-
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/
WHy All Guns Are Always Loaded
- Thread starter Kirk Freeman
- 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:
This just happened Thursday in our little corner of SE Indiana.
Gun accidentally discharges in Batesville business | Local News | batesvilleheraldtribune.com
Gun accidentally discharges in Batesville business | Local News | batesvilleheraldtribune.com
Did he have it in a green nylon bag with his groceries?
Hatin Since 87
Bacon Hater
Just goes to show, anything less than .45 just doesn’t do the job.
Kirk Freeman
Grandmaster
Was the last phrase before the POP! a "Eet ain't low-dead" or "Eye been round gunz all meye lie-eef"? Or, a combination thereof?
The last sentence of the article states:
[FONT=&]“Holt noted, "The Batesville police would like to encourage citizens to treat all guns as if they were loaded and always keep them pointed in a safe direction."
How’d that work out this time?
STOP. Just stop giving people a reason to treat guns differently if they think they’re not loaded.
Imagine if, from square one the rules always were as the NRA publishes. If we planted the seed to always keep all guns pointed in a safe direction first foremost and always no one could use the excuse “but I didn’t think it was loaded.”
Signed,
cbhausen
(just doing my little part to help ensure a more well-regulated militia)[/FONT]
[FONT=&]“Holt noted, "The Batesville police would like to encourage citizens to treat all guns as if they were loaded and always keep them pointed in a safe direction."
How’d that work out this time?
STOP. Just stop giving people a reason to treat guns differently if they think they’re not loaded.
Imagine if, from square one the rules always were as the NRA publishes. If we planted the seed to always keep all guns pointed in a safe direction first foremost and always no one could use the excuse “but I didn’t think it was loaded.”
Signed,
cbhausen
(just doing my little part to help ensure a more well-regulated militia)[/FONT]
“It is a gun, always treat it the same,” requires the assumption that “all guns are always loaded.” Absent that assumption it doesn’t make any sense.
For a gun to fire it must be loaded. Behaving as if a gun can fire and thereby cause harm is behaving as if it were loaded. Thus, the “four rules is teaching lies!” line equally condemns the three rules proponents.
For a gun to fire it must be loaded. Behaving as if a gun can fire and thereby cause harm is behaving as if it were loaded. Thus, the “four rules is teaching lies!” line equally condemns the three rules proponents.
He shot himself right where he was pointing the gun, what he said or didn't say as he did so simply has nothing to do with his reckless gun handling.
If only there were more observable and correctable violations of safe gun handling that you could focus on...
Oh, wait. There are, you just tend to avoid addressing them. Why is that?
No assumptions required to safely handle guns. If you must assume some condition to curb unsafe behaviors, go ahead and do that, but don't claim that it makes sense or is necessary.
BehindBlueI's
Grandmaster
- Oct 3, 2012
- 25,897
- 113
No, it doesn't. I've already laid out why.
What sense does having two sets of gun handling rules make? It doesn't matter if it's loaded or not. Treat it the same. If playing pretend helps you, do that. But it's not required.
And just so we're clear, in 1998 Cooper wrote:
RULE 1ALL GUNS ARE ALWAYS LOADEDThe only exception to this occurs when one has a weapon in his hands and he haspersonally unloaded it for checking. As soon as he puts it down, Rule 1 applies again. - https://www.billstclair.com/cooper/jeff6.pdf
So, at least in 1998, St. Cooper didn't indicate you needed to play pretend, either.
Just to be clear, in the stove analogy you are still telling people to never, ever touch a burner.ALL STOVES ARE ALWAYS HOT! adherents seem to run out of sound reasoning to support its inclusion pretty quickly these days.
Without the assumption that every firearm is a mechanism capable of doing harm by propelling a projectile right now everything falls apart. If you make that assumption (which you do despite your constant denials) then you are making the same point.
I agree that it doesn't make sense to have two (or more) sets of gun handling rules. Glad we're on the same page!
Exactly. Whether we believe a gun to be loaded or not we treat it by the one acceptable set of rules ... that which guards against the dangers of it doing harm by propelling a projectile right now.
these threads!!!
If a person chooses not to ALWAYS adhere to safe gun handling practices, then pretending they're always loaded might be the next best thing for them (and I do hope they continue if that's what it takes).
Still, let's not go so far as claiming that everyone who chooses to practice safe gun handling does or must pretend likewise. I adhere to safe gun handling practices with unloaded guns all the time and nothing "falls apart" - it just seems simple and proper to do so.
Also, keep your finger off the stove dial until ready to cook.
Still, let's not go so far as claiming that everyone who chooses to practice safe gun handling does or must pretend likewise. I adhere to safe gun handling practices with unloaded guns all the time and nothing "falls apart" - it just seems simple and proper to do so.
Also, keep your finger off the stove dial until ready to cook.
Is that your best, ATM? Your opposition in this debate does not in any way disagree that ALWAYS adhering to safe gun handling practices is a must. Insinuating that they are less safe, less capable, or less enlightened does nothing to promote widespread, consistent safe gun handling. I believe that to be your true goal as well as Kirk's, despite the sniping that goes on in both directions.
Whether via pretense or dogma, both schools of thought absolutely do teach the non-intuitive and seemingly irrational idea that an apparently inert mechanism be treated with a reverence reserved for non-inert mechanisms. That is the necessary "falsehood" demanded by both sides. Moreover, the problem lies not with the people on your side who devotedly follow the Three, nor the people on Kirk's side who do the same with the Four. The problems come from the people who reject the "falsehood" of the potential danger of a gun they believe to be unloaded because they know better.
To be completely fair, it is a mindset we do not apply in most other scenarios of daily life. Even so, when it comes to guns whether you believe in the refrain that "all guns are always loaded, so always treat them as such" or instead prefer "all guns should always be treated with a set of rules that imply the gun is capable of firing", you necessarily (and correctly) advocate treating a gun in a manner that does not necessarily reflect the literal truth of its ability to actually operate.
BehindBlueI's
Grandmaster
- Oct 3, 2012
- 25,897
- 113
Which is why loaded status doesn't matter and introducing it is counterproductive. You can argue a gun is loaded or not. You can't argue it's not a gun.
Ha! No, just a different tack. My best is reserved for when I feel challenged.
Of course it doesn't. My opposition is to the ALL GUNS ARE ALWAYS LOADED nonsense which is most certainly not a must and really has no place among actual safe gun handling practices which should be taught and adhered to.
This insinuation is more often levied against folks who do not embrace the ALL GUNS ARE ALWAYS LOADED metaphor, despite promoting consistent safe gun handling.
I believe he is just role playing on the topic at this point, same old schtick, never a new approach, abandons discussion and starts over once firmly countered.
I don't question his interest in promoting or his personal practice of safe gun handling, I just play whack-a-mole with him when he starts in the way he does. No harm, nothing personal, and sometimes entertaining for the readers.
Adhering to safe gun handling practices is a simple choice and does not require even an ounce of cognitive dissonance or demand adopting any "falsehoods". Reverence is a choice that need not deny any literal truth to adopt and practice.
How much more simple than ALWAYS does it get, really? How complex would you prefer it?
NRA 3/3 states: "ALWAYS Keep The Gun Unloaded Until Ready To Use". So there's that. Or are you advocating another ruleset altogether?
Secondly, I do understand what you're trying to communicate and don't disagree entirely. What I disagree with is the conclusion that not mentioning loaded status in Rule 1 makes the student any more likely to internalize the idea that a gun perceived to be unloaded cannot be treated differently.
Whether mentioned in the rules or not, the loaded/unloaded dichotomy will come up. This may happen through cultural osmosis or simply because anyone who uses a gun will notice the fact that a gun without ammunition does not fire. People will at some point come to the conclusion that unloaded=no boom and a few seconds later that unloaded firearms can be treated differently. I don't think you can prevent that process from happening by eliminating Rule 1. However imperfectly, "All guns are always loaded" does speak to that inevitable conclusion.
BehindBlueI's
Grandmaster
- Oct 3, 2012
- 25,897
- 113
Stored guns aren't being handled...
As far as the dichotomy spontaneously occurring, that has not been my experience.
As far as the dichotomy spontaneously occurring, that has not been my experience.
