Dude carrying a gun in public in VA has an AD that ends in his own death

[SunnySlopes]

He had a carry permit.
Glock 27.
Mexican carry.
His wife was halfway out the door.
He threw the gun to the floorboard.
"Oh my God I think I just shot myself"

The kids thought a balloon in the car popped.

The police surmise he was "adjusting" the gun.

There are 275,428 active permits in Virginia according to the article.

I am looking at the Richmond Times-Dispatch. Page B2.

Wait. The deceased in the article died because his gun discharged when the gun fell onto a hard surface? His gun discharged when it hit the floorboard?

How is that possible with a Glock? It doesn't make sense.

 

[gym]

Sunny your reading it wrong, he threw it after he shot himself. Since I went back to Glock as my main carry, I use the block. No garantee it can't fall out, but so far it hasn't other than from the wrong holster choice. I can push it out with my normal motion of putting finger in trigger gaurd. Meanwhile it's not a magic cure all, but will keep things out of that area, like zippers drawstrings etc. It dosen't take too much preassure to knock it out, "adjustable with allen wrench", you can make it super tight, but that could also be a problem.
I set mine so you need to press harder than just a touch, you need to pop it out. I works with some holsters, like open top iwb "with no strap", even my fobus, if I tighten it down, but I don't really need it with that type holster. It's good for night time when you keep your gun on the night stand or in a holster hanging off the bed side. It has come out 2 to 3 times in 3 years, because of it not liking a certain holster. It's better than nothing, Why someone hasn't made something better is still a mystery to me. I have seen the triggers ranging from 50-200 dollars, but I don't like having something drilled through the trigger. The frame mod is just too expensive and I would go to a sig before doing that. You have to price something inline with the gun. When I asked for night sights on my 26, the seller, "who is a member here" said I don't usually carry them because people have a number in their head for this gun of $500. Pricing it at 625.00 is a no go for most folks. And spending $200 for a frame safety is the same. Just go into a sig or H&K . There should be a plastic part that is more secure than the block, but easy to get off, like a thumb break. Whoever figures out the design will make a lot of money. This has been going on way too long with people worrying about shooting themselves. I honestlly didn't really concern myself with it until I started reading about someone doing this every time I look at a forum. Maybe a 11 lb trigger is a compromise, but not for me, I like the trigger, it's one of the best selling points of the gun. Could we just have a lot of folks who are too new to shooting to own a glock? I know my neighboors use it as a substitute for the word Gun. I want a Glock, I hear that all the time from non shooters.

 

[JohnBT]

His wife was exiting the vehicle to return a movie when the gun went off. The police surmise he threw the gun on the floor after shooting himself.

Read the part where they think he was "adjusting the gun" when it discharged.

 

[revolversrbetter]

here's a link to the story

http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/2011/nov/18/tdmet02-man-whose-gun-discharged-killing-him-had-c-ar-1467500/

 

[Leanwolf]

HORSESOLDIER - "NFL player Plaxico Burress managed to shoot himself in the leg at a nightclub in NYC after jamming his pistol (a Glock also, IIRC) in his pants waistband without holster..."

Thanks for that info, HorseSoldier. I'd forgot that story about Plaxico, as I'm not much of a football fan. The name struck me as that of a long time IPSC shooter, Bill Plaxco, against whom I used to compete in the old IPSC days.

L.W.

 

[Panzercat]

Simple solution ... don't chamber a round in a carry gun.

I hate to speak ill of the dead, but yeah, that. And I guess his safety was off too? I'm not horribly familiar with glocks and how easy it is to disengage that and pull the trigger accidentally, but... dang.

 

[45_auto]

From the newspaper article about the shooting:

http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/...-gun-discharged-killing-him-had-c-ar-1467500/

Glock semi-automatic handguns and other "safe action" pistols have a series of internal safeties, rather than external, that prevent the gun from discharging unless the trigger is pulled, said J.D. McEwan, who runs the firearms department at Southern Police Equipment. Such guns need to be carried in a quality holster that keeps the trigger guard covered, he said.

"And unfortunately, this gentleman, as tragic as it is, wasn't following proper safety protocol," McEwan said.

 

[allaroundhunter]

I hate to speak ill of the dead, but yeah, that. And I guess his safety was off too? I'm not horribly familiar with glocks and how easy it is to disengage that and pull the trigger accidentally, but... dang.

Again, there is no point to carrying a defensive handgun without a round in the chamber...and again, Glocks do no have a manual active safety. The stock trigger pull is typically around 5-7 pounds, so it really isn't hard to have an ND if you aren't following safe gun handling and carrying procedures.

 

[Jim Watson]

I wish they would get their stories straight.
Pocket or waistband, seatbelt or "adjusting".
But I doubt we will ever know just what went wrong.

If I had just shot myself in my car, I would probably be like him and claim that I was trying to unbuckle a seat belt too.

Maybe not in this case, but such things are very common, coverups of really dumb tricks as low probability accidents, coverups of suicides as accidents, coverups of domestic disputes as accidents. Happens regularly.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

The only reason I can think of not to carry Condition One is because you cannot do so safely, either due to a lack of proper equipment, or the lack of the necessary skillset/mindset to carry that way.

The guy in this story had several options that would have been better. One would have been to carry the Glock in a holster designed for that model of Glock that covered the trigger. He could have used a trigger block device like several of those mentioned here. He could have carried Condition 3 if he just had to carry Mexican with an exposed trigger on a pistol with a short 5-7lb trigger.

It is such a sad, unnecessary death. If we understood better why he thought that the mode of carry he used was appropriate/safe, we might have a better understanding of what was really needed to prevent this; because ultimately the real problem is that he took an unnecessary risk and apparently didn't realize it.

 

[SunnySlopes]

Ok, from the article:

"For some reason, maybe for comfort, he reached out and went to adjust it," said Spotsylvania sheriff's Capt. Liz Scott. "The detective thinks that in doing so — in just grabbing it — he inadvertently grabbed the trigger."

He had the gun stuck in his waistband. First safety violation since he should have been carrying in a high quality holster which covers the trigger.

Then he went to adjust the way the handgun was riding in his pants. He "grabbed the trigger." That's why the weapon discharged. The bullet severed his femoral artery and he bled to death.

This unfortunate fellow violated a number of safety measures. I don't think the accident has anything to do with a) Glock weapons or b) external safeties (or the lack thereof).

 

[JohnBT]

Why don't you think it concerns Glocks and external safeties?

If the pistol had an external safety.
If the external safety had been engaged.
When the trigger was pulled it would not have fired.

Glocks do not have an external safety. A external safety improves your chances quite a bit when you are carrying with the trigger exposed.

Still with me?

It wasn't what I would call an accident. It was what we call an accident just waiting to happen.

 

[Mr. Doughnut]

Glocks do not have an external safety. A external safety improves your chances quite a bit when you are carrying with the trigger exposed. ...It was what we call an accident just waiting to happen.

I couldn't agree more. Glocks are simply too real-world risky, IMHO. I've had a CCW permit since '75, and have fired many Glocks on the range. Easy to shoot --and usually pretty accurate -- but I'd never carry one.

My heart goes out to the deceased's family.

Mr. Doughnut

 

[SunnySlopes]

Why don't you think it concerns Glocks and external safeties?

If the pistol had an external safety.
If the external safety had been engaged.
When the trigger was pulled it would not have fired.

Glocks do not have an external safety. A external safety improves your chances quite a bit when you are carrying with the trigger exposed.

Still with me?

Several makes and models of semiauto weapons don't have external safeties and we hear nothing about them.

My primary carry piece is a Sig 239 SAS DAK. It does not have an external safety. I've never heard of an AD re that fact w/that weapon.

I also carry a Glock 19. Both weapons are carried in comptac holsters which completely enclose the trigger.

Your little tirade faults Glocks for not having an external safety. That has nothing to do with what happened.

Still with me?

The unfortunate soul in the article was carrying his weapon in an unsafe manner.

"Mexican carry" is unsafe carry. If one is going to carry concealed, one must have a top line holster which covers the trigger. That would have prevented the above accident. An external safety has nothing to do with it.

 

[Panzercat]

I gotta agree with Doughnut & JohnBT here and there isn't much more to say beyond that. Call me a lightweight, but to not have that final, last layer of manual actuation in a chambered carry pistol not on the battlefield is just... Sigh. Sure, the right holster may mitigate that and I know we're all spec ops and top shot here, but random chance is better.

My opinion of course. That said, I certainly won't infringe on your right to carry one /shrug.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Got a Glock In Condition One in my pocket right now in a pocket holster designed for it. The key is you can't stick your fingers or other things in the triggerguard unless you are ready to shoot. If you don't feel you can manage that safely, then a Glock is not for you.

 

[Alex23]

This story is sloppy and doesn't illuminate.

Glocks tend to go bang when you pull the trigger. Using a high quality holster that totally prevents access to the trigger (MTAC / Crossbreed etc) is better than any manual safety.

Most people who bitch about Glocks being dangerous simply have no idea about gun safety when carrying. This "DEA agent" shot himself. Some people might blame the Glock. Rational people will realize he was a lazy idiot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pf3ID3XQ6o

Classic video. The guy is a tool, untrained, shoots himself, and then tries to lecture about guns.

 

[joedotnet]

Why don't you think it concerns Glocks and external safeties?

If the pistol had an external safety.
If the external safety had been engaged.
When the trigger was pulled it would not have fired.

Glocks do not have an external safety. A external safety improves your chances quite a bit when you are carrying with the trigger exposed.

Still with me?

It wasn't what I would call an accident. It was what we call an accident just waiting to happen.

Ummmm....so if he's carrying it in his pocket...WITHOUT a holster....and is unfortunately untrained enough to put his hand in and adjust it by using the trigger...what makes you think he would have been so conscious about safety to actually USE the external safety?

 

[gym]

The pistol is a "Fighting gun", it is meant to be simple. Those of us that have been carrying them for decades know and respect that. The block is just a part for preventing removing the gun when you are in your down time. It is as I mentioned great at night, "along with a front night sight" to get it in a hurry in complete darkness, like when dressing and undressing. Otherwise I don't touch my guns. The most I would do is graze my pocket to make sure my spare is where it's supposed to be. And nothing should be going on if you have to remove the gun. I take the holster out with the weapon. I never try to stick a Glock in a iwb holster. If I have to disrobe, I take it completely out with the pistol, do what I have to, and replace it the same way as when I got dressed. That's just me and my rules, same as replacing all my papers and cards before leaving a counter or bank window.You need a routine for youself otherwise you are an accident waiting to happen. Now that I said this I will no doubt loose something, but up until know I have never lost my keys, my wallett, or anything else, because they go where and when they are supposed to go.
Adjusting you gun in a car while talking to your wife and kids or anyone is just a dumb thing to do. I feel bad for the guy , but he brought this on himself. Glocks are efficient little killing machines, they aren't for everyone, IMO too many people have them that aren't aware of the danger element. They are made to point and shoot, they have become very popular, and as mentioned a substitute for the word "gun" sometimes. In untrained hands they can cause things like this to happen very easily. As we know just because somone has a badge ,doesn't make them a weapons expert. playing around with a Glock or any striker fired pistol with no safety is not a good idea for anyone, unless you are paying full attention to what you are doing. I remember my first one a gen 1 Glock 23, and after buying it thinking man this is dangerous unless it's in a good Gaalco holster, "popular back then", and carrying it unchambered for a few days untill I felt comfortable with it. 1993 ish, that was my first of many, Fear and respect of something new is a good thing. But I would never carry any gun unchambered, anything can go wrong in a "shoot fast" situation, you will be too busy to rack the slide and take aim if you are under fire, it's best to carry a different gun if you aren't comfortable with the Glock.

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

I couldn't agree more. Glocks are simply too real-world risky, IMHO. I've had a CCW permit since '75, and have fired many Glocks on the range. Easy to shoot --and usually pretty accurate -- but I'd never carry one.

Real world risky? Like what? Being too lazy to put a holster on or something?

 

[JohnBT]

"Several makes and models of semiauto weapons don't have external safeties and we hear nothing about them."

We know that fact and that Glocks outnumber all of them. This man had a Glock. You keep getting off track when discussing what this person did.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

Defective product ....

WikiPedia: "The Glock pistol, sometimes referred to by the manufacturer as Glock "Safe Action" Pistol... commanding 65% of the market share of handguns for United States law enforcement agencies as well as supplying numerous national armed forces and security agencies worldwide."

A relatively light double action trigger pull is a feature of the Glock pistol accepted by literally millions of military and police users since 1982. Kinda hard to argue that is a defect since so many government users are aware of the guns features and trained accordingly.

Carry permit in TN includes 4 hr class on gun safety including a written exam (with passing score). Proper holster has been emphasized by everyone I have heard speak about handgun carry not just Glocks, and "pocket carry" of any handgun is discouraged.

ADDED: I practiced carry about the house until I was satisfied that I could carry in public without having to do any "adjustments" to the carry rig or gun.

 

[Mr. Doughnut]

In order for an AD/ND to occur, a certain number of successive hurdles must be cleared. External safeties increase the number of those hurdles, thus reducing the chances of an AD/ND.

Consider... A little child picks up a loaded Glock, points it at another child and pulls the trigger. It goes bang. Now, replace the Glock with, say, a Makarov on safe and two hurdles are in place: disengagement of the thumb safety and the long DA trigger pull.

I know, I know, "Why does the kid have access to a gun in the first place?" Stuff happens, like with the victim in the minivan. Hey, maybe the dude had been carrying Mexican since Pancho Villa was a corporal, but on that day the planets lined up and Murphy chimed in.

Someone said it best earlier in this thread when they likened carrying a Glock to carrying a single-action revolver that's already cocked. Carrying a gun with that kind of risk profile is simply looking for trouble, and sooner or later trouble will find you. Why take the chance?

Clearly, Glock's massive penetration into the LE and civilian markets is a triumph of marketing genius and a tribute to consumer gullibility. Yes, the guns shoot well, are rugged, accurate, etc., but so are lots of others.

BTW, the ad agency that coined the term "safe-action pistol" for Glock really earned their fee. Kudos. That slogan is strong and reassuring -- positively brilliant copy.

In our discussion, the pro-Glock arguments stress the human element (training, safe handling, storage, etc.). But temper the human element just a little and it's clear that Glocks are inherently unsafe.

By their own design, Glocks are more dangerous than pistols equipped with an external safety -- and that is an undeniable fact.

Mr. Doughnut

 

[TexasRifleman]

By their own design, Glocks are more dangerous than pistols equipped with an external safety -- and that is an undeniable fact.

All guns are dangerous in the hands of someone who doesn't practice proper safety techniques. Glocks are not more dangerous than any other gun. Do they require more diligence than a gun with a manual safety? Probably so. That doesn't make them more dangerous in the hands of someone who knows what they are doing. Let's be honest here. Glocks are by far the most common handgun in the US both in the hands of LE and civilians. If they really were truly more dangerous or had any kind of design flaw we'd be seeing incidents literally daily and lawsuits backed up in the Georgia courts. The gun works as it is designed. If you don't like the design, the market is full of alternatives and maybe more folks should consider that. I will agree that Glocks marketing department does a great job. But, in the end, buyer beware.

This guy should have been carrying his gun with a loaded magazine and empty chamber. It's not uncommon, and it's not silly in a situation like this. If someone insists on carrying a semi auto without a holster, where the trigger is exposed all the time, the proper way to do it is in Condition 3.

Of course it's not the best way to do it, the best way is to use a proper holster. But if someone, for whatever reason, doesn't want a holster then Condition 3 is the right thing to do.

You simply can't design a gun safe enough to be idiot proof.

This sad story is a case of lack of knowledge and technique, and nothing more.

 

[JohnBT]

I've carried a Rohrbaugh 9 everyday for 4.5 years and always in a holster. No external safety of any kind. A good holster, not a flimsy one. (Holsters provide a little protection too. Front pocket carry puts my R9 down there with the table corners, door knobs, etc. )

"what makes you think he would have been so conscious about safety to actually USE the external safety? "

Chances of using an external safety if you don't have one? Zero.
Chances of using it if you actually have one on your gun are a whole lot better.

You can't make people do stuff, but often if something is right there and ready to go, they'll use it. If you tell them the gun has multiple safeties, well, maybe they feel protected from accidents while carrying their Glock.

Does Glock still advertise proudly that their guns have multiple safeties?

Okay, I looked. www.glock.com/downloads/GLOCK_Gen4_en.pdf The title you see if you open the 12-page document is GLOCK "SAFE ACTION".

Of the six features listed first, the top one is "Safe Action" System. I can see this lulling some folks into a false sense of security. On page 10 they discuss the "fully automatic safety system consisting of three passive..."

Passive. You don't have to do a thing to be safe.

John