Off-duty officer's gun accidentally fires at school event

[Sylvain]

No, it's 2 separate things. You can get suspended for a day or two for things that have nothing to do with carrying a firearm.

I meant if as a cop you do something stupid with your gun like having a nervous breakdown and shoot your gun in the air in public (or a desk pop at the public library) ... can a judge also keep you from carrying with your LTCH if you are deemed unfit to carry a gun?

 

[Route 45]

I meant if as a cop you do something stupid with your gun like having a nervous breakdown and shoot your gun in the air in public (or a desk pop at the public library) ... can a judge also keep you from carrying with your LTCH if you are deemed unfit to carry a gun?

The determination of whether one is fit or unfit to possess an LTCH is independent of one's status as a police officer or non-LEO.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Administrative, you will likely incur the wrath of the department for violating G.O. up to termination recommendation.... Our list of off-duty guns is quite good, leaving off POS manufacturers and single-actions.

There is no longer a list of off duty guns. I remember the matrix of approved manufacturers in various calibers, but that went away years ago. Now there is a list of mandatory/prohibited features, maximum barrel length, and approved caliber range along with recommended manufacturers in GO 1.8a. However, "...determining factors as to whether a weapon is ultimately authorized will be the weapon's functionality and the officer's ability to safely handle and demonstrate appropriate proficiency with the weapon."

As far as violating GO, 1.8 reads "nothing in this general order precludes an officer from having other firearms or types of ammunition when the officer is in an off-duty capacity and involved in legal and/or recreational use of such firearms. Officers may also carry a handgun under the authority of (LTCH). Administrative limits on approved/authorized handguns do not apply under this authority, but officers should carefully consider the personal liability..."

If I get sued in any situation where GO matters, the city is getting sued, too. I'm not particularly concerned.

 

[Route 45]

There is no longer a list of off duty guns. I remember the matrix of approved manufacturers in various calibers, but that went away years ago. Now there is a list of mandatory/prohibited features, maximum barrel length, and approved caliber range along with recommended manufacturers in GO 1.8a. However, "...determining factors as to whether a weapon is ultimately authorized will be the weapon's functionality and the officer's ability to safely handle and demonstrate appropriate proficiency with the weapon."

As far as violating GO, 1.8 reads "nothing in this general order precludes an officer from having other firearms or types of ammunition when the officer is in an off-duty capacity and involved in legal and/or recreational use of such firearms. Officers may also carry a handgun under the authority of (LTCH). Administrative limits on approved/authorized handguns do not apply under this authority, but officers should carefully consider the personal liability..."

If I get sued in any situation where GO matters, the city is getting sued, too. I'm not particularly concerned.

I could see a situation where the city gets sued in a questionable shooting with a non-approved weapon, and thus tries to wash their hands of the whole thing by citing the use of an unauthorized weapon for official purposes. Heck of a risk to take, just to carry a favorite toy.

 

[Gabriel]

Seems like a bad idea to me, for an off-duty LEO to carry something that he's not officially qualified with. Because you never know when you are gonna be "on duty" at a moment's notice. A cop is a cop, off duty or not.

That's why I carry a Glock 19 off duty. We are issued the 17 and 26, but I can't stand the 26 for some reason. The 19 is basically the same gun, plus I shoot it at our yearly qualification just so I can say I've passed the qualifying course with it.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

This story has a few more details. Revolver in a pocket...

https://www.clickondetroit.com/news...-wrestling-tournament-at-michigan-high-school

Carrying guns in pockets?

If only someone had warned us of that.

 

[bwframe]

Very cool "inside baseball" stuff here gents. Many thanks again to our INGO professionals!

 

[Route 45]

Carrying guns in pockets?

If only someone had warned us of that.

Just because some people can't do it right doesn't mean that it is any more dangerous than any other method.
I've been pocket carrying for years without incident. Gun goes in a proper holster, holster and gun goes into pocket.
Easy peasy.

 

[rvb]

Just because some people can't do it right doesn't mean that it is any more dangerous than any other method.
I've been pocket carrying for years without incident. Gun goes in a proper holster, holster and gun goes into pocket.
Easy peasy.

yup. pocket carry isn't dangerous. carrying w/o a safe holster that covers the trigger is dangerous. doesn't matter where it's at on the body.

-rvb

 

[HoughMade]

"One person was treated for a twisted ankle they suffered while fleeing the scene, police said...."



...and you people must have some big pockets.

 

[rvb]

One of my old school teachers has retired and run for state level office (not IN). she's pretty liberal, a running as democrat. A few weeks ago when talking about "arming teachers" was in the news she posted a link on FB going back a few yrs to a teacher in Oregon (I think? Maybe UT?) that had an AD (one student injured from frag). I responded with a news link to a school bus that crashed with several kids killed and many injured. Point is life is full of risks to safety. Driving kids to school is at the top of the list (either in busses or personal cars). But we don't ban busses or cars from school property. We balance risk to convenience all the time (eg why no seatbelts on busses?) yet we can't balance risk to school safety?

OK. an AD happened. discipline the person. learn from it. but that instance doesn't sway MY opinion on whether we should removing the "GFZ" status from schools.

-rvb

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I could see a situation where the city gets sued in a questionable shooting with a non-approved weapon, and thus tries to wash their hands of the whole thing by citing the use of an unauthorized weapon for official purposes. Heck of a risk to take, just to carry a favorite toy.

If the city wants to find a way to throw me under the bus, they will, but GO is clear and that's why I pay my FOP dues.

That said, I carry my duty gun the vast majority of the time.

 

[HoughMade]

If the city wants to find a way to throw me under the bus, they will, but GO is clear and that's why I pay my FOP dues.

That said, I carry my duty gun the vast majority of the time.

How big are your​ pockets?

 

[BehindBlueI's]

How big are your​ pockets?

Not big enough for my duty gun. But I do qualify on my LCR.

The odds of me carrying a gun I'm not qualified on are slim, but present. Primarily because I have multiple copies of what I carry. If the Shield as a BUG breaks, I've got another one. If I'm at the range with a "training" duplicate of my 17M but not my authorized one and Mr. One Pot Meth Maker wanders in aggressively, I'm technically holding an unauthorized gun. You get the idea. In order to qualify with what I routinely carry and the duplicates of those, that's 8 guns just on the handgun side.

 

[rkwhyte2]

Not big enough for my duty gun. But I do qualify on my LCR.

The odds of me carrying a gun I'm not qualified on are slim, but present. Primarily because I have multiple copies of what I carry. If the Shield as a BUG breaks, I've got another one. If I'm at the range with a "training" duplicate of my 17M but not my authorized one and Mr. One Pot Meth Maker wanders in aggressively, I'm technically holding an unauthorized gun. You get the idea. In order to qualify with what I routinely carry and the duplicates of those, that's 8 guns just on the handgun side.

Well I just learned something. I fail to see why the same weapon in every way except the S/N is considered as unauthorized to one you qualified with. That would be like a pilot only being able to fly in a particular plane that they had been checked out in.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Well I just learned something. I fail to see why the same weapon in every way except the S/N is considered as unauthorized to one you qualified with. That would be like a pilot only being able to fly in a particular plane that they had been checked out in.

When you initially qualify on it, an armorer also inspects it. Then you shoot the qualification course. I figure the "exact gun" requirement is to ensure that there's no mechanical flaw/out of spec issues with that particular gun and then you shoot it to verify sights, etc. I get why they do it. Not every cop is a "gun guy" so they at least get some basic verification it works and is safe.

Note even if you have to get your issued gun replaced, it breaks or goes into evidence or whatever, you still have to re-qualify with your new one ASAP.

 

[87iroc]

Saw this on FB linked to an article about 'all the times that guns in the hands of PO's in schools discharged' and 'how can we trust lesser trained people with them'...'the fools'.

My thought is. How many people have died, on average, in schools, due to a ND vs how many people have died due to mass shooters that you say 'happens almost daily'. Trying to have it 'both ways'.

 

[MarkC]

When you initially qualify on it, an armorer also inspects it. Then you shoot the qualification course. I figure the "exact gun" requirement is to ensure that there's no mechanical flaw/out of spec issues with that particular gun and then you shoot it to verify sights, etc. I get why they do it. Not every cop is a "gun guy" so they at least get some basic verification it works and is safe.

Note even if you have to get your issued gun replaced, it breaks or goes into evidence or whatever, you still have to re-qualify with your new one ASAP.

A good friend of mine who owns the exact model of Glock he was issued got involved in a police action shooting; he then got REALLY worried because he couldn't recall whether he had taken his personal weapon or the department's weapon when he got called out.

Turns out that it didn't really matter in the end.

 

[Denny347]

There is no longer a list of off duty guns. I remember the matrix of approved manufacturers in various calibers, but that went away years ago. Now there is a list of mandatory/prohibited features, maximum barrel length, and approved caliber range along with recommended manufacturers in GO 1.8a. However, "...determining factors as to whether a weapon is ultimately authorized will be the weapon's functionality and the officer's ability to safely handle and demonstrate appropriate proficiency with the weapon."

As far as violating GO, 1.8 reads "nothing in this general order precludes an officer from having other firearms or types of ammunition when the officer is in an off-duty capacity and involved in legal and/or recreational use of such firearms. Officers may also carry a handgun under the authority of (LTCH). Administrative limits on approved/authorized handguns do not apply under this authority, but officers should carefully consider the personal liability..."

If I get sued in any situation where GO matters, the city is getting sued, too. I'm not particularly concerned.

Right, the term "list" was used loosely There is little reason to NOT qualify with your off-duty gun.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Right, the term "list" was used loosely There is little reason to NOT qualify with your off-duty gun.

There isn't, other than the logistics of having lots of guns that could, in theory, be pressed into defensive service. However what I responded to was that you could be administratively punished for failing to do so.

Unless there's something other than 1.8 I'm missing, my point remains you can't be in trouble administratively for not obeying a GO for carrying a weapon not on the "list" off duty. If I am missing something, I'd appreciate the heads up.