TexasCHLforum.com

TxRVer wrote:They need to talk to the kid to find out his intent? Give me a break.

If it had been any other State besides CA (and maybe NJ, MD, NY, etc). I would have said that some gun safety training could have prevented this situation. But we all know that there is no way ever that CA schools would allow any sort of a gun safety course. Our 9 yr old granddaughter understands very well that no one ever should put their finger on the trigger of a gun unless it is on target and ready to fire. But for kids without that kind of background, a gun can be a curiosity. It could have been just an innocent reach to touch the gun by the child. In the 7-8 year old range, they want to touch everything. That is why many of the hands on exhibits at the museums are so popular with them.

Beiruty wrote:A duty holster should cover the trigger, no?

Police say because the gun was in a holster the accommodate the attached flashlight, the trigger was more accessible.

It didn't make sense to me either. What a flashlight and a trigger guard have to do with one another isn't clear.

Having been in classrooms with kids around that age, it isn't uncommon for them to want to get close to a "special" person that is brought in. If the officer's focus was other than what was directly around his gun, it would have been easy for one of the kids to slip up unnoticed and just reach in without warning.

The article talks about changing protocols. How about just wearing a holster with a trigger guard in such situations? I realize that mine is an IWB but there is no way for a child to have done the same to me.