gun and was wearing a red shirt, AND Officer Schmossifer mistakenly shot Mr Garcia who was holding his own gun and wearing a burgundy apron, that officer made a tragic mistake, but the municipality contributed to the tragic chain of events.

If Officer Schmossifer misses the perpetrator and tragically hits a bystander, one could question the officers situational response and marksmanship, training for both of which were determined by the municipality.
That's why the department is going to be stuck with the civil liability when a innocent bystander is shot, or a mistake of fact shooting occurs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomkinsSP View Post
When Mr Jonh Q Public buys himself a 'George Zimmerman signature edition KelTek' and appoints himself guardian angel, his mistakes, his lack of training, his psychology, his four rejected applications are solely HIS responsibility.

I believe in the right of law abiding citizens to CCW and to use deadly force to defend themselves or innocent others any place they have the legal right to be. This is a great power, as Uncle Ben said, with it comes great responsibility.
I'm not in full agreement with this bit. Police officers are paid to respond to situations where they ae required to go looking for bad guys.

In contrast, even in states with a castle doctrine or stand your ground type laws that do not place a duty to retreat on an armed citizen, there is still a question of whether what you are doing is prudent and responsible. That's because all our rights come with a commensurate requirement to wield those rights responsibly. A responsible armed citizen will use good judgement and situational awareness to minimize the possibility that he or she will ever have to utilize deadly force to defend him or herself. That's the difference between some one who carries a gun fro self defense and someone who goes looking for trouble.

We are probably more in agreement than not, as while Zimmerman ultimately was determined to have a legal right to be where he was at, and to have still had the right to use deadly force to defend himself, pretty much anyone with a functioning brain agrees that he acted irresponsibly and demonstrated incredibly poor judgement.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 10-12-2017, 08:04 PM
BB57's Avatar
BB57 BB57 is online now
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Eastern NC
Posts: 1,534
Likes: 634
Liked 3,116 Times in 998 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ContinentalOp View Post
While it's not entirely clear from reading the article, and hopefully the investigation will clear things up, but generally speaking I would think that having a gun at the ready when trying to protect a dog attack victim from continued aggression would be prudent and justifiable under most circumstances.

Any conclusions drawn from this article is speculation, at best.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with being armed and ready.

However it's a real stretch to find that shooting the victim of a dog attack in an attempt to defend that victim from the dog was a prudent thing to do. If you don't have clear shot, and very high degree of confidence in taking that shot, the prudent and responsible thing to do is not take the shot. The prudent thing to do is to wait for a clear opening and then stop the attack and/or wade in and close to point blank range with the dog.

One of the few, and perhaps only, exceptions would be if the damage being done to the victim was so severe and so imminently life threatening that the victim is likely to be dead if any delay was incurred.

This incident is just one of a number of reasons where "defense of others" can go south on you in an instant.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #33  
Old 10-12-2017, 08:09 PM
GypsmJim GypsmJim is offline
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 473
Likes: 1
Liked 265 Times in 130 Posts
Default

No question the shooter should not have been armed. An armed citizen "on patrol" without proper training is an accident waiting to happen.

OTOH, in my neighborhood in recent months there have been 3 cases of dog attacks with severe consequences. In one case a woman was killed by a neighborhood dog. In another case, a young child was maimed by a dog that went for the poor child's face and neck. After multiple surgeries and many months in the hospital the little girl is home now with pitifully disfigured face. To make matters even worse, the dog owners are fighting to "save" the dog from being euthanized, and the sorry judge is actually considering their case!

The root cause here is the irresponsible dog owner. They should be held just as accountable as the shooter.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #34  
Old 10-12-2017, 08:16 PM
Protected One's Avatar
Protected One Protected One is offline
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 1,891
Liked 2,741 Times in 1,133 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Watchdog View Post
I've read the linked article several times. I don't see anything that says there were two dogs involved, or that the idiot with the gun had a concealed carry license. And frankly, the more I read the article, the stupider Michael Williams sounds.
I caught the story on local TV, where they were speaking with him (and several neighbors). He stated in his comments that there were two dogs - one attacking the woman and the other keeping people away. He also said that he had a cpl.

The news reporter said the police detained him briefly before releasing him and that police say he was cooperating fully.
It was apparent while listening to him talk that he was not an idiot, but rather someone who didn't invest quite enough time in handgun training.
__________________
Stay protected my friends.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #35  
Old 10-12-2017, 08:26 PM
BB57's Avatar
BB57 BB57 is online now
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Eastern NC
Posts: 1,534
Likes: 634
Liked 3,116 Times in 998 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JDBoardman View Post
As an armed citizen, we all need to be aware that every bullet we fire has a lawyer attached to it, In this case, the man's motives might have been as pure as the driven snow, but his judgement appears to have been seriously flawed. Had he hit and killed the dog, would anyone be less likely to pillory this poor schmoo, or would we still in our self-rigorousness hang him out to dry? I would hope I would respond to a cry for help as he did, and I would also hope my response was more tempered with judgement than his.
We naturally tend to judge events and people based on outcomes, taking a dimmer view when poor judgement and or deficient skills actually result in someone getting hurt. Unfortunately, many people are often overly concerned about confronting and offending someone who exhibits poor judgement, inadequate skills or dangerous habits. Consider how you respond to a fellow shooter (or even a fellow officer) who keeps sweeping people with his or her firearm. I'd like to think most of us would calla spade a spade and insist on resolving the shortcoming before someone does get hurt.

Personally, if I knew about it, I'd still be pointing out the guy's lack of judgment had he shot the dog rather than the victim, or missed both the victim and the dog. Managing to avoid an actual harm still doesn't make it a good practice or a demonstration of good judgment.

----

Consideration of intent will come into play in terms of the criminal charge (if any). In this case the intent is negligent intent, and that generally goes with involuntary manslaughter. It may also come into play in the sentencing phase (if convicted) where the court, assuming the judge has any latitude under any sentencing guidelines, may consider what this unfortunate individual was actually trying to accomplish. That would be also be based in large part on a pre-sentence investigation completed by a court service officer, who'll look at the guy in depth and make a sentencing recommendation accordingly.

It may also come into play short of a trial if the prosecutor decides to offer him a plea bargain for some lesser offense, in exchange for perhaps, giving up his concealed carry permit and firearms in order to prevent a repeat performance. Justice probably wont be served by put a 64 year old man of questionable judgement in jail. That however can also be a very politically driven decision, as if the prosecutor is elected, he or she may not want to be seen as being weak on crime and/or may want to set an example to prevent other idiots from making similar poor judgement calls.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 10-12-2017, 08:41 PM
Protected One's Avatar
Protected One Protected One is offline
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 1,891
Liked 2,741 Times in 1,133 Posts
Default

The family of the victim has already gone on record as saying they will not press charges because he was trying to help their loved one.
Apparently, he fired SEVERAL shots, one of which is thought to have hit the dog...which they have not located yet.
__________________
Stay protected my friends.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 10-12-2017, 08:57 PM
TomkinsSP's Avatar
TomkinsSP TomkinsSP is online now
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: May 2017
Location: E of America's Great Lake
Posts: 430
Likes: 39
Liked 371 Times in 165 Posts
Default

South Dakota: I don't see how we are in disagreement. I said I belive in the right to defend oneself and innocent others with deadly force anywhere one happens to be so long as one is there legally. I said it was an awesome responsibility. Just as I have the right to procede on a green light, but I do not if I see that another car is not going to stop.

(Mostly I support this right because it legally precludes idiotic blame the victim questions. Criminals choose the settings of thier crimes, innocent citizens should not be called to answer for the criminal's choices.)

I do draw a distinction between pretending you are a Guardian Angel (I think he got himself killed, didn't he) and being a LTC civilian going to the store, for a jog, whatever. Smart people don't go looking for trouble, or run into burning buildings unless it is thier job and they have lots of training on how to do it safely.
__________________
Certified Curmudgeon

Last edited by TomkinsSP; 10-12-2017 at 09:01 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 10-12-2017, 09:18 PM
ContinentalOp's Avatar
ContinentalOp ContinentalOp is offline
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,906
Likes: 2,978
Liked 2,011 Times in 812 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BB57 View Post
There's absolutely nothing wrong with being armed and ready.

However it's a real stretch to find that shooting the victim of a dog attack in an attempt to defend that victim from the dog was a prudent thing to do. If you don't have clear shot, and very high degree of confidence in taking that shot, the prudent and responsible thing to do is not take the shot. The prudent thing to do is to wait for a clear opening and then stop the attack and/or wade in and close to point blank range with the dog.

One of the few, and perhaps only, exceptions would be if the damage being done to the victim was so severe and so imminently life threatening that the victim is likely to be dead if any delay was incurred.

This incident is just one of a number of reasons where "defense of others" can go south on you in an instant.
Re-read my post. I never said it was prudent to shoot the victim. I find it difficult to see how my post could be interpreted so as to make you think I did. I wasn't referring to this specific event; I was speaking in generalities. I was responding to CalmerThanYou when he said this person shouldn't have been armed. As you yourself said, it would in fact be prudent to be "armed and ready" in a situation like this.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 10-12-2017, 09:24 PM
ContinentalOp's Avatar
ContinentalOp ContinentalOp is offline
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,906
Likes: 2,978
Liked 2,011 Times in 812 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GypsmJim View Post
No question the shooter should not have been armed. An armed citizen "on patrol" without proper training is an accident waiting to happen.
Why? He wasn't "on patrol" when this incident took place. It states, in the very first paragraph:

Quote:
Michael Williams, 61, says he was spraying for bugs outside his house on the 9500 block of Goodwin Street on Monday evening when he heard his neighbor call for help.
While I agree that a non-LE/security individual shouldn't be conducting such patrols, it's irrelevant in this case because he wasn't doing that. He was on his own property, taking care of it.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #40  
Old 10-12-2017, 09:31 PM
CalmerThanYou CalmerThanYou is offline
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Titletown USA
Posts: 42
Likes: 58
Liked 83 Times in 27 Posts
Default

Just to be clear...I said he should not have drawn his firearm. Which I stick to given the provided account.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #41  
Old 10-12-2017, 09:34 PM
Stevens's Avatar
Stevens Stevens is offline
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Thibodaux, Louisiana
Posts: 2,066
Likes: 1,044
Liked 1,376 Times in 650 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GypsmJim View Post
No question the shooter should not have been armed. An armed citizen "on patrol" without proper training is an accident waiting to happen.

OTOH, in my neighborhood in recent months there have been 3 cases of dog attacks with severe consequences. In one case a woman was killed by a neighborhood dog. In another case, a young child was maimed by a dog that went for the poor child's face and neck. After multiple surgeries and many months in the hospital the little girl is home now with pitifully disfigured face. To make matters even worse, the dog owners are fighting to "save" the dog from being euthanized, and the sorry judge is actually considering their case!

The root cause here is the irresponsible dog owner. They should be held just as accountable as the shooter.

How about "euthanizing" that dog owner!

Last edited by Stevens; 10-12-2017 at 09:37 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 10-12-2017, 10:11 PM
Watchdog's Avatar
Watchdog Watchdog is offline
US Veteran
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 7,411
Likes: 12,211
Liked 16,016 Times in 4,252 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JDBoardman View Post
I would hope I would respond to a cry for help as he did, and I would also hope my response was more tempered with judgement than his.
Well, while you're busy doin' all that hopin', ought to be hopin' you're a better shot than he was.
__________________
Klaatu barada nikto.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 10-12-2017, 10:49 PM
okiegtrider's Avatar
okiegtrider okiegtrider is offline
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,505
Likes: 1,906
Liked 2,542 Times in 811 Posts
Default

This story about the incident does nothing to make this situation less pathetic.

Hear from man who accidentally shot, killed neighbor during dog attack - WXYZ.com
__________________
America First
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 10-13-2017, 12:50 AM
Fastbolt's Avatar
Fastbolt Fastbolt is offline
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: CA Central Coast
Posts: 3,577
Likes: 456
Liked 3,346 Times in 1,275 Posts
Default

Damn, damn & damn. Tragic.

Depending on the laws there, if they're similar to some other states, it's not unlikely the man may end up facing an involuntary manslaughter charge.

A manslaughter charge can still be brought even if the man was engaged in the performance of an otherwise lawful act (justified use of deadly force), depending on the rest of the circumstances.

For example, using a CA Penal Code (just copying what might be the relevant subsection of the code):

Quote:

CA Penal Code 192PC

Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice. It is of three kinds:

(b) Involuntary—in the commission of an unlawful act, not amounting to a felony; or in the commission of a lawful act which might produce death, in an unlawful manner, or without due caution and circumspection. (underlining by me)
If the law involving the homicide of a human being is similar in that state, I suspect the police investigation will focus on whether the man handling and shooting the gun, even acting in what he perceived to be the defense of an innocent third person, was acting in a reasonable manner for the circumstances, and was using due caution and circumspection in his handling and use of the gun.

When I used to teach classes to private citizens (think CCW licensees), we had many an eye opening discussion of hypothetical situations where what might otherwise be considered a reasonable and lawful use of deadly force might, because of the totality of the circumstances, potentially result in unexpected criminal charges being brought because due caution and circumspection could be shown as not being present on the part of the "shooter".

Tragic? Absolutely.

As some other posters have opined, sometimes it's possible in private citizen shootings that a lack of relevant training, knowledge of the law and experience could end up putting the private citizen in the position of not being prepared for the sudden, dynamic and possibly chaotic circumstances involved in the use of deadly force.

Yes, of course police also face these same risks, but that's why police training in the laws, and preparation in hopefully using good judgement in making critical decisions, including not only being able to rapidly decide that a use of deadly force is not only lawful, but reasonable and appropriate for the circumstances.

Police also have some additional protection in the form of qualified immunity while invoking their authority for acts done in their official capacity, presuming their actions are not only within the law (which includes relevant examples provided by existing case law), but also within agency policy. Acting within policy can be just as important as statutory law when it comes to the actions of police (yes, this is a gross simplification of things).

This is where police, if acting outside policy, can expose themselves to greater liability (and sometimes provide an opportunity for agencies to distance themselves, to some degree, from the actions of an officer deliberately acting contrary to policy).
__________________
Ret LE Firearms inst & armorer

Last edited by Fastbolt; 10-13-2017 at 02:04 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 10-13-2017, 01:22 AM
The Big D The Big D is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Maryland
Posts: 2,620
Likes: 651
Liked 1,072 Times in 468 Posts
Default '...and the gun went off'...

...more information that proves some people should not own/carry a gun.

Be safe.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #46  
Old 10-13-2017, 02:30 AM
Wise_A Wise_A is offline
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,362
Likes: 945
Liked 1,642 Times in 725 Posts
Default

The entire account makes no sense. I'm confused as to how, if he was standing in between the victim and the dog, he managed to shoot the woman without facing her, without wildly waiving his firearm around.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lobster Picnic
Probably had a semi-auto pistol. I think the long DA pull of a revolver makes for safer handling when the adrenaline is flowing.
You'd think that, but no.

What actually happens when you're under stress is that you don't notice how much pressure your finger is applying to the trigger, or that your finger is moving, or even that your finger is on the trigger. Part of that is the chemicals your brain is dumping into your body. The other part is that your brain is hyper-focused on the danger, and isn't processing much else. Remember, for about 1.5m years, we've been using pointy sticks and rocks to defend ourselves--that's what we're evolved to use.

End result being, it doesn't matter how long or how heavy the trigger is, once you get into the realm of reasonable. The type of gun you carry will not keep you from doing stupid things. Consciously keeping your finger off the trigger until ready to fire, and training that to be a habit, will.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BB57 View Post
When that happens, or when an officer in the course of an otherwise "justified" use of deadly force happens to shoot an innocent bystander, or has a mistake of fact shooting, the worst thing that usually happens is the officer gets fired. The department accepts all the liability and pays any settlements.
lolno. Some jurisdiction stand by their people. Some hang them out to dry.

And really, police officers should be indemnified against liability to an extent. After all, they're carrying a gun because they're doing their jobs, jobs we ask them to do. They're in dangerous situations because, hell, somebody has to be.

Ordinary citizens are free to not be in dangerous, stupid situations, and thus are responsible for themselves.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 10-13-2017, 08:21 AM
BB57's Avatar
BB57 BB57 is online now
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Eastern NC
Posts: 1,534
Likes: 634
Liked 3,116 Times in 998 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wise_A View Post
The entire account makes no sense. I'm confused as to how, if he was standing in between the victim and the dog, he managed to shoot the woman without facing her, without wildly waiving his firearm around.



You'd think that, but no.

What actually happens when you're under stress is that you don't notice how much pressure your finger is applying to the trigger, or that your finger is moving, or even that your finger is on the trigger. Part of that is the chemicals your brain is dumping into your body. The other part is that your brain is hyper-focused on the danger, and isn't processing much else. Remember, for about 1.5m years, we've been using pointy sticks and rocks to defend ourselves--that's what we're evolved to use.

End result being, it doesn't matter how long or how heavy the trigger is, once you get into the realm of reasonable. The type of gun you carry will not keep you from doing stupid things. Consciously keeping your finger off the trigger until ready to fire, and training that to be a habit, will.



lolno. Some jurisdiction stand by their people. Some hang them out to dry.

And really, police officers should be indemnified against liability to an extent. After all, they're carrying a gun because they're doing their jobs, jobs we ask them to do. They're in dangerous situations because, hell, somebody has to be.

Ordinary citizens are free to not be in dangerous, stupid situations, and thus are responsible for themselves.
In reverse order...

We're in total agreement that LEOs should be indemnified to the extent that they do not intentionally over step their authority or intentionally break the law.

In terms of what actually happens, I have perhaps described the ideal, or at least the norm rather than the exceptions where some departments may hang an officer out to dry. It seems to be a bigger issue in municipal police departments where the chief is a political appointee, beholden to a mayor or panel of commissioners with a political agenda.

However, it also works the other way as well, with some departments retaining officers with histories and behavior patterns that suggest they should not.

----

Trigger discipline and what happens under stress is one of the major areas where LEO firearms training falls short. Most officers are not gun people and do not shoot recreationally. Given the limited training in a training academy, followed by shooting no more often than required or perhaps semi-annual qualification, officers never get to the point where the necessary habits become conditioned and ingrained responses that hold up under extreme stress.

The same is true in spades for those individuals who conceal carry who have even less training or lack any proper training at all. Even with proper training it is still imperative to practice on a regular basis and I'll wager most people who conceal carry do not practice nearly enough.

Some of that practice also needs to be directed at pre-cognition of how you might respond under various scenarios, with an eye on 1) the laws pertaining to use the deadly force, 2) the need to actually shoot or draw a weapon (versus just the pure legality of it), and 3) your actual ability to meet the demands of the situation.

Number 3 however is a tough one as most people badly over rate their actual ability, in part because they are usually not familiar with how they actually respond under extreme stress and time pressure.

Shooting in practical pistol matches where there is time pressure and some competitive stress helps. If nothing else it gets the person out shooting more under closer to real world conditions, and more often than not gives people a reality check on their actual ability. That applies to all shooter - LEOs and armed citizens alike.

Last edited by BB57; 10-13-2017 at 08:23 AM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #48  
Old 10-13-2017, 09:11 AM
TomkinsSP's Avatar
TomkinsSP TomkinsSP is online now
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: May 2017
Location: E of America's Great Lake
Posts: 430
Likes: 39
Liked 371 Times in 165 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wise_A View Post
The entire account makes no sense. I'm confused as to how, if he was standing in between the victim and the dog, he managed to shoot the lady.
I wasn't there. This is not fact or even speculation, just a mental exersise.

He is standing between the lady and the dog, facing the dog. Weapon holstered in snug holster with FBI cant. He draws on dog, touches trigger, ND while gun is canted muzzle to his back. Lady is shorter, maybe even on the ground, report says she was hit in lower back.
__________________
Certified Curmudgeon
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 10-13-2017, 01:02 PM
otasan56 otasan56 is offline
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: VT
Posts: 109
Likes: 16
Liked 35 Times in 28 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Protected One View Post
This happened recently. A licensed concealed carrier was attempting to help his screaming neighbor who was being attacked by two dogs. In the process of drawing his gun he unintentionally fired an round, striking her in the lower back. She later died of the injury.

Unfortunately, he has to wait for the determination of whether he will face any charges. It looks like a case of poor trigger discipline, but I'm keeping an eye on the story.

Detroit man calls shooting death of dog attack victim an accident
I wonder if the gun was a Glock? No safeties on Glocks.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 10-13-2017, 01:13 PM
Muss Muggins's Avatar
Muss Muggins Muss Muggins is offline
Member
Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome Good intent...Bad outcome  
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: southeast Missouri
Posts: 7,754
Likes: 2,722
Liked 9,497 Times in 3,369 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by otasan56 View Post
I wonder if the gun was a Glock? No safeties on Glocks.
There are three safeties on a Glock, and the presence or absence of a safety is unlikely to have altered the outcome of this tragedy. Proper firearm handling, on the other hand . . .
__________________
Wisdom comes thru fear . . .
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2A intent Bkreutz The Lounge 7 08-31-2015 09:07 PM
19-2 Snubbie Outcome Kevin G The Lounge 10 10-10-2012 12:00 AM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:58 PM.


© S-W Forum, LLC 2000-2015
Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)