Yeah, pretty funny about that. An expert says, "guns are bad, Mkay" and we can use logic and reason to argue against it.
But an expert says, "All guns are always loaded." and our argument consist of dredging up a dozen You Tubers that parrot him.
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Rule Number One: All Guns are always loaded
- Thread starter SubicWarrior1988
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Yeah, pretty funny about that. An expert says, "guns are bad, Mkay" and we can use logic and reason to argue against it.
But an expert says, "All guns are always loaded." and our argument consist of dredging up a dozen You Tubers that parrot him.
There's nothing to defend, it's been laid out in several videos and explained as a mindset. The premise has been in place and practiced for over 100 years. People can either intellectually reconcile that, or not. I say adhere to the safety mindset that keeps you safe.
I know, I know, every excuse to not follow the established rules. Break it down, tear it up with silly semantics, whine about it all.
No way some old guy who was responsible for pretty much all modern day firearms instruction practices could still be right in a sea of geniuses like us.
Question safety, it's "big boy rules."
Really, if you get anything even remotely approaching an answer to my question, please post it here where I'll see it. Thanks.
Really, if you get anything even remotely approaching an answer to my question, please post it here where I'll see it. Thanks.
Why would I entertain your silly attempt at circumventing established firearms safety handling rules? You give excuse to the gullible who believe that the rules don't apply to them or that there are no rules at all.
I'm not questioning anyone's safety or safe gun handling practices, I'm shredding the ALL GUNS ARE ALWAYS LOADED fallacy and it's many variants, trying to find anyone able to present a cogent argument for its inclusion as a safe gun handling rule.
1. Just about every video you linked has different interpretation ranging from Hunky McGlock's "we checked with our pinky, so it's safe" to CCW Squarejaw's defense of the original version and explaining it as "a mindset". The fact that these experts you've trotted out can't even get on the same page speaks volumes.
2. Am I missing something? Over 100 years?
I understand the premise, "eez gon, eez dangerous". I just don't understand the need to explain it with a logical fallacy. Really it's as simple as listing the Three Rules an precede or follow it up with the reinforcement, "these are the rules, ALWAYS follow them regardless of whether you think the gun is unloaded or not." Isn't that far easier to convey and understand than explaining a contrived mindset?
1. Just about every video you linked has different interpretation ranging from Hunky McGlock's "we checked with our pinky, so it's safe" to CCW Squarejaw's defense of the original version and explaining it as "a mindset". The fact that these experts you've trotted out can't even get on the same page speaks volumes.
2. Am I missing something? Over 100 years?
I understand the premise, "eez gon, eez dangerous". I just don't understand the need to explain it with a logical fallacy. Really it's as simple as listing the Three Rules an precede or follow it up with the reinforcement, "these are the rules, ALWAYS follow them regardless of whether you think the gun is unloaded or not." Isn't that far easier to convey and understand than explaining a contrived mindset?
You cannot intellectually reconcile the mindset, the 3 rules are perfect for you. See how easy that is?
If the 4 rules compromise gun safety, I ask that you give me one single example of someone following the 4 rules of gun safety that accidentally shot themselves or another person.
Yes over 100 years, as much as you believe Jeff Cooper invented the concept, you would be wrong.
Ira L. Revees, in his 1913 book The A B C of Rifle, Revolver and Pistol Shooting,[SUP][4][/SUP] stated the following:
- "The Accident-Proof Rule":
- "the companion rule of the one just given":
- And he went on to say:
Why would I entertain your silly attempt at circumventing established firearms safety handling rules? You give excuse to the gullible who believe that the rules don't apply to them or that there are no rules at all.
This makes no sense at all. Seriously, From the first sentence I can infer, "We've always done it this way, so don't critique it!" From the second sentence I can infer that you find fault with the NRA's Three Rules.
Is this a correct interpretation?
Perhaps you care to reframe this argument into a discussion of what is wrong with only three rules? I doubt you'll have any better luck at winning that one.
So that the students I instruct won't have to argue with the students you instruct for generations to come. If you could correct the unsafe gun handling I teach, many will benefit. Do it for them.
You give excuse to the gullible who believe that the rules don't apply to them or that there are no rules at all.
Please explain how. What excuse do I afford them to handle guns unsafely? Many are gullible when it comes to safe gun handling, they'll adopt most anything I tell them, so I want to make sure I get this right.
Please be specific here. If you can sway me to adopt ALL GUNS ARE ALWAYS LOADED it will have a huge impact far beyond INGO. I'm very persuasive.
Well, I guess I was missing something!
Nevertheless, I stand by the assertion that it is adherents to the Four Rules may, in their own mind, determine that a gun is unloaded. Now they have disproved Rule #1. Following this, they may make further folly and regard rules #2,#3,#4 as moot by the mere fact that the gun is unloaded.
Tragedy Ensues.
How many times have we heard "I thought it was unloaded?". It's safe to say a great number of those persons were adherents to the Four Rules.
I hear you know retorting, "But wait! They didn't truly follow the four rules!"
I will concede on that point - they didn't truly obey. Then what good is the Four Rules if those that profess to abide by them will often throw them to wayside? Oh, would it be far better if there are only Three Rules yet they are followed more diligently.
In my experience, folks who argue the Four Rules of Firearms Safety often have trouble following any rules. Always some excuse...
If an ad hominem attack is all you have to stand on...
You're proposing a straw man. Only the first is discredited. By lumping in the actual safe gun handling rules which follow as an unbreakable set, you are attempting to give undue relevance to the odd one at the top.
Our contention is that the 3 without the first are sufficient. One could add any number of lesser or completely bogus "rules" to those 3 and people would still be safe by practicing those 3.
In my experience, folks who argue the Four Rules of Firearms Safety often have trouble following any rules. Always some excuse...
Again, if you get anything even remotely approaching an answer to my question, please post it here where I'll see it. Thanks.
I actually agree with you on some points and understand where you're coming from. We are trying to accomplish the same thing, increased safety and awareness, which is why i always tell people to adopt and practice the mindset that works for them. The 4 rules make sense to me, I'm old school, I don't care about the logical fallacy because I don't spend brain power thinking about the semantics of the words, but rather the intent and how I apply them.
The NRA rules are fantastic, I love the simplicity. You will never hear me disparage the 3 rules.
Thanks for the dialogue, I do think this is an important conversation.
Again, if you get anything even remotely approaching an answer to my question, please post it here where I'll see it. Thanks.
I already made it clear, thank you.
Why would I entertain your silly attempt at circumventing established firearms safety handling rules? You give excuse to the gullible who believe that the rules don't apply to them or that there are no rules at all.
In my experience, folks who argue the Four Rules of Firearms Safety often have trouble following any rules. Always some excuse...
Another great post. We then agree that following the 4 safety rules do not break the NRA 3 rules, keeping adherents of both mindsets safety conscience.
Treating all guns as if they are loaded prompts me to safety check every single firearm that i handle.
And I too understand your points.
Most of my brain power goes to computer programming, ergo, logic is king. I can't program a mindset, but I can program strictly logical rules. So, in my world Rule #1 is a stumbling point. I'd rather provide Tommy Twentytwo and Suzy Sixgun with a set of rules that require no mindest, only three simple rules to obey. Obey the rules; don't interpret, don't decide when it's OK to break Rule #1.
Agreed. My issue is with the unnecessary and logically invalid stumbling point at the top of Cooper's set.
If you've turned it into a personal reminder to do something in a safer manner, great!
Unfortunately, too many apply it as a mental qualifier to dismiss anything which follows after they believe they've adequately completed a safety check.
None of the others seem nearly as debatable, maybe that's why they are good rules for safe gun handling.
If you've turned it into a personal reminder to do something in a safer manner, great!
Unfortunately, too many apply it as a mental qualifier to dismiss anything which follows after they believe they've adequately completed a safety check.
None of the others seem nearly as debatable, maybe that's why they are good rules for safe gun handling.
In my experience, folks who argue the Four Rules of Firearms Safety often have trouble following any rules. Always some excuse...
Maybe they don't follow the 4 rules because there are only truly 3. Why have 4 rules when 3 is sufficient to avoid negligible harm? I have been to many shoots where children between the ages of 5-17 have safely handled firearms following 3 simple rules. Accidents happen when people violate one of those 3. Assumption is the mother of all **** ups. As I mentioned earlier, a gun with the magazine out, chamber cleared and slide locked is not loaded. It is now possible for it to hurt me if I drop it on my toes, but it will never fire a bullet at me in this condition. Do you agree?
