I’m skeptical
Two police officers in Baltimore claim their service weapons discharged while holstered. It is possible there was some sort of mechanical failure but odds are significantly against that. More likely a booger hook on the bang switch. Or possibly a draw string from a jacket in the holster.
March 6th, 2016 at 2:35 pm
It took a tiny amount of digging, but they’re talking about the FNS model – a striker-fired .40 similar in function to the Glock. Unless FN has done something REALLY STOOPID, I don’t think you can set one of those off without pulling the trigger back.
March 6th, 2016 at 7:26 pm
Remember that in Baltimore the police are at the mercy of gangs, individual criminals, , the press, their own officers, every city administrator and elected official, and the public.
And the police have zero reasonable expectation that they will be supported by anyone, rather than fed to the wolves, should any action or nonaction of theirs cause someone to be offended in any way.
Under those circumstances, admitting one had a negligent discharge for any cause is likely to land one in very hot water, followed by being hung out to dry.
March 6th, 2016 at 9:23 pm
Sounds like the start of a joke.
You’d think inside a police precinct they’d have cameras covering the entrances and exits at least.
All in all, in Baltimore, there seems to be a lack of cameras covering where police mischief is possible. You know where they could have used a camera earlier, in the back of the police van, especially after settling lawsuits. A private company would have installed cameras at the insistence of their insurer.