Are Rules Rules?
- Thread starter Loosedhorse
- Start date
- Status
Perhaps we should consider this in the context of risk management. I'll bet you that Justin has cleared the weapon, before he dry-fires it.
If I disassembled a weapon, the barrel ceases to become a threat to me. I really have some difficulty understanding the concept of why an unloaded and safe gun falls under any rules. To me it isn't dangerous until it's reassembled and loaded.
Can anyone address the rules from this perspective.
JohnBT
Member
"Can anyone address the rules from this perspective."
How about a quote from Emerson.
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines."
- Ralph Waldo Emerson
From: Essays. First Series. Self-Reliance.
How about a quote from Emerson.
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines."
- Ralph Waldo Emerson
From: Essays. First Series. Self-Reliance.
Ragnar Danneskjold
Member
And by contrast, in my experience, people who prefer a precise and exacting definition for something, tend to be precise and exacting in most areas, including safety.
For one with an analytical mind, true=true and false=false. If a rule is alleged to be true all of the time, and an exception can be found, the rule must be reworked to include the exception, or be stated that it is not true all of the time. That's logic. And those who think like that tend to have a mind that is set up to approach many situations in a similar fashion. And it happens to be a very safe method as it promotes consistency, accuracy, and thoroughness.
Last edited:
Justin
Moderator Emeritus
Of course. The gun is emptied of any ammunition, which is put into a container and stored in another room. My dry fire work is done in a room where no ammunition is present, and the status of the gun is checked several times before I begin practicing.
Personally, I draw a distinction between gun parts and assembled and functional guns. Gun parts of a disassembled and therefore functionless gun are one thing (after all, a frame with no slide on it isn't really a gun.)
On the other hand, its a good idea to adhere to the Four Rules even with a gun you have verified is safe because it helps to mentally reinforce good gun handling skills. If you refuse to cover anyone with the muzzle of any gun, ever, then you will never accidentally shoot someone. It's really as simple as that.
That's what I said previously. Call it the doctrine of competing harms. In order to engage in dry-fire practice, I've optimized the situation and picked the least-worst outcome in the event that the worst case scenario materializes. In the case that I have an ND in my basement, the only thing I will have destroyed is some drywall and concrete. I'm not dry-firing at my dog, kid, or doing this in my living room where a round could go through the window and kill someone on the street.
Furthermore, I undertake precautions to ensure that my dry fire practice goes uneventfully. Regardless, I'm aware of the fact that I'm doing something that is, strictly speaking, a violation of the four rules.
I agree with that completely, it's the same reason I put on a seat belt to drive one block. I was referring to when I felt comfortable looking down the barrel of a gun to inspect it. I'm trying to say, that there has to be a time when we have rendered a gun safe for inspection.
JohnBT,
You are not alone....many people would say I have a small mind.
Loosedhorse
member
Actually, no. For me, it's more a question of whether the rules are hysteretic or non-hysteretic.
Not at all. Again, the rule is for behavior, not legal determinations of justification. Your argument is like asking, how can a caught batted ball always be an out in baseball, if it's not also an out in football?
No. I'm saying that rules of safe gun-handling have nothing to do with rules of law. Like football and baseball. I take it your obtuseness is actually rhetorical?
Or the word "exception", or "breaking." Whichever way, I think you're right.
My hat is off to you, sir. Perhaps that portion of the debate that is NOT semantic divides those of us who "rework" our understanding of the Rules so that they do always apply; and those who prefer to just say the Rules are inconstant.
My problem with the latter approach is that, unless you are very thorough in your description of when the rule doesn't apply, you've declared a very important safety principle invalid, and left in its place to fill the void...
Nothing at all.
Last edited:
Owen Sparks
member
- Joined
- May 27, 2007
- Messages
- 4,523
I let the muzzle cover all sorts of things that I am not willing to destroy, including my new holster every time I draw and every time I re-holster. I also let the muzzle cover many expensive things in my home and the interior vehicle that I do not wish to destroy. The only thing I NEVER let the muzzle cover is people, even if it means pointing the muzzle at my new bedroom carpet, the expensive plasma TV or the hot water heater.
I point the muzzle in a SAFE DIRECTION. "Safe" is a relative term. All guns are always pointed somewhere and I would rather have them pointing it at various THINGS that I don't want to have to replace to avoid pointing them at PEOPLE who can't be replaced.
A better wording of rule 2 would be:
2. Always keep the muzzle pointed in a safe direction.
That is more realistic and can actually be followed to the letter as opposed to the original which is so impossibly strict that it literally can not be followed.
I point the muzzle in a SAFE DIRECTION. "Safe" is a relative term. All guns are always pointed somewhere and I would rather have them pointing it at various THINGS that I don't want to have to replace to avoid pointing them at PEOPLE who can't be replaced.
A better wording of rule 2 would be:
2. Always keep the muzzle pointed in a safe direction.
That is more realistic and can actually be followed to the letter as opposed to the original which is so impossibly strict that it literally can not be followed.
o Unforgiven o
Member
No, in it's place he has left common sense. Why is that so hard for you and others here to understand? Are you saying that people are so incompetent, so stupid, that saying a rule has exceptions without listing all of them specifically, somehow devalues the rule? If someone needs such absolute, all encompassing exceptions spelled out clearly so they can check whether or not their situation falls under the approved list for safety's sake, they are unfit to have a gun.
If someone followed the four rules to a T, they better not buy a glock because they would never get the damn thing apart. THAT, is where common sense comes into play, unfortunately it is not so common anymore, in this thread or otherwise.
Freedom_fighter_in_IL
Member
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2010
- Messages
- 2,097
I'm beginning to think this horse is dead enough.
exavid
Member
Definitely beaten to a pulp!
dmazur
Member
How about one more stroke on the poor horse...
Of course not. It is wise for you to also check, before closing the action.
The point of the action open is to disable the weapon, to make it safe for handling. (That is, to make it OK to violate Rule 2.)
And, since nobody else but you knows it is unloaded, Rule 1 and Rule 2 apply when you close the action.
Of course not. It is wise for you to also check, before closing the action.
The point of the action open is to disable the weapon, to make it safe for handling. (That is, to make it OK to violate Rule 2.)
And, since nobody else but you knows it is unloaded, Rule 1 and Rule 2 apply when you close the action.
JRH6856
Member
OF course it is rhetorical. It is an argument in the absurd. But it illustrates my point. The "absolute" rules only apply under certain conditions and not absolutely. They can serve as a guide to safe action when applied to ones own actions, but can't be used as a guide for analyzing the actions of others. Ergo, the rules are not absolute.
And by now the horse is probable been served at some burger joint.
doc2rn
Member
All things being considered I like "Gunnies Rule": Keep your' bugger picker off the bang switch! Slam fires can happen, things can get stuck in the trigger guard, and life can happen but most things are easily avoidable if you remember Gunnies Rule. The gun is just a tool.
Loosedhorse
member
Like I said, nothing at all.
If we are back to depending on common sense, it makes the Rules, well, unimportant--even fussy! Might as well make one safety Rule: "Make sure you use enough safety, but not so much as to be rigid or ridiculous." Great rule...but doesn't say much.
Ah. Well, your providing an absurd argument does make your point more emphatically--as a good rhetorical device should!--but it does not support your contention that obeying a safety law absolutely is absurd or impossible.
Again, thanks everyone. If this is all the meat there is on this bone, it's still enough for me to chew on.
dmazur
Member
I think that citing Cooper's own words, and a text he edited, should be sufficient.
Rules 1 and 2 have exceptions, as explained in those references. They are exceptions borne out of necessity, not convenience. IMO, if you stick to the recognized exceptions, you aren't in dangerous territory.
However, it appears to be necessary to study the exceptions as well as the rules.
I looked pretty hard, and I couldn't find any exceptions to Rules 3 & 4. Probably because there just isn't any "maintenance" stuff going on at this part of gun handling.
Rules 1 and 2 have exceptions, as explained in those references. They are exceptions borne out of necessity, not convenience. IMO, if you stick to the recognized exceptions, you aren't in dangerous territory.
However, it appears to be necessary to study the exceptions as well as the rules.
I looked pretty hard, and I couldn't find any exceptions to Rules 3 & 4. Probably because there just isn't any "maintenance" stuff going on at this part of gun handling.
JohnBT
Member
3. Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target.
How do you shoot a double tap then? You fire the first shot and the muzzle rises, right? Is your finger off the trigger, because your sights are NOT on the target until the barrel comes back down. The gun is probably aimed at the ceiling momentarily or over the berm if outdoors. But I'd be willing to bet your finger is on the trigger the entire time.
You have violated Rule #3.
We have to make exceptions when necessary. Like those always loaded (empty) guns on shelf at the gun store that point either at the customers' knees or at the employees behind the counter.
How do you shoot a double tap then? You fire the first shot and the muzzle rises, right? Is your finger off the trigger, because your sights are NOT on the target until the barrel comes back down. The gun is probably aimed at the ceiling momentarily or over the berm if outdoors. But I'd be willing to bet your finger is on the trigger the entire time.
You have violated Rule #3.
We have to make exceptions when necessary. Like those always loaded (empty) guns on shelf at the gun store that point either at the customers' knees or at the employees behind the counter.
jcwit
member
Would you pull the pin on an inert grenade,
and still run?
This is where common sense comes in!
and still run?
This is where common sense comes in!
JRH6856
Member
Actually not. The rule, as stated, says nothing about taking your finger off the trigger once you have put it there.
Still, I stated the rule as " Keep your finger off the trigger until ready to fire." But that is because at SD ranges, I don't use sights.JohnBT
Member
"The rule, as stated, says nothing about taking your finger off the trigger once you have put it there"
Once you put it there you can't ever take it off? Ever? That's a long time. That's what you're saying.
3. Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target.
It appears to be rather straightforward - only have your finger on the trigger when the sights are on the target. Keep it off means keep it off until your sights are on the target. Riding the trigger until the sights go back down on target is prohibited by Rule #3. Right?
Folks want the rule to be absolute? Okay, I'll play.
John
Once you put it there you can't ever take it off? Ever? That's a long time. That's what you're saying.
3. Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target.
It appears to be rather straightforward - only have your finger on the trigger when the sights are on the target. Keep it off means keep it off until your sights are on the target. Riding the trigger until the sights go back down on target is prohibited by Rule #3. Right?
Folks want the rule to be absolute? Okay, I'll play.
John
JRH6856
Member
No, I'm saying that the rule, as stated, only applies until your sights are on the target. The word until limits the time of application of the rule. It does not speak to what you should do after your sights are on target and your finger is on the trigger so you are free to do as you please. Now, if it said, "unless" instead of "until", then your argument would be correct and valid. As Ragnar said, words have meaning.
But as I said, if I applied a rule requiring sights on target, I would never be able to fire a gun in an SD situation, at least not inside of 7 yards.
Freedom_fighter_in_IL
Member
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2010
- Messages
- 2,097
Good Lord folks, this horses bones are already bleached!
- Status
