Inshallah Instructor Injures Individual

[cbhausen]

I do truly respect ATM's choice. He's come to a different conclusion than I have, but even with their shortcomings the NRA rules aren't the worst in the world. If ATM ever takes a break from patting himself on the back and accidentally actually teaches gun safety to someone then one more person will be a little bit safer. That is to the good.

On the other hand, I do not much respect how he has chosen to present himself. Do you?



Not in any way dependent on using NRA3 vs Cooper4 then.


That's an instruction style issue, not a ruleset issue. Either method ("look who broke a rule!" vs "let's look at the rules he broke and what better decisions he could have made") can be used with either set of rules. So no difference in "corrective application" then.


If you are really the most hardcore Cooper4 supporter who despises everything about the NRA3, and are false-flagging by supporting them as ineffectually and obnoxiously as possible then well played, sir. I confess I see it as going to an extreme just to sabotage the NRA3, but I cannot argue with the effectiveness.


Then you are failing. It is hard to believe that you are as yet unaware of that. Your chosen strategy does the exact opposite of this.

As a matter of fact, yes I do. Do you know him? Have you met him? Have you ever worked a firing line with him? He has trained hundreds (if not thousands) firearm safety, handling and marksmanship (not to mention American history and heritage and civic responsibility). He has done ALL of this without charging a penny because he loves this country and the Liberty we enjoy here, He has worked diligently to instill in others the love and appreciation for what our Founders did for generations to come while being absolutely apolitical in the process.

 

[jamil]

Will you pass up another exercise just to chatter? What motivates you?

ETA: Your responses, too, Jake.

Oh. Well. You're chattering about which set of gun safety rules is bestest. So I get to say which tp I think is bestest. If you disagree with my choice, please evaluate, compare and contrast. Once you've finished with your evaluation, report back and I'll grade your work, and instruct you in where you went wrong.

 

[jamil]

As a matter of fact, yes I do. Do you know him? Have you met him? Have you ever worked a firing line with him? He has trained hundreds (if not thousands) firearm safety, handling and marksmanship (not to mention American history and heritage and civic responsibility). He has done ALL of this without charging a penny because he loves this country and the Liberty we enjoy here, He has worked diligently to instill in others the love and appreciation for what our Founders did for generations to come while being absolutely apolitical in the process.

I get it. ATM is a great guy. In person.

 

[ATM]

Oh. Well. You're chattering about which set of gun safety rules is bestest. So I get to say which tp I think is bestest. If you disagree with my choice, please evaluate, compare and contrast. Once you've finished with your evaluation, report back and I'll grade your work, and instruct you in where you went wrong.

So, start a thread about TP, itchy bungholes, smelly fingers.

This one is about mitigating the risks associated with handling guns, methods of making people more successful in that regard, properly identifying and correcting the real basis for their failures to handle guns safely.

Give it a try, offer some ideas or challenges to this topic. It's important.

Make a difference, jamil, we're all in this one together.

 

[jamil]

So, start a thread about TP, itchy bungholes, smelly fingers.

This one is about mitigating the risks associated with handling guns, methods of making people more successful in that regard, properly identifying and correcting the real basis for their failures to handle guns safely.

Give it a try, offer some ideas or challenges to this topic. It's important.

Make a difference, jamil, we're all in this one together.

No. You made it about that. It started with this. I sense that Kirk wasn't trying to prod you into making it about what you made it about.

Michigan firearms "instructor" takes pistol out of holster and fires through door injuring student in another room.

"Don't worry . . . eet ain't low-dead!"

Irresponsible Gun Owner: Firearms Instructor Has A Negligent Discharge, Shoots Student ? Concealed Nation

So. Support the best tp experience. Make a difference, ATM, we're all in this one together.

BTW, I'm not a joiner by nature. We ain't in **** together. No one is. We are individuals and families. I will support you when I think you're right. But only on issues where I think you're right. As I said in the other thread where it became about this topic, I think you're right to teach the NRA3 and I think those who teach the copper4 are not wrong. Because. Morons.

 

[hog slayer]

As a matter of fact, yes I do. Do you know him? Have you met him? Have you ever worked a firing line with him? He has trained hundreds (if not thousands) firearm safety, handling and marksmanship (not to mention American history and heritage and civic responsibility). He has done ALL of this without charging a penny because he loves this country and the Liberty we enjoy here, He has worked diligently to instill in others the love and appreciation for what our Founders did for generations to come while being absolutely apolitical in the process.

I can claim that I know him. Granted, our interactions have been limited. However, I do know him from our limited time together on INGO. Now, that may bring up some problems. But we both know the scenario going into this forum. It's unfortunate that the wonderful person and patriot you know and appreciate is not presented in a similar package here. You expressed distaste when I stated I did(do, its current) not believe ATM to be a leader. Given the interaction of this thread, can you explain to me the leadership trait or characteristic you feel is most represented? Realize, please, that you have brought up the positive character of this individual. Without that commendable effort, it may have never been realized by the audience you chose to address.

I should have figured him out much sooner. He describes himself accurately: will argue for sandwiches (Swype doesn't like the spelling). That isn't a leadership trait. Debate, sure. Discussing, fine. Argument? not hardly.

 

[ATM]

No. You made it about that. It started with this. I sense that Kirk wasn't trying to prod you into making it about what you made it about.

What did I make it about? Identifying and addressing the multiple failures of the event he cited? Probing to consider the real basis, the flawed reasoning, that led to those failures? Leading others to become more successful in handling guns safely? Did you have some problem with my first response in this thread?

I prefer a more corrective and instructive approach than that when folks screw up so others might learn from each specific error committed:

1. Why did he point a gun in an unsafe direction? Was that door an immediate threat? Was there a safer direction? A bucket full of sand, perhaps?

2. Why did he pull the trigger if he wasn't ready for it to shoot? Was there some reason compelling him to demonstrate a click sound? Get a clicker.

3. Why did he use a gun that was loaded for use? Couldn't he have opted to use an inert training aid for demonstration purposes?

Also, that article kinda butchered even the old 4 "law" variation on safe gun handling.

Because this is how that was received in post 7 and 8 of this thread:

Sure, I'd deflect too if I were you.

He did all those things because he thought the gun was unloaded.

Yep, someone told him he could ignore Rule #1.

Basically, a resounding NO! It is only ever Cooper #1, END OF DISCUSSION!

And so it began... If you remember it differently than it occurred, how do you explain your memory in light of the evidence?

So. Support the best tp experience. Make a difference, ATM, we're all in this one together.

Engage in the solution, jamil, don't try to be a roadblock.

BTW, I'm not a joiner by nature. We ain't in **** together. No one is. We are individuals and families. I will support you when I think you're right. But only on issues where I think you're right. As I said in the other thread where it became about this topic, I think you're right to teach the NRA3 and I think those who teach the copper4 are not wrong. Because. Morons.

When it saves someone you love from causing or becoming a senseless and easily preventable tragedy, perhaps you'll reconsider.

We are all in this together. What is your role? Roadblock? What is your motivation? To see if I'll go through or around you?

 

[ATM]

I can claim that I know him...

You claim many things. You presuppose many things. You disengage rather than admitting and correcting your errors.

Your conclusions have suffered and they will continue to suffer.

 

[ATM]

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/argue

ARGUE

intransitive verb

• 1 : to give reasons for or against something : reason argue for a new policy
• 2 : to contend or disagree in words : dispute They're always arguing about money.
• transitive verb
• 1 : to give evidence of : indicate The facts argue his innocence.
• 2 : to consider the pros and cons of : discuss argue an issue
• 3 : to prove or try to prove by giving reasons : maintain asking for a chance to argue his case
• 4 : to persuade by giving reasons : induce couldn't argue her out of going

 

[hog slayer]

You claim many things. You presuppose many things. You disengage rather than admitting and correcting your errors.

Your conclusions have suffered and they will continue to suffer.

Q) Is my claim that you are NOT a leader of men incorrect?

A) yes: demonstrate how I should know that, please
B) no: that's o.k. because it's not an insult. (not being a leader in your house would be, but that is not being contested here; not everyone can be a leader of men)

I do not believe my method (the method I practice and have been "told"/4 rules) is flawed in application. I have conceded that in brevity, the 3 are more accurate. This seems to stand in the way of my observing and recognizing my own errors.

My conclusions have only been said to suffer by yourself and a couple others. Certainly not enough to constitute a majority, not that majority is a great indicator of right and wrong. But, outside of morals and ethics, a majority would be useful in determining justification.

If your intent in copy and paste of Webster's definition of argument is to justify it as a leadership trait, it'll require a bit more effort. If it's just to enlighten me, I accept your cut and paste effort.

 

[jamil]

What did I make it about? Identifying and addressing the multiple failures of the event he cited? Probing to consider the real basis, the flawed reasoning, that led to those failures? Leading others to become more successful in handling guns safely? Did you have some problem with my first response in this thread?



Because this is how that was received in post 7 and 8 of this thread:





Basically, a resounding NO! It is only ever Cooper #1, END OF DISCUSSION!

And so it began... If you remember it differently than it occurred, how do you explain your memory in light of the evidence?




Engage in the solution, jamil, don't try to be a roadblock.



When it saves someone you love from causing or becoming a senseless and easily preventable tragedy, perhaps you'll reconsider.

We are all in this together. What is your role? Roadblock? What is your motivation? To see if I'll go through or around you?

I will give you the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps you thought Kirk was calling you out. In that context I guess a pedantic argument about which set of rules is better could be the purpose of this thread. Maybe Kirk could chime in on what he thought the purpose was.

And I'll say this about that argument. If you're saying no one should be taught Cooper's rules, I think you're just as wrong as those who might say no one should be taught the NRA rules. No matter which rules you learned, it's obvious that the story in the OP violated both sets of rules, so both sets of rules followed would not have led to the ND.

So. I say, just be safe. The basic safety rule that either set of rules distill into is simply, don't do stupid **** with your firearm. That's my contribution. I don't need to compare and contrast these two satisfactory lists of safety rules. You do your thing. Let everyone else do theirs.

 

[JettaKnight]

Scott toilet paper is by far superior to any other toilet paper brand. Compare and contrast any other. If you don't end up agreeing with me, you obviously don't mind the toilet paper breaking and getting poop on your hands.

All toilet paper is always poopy.

 

[ATM]

Q) Is my claim that you are NOT a leader of men incorrect?

I'll wait for you to make some case for your claim before I decide. Do you have a case to make the claim or did you trust your own presuppositions? Did you scrutinize them yourself before making the claim so it wouldn't appear foolish?

A) yes: demonstrate how I should know that, please

Demonstrate how you should know a thing and scrutinize it yourself before simply assuming and proclaiming it? I do that all the time, follow my discussions and learn.

B) no: that's o.k. because it's not an insult. (not being a leader in your house would be, but that is not being contested here; not everyone can be a leader of men)

That's what I said when I was accused of pejoratively insulting a follower mentality. I have no disdain for followers, I'll even help them learn to lead if they want.

I do not believe my method (the method I practice and have been "told"/4 rules) is flawed in application. I have conceded that in brevity, the 3 are more accurate. This seems to stand in the way of my observing and recognizing my own errors.

I'm giving you a chance to challenge your own beliefs and mine as part of a reasoning and testing process, not just telling you to adopt mine.

My conclusions have only been said to suffer by yourself and a couple others. Certainly not enough to constitute a majority, not that majority is a great indicator of right and wrong. But, outside of morals and ethics, a majority would be useful in determining justification.

I rarely, if ever, argue for popular justifications - no challenge to anyone in doing so, no advancement, no thought, no difference.

If your intent in copy and paste of Webster's definition of argument is to justify it as a leadership trait, it'll require a bit more effort. If it's just to enlighten me, I accept your cut and paste effort.

You don't need to "get" or accept any of the reasons I posted it, it's for everyone to consider.

Please, stay engaged, find out where all this is leading...

 

[jamil]

All toilet paper is always poopy.

I see what you did there. I won't hold it against you.

 

[HoughMade]

I have no one to blame but myself for continuing to check on this thread.

 

[jamil]

I'll wait for you to make some case for your claim before I decide. Do you have a case to make the claim or did you trust your own presuppositions? Did you scrutinize them yourself before making the claim so it wouldn't appear foolish?



Demonstrate how you should know a thing and scrutinize it yourself before simply assuming and proclaiming it? I do that all the time, follow my discussions and learn.



That's what I said when I was accused of pejoratively insulting a follower mentality. I have no disdain for followers, I'll even help them learn to lead if they want.



I'm giving you a chance to challenge your own beliefs and mine as part of a reasoning and testing process, not just telling you to adopt mine.



I rarely, if ever, argue for popular justifications - no challenge to anyone in doing so, no advancement, no thought, no difference.



You don't need to "get" or accept any of the reasons I posted it, it's for everyone to consider.

Please, stay engaged, find out where all this is leading...

I'll let you guys argue this out. My only comment is about the highlighted text. You seem to be presupposing that he's not challenged his own beliefs and is in need of your guidance to do so. It may be that he has duly considered everything that you have and has drawn a different conclusion.

 

[ATM]

I will give you the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps you thought Kirk was calling you out. In that context I guess a pedantic argument about which set of rules is better could be the purpose of this thread. Maybe Kirk could chime in on what he thought the purpose was.

He thought my purpose was to make rationalizations for the negligent, unsafe gun handling. He was ridiculously wrong.
Why was he wrong? His perception trumped reality. This is a problem, a big one.

And I'll say this about that argument. If you're saying no one should be taught Cooper's rules, I think you're just as wrong as those who might say no one should be taught the NRA rules. No matter which rules you learned, it's obvious that the story in the OP violated both sets of rules, so both sets of rules followed would not have led to the ND.

That's exactly what I'm saying. Care to explore and discuss the reasoning further, or will you avoid the exercise because your conclusion is fixed?

So. I say, just be safe. The basic safety rule that either set of rules distill into is simply, don't do stupid **** with your firearm. That's my contribution. I don't need to compare and contrast these two satisfactory lists of safety rules.

If you have no further contributions on this subject, why do you keep typing in this thread?

You do your thing.

Identify and advance past roadblocks? Of course.

Let everyone else do theirs.

Attempting to stop me? Good luck.

 

[ATM]

I'll let you guys argue this out. My only comment is about the highlighted text. You seem to be presupposing that he's not challenged his own beliefs and is in need of your guidance to do so. It may be that he has duly considered everything that you have and has drawn a different conclusion.

We'll all see ...if he continues.

 

[jamil]

I have no one to blame but myself for continuing to check on this thread.

But. Have you learned anything new about toilet paper?

 

[ATM]

All toilet paper is always poopy.

I see what you did there. I won't hold it against you.

Dang.


That was funny.