Functional Behavior Assessment of the Unintentional Discharge of Firearms in Law Enforcement

O’Neill (2018) reviewed police files and science papers about cops who fired their gun by accident.

He sorted the stories into six trigger groups: bumping into things, medical events, muscle twitches, routine tasks, sudden noises, and new tasks.

The paper is a roadmap, not an experiment. It tells trainers how to build lessons that cut misfires.

No shots were counted or graphed. Instead, the author gives a ready-made FBA checklist.

If trainers teach around the six antecedent classes, officers should trip the trigger less often.

Kunnavatana et al. (2013) and Capio et al. (2013) show the same logic works in schools and group homes. They train teachers and house managers to run trial-based FAs with brief BST and a booster. O’Neill simply moves the lens from kids to cops.

Bell et al. (2018) streamline FA for clients who show many problem forms. O’Neill mirrors the move: one tidy map now covers many firearm-slip topographies.

Anonymous (2018) builds a computer-friendly FBA ontology while O’Neill builds a trainer-friendly taxonomy. Both aim to make assessment language the same across teams, just with different tools.

You can borrow the six-class cheat sheet today. Plug each class into role-play drills, video reviews, or in-situ probes the same way you teach fire safety or CPR. The paper turns a deadly error into a teachable moment and gives behavior analysts a seat at the police-training table.