CHL holder accidently discharges weapon at work question

[fishman]

I think it might be a good idea to show him this thread so he see the debate going on in this forum. Seems kinda one sided does'nt it?

[bayouhazard]

Maybe he can get a job as a fed teaching gun safety in schools.
He certainly proved he's "professional enough" for the job.

[E.Marquez]

EDIT NOTE:
I fully BLAME the shooter, his action, his weapon, his ignorance.

HOLY CRAP!!!

I cannot believe that a CHLer could be this stupid. This is just ridiculous.

.

I believe it, and I believe there are many more just like this one unqualified to carry a weapon.

I believe in part, in my opinion this kind of situation happens due to the poor instruction provided by some CHL instructors.
Here, http://texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=46722" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; some of the comments prove without a doubt, instruction in how to actually, proficiently use a firearm are not the stated purpose of a CHL course of instruction. By the letter of the law (as a lawyer here has said) it may not be required to teach, but it should be, and in laymen’s terms, I believe that is what is written in the CHL instructiors guidance…and what the law requires..
But you know what they say about opinions….and of course IANAL

Poor instructors likely contribute to negligent discharges.

For sure, the requirement of personal responsibility lays the full weight of blame on the shooter But the instructors we have “teaching” is so minimal in many cases, they set the conditions for ignorant CHL’s to do this kind of thing time and time again.

Many here will defend the almost non instruction that takes place, some of those same people are instructors, though in my opinion, Instructor is inaccurate.. Much like a HS History teacher that hands out the test and teachers only the answers. In the end the students of both learn little.

[kjolly]

My rule safety #5 is I do not play with a gun. This includes showing it or doing ANY unnessary handling. It stays concealed and safe. Someone that does know I carry might ask if I have it with me but no one ever gets to see it.
the less you handle a weapon the safer you are. They do not spontaneously explode.
I also go to the range at least twice a month to maintain profficency and practice.

[olafpfj]

I still cannot wrap my brain around anyone not realizing that pulling the slide back with the magazine inserted will chamber another round!!!!

How can a gun owner not understand the fundamental principle on which a semi-auto handgun operates?

What do they think the slide coming back and returning to battery is supposed to be doing?!!!!

[Keith B]

EDIT NOTE:
I fully BLAME the shooter, his action, his weapon, his ignorance.

HOLY CRAP!!!

I cannot believe that a CHLer could be this stupid. This is just ridiculous.

.

I believe it, and I believe there are many more just like this one unqualified to carry a weapon.

I believe in part, in my opinion this kind of situation happens due to the poor instruction provided by some CHL instructors.
Here, http://texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=46722" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; some of the comments prove without a doubt, instruction in how to actually, proficiently use a firearm are not the stated purpose of a CHL course of instruction. By the letter of the law (as a lawyer here has said) it may not be required to teach, but it should be, and in laymen’s terms, I believe that is what is written in the CHL instructiors guidance…and what the law requires..
But you know what they say about opinions….and of course IANAL

Poor instructors likely contribute to negligent discharges.

For sure, the requirement of personal responsibility lays the full weight of blame on the shooter But the instructors we have “teaching” is so minimal in many cases, they set the conditions for ignorant CHL’s to do this kind of thing time and time again.

Many here will defend the almost non instruction that takes place, some of those same people are instructors, though in my opinion, Instructor is inaccurate.. Much like a HS History teacher that hands out the test and teachers only the answers. In the end the students of both learn little.

You are placing too much responsibility on the CHL instructor/RSO for the limited amount of time they have to teach the required information.

As a certified pistol instructor and range safety officer, I can tell you there is no time in the CHL class to teach basic pistol safety. You can emphasize it and watch them at the range, but there is not near enough time to teach them proper safety and firearm handling techniques in a CHL class if they don't already have some of them down to begin with.

Bottom line there are even some folks that would do this kind of stupid stunt after multiple hours, if not days, of training. So, don't think a CHL class instructor bad or good even contributed to this. This was the individual all on their own.

[Bart]

You are placing too much responsibility on the CHL instructor/RSO for the limited amount of time they have to teach the required information.

Maybe but the filler videos some instructors show tells me they think they have too much time and not enough to teach.

Also, even if there's not enough time to teach, there's time to fail students who don't can't demonstrate the needed skills. Like a public school teacher who passes an illiterate 7th grader, those instructors are responsible for giving a PASS to someone who didn't earn it.

[Keith B]

You are placing too much responsibility on the CHL instructor/RSO for the limited amount of time they have to teach the required information.

Maybe but the filler videos some instructors show tells me they think they have too much time and not enough to teach.

Also, even if there's not enough time to teach, there's time to fail students who don't can't demonstrate the needed skills. Like a public school teacher who passes an illiterate 7th grader, those instructors are responsible for giving a PASS to someone who didn't earn it.

The problem is, when working with CHL classes I see numerous students who are 'adequate' at shooting and safety. They properly handle the firearm and don't do anything that would keep them from passing, but they are far from 'extremely proficient'. That doesn't mean they or even someone with tons more training won't pull a dumb stunt and do something like this. Discipline is discipline, and there are those that get it, those that don't, and those that feel they don't need it.

Just because you have had firearms training doesn't mean you can and will be an expert in safety. I have seen current and ex-military and LEO's that have had tons of training do things that make my skin crawl because they got careless or just weren't thinking.

And, if you add enough time to properly train them, then you will double or triple the time required to teach, and the cost, and in turn we will see too many start looking for an alternative (like they already do) other state license that doesn't require shooting and costs less.

[VMI77]

I think the fact that the guy didn't get fired speaks to an element of why this happened in the first place. This guy doesn't think the rules apply to him, and apparently he has reason to believe they don't, since as described, his relationship to the boss protected him from being fired. And there is apparently a corporate culture at this office that condones exempting certain people from the rules that apply to everyone else. This kind of atmosphere breeds attitudes of indifference, contempt, and carelessness. I suspect this incident is a symptom of a much larger problem with this company's management. At a minimum, I would think that ethical corporate management would find such special treatment bad for morale, and that even unethical but smart management would fear that tolerating such an egregious violation of company policy by someone known to be a boss buddy would expose the company to various kinds of liability.

It seems obvious to me that from the corporate standpoint, this guy should be fired along with his boss buddy. Apparently upper management condones this kind of behavior along with special treatment for certain employees and doesn't care about the effect on employee morale or fiduciary responsibility to the company. I sure wouldn't want to work in that kind of environment and corporate culture. Also, I have to wonder why, if anti-gun people were in the office, none of them called the police? That also suggests a rather pernicious corporate environment.

[DONT TREAD ON ME]

The problem is, when working with CHL classes I see numerous students who are 'adequate' at shooting and safety. They properly handle the firearm and don't do anything that would keep them from passing, but they are far from 'extremely proficient'. That doesn't mean they or even someone with tons more training won't pull a dumb stunt and do something like this. Discipline is discipline, and there are those that get it, those that don't, and those that feel they don't need it.

And, if you add enough time to properly train them, then you will double or triple the time required to teach, and the cost, and in turn we will see too many start looking for an alternative (like they already do) other state license that doesn't require shooting and costs less.

So if you see "numerous students who are 'adequate' at shooting and safety. They properly handle the firearm and don't do anything that would keep them from passing, but they are far from 'extremely proficient'" why not take a little extra time and go over gun safety?

My instructor drilled it into our heads even though all of us in that particular class already knew and practiced it. He did this with plenty of time to cover the rest of the required material.

[Keith B]

The problem is, when working with CHL classes I see numerous students who are 'adequate' at shooting and safety. They properly handle the firearm and don't do anything that would keep them from passing, but they are far from 'extremely proficient'. That doesn't mean they or even someone with tons more training won't pull a dumb stunt and do something like this. Discipline is discipline, and there are those that get it, those that don't, and those that feel they don't need it.

And, if you add enough time to properly train them, then you will double or triple the time required to teach, and the cost, and in turn we will see too many start looking for an alternative (like they already do) other state license that doesn't require shooting and costs less.

So if you see "numerous students who are 'adequate' at shooting and safety. They properly handle the firearm and don't do anything that would keep them from passing, but they are far from 'extremely proficient'" why not take a little extra time and go over gun safety?

My instructor drilled it into our heads even though all of us in that particular class already knew and practiced it. He did this with plenty of time to cover the rest of the required material.

Never said we didn't provide extra where we can did I? There have been individual's that have been taken one-on-one and worked with to make sure they got extra. Unfortunately the time alloted in a CHL class will not allow for enough extra to make all of them experts. And, every student is different. You give the the basics and make sure they follow the 3 rules and go form there. So, you have to make the determination if they are safe and handle the firearm properly, then they are adequate or better and they get passed.

[MasterOfNone]

People doing stupid things like this do not necessarily have anything to do with the instruction they have received. Stupid acts like this happen because people disregard their training. If this guy was never taught how to safely clear a handgun, why did he not have this ND the first time he ever handled a handgun? Are we to believe that Lee Paige's infamous ND (DEA firearm safety instructor video) was because he was not taught how to safely clear a handgun? Next we'll be told that every car accident in which a driver made a mistake is the result of the bad training he received when he got his license.
A person can know how to do a thing, and do it correctly for years, before the one day he does it wrong. It does mean he was not taught the correct way.

[RPB]

he takes out the ... weapon,

Intentional failure to conceal


Finger on the trigger ....

All the above posts .....


That guy is just wrong on so many levels...


If I was business owner and guy was my buddy and it was my company, I'd "sentence him" to gun safety courses, and range time and more courses ... at his expense, with proof provided to the company from the instructors/ receipt/note whatever... but yep several laws were broken. .... good thing he isn't doing prison time for negligent homicide (The old Pasadena Police building had a ding in the floor where the chip of tie and concrete under it got removed when some officer switched to a Glock from a revolver.... I still can't understand how he didn't know the bang switch makes it go bang..... the Glock had more "safeties" than his revolver did, but the one between his ears failed.

another employee comes up and says he is interested in purchasing the same model that he carries and asks if he can check it out.

Sure, meet me at my house, I'll instruct you on how it works, and then we'll go to the range.

[Heartland Patriot]

People doing stupid things like this do not necessarily have anything to do with the instruction they have received. Stupid acts like this happen because people disregard their training. If this guy was never taught how to safely clear a handgun, why did he not have this ND the first time he ever handled a handgun? Are we to believe that Lee Paige's infamous ND (DEA firearm safety instructor video) was because he was not taught how to safely clear a handgun? Next we'll be told that every car accident in which a driver made a mistake is the result of the bad training he received when he got his license.
A person can know how to do a thing, and do it correctly for years, before the one day he does it wrong. It does mean he was not taught the correct way.

Once I was in a leadership role in the USAF, I had quite a few younger apprentices and newly qualified folks who I supervised in some form or fashion across several years. They were all trained to at least a basic level on maintenance safety because airplanes can get you killed. Lots of big moving parts, high current, high pressure fluids/gasses, etc. And MOST of the younger folks took their training to heart and did what they needed to do to stay safe, keep others safe, and prevent damage to aircraft. Occasionally, though, you would get some knucklehead who somehow managed to do all the right things during their initial technical school(s) and get their assignment to the flightline but then proceed to disregard a lot of what they had been taught. Most of the time someone would catch them before they really managed to do something dangerous, but not always...you can train the daylights out of some folks, but getting them to apply that training on a consistent basis is akin to pulling teeth from a lion...PAINFUL!

[Oldgringo]

HOLY CRAP!!!

I cannot believe that a CHLer could be this stupid. This is just ridiculous.

<stuff deleted>

While it is pretty well established that CHLers are more law abiding than average, there is no real evidence nor is there a requirement that they be smarter than average. :(

Well said and timely! You can't fix stupid...with an instructional course, a license or anything else.