The second deputy pointed the weapon at the first deputy and – apparently unaware the weapon was loaded – pulled the trigger
BY Herschel Smith
8 years ago
A San Francisco sheriff’s deputy accidentally discharged a non-duty weapon, a “baby Glock,” inside the Hall of Justice on Wednesday morning, apparently while trying to demonstrate the proper use of the weapon to a colleague.
The round narrowly missed the fellow deputy, but no one was injured.
San Francisco Sheriff’s Department spokeswoman Eileen Hirst said the discharge occurred before court started and was under investigation. She was not able to provide details, pending the outcome of the probe.
“An accidental discharge of a firearm is a very serious matter,” she said. “We are all very grateful that no one was injured.”
Sources say that Rhonda Gaines, a 20-plus year veteran, brought the gun to work and that Sotero Santos accidentally fired it. Hirst would not confirm either identities but said that the person who fired the weapon is receiving a one-on-one refresher on firearm training, as is the deputy who brought the weapon to the courthouse.
[…]
Sources told NBC Bay Area that Gaines brought the handgun, a 22-caliber “baby” Glock, to work and was apparently not familiar with how it operated. She handed it to Santos and asked him about its use, sources said. The second deputy pointed the weapon at the first deputy and – apparently unaware the weapon was loaded – pulled the trigger. The round missed her, piercing an equipment storage cabinet, before lodging in the office wall.
I don’t do Glocks, but even so, I know that unless it’s had the conversion kit applied to it, there is no .22 Glock. The department may have been referring to a Glock 22, which is a .40. Either way, it’s a good thing this happened among people so well trained in the science of firearms use and tactical applications (unlike us ignorant civilians). Otherwise, someone might have been hurt and the other sent to prison.
On April 17, 2016 at 11:26 pm, rumcrookâ„¢ said:
Another fine example of “only cops should have guns” sarc/
On April 18, 2016 at 5:47 am, t_reese said:
Actually, it’s a fine example of two Deputy’s who need to have their badges and guns taken away!
On April 18, 2016 at 9:48 am, rumcrookâ„¢ said:
That too, but on a larger scale we are often told by mindless gun haters only the government and thier functionaries should have guns, when reality is many police are less familiar with firearms than most civillian gun owners and only practice or qualify to a minimum standard, and story after unfortunate story shows police presenting a firearm and accidently shooting someone, these two are the tip of an iceberg
On April 18, 2016 at 9:13 am, Frank Clarke said:
If this is any indication of the caliber (snork) of SanFran’s minions (snork) of justice, no wonder they don’t want anybody to have guns!
On April 18, 2016 at 10:38 am, UNCLEELMO said:
“This is how to properly handle a loaded firearm.”
BANG
“And that was a demonstration of what not to do. Any questions?”
On April 18, 2016 at 10:56 am, Damocles said:
Oh “only the police are trained enough” SMH….There are only 4 basic firearm safety rules, how hard is it for some people….?
On April 18, 2016 at 11:16 am, Jack Crabb said:
‘Again, the leftists calling an “accidental discharge” instead of the proper “negligent discharge”.
And personally, I don’t find it sad, rather it’s a bit comical that The Only Ones are so irresponsible.
On April 18, 2016 at 11:56 am, Archer said:
It’s another example of using “passive voice” when writing about anything LEOs do. Look up the difference between “active voice” vs. “passive voice”, if you aren’t familiar.
Key quote from that link: Active voice makes documents stronger by showing responsibility or giving credit for an action. When we avoid showing responsibility, we often don’t give enough information to explain the problem and how to fix it. Often, we use a form of the passive called the “cut passive” and never identify the doer of the action. [emphasis added]
Reading about LEO negligent discharges, you see a lot of phrases like, “shots were fired”, “the gun was discharged”, “Officer So-and-so was nearly hit”. It leads us to believe it was an accident, that no person is at fault; the writers’ language is vague and does not assign responsibility.
The reality is the opposite.
On April 18, 2016 at 1:41 pm, Jack Crabb said:
Exactly. When you let the enemy (leftists) define the battlefield (words and terminology – i.e.: gun control, global warming or whatever their phrase du jour is, etc.) they are halfway to victory. Incrementalism, as well as leftist and statist policies are evil.
On April 18, 2016 at 3:44 pm, Archer said:
Yep. “Gun control” becomes “gun safety” (“Who could be against gun safety?”), “anthropogenic [man-caused] global warming” becomes “climate change”, “pro-life” becomes “anti-choice”, etc….
When the terms are redefined, opposition — any opposition — sounds unreasonable or becomes outright impossible.
It’s like George Orwell wrote, in the appendix to 1984: “The purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the world-view and mental habits proper to the devotees of Ingsoc [English Socialism], but to make all other modes of thought impossible.” [emphasis added]
When you literally cannot talk about “climate change” without referring to man-caused climate change, when you can’t talk about “gun safety” without referring to restrictions on the basic right to keep and bear arms, and when you can’t talk about the sanctity of human life without referring to “the denial of women’s health” — because the terms have been redefined to make such abstractions and distinctions impossible and there are simply no words for the thoughts you are trying to express — we have well and truly crossed into Orwell’s nightmare.
On April 18, 2016 at 4:43 pm, Pat Hines said:
Because I lived in the SF Bay Area for 13 years, I’ve very familiar with San Francisco county. The county and the city share the same boundaries, there’s no non-city areas at all.
That means that the duties among the SF Police Department and the SF county sheriff’s department are divided. I don’t know the precise lines, but suffice it too say that there’s a huge amount of overlap and needless expenditure.
On April 19, 2016 at 2:23 am, Michael Ejercito said:
The sheriff operates the jail and serves court summons.
On April 20, 2016 at 3:39 pm, TSA_TheSexualAssault said:
G27, the .40S&W version of the G26. Short barrel, stubby grip, early-1990’s double-stack semi-concealable pistol. Nowhere near as concealable as the current G42 single-stack .380Auto “Baby Glock”.
Same as all Glock pistols: pull the trigger and they fire, every time. Drop it and it doesn’t fire, every time. Handled by clowns in official costume: “oops”.