https://www.news4jax.com/news/local/...ety-practices/
JSO memo sent to officers after accidental shooting during traffic stop highlights gun safety practices
https://www.news4jax.com/news/local/...ety-practices/
JSO memo sent to officers after accidental shooting during traffic stop highlights gun safety practices
Bodycam and an update here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79Mjo-a4ODM&rco=1
Wow. With 3 officers there (for a traffic stop), I presume there was training going on. It was the initial contact officer (who I assume to be the FTO) who decided that the subject needed to be disarmed “for your safety and mine”.
This screenshot (from immediately after the gunshot) makes it clear how the gun went off.
![]()
If it turns out as it looks (officer shot a person not needing shooting though careless gun handling) what are the likely ramifications for that officer?
Optimists study English; pessimists study Chinese; and realists learn to use a Kalashnikov.
From the video description:
While Officer Cardwell was attempting to remove the firearm, it discharged, striking Arrington in the leg. The bullet struck Arrington in his upper thigh and came out his inner thigh on his right side. The other officers tell Cardwell to put the gun down, and then they immediately call for paramedics, help Arrington onto the grass and administer a tourniquet to stop the bleeding in his leg. Arrington said the gunshot wound left him with lasting physical impairments that affected his ability to work as a crane operator. The Internal Affairs investigation resulted in a sustained charge of incompetence against Officer Cardwell and JSO has begun termination proceedings for Officer Cardwell.
I watched the initial exchange / contact portion once again .. I have the feeling that the officer making contact does not, initially, appear spooked after being told the driver has a gun in his pants. He then reverses course and announces he is going to disarm the driver only after asking the driver if he has a CHL (negative answer), and a follow up question asking if he is a convicted felon. Anyone else feels the same way about that exchange?
This is not to justify the actions of the officers in this specific instance, or to say a civ can only carry with a CHL. But I think it makes for interesting conversation and I would love to witness the "parallel universe event" where the the driver provides a CHL together with his license, or as a follow up to the office question.
Here in WA when the vehicle license plate is entered into the DOL computer the CPL comes up. The LEO knows before the talk that the driver has a carry permit. I've been stopped a few times and the topic never came up. I guess the LEO just assumed I was armed.
They don't like it if you exit your vehicle without being asked to do that however. I made that mistake one time.
In the P-F basket of deplorables.
Unbelievable!
[MENTION=22657]MTP[/MENTION] I didn’t see your link until after posting this.
I thought the question about whether “you have anything crazy or dangerous in the car” (or words to that effect) was unusual (given my experience). I wondered whether the contact officer intended to search the car or the driver. Makes me wonder whether the traffic stop for running a red light was actually a pretense for stopping him. Maybe there was something else going on?
(DELETE: Double-post.)
Last edited by runcible; 01-22-2025 at 05:56 AM.
Jules
Runcible Works