Sleeping Girl Shot By Police

ZoZo wrote:

How does a gun "just go off", anyway? If they tend to do that, shouldn't someone do something about that?

They don't. This reeks of a negligent discharge.

Harley Quinn hyenaholic wrote:

Why wasn't his safety on?

Because safeties don't work that way. They're an anti-accident device, not an anti-idiot device.

Spotts1701 wrote:

I want to come back to the issue of the police using
flash-bangs before raiding the house. I was under the impression that
SOP was to never use flash-bangs when there is the
potential of young children being in the house?

It can be but it doesn't have to be. Same with tazers, really.

This sort of thing is why I'm not a fan of "no-knock" warrants.

Penguin wrote:

ZoZo wrote:

How does a gun "just go off", anyway? If they tend to do that, shouldn't someone do something about that?

They don't. This reeks of a negligent discharge.

Negligent discharge=BAND NAME!

Does that mean "blindly shooting around like a dick"?

I'm asking these questions as a genuinely naive Britlander, to whom guns are big unwieldy things that you might use to shoot clay pigeons with.

Basically, to discharge a firearm is to set it off.

An accidental discharge is something that happens through no fault of the person with the gun. This is almost always due to a mechanical defect of some kind; inadequate safety devices, dangerous engineering, etc.

For example, the Japanese used an 8mm pistol in WW2 called the Nambu. It could fire if its sides got squeezed. This could easily happen without the person doing something that could be reasonably expected to fire the weapon.

True accidental discharges are very rare this day and age because guns capable of them are more of a liability than anything else, and most modern guns are very safely designed. (Glocks have been tested by dropping them out of a helicopter and they didn't go off, for example).

A negligent discharge is what happens when someone fires a gun without meaning to through stupidity. This is almost always because their finger is on the trigger when they're not ready to shoot. A significant number of police officers have "Glock leg" from trying to holster their weapon with a finger on the trigger.

Basically, your finger should only ever be on your trigger ONLY AFTER you have identified your target and have aimed at it.

That sounds about right. So I have to ask... why don't police officers get extensive firearms training so that shit like this doesn't happen?

Again

Quote :

Aiyana's grandmother Mertilla Jones was in the front room of the house and tussled with the first officer when his gun discharged, hitting Aiyana, police said.

Reading is hard.

Psy-4 wrote:

Quote :

Aiyana's grandmother Mertilla Jones was in the front room of the house and tussled with the first officer when his gun discharged, hitting Aiyana, police said.

Reading is hard.

So why was his finger on the trigger, if, as Penguin said, it shouldn't be?

Following the thread of a conversation is hard.

Psy-4 wrote:

Again

Quote :

Aiyana's grandmother Mertilla Jones was in the front room of the house and tussled with the first officer when his gun discharged, hitting Aiyana, police said.

Reading is hard.

No, reading is not hard.
Imagining a scenario in which the police break in, toss flash-bangs, are attacked by Rabid!Granny and wrestle for the gun, all this while a kid sleeps peacefully on the couch, this is hard.

ZoZo wrote:

So why was his finger on the trigger, if, as Penguin said, it shouldn't be?

Following the thread of a conversation is hard.

I'm pretty sure tussling with an officer makes you a good target.

You're assuming the officer's finger couldn't have slipped during the struggle.

You're assuming grandma's hands were nowhere near the trigger.

When you try to imitate the quoted post, make sure you don't look like an idiot.

The Unoriginal wrote:

Imagining a scenario in which the police break in, toss flash-bangs, are attacked by Rabid!Granny and wrestle for the gun, all this while a kid sleeps peacefully on the couch, this is hard.

Yes, an improbable event happens, means the police are lying.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Psy-4 wrote:

ZoZo wrote:

So why was his finger on the trigger, if, as Penguin said, it shouldn't be?

Following the thread of a conversation is hard.

I'm pretty sure tussling with an officer makes you a good target.

You're assuming the officer's finger couldn't have slipped during the struggle.

You're assuming grandma's hands were nowhere near the trigger.

When you try to imitate the quoted post, make sure you don't look like an idiot.

No really, if you'd have been following, you may have noticed that I have absolutely no clue about how guns work--or rules regarding how the police are supposed to use guns, or even how easy it is to accidentally shoot someone. Keep up, Psy-4. Otherwise, how will you know which memes to pointlessly repeat?

I'd like to ask, if they'd just thrown a flash bang device into the house, how come the girl was still asleep?

I realize this is a little off topic, but

Spotts1701 wrote:

the truth (which likely lies somewhere in the middle).

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Don't say stupid shit like this.

I think 'accidental discharge' is a technical term for 'some moron saw a sleeping person getting up and shot at them, thinking they were the criminal or something'.

"Mistaken shooting" just doesn't have that ring to it, you know.

ZoZo wrote:

Psy-4 wrote:

Quote :

Aiyana's grandmother Mertilla Jones was in the front room of the house and tussled with the first officer when his gun discharged, hitting Aiyana, police said.

Reading is hard.

So why was his finger on the trigger, if, as Penguin said, it shouldn't be?

Following the thread of a conversation is hard.

The lady fighting with the police officer may have been the one to set the gun off. Though that seems less likely than the officer accidentally firing it. Also, he may have already identified something he may have actually wanted to shoot, then granny body checks him and the gun fires.

Harley wrote:

I'd like to ask, if they'd just thrown a flash bang device into the house, how come the girl was still asleep?

She may have been sleeping before it, the flash-bang woke her up, and she didn't get off of the couch right away because she had NO idea what was happening. I kind of assumed the grenade woke her up to begin with.

Even if there was no flash-bang, you'd think the police barging in to your place and wrestling with people would wake you up.

It seems the family's lawyer is claiming that the kid was burnt by the flash grenade (which might explain her remaining on the sofa). Additionally the lawyer says (and since he claims to have video footage to back him up I'm inclined to believe him) that the shot that killed the kid was fired from outside the house.

Having said that, he's not turned the tape over to the state police who are investigating.

Harley Quinn hyenaholic wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

But keep trying Harley. Really. I mean it.

Ellym wrote:

It seems the family's lawyer is claiming that the kid was burnt by the flash grenade (which might explain her remaining on the sofa). Additionally the lawyer says (and since he claims to have video footage to back him up I'm inclined to believe him) that the shot that killed the kid was fired from outside the house.

Having said that, he's not turned the tape over to the state police who are investigating.

Which makes me wonder how the lawyer got it, since this is presumably the tape from the A&E crew.

Freezer wrote:

Ellym wrote:

It seems the family's lawyer is claiming that the kid was burnt by the flash grenade (which might explain her remaining on the sofa). Additionally the lawyer says (and since he claims to have video footage to back him up I'm inclined to believe him) that the shot that killed the kid was fired from outside the house.

Having said that, he's not turned the tape over to the state police who are investigating.

Which makes me wonder how the lawyer got it, since this is presumably the tape from the A&E crew.

Not necessarily - it's more likely from some neighbor with either a cell phone or camcorder. A police tactical unit rolls up, everyone turns into a Zapruder.

For some reason, this incident has turned into a source of racial tension here in California.

No, I don't understand it, either.

Lady Anne wrote:

For some reason, this incident has turned into a source of racial tension here in California.

No, I don't understand it, either.

Probably Rodney King flashbacks.

ZoZo wrote:

That sounds about right. So I have to ask... why don't police officers get extensive firearms training so that shit like this doesn't happen?

Police officers are typically required to qualify with their weapons twice a year at most, usually expending about a box of ammo each (about 50 rounds). This is nothing, really. For most handgun shooters, that's about a third of a monthly range session. Some departments budget more time and resources for training, but sometimes they have to make a choice between more training, new/replacement equipment, and/or hiring on a new officer. The second one, equipment, can often be a problem as police departments spend money on slick, SWAT-type equipment that they probably don't really need. Just another problem with the increasing militarization of police forces: As mil-spec gear goes up, training goes down.

Plus, police work can breed complacency with firearms, especially since most police officers will never have to fire their weapons in anger. This guy is a perfect example of police complacency:



And he's from a federal law enforcement agency, which typically has a FAR bigger budget than your typical city police.

Quote :

Just another problem with the increasing
militarization of police forces: As mil-spec gear goes up, training goes
down.

Holy shit. You mean, their budget goes to getting in more complicated gear, and less goes to training their men how to fucking USE it?!

Not always, but that's often the case, yes. You get the new equipment, you put your officers through a familiarization or qualification course with it, and once they're signed off, depending on what the equipment is, they might need to occasionally re-qualify. But that costs money, and training with the stuff they already had isn't nearly as attractive anymore.

So Officer Friendly might be slicker than snot at driving the department's new military surplus APC over a meth lab in the woods, but he's gone rusty on his building entry and gun handling.

A quick bit of research indicates the Detroit PD has in recent years issued Glocks as their standard sidearm, but is switching to Smith and Wesson M&Ps. Glocks have no external safety, while the M&P does not come stock with an external safety. So like a double action revolver there is no way to render them unfireable in a struggle.