I want to meet this man, and he's right "up the hill". How do I do that?
Use the force.
I want to meet this man, and he's right "up the hill". How do I do that?
If I see you making suggestions which take bad mantras and make them even more dangerous, I'm also free to tell you. I really don't care what wording suits you, but I do care what is passed on to others who don't know any better than to adopt whatever they are told or read. You put it out there so it was fair game to poke holes in for the other readers.
Ahh, different underlying opinions might entail more than just semantics, right? So possibly not the silliest recurring argument to be found on INGO.
If you don't care, it don't matter, right? It's not like people die due to inadequately comprehending the need or methods to handle guns safely. That's not something worthy of discussing on a gun owner's forum because we all do it however it suits us, right?
Screw the newbie who doesn't know good advice from bad, and those who teach others without having ever pondered or critically considered how or what they were taught before regurgitating it rotely on down the line.
Point it out, please, so we can get back to a topic that matters to you.
All right, you like to argue over silly minutia. I can't get back to sleep, so what the ****. Let's argue over silly minutia.
What makes it a silly argument is that you're trying to make into something more important than it is. That's my opinion. Every thread that casually mentions rule #1, you or one of the other zealots divert the topic to preach the folly of rule #1. I'll back off a little bit though. I think I said it was the silliest. It does come in a short second in silliness to the vaccine debates.
Do you honestly think Cooper is responsible for ND's? Do you honestly think that not telling noobs that rule will magically reduce accidental shootings? I think it's fine to tell noobs that all guns are always loaded. I give people credit enough for figuring out what that means. And, if you'd rather, I also think it's fine to not tell them rule #1. Because either way, it doesn't matter. It's not going to ruin them whichever set of rules you teach. People have "accidents" for all kinds of reasons that distill into some form of negligence. So how about that? Maybe we should just make rule #1, "don't be negligent." Would that help? No.
What's the common thing everyone says after they've had a ND? "I didn't know it was loaded." Why do they say that? Was that really why they fired the gun unexpectedly? No. That's just an excuse covering for negligence.
And no. I don't care about this silly topic. But I'll tell you how you can get me to care more. Produce some data that definitively shows that people who've been taught Cooper's rule #1 have more ND's than not. Show me that data and I promise I'll care more.
So, there is no data that show a direct correlation between rule #1 and ND? If there is, I would love to see it so that we can justify the many, many opinions that have been stated as facts in this thread about Rule #1 and it's association with ND.
Thanks in advance.
I have no idea. According to your anecdotal youtube references, everyone everywhere teaches and supports the Cooper method so I'd say that all NDs in the last 60 years or so are directly owned by him.
I'm doing my part to provide alternative data points but I don't know if they'll ever show up in ND reports since I teach them simply and concisely how to safely handle guns.
Yay!
Well, we didn't deflate the concealed-only crowd in one or two threads, sometimes you dig in for the long battle.
Fortunately, INGO open carriers are not all John Waynes giving up the element of surprise, flaunting their guns like they're in Texas, begging to be the first one shot in a convenience store robbery anymore (as ridiculously incorrect as those assertions were, they were once widespread and cropped up at least weekly.)
It took some whack-a-moling to purge that nonsense and that is what's going on here. Wherever it rears its head ...whack.
If my purpose is to share with people the knowledge, skills and attitude to safely and effectively use guns, why would I give them cryptic fallacies that are reworded by nearly everyone that adopts them, must be figured out on their own or via follow-up explanations and disclaimers, and contain portions which may or may not be rationally dismissed if they triple-check the chamber with their pinky?
If you never teach anyone else, I guess it wouldn't matter to you, but I want to give them the best instruction available, the best tools to succeed.
Who can blame them for trying that excuse? The popular method seems to be to teach people how to handle loaded guns that are always loaded. Then they are told to check to make sure the gun is unloaded. Well, how do you handle a gun that's unloaded? They don't exist; just handle it as if it's loaded. So, there is a way to handle unloaded guns, you're just not telling me, right?
NO! They're always loaded so handle them like they're loaded even when they're not.
But I checked the chamber with my pinky! I'm going to handle it like it's unloaded now. I think that means I can skip the loaded handgun rules that followed.
Ouch. No, those were just gun handling rules, not loaded gun handling rules. Sorry about all that stuff I started with that didn't make sense and couldn't be reconciled in your wee human brain - if you were Col. Cooper or a high-speed beard operator it would have made perfect sense to you (or so you would claim on the internets). Those rules that followed are just safe gun handling rules, we don't treat loaded and unloaded guns differently.
You wait for the data, I'll be out there changing the world, creating data and skewing it in our favor.
Give that man a ceegar!
Let's make it happen. Most others are unwilling to even make the attempt. Heck, they'll gladly give Bill a ceegar, selectively skipping rational bits like this which beg for more discussion:
...I'll further acknowledge that once it is proven to not be, if that's the reason you do the other (safe) things, you lose the reason to do them...
...but they don't want to directly discuss anything resembling a critique of the hallowed Santa Claus method of introducing people to safe gun handling with me.
Go figure. (Yeah, I know, everyone likes Bill.)
Perhaps you, me and Bill could get together for some spirited discussion over root beers sometime. No hurt feelings, I promise.
All that bluster. So little reason. Show me the data. Give me a reason. If changing the world is worth all your vim and angst, surely you can produce data proportionate in amplitude to all the bluster.
You teach your way. By all means. Please do that. It won't matter except that your students were taught *some* gun safety. The people who say, "I didn't know it was loaded" have heard it both ways, or even neither way. Prove me wrong. Show me the data.
If striking #1 from the list of rules is all that vital to actual gun safety, you'll change the world quicker if you have more than vim and angst as an argument. As I said, go out upon all the interwebz, produce ye some data, and then I'll join your marry crusade to nix #1. Until then, every time I see you guys threadjack onto this silly topic, I'm going to be there saying, "so what?"
On the OC/CC debate, I have pretty much the same response. So what? I don't care how you carry yours as long as you're not being an asshat about it. I expect reciprocity.
Arguing online is a guilty pleasure for me ...that and Kung Fu.
Let's make it happen. Most others are unwilling to even make the attempt. Heck, they'll gladly give Bill a ceegar, selectively skipping rational bits like this which beg for more discussion:
...but they don't want to directly discuss anything resembling a critique of the hallowed Santa Claus method of introducing people to safe gun handling with me.
Go figure. (Yeah, I know, everyone likes Bill.)
Perhaps you, me and Bill could get together for some spirited discussion over root beers sometime. No hurt feelings, I promise.
I don't need data to expose an unnecessary fallacy being included as a safe gun handling rule.
Your data may be out there but I am not going to gather it for you, I am not relying on the metric you seek to prove or disprove any positions here. I'm not trying to coax you to the tipping point so that you'll join in, I'm just tipping things over and noting who squeals the loudest.
There were several who did that throughout the INGO anti-OC purge. They didn't really bother anyone involved and neither will you.
No problem. Don't suggest unnecessary or dangerous fallacies as safety rules and I won't refute them.
According to your anecdotal youtube references, everyone everywhere teaches and supports the Cooper method s
Actually, every single video he posted they changed rule #1. Every single one. So no one teaches Rule #1 as Jeff Cooper intended.
He claims to follow it judiciously but then he says "Treating all guns as if they are loaded prompts me to safety check every single firearm that i handle."
So he's not really arguing the REAL rule #1 but his own version of it. How can you argue anything if his version changes with every post?
Actually, every single video he posted they changed rule #1. Every single one. So no one teaches Rule #1 as Jeff Cooper intended.
He claims to follow it judiciously but then he says "Treating all guns as if they are loaded prompts me to safety check every single firearm that i handle."
So he's not really arguing the REAL rule #1 but his own version of it. How can you argue anything if his version changes with every post?
Went to the LGS this morning to fondle a few handguns, as I had today off. When the owner pulled out the first handgun I want to see, he checked to ensure that it was unloaded then handed it to me. I immediatly dropped the magazine, racked the slide back and checked the handgun myself to ensure that there was nothing in the chamber. The owner stood there with a shocked look on his face and thanked me for checking the weapon myself. This led to a long discussion and a longer than planned visit to his store. He told me to come back when I wanted to purchase and ask for him (if he was not out front) and he would "hook me up" with a great price on anything I wanted.
It pays to follow the rules I learned 40 +years ago
Wrong again, each video 100% affirmed the mindset that is established by rule #1.
I've done some research. The closest thing I can find to being the gold standard for the rules is the book The Modern Technique of the Pistol written by Gregory B. Morrison with Jeff Cooper as Contributor.
Here's what the book says:
RULE I: ALL GUNS ARE ALWAYS LOADED
There are no exceptions. Do not pretend that this is true. Some people and organizations take this rule and weaken it;e.g. "Treat all guns as if they were loaded." Unfortunately, the "as if" compromises the directness of the statement by implying that they are unloaded, but we will treat them as though they are loaded. No good! Safety rules must be worded forcefully so that they are never treated lightly or reduced to partial compliance.
All guns are always loaded - period!
This must be your mind-set. If someone hands you a firearm and says, "Don't worry, it's not loaded," you do not dare believe him. You need not be impolite, but check it yourself. Remember, there are no accidents, only negligent acts. Check it. Do not let yourself fall prey to a situation where you might feel compelled to squeal, "I didn't know it was loaded!"