Pro-gun police chief accidently shoots himself--again

[doggie]

and we wonder why teachers should not have guns in class.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/01/22 ... oots-self/

David Counceller, a police chief out of the Connersville Police Department in Indiana, didn’t have the greatest of extended weekends over the Martin Luther King holiday. In an epic stroke of irony, one of the often touted “good guys with a gun†managed to accidentally shoot someone: himself. While putting his own weapon back into its holster after comparing it to a newer model, the police chief accidentally caught the 40-caliber Glock on his clothes and shot himself in the leg. They often say there’s a first time for everything, but this definitely wasn’t it for Chief Counceller.

Counceller making a career out of shooting himself.

Even though Counceller is a veteran of the force, having served over 30 years in his current department alone, some may think it’s understandable to make such a mistake. After all, no one was harmed; so no harm, no foul. Right? Well that would be incredibly easier to believe if the chief hadn’t been in this same situation before. Around 15 years ago, Counceller managed to shoot himself in the hand, and that occurrence seems a bit worse than his latest shooting.

Keep in mind, his first accident occurred 15 years ago, and his police career has been just over 30 years long. This means that this well-trained “good guy with a gun†has managed to shoot himself in 15 year intervals since he got started. What’s even worse than that? His first accident occurred when he failed to check the chamber for a bullet when unloading the gun.

That’s right, Counceller, this well-trained police chief managed to forget to the one thing that you have to do when emptying a gun. Come on chief; you had one job. The absolute best part about this, though, is the fact that Counceller is seeking the Republican nomination for Sheriff in his county. He actually thinks that shooting himself for the second time could be beneficial for his candidacy. He literally said:

“You have to keep your guard up at all times. Some candidates are out there doing things for kids to try to get elected. Me, I shoot myself. What a way to get publicity.â€

What’s really sad about this? It’s a Republican primary, so Counceller actually may be right. Come on, a cop with two shootings on his record? Conservative gold.

Police shooting themselves isn’t isolated.

What’s especially frightening is the fact that the Connersville police chief isn’t an exception to the rule. In fact, police manage to accidentally shoot themselves relatively frequently. In fact, one study on the Los Angeles Police Department between 1985 and 2005 found that police accidentally shot themselves or each other nearly as often as they shot perpetrators. That’s right. Los Angeles, the city often linked to overkill when it comes to shooting suspects (just look at the unarmed mentally ill veteran who was shot while surrendering to LA Police), has police officers who are nearly as dangerous to themselves as they are to crooks.

Lesson learned.

What should be taken away from this all is the fact that even well-trained officers of the law manage to have accidents with guns. For some reason, though, many states don’t even require training courses for individuals who want to purchase these weapons. Yet every time a child shoots themselves with their parent’s gun or a person kills one of their loved ones on accident, self-proclaimed protectors of the 2nd Amendment claim that it’s due to carelessness on the part of the gun owner.

Really? There are Billy Bobs and Bubbas in America right now whose extent of training is taking themselves out to the woods in the back and shooting Budweiser cans off of the steps of the trailer that used to serve as a meth lab, and they’re claiming that only careless gun owners can be involved in accidents where innocent people get shot? Go tell that to the Connersville police chief.

Until the majority of “good guys with guns†are forced to get at least the amount of training that police, who manage to accidentally shoot people plenty, are getting, I’m pretty sure I’m a bit more scared of the “good guys†who think Friday nights in the woods with Billy Ray constitute adequate training than I am of the bad guys.

[FloraKitty35]

:lol: :lol: If he goes three for three, will he shoot himself in his privates?

[doggie]

:lol: :lol: If he goes three for three, will he shoot himself in his privates?

too late for that I think. :stir-pot:

[Vex]

See, I have no objection (well, relatively few objections) to trained security guards patrolling schools. Preferably security guards who have to keep up with their shooting in a similar way to their police (if their accuracy falls below a certain level they have to retake training) and who have been trained in sharpshooting (because you need to be an exceptional shot to stop an armed assailant in an emergency situation).

But the idea that teachers, teachers who need no training WHATSOEVER get to carry guns around students? No, no, no. Guns are dangerous enough around people who are careful and competent! What if a student grabbed the gun off the teacher and opened fire? They're just a teacher. Perps manage to catch cops off guard and steal their weapons with alarming frequency and I'm guessing it would be way easier to do that with a teacher, especially one with zero training.

It would take one second, and then bam. Congratulations good guy with a gun, you just brought the massacre to the school!

Goddamn, how can they not see the stupidity? I actually have a friend who believes teachers should have guns. I can't even really talk about the subject with him because I get so flabbergasted by his stupidity in this matter. I pointed out that the chances of an untrained civilian firing upon and actually hitting an assailant in the heat of the moment without hurting anyone else were virtually nil, but like all pro gun nuts he thinks joe average could totally save the day. Naturally, he owns a bunch of shotguns and magnums and possesses no actual official instruction in firearms.

[PennySycamore]

Why does this make me think of Barney Fife?

ZLsg0EvZozI

[snarkopolis]

See, I have no objection (well, relatively few objections) to trained security guards patrolling schools. Preferably security guards who have to keep up with their shooting in a similar way to their police (if their accuracy falls below a certain level they have to retake training) and who have been trained in sharpshooting (because you need to be an exceptional shot to stop an armed assailant in an emergency situation).

But the idea that teachers, teachers who need no training WHATSOEVER get to carry guns around students? No, no, no. Guns are dangerous enough around people who are careful and competent! What if a student grabbed the gun off the teacher and opened fire? They're just a teacher. Perps manage to catch cops off guard and steal their weapons with alarming frequency and I'm guessing it would be way easier to do that with a teacher, especially one with zero training.

It would take one second, and then bam. Congratulations good guy with a gun, you just brought the massacre to the school!

Goddamn, how can they not see the stupidity? I actually have a friend who believes teachers should have guns. I can't even really talk about the subject with him because I get so flabbergasted by his stupidity in this matter. I pointed out that the chances of an untrained civilian firing upon and actually hitting an assailant in the heat of the moment without hurting anyone else were virtually nil, but like all pro gun nuts he thinks joe average could totally save the day. Naturally, he owns a bunch of shotguns and magnums and possesses no actual official instruction in firearms.

Yeah, sounds great EXCEPT for a few things. #1--Who is paying for all these highly trained security guards? Is the NRA going to be handing out grants for this? I think not. #2--Can't wait to see the insurance premiums for the local schools go through the roof, and who is paying for that? and #3-- the first time one of these mouth breathers shoots the wrong person (my bad) who is paying for the lawsuit?

Just a few thoughtful questions, but don't let that stop you from arming the Goobers of the world to roam school buildings with weapons. And btw since these school shootings happen in NOT so dangerous America do not presume that my tax dollars should be used. I would rather you update your science and computer and math lab space or buy a tablet or smart board. Since they NEED gun toting guards THEY can pay for it themselves.

[JesusFightClub]

See, I have no objection (well, relatively few objections) to trained security guards patrolling schools. Preferably security guards who have to keep up with their shooting in a similar way to their police (if their accuracy falls below a certain level they have to retake training) and who have been trained in sharpshooting (because you need to be an exceptional shot to stop an armed assailant in an emergency situation).

Aargh!

I agree with the rest of your post, totally. But don't give security guards that power.

I was one a while back because graduate jobs are thin on the ground. I can honestly not think of any of my colleagues who should have a gun as part of their regular duties. I shouldn't have had one, either.

Security guards are one of three things. 1. failed coppers (they have a criminal record, or something which means they can't join the police). 2. ex-coppers (seeing all of the general public as enemies who are plotting criminal acts). 3. people desperate for a job (graduates with no prospects, people who smoke far too much weed). We all tried to do our best and NONE of us should have been armed. Ever.

We were all on minimum wage. Expecting people paid peanuts to outmatch trained police marksmen isn't logical. Most security guards are on zero hour contracts (I was), you're called in as and when you're needed. I could pull double shift for 3 days in a row then not work again for a week. If you do a lot of double shift, you only sleep 3 hours at a time. Sleep-deprived people worrying about how to make the rent aren't the people you want to have guns.

Also, there's the nature of security duty. The customers are the bad guys. You assume that they're up to something, whether that something is refusing to evacuate when a fire alarm is blaring, taking drugs or weapons into a concert, or refusing to be moved on because "It's my human right to tell people about My Lord Jehovah". You are called in when a situation escalates, and your role is to de-escalate. Being armed would not help here.

[Vex]

Woah, Snarkopolis. I think you misunderstood me drastically if you think I meant armed security guards in schools are a good idea.

For starters, I was speaking theoretically. I know full-well that it would be a disaster of epic proportions and I don't think it should happen. I don't think guns have any place in schools, period. The idea of finding money to pay for highly skilled personnel in schools, which are chronically underfunded as it is, is a joke.

I completely agree with every single one of your points. When I said that I have relatively few problems with the idea, I meant just that - with the idea itself, and relatively being the key word. What I meant is that I have less issues with the idea of security guards patrolling schools if they were highly trained compared to the even more ridiculous idea of arming teachers or random parents.

I never thought about security guards like that JFC. Here they don't have guns at all, thankfully. I don't even really like seeing the police with guns so I sure as hell don't want to see some guy who couldn't cut it as a cop with one.

[Sola]

Well there's a Darwin Award in the making.

[docmom]

If they arm anyone in my childrens' school, I am homeschooling them.

[FloraKitty35]

See, I have no objection (well, relatively few objections) to trained security guards patrolling schools. Preferably security guards who have to keep up with their shooting in a similar way to their police (if their accuracy falls below a certain level they have to retake training) and who have been trained in sharpshooting (because you need to be an exceptional shot to stop an armed assailant in an emergency situation).

But the idea that teachers, teachers who need no training WHATSOEVER get to carry guns around students? No, no, no. Guns are dangerous enough around people who are careful and competent! What if a student grabbed the gun off the teacher and opened fire? They're just a teacher. Perps manage to catch cops off guard and steal their weapons with alarming frequency and I'm guessing it would be way easier to do that with a teacher, especially one with zero training.

It would take one second, and then bam. Congratulations good guy with a gun, you just brought the massacre to the school!

Goddamn, how can they not see the stupidity? I actually have a friend who believes teachers should have guns. I can't even really talk about the subject with him because I get so flabbergasted by his stupidity in this matter. I pointed out that the chances of an untrained civilian firing upon and actually hitting an assailant in the heat of the moment without hurting anyone else were virtually nil, but like all pro gun nuts he thinks joe average could totally save the day. Naturally, he owns a bunch of shotguns and magnums and possesses no actual official instruction in firearms.

I hate the armed teacher idea. I had some ignorant sadistic fuckers for teachers at least one or more of them were alcoholics and a couple of them were cocaine and prescription pill addicts.

[JesusFightClub]

Woah, Snarkopolis. I think you misunderstood me drastically if you think I meant armed security guards in schools are a good idea.

For starters, I was speaking theoretically. I know full-well that it would be a disaster of epic proportions and I don't think it should happen. I don't think guns have any place in schools, period. The idea of finding money to pay for highly skilled personnel in schools, which are chronically underfunded as it is, is a joke.

I completely agree with every single one of your points. When I said that I have relatively few problems with the idea, I meant just that - with the idea itself, and relatively being the key word. What I meant is that I have less issues with the idea of security guards patrolling schools if they were highly trained compared to the even more ridiculous idea of arming teachers or random parents.

I never thought about security guards like that JFC. Here they don't have guns at all, thankfully. I don't even really like seeing the police with guns so I sure as hell don't want to see some guy who couldn't cut it as a cop with one.

LOL, sorry! I obviously have....issues....from my security days. :embarrassed:

Nearly everyone I worked with was the kind of person who should never have a gun ever, which is what I was trying to say in a rubbish fashion. I would have trusted parents over the people I worked with to own a gun, seriously. I agree with you completely that there should be no guns anywhere near schools, but the idea of armed security made me twitchy.

I learnt some useful lessons - never tell a drunk person they've had too much to drink and when you're doing the front desk shift at 2am, you will actually be grateful that you have a copy of Trotsky's collected works to hand. However I also noticed a couple of things about older security - they are either failed coppers or they used to be coppers and now aren't. The second lot were booted out of the polis, and it may be illuminating to find out why. :pink-shock: