The incident occurred a week and a half ago. There hasn’t even been time to complete an investigation and the attorney has already stated his intent to file suit. Retaining an attorney early on is one thing because the family would want to make sure evidence is preserved, etc. However, announcing a suit at this stage makes it clear that they are not trying to determine how this happened, but are looking at it as their winning lottery ticket.
A family’s daughter is killed because an idiot police officer is unable to deal with the responsibilities of having a gun and you disgusting vermin say they are looking at it as their winning lottery ticket. There is truly something wrong with you when you have become so jaded that this is your take on the world.
And who cares what the lawyer says; that in no way indicitive of the pain the family is going through. Try to buy some compassion, you’ve certainly lost any you ever had.
So that you will know J.S., this is an occupational hazard of claims adjusters. If B.O. gets re-elected, I think we should all claim Total Emotional Disability and retire while there’s still time. Sounds like we’ll have your vote.
Police officers, like doctors, are never really “off duty”. Since they’re trained professionals they can respond to situations as needed depsite the fact they aren’t “on the clock”. This case is strange and we don’t know enough about it. Even with a “soft” holster, an automatic weapon is pointing forward or down. Someone would have to release the safety, turn the weapon around so it was pointing backwards, and pull the trigger. Doesn’t make sense does it?
My heart goes out to the family of Ms. Miller. I agree a full investigation must be done. I am stunned that anyone would even ask why an off duty police officer needs to carry a gun. That question shows an incredible lack of understanding the life of a police officer and the constant danger he or she is in. Why at a party at his own house? Because he, or she, has no idea of who may be brought by an invited person. I agree an investigation must be done by an outside agency. There may be negligence. It may be a horrible accident without negligent fault.
Insguy: Many jurisdictions require that police officers carry at all times. Even if they don’t, that he doesn’t ‘need’ to carry a gun doesn’t mean he *should* not.
Nothing in the article indicates negligence on his part.
Bartleby, you say nothing indicates negligence. A woman was killed with the gun. Either it’s intentional (unlikely) or the officer was negligent. There is no third option.
Insguy, he is a trained professional that may be required to carry a gun when off duty, and besides, why shouldn’t he carry it?
And J.S. is correct: he had possession/control of his firearm and it discharged killing someone. there is negligence there without a doubt.
but the family may be giving away 30-40% of their insurance claim to some bottom feeder when they may not need to. they should wait for the offer, then they can retain a lawyer if they don’t like it.
There is a whole lot of speculation here; without a whole lot of facts. First, without any indication of what model weapon he was carrying, what type of holster he had it in, and exactly where on his waist it was being carried, it is way too early to tell what the cause of the misfire was; and that assumes that this even happened the way it is being related in the press. And sorry, J.S., but the only two options are not just intentional act or officer negligence. It is just as possible, until we have the facts, that the incident was caused by a holster malfunction or a weapon malfunction; or, for all we know, an accidental action by the victim herself.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
The incident occurred a week and a half ago. There hasn’t even been time to complete an investigation and the attorney has already stated his intent to file suit. Retaining an attorney early on is one thing because the family would want to make sure evidence is preserved, etc. However, announcing a suit at this stage makes it clear that they are not trying to determine how this happened, but are looking at it as their winning lottery ticket.
I think you hit it right on the head.
A family’s daughter is killed because an idiot police officer is unable to deal with the responsibilities of having a gun and you disgusting vermin say they are looking at it as their winning lottery ticket. There is truly something wrong with you when you have become so jaded that this is your take on the world.
And who cares what the lawyer says; that in no way indicitive of the pain the family is going through. Try to buy some compassion, you’ve certainly lost any you ever had.
So that you will know J.S., this is an occupational hazard of claims adjusters. If B.O. gets re-elected, I think we should all claim Total Emotional Disability and retire while there’s still time. Sounds like we’ll have your vote.
Why does an off-duty police officer need to carry a gun? Especially while attending at a party?
Police officers, like doctors, are never really “off duty”. Since they’re trained professionals they can respond to situations as needed depsite the fact they aren’t “on the clock”. This case is strange and we don’t know enough about it. Even with a “soft” holster, an automatic weapon is pointing forward or down. Someone would have to release the safety, turn the weapon around so it was pointing backwards, and pull the trigger. Doesn’t make sense does it?
My heart goes out to the family of Ms. Miller. I agree a full investigation must be done. I am stunned that anyone would even ask why an off duty police officer needs to carry a gun. That question shows an incredible lack of understanding the life of a police officer and the constant danger he or she is in. Why at a party at his own house? Because he, or she, has no idea of who may be brought by an invited person. I agree an investigation must be done by an outside agency. There may be negligence. It may be a horrible accident without negligent fault.
Insguy: Many jurisdictions require that police officers carry at all times. Even if they don’t, that he doesn’t ‘need’ to carry a gun doesn’t mean he *should* not.
Nothing in the article indicates negligence on his part.
Bartleby, you say nothing indicates negligence. A woman was killed with the gun. Either it’s intentional (unlikely) or the officer was negligent. There is no third option.
Insguy, he is a trained professional that may be required to carry a gun when off duty, and besides, why shouldn’t he carry it?
And J.S. is correct: he had possession/control of his firearm and it discharged killing someone. there is negligence there without a doubt.
but the family may be giving away 30-40% of their insurance claim to some bottom feeder when they may not need to. they should wait for the offer, then they can retain a lawyer if they don’t like it.
There is a whole lot of speculation here; without a whole lot of facts. First, without any indication of what model weapon he was carrying, what type of holster he had it in, and exactly where on his waist it was being carried, it is way too early to tell what the cause of the misfire was; and that assumes that this even happened the way it is being related in the press. And sorry, J.S., but the only two options are not just intentional act or officer negligence. It is just as possible, until we have the facts, that the incident was caused by a holster malfunction or a weapon malfunction; or, for all we know, an accidental action by the victim herself.