Home Main Category Personal Defense

Lodi Police Officer Shot When Child Pulled Trigger On His Gun At Reading Event

Big ChiefBig Chief Senior MemberPosts: 32,995 Senior Member
Murphy's LAW will sure strike when you least expect it.

http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2013/09/02/lodi-police-officer-shot-when-child-pulled-trigger-on-his-gun-at-reading-event/


"LODI (CBS13) — A Lodi Police SWAT officer had a Glock .35 with a flashlight in his thigh holster at a children’s reading event when a boy managed to pull the trigger and shoot the officer.

“It doesn’t have an external safety or anything like that,” said Lt. Sierra Brucia with the department. “The gun functioned how it was supposed to. When the trigger was pulled, the gun went off.”

The officer was showing off the department’s SWAT truck, vest and other gear at a children’s event called Reading Roundup on Aug. 24.

“A small child, witnesses tell us was 6 to 8 years old, was able to walk up to the officer and was able to pull the trigger.”

The bullet hit the officer’s leg. He was taken to the hospital for a minor injury and released.

The department is investigating the shooting to see if protocols or procedures need to be changed to prevent the same thing from happening again.

Officers want to find the child and his parents to piece together what went wrong.

“Hopefully, speaking to the child and the child’s parents to find out how they were able to get access to the officer’s gun, what the child’s intent may have been—we don’t know if it was accidental or unintentional.”

Police say because the gun was in a holster to accommodate the attached flashlight, the trigger was more accessible.

The officer has been on the SWAT team for about 5 years and he is back on duty "

http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2013/09/02/lodi-police-officer-shot-when-child-pulled-trigger-on-his-gun-at-reading-event/
It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
«13

Replies

  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,887 Senior Member
    Big Chief wrote: »
    Police say because the gun was in a holster to accommodate the attached flashlight, the trigger was more accessible.
    Not all light rail holsters are like that. I know several officers who carry Glock pistols with the lights attached in holsters, and in ALL of them the trigger is shielded. Looking at Safariland, I guess that there are some holsters where a young child could get their fingers into the triggerguard to trigger a release, but I kinda doubt it.
    I'm just here for snark.
  • BufordBuford Senior Member Posts: 6,721 Senior Member
    Big Chief wrote: »
    Murphy's LAW will sure strike when you least expect it.

    “Hopefully, speaking to the child and the child’s parents to find out how they were able to get access to the officer’s gun, what the child’s intent may have been—we don’t know if it was accidental or unintentional.”

    I like that, the child's intent.

    Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk 2
    Just look at the flowers Lizzie, just look at the flowers.
  • NNNN Senior Member Posts: 25,146 Senior Member
    There goes the safe action pistol reputation, hey.
  • RazorbackerRazorbacker Senior Member Posts: 4,646 Senior Member
    Looks like all that expensive retention training really paid off.
    Teach your children to love guns, they'll never be able to afford drugs
  • horselipshorselips Senior Member Posts: 3,628 Senior Member
    Murphy's Law, and Glocks were made for each other. A match made in Heaven.
  • RazorbackerRazorbacker Senior Member Posts: 4,646 Senior Member
    I've never owned a Glock but I have shot one that I can remember. A 10mm my BIL owns. It was pretty sweet. His handloads are a handful to be sure but once I got dialed in it was great. I'm seriously considering a pair of hi-cap 9mm for new nightstand guns for us.
    I'm sure you'll all agree, the platform in question was in no way responsible for the
    incident that occurred.
    Teach your children to love guns, they'll never be able to afford drugs
  • horselipshorselips Senior Member Posts: 3,628 Senior Member
    I'm sure you'll all agree, the platform in question was in no way responsible for the
    incident that occurred.

    Actually, I don't agree. To my old fashioned and obsolete mindset, any partially cocked, light-triggered automatic that doesn't have an "off" switch, and cannot be de-cocked except by firing it, is intrinsically, inherently flawed, and fundamentally unsafe in all but the most experienced and anally attentive of hands, to whom firearm safety is a borderline obsessive-compulsive disorder. I know, I'm the poster boy for Neanderthal Luddites, just my opinion.
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,813 Senior Member
    horselips wrote: »
    Actually, I don't agree. To my old fashioned and obsolete mindset, any partially cocked, light-triggered automatic that doesn't have an "off" switch, and cannot be de-cocked except by firing it, is intrinsically, inherently flawed, and fundamentally unsafe in all but the most experienced and anally attentive of hands, to whom firearm safety is a borderline obsessive-compulsive disorder. I know, I'm the poster boy for Neanderthal Luddites, just my opinion.

    And what about double-action revolvers? My Smith & Wesson Model 66 is operated the same as my Glock G-20 (draw the gun and pull the trigger), and if anything, has an easier trigger pull. With either, you don't touch the trigger until you are ready to destroy whatever is in front of the muzzle. If a person can forget that, he can also forget to flip a lever safety.

    Anal retentiveness is a requirement for the safe handing of loaded firearms.
  • horselipshorselips Senior Member Posts: 3,628 Senior Member
    bisley wrote: »
    And what about double-action revolvers? My Smith & Wesson Model 66 is operated the same as my Glock G-20 (draw the gun and pull the trigger), and if anything, has an easier trigger pull. With either, you don't touch the trigger until you are ready to destroy whatever is in front of the muzzle. If a person can forget that, he can also forget to flip a lever safety.

    Anal retentiveness is a requirement for the safe handing of loaded firearms.

    A standard Glock trigger pull is approximately 5.5 pounds (by swapping out some parts, it can be reduced to half that). It is a rare revolver, especially a Model 66 that has a double action trigger pull that light. The usual double action pull weight on an unmodified Model 66 is 11-12 pounds (the single action pull weight is a very nice 2.5 pounds). The NYPD and some other sensible departments have specified an extra-heavy 8-12 pound trigger for their Glock pistols, even though they are to be used by trained professionals.

    OK, so we agree to disagree. I'm not saying I'm right, just what's right for me. If you're cozy and comfy with a "safe action" pistol, be my guest. Be careful. Enjoy.
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,813 Senior Member
    I am comfortable with it, but I had to overcome the same misgivings that you have, and my comfort level is in direct proportion to how much practice I'm getting. When I go a long time between range sessions, I over-do the safety issues, to try to keep them burned into my brain (anal retentiveness?). I also find that I have to do the same thing when practicing with a DA/SA pistol, though. So, I contend that the lever safety is not inherently safer than a striker fired pistol - it's all a function of the amount and quality of practice, in my opinion. I actually prefer the XD platform, which also employs a grip safety, a feature that might have prevented the accident described in the original post. And my revolver analogy comes from the perception I have that the smoothness and efficiency of the S&W action cancels out whatever differences there are in pull weights. I have fired both in the same range session, and my perception was that the S&W double-action was easier on the trigger than the Glock.
  • bullsi1911bullsi1911 Moderator Posts: 12,073 Senior Member
    Wait... y'all are blaming the gun? That officer was wearing a holster that left the trigger exposed. Whoever issued that holster is at fault. And any company that makes a Glock holster that leaves the trigger accessible to a finger is negligent
    To make something simple is a thousand times more difficult than to make something complex.
    -Mikhail Kalashnikov
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,887 Senior Member
    Don't you understand? If the Glock trigger wasn't so light, this would NEVER have happened. Glocks need heavier triggers because they're a bad design.

    Nevermind the child getting to close to the police officer and messing with his firearm. If that is what actually happened.
    I'm just here for snark.
  • BigDanSBigDanS Senior Member Posts: 6,992 Senior Member
    Don't you understand? If the Glock trigger wasn't so light, this would NEVER have happened. Glocks need heavier triggers because they're a bad design.

    Nevermind the child getting to close to the police officer and messing with his firearm. If that is what actually happened.

    Bad design?

    It is no different than a revolver, other than the trigger is lighter.

    It has to be treated with the respect it deserves. After all you are carrying a loaded gun....

    D
    "A patriot is mocked, scorned and hated; yet when his cause succeeds, all men will join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot." Mark Twain
    Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.... now who's bringing the hot wings? :jester:
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,887 Senior Member
    No, no, no. You're not listening/reading! The Glock is an inherently unsafe design because it goes boom when the booger hook or anything else depresses the bang switch. We need to make them harder to use, with more features, to prevent this sort of thing! Treat it with respect? It's an inanimate object. You can't respect it. You can blame it, but you can't respect it...
    I'm just here for snark.
  • BigDanSBigDanS Senior Member Posts: 6,992 Senior Member
    No, no, no. You're not listening/reading! The Glock is an inherently unsafe design because it goes boom when the booger hook or anything else depresses the bang switch. We need to make them harder to use, with more features, to prevent this sort of thing! Treat it with respect? It's an inanimate object. You can't respect it. You can blame it, but you can't respect it...

    ah!

    D
    "A patriot is mocked, scorned and hated; yet when his cause succeeds, all men will join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot." Mark Twain
    Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.... now who's bringing the hot wings? :jester:
  • SlanteyedshootistSlanteyedshootist Senior Member Posts: 3,947 Senior Member
    Could it be that the gun was not properly holstered?
    The answer to 1984 is 1776
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,887 Senior Member
    You're blaming the officer? I think it's that the gun didn't properly holster itself.
    I'm just here for snark.
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 27,457 Senior Member
    horselips wrote: »
    Actually, I don't agree. To my old fashioned and obsolete mindset, any partially cocked, light-triggered automatic that doesn't have an "off" switch, and cannot be de-cocked except by firing it, is intrinsically, inherently flawed, and fundamentally unsafe in all but the most experienced and anally attentive of hands, to whom firearm safety is a borderline obsessive-compulsive disorder. I know, I'm the poster boy for Neanderthal Luddites, just my opinion.

    Well freakin' horror of horrors! The safety on the venerable old 1911 cannot be engaged until the pistol is cocked either by operating the slide or cocking the hammer! And the slide cannot be operated to unload the pistol when the safety is in the ON postition. They are subject to ND when the magazine is inserted and the trigger finger is on the trigger and the slide is racked to chamber a round. This is clearly a very unsafe design due to it's being an old design not up to modern standards.

    Maybe people that can't keep their finger off the trigger until they are ready to fire need to install a trigger lock on their revolvers and pistols that prevent such sillyness. They can then go to the trouble of removing it ONLY when it is necessary to fire.

    Firearms safety is a habit, and habits, good or bad, are formed by repetition of the action. Concerning firearms, the habit should be so practiced as to be an unconscious action.
      I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer”
    ― Douglas Adams
  • EliEli Senior Member Posts: 3,074 Senior Member
    I think some of you are misunderstanding how this happened. It isn't the guns fault, and it isn't the holsters either.

    The very nature of flashlights, being what they are, dictate that you mount them under the barrel, therefore, in front of the trigger guard. The holster has to be a functional thing, you can't just have a holster on your side for looks, and carry the gun in your hand (I would've thought that was obvious, but from some of the comments, I'm not sure). Since you have to be able to holster the gun with the light, then the holster must be wide enough to accommodate said target illumination device. If the front end (light) is bigger than the back end (trigger guard), then it stands to reason that there is going to be empty space when everything is in position.



    This is my carry gun, a Glock 19L, wearing an Inforce APL, riding in an Aegis Armory holster. It is easy to see that from the side the holster "covers" the trigger guard just as much as any other holster should/does.

    lighttrigger.jpg



    The issue however, is that from the top, to accommodate the light, there is a gap that even I can fit my fat fingers in, not to mention the digits of a small child.

    lighttrigger2.jpg


    Bottom line is: The cop should've been more observant and payed attention to what the kid was doing (he was touching the gun/holster for christ's saked, how do you not notice that?!!)......and the kid shouldn't have been and idiot, and kept his fingers off of stuff that he had no business touching.
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,887 Senior Member
    Eli....

    You're new here, aren't you? Facts have no business in these discussions.
    I'm just here for snark.
  • EliEli Senior Member Posts: 3,074 Senior Member
    Eli....

    You're new here, aren't you? Facts have no business in these discussions.

    :tooth:

    I'm sorry, I wasn't thinking. I'll go stand in the corner now.
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,887 Senior Member
    You do raise up some good points, though.
    I'm just here for snark.
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 27,457 Senior Member
    Eli wrote: »
    :tooth:

    I'm sorry, I wasn't thinking. I'll go stand in the corner now.


    No need for standing in the corner. Let's say that the cop's situational awareness sucked badly. And is probably an example of this quote.

    A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. Douglas Adams
      I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer”
    ― Douglas Adams
  • BullgatorBullgator Member Posts: 393 Member
    None of my first five handguns I owned had manual safeties (two revolvers, two XDs, and an AMT Backup). I just developed a mindset that every gun is only a trigger pull away from firing. I handle all my guns that way, regardless of safety devices. I wouldn't carry a gun with the trigger exposed even if it had an external safety. YMMV
  • BufordBuford Senior Member Posts: 6,721 Senior Member
    Eli wrote: »
    ......and the kid shouldn't have been and idiot, and kept his fingers off of stuff that he had no business touching.

    Those 6 year old's should know better.
    Just look at the flowers Lizzie, just look at the flowers.
  • BufordBuford Senior Member Posts: 6,721 Senior Member
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    My 6 year olds knew better .

    So did mine, would I trust them around a gun no way. This cop was the stupid one here. It takes time to remove the temptation of playing with a gun. The curiosity of the forbidden fruit is strong. We lost the neighbor boy because he bought a friend home and got his dads Beretta removed the magazine and handed it to his friend who shot him dead. This child knew better but he did it anyway.
    Just look at the flowers Lizzie, just look at the flowers.
  • EliEli Senior Member Posts: 3,074 Senior Member
    Buford wrote: »
    Those 6 year old's should know better.

    Of course he should know better. Even if the child had never been exposed to firearms in any way whatsoever, "Don't walk up and stick you finger into something that's hanging off of another person." seems like a pretty simple thing for a child to know.

    "If it doesn't belong to you, and you haven't gotten permission, DON'T TOUCH IT" is a lesson my niece and nephew had no problem comprehending when they were three, a six year old should definitely know better.
  • BufordBuford Senior Member Posts: 6,721 Senior Member
    Eli wrote: »
    Of course he should know better. Even if the child had never been exposed to firearms in any way whatsoever, "Don't walk up and stick you finger into something that's hanging off of another person." seems like a pretty simple thing for a child to know.

    You would think so but as shown here that don't work too well. That's why there is so much Adult supervision required when raising children.
    Just look at the flowers Lizzie, just look at the flowers.
  • coolgunguycoolgunguy Senior Member Posts: 6,632 Senior Member
    Buford wrote: »
    You would think so but as shown here that don't work too well. That's why there is so much Adult supervision required when raising children.


    That is very true. Apparently, none of the adults in charge of 'supervising' (the cop, the teacher and whoever else might have been there) were up to the task. When you have the stupid leading the blind, somebody is eventually going to bump into something.

    The kid should have had a firm grasp of 'Don't touch' by this point. OTOH, the cop needs to know that you NEVER allow somebody to get close enough to be able to do what that kid did. Especially when you're around a group of people who are easily distracted and like as not also suffer from a lack of impulse control.
    "Bipartisan" usually means that a bigger than normal deception is happening.
    George Carlin
  • SirGeorgeKillianSirGeorgeKillian Senior Member Posts: 5,463 Senior Member
    My 3 year old knows better! I take her to work at the shop all the time, never once has she touched a gun without asking me first. She knows better. Though she is getting pretty good with a bore scope!


    uploadfromtaptalk1378390673513.jpg
    Unless life also hands you water and sugar, your lemonade is gonna suck!
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    I'm in love with a Glock
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.

Advertisement