never trust ANYTHING an leo tells you…. period. I had a state trooper firearms instructor tell me he knew nothing about NFA paperwork. he had never seen any of it. which waa true. ive had others tell us suppressors are illegal to own, which isn’t true.. sheriffs depuys told us they shoot thier firearms ONCE a year for qualifying and have had zero training after graduation of police academy.. zero. many leo are not knowledgeable about firearms despite what tv shows tell you. if the booger hook is near the bang switch it will go off.. ask alec baldwin..
1. Did the shooter or something within their control (keys, ballpoint, flashlight, etc.) pull the trigger?
If no, then we have a non-shooter issue to investigate.
If yes, then 2. Did the shooter you intend to pull the trigger?
Seemed to me that all else flowed from those two questions.
And no, I do not give LEOs the expectation of knowledge or experience when it comes to firearms. Hollywood makes far too much BS about it, not to mention casual conversation with LEOs at the civilian range. Those conversations made me wary not of them (they were at least AT the range after all), but of others of whom they spoke candidly.
I don't expect the average cop to know in detail how the engine or transmission in their patrol car works, or the physics of semiconductor junctions or arc discharges that make the blinky-flashy lights work. I don't expect a nuanced understanding of the Maxwell equations that are fundamental to radio transmission.
But I do expect and believe that good understanding of how to drive, how to use the emergency lights, and how to use their radio, are fundamental requirements for being a police officer that's not a hazard to the general public and himself.
No different with guns. I don't demand sniper precision, nor a nuanced understanding of tradeoffs between barrel length and round expansion vs powder charge. But expecting a basic level of knowledge of - and compliance with - basic gun safety principles is entirely reasonable given the job.
My translation of that article is "we're too ignorant to be safe around guns, and we have no desire to fix that, so we're inventing BS excuses to hide that fact".
never trust ANYTHING an leo tells you…. period. I had a state trooper firearms instructor tell me he knew nothing about NFA paperwork. he had never seen any of it. which waa true. ive had others tell us suppressors are illegal to own, which isn’t true.. sheriffs depuys told us they shoot thier firearms ONCE a year for qualifying and have had zero training after graduation of police academy.. zero. many leo are not knowledgeable about firearms despite what tv shows tell you. if the booger hook is near the bang switch it will go off.. ask alec baldwin..
My logic has always begun with 2 questions.
1. Did the shooter or something within their control (keys, ballpoint, flashlight, etc.) pull the trigger?
If no, then we have a non-shooter issue to investigate.
If yes, then 2. Did the shooter you intend to pull the trigger?
Seemed to me that all else flowed from those two questions.
And no, I do not give LEOs the expectation of knowledge or experience when it comes to firearms. Hollywood makes far too much BS about it, not to mention casual conversation with LEOs at the civilian range. Those conversations made me wary not of them (they were at least AT the range after all), but of others of whom they spoke candidly.
I don't expect the average cop to know in detail how the engine or transmission in their patrol car works, or the physics of semiconductor junctions or arc discharges that make the blinky-flashy lights work. I don't expect a nuanced understanding of the Maxwell equations that are fundamental to radio transmission.
But I do expect and believe that good understanding of how to drive, how to use the emergency lights, and how to use their radio, are fundamental requirements for being a police officer that's not a hazard to the general public and himself.
No different with guns. I don't demand sniper precision, nor a nuanced understanding of tradeoffs between barrel length and round expansion vs powder charge. But expecting a basic level of knowledge of - and compliance with - basic gun safety principles is entirely reasonable given the job.
They're playing legal games with responsibility. All UDs are negligence of the 4 rules. That may be negligence on the part of the training but still.
Mm, perhaps an ND is not negligence of all four.
Someone getting hurt from one, however, is imo.
Correct. I wasn't thinking all 4 at once necessarily.
My translation of that article is "we're too ignorant to be safe around guns, and we have no desire to fix that, so we're inventing BS excuses to hide that fact".