Gun safety instructor shoots student

[KyJim]

One point that most have overlooked -- the bullet ricocheted off a desk before striking the student. That perhaps means the instructor thought the muzzle was pointed in a safe direction. We don't have enough information to determine this. That doesn't excuse his negligence but maybe mitigates it just a little.

[treeprof]

As I indicated in my other post, the guy who shot the student demonstrated fundamentally poor gun handling THROUGHOUT the course when I took it. Even if it was deliberately pointed at the desk, the room is laid out such that he was still standing in front of the students, aiming in their general direction.

Re his age, I think it's only relevant in that in his course he displayed an attitude and corresponding gun handling skills that indicted to me he'd become too cavalier about safety, having been around guns a long time. That, combined with his "look at me" demeanor made this almost inevitable, in my opinion.

[Double Naught Spy]

Re his age, I think it's only relevant in that in his course he displayed an attitude and corresponding gun handling skills that indicted to me he'd become too cavalier about safety, having been around guns a long time. That, combined with his "look at me" demeanor made this almost inevitable, in my opinion.

These behaviors are not age-specific or age-determined.

[johnwilliamson062]

IMHO the worst of the worst are the young studs who just got out of the military and think they know everything.

I find this attitude common to almost all individuals who received minimal firearms training from any level of government. Age irrelevant.
It should be noted this guys supposed credentials include:
Various NRA certifications
Police training for at least several agencies including SWAT
Consultant for Ohio Supreme Court Security
Retired Police officer
Current Sheriff

By several accounts this instructor was careless and cavalier.

NRA Basic pistol course was not designed to train for CCW. I think if it is going to be the standard it needs revision. Of course, this guy was OPOTA certified. He was teaching the 12 hour NRA course and not the 20 hour OPOTA, but he did have the OPOTA cert.

[treeprof]

Age doesn't necessarily breed or correlate with over-familiarity and/or carelessness, but incident-free experience (enough of which becomes a proxy for age) combined with the wrong attitude, can. He enjoyed the former up until last weekend, and had the latter in spades.

[David13]

"Don't screw it up" and you won't have a problem.
dc

[Wreck-n-Crew]

All guns are always loaded. Period.

That really ought to be the only rule we need, right?

Amen!
First rule when taking possession of a firearm is to do a safety check while pointed in a safe direction!

Every single time, no matter what!

The very first thing I learned about a gun before it was placed in my hand.

These behaviors are not age-specific or age-determined.

Agree. With age comes forgetfulness for many, as well as complacency.

My shop teacher (Many moons ago) made a statement that remains with me until this day:
" Accidents don't happen, they are made!".

Repitition overrides complacency. If you safety check a weapon even when you know it isn't loaded, you are doing the right thing.

[lcpiper]

It's just human nature, we are fallible. You can take all the safety precautions you want but you will not completely eliminate accidents like this. In fact, the more you insist on training, classes, etc, the more you increase the frequency of risk, after that it's just a matter of time and sooner or later human nature will prove out.

I am not saying that you don't do all you can within reason, but I am saying is that although every ND is preventable, you can't prevent all NDs.

[ClydeFrog]

The big thing to remember is; don't rush.
Weapons and live rounds can be extremely dangerous.
Take it slow and use caution in class environments.
Veteran instructors or cadre shouldn't be hassled or annoyed either.
If a firearm instructor is lax or "too cool for school" then a AD will occur.

If you are new to TFL or weapons see the Lee Childs incident online. Childs was a DEA special agent giving a lecture to young kids about guns when he shot himself with a loaded Glock .40S&W. He did a inspection too of the firearm then discharged it.

[MLeake]

IIRC, (Edit: Paige - thanks Tom Servo - Lee Child is the Jack Reacher author) cycled the slide to eject the chambered round prior to removing the loaded magazine.

He did this with other agents looking on. It was recorded. I am not sure how they all failed to notice this.

I also do not know why they (or the instructor in the OP) brought live ammo into a classroom....

[Tom Servo]

He did a inspection too of the firearm then discharged it.

Actually, his name is Lee Paige. He didn't inspect his firearm, and that's the problem. The pertinent questions:

• Why did he bring a live firearm into the room if he was planning to manipulate it?
• Why did he trust someone else to clear it, instead of doing so himself?
• Why didn't he notice that the magazine was inserted, or that the gun was awfully heavy to have been "empty?"
• Why did he pull the trigger?

Again, the only feasible answer is complacency. It can get us maimed, killed, or tied up in very expensive litigation.

[MLeake]

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MeGD7r6...%3DMeGD7r6s-zU

video of DEA agent;

He pulls the slide back off-camera, then walks back into camera view with slide locked back. He releases the slide with the magazine still in the well...

[Garycw]

Originally Posted by MLeake

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MeGD7r6...%3DMeGD7r6s-zU

video of DEA agent;

He pulls the slide back off-camera, then walks back into camera view with slide locked back. He releases the slide with the magazine still in the well...

Simply amazing. I guess he's the ONLY one professional enough in the room to shoot himself in foot and continue teaching the class.
I would have left too when he tried to bring out the next one.
Great safety demo on what NOT to do!

[Bezoar]

so if you were in that hunter safety class, and ended up shooting your future hunting buddy, could you claim "but it was part of the course material"

[Double Naught Spy]

Gunfire/GSW stress inoculation training?

[Cnon]

Those instructors that shot themselves or students were simply idiots.



As my Hunter Ed teacher said: "you can't call that bullet back."



Cnon

[Bezoar]

But remember folks those instructors are TRAINED and sufficiently wise to use and carry a concealed handgun in the view of anti-gunners. Yet the rest of us who havent shot someone by accident/stupidity arent.

[pax]

The problem is the rule that says, "no live ammunition in the classroom." That is a bad rule. It is a foolish rule. And it causes a certain number of these stupid, stupid, stupid accidents every single stinking freaking year.

The problem with that rule is that it trains people that they can handle guns stupidly, foolishly, carelessly, without any worry whatsoever – as long as the gun is "unloaded." This is exactly and precisely the opposite of what you want to be teaching your beginning students.

The actual rule you should be teaching your students is, "do not handle firearms – any firearm, loaded or not – unless you have a safe direction."

Most classrooms have no safe direction. They have walls that can be punched through by any handgun caliber. Or they have cinderblock walls where the bullet will ricochet off. They have multiple people moving around. Firearms should never be handled in these conditions. They should be left safely inside the holster (loaded or not, it does not matter). Or they should be left inside the range bag until such time as you can go to the range, where there is a safe direction.

Teach your students to be comfortable handling firearms only when it is safe to do so. Do not teach them to be comfortable handling firearms in unsafe conditions.

pax

[pax]

Incidentally, in reference to the Lee Paige incident, part of the issue was that he told the person looking at the weapon what they were supposed to see: "Empty weapon, right? Empty weapon." People often see what they expect to see, and this person was no exception. The person apparently nodded and agreed with him that he was correct – without really looking.

If you insist on being among those ... errrrr, people ... who handle working firearms inside a classroom setting with no safe direction, and you think it is sufficient to ask somebody else to check your weapon, at least please exercise caution when asking them to check. Do not tell them what they see. Let them tell you what they see.

pax

[Aguila Blanca]

I still believe the rule against live ammo in a classroom is a good one, I suppose at least partially because that's the way I was trained. And perhaps more because I have seen too many people who think it's "cool" to carry a couple of live rounds in their pocket and try them in any gun they can get their hands on.

That said, the expectation that there isn't supposed to be any live ammo in the room is NOT an excuse for careless gun handling. In the recent incident, the class was a pre-CCW class, which means the purpose of the class wasn't to turn cab drivers into "operators," it was to teach newbies the fundamentals of handling a firearm SAFELY. In my state, the law is clear that the required class for a permit is a class in handgun "safety." Ditto Florida ... and probably a number of other states that require some kind of class as a prerequisite to a permit/license.

NRA Basic Pistol isn't teaching marksmanship. It's teaching people how to handle and shoot a gun safely. Irrespective of live ammo in the room, you simply can't teach people how to handle a gun safely by NOT handling guns safely in the classroom. Whether or not the school or the instructor has a "No live ammo in the classroom" rule, the first of the basic rules of gun safety is still "All guns are loaded."

Ignore that at your (and your students') peril.

[pax]

Let me try it again: there is no way to teach somebody to handle a firearm "safely" where there is no safe direction in which to point the gun. Period, full stop, end of story.

It is an illusion. It is a dangerous illusion. It leads to circumstances like this.

By definition, handling a functional firearm without a safe direction is, in actual fact, teaching people to handle guns carelessly. If you believe you absolutely must allow them to handle firearms inside your classroom, then you must have a safe direction. It is not enough to "pretend" that one direction or another is safe. It is certainly not enough to figure, "well, we don't allow ammunition in the classroom anyway so ..." That kind of thinking is what leads directly into injuries and deaths.

Treating the gun as if it is loaded means treating it with every ounce of respect you would give it if you knew for certain that there was live ammunition in your classroom. That includes being certain you have a solid backstop that will safely contain the bouncing bullet.

pax

[Aguila Blanca]

Pax, all you're doing is arguing for the use of "blue guns" and firearms with yellow, training barrels or disabled firing pins. Both are good ideas, and I use both in my classes. I agree that most classrooms don't have a direction that is really safe. But you also can't teach people to handle a gun without showing them how to handle a gun, and allowing them to handle a gun.

[pax]

Aguila,

We may have here a case of vehement agreement.

If you (generic you, not specific you) are going to allow students to handle firearms inside your classroom, you absolutely must have a genuine, real, definite, true safe direction in which to point the gun. That includes a solid backstop that would definitely stop the bullet from bouncing into a student's arm. And you must enforce the use of that safe direction, not casually allow yourself or your students to ignore it based on the fact that there is "no live ammunition" inside your classroom.

If you do not have that truly safe direction that would definitely stop a bullet and prevent it from bouncing around the room, or if you do not enforce its actual use, you are teaching your students to handle firearms in an unsafe manner. That is exactly the opposite of what you want to accomplish.

I don't care how "unloaded" the gun is, or how thoroughly you are convinced that you have "no live ammunition" in your classroom. If you do not have a truly safe direction, and you allow students to handle guns in that circumstance, you're teaching them to do something unsafe. And you are yourself behaving in an unsafe manner.

pax

[lcpiper]

I'd argue that we are doing it all wrong right from the start.

I agree that people need to be taught how to safely handle and shoot a firearm.
I disagree that classrooms are the way to do it. My father taught me. His older brother taught him, etc.

I don't think anyone would disagree that one on one instruction is the best way to teach something this important. I know some of you may make your living training others.
I think such training should be with a one to one student instructor ratio without exception.
I think the test should be administered by someone other then the instructor.
I think you should be able to test without a class.

Although the lessons are very important, they just are not that difficult to learn or teach in a one on one setting.

[Evan Thomas]

In an ideal world, we'd all have a skilled friend or relative who could teach us to use firearms safely and well.

Failing that, many people have to rely on professional instruction; and many people prefer to learn from professionals, because they're... more professional. Most classes are a mixture of time spent imparting information and time spent teaching skills. The former is done most efficiently with a group, and much of the latter has to involve one-on-one instruction in any case.

One-on-one tutoring is an attractive idea on the surface, but in practice, it would be more expensive for the students and less feasible economically for the instructors. Requiring nothing but one-on-one instruction would not only price a lot of students out of the market; it would also make it harder for firearms instructors to make a living. (I don't doubt that many instructors would love to be able to teach for free, but, again, that's not the world we live in.)