Posted on 03/02/2011 9:21:03 AM PST by ArrogantBustard
Guns are dangerous tools. They can save lives and they can destroy them. When you take on the responsibility to handle a firearm, you must take it seriously and you must educate yourself, on all that it takes to be a safe and responsible gun owner. You may be surprised to learn that there are only four basic golden rules to gun safety. If you follow these rules—at all times—you will be safe and so will the people around you. Please realize that any gun owner who's foolish enough to disobey these golden rules, by negligence or stupidity, makes us all look bad. If you know someone who's new to firearm ownership, or if you know an "expert" who thinks he or she no longer needs to follow these rules, please send them this link. I hate to sound melodramatic, but it will probably save lives.
The four golden rules were given to us by the late Col. Jeff Cooper. To many, as to me, Mr. Cooper is the father of the modern pistol craft. If you take the time to read his books (e.g. To Ride, Shoot Straight and Speak the Truth) , you'll find that he is much more than that but, in this context, we'll look at the knowledge he condensed and packaged for us.
The four golden rules to firearm safety:
1. All guns are always loaded.
2. Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy.
3. Keep your finger off the trigger till your sights are on the target.
4. Identify your target, and what is behind it. Never shoot at shadows and/or noises.
(Excerpt) Read more at associatedcontent.com ...
I told you to bring proof, not blather.
the wording on 1 is poor, 2 and 4 are redundant.
treat every gun with the the respect and care due a loaded gun.
ensuring that a gun is unloaded does not absolve you from keeping your gun from pointing at anything you don’t want to shoot, and that you keep your booger hook off the trigger until you’re ready to drop the hammer.
5. Always point firearm at the nearest liberal whenever unloading or cleaning it.
There's some validity to that ... if you don't know what it is, how can you decide whether or not you're willing to destroy it?
That's why you need two gallons of water ...;'}
Ayoob broke his strong(right) hand Cooper was an arrogant blowhard. But his acolytes still worship at his altar. The funniest story I have heard about cooper
was when Masaad Ayoob was challenged to
compete in a pistol match by cooper.
and competed and outscored cooper
in the pistol match with his weak hand !!.
I told you to bring proof, not blather.
Insulting this or that supposed firearms expert is no skin off my nose ... it just reveals your character.
If you're actually able to show any proof of your claims about "unsafe safety rules", be sure to ping me.
Otherwise, I have no further interest in you whatsoever.
nras attempt to dumb down the rules for use plebes leads to this crap...
how does one carry for defense with an un-loaded weapon ??? of course 'use' could be defined as carrying in that sense, BUT this #3 is easy to use as 'i thought it was unloaded, rather than demanding the resepct of 'all firearms are always [considered] loaded'...
i guess im just a stickler for demanding responsibility in the fact that there are no 'accidents' because someone thought that a gun was unloaded and therefore safe...unless its broken down into component pieces on a bench, or the mag is visibly removed and action tied open...my .02...
Joe, thanks for the gun facts link!
Be Ever Vigilant!
the other rules basically are the same items, only the cooper version stresses the fatality of playing fast and loose with em, whereas the nra version simply deems a violation to be an 'oopsie'...
lotsa dead people that were 'accidently' shot with unloaded guns...and yes there are also plenty that have been dead from negligent discharges of loaded ones as well...
to me, small distinction, big difference...
I agree, even though I carry, under a piece of clothing. (CC means CC)
Because they are UNSAFE !!!
U - I've been following your antics through several threads now. AB has asked multiple times for proof for your statements and all you come back with is stupid "yo-mamma" like quips. They're not as witty as you seem to believe, and without proof you're just chewing up bandwidth that could be better spent as white space on a blank page.
You put forward a factual proposition that (1) the NRA used Cooper's rules in the past, (2) ND's did not decrease after implementation of those rules (a meaningless statement without knowing what rules existed beforehand), (3) NDs did decrease after implementation of the new NRA rules, and (4) by implication the decrease was due to the implementation of the new NRA rules rather than some outside cause. You have also put forward the legal proposition that promotion of the Cooper rules exposes one to liability because those rules are unsafe.
Taking the last one first, leave the lawyering to lawyers because you clearly have no clue. In any negligence action the standard of care will be reasonableness based upon accepted standards of care within the particular trade or industry. Given that the Cooper rules are widely accepted as safe and valid expressions of the general concept of "don't shoot yourself or anyone else without intending to do so", I am confident that no credible expert would be willing to go on record at trial stating that the Cooper rules are not a reasonable standard of care.
As for your general factual misrepresentations, your conclusion that NRA dropped the Cooper rules because they were measurably unsafe is brand new to me. The story I've heard is that the NRA developed its own rules as a matter of internal politics to distance itself from Cooper's gunsight operation. I have never seen anything suggesting that the NRA's formulation of the exact same concepts are any more or less safe than the Cooper rules. Well, except for gun counter hangers who have too much time on their hands but that's another matter. Is that where you got your ideas? 'Cause you can hear pretty much everything at a gun counter.
Last, you've made empirically verifiable statements regarding comparable ND rates under persons trained under two sets of rules. If you're going to do that you need to have real data to back it up. Anecdotes or even your own internal subjective suppositions just won't cut it. Without that, your annoying font is just a meaningless collection of unfounded personal beliefs, and I applaud AB for calling you on it. Repeatedly.
And yes, my CC piece would fall into the category of underwear.
I make an assertion with experience as a
certified NRA trainer of trainers,
and a blowhard makes an assertion,
who you gona believe ?
Lol, true, don't leave home with out it.
My family loves to watch “Top Shot”, the other day they had this contest where they had to run up hill and shoot at various targets, one of the guys was running with the barrel of his M1 pointing straight at the ground, it could have easily dug into the dirt and clogged the barrel, I winced and told my kids that was not correct. They said “We know dad !!” and they did because of the excellent Hunters Ed class the 4H program offers.
BOTH
Dad use to tell me there is no such thing as an unloaded gun...
but I do believe the late great Mr. Cooper appreciated the fact that a gun should be carried and it should be carried loaded...
Guns in active use are obviously loaded.
The point of number 3 is simply to ensure guns that aren't in active use are not loaded. "Use" can be defined broadly - a loaded condition one 1911 left on the kitchen counter for "home defense" - use- might be fine in one household and a hazard in another. Number 3 demands you make the assessment and act accordingly to reduce the potential for AD/ND.
It is NOT a directive to load your gun at point of use.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.