Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Moderator
Joined
·
69,743 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I recognize that police are technically civilians, and I used the title only for effect.

It occurred to me while shooting with some of the posters here (see the photos from the "meeting" thread in General Events) that nobody got shot.

Amazing, huh?

Actually, I have never been at a gun range with civilians when somebody was accidentally shot. I am sure it happens, but in comparison, I have been at police gun ranges when people were shot. My first experience with police officers' negligence occurred when three people were injured during my police academy shooting qualification, which was also my first experience shooting with working police officers (first experience + first shooting = anecdotal evidence).

The drum beat for "training requirements" for us packers is heard sometimes even from within our own quarters. Is there evidence of a difference between states with training requirements and those without?

What about the difference between highly trained police and the untrained non-police? I do not want to turn this into a cop bashing thread, but it occurs to me that I am simply posting some facts:

While the vast majority of police officers are likewise competent, it would be a grave mistake to imagine that police officers are immune from the foibles and stresses can lead to unlawful shootings. ne study of 1,500 incidents involving police use of deadly force concluded that deadly force was not justified in 40% of the incidents, and was questionable in another 20%. [166] Using evidence from the Chicago Police Department's internal investigations, one scholar found 14% of killings by Chicago officers to be "prima facie cases of manslaughter or murder" and "Several others presented factual anomalies sufficient to suggest that a thorough investigation might well have revealed such prima facie cases." Not a single one of those was prosecuted--or even reprimanded for shootings in plain violation of official policy. [167]

Whenever a New York City police officer fires a gun (outside of a target range), police officials review the incident. About 20% of discharges have been determined to be accidental, and another 10% to be intentional discharges in violation of force policy. In other words, only 70% of firearms discharges by police are intentional and in compliance with force policy. [168] In Los Angeles, 75% of shootings by police officers led to discipline of the officer or retraining because the officer had made an error. [169]

. . .

When an off- duty New York City policeman fires a gun, one time out of four the firing will be an accident, a suicide, or an act of frustration. [170] The rate of substantiated crimes perpetrated by New York City police officers is approximately 7.5 crimes per year per thousand officers. The number of New York police crimes alleged is 112.7 per thousand officers.
. . .
From these states, the most detailed data are those compiled by the Dade County (Miami) police. As discussed above, the police kept track of every known incident involving the county's more than 21,000 handgun carry permitees over a six-year period. In that six-year period, there was one known incident of a crime victim having his gun taken away by the criminal. There were no known incidents of a crime victim injuring an innocent person by mistake. In some cases the handgun permit holder was successful in preventing a crime, and in some cases not, but in no case was any innocent person injured as a result of mistake by a permit-holder.

Another study examined newspaper reports of gun incidents in Missouri, involving police or civilians. In this study, civilians were successful in wounding, driving off, capturing criminals 83% of the time, compared with a 68% success rate for the police. Civilians intervening in crime were slightly less likely to be wounded than were police. Only 2% of shootings by civilians, but 11% of shootings by police, involved an innocent person mistakenly thought to be a criminal.

. . .

The most detailed information about civilian defensive gun use has been compiled by Professor Gary Kleck (a liberal Democrat, and member of the ACLU and Common Cause) in his book Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America. In 1992 the American Society of Criminology awarded the book the Hindelang Prize, as the most significant contribution to criminology in the previous three years. In Point Blank, Kleck studied computer tapes from the U.S. Department of Justice's National Crime Survey, for the years 1979-85. Analyzing the data from over 180,000 crime incidents in the National Crime Survey, as well from other studies, Kleck found the following:

- In no more than 1% of defensive gun uses was the gun taken away by a criminal.
- The odds of a defensive gun user accidentally killing an innocent person are less than 1 in 26,000.
source for material http://www.claytoncramer.com/shall-issue.html#c34
 

·
Lawyer and Gun Activist
Joined
·
28,447 Posts
training

whether a person has enough training, or is otherwise "safe enough" with a gun, depends on the circumstances under which he is carrying it.

Most people think that just keeping a gun in your home for defense against burglars and home invaders requires no training at all. Most states do not have any such requirement.

Most people do not think that shooting a gun on an established firing range, even in the company of other shooters, requires prior training. A few states have a training requirement to take a pistol to a range, but most do not.

Most people think that hunting is a higher-risk activity, and they demand that that risk be addressed with mandatory hunter safety training requirements. These have been in place for more than 25 years in most states.

Most people are nervous about the idea of untrained fellow citizens packing concealed handguns in public places, especially places where large groups of people gather. Such places may or may not legally qualify as "public gatherings" under Georgia law, but what counts is that most of our fellow citizens only tolerate us packing guns on a daily basis in some places and under some circumstances, but not others, in part because of a belief (perhaps mistaken, but nonetheless a firmly-held belief that they act upon) that cops are safe and effective gun-handlers because of their "qualifications" and "training" while Joe Blow down the block is just, well, Joe Blow from down the block. He's a guy with a gun, nothing more.

Now in Georgia, a GFL-holding civilian and a LEO have some things in common. They both have no criminal history as to felonies or violent crimes. They do not have an extensive arrest record, period. They both had to apply for the State's permission to carry a gun, and they had to jump through the hoops that the State set before them. Both the cop and the GFL permit holder got their licenses conditionally, with a set of rules, and they are told that violation of the rules can result in revocation of the license by the State. Only the State can revoke their licenses or add more conditions on them.

Is it such a stretch to suggest that if the State treats GFL-holding civilians and certified LEO's somewhat alike now, it would be a good thing to treat them MORE ALIKE? More training and documentation for the civilian, but then with carry-almost-everywhere privileges that are currently reserved for cops and other agents of the State?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,460 Posts
The thing is, while training is a good idea for someone who has absolutly no idea about guns, the police who have training are usually the ones who do the most stupid things with them.

I think the police and others who do have extensive training get into a mindset that they know what they are doing and it is ok for them to do it. That is a bad thing when you get bad habits.

I have no proof to back this up, but just looking at the news, the 2 groups with the worst gun handleing are people who do not know guns (first thing they want to do is pull the trigger) and LEO's.

I think it boils down to respecting the firearm. Uneducated people do not know to repect them and some LEO's are so used to carrying them that they no longer properly respect them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,172 Posts
Sounds a lot like motorcycle riders

Most injuries and deaths occur not to rank beginners or very experienced riders, but to those who think they are experienced and know what they're doing...
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
69,743 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Re: Sounds a lot like motorcycle riders

Macktee said:
Most injuries and deaths occur not to rank beginners or very experienced riders, but to those who think they are experienced and know what they're doing...
Riders? You mean like on motorcycles?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,103 Posts
I agree with the statments above about officers who are supposed to be "properly trainned". The average LEO is not special when it comes to there "skills" with firearms. But to defend LEO's or any personell who carry weapons everyday on the job. Since they have more contact with the weapons on a deadly basis, of course they have more chances for mistakes. But, Bottom line is that if you don't follow the weapons safety rules and become complacent bad things will happen.

However the excuse to let LEO's carry more places may and probobly is because they have had "deadly force traning". But, MP has shown that simply because they have that training doesn't mean they make the correct decisions with it. I would like to see everyone with a gun get proper training with there weapons. But, I do not think it's the governments place to force people to get it. If you don't feel comfortable carrying a weapon then DON'T. I think most people understand that. And I think most people aren't going to go to a public gathering and start taking there pistol out there holster. And if an accedent happens your accountable for it. If you use your weapon in what you believe is a justified situation, and it turns out it's not then your responsible. So I don't see the problem with having GFL carriers having the same privleges as LEO's.
 

·
Professional Troll
Joined
·
2,163 Posts
Yea, like the video of the DEA agent in front of the classroom telling everyone that he is the only one qualified in the building to handle a Glock 40 right before he shoots himself :lol:

I didn't know that Glock had a model 40 in their product line #-o
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
69,743 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Hey, look here! Can You Read This? Huh?

Gunstar1 said:
Check the post subject: Sounds a lot like motorcycle riders :wink:
The post subjects are so small I never notice them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,531 Posts
"Yes, officer, I know you have been "trained" for over 5 years with your sidearm. However, *I* have been trained since the day I could walk with every pistol and rifle within arms reach, and I continue to "train" with them all the time, not once a year. Care to go to the range and see who outshoots whom?"

:shock: 8) *grin*
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top