Officer exonerated in theater gun incident

WTNH ^ | 4/17/2003 | AP

[always vigilant]

(Hartford-AP Apr. 17, 2003 11:35 AM)_ An off-duty state Capitol police officer has been exonerated in a gun incident at the Bushnell Center.

An investigation began in February after Officer Paul Warren's personal gun went off accidentally inside the crowded theater.

The incident occurred during intermission of "The Tale of the Allergist's Wife" starring Valerie Harper.

The gun, a .380-caliber Browning automatic handgun was in his shoulder holster when it went off as he and his wife were returning to their seats at the end of intermission.

Both Hartford police and state Capitol police could not determine why the gun went off and found no negligence on Warren's part.

They also determined he did not violate any laws or department policy.

[A2J]

Police are some of the least trained people carrying guns around.

And what eruption of a plasmatoid brain cell in your head has you believing that?

[MineralMan]

"Training kids and training rough men is two different things.
"

Rough men, eh? Sounds scary. Oh, wait, I'm thinking of "rough trade." Never mind.

[Hodar]

Are you hostile to gun rights, or just incapable of conceiving that a cop could do something stupid and dangerous?

Oh, I think most everyone should have a gun. An armed population is a polite population. I just take a 'sanity check' when people insist that it is wise to carry a live round in the chamber at all times. Why is it illegal (and stupid) to drive around hunting with a loaded weapon, but the preferred SOP with a pistol? Shotguns and rifles must either have the breach open (showing an empty gun) or the action/bolt open during transport. But, apparently pistols should be carried with a live round. That's where I draw the line. It takes just a few moments to change a pistol from a 'club' to a lethal weapon. Clubs aren't known to go off accidentally.

[ArmstedFragg]

There's a name for that sort of thing.

Oh, I think that's agreed by all.

The question is whether that name is "paranoia" or "situational awareness".

[MineralMan]

"The question is whether that name is "paranoia" or "situational awareness"."

Depends, I guess. Given the number of people shot during the performance of a musical play in the past 20 years, I'd say that "situational awareness" would dictate that Condition 1 was not warranted in that situation.

Paranoia, on the other hand, might dictate something else.

[TexRef]

Besides that, if he's such a safe person, how did his Browing "go off?"

Having a round in the chamber doesn't make the gun unsafe.

Pulling the trigger "accidentally" does.

[Atlas Sneezed]

Bang

[oldcomputerguy]

t's a smooth, one-step action. It does require two hands, of course, but would not slow me down a bit.

So the mugger grabs you from behind and pins your arms back, then what? Now you have to get both arms free rather than one.

[TexRef]

Does basic gun safety in a crowed theater mean anything to you? He was in a theater, not a crime scene, battlefield, nor firefight. There are times to have a shell loaded, and frankly a crowded theater isn't one of them.

Says who?

What about having a round chambered in a crowded school, church, restaurant, or subway? There have been PLENTY of shootings in each. Would you like for some lunatic to get a few extra shots off while you chamber a round?

I have always carried my gun decocked with a round in the chamber. It is a perfectly safe way to carry.

[MineralMan]

"Having a round in the chamber doesn't make the gun unsafe.

Pulling the trigger "accidentally" does."

Well, let's look at that. If the safety was on, then pulling the trigger wouldn't fire the weapon, right? So, this is a combination of things. This guy had a round in the chamber _and_ had the safety off. Probably an accident that the safety was off, I'm sure.

However, one thing's certain. If there's no round in the chamber, the weapon won't fire, even if you pull the trigger. Am I right there? So...you only provide one condition, the round in the chamber. But, in this case, two conditions were in effect. The only thing that would absolutely prevent that weapon from firing would be an empty chamber.

The weapon fired. So...the chamber was loaded with a round and the safety was off or malfunctioned. Bottom line is that a round was fired. Nobody was injured, thank goodness. But a round was fired. What if your family was sitting behind this idiot? How would you react when this idiot's weapon discharged?

I doubt that you'd be giving a lecture on the value of having a round in the chamber.

[Hodar]

I have always carried my gun decocked with a round in the chamber. It is a perfectly safe way to carry.

This article just pointed to the flaw in your logic. An unchambered round won't misfire. Besides, unless you are going for the 'Quick Draw McGraw' shooting style; you have more than ample time to arm your weapon. As we typically haven't have OK corral style shoot-outs in the past 100 years, the time spent chambering your round is hardly wasted.

[ArmstedFragg]

Given the number of people shot during the performance of a musical play in the past 20 years

I think I'd confine that to "audience members" as opposed to "people". There's some tough critics in that town.

[MineralMan]

"So the mugger grabs you from behind and pins your arms back, then what? Now you have to get both arms free rather than one."

What if the mugger doesn't get that close and just shoots me in the back of the head? There's always a what if. Quite frankly, I'm almost never in a situation where a mugger is likely to get close enough to me to grab me from behind. That's just not my lifestyle.

I don't carry on the street at all. I carry in my place of business, and that's it. I don't go places that are likely to produce a mugging. I don't live in a large city, either. I've reduced my risks to an acceptable level.

Wanta know the number of homicides in my community in the past 5 years? Zero. Wanta know the number of people injured in shootings in the same period. Six, and all were domestic.

There's more than one way to skin a cat.

[TexRef]

This article just pointed to the flaw in your logic.

I don't see how. No more than someone shooting their spouse while "cleaning" their gun proves that you shouldn't clean your firearms -- just to be on the safe side.

Bottom line: If you are carrying a gun -- HANDLE IT SAFELY!

I think that these incidents with cops are more frequent because they always carry and take it for granted that they have their gun with them. When "ordinary" citizens carry, we are certainly more careful.

[Myrddin]

Where is the muzzle pointing with a shoulder holster? I'll bet it was chambered, cocked and not locked. The dope is lucky that he didn't shoot himself while placing it in the holster. Even if he wasn't prosecuted for the negligent discharge, they should have pulled his CCW for that stunt.

[oldcomputerguy]

That's just not my lifestyle.

Apparently walking down the street is not in your repertoire. Well I guess if you do not carry in these other situations then you are not qualified to critcize those that do about whether they should have a round chambered or not.

Wanta know the number of homicides in my community in the past 5 years? Zero. Wanta know the number of people injured in shootings in the same period. Six, and all were domestic.

What does this have to do with anything?

[MineralMan]

"The dope is lucky that he didn't shoot himself while placing it in the holster. Even if he wasn't prosecuted for the negligent discharge, they should have pulled his CCW for that stunt."

Depends on the holster, actually. Some point down. Some point back. But this guy was a cop, so prosecution's not going to happen. He doesn't have to have a permit; He's a cop.

And he's not even going to be disciplined. Even the Police and the State Police "can't figure out how the gun 'went off.'"

Now, some folks might believe that, but nobody who is familiar with the weapon in question would. This cop is an idiot, carrying his weapon in an unsafe way. He discharged it negligently in a crowded theater. Only luck prevented someone from being injured.

But, nothing will happen to the idiot. Now...if it had been one of our thread posters, something would happen. They'd be cooling their heels in the local pokey until they made bail, and would be charged for unlawfully discharging their weapon in a public place.

[MineralMan]

"Well I guess if you do not carry in these other situations then you are not qualified to critcize those that do about whether they should have a round chambered or not.
"

Actually, I am qualified to do that. In fact, I have done it already.

[MineralMan]

"Wanta know the number of homicides in my community in the past 5 years? Zero. Wanta know the number of people injured in shootings in the same period. Six, and all were domestic.

What does this have to do with anything?"

Risk assessment. That's simple. The risk of being attacked on the street in my community is vanishly small. So, I don't carry on the street. Why would I bother?

[Hodar]

When "ordinary" citizens carry, we are certainly more careful.

Absolutely, I handle my 9mm as if it were a priceless relic. I am conscious, almost to the point of paranoia of where the barrel is pointed. Maybe because us 'ordinary' citizens would be held far more accountable for 'accidental misfires' in crowded theaters.