Noir Angel Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 This scary mentality always boggles my mind too. It's like a teenage gang member who think's he's tough cause he owns a gun. Pathetic. Anyone can pull a trigger, it takes a bigger man to walk away or solve a disagreement with words. People like DocM just seem to be of the mindset that the only way you're ever going to get out of a sticky situation is by capping someone's ass when in reality there is very little chance of that happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted July 10, 2012 Author Share Posted July 10, 2012 Oh please, I've seen you talk with a great deal of glee about the harm your weapons could do to people. America just loves violence it really is that simple. If there's any "glee" it's over a tool that can do its job well and quickly. As for any sympathies for the perp; for them no, for their family of course. That doesn't change the fact that they put themselves in the position of being fired upon. See RAH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin McGregor Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 Stupid gun loving americans and your gun boners. Im so glad im a real man and don't need a weapon to defend myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted July 10, 2012 Author Share Posted July 10, 2012 You do if the opponent is armed and outside your reach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted July 10, 2012 Author Share Posted July 10, 2012 Bacl on-topic, an update http://www.freep.com/article/20120709/NEWS01/120709035/DPD-chief-addresses-accidental-shooting-woman-by-off-duty-officer Police: Officer's gun that killed Adaisha Miller had trigger that could be reached through holsterOff-duty Detroit Police Officer Isaac Parrish was carrying his department-issued pistol in a soft holster on the right side of his waist while hosting a fish fry at his house on Detroit's west side over the weekend when a woman was fatally shot by his gun in what police say appears to have been an accident. Adaisha Miller, who would have turned 25 today, was killed early Sunday morning when Parrish's department-issued gun accidentally discharged while she was dancing behind him and touching his waist, Detroit Police Chief Ralph Godbee Jr. said. Police are investigating the incident and say preliminary findings show the holster may have allowed the trigger to be "manipulated" while the Smith & Wesson M&P 40 was stored, Godbee said. In most incidents, he said, a weapon ?does not go off without the trigger being engaged in some manner.? Godbee said the department does not have a policy regarding what holsters officers should use for their guns when off duty. The shooting is being investigated by the department?s internal affairs unit, but, in the preliminary investigation, it appears the shooting was accidental and the officer did not touch his gun, Godbee said. Based on the preliminary investigation and witness accounts, Godbee said, the shooting occurred after Miller was dancing with Parrish, embraced him from behind and touched his waist. The Wayne County Medical Examiner?s Office performed an autopsy and determined Miller died from a single gunshot wound to the chest, county spokeswoman Brooke Blackwell said. Her death was ruled a homicide. The gun is a Smith & Wesson M&P 40-caliber semi-automatic. Police said the gun does not have an external safety, but does have an internal safety in the trigger. Matt Rice, with Blue Heron Communications -- a public relations agency that represents Smith & Wesson -- said M&Ps can be made with or without an external safety. According to a news release from Smith & Wesson, the weapon has a trigger system that features a 6.5-pound trigger pull and is designed to prevent the gun from firing if it is dropped. During the news conference, Godbee did not answer a question about whether Parrish, a 16-year veteran of the department, was given a Breathalyzer test. The shooting is tragic, "but not intentional at all, Godbee said, adding that his condolences go out to Miller's family. He said the officer is ?very remorseful of the incident and the tragic nature of this young lady losing her life in the manner that she did.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrewbares Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 People like DocM just seem to be of the mindset that the only way you're ever going to get out of a sticky situation is by capping someone's ass Actually if you read the last page you would find that YOU sir are incorrect. This is totally true. I've only had to open fire once, but have made numerous citizens arrests where the perp saw the wide open maw of a 12 guage or hand cannon pointed at them and just gave up. He doesn't just fire at people the first chance he gets. It's a LAST RESORT. Thanks for the update on the article... it doesn't seem like it was the officer's fault, although if he did want to kill this woman for some reason, he could have and played it off as an accident like this. That would be more like a story on the fake crime TV shows though hah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloatingFatMan Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 Going to stop here, I can already tell this thread is easily going to turn into a "This is why we need to ban guns" and "Its our right to carry". I personally have my conceal license and support guns, at least in the sense of good people having them. I'm English. I really don't see the need to be carrying a gun at all times, and I really don't see why you would -want- to; but I'm not going to tell you folks not to. It's your way of life, after all. I just find it really sad when accidents like this, or worse, when those involving kids, happen. Unfortunately, that's the way your society rolls. Accidents will -always- happen when guns are commonplace. At least you guys don't go randomly discharging your weapons into the air, as is common in so many Arabic nations. Gotta wonder how many folks are seriously hurt because of -that-! andrewbares and Bryan R. 2 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted July 10, 2012 Author Share Posted July 10, 2012 > Unfortunately, that's the way your society rolls. Accidents will -always- happen when guns cars, bicycles, motorcycles or pedestrians are commonplace. All of which are involved in more accidents than firearms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloatingFatMan Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 All of which are involved in more accidents than firearms. The topic is firearms, not those other things. Irrelevant. Tha Bloo Monkee 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted July 10, 2012 Author Share Posted July 10, 2012 Perspective, Grasshopper, perspective. This thread is about an accidental shooting, so discussing how firearms place relative to other causes of accidents fits. Fact is, they are responsible for less than 1%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killer2239 Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 I'm English. I really don't see the need to be carrying a gun at all times, and I really don't see why you would -want- to; but I'm not going to tell you folks not to. It's your way of life, after all. I just find it really sad when accidents like this, or worse, when those involving kids, happen. Unfortunately, that's the way your society rolls. Accidents will -always- happen when guns are commonplace. At least you guys don't go randomly discharging your weapons into the air, as is common in so many Arabic nations. Gotta wonder how many folks are seriously hurt because of -that-! Yeah, I don't agree with people just going around shooting guns in the air. That is just stupid. As for when I carry, I only carry sometimes. I took the class and test for my license to better educate myself about firearms and the laws for protection. If I am going anywhere to drink, I do NOT take it with me. I usually only carry it once in a while, like if I am going out in the country to do little hiking or run rc trucks in similar areas. Sometimes if I am going to a place I feel there could potentially be an incident. As for the update to this story, thanks for posting it. It is interesting that he would use a holster that does not fully protect the trigger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILikeTobacco Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 Bacl on-topic, an update http://www.freep.com...ff-duty-officer Looks like the department needs to change its policy and tell them what kind of holsters to use to prevent this in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted July 10, 2012 Author Share Posted July 10, 2012 That can happen if you buy a generic holster instead of one fitted to that specific firearm. Such holsters are sold in department and sporting goods stores etc. but to get a fitted / molded one requires a good gun dealer or range with a large selection or an outfit that makes custom rigs. I buy mine from a custom shop named CrossBreed, specifically the SuperTuck. It has a polymer 'holster' portion that's custom molded and grips the firearm, and a leather backing that protects my hide. 2 hools go over the waistband and attach to my belt. Mine also has a custom added thumb break - a thumb releasable strap that doubles up on keeping the firearm in place and protects the guns hammer. VERY comfortable, and safe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noir Angel Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 Guns are designed with 1 intention in mind, and that's to kill things. Cars and motorcycles aren't designed to kill things. So really it's rather laughable that gun nuts use that rhetoric to justify the fact that guns kill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted July 10, 2012 Author Share Posted July 10, 2012 Doesn't change the fact that they're a minor contribution to accidental deaths, and that the number of actual shootings in self defense (cops + civilians) is only a few hundred a year. 99.9% of the time just showing it ends the attack cold. Often it doesn't even have to leave the holster. Also, most firearms are used for target or hunting - not people. Even handguns - I hunt deer, bear and hogs with a large handgun and small game with smaller calibers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noir Angel Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 It doesn't change the fact that they're a major contributor to homicides either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted July 10, 2012 Author Share Posted July 10, 2012 And the vast majority of those are gang, especially drug gang, related - and those are totally unaffected by gun laws. All restrictive laws do is leave innocent people defenseless. Been there, did that, and it didn't work. Just look at Chicago - one of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation is in Illinois and even harsher in the city, and one of the highest murder counts - almost all gangs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahhell Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 Ummmmm, no. If you're a cop, you're required to carry an off-duty weapon. At least that's what I've seen from family and friends. You're not on duty, but you're always on duty. Did you even read the bloody article??? "Detroit police officers are not required to carry firearms while off duty. ?It is optional,? Stephens said tonight." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan R. Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 Guns are designed with 1 intention in mind, and that's to kill things. Cars and motorcycles aren't designed to kill things. So really it's rather laughable that gun nuts use that rhetoric to justify the fact that guns kill. You are clearly aimed at going around in circles until your "correct" opinion "sinks in". I say this because you're repeating yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted July 10, 2012 Author Share Posted July 10, 2012 He's in a philosophical echo chamber. Did you even read the bloody article??? "Detroit police officers are not required to carry firearms while off duty. ?It is optional,? Stephens said tonight." True, but in a great many jurisdictions it *is* required. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan R. Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 And how many hero stories do we have where an off duty police officer saves someone? Quite a few actually... I appreciate that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerzdawg Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 And how many hero stories do we have where an off duty police officer saves someone? Quite a few actually... I appreciate that. The people who are anti-gun dont bother to respond to articles like that. They only want news that will help fuel their agenda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killer2239 Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 And how many hero stories do we have where an off duty police officer saves someone? Quite a few actually... I appreciate that. Sadly we do not even hear about those incidents that often. The news is always about showing everything wrong with the world and negative things, then they might throw in 1 positive thing once in a while. People feed on drama and negative stories just so they have things to complain about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vykranth Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 And how many hero stories do we have where an off duty police officer saves someone? Quite a few actually... I appreciate that. Why, sure, this is the kind of statement that is really going to help the grieving family and the police officier cope with that tragic accident. "Sir, I am sorry to hear that your wife died but think about all the other people saved!" It is an accident. An accident which happened because a gun, a dangerous item by defintion, was not properly secured. This is the problem with guns, when improperly handled outside the rules, accidents happen, and accident with guns are very often tragic. Frankly, can someone explain the reason why anyone would need to have to carry a gun while dancing at his own party? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted July 10, 2012 Author Share Posted July 10, 2012 Frankly, can someone explain the reason why anyone would need to have to carry a gun while dancing at his own party? He was at home. His home is in Detroit. That says enough. More times than I care to remember cops in our neighborhood (well outside of Detroit) have had to respond to local off-duty incidents in seconds. Often seconds count, and running to get your firearm can take too many of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts