|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
by Guy Page
Thursday, a gun went off at the Derby post office after it was dropped by its owner. State police say a man was removing his firearm before entering, to comply with federal regulations prohibiting carrying firearms in federal buildings.
State police sat that at 3:14 PM June 6, the Vermont State Police Derby Barracks received a report of an accidental discharge of a firearm that occurred at the post office. Troopers arrived on the scene and identified the male as Alex Carter, 68 of Morgan.
Investigation revealed Carter was removing his firearm prior to entering the post office. During the course of removing the firearm, he dropped it onto the ground, where a round was discharged into the ground. There are no reported injuries, police say.
Federal law says “no person while on postal property may carry firearms, other dangerous or deadly weapons, or explosives, either openly or concealed.” A decision by a Florida judge, purported to overturn the law, does not actually do so, post office authorities say, and the policy remains in effect.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Police Reports
People who carry…please be aware that any public misstep you make is fodder for those who hate guns. If your handgun fires when dropped, you may want to reconsider your choice of firearm.
Some more advice:
If you drop your firearm often then please consider more training… For yours and everyone’s training.
With that said accidents/mistakes happen all the time. Then again if he wasn’t denied his 2nd amendment right given to him by God then maybe he wouldn’t have dropped it or even touched it in the first place.
I suggest the Walther PPK/S. The safety blocks the firing pin when applied.
Highly unlikely. Modern pistols are drop safe. Technically you can’t even have one in the post office parking lot, but some court cases are saying it’s not a valid restriction.
This should prompt a free community firearm safety practice course for the town. If for some reason your carry firearm isn’t actually drop safe, keep it in the holster when you remove it. Schools should also have mandatory firearm safety training for every age group. No excuse.
Of course the gun and power fetish politicians will use this as an excuse for some sort of law for folks that didn’t commit this act of poor safe handling. If you aren’t safe with your firearm, you should be sanctioned for corrective action. I’m all for targeting specific offenders, but you know that’s now how the overloads work their magic.
Edit. Ignore that holster suggestion, just buy a modern firearm.
…or just carry concealed, and maintain that it’s nobody’s business/dont ask, dont tell. So far, they dont have metal detectors at the entrance to post offices.
Some older Sig-Sauer P320’s had a problem with accidental discharge when dropped at a specific angle, as they have no safeties. They have a modification where a lighter trigger is installed, thus reducing inertia. Newer models are already retrofitted.
I am sure Rich is a “law and order guy”. The problem is that he only wants to obey laws he agrees with.
the right to bear arms is guaranteed by the Second Amendment.
Guns are not toys. A mandatory safety course for anyone wanting to “carry” in public makes perfect sense.
“A mandatory safety course” should be required for anyone wanting to post on the daily chronicle.
If the government wants gun safety education, their role would be to introduce it in the school systems for everyone. Singling out people that choose to exercise their rights and have them beg for permissions is something that craphole countries do, not in America where power is to the people. Free people don’t ask for permission. Government doesn’t have this authority.
John, any time that the government can set the criteria or regulations for excersizing a constitutional right the right is severely diminished. For example, the required “safety course” could be scheduled at times that would make it difficult for many people to attend, the cost for the course could be set above what most people could easily afford, or, like during Covid, the courses could be canceled indefinitely “for our own good”. However, the most important reason that safety course should not be required is because the 2nd Amendment is a constitutional right which the government has no right to interfere with. Period. Mr. Carter was obviously aware of the rules and was obeying them. I don’t believe any safety course could prevent an accident like dropping a firearm. More importantly, people entering federal buildings should not be denied their 2nd Amendment right.
Since, as you acknowledge that we are talking about a right guaranteed by the Constitution, I see no need for an educational requirement. I am fine with most of the federal laws establishing who can be prohibited from possessing/buying/selling.
That being said, if one’s status as a convicted felon or drug addict precludes you from bearing arms, it also ought to preclude you from voting. The pen is mightier than the sword.
John: The Constitution doesn’t guarantee anyone anything. It’s a list of things the government isn’t supposed to do. So, if a rogue (U.S.) government decides it doesn’t want to abide by the Constitution…then what. Take them to court?
John, the rights established in the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments of the constitution do not allow the government to mandate anything. They establish what the government can’t do to the people to exercise those rights that precluded government, as in the God given right to protect yourself, your family and your property.
There was a lot of government push to mandate the people to trust the government to force with their words, an untested Gene-therapeutic non-vaccine that the government labeled a vaccine. The mandate would have been totally unconstitutional. Yet, in the end some 75 to 80% of the people trusted the government. During the 20th century, 100 million people were killed worldwide by their own governments. As for the covid era non-vaccine so-called vaccine the story is not over. We have been given rights on our founding documents for a reason. That reason is well documented in the history of time. Words are actually more dangerous than any firearm when they are used to coerce or force compliance or mandates.
I know a lot of people feel that it is necessary to carry a chambered round in their weapon. As a personal choice and for safety, I choose not to. I believe I can draw and chamber a round and fire it fast enough, and make sure of my target. If not, I probably would be incapacitated anyway. But I do not want to hurt an innocent.
That’s good advice…an unchambered weapon is a “second safety, even if two hands are required to make it operable. Most police routinely carry chambered weapons, even Glocks which do not have a manually-operated “safety”. Police are highly trained and may need to deploy their weapon on a second’s notice, so they have a good excuse for keeping their firearm at the ready.
Another advantage of an unchambered firearm is in the case where a miscreant human is presenting a threat, just the sound or visual of a slide being racked is an excellent deterrent, without firing a shot or even pointing.
Skippy, here’s something for you to think about. During my intensive NRA training to become a certified firearms instructor we learned the following. A person with a knife 20 feet away from you with a holstered firearm, can reach and stab you before you can get your gun out of the holster. You may be fast but you’re not fast enough. Modern firearms are not dangerous to carry with a chambered round in a holster. A defensive firearm is no better than a paper weight unless it is ready to deploy. The risk is yours but it’s not good advice. Safety training will save your life and knowing the mechanical function of your firearm. Get a holster made for the particular gun and carry it in the same position on your body, practice getting it out of the holster with it unloaded. Just a suggestion, do it your way if you wish.
Rich, with all due respect, I don’t agree. Someone intent on hurting or killing you has the upper hand and will not wait to hear the sound of a slide chambering a round. What if one of your hands is injured and can’t be used? There are too many variables in an adrenalin filled instance. If this is what you want, carry a revolver. Modern revolvers have hammer block safeties and a long trigger pull. Accidental discharge with a modern revolver is almost impossible, the trigger has to be pulled all the way to the rear for it to release the safety bar before the hammer can strike the firing pin.
Terrible advise. You need a minimum standard of 1.5 seconds draw to first hit, and that is when the bad guy isn’t paying attention to you and shows you his ear/shoulder, which you might not get. You should know your draw to first shot times, and you should already know all your go signals. If you are lucky enough for the bad guy to turn his back to you, you need a 2 second draw to first hit with a full grip. If the bad guy is just looking away with the gun pointed down, but still facing your direction, that’s about 1 second draw to first hit. With about 15 minutes of practice a week you can easily achieve 1 second. You shouldn’t “believe” how fast you are, you need to know. A gun isn’t a good luck charm.
Get training folks and always keep one in the chamber. Carry a field tested and trusted modern firearm, and test it for safety. Keep it on your person with a PROPER holster. I highly doubt this guy dropped his firearm, he probably touched the trigger. There are some known issues with some guns where this can happen, so make sure it’s not one you are carrying, like the early model of the P320.
Mandatory safety course? No one even pays any attention to being mandated to use their given name or to keep from name-calling others like 6th graders in a schoolyard. Maybe start with those.
I see no need for a gun safety course for anyone who wants to keep a gun their home. The only ones in danger are loved ones and the gun owner.
If you wish to take the gun into public places, then you should be qualified in its use. I would think that all responsible gun owners would oppose irresponsible and untrained individuals to carry a gun in public.
If you served in the military, you would know that guns are not issued to military personnel until AFTER they have demonstrated competency.
If you wish to live in a country were the power is in the hands of the people, you should support self responsibility for your actions. The United States of America recognizes the RIGHT of the PEOPLE to protect their person and property. RIGHTS don’t require a safety training course. The government and the people should recognize this as FACT, and respond accordingly by providing gun safety to EVERYONE.
If an individual does something inappropriate with an object, THEN the government can take corrective action to the offending INDIVIDUAL. The government has NO AUTHORITY to make non offending individuals to do anything to FREELY exercise their rights.
If you don’t understand this, and you refuse to accept it, you are an enemy of human rights.
I see no need for a 1st amendment safety course for anyone who wants to use their first amendment at home. The only ones in danger are loved ones and the first amendment user.
If you wish to take your first amendment into public places, then you should be qualified in its use. I would think that all responsible first amendment users would oppose irresponsible and untrained individuals to use their first amendment in public.
If you served in the military, you would know that first amendment rights are not issued to military journalists and reporters until AFTER they have demonstrated competency.
I don’t worry about my firearm going off anywhere because I don’t take it out unless I intend to use it. If the Post Office didn’t infringe on this person’s constitutional right with an unconstitutional rule this incident never would have happened. A gun-free zone became a gun accident zone. I am happy no one got hurt.
THE 2nd AMENDMENT DOES NOT GRANT US THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS. THE 2nd AMENDMENT PROHIBITS THE GOVERNMENT FROM INFRINGING ON OUR RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS – PERIOD! THEREFORE, ALL GUN CONTROL UNDER THE CONSTITUTION IS ILLEGAL!
Regarding equating the 1st Amendment and the Second Amendment: Words don’t kill people. Guns in the hands of irresponsible and incompetent individuals do.
Re: ‘Words don’t kill people. Guns in the hands of irresponsible and incompetent individuals do.’
Not to mention the drugs coming across the border from China killing 100,000 people a year in the U.S., or the increased suicide rates for young people confused by our public-school dysphoria (suicides for 18-24 year-olds doubled last year in Vermont from the previous 3-year average), or the people who followed the push for Covid vaccines on behalf of ‘big pharma’ profits while being misinformed about Ivermectin, Zinc, and Hydroxychloroquine (still counting this cohort). And how many people have died in Vermont from car accidents that were drug or alcohol related?
The above remark implies that the only people being killed today are those at the hands of irresponsible and incompetent gun owners. How about some proportionality.
Rights are Rights. You hate human rights and are a hysteric. We get it, have fun with that. You disregard the rule of law. Governments disregarding human rights and asserting authority where they have none, are responsible for more human deaths than anything else in the history of humanity.
Interesting how whenever the irrational position some folks have about guns is noted, they proceed to rant about all of the other ills in society.
By the way, drugs coming across the border are transported by the hundreds of commercial and private vehicles crossing daily, not by young mothers arriving at the border carrying their young children.
Interesting indeed. Which irrational position are you referencing – that only guns in the hands of irresponsible and incompetent individuals kill people, or that drug trafficking across the border isn’t an issue because young mothers carrying their young children don’t carry the drugs?
“Did you take your 1st amendment compliance test before typing that message? I noticed you didn’t post your latest hate speech, dangerous speech, anti-threatening speech, anti-fire in a crowded room training, and anti-use messages to facilitate crimes that cause human death compliance certificate’s. ”
“If you don’t provide this to us immediately, you will have a warrant out for your arrest, where men with guns will come to your house in the middle of the night and shoot your dogs, and terrorize your family. If you are in the middle of sleeping and move in a threatening manner in front of the agents, you might be shot. ”
” We all know people have abused free speech to get other people killed. Without your continued cooperation, you will no longer be allowed to practice your free speech rights. ”
” Sincerely, DSCA Dangerous Speech Compliance Agency “