How and why safety procedures fail. TDA vs Striker vs LEM spinoff

[JustOneGun]

We had another good discussion about the pros and cons of TDA/Striker/LEM/DAO platforms. During these discussions we often start our thought process with the fact that accidents happen and this is how we are going to lessen the chance. I have no problem with that idea but we tend to stop there. We never talk about is what we are doing wrong to make them happen in the first place?

I believe there are some very real reasons that all ND/AD's happen. I believe they are training practices we develop that cause or allow them to happen.

To me there are three main reasons:

1. We have placed multiple procedures in our brain for the same physical act.

We see this with the draw where it's a hip holster for games and AIWB for CCW. For safety reasons it's the holstering that is so dangerous. Having a procedure where you move the cover garment away from the holster. Look into the holster to find any foreign object, if clear place the pistol into the holster up to the front of the trigger guard, see you trigger finger straight and outside of the trigger guard on the slide, tilt the muzzle slightly away so it's not pointed at any part of your body and place the pistol fully into the holster.

Then the second procedure we learn during dryfire. Finish dryfire, holster without looking or half ass the procedure because we, "Know" it's empty. Do this over and over again without thought.

Sometimes in real life those two procedures get mixed up. It's as thought the brain under stress or distraction just sometimes picks the wrong one. Depending on the circumstances it can lead to an ND.

2. We have unconscious procedures for physical acts that should remain conscious procedures.

In the two examples above we want the draw to be selected and then unconsciously done. For the holster, even for officers, it does not have to be unconscious. It should literally be done by the numbers. Holstering without thinking will make it into an unconscious procedure. It is unconscious procedures that sometimes get selected by our brain inappropriately under distraction or stress. i.e. at the worst possible time.

For civilians I think it would be a good discussions to have, is it even necessary to holster after a shooting. I personally train a holster by the numbers. If you feel speed holstering is a good skill then perhaps one could learn it by the numbers and then over time speed those numbers up. So when the time comes you're mind says holster and it is fast but still, 1,2,3,4. I don't like that but it certainly better than just cramming the pistol in the holster.

3. We have poor, not well thought out procedures.

Of course if we have a procedure that does not account for how the ND/AD would happen then it isn't going to work no matter how well it's implemented.


I'd be curious what other instructors, high end competitors and Safety officers think about the why and how of the ND/AD's that they've seen. I think it would help new and experienced shooters to hear how we avoid people shooting themselves during the draw, holster, movement, CQB/retention shooting, etc.

*I don't really think it would be helpful to discuss the different platforms unless they are specific to the procedure. We beat that one into the weeds a few times recently. Just the generic procedures that folks teach and the why of their safety procedures would be great.

[RJ]

Useful thread. My AD story falls into #2, I believe.

"ND at Hot Range: Training Scar?"

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?19800-ND-at-Hot-Range-Training-Scar

To the Why and How: noobie shooter goes to 1 USPSA match, then NDs at first time at a hot range, due to unconscious UL&SC habit. Fortunately gun was pointed down range.

To the How to avoid:

1. Do not allow UL&SC at matches to be an unconscious habit.

STOP.

Drop the mag.

LOOK for the round to eject as you rack the slide. ACTUALLY LOOK.

LOOK at the chamber as you UL&SC to the RSO. ACTUALLY LOOK.

THINK about what you just did as you hammer down. THINK.

2. At a live range, TELL YOURSELF, I AM AT A LIVE RANGE.

Think about the trigger press EVERY TIME.

THINK.

About all I got, will be interested in the responses. My experience last year at Tac Con still troubles me.






Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[octagon]

Good post and thoughts on holstering ND/AD Justonegun. I think you hit several valid issues. Unfortunately there is no database or hard numbers that I am aware of that would indicate how many ND/ADs there are related to holstering,drawing,moving or holding a threat at gunpoint(or ready position) so it is hard to say what is most problematic and for what reason either finger on the trigger or obstruction or holster pressing trigger either resulting in an AD/ND. I believe that holstering is probably the most common procedure being performed when a ND/AD occurs so that should be more focused upon and more carefully done(consciously) but other procedures also have risk for NDs.

First I should say that I consider almost every discharge when not intended to be a ND unless the gun was heavily and/or wrongly modified and a bump or vibration causes it to discharge. Dropping a gun when it is expected to be drop safe but isn't is also what I consider AD even if there may be some negligence in dropping it, it shouldn't discharge. Holstering and having the gun discharge due to an obstruction mixes negligence by not verifying the holster is clear but also some accident if it is done by LEO or others where they are holstering quickly to go hands on or switch to an alternate tool depending on circumstances changing. This can happen with CC citizens but is less likely because they usually have less options and support for using other force tools,Cuffing,pepper spray,TASER,baton) and often may be alone or with non trained family/friends.

My thought on any procedure being performed except holstering comes down to finger off the trigger and outside the trigger guard but also indexed on a consistent location where slipping or startle reflex is unlikely to cause the trigger finger to enter the trigger guard or strike the trigger. I believe these NDs are less common than holstering in part because we as defensive and competitive shooters are concentrating and focus our attention when performing these techniques much more than when we holster. I think often people have "let their guard down" on safety after shooting and after action procedure and just holster.

Just my opinion

[JustOneGun]

Octagon,

I agree. That, "let your guard down" to me is just doing something subconsciously. There are training techniques to keep that from being a subconscious act, even in speed holstering.

[YVK]

Unfortunately there is no database or hard numbers that I am aware of that would indicate how many ND/ADs there are related to holstering,drawing,moving or holding a threat at gunpoint(or ready position) so it is hard to say what is most problematic


There is some data from the Gunsite that GJM likes to quote and some members here provided their own information. Some data suggests no difference in frequency distribution between draw vs holstering vs others, while others stated that holstering was more worrisome.

I personally don't think that it is possible to get rid of a subconscious acts when talking about something that people do frequently, regularly and repetitively. It eventually becomes inhabituated and often times subconscious. I think that most NDs are a result of disconnect between stated and agreed upon safety rules and principles vs developing a yet again inhabituated set of behaviors to support those rules.

[voodoo_man]

Interesting topic.

I do not look at my holster when I reholster, I actively scan my area at that time. It is a habit I picked up and it's stuck. I have changed little things here and there but for the most part it's unconscious and deliberate.

On or off duty, dryfire or live fire, the reholster is always the same. One thing I never do is holster a non-hot gun, in that I mean a gun that isn't cocked/able to fired/dryfired without manipulation. When I stow a gun it's always in a "cruiser safe" type setup. When I'm carrying obviously it's loaded with one in the chamber. The only difference is when I dryfire or perform maintenance the magazine is removed the protocol does not change other than that.

I never pull the trigger just to pull the trigger, like a gamer styled unload and show clear, that's burning the worst type of rep which can induce an ND in particular circumstances.

The only time I look at my holster is when I am reholstering and third attempt it becomes difficult to reholster. In that case I will actually look at what is going on, even then, I immediately look up and begin to scan around.

I refer to time spent looking at your equipment as dead time. You aren't actively discriminating threats, you arent doing anything which will keep you alive. You are just standing there looking down and away from whatever just happened. By the way if you had your gun out and burned someone down, you probably should be looking around, at the very least.

[farscott]

One other issue that I have personally encountered: Interruptions can cause a safety lapse as one's mind remembers completing a step that was, in reality, interrupted before completion. When we practice something quite a bit, we subconsciously get ready for the next operation and an interruption tricks the mind into believing the previous step has been completed.

I have learned that any interruption requires me to "restart" the process in order to insure, for example, I am not holstering a cocked SIG P226 that I would have sworn I had de-cocked before the interruption occurred.

[JustOneGun]

There is some data from the Gunsite that GJM likes to quote and some members here provided their own information. Some data suggests no difference in frequency distribution between draw vs holstering vs others, while others stated that holstering was more worrisome.

I personally don't think that it is possible to get rid of a subconscious acts when talking about something that people do frequently, regularly and repetitively. It eventually becomes inhabituated and often times subconscious. I think that most NDs are a result of disconnect between stated and agreed upon safety rules and principles vs developing a yet again inhabituated set of behaviors to support those rules.

Are you suggesting that a person during dry fire and live fire training can't make a habit of using a procedure to holster? I agree that if you do it frequently it will be unconscious. But if you do it frequently as a conscious procedure it will become a conscious procedure.

For me I use it because I slowed down my training. One dry fire example: No more draw, holster, draw, holster, draw holster. Better to do a timed draw with a side step, critique. Pause. Do a reload while the gun is out of the holster, critique that. Pause. Move at a 45 with the gun out finger on the slide. Holster using my procedure. Move up to the target and practice a retention draw, critique. Pause. Holster using procedure. Timed draw with sidestep transitioning to moving away from the target, critique. Pause. Start over going opposite direction.

My procedure is done much like dry fire safety. I say out loud, Time for dry fire. "Unload the pistol." When I'm done with dry fire it's, "Training is done. Reload the pistol and holster." So the procedure begins with, "Holster." Slowly run through the steps. After a few years of doing this it is a conscious habit. I feel no need to just cram the pistol in the holster like my police days. I broke the habit.

[spinmove_]

Interesting topic.

I do not look at my holster when I reholster, I actively scan my area at that time. It is a habit I picked up and it's stuck. I have changed little things here and there but for the most part it's unconscious and deliberate.

On or off duty, dryfire or live fire, the reholster is always the same. One thing I never do is holster a non-hot gun, in that I mean a gun that isn't cocked/able to fired/dryfired without manipulation. When I stow a gun it's always in a "cruiser safe" type setup. When I'm carrying obviously it's loaded with one in the chamber. The only difference is when I dryfire or perform maintenance the magazine is removed the protocol does not change other than that.

I never pull the trigger just to pull the trigger, like a gamer styled unload and show clear, that's burning the worst type of rep which can induce an ND in particular circumstances.

The only time I look at my holster is when I am reholstering and third attempt it becomes difficult to reholster. In that case I will actually look at what is going on, even then, I immediately look up and begin to scan around.

I refer to time spent looking at your equipment as dead time. You aren't actively discriminating threats, you arent doing anything which will keep you alive. You are just standing there looking down and away from whatever just happened. By the way if you had your gun out and burned someone down, you probably should be looking around, at the very least.

Genuinely curious question from someone who is most definitely not a professional face-shooter: If you've scanned the area "post shoot" and deemed the area "free from threats" and can now transition to a more administrative set of actions would it not be more beneficial to look while reholstering than not?


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[voodoo_man]

Genuinely curious question from someone who is most definitely not a professional face-shooter: If you've scanned the area "post shoot" and deemed the area "free from threats" and can now transition to a more administrative set of actions would it not be more beneficial to look while reholstering than not?


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

Few considerations I've learned from real world experience.

I have had to quickly my firearm on several occasions working in a non-uniformed capacity because of responding uniformed officers imminent arrival. It has been shown repeatedly that arriving uniformed officers have a higher statistical percentage of shooting anyone with a firearm in their hand, even other uniformed officers. Knowing this beforehand I made it a point to quickly reholster while looking around for other threats which may present themselves and may still be developing.

This is not to say you should not save your life and the lives of others, regardless of knowing the above fact, if the threat of death and/or serious injury immediately exists. You are just creating a circumstance where arriving officers may not use verbal commands and just shoot at you.

There is a 35-45% chance the person you are using force against is not alone, it fluctuates up and down every year in the FBI LEOKA (https://ucr.fbi.gov/leoka). I have experienced this first hand as you just do not know where the other guy is and if he even exists, even if you just used deadly force you should be looking around. Every police department (and any first responder's training) first starts with "make sure the scene is safe" - well this means a lot more than environmental hazards. If you think the bad guys don't know how to L-Shape and have a capacity for immediate use of force without consideration for backdrops and whatnot, you are extremely mistaken. They do not have to play by the rules, we have to at all times. With this information, simply believing you won because you downed one guy is very much a mistake, one which can end up with you shot and/or killed.

At the end of this discussion, you have to realize that reality is extremely unpredictable. Using square range "admin actions" in the real world is not only something which won't occur, but if you try to force it you will likely feel a form of cognitive dissonance because you know you shouldn't be doing it, but you are against your better judgement which ends up confusing the hell out of you. I've seen it in person when an officer needed to reload after the fact and he just stood there with his gun in hands looking at his spare mag. He didn't know what to do with the half depleted magazine, he had never trained any other way than how the range staff instructed which was to put that spare mag in his cargo pocket, except we don't wear cargo pants on duty. He figured it out but during that "dead time" he was just standing there letting the wheels work. It is best not to do this and not to train like this.

[JustOneGun]

Holstering quickly and holstering unconsciously are two very different mental procedures. One does not take much more time than the other but they can have different outcomes.

[YVK]

Are you suggesting that a person during dry fire and live fire training can't make a habit of using a procedure to holster?


I was talking in a more global sense than just holstering. For the holstering, I am suggesting that you can develop a procedure that would be safe on a subconscious level should you inadvertently slide from a conscious action into subconscious. I think that all procedures should by built on overlapping or redundant principles, just like the cardinal safety rules are. I think that this is a better way of addressing this issue.

[JustOneGun]

There is some data from the Gunsite that GJM likes to quote and some members here provided their own information. Some data suggests no difference in frequency distribution between draw vs holstering vs others, while others stated that holstering was more worrisome.

I personally don't think that it is possible to get rid of a subconscious acts when talking about something that people do frequently, regularly and repetitively. It eventually becomes inhabituated and often times subconscious. I think that most NDs are a result of disconnect between stated and agreed upon safety rules and principles vs developing a yet again inhabituated set of behaviors to support those rules.


By talking about holstering first, I did not mean to imply that it is the worst or happens the most. Because us civilians have such a low probability of holding someone at gunpoint I just started with holstering where we have the most probability of shooting ourselves.

I think the next problem is drawing. That is a bit more complex a situation because there is no simple procedure placed into habit that can solve the problem. I believe that people getting their finger on the trigger too soon can be avoided with a few training ideas. I just randomly throw them out here:
1. Don't increase speed while live firing that you haven't proven you can do without a, "Click" in dry fire.
2. New shooters can and should learn the draw in dry fire.
3. New shooters can and should learn to live fire from the #2 position from the draw. If a person is shooting at an established range they will probably have a rule against drawing anyway.
4. New shooters or established shooters using a new platform should not try to drive the wheels off the gun by going fast. Slow to start and small incremental steps in speed that maintain accuracy.
5. In number 3 above a shooter can realize the physical act of moving the pistol from the #2 position of the draw to #4 full extension is far long in space and time than moving the trigger finger from the slide to the trigger. As the draw is learned they must emphasize the trigger finger doesn't move until the end of the draw or very late in the draw.
6. As a person's draw becomes smooth, consistent and relatively fast it might be a good idea to start and time it. Before that happens it's a good idea to video tape the draw from the side. This can show if there is any bowling, fishing going from the #3 to #4 position. It also can show when the trigger finger starts to move. Starting and stopping the video can show when that finger starts to move. It will show if it is moving too soon in the draw.
7. Number 5 and 6 are also important when it comes to people running around with their finger on the trigger or trigger checking at stressful times.

[Jason M]

Interesting topic.

I do not look at my holster when I reholster, I actively scan my area at that time. It is a habit I picked up and it's stuck. I have changed little things here and there but for the most part it's unconscious and deliberate.

On or off duty, dryfire or live fire, the reholster is always the same. One thing I never do is holster a non-hot gun, in that I mean a gun that isn't cocked/able to fired/dryfired without manipulation. When I stow a gun it's always in a "cruiser safe" type setup. When I'm carrying obviously it's loaded with one in the chamber. The only difference is when I dryfire or perform maintenance the magazine is removed the protocol does not change other than that.

I never pull the trigger just to pull the trigger, like a gamer styled unload and show clear, that's burning the worst type of rep which can induce an ND in particular circumstances.

The only time I look at my holster is when I am reholstering and third attempt it becomes difficult to reholster. In that case I will actually look at what is going on, even then, I immediately look up and begin to scan around.

I refer to time spent looking at your equipment as dead time. You aren't actively discriminating threats, you arent doing anything which will keep you alive. You are just standing there looking down and away from whatever just happened. By the way if you had your gun out and burned someone down, you probably should be looking around, at the very least.

Nor do I. Can we thank the governing body that we talked about yesterday for this?

[octagon]

Here is some data on the issue. It is hard to find clear cut reasons from the data but some things that are trends are the mental focus or lack there of when handling the gun and safe handling procedures being well ingrained.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/08/robert-farago/force-science-institute-study-police-unintentional-discharges/ ( I used TTAG article because it more concisely breaks down the Force science Research Center article)

http://homicidecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Police-Accidental-Discharge-Research-Brief-FINAL.pdf

https://www.concealedcarry.com/safety/300-negligent-discharges-comprehensive-data-science-reveals-gun-grabbers-and-gun-owners-are-both-wrong/

Just to add some personal perspective on likeliness of NDs. My agency had 250 armed officers if you include Reserves. If each officer holstered their gun 2 times a workday (at the start and one other time say prisoner trip or interview, off duty at end of shift etc..) That is 500 times total times working 20 days a month(10,000) times 11 months worked a year(110,000) times 25 years (2,750,000) or almost 3 million times the gun is holstered. This doesn't include twice annual training,initial 2 week training or academy for each officer let alone their own dry fire and live fire practice and more frequent live fire practice. It could easily be 6 million times. Most of these people are not gun enthusiasts or highly trained and practiced. We had 3 NDs all with no injuries.
That works out to be a 1 in 2 million odds for us. It would be great if it were even better but not something I think should be taken too far to an extreme. If someone says "Its the stakes not the odds" I hope they carry a gun with a manual safety or key safety and chamber empty.

It is about balancing risk and odds not all one or the other. Quality gun and equipment with proper training and safe practices is where I balance my odds and stakes. YMMV

[JustOneGun]

Here is some data on the issue. It is hard to find clear cut reasons from the data but some things that are trends are the mental focus or lack there of when handling the gun and safe handling procedures being well ingrained.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/08/robert-farago/force-science-institute-study-police-unintentional-discharges/ ( I used TTAG article because it more concisely breaks down the Force science Research Center article)

http://homicidecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Police-Accidental-Discharge-Research-Brief-FINAL.pdf

https://www.concealedcarry.com/safety/300-negligent-discharges-comprehensive-data-science-reveals-gun-grabbers-and-gun-owners-are-both-wrong/

Just to add some personal perspective on likeliness of NDs. My agency had 250 armed officers if you include Reserves. If each officer holstered their gun 2 times a workday (at the start and one other time say prisoner trip or interview, off duty at end of shift etc..) That is 500 times total times working 20 days a month(10,000) times 11 months worked a year(110,000) times 25 years (2,750,000) or almost 3 million times the gun is holstered. This doesn't include twice annual training,initial 2 week training or academy for each officer let alone their own dry fire and live fire practice and more frequent live fire practice. It could easily be 6 million times. Most of these people are not gun enthusiasts or highly trained and practiced. We had 3 NDs all with no injuries.
That works out to be a 1 in 2 million odds for us. It would be great if it were even better but not something I think should be taken too far to an extreme. If someone says "Its the stakes not the odds" I hope they carry a gun with a manual safety or key safety and chamber empty.

It is about balancing risk and odds not all one or the other. Quality gun and equipment with proper training and safe practices is where I balance my odds and stakes. YMMV


This line of thought is why I disagree with many command staff and chiefs of police. If we take your premise, why do police carry guns at all? Why do civilians? The answer to these questions and yours is the same.

Without knowing it your training staff orders training that incorporates these ideas that we speak of. Yes, some departments and civilians do it better than others. But not worrying about ND's will, over time, cause the training to change without thought for the ND's. That in and of itself will cause more ND's to happen. So the idea is to order training, both dry fire and live. to avoid on the range, place good procedures and ultimately to make those three ND's go down to zero.

So a Chief must take into account if I ask them to buy a new gun or training device to stop those three ND's. That's just business. But by thinking about the problems I can order the training that I'm going to conduct anyway. That change is designed to be a win, win. We are doing it in a way that is safe on the range. Gives the student good procedures that will translate to real life shootings and ultimately make us safer.

[Mitch]

Hypothetical question here, mostly aimed at Voodooman or any other LEOs...

If I were in a shooting and the police showed up, it seems to me that I'd be better off dropping the gun than reholstering in a hurry under a great deal of stress. Am I off base here?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[STI]

Hypothetical question here, mostly aimed at Voodooman or any other LEOs...

If I were in a shooting and the police showed up, it seems to me that I'd be better off dropping the gun than reholstering in a hurry under a great deal of stress. Am I off base here?

Very curious as I believed that a civilian would do best with the weapon reholstered before LE arrived.

[octagon]

Justonegun I am not sure what you are trying to say or if you agree with my opinion or not.

I am not saying or suggesting that NDs not be looked at carefully,determined how and why they occurred or addressed to prevent future NDs. I am only saying that the risk mitigation must be kept in perspective. If there is a reasonable way to reduce 3 NDs out of 6 million holstering to zero great I'm for it. If the cost is prohibitive than I bet the chief of any agency will say the benefit does not outweigh the risk. If the 3 NDs at our agency resulted in death of an innocent, or suspect unnecessarily or injury or death of an officer that would change the perspective and alter the cost/benefit ratio every chief and every person must balance for their situation.

Too often people will take a statement or example and change it to an all or nothing point of view. That skews the discussion and is a unfair characterization of a persons stand on an issue. I almost never use the words "always" or "never" or "100% of the time" because there are always exceptions. However I think we do a great disservice to improving the understanding of an issue being discussed if we move a discussion to the far right or far left of where reality is.

I most often use "Balance" "perspective" "context" and "In my opinion" or "in my experience" to clarify my stance or what I post to avoid sounding dogmatic, or like I am offering inflexible stance.

[Mitch]

Just to clarify my question a little, I agree. I'd rather have the gun holstered. But if I have to choose between holstering in a hurry so I don't get shot and dropping the gun, I think I'd rather drop the gun than risk shooting myself to keep someone else from shooting me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JustOneGun]

Hypothetical question here, mostly aimed at Voodooman or any other LEOs...

If I were in a shooting and the police showed up, it seems to me that I'd be better off dropping the gun than reholstering in a hurry under a great deal of stress. Am I off base here?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



You will have plenty of time from the end of the gunfight to when the responding police show up. One of the problems is when an off duty officer or armed civilian doesn't see the shooting but gets involved and thinks you're the bad guy. If someone is talking to you and ordering you then it's a good bet they consider themselves a good guy. Simply opening your grip and letting that modern drop safe pistol fall to the ground is not a bad idea if the bad guy isn't in the act of killing you. Then you can explain without fear of getting shot.

[voodoo_man]

Hypothetical question here, mostly aimed at Voodooman or any other LEOs...

If I were in a shooting and the police showed up, it seems to me that I'd be better off dropping the gun than reholstering in a hurry under a great deal of stress. Am I off base here?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There is no one answer which will encompass all the possible circumstances.

You shoot a guy in your kitchen in the middle of the night and have to call the police? As long as the guy is alone and he is no longer a threat you should probably not have a gun on you when the police show up.

If you drop a dude on a public street, the police are coming, there should be at no time that you put a pistol on the ground unless ordered to do so by a police officer. The last place a firearm should be is on the ground in a busy street.

There is also the consideration of the fact that the responding police officers might not clearly understand what happened or be able to comprehend what happened due to their level of adrenaline.

In a public setting, standing there with your hands up when the police show up is best course of action.

Those are just a few situations, there are hundreds of possible types.

[LSP552]

I don't have access to hard number anymore, and It's been awhile. However, the majority of NDs I'm personally aware of at LSP, both as a firearms instructor and Detective assigned to investigate some of them, were caused by conscious decisions to pull the trigger on what they thought was an unloaded gun.

With shotguns, it was failing to check the chamber, and on on some of the old Ithacas, placing the finger on the trigger while stroking (no trigger disconnect). With semi-autos, it was usually caused by reversing the unloading procedure. If you cycle the slide and then drop the mag, failing to physically check the chamber will make the big noise.

NDs with revolvers were generally caused by failing to clear and thinking the gun was unloaded.

I've been a bullet launcher and bullet dodger on the job, but the closest I've ever come of being killed was an ND by another Trooper with a 2 1/2" model 66 .357. A magnum round passed exactly where my chest was .5 seconds and one step before the big noise. I'm pretty sensitive to shitty gun handling and failure to obey the standard safety rule.

[octagon]

All 3 at our agency were like that. None holstering but deliberate pressing the trigger when thinking it was empty for cleaning or clearing purposes.

[blues]

NDs with revolvers were generally caused by failing to clear and thinking the gun was unloaded.


All 3 at our agency were like that. None holstering but deliberate pressing the trigger when thinking it was empty for cleaning or clearing purposes.

Similar experiences here. Mostly NDs at the range or in the classroom before or after the range when no one was supposed to be handling a firearm...and one biggie when a guy (who went on to become an ASAC) shot himself in the thigh through the back of his UC vehicle while placing a loaded Glock back over the pillar in the OEM tupperware container. Yep, that got him a big settlement for being stupid and Glock to put warning labels for stupidity and eventually change the container.

[JustOneGun]

All of you that are talking about percentages of when an ND occurs might be looking at it wrong. Certainly we should have a safety procedure for unloading the pistol prior to manipulating it during dry fire, cleaning, etc. In that I agree with you.

But the way you guys are coming across (perhaps unintentionally) is a balance of, this is important because it happens a lot. This isn't as important because it's more rare. That's a dangerous use of statistics/trends in this case. While on it's face it might be true, the fact that you are downplaying the rare occurrence makes it more likely to happen. We see this in institutions all the time. If it can happen to individuals in institutions then certainly it can happen to us as individual civilians.

[blues]

JOG...I don't think because we "normally" see certain mishaps more frequently or commonly in one venue or circumstance makes it any less important to be vigilant at all times that an activity puts us at risk. And I don't think that's what the intended message was of our esteemed forum members who opined on the matter.

[octagon]

JOG I posted references to data on the occurrences of NDs as they relate to LEO and citizens as well as those that resulted in injury and/or death. I did this to help validate that they occur and information on who,what,when,where and why. This is partially so readers can have information to work from rather than conjecture and speculation. My personal position on the issue is that every ND regardless of how frequent or infrequent should be considered a failure in equipment,training or practice of safety rules. We should always consider each one individually and all of them we have information about as a whole to help determine how to stop any from happening in the future and eliminating injury and deaths from them. I also posted my agency info on our NDs along with an estimate of the number of holstering over 25 years to put some personal perspective as to the likelyhood or frequency we experienced. This was done to again put this issue into perspective as to how likely it is to occur not to promote disregarding the risk when it does occur.

Everything we do or don't do must be addressed with the balance of factors considered. On the ND issue we could have the 4 rules of firearm safety, not carry AIWB, not carry with a round in the chamber(Israeli style) and carry guns with long heavy trigger pulls and manual safety plus trigger safety and yet still there will be NDs. This must be balanced with the ability to draw and engage a life threatening adversary with some speed when circumstances dictate, the cost of training,reinforcement and equipment and how challenging it is for less trained people to accurately hit a threat under stress with a weapon carried empty chamber,safety on with long heavy trigger pull. Somewhere there is an acceptable middleground of risk of a ND happening and reasonable training,equipment and gun design. This will be different for every person, LE agency,military etc. There will be some common ground between groups but ISIS,South American rebels,American LEO agencies, and a mom with small children are likely to have very different risk tolerances and their acceptance of the outcomes of a possible ND. I hope that clears up my opinion on the issue rather than cloud it up.

[JustOneGun]

As I said, I didn't think you guys were meaning to say that. But PF has a lot of new shooters showing up. Too cool for the discussion board. They definitely would read what you said and think that. I was just trying to clarify that for anyone who might think that.

[LSP552]

As I said, I didn't think you guys were meaning to say that. But PF has a lot of new shooters showing up. Too cool for the discussion board. They definitely would read what you said and think that. I was just trying to clarify that for anyone who might think that.

Understood. I certainly wasn't trying to convey other NDs don't happen or aren't important. I'm aware of an injury ND to the foot after bolstering a cocked SIG where the thumb snap went into the trigger guard and fired. I'm also aware of a couple of NDs with the old LSP High Standard derringer, which has no trigger guard. One caught on a rear pants pocket and one on a boot top.

These just were not the norm at my old place. Some of the shotgun NDs were after pointing them at bad guys and then failing to correctly put them back in car carry condition.

Off the top of my head, I can't remember an ND from a handgun while holding someone at gun point. Not saying it hasn't happen at my old place, pretty much everything has. Just don't remember one.

[Hemiram]

I've had one ND myself, after cleaning a .22LR semiauto gun of some kind, don't remember for sure, but it was probably one of my junk Erma ones. I had cleared it, cleaned it, and then, probably because it was really late , like 4-5am, and I was too tired to be doing anything with a safety risk, I put the mag back in, racked the slide, and pulled the trigger. BLAM. It seemed louder than I thought was possible from a .22. My mother was living with me, and somehow, it didn't wake her up! The bullet went through a rug and about a half inch into the floor. My dogs took off, one was in the room, the other one was in my bedroom next to the room I was in. I was genuinely shocked when it went off. After I calmed down, I went to bed, and never told my mother she had slept through it. After that point, no more ammo handling of any kind that late (My normal bedtime from birth is about 5am) at night.

[Tamara]

In re: the dangers of holstering and the whole "odds/stakes" thing, using department data is great...for figuring department risks.

I'm not putting a gun away into a rigid gun bucket with an inch or more of standoff from my body. An IWB holster changes things there. Probably why Gunsite doesn't allow them for 250 classes...

[Rex G]

When Houston PD was primarily a revolver-or-1911 place, there were plenty of unintended discharges with revolvers. When Glocks started becoming popular, the number of NDs with Glocks became horrendous, almost causing Glocks to be banned for duty and personal-time carry. Indeed, the standardization, in 1997, upon specified .40 de-cocker autos for primary duty pistols, may have been partly to keep Glocks out of duty holsters. (Nobody was compelled to switch duty pistols; existing weapons could be grandfathered.)

By 2002, however, the Glock-o-philes had prevailed, and the G22 was added to the list of authorized duty pistols, breaking the de-cocker-only monopoly. By then, training had caught up with the technology, and there were fewer unintended discharges with all types of handguns.

FWIW, in 2017, starting with Class 231, the 9mm P320 is the new standard duty pistol for new-hires.

Houston PD officers, for many decades, have had to buy their/our own firearms, within policy guidelines.

[sharps54]

As a civilian I will admit since switching to AIWB carry I have given thought to the idea of grounding my pistol when police arrive as opposed to reholstering. The concern is not being able to know the skill level and potential "pucker-factor" of the officer that would be drawing my loaded Glock from my AIWB holster. That said I think voodoo_man's comments earlier need to be seriously considered if one decides not to holster.