Local news
Virginia Beach Police have launched an internal investigation after a
gun was accidentally fired during a training exercise in North
Carolina.
Police confirm it happened Wednesday night at the Academi Training Center in Moyock, North Carolina. You may know that facility by its former name, Blackwater.
The Camden County Sheriff’s Office says the incident occurred after
training was completed Wednesday afternoon, when officers were cleaning
their weapons. The Sheriff’s Office says Capt. Michael Ronan’s weapon
accidentally discharged, which resulted in one officer being struck in
the arm.
How in the world can someone who's trained in firarms handling do something like this? How much training does it take to remember to remove the round from the chamber FIRST?
I say such an amazing lack of competence in gun-handling should be considered criminal. Such a person should lose his rights to own and use guns.
"How much training does it take to remember to remove the round from the chamber FIRST?"
ReplyDeleteActually Mike, you remove the magazine FIRST, then clear the chambered round. Doing it in the wrong order can result in another round from the magazine being loaded if the bolt is allowed to go forward.
I wonder if Mikeb has even enough sense to be embarrassed about that lapse.
DeleteI kinda doubt it.
By FIRST I didn't mean before removing that magazine. I meant before disassembling the gun.
DeleteYou guys are such liars you can't resist these gotcha attempts, pretending all the while that you misunderstood what I said.
"By FIRST I didn't mean before removing that magazine. I meant before disassembling the gun."
DeleteWell Mike, while its an easy concept, it takes consistent devotion to do it the right way EVERY time. These are professionals, some high ranking, but the gun doesn't care. You do it wrong once and it will bite you.
I've personally seen it happen in training several time with deploying units. It gets treated seriously with much attention and retraining. I'm glad the officer wasn't seriously hurt. And the department will handle it internally.
MikeB speak: "by first I meant second."
DeleteBy FIRST I didn't mean before removing that magazine. I meant before disassembling the gun.
DeleteSure, why not? If "voluntary" can mean "constrained by law," then why should "first" not mean "second"?
But wow--calling SSG a liar, for merely correcting your extremely dangerously false description of the procedure for safely disassembling a firearm? Are you turning into a slightly less idiotic version of your little Bravely Anonymous, SSG-hating buddy now?
"You do it wrong once and it will bite you. "
DeleteWell, not really. I'm sure many of you guys forget a round in the chamber and get away with it. The problem comes when you combine that oversight with breaking one or two of the safety rules. In other words, forgetting the round in the chamber is no biggie unless you also point the gun in the wrong direction and put your finger on the trigger when you should't.
"But wow--calling SSG a liar, "
DeleteI thought it was TS followed by you. I would never call ss a liar. He's proven himself to be a respectful man who argues fairly, unlike yourself, Kurt.
Sorry, ss. Thanks for not getting bent out of shape for that mistake on my part.
I would never call ss a liar.
DeleteAnd now we discover that to Mikeb, "never" means "November 11, 2015, at 8:27 AM." Or is that an "unfair" argument on my part?
Let's just hope your horribly dangerous advice on how to disassemble a firearm doesn't get anyone killed. Or am I overestimating your morality? Could it be that you want someone to use the procedure you described, leading to a fatal tragedy? After all, it would likely just be a gun owner or his/her child who gets killed--no loss in your book--right, Mikeb? And then, you'd have another anecdote to "prove" that gun owners are too clumsy/stupid/irresponsible/careless/negligent to own guns. A win, win scenario for you, right, Mikeb?
"Well, not really. I'm sure many of you guys forget a round in the chamber and get away with it."
DeleteAre you referring to forgetting and that resulting in a negligent discharge? Or just forgetting and getting that rude awakening of a round popping out of the ejection port when you weren't expecting it? I don't consider either one to be "getting away with it", even if the only damage is to your hearing.
The two of us seem to have different philosophies regarding how to deal with negligent discharges. Yours, from what I'm understanding is the "one strike and your out" policy in which a single occurrence results in permanent loss of gun rights. And mine mimics the current policy in use by the Army, which while giving consequences which escalate in accordance with severity of damage and/or injury regards it as a training issue.
I personally believe that the policy I support is more likely to result in an overall reduction of these incidents because the emphasis is on training to promote safe behavior in the future while requiring that responsibility be taken for the results of the event.
This is much like the removal of the stigma involved in people seeking care for psychological issues. Removal of the stigma resulted in more people getting treatment and resulting in a net improvement. In the one strike you're out policy, you'll increase the efforts to avoid accountability due to the permanent removal of gun rights. Keep in mind, that I have seen soldiers attempting to avoid reporting negligent discharges even in a training environment that involved blank ammunition because it gets treated the same as with live ammo.
In fact, the military model is to a degree already observed on the civilian side. The emphasis on improving gun safety through education has been the primary philosophy in the gun culture for many years and has resulted in the steady decline in unintentional gun deaths.
As for there needing to be a violation of more than one safety rule to result in injury such as what happened here, I totally agree. In fact, I have a basic handgun video done by Jeff Cooper in which he speaks to that at length when he teaches the four rules of gun safety.
Much to my children's' occasional despair, I make them watch that portion of the video to include a quiz at the end given by me before we go to the range. Cooper is very straightforward in regards to safety and isn't averse to using the word "fool" in the video.
"Sorry, ss. Thanks for not getting bent out of shape for that mistake on my part."
DeleteNo worries Mike, I try to start out by treating this kind of thing as a training issue, because that's what I do. As Anon so loves to point out, I train soldiers.
I thought it was TS followed by you. I would never call ss a liar.
DeleteSo wait a second. If TS had pointed out the horrible danger of performing a firearm disassembly with the steps in the sequence you so recklessly advocated, it would be a lie (and "unfair"), but since it was SSG who did so--saying precisely the same thing--it was neither a lie, nor "unfair," is that it? And in fact, since it was SSG who said it, you feel obligated to express your remorse to him for your grotesquely irresponsible accusation of "lying," and your gratitude to him for staying silent about any psychological pain you may have inflicted on him with that accusation. Oh, and of course my agreement with the correction of your deadly advice is a "lie," no matter who it is that I'm agreeing with. Does that accurately sum up your position, Mikeb? Sure sounds like it.
"I personally believe that the policy I support is more likely to result in an overall reduction of these incidents because the emphasis is on training to promote safe behavior in the future while requiring that responsibility be taken for the results of the event. "
DeleteI don't think that'll work for the simple reason that these dangerous guys have already had training. A little more won't make much difference.
"I don't think that'll work for the simple reason that these dangerous guys have already had training. A little more won't make much difference."
DeleteMike, I think this is the second time I've heard you make the assumption that simply owning a firearm somehow equates to having some sort of training.
In this case, they have and obviously need some refresher training, which they've likely already had by now. The gun industry has been encouraging training in firearm use for many years now and most states also have hunter safety classes for youth. This has resulted in a long term decline in unintentional gun deaths. A quite sizable one if you'll recall our last discussion on the subject.
It also works in the military.
Kurt: "Does that accurately sum up your position, Mikeb? Sure sounds like it."
DeleteOf course. Mike will often make excuses for state level gun control not working by saying criminals can just drive a few hours. If I point out that state level gun control doesn't work, and back up that statement with statistical analysis, then I am a "filthy liar".
Yep--he once called me a liar for posting a direct, exact quote of what he had said. Oh, how I laughed!
DeleteThat one's bullshit, Kurt.
DeleteTS, you would be a liar if you said that Chicago's gun violence is only affected by Chicago's gun laws and has nothing to do with the proximilty of Indiana. I don't remember, did you really say that and did I call you on it?
That one's bullshit, Kurt.
DeleteIt most certainly is not, tough guy.
Let me help you clarify my position. Chicago’s gun laws are useless at preventing Chicago’s violence. Also, Indiana’s gun laws are useless at preventing Chicago’s violence, as well as useless at preventing Indiana’s violence.
DeleteClear?
Kurt, you've frequently pretended to not get what I say, the "straight across the board" quote is a perfect example. You've also many times taken something I've said out of context in order to jump on a gotcha. You're a drag. I guess it's good news because if you had a real argument you wouldn't have to continually do this nonsense.
DeleteAh, so "straight across the board" didn't mean "straight across the board," just as "voluntary" means the precise opposite of "voluntary," "first" means "second," etc. I think I've got it now. Thanks for clearing that up.
DeleteWho the hell gives a shit whether or not the "round" is in a goddam chamber or a fucking magazine? We get the meaning. The only embarrassment would be in condoning violent gun training.
ReplyDeleteHow about we put these Blackwater subversives out of business in any way possible? We don't need right-wing, paramilitary corporations. In any way, shape or form.
My apologies for missing the entire point of this post. I saw it yesterday. Just did not put two and two together.
ReplyDeleteWhat the hell is a sheriff department doing using a subversive outfit like Blackwater for basic training? This is absolutely not acceptable. Thank the Goddess that their shoddy practices have come to light. Let us hope that the saner political elements in NC, such as those that voted Obama a second term can put a rapid end to this destructive practice.
In my city, road repair has been privatized. God knows how many American prisons have been privatized. We don't need Blackwater/Xi/Academi in charge of any public affairs or funded by any public treasuries whatsoever. Never in a million. Let's work together to end this scourge.
"What the hell is a sheriff department doing using a subversive outfit like Blackwater for basic training? "
DeleteActually FJ, it appears in this case, they were just using the ranges. Good ranges, especially those that allow you to train in tactical movement aren't plentiful. This means officers have to travel for quality training experiences. In this case, they used the range at Academi.
Whatever you think of the company's behavior or history, in this case, they are providing a service to law enforcement. From the sounds of it, even if they had gotten some sort of training from staff there, this took place after training was completed and only involved law enforcement officers.