View Single Post
Unread 01-17-2021, 10:13 AM   #6
mrerick
Super Moderator - Patron
LugerForum
Life Patron
 
mrerick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Eastern North Carolina, USA
Posts: 3,920
Thanks: 1,377
Thanked 3,135 Times in 1,518 Posts
Default

While the officer that discharged the firearm was clearly negligent, there are larger questions here.

There is a difference between live fire training at targets, and SIRT laser training. I have to ask, what exactly was any actual firearm or any live ammunition doing in the spaces and facility where SIRT training was in progress?

Whom ever is responsible for the training protocols and the facility itself are negligent in permitting any actual firearms or live ammunition, much less a firearm loaded with live ammunition, in a facility or space where this training was taking place.

I permit no live ammunition in the classroom facility where I teach. Period. Everyone inspected as they enter the building.

Officers that were aiming SIRT laser guns at each other outside of the actual training protocols were clearly negligent. Each of them should be sanctioned for this post-training activity. It created the context for this kind of negligent discharge.

The officer that mistakenly fired an actual firearm in this space is clearly not competent to carry firearms, much less carry them in public. That individual needs to be fired and prevented from police or security employment in the future.
__________________
Igitur si vis pacem, para bellum -
- Therefore if you want peace, prepare for war.
mrerick is offline   Reply With Quote
The following 6 members says Thank You to mrerick for your post: