Rule Number One: All Guns are always loaded

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!
  • ATM

    will argue for sammiches.
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    30   0   0
    Jul 29, 2008
    21,019
    83
    Crawfordsville
    What I would find the most compelling evidence is something that says the people who've learned it one way tend to have fewer NDs.

    I could come up with several reasons to discount such a lone data point, regardless of which method it seemed to promote. So would others.

    Even so, would such a thing intrinsically discount any of the other reasons given or simply be one more point of consideration in the mix?
     

    MTC

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 14, 2009
    1,356
    38
    ATM,

    Thanks so much for your hospitality. It was good to see you again. I was also very happy to finally meet BoR.
    I'm interested in exploring more in-depth the other topics mentioned.
     

    BugI02

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 4, 2013
    32,570
    149
    Columbus, OH
    I could come up with several reasons to discount such a lone data point, regardless of which method it seemed to promote. So would others.

    Even so, would such a thing intrinsically discount any of the other reasons given or simply be one more point of consideration in the mix?

    That would serve as an equally powerful argument for keeping the four rules if their adherents proved more immune to NDs, and apparently even if they didn't :stickpoke:
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    62,361
    113
    Gtown-ish
    I could come up with several reasons to discount such a lone data point, regardless of which method it seemed to promote. So would others.

    Even so, would such a thing intrinsically discount any of the other reasons given or simply be one more point of consideration in the mix?

    It's just a data point. It serves as a practical indicator that your theoretical reasons for changing actually work in reality. If, for the sake of argument, I cling to the traditional rules but then some study comes out that says people who've learned the traditional gun safety rules are twice as likely to have a ND as people who've learned the NRA rules, I have to deal with the evidence that counters my belief somehow.

    Maybe I would find issues with the study that invalidates it. Or maybe I would find that the study is pretty solid. Maybe I would find that the results are due to other causes besides which rules were taught. Or maybe the study was so solidly conducted that other causes are ruled out. Maybe in the end intellectual honesty would requre me to admit that my belief is wrong.

    The point I'm making should be obvious so no need to go on about it. It's why people gather data and study it, to prove that reality supports the hypothesis.
     

    ATM

    will argue for sammiches.
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    30   0   0
    Jul 29, 2008
    21,019
    83
    Crawfordsville
    That would serve as an equally powerful argument for keeping the four rules if their adherents proved more immune to NDs, and apparently even if they didn't :stickpoke:

    No, I'm saying that even if such a data point could be mined, alone, it wouldn't even begin to suggest causation and would be rather insignificant compared to the stronger points I've brought forth.

    I don't consider it worth mining, apart from a more exhaustive study of several other variables, even if it really would convince jamil.
     

    ATM

    will argue for sammiches.
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    30   0   0
    Jul 29, 2008
    21,019
    83
    Crawfordsville
    It's just a data point. It serves as a practical indicator that your theoretical reasons for changing actually work in reality. If, for the sake of argument, I cling to the traditional rules but then some study comes out that says people who've learned the traditional gun safety rules are twice as likely to have a ND as people who've learned the NRA rules, I have to deal with the evidence that counters my belief somehow.

    Maybe I would find issues with the study that invalidates it. Or maybe I would find that the study is pretty solid. Maybe I would find that the results are due to other causes besides which rules were taught. Or maybe the study was so solidly conducted that other causes are ruled out. Maybe in the end intellectual honesty would requre me to admit that my belief is wrong.

    The point I'm making should be obvious so no need to go on about it. It's why people gather data and study it, to prove that reality supports the hypothesis.

    Just imagine teaching it each way to people who will one day teach it to others. That's the closest to a practical indicator as I know to suggest. It's made all the difference to me.

    I want to disseminate the absolute best tools via the best methods of transferring those tools. Neither system makes me, you, or most people in this thread any more or less safe (we all know them both), so it has nothing to do with adoption for personal benefit - it's about others, which means it really boils down to education (not gun handling).
     

    EPeter213

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 4, 2016
    1,154
    83
    Floyd/Harrison
    Just read through the entire thread, and I am glad I did. Obviously, the thread drifted a bit at times, but I did get two very solid take aways from this.

    1: From a 'safe handling' standpoint- Cooper's #1 seems to be adequately covered in NRA #3

    2: From a 'There is a gun in my vicinity ' standpoint- Coopers #1 seems like a very good assumption.

    There's more to be learned and discussed, but these two points really stuck out. Thank you to all who participated.
     

    Spear Dane

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Sep 4, 2015
    5,119
    113
    Kokomo area
    Two days ago I read about a teen that was messing with his graduation gift hand gun and fatally shot his girlfriend in the stomach. The real nad kicker? Her dad gave it to him.
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    62,361
    113
    Gtown-ish
    Stirring a dead beast, no matter how noble the cause, is unwise.

    Or, I dunno. Maybe INGO mods should make this a sticky thread. Either way.
     

    lonehoosier

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    28   0   0
    May 3, 2011
    8,012
    63
    NWI

    Benp

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    Mar 19, 2017
    7,362
    113
    Avon
    Back in school, oddly enough, in our hunters safety education classes they taught us to always check regardless if we are told it's condition or not. When my little girl is old enough to learn then I'm going to teach her the same that I was taught. If I see someone safety check a firearm before they hand it to me, the first thing that I will do is safety check the firearm as well. Always see for yourself. If I hand anyone a unholstered firearm and the slide isn't open then I'm hoping to see them safety check the firearm. I prefer to hand someone a slide open firearm.
     

    JettaKnight

    Я з Україною
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Oct 13, 2010
    26,750
    113
    Fort Wayne
    viserys-targaryen-you-do-not-want-to-wake-the-dragon.jpg
     
    Top Bottom