Inshallah Instructor Injures Individual

[Spear Dane]

It is resistance to the f**kery and asshatery of the embroidered shirta who think they are smarter than everyone else and do not have to be disciplined.



Pointing guns at people is wrong. So wrong, in fact, that it is a crime.



You're not selling anything new or superior, just rationalizations for f**kery and asshatery of the embroidered shirts and their gd gun waving.



I don't know, maybe that I don't want to rationalize just dips**t stuff with guns and then behaving like an Aspie 5 year old and asking people why?

Sometimes I love lawyers. This is one of those times.

 

[ATM]

It is resistance to the f**kery and asshatery of the embroidered shirta who think they are smarter than everyone else and do not have to be disciplined.

When people do unsafe things with guns you only say, "eet ain't low-dead!" How is that resistance? What does that identify? What does it correct? Who is instructed? Who is challenged? How is anyone helped by that? Who will be saved by that?

I resist the f**kery and asshatery of the embroidered shirts and any others who think they are smarter than everyone else and do not have to be disciplined by identifying their unsafe actions, actually calling those out specifically, providing corrective instruction so others don't duplicate their actions or are at least made aware of the potential consequences and the simple remedies to prevent them.

How is your response better in any way? How is it even adequate? It isn't.

Pointing guns at people is wrong. So wrong, in fact, that it is a crime.

I consider that the golden rule, #1 on the list. You consider it #2 and you rarely get around to even mentioning it.

How is your preference better in any way? How is it even adequate? It isn't.

You're not selling anything new or superior, just rationalizations for f**kery and asshatery of the embroidered shirts and their gd gun waving.

Am I offering rationalizations for them or am I actually calling out multiple, specific violations in their actions and giving multiple, specific steps by which they could have easily have been avoided and should be avoided by others? Examine the evidence, counselor, it's all still right there for everyone to read.

I don't know, maybe that I don't want to rationalize just dips**t stuff with guns and then behaving like an Aspie 5 year old and asking people why?

You always retreat from these discussions, until you find a new excuse to say, "eet ain't low-dead!" I get it, that's all you're interested in doing. But, I don't start over like you do, I continue on from where I left off and actually try to make a difference, try to save some folks, try to lead some folks, make an impact, make a difference.

You should either follow or stay out of my way.

 

[cbhausen]

It is resistance to the f**kery and asshatery of the embroidered shirta who think they are smarter than everyone else and do not have to be disciplined.



Pointing guns at people is wrong. So wrong, in fact, that it is a crime.



You're not selling anything new or superior, just rationalizations for f**kery and asshatery of the embroidered shirts and their gd gun waving.



I don't know, maybe that I don't want to rationalize just dips**t stuff with guns and then behaving like an Aspie 5 year old and asking people why?

Where in hell is ATM defending the actions of those who handle firearms in an unsafe manner? How is he "rationalizing"?

I've been on the line with ATM many times and he is an outstanding instructor. And Kirk, your arguments would be more effective without the spellings mocking certain... groups.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

You should either follow or stay out of my way.

That's fair.

 

[NIFT]

I find it most fascinating that there is only one person with self-proclaimed perfect wisdom and knowledge of gun safety and all others should follow him or get out of the way. His way has been proven (by him) to be the only real truth. Any deviation from his absolute pronouncements is, to use his words, "garbled nonsense." People who dare to disagree with him have motivations he calls, "pathetic." Why this anonymous person is nowhere else found to be proclaimed as the world's font of gun safety wisdom is a real puzzle, given his claim that any deviation from his perfect gun safety position must be belittled as incorrect and ignorant.

Given all that, it is even more astounding that he has not taken folks to task for the proven error of their ways in the following rather long thread, which has been on this site for quite some time and praised for its content. He has only one post, which does not, in any way, address the blatant fallacies presented in the thread. Tis a muddle.
https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...ate-col-jeff-cooper-shooter-trainer-hero.html

However, I, for one, find the self-proclaimed all-knowing expert's input on INGO very useful in classes.

 

[chipbennett]

Oh, look: another four-rules-vs-three-rules by people who disagree about whether Rule #1 is a literal rule or a mindset rule, in response to yet another negligent discharge by someone who disregarded both the literal and mindset interpretations of Rule #1.

 

[JettaKnight]

Oh, look: another four-rules-vs-three-rules by people who disagree about whether Rule #1 is a literal rule or a mindset rule, in response to yet another negligent discharge by someone who disregarded both the literal and mindset interpretations of Rule #1.

You can't say you didn't see it coming.

 

[cbhausen]

I find it most fascinating that there is only one person with self-proclaimed perfect wisdom and knowledge of gun safety and all others should follow him or get out of the way. His way has been proven (by him) to be the only real truth. Any deviation from his absolute pronouncements is, to use his words, "garbled nonsense." People who dare to disagree with him have motivations he calls, "pathetic." Why this anonymous person is nowhere else found to be proclaimed as the world's font of gun safety wisdom is a real puzzle, given his claim that any deviation from his perfect gun safety position must be belittled as incorrect and ignorant.

Given all that, it is even more astounding that he has not taken folks to task for the proven error of their ways in the following rather long thread, which has been on this site for quite some time and praised for its content. He has only one post, which does not, in any way, address the blatant fallacies presented in the thread. Tis a muddle.
https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...ate-col-jeff-cooper-shooter-trainer-hero.html

However, I, for one, find the self-proclaimed all-knowing expert's input on INGO very useful in classes.

Mr. NRA Instructor:

I don't see anything in NRA's own rules analogous to "every gun is always loaded" or "treat every gun as if it is loaded". In fact, Rule #1 is about muzzle discipline:

https://gunsafetyrules.nra.org/

And that thread runs from 2008-2013 (culminating in a terrible tragedy because... wait for it... some negligent person did not keep their shotgun pointed in a safe direction.

Maybe ATM did some critical thinking on gun safety and his notion of properly written gun safety rules has evolved in the meantime? No shame in that unless one's ego gets in the way. That's where the shame should be.

Why make this about ATM or anyone else? It's about preserving life, limb, and our Liberty.

 

[NIFT]

Mr. NRA Instructor:

I don't see anything in NRA's own rules analogous to "every gun is always loaded" or "treat every gun as if it is loaded". In fact, Rule #1 is about muzzle discipline:

https://gunsafetyrules.nra.org/

Abd that thread runs from 2008-2013 (culminating in a terrible tragedy because... wait for it... some negligent person did not keep their shotgun pointed in a safe direction.

Maybe ATM did some critical thinking on gun safety and his notion of properly written gun safety rules has evolved in the meantime? No shame in that unless one's ego gets in the way. That's where the shame should be.

Why make this about ATM or anyone else? It's about preserving life, limb, and our Liberty.

So, what's the problem? I've said I find the self-proclaimed all-knowing expert's input on INGO very useful in classes, and it is, indeed, very useful and instructive.

 

[indiucky]

You can't say you didn't see it coming.

I saw it coming Jetta....Is it bad that I was grinning in anticipation?????

 

[cbhausen]

So, what's the problem? I've said I find the self-proclaimed all-knowing expert's input on INGO very useful in classes, and it is, indeed, very useful and instructive.

The problem is you made it about the messenger instead of the message. Let's talk about the message instead.

 

[ATM]

So, what's the problem? I've said I find the self-proclaimed all-knowing expert's input on INGO very useful in classes, and it is, indeed, very useful and instructive.

You abandon discussions with me here and just leave your attempts hanging, but still pretend that you could hold your own when you describe it to others in your classes?

How sad.

I live here where people can read the text of our arguments. No pretending here.

 

[NIFT]

The problem is you made it about the messenger instead of the message. Let's talk about the message instead.

Reading comprehension is key: the "input" is what is useful and instructive.

 

[cbhausen]

Oh, look: another four-rules-vs-three-rules by people who disagree about whether Rule #1 is a literal rule or a mindset rule, in response to yet another negligent discharge by someone who disregarded both the literal and mindset interpretations of Rule #1.

If all rules were literal and Rule #1 universally covers muzzle discipline we wouldn't be having thus discussion.

Literal fallacies have no place in firearms training.

PERIOD

 

[JettaKnight]

That thread would have been a lot easier to read without all the low post count one-liners.

Oh, I did notice this:

RULE I: ALL GUNS ARE ALWAYS LOADED
There are no exceptions. Do not pretend that this is true.
...

Wait, what? I thought the whole premise is to pretend it's true, because, you know, mindset.


EDIT:
I thought this is a typo on INGO, but a google search shows it to appear 633 times!

Seriously, can someone explain this? Or, can someone explain why the RO says it's safe to go downrange because all firearms are benched and unloaded? Does he not understand that all guns are always loaded?

 

[HoughMade]

I saw it coming Jetta....Is it bad that I was grinning in anticipation?????

I'm starting to see it coming in Break Room threads.

 

[cbhausen]

I'm starting to see it coming in Break Room threads.

Always keep your keyboard pointed in a safe direction?

 

[JettaKnight]

I saw it coming Jetta....Is it bad that I was grinning in anticipation?????

You and me both.


It's fun to watch someone step up to the plate to spar with ATM. I've seen about every argument and tactic under sun applied and they rarely have any effect and generally aren't convincing.

 

[ATM]

I have continued to actively advance and promote safe gun handling since NIFT abandoned our last discussion on this topic and my last response to him in January.

I haven't spent that time pretending or telling others that I had actually challenged him in some way or had superior responses. In fact, I haven't thought of him at all since then. I just assumed he had no good come-backs and gave up.

Oh well, I'm here now, I live here. Watcha got today, NIFT? Anything new?

 

[chipbennett]

If all rules were literal and Rule #1 universally covers muzzle discipline we wouldn't be having thus discussion.

Literal fallacies have no place in firearms training.

PERIOD

People apparently make a distinction without a difference with respect to Rule #1, because (I assume) they just like to argue. The reality is, everyone arguing 3-Rule-vs-4-Rule philosophy understands the intent, and will generally act appropriately when handling firearms - and all the philosophical arguing will not serve to educate a single person who does not already have the desire/mindset to handle firearms safely.