Treat all guns as loaded until you have personally ensured that the weapon is clear..

[TCinVA]

...or you end up like this:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=30b_1421174383

[Shellback]

Thankfully he didn't shoot one of the people standing in front of or behind the counter.

[Kyle Reese]

or................or................or............ ...don't point a firearm at your hand and press the trigger, amirite?

The clerk was also clearly in the wrong for not locking & clearing the weapon before handing it to the officer.

[Trooper224]

That's so massively bad on the charlie foxtrot scale that we could go on all day about it.

[hufnagel]

I'm not sure I can count the number of fails in that video.

[ToddG]

All humans are fallible. Treat them accordingly.

[Malamute]

or................or................or............ ...don't point a firearm at your hand and press the trigger, amirite?

The clerk was also clearly in the wrong for not locking & clearing the weapon before handing it to the officer.



Thankfully he didn't shoot one of the people standing in front of or behind the counter.

Thats what I kept thinking all the time he was pointing it at most of the people in the store.


That's so massively bad on the charlie foxtrot scale that we could go on all day about it.

Numerous and massive fail.

Even having checked a gun, it shouldnt be pointed at things one doesnt want to shoot. It seems dreadfully common at gun shops and gun shows, and in casual social situations.

[GardoneVT]

He broke every single one of the four rules.

My only takeaway-how in tarnations did the officer not notice the live round in the chamber while he was literally coonfingering the gun?

[JV_]

My only takeaway-how in tarnations did the officer not notice the live round in the chamber while he was literally coonfingering the gun?

My guess it was in the mag, not the chamber, so it was harder to notice. He racked the slide at 42s, which then chambered the round.

[Totem Polar]

Yup, there was a lot that had to go wrong for that to happen. Thanks for the vivid 4 rule reminder check-in.

[45dotACP]

Man, that's rough to watch....

A long long time ago, I had just finished up shooting and picked up my gun. Slide was locked back and everything. I dropped the slide, not even noticing a loaded mag was in the gun. Fortunately, it felt just a little...well a little off. Scared me shitless to think I didn't notice the loaded magazine in the gun. Guns are not things to be careless, overconfident, or showing off around.

Since then, I've been very very careful to never ever be confident that any gun is unloaded until I've double checked it.

[Hambo]

So many "don'ts" for one video. I'm interested in how he makes the case that vaporizing the tip of his index finger is a career ending injury.

[JodyH]

I'm thinking it's a good thing this was a career ending injury.

[ToddG]

If he can no longer press the trigger on WHO stage(s) of the mandated qualification he'd almost certainly be eligible for medical retirement.

[fixer]

He broke every single one of the four rules.

My only takeaway-how in tarnations did the officer not notice the live round in the chamber while he was literally coonfingering the gun?

I agree with the copious scorn with this situation and mostly towards the store owner...but I have to agree with Gardone here...how in the bloody lovin hell did he not notice, or even feel, the round being chambered.

The fine purveyors at Academy thought I was strange when I checked the chamber on their display units...this is a great reason why.

[Malamute]

I agree with the copious scorn with this situation and mostly towards the store owner...but I have to agree with Gardone here...how in the bloody lovin hell did he not notice, or even feel, the round being chambered.
.

I thought that, and wondered why it didnt register that an unloaded gun with a magazine in it didnt lock open when he cycled the action.

[Shellback]

I am the only one professional enough...

[BaiHu]

This should be the video shown to all new shooters. Especially at ranges and NRA classes. As y'all have already said - So. Much. Fail.

[Lomshek]

This should be the video shown to all new shooters. Especially at ranges and NRA classes. As y'all have already said - So. Much. Fail.

One could probably put together a nice (under) 5 minute video with 10 or so accidental shootings then spend another 10 minutes having a chit chat about what was done wrong in all of them. That would be a great way to beat it into new shooters.

[fixer]

watched again...what is with the obsession people have with putting their hands on the muzzle?

[Hambo]

If he can no longer press the trigger on WHO stage(s) of the mandated qualification he'd almost certainly be eligible for medical retirement.

Jody is right that it's probably better if he hangs it up, but where I worked the pension board and work comp hearing officers were not known to be generous with disability retirement packages. As an example, one guy I worked with had a heart attack and was resuscitated twice in the ER. The pension board refused his request for disability retirement. I can't see them feeling the love on a self-inflicted weak hand finger. In this case I think it's his lawyer trying to make the case for a larger award for stupidity.

[Artemas]

This guy is a beacon of personal responsibility...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/01/13/former-cop-sues-kentucky-hunting-store-after-accidentally-shooting-off-his-own-finger/

[TCinVA]

The store shouldn't have handed him a loaded gun, certainly...but you know what? If I'm in a store or on a range or even in a building where some sort of modern interpretative dance event is going on and someone hands me a firearm (true story) then what happens with that weapon in my hands is completely and utterly my responsibility. It doesn't matter what condition it was handed to me in...once it's in my hands what happens with that weapon is now entirely on me. It is my responsibility to see that I don't do myself or anyone else any unintentional harm with that weapon.

I don't see this as a 50/50 blame situation. The person handling that weapon was a police officer who had to receive a reasonable level of training on the proper handling of a firearm as a condition of employment. He violated all the major safety rules he had been trained on and was injured as a result. The blame is on him.

[Al T.]

watched again...what is with the obsession people have with putting their hands on the muzzle?

I work in a LGS and see it every single day and usually multiple times. I also know two guys, over 55, who have shot their fingers off in the last couple of years.

Darnedest thing.

[TCinVA]

I work in a LGS and see it every single day and usually multiple times. I also know two guys, over 55, who have shot their fingers off in the last couple of years.

Darnedest thing.

My pet peeve is the morons who deliberately point the gun at other people and then screw with it. I'm unwelcome in one gunshop in Virginia because I strongly objected to somebody sighting a Sig in on my face.

[BaiHu]

My pet peeve is the morons who deliberately point the gun at other people and then screw with it. I'm unwelcome in one gunshop in Virginia because I strongly objected to somebody sighting a Sig in on my face.
Around here, I find the counter guys are more concerned with offending the customer than they are with safety. Admittedly, they are very consistent in locking back and showing clear, but after that the whole place looks like the end of The Good, The Bad and The Ugly.

I've derped on muzzle discipline before even after it was locked back, checked by another party and mag free and it wasn't cool then. I'm not about to muzzle strangers just because it's "Ok" around the cool kid's table aka the LGS.

[Nephrology]

Honestly, I am surprised this doesn't happen more often. I have witnessed absolutely appalling gun safety violations at all of the brick and mortar stores I've frequented over the years, to the point that I now basically avoid them entirely. No good ones in my area, anyway.

also, I agree - the officer was 100% responsible for that accident. I do think it is completely inexcusable that they had a loaded magazine in the pistol (what on earth is a loaded mag doing in a gun store? If it's not in the mag well of a gun on somebody's hip, it shouldn't be there. Period) but at the end of the day it was up to the officer to verify an empty chamber before pulling the trigger. Not a mistake he will be making again (I hope). His lawsuit should be dismissed.

[SecondsCount]

The store shouldn't have handed him a loaded gun, certainly...but you know what? If I'm in a store or on a range or even in a building where some sort of modern interpretative dance event is going on and someone hands me a firearm (true story) then what happens with that weapon in my hands is completely and utterly my responsibility. It doesn't matter what condition it was handed to me in...once it's in my hands what happens with that weapon is now entirely on me. It is my responsibility to see that I don't do myself or anyone else any unintentional harm with that weapon.

I don't see this as a 50/50 blame situation. The person handling that weapon was a police officer who had to receive a reasonable level of training on the proper handling of a firearm as a condition of employment. He violated all the major safety rules he had been trained on and was injured as a result. The blame is on him.

100% agree, especially the part about him being a trained police officer. He had to have heard the "Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy" rule several times in his career.

There are multiple rules for a reason, redundancy. If you break the trigger on the finger rule but the muzzle is pointed in a safe direction then you will probably get away with it and vice versa. This guy broke them all at once and is paying the consequence.

[GardoneVT]

Honestly, I am surprised this doesn't happen more often. I have witnessed absolutely appalling gun safety violations at all of the brick and mortar stores I've frequented over the years, to the point that I now basically avoid them entirely. No good ones in my area, anyway.

also, I agree - the officer was 100% responsible for that accident. I do think it is completely inexcusable that they had a loaded magazine in the pistol (what on earth is a loaded mag doing in a gun store? If it's not in the mag well of a gun on somebody's hip, it shouldn't be there. Period) but at the end of the day it was up to the officer to verify an empty chamber before pulling the trigger. Not a mistake he will be making again (I hope). His lawsuit should be dismissed.

Methinks a customer traded a gun for a different one, store staff didn't clear the magazine of ammo, then the LEO decided to check it out.

[BaiHu]

Methinks a customer traded a gun for a different one, store staff didn't clear the magazine of ammo, then the LEO decided to check it out.
Agreed. My IANAL guess is that he'll get some kind of settlement for his injuries from the LGS due to their gross negligence in the matter. Then he'll be put behind a desk to grind it out until retirement due to his gross negligence of impersonating a LEO. But by the looks of it, maybe he was already riding a desk [emoji16]

[Glenn E. Meyer]

However - I think we all know highly trained folks who have left ammo in a gun causing an inappropriate bang. Or swept folks with a loaded gun.

I recall two in my presence that did such and were immediately horrified by their action. Slips do happen and of course the slipper is cupable. However, human behavior is variable.

That being said, it is more likely if just do plainly stupid things like this one. Whether I am without sin - that's for me to know.

[Terence]

Update: The officer is suing the gun store.

http://controversialtimes.com/news/2-idiots-1-gun-shop-police-officer-suing-gun-store-after-shooting-off-his-own-finger-video/

[Peally]

Quick, better sue McDonald's for that hot coffee spill too!

[idahojess]

Quick, better sue McDonald's for that hot coffee spill too!

Dumb/complacent move by the cop. But I don't really have a problem with him suing the store either. If this was anyone other than a cop, say a mom shopping for a gun to protect herself, wouldn't the story be different?

A lot of lawsuits involve negligent acts by both parties --whether it is complete bar to a suit depends on the law of the particular state and the proportion of the negligence. If this does get to a jury (I imagine settlement would happen) one issue would be whether the cop was behaving as a "reasonable customer at a gun counter," rather than as a cop. Everyone here has high standards on handling firearms, which is a good thing. Whether the "treat all guns as if they were loaded" standard is the standard that is ultimately applied by the court here is a different story. Obviously and unfortunately, average "reasonable" people are very sloppy with their gun handling at gun counters and gun shows.

Here's a pretty good thread on the Mcd's coffee. http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?8871-Hot-Coffee

[ToddG]

idahojess is exactly right. While we may all agree that the officer shouldn't have been breaking the Cardinal Rules, it happens every day in every gun shop in America.

OTOH, handing a customer a loaded gun from the display case is not the norm and, more to the point, I'm willing to bet the clerk himself would testify that it should never have happened. He may not agree that it was his personal responsibility to check the gun but does your store normally display loaded guns? "Nope."

Is there a designated safe direction in your store where customers can point the guns they are examining? "Nope."

Do you tell customers not to try the trigger and other controls on the guns they are examining? "Nope."

Is this the first time you've seen a customer point a gun at his hand while examining a gun? "Nope."

Did you tell him to stop and instead follow a set of safety standards in handling the firearm? "Nope."

Does your shop have a formal & enforced policy regarding how customers are allowed to handle store firearms? "Nope."

Not hard to guess how this will turn out...

[Wondering Beard]

Dumb/complacent move by the cop. But I don't really have a problem with him suing the store either. If this was anyone other than a cop, say a mom shopping for a gun to protect herself, wouldn't the story be different?

A lot of lawsuits involve negligent acts by both parties --whether it is complete bar to a suit depends on the law of the particular state and the proportion of the negligence. If this does get to a jury (I imagine settlement would happen) one issue would be whether the cop was behaving as a "reasonable customer at a gun counter," rather than as a cop. Everyone here has high standards on handling firearms, which is a good thing. Whether the "treat all guns as if they were loaded" standard is the standard that is ultimately applied by the court here is a different story. Obviously and unfortunately, average "reasonable" people are very sloppy with their gun handling at gun counters and gun shows.

Here's a pretty good thread on the Mcd's coffee. http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?8871-Hot-Coffee

Pretty much what I was thinking.

[rsa-otc]

idahojess is exactly right. While we may all agree that the officer shouldn't have been breaking the Cardinal Rules, it happens every day in every gun shop in America.

OTOH, handing a customer a loaded gun from the display case is not the norm and, more to the point, I'm willing to bet the clerk himself would testify that it should never have happened. He may not agree that it was his personal responsibility to check the gun but does your store normally display loaded guns? "Nope."

Is there a designated safe direction in your store where customers can point the guns they are examining? "Nope."

Do you tell customers not to try the trigger and other controls on the guns they are examining? "Nope."

Is this the first time you've seen a customer point a gun at his hand while examining a gun? "Nope."

Did you tell him to stop and instead follow a set of safety standards in handling the firearm? "Nope."

Does your shop have a formal & enforced policy regarding how customers are allowed to handle store firearms? "Nope."

Not hard to guess how this will turn out...

All of which is why my current policy is to avoid the LGS as much as possible. If I must make a trip I try to time it so the store is not busy and avoid the firearms display if at all possible. Over the years I've looked down to many gun barrels in that environment.

Fortunately I have a FFL who lives several blocks from me and I get to fondle guns that interest me in the privacy of his home one on one. I can only hope that you all find an outlet that you are as comfortable with as I currently am.

Actually my wife usually hates it when I visit my FFL since most times I'm late to dinner because Bob is an old friend and we end BSing for hours at a time.

[Tamara]

Did you tell him to stop and instead follow a set of safety standards in handling the firearm? "Nope."

Does your shop have a formal & enforced policy regarding how customers are allowed to handle store firearms? "Nope."

I have personally torn strips off employees for handing guns over with the action closed. It's something of a pet peeve (http://booksbikesboomsticks.blogspot.com/2011/08/formative-experiences.html) of mine.

"Can we at least act like we're handling deadly weapons and not cans of soup?"

[GardoneVT]

Update: The officer is suing the gun store.

http://controversialtimes.com/news/2-idiots-1-gun-shop-police-officer-suing-gun-store-after-shooting-off-his-own-finger-video/

He's got grounds to win-and frankly, I hope earnestly he does get a big, profit eating settlement.Then maybe the 4 Rules wont be just another set of empty words on the store wall.

Yes, he was a negligent fool in handling the gun-but the weapon would not have fired to begin with had the store staff exercised basic safety and due dilligence themselves, as there'd be no live ammo in the gun.Forget about just the clerk-how come the guy who processed the .380 into inventory didnt check it?

Perhaps stores can engineer a setup where specifically disabled "demo guns" with no firing pin or striker and blocked barrels are used for display, physically separated from the live inventory which isnt brought out until cash & BG check has already happened. When Cleetus decides to sweep half the store, then everyone can be reasonably assured there wont be a Loud Noise.

Its a similar concept to other retail businesses-you dont get to try out your smartphone before buying,for example . You get a demo specifically made to handle by customers, with only basic functions and apps enabled. Once a buyer wants it, then a sealed unit is brought out from the back and activated.That's probably the best approach to take here too.

Its not perfect-we have the problem of picking a vetted agency to disable the guns-but its better then strapping on body armor before going to the Sporting Goods section of your local store.

[ToddG]

"Can we at least act like we're handling deadly weapons and not cans of soup?"

http://shutupimtalking.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/soupoftheday.jpg

[Jeep]

[QUOTE=ToddG;285887
Not hard to guess how this will turn out...[/QUOTE]

Well, it will almost certainly settle. It is a classic case of comparative negligence. The gun store was negligent. So was the guy. Both knew better. Had it been a customer with no firearms knowledge, he or she would win easily. But the cop? What is he going to say "I never knew you need to check a gun any time you were handed one. They certainly didn't train us that way in the academy"?

However, since the gun store has no possible non-negligent explanation for leaving a loaded gun in a display case, and not checking the gun before handing it over, its insurance company is going to want to settle also. Too big a risk for each side.

But a good object lesson for all of the rest of us. Never, ever assume it's not loaded.

[BoppaBear]

My pet peeve is the morons who deliberately point the gun at other people and then screw with it. I'm unwelcome in one gunshop in Virginia because I strongly objected to somebody sighting a Sig in on my face.

In the same boat. No gun is safe until I render it that way, and I too have major issues with any weapon being pointed in my general vicinity.

I've gotten all kinds of "looks" after I watch the person behind the counter do a half-ass clear, then do it myself right after them.

Another thing is when they try hand it to me muzzle first, slide forward, because they "cleared" it. I've walked out of shops for that.

Finally, when I hand it back, even if I've handled the weapon without manipulating any controls, I drop mag and lock slide/bolt, and hand them two pieces. I still don't think most people understand why, which is why I generally only go to one shop.

[Dagga Boy]

I have personally torn strips off employees for handing guns over with the action closed. It's something of a pet peeve (http://booksbikesboomsticks.blogspot.com/2011/08/formative-experiences.html) of mine.

"Can we at least act like we're handling deadly weapons and not cans of soup?"

Still my favorite person on the internet. This is also a huge pet peeve of mine, and it is a very basic courtesy in gun handling world.

[fixer]

I honestly can't fault the guy for filing suit.

[TCinVA]

I honestly can't fault the guy for filing suit.

I can.

I understand his legal argument might win in a courtroom, but if the world was fair and just what he did to himself would be entirely on him.

[Tamara]

I honestly can't fault the guy for filing suit.

If he had shot someone else instead of himself, would that change our feelings on the matter?

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Not be a lawyer - I read some texts (so not being a lawyer) - in civil suits, I think they apportion blame in settlements. If they say the guy who got shot was to blame X amount but the store was to blame Y amount (and that is greater), the guy would win but amounts might be less. If he shot someone else - both might be assigned some of the blame. Like I said - what do I know about this?

[SecondsCount]

I can.

I understand his legal argument might win in a courtroom, but if the world was fair and just what he did to himself would be entirely on him.

It would seem like the attitude of the gunshop should be "A uniformed officer of the law, who has a gun on his hip when he walks into our place of business, should know how to handle a firearm. If not, we are not the ones who failed him, but his department and those who trained him. He is not treated like the other customers who come into our store because he is trusted on a daily basis to handle a firearm in the line of duty."

Both the officer and the gunshop share responsibility in their mistakes. Why the gunshop should be the one to pay for the mistake is beyond me.

Edit to add: Glenn is thinking along the same lines that I am. Shared responsibility.

[Terence]

I am even more not a lawyer (EMNAL) than the rest of you, but I wonder if legally there's a difference between the two negligent actors here. If the gun store hadn't been negligent, then the police officer's negligence -- while still very very negligent -- wouldn't have had any consequences.

Is the gun store's negligence worse?

You can argue the other way, I guess, but claiming that the ND wouldn't have happened if the officer had done his part seems like weaker sauce.

[Tamara]

Wrong thread.

[Terence]

Wrong thread.
I knew what you meant, though.