The Dog Was Blamed First
When fellow deputies responded to a report of shots fired on October 2, former Monongalia County sheriff’s deputy Andrew Mounts reportedly gave them an unusual explanation: a friend’s dog caused an AR-15 rifle to fire. The round traveled through the ceiling and into the occupied apartment above. Three people were present there, and one juvenile was injured. The juvenile received medical evaluation and treatment at the scene. What began as a firearms accident quickly became a serious case because the discharged round entered another home where people were present.
Investigators Found a Different Account
The Monongalia County Sheriff’s Department said its investigation found that Mounts’ loaded, unsecured AR-15-style rifle discharged inside his apartment while its safety was disengaged. The projectile went through the ceiling and into the apartment above. Mounts later admitted that he had been handling the rifle when it discharged. He was charged with Wanton Endangerment Involving a Firearm. The charge is an allegation, not a conviction, but the department’s account directly contradicted the initial explanation involving the dog.
The Deputy Is No Longer Employed
Mounts was working as a Monongalia County deputy sheriff when the incident occurred, but the department said he is no longer employed there. The agency also said it remains committed to holding all personnel to high standards of conduct and accountability, both on duty and off duty. That statement places the incident in a broader public-trust context. Law enforcement agencies depend on their employees to follow safety rules and provide accurate accounts when something goes wrong, especially when another resident is injured.
Accidental Firearm Deaths Have Declined
CDC data cited in the report show that accidental deaths from firearms discharging declined by almost half, from 824 in 1999 to 450 in 2024. That long-term decline is significant, but national figures do not lessen the consequences of a single unsafe incident. In this case, a loaded and unsecured rifle discharged inside an apartment, sent a projectile into another occupied apartment, and injured a juvenile. The local outcome remains serious even as the broader trend moves in a better direction.
Why It Matters
This case matters because it brings firearm safety, personal accountability, and public trust into the same frame. The central issue is not only that a rifle discharged, but that it was loaded, unsecured, and handled in a home beneath another occupied apartment. A juvenile was injured, and other people were exposed to the danger. When a law enforcement employee is involved, the public expects careful conduct and a clear account of what happened. The department’s response shows why agencies must address conduct away from the job as well as conduct while on duty.
The story also shows why improving national safety figures cannot make individual negligence seem harmless. One unsecured weapon can affect people who had no role in handling it. The open questions are how the charge will proceed, what legal consequences may follow, and whether the incident prompts further scrutiny of safe firearm handling. The available account does not establish a final legal outcome, so the facts of the charge and the court process should remain separate from any conclusion about guilt.
Source: The Liberty Daily
