In September 2025, a moment of reckless informality between two Pasadena police officers — men trained to treat firearms with absolute discipline — ended with a bullet in a colleague's shoulder. What began as a playful quick-draw exchange beside a patrol vehicle became, in a fraction of a second, an accidental shooting that no amount of good intent could undo. The incident asks an enduring question about the gap between professional identity and private behavior: what happens when those entrusted with lethal tools forget, even briefly, what those tools are.
Pasadena officer shot by colleague in 'horseplay' incident with loaded firearms
One officer was shot in the left shoulder but recovered from injuries sustained in the accidental shooting.
One officer shot another during what was framed as casual behavior with loaded guns.
Mark
Why did it take months for the department to release this video? Was there an attempt to keep it quiet?
Mimi
The source doesn't say. We know the incident happened in September and the video came out later, but the timing of the release and the reasons behind it aren't explained in the reporting.
Luke
That's an important gap. We don't know if this was a routine disclosure, a response to a public records request, or something else entirely.
Mark
How serious were the officer's injuries? You said left shoulder—was this life-threatening?
Mimi
The chief stated the officer recovered, but we don't have details about the severity, hospitalization, or long-term effects. "Recovered" could mean anything from a minor wound to something more serious.
Luke
Right. We know the bullet hit the shoulder and the officer is okay now, but the actual medical picture is missing. That matters for understanding the real stakes.
Mark
What kind of disciplinary action was taken? Were officers fired, suspended, retrained?
Mimi
The chief said "disciplinary measures" were taken and that the administrative investigation was completed, but the specific consequences aren't detailed in this reporting.
Luke
That's a significant omission. Readers don't know if this was a written warning or termination. The vagueness actually raises questions about whether the discipline was proportional.
Mark
Is this kind of behavior common in police departments, or was this truly an outlier?
Mimi
The source doesn't provide that context. We only know what happened in Pasadena on that day.
Luke
And we should be honest about that. One incident doesn't tell us whether this reflects a broader culture problem or a one-time lapse by specific officers. The chief's language about "culture" suggests concern, but we're not given evidence of a pattern.
Il Polso
- Two officers turned loaded service weapons into props in a casual exchange, a lapse in judgment that department policy explicitly forbids.
- A gun discharged from inside a police vehicle, sending a bullet through the windshield and into a fellow officer's left shoulder — transforming horseplay into a medical emergency.
- Video footage released months after the September 7 incident made the sequence of events undeniable, forcing public accountability the department could not sidestep.
- Chief Gene Harris condemned the conduct as incompatible with departmental values and confirmed that an administrative investigation concluded with disciplinary action against those involved.
- A parallel criminal investigation and use-of-force review remained open at the time of the footage's release, leaving the full legal reckoning unresolved.
In September 2025, a moment of reckless informality between two Pasadena police officers — men trained to treat firearms with absolute discipline — ended with a bullet in a colleague's shoulder. What began as a playful quick-draw exchange beside a patrol vehicle became, in a fraction of a second, an accidental shooting that no amount of good intent could undo. The incident asks an enduring question about the gap between professional identity and private behavior: what happens when those entrusted with lethal tools forget, even briefly, what those tools are.
In September 2025, the Pasadena Police Department found itself releasing video evidence of something its own leadership described as entirely preventable. On September 7, two officers engaged in what Chief Gene Harris would later call dangerous, out-of-policy horseplay with loaded firearms — and one of them was shot.
The sequence captured on video is brief but consequential. A standing officer drew his weapon in a quick-draw gesture as a colleague's vehicle approached, pointing it at the car before re-holstering. The driver, apparently mirroring the moment, drew his own firearm from behind the wheel and pointed it back. His gun discharged. The bullet passed through his own windshield and struck the standing officer in the left shoulder.
The footage is unambiguous — a puff of smoke, a hole in the glass, and the immediate aftermath of a wound that should never have existed. The injured officer recovered, but the incident left a different kind of damage behind.
Chief Harris addressed the public with measured gravity, calling the conduct regretful and inconsistent with the department's values and service commitments. He confirmed that an administrative investigation had been completed and that disciplinary measures had been taken. A criminal investigation and a separate force review were still pending at the time the video was released, meaning the full accounting remained ongoing.
The episode endures as a precise illustration of how quickly the boundary between casual and catastrophic can dissolve when loaded weapons are treated as anything other than what they are.
In September 2025, the Pasadena Police Department released video documentation of an incident that should never have happened—one officer shooting another during what department leadership later described as dangerous horseplay with loaded firearms. The shooting occurred on September 7, and the release of the footage months later prompted Chief Gene Harris to publicly characterize the event as "a suspected accidental officer-involved shooting" that "resulted from officers engaged in unsafe, and out-of-policy horseplay involving loaded firearms."
The video tells a specific story of escalating risk. An officer standing beside a police vehicle drew his weapon as a colleague's car approached, pointing the gun at the vehicle in what the chief described as a "quick draw fashion." After a few seconds, the standing officer re-holstered the weapon. But the moment created a dangerous precedent. The driver, now inside the approaching vehicle, drew his own firearm from the driver's seat and pointed it at the standing officer—mirroring the gesture that had just been made at him. What followed was a split second of consequence: the driver's gun discharged. The bullet pierced the windshield of his own police vehicle and struck the standing officer in the left shoulder.
The footage captures the moment of impact—a visible puff of smoke, the hole in the glass, and the immediate reaction of the officer who had just been shot. It is the kind of incident that exists in the gap between intent and outcome, between what officers thought was acceptable behavior and what actually occurred when loaded weapons became props in a moment of poor judgment.
Chief Harris made clear that the injured officer recovered from the wound. He also made clear that the department viewed the conduct as fundamentally at odds with its values. In a statement, he noted that "this regretful conduct is not consistent with the expectations and service commitments of this department. And appropriate actions will be taken to ensure our culture reflects appropriate conduct, values, and service to this community." The administrative investigation was completed, and disciplinary measures were imposed on the officers involved.
The chief acknowledged that understanding of the incident might deepen as additional evidence was collected and reviewed. A criminal investigation and a separate force review remained pending at the time of the video release. What was certain was that two officers with loaded weapons had engaged in behavior that violated department policy, and that one of them had been shot as a result. The incident stands as a stark reminder of how quickly unsafe handling of firearms—even in moments framed as casual or joking—can produce real injury.
Citazioni salienti
This regretful conduct is not consistent with the expectations and service commitments of this department.— Chief Gene Harris, Pasadena Police Department
Vuoi la storia completa?
Leggi l'originale su Fox News ↗
Politics & Governance