Officer “Accidentally” Fires Gun On Junior High Campus
BY Herschel Smith
9 years, 8 months ago
ODESSA, TX — An Ector County ISD police officer accidentally fired his gun inside Crockett Junior High on Friday.
“It discharged into the wall of his office and then the bullet went up into the ceiling,” said ECISD Communications Officer Mike Adkins.
“His gun was wet, and he went back into his office and felt it would be an opportune time to clean it and make sure it was working,” said Adkins.
The school system is investigating the incident, and the officer has been placed on administrative duties.
“They want to know exactly what happened, how it can be avoided in the future and if there needs to be retraining done for our officer or even other officers,” said Adkins.
The owner of a business called Guns and Trades, Tommy Atchison, offered reaction on Monday.
Atchison said, “All guns should be acted like they’re loaded at all times.”
Gosh. I hate it when that happens to me. I remember the last time I shot up a junior high school while trying to clean my gun. I didn’t pull the trigger either. It just “went off.” But everybody wanted to blame me.
Meanwhile, some folks in Texas are really glad those goober civilians who are about to be allowed to open carry will have to get training since a concealed carry permit is a requirement. We wouldn’t want them to shoot up junior high schools.
On March 25, 2015 at 7:55 am, Ironwolf32 said:
His gun was wet? That is why it went off? I am glad he determined that “it worked”.
My guess is that he either tried to clear it with his finger on the trigger or took the magazine out without clearing the one in the chamber.
I would say that is strong case for dismissal.
On March 25, 2015 at 11:39 am, Archer said:
Notice the different voice – active vs. passive – in the reporter’s writing and in the police
representative.
Police: “[The gun] discharged…” Passive voice, indicating no fault or direct cause – the gun just discharged.
Reporter: “…an officer … fired his gun….” Active voice, indicating the cause as well as the effect – guns don’t “just go off”; the officer fired it.
Police spokespersons have a nasty habit of speaking in the passive voice when it comes to
accidentalnegligent discharges, and even some deliberate shootings. We hear or read a lot of “shots were fired” (who fired them?), “there was a discharge” (what caused it?), “bystanders were injured/killed” (who injured/killed them?), etc. I understand they’re trying to protect their own, but unless it’s an extremely rare case of mechanical defect or failure, guns don’t just “go off”. Someone or something (usually the former) directly caused the discharge by pulling the trigger.It’s disingenuous and just plain bad writing to indicate otherwise through vagueness.
On August 29, 2015 at 9:40 pm, VerminMcCann said:
“‘[The gun] discharged…’ Passive voice, indicating no fault or direct cause – the gun just discharged.”
That isn’t passive voice.
On August 30, 2015 at 11:22 am, Herschel Smith said:
Sure it is.
On August 30, 2015 at 11:32 am, VerminMcCann said:
No it isn’t. “Gun” is the subject. “Discharged” is the verb.
On August 30, 2015 at 11:45 am, Herschel Smith said:
Active voice would have been something like “He discharged the firearm.” “The gun discharged” is passive.
Thanks for playing.
On August 30, 2015 at 2:15 pm, VerminMcCann said:
“The gun discharged” is passive.
No it isn’t. In the passive voice, an agent not named in the sentence acts on the subject of the sentence: “The gun was discharged.” In “the gun discharged” “discharged” is an intransitive verb (meaning it requires neither an agent nor an object) that is performed by the subject (the gun).
For a more detailed explanation refer to: http://www.lel.ed.ac.uk/grammar/passives.html#passivepostlist
Specifically see: http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=1264:
“Thus a recent news story about a shooting incident includes sentences like these, where a bullet and a gun are the subjects of active verbs:
The .45-caliber bullet entered an adjacent unit, passing within 12 feet of a man eating dinner on his living room couch, then lodged in another wall, Lt. Sean Cooney said. […]
Cooney said Milligan called police at about 7:30 p.m. Thursday to report his gun had discharged. Milligan told investigators that he invited Getting into his apartment to see his gun collection, Cooney said.
During the visit, Milligan handed Getting the gun, which Milligan recently purchased, and it discharged, Cooney said.”
On August 31, 2015 at 11:55 am, Archer said:
In context, it’s still a passive voice. To say otherwise is to say that an inanimate object is capable of manipulating itself.
“The lights went out.”
“The stick broke.”
“The gun discharged.”
Technically speaking, these all fall under your definition of “active voice”, but as none of them are capable of doing these things on their own, we have to ask, “What made the actions happen?”
A light cannot turn itself on or off; it is controlled by an external entity. Even those “self-regulating” lights are controlled by a computer chip, but it’s the chip that makes the decision, not the light.
A stick cannot break itself; it must be acted upon by an outside force. Be that the wind, a bird, a bear, a human, or anything, something else, external to the stick, causes the stick to break.
And as we’ve seen at this site, repeatedly, a gun cannot discharge itself. Some external entity must actuate the trigger mechanism, or otherwise cause the firing pin to strike the primer.
Inanimate objects cannot act upon themselves. Thus, it is a passive voice. Going Grammar Nazi on the technicalities doesn’t refute the argument.
On August 31, 2015 at 12:12 pm, VerminMcCann said:
“In context, it’s still a passive voice.”
No it isn’t. It’s active voice. The fact that it’s inaccurate writing doesn’t change that. And you can’t complain about “grammar Nazis” while lodging your own, misinformed criticisms of another writer’s grammar.
On August 30, 2015 at 2:33 pm, VerminMcCann said:
See also http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/passive+voice
On August 30, 2015 at 8:18 pm, Herschel Smith said:
Ha! Who would’ve thunk it! A gun has volition and intentionality, and can take actions all on its own!
On August 30, 2015 at 9:47 pm, VerminMcCann said:
That has absolutely nothing to do with whether the sentence is active or passive.
“The rock did nothing” is active voice. “The kids were saved by Superman” is passive voice.
Passive simply means the subject of the sentence is the object of the verb. Refer to the links I posted.
On March 25, 2015 at 1:44 pm, Seerightthere! said:
So he apparently walks around the school with one in the tube, I wasn’t even allowed to do that on post as an MP on patrol.
On March 25, 2015 at 6:54 pm, SunwolfNC said:
I remember someone in my flight being article 15’d after the armorer reported less than 20rnds in the magazine on check in as there was one in the chamber.
Security police weren’t allowed to charge their duty weapons unless they intended to fire them. Walking around with one in the pipe was a huge no-no.
On March 25, 2015 at 2:13 pm, Ned Weatherby said:
Hate it when I have to beat my gun and threaten it so it won’t discharge. Doggone thing.
On March 25, 2015 at 2:39 pm, Xia Tianhun said:
My gun was wet so I decided to clean it by pulling the trigger.
On March 25, 2015 at 6:55 pm, SunwolfNC said:
Accidental…Accidental…I do not think that word means what they think it means.
The word they’re looking for is “Negligent”
“Definition of Negligent Discharge:
Negligent discharge is the discharging or firing of a weapon when it is unintended,normally when handling a gun.”
Complacency will kill you when handling firearms.
On April 6, 2015 at 5:03 pm, ssgcmwatson said:
I wonder if the leftists will define this as a “school shooting” to inflate their numbers.