Should rule two be revised or reworded?

[Taurus 66]

IMHO, the rule should continue to stand how it is stated. The word "destroy" covers the potential destruction of life or property. If you use the sentence, "Don't point your muzzle at anything you do not intend to kill." implies it's okay to point it towards someone's $120,000 Corvette ZR1 or something, or point it towards their even cheaper house (while currently occupied of course).

Don't fix something that isn't broke! This cycle of always trying to make better of something which currently exists is what got us all in trouble in the first place! Those who were before us were no dummies!

There are lawyers and politicians out there who think they can rewrite the 2nd Amendment to make it sound better (more snappier) than it already is ... imagine that ... but beware.

 

[Four Knives]

IMO Rule 3 needs to be changed:

Keep your finger OUT OF THE TRIGGER GUARD, until your sights are on target and you intend to fire.

 

[ZeroJunk]

I doubt anybody misses the point of any of these rules.

 

[Loosedhorse]

Are there a lot of cases in which somebody who was abiding by the 4 rules as they stand today, followed all 4 and still had a negligent discharge that resulted in the life or injury of another human being? If not, we're arguing the semantics of a system that is achieving its objective.

I think an alternative question is, "How many people who had NDs were aware of the 4 Rules?" That really goes to their effectiveness.

Some of us are saying the the 4 Rules are intuitive, simple, easy to remember, etc. Others are saying things like the Rules don't really apply to this activity, or that activity. So, how intuitive are they, if they give many people the impression that they don't apply in some situations? How effective are they if people who know them still have NDs?

A repeated theme in this thread goes something like, "Every time you pick up a gun--unless you need to shoot it NOW--check to see if it is loaded. If you put it down and pick it up again 10 seconds later, check it again." I personally think that's a VERY important rule, but it isn't stated anywhere in the 4 Rules. I'm being told that it's "implied" by Rule 1.

How obvious is that?

 

[45_auto]

How obvious is that?

Seems pretty obvious to me.

If all guns are always loaded, why wouldn't you check it every time you pick it up?

It doesn't say "All guns are always loaded unless you think they aren't or are pretty sure that they might not be".

 

[Frank Ettin]

...I personally think that's a VERY important rule, but it isn't stated anywhere in the 4 Rules. I'm being told that it's "implied" by Rule 1.

How obvious is that?

One of the goals in formulating the Four Rules as they have been was to have a small group of short, easily remembered rules for safe gun handling. The Rules are most often in basic classes taught through an expanded discussion of safety, but as short, easily remembered statements, the Rule can help people recall the more extended discussion.

Now you might think the Four Rules are deficient and leave too much out. So here's a challenge:

• Rewrite the Rules of Safe Gun Handling to avoid and eliminate the various deficiencies identified.
• The revision should be no fewer than three rules nor more than five.
• The rules should be simple, direct, straight forward, actionable and unequivocal.
• Each of the new rules should contain no more than 20 words (that over 50% more words than the longest of the Four Rules in the formulation now posted at Gunsite. (see post 39)).

Let's see what you can come up with.

 

[Loosedhorse]

Let's see what you can come up with.

Well, several here have talked about the modifications they use. Changing Rule 2 to a positive, for example: "Always point the muzzle of a handled, closed-action gun at a safe backstop." This modification makes clear that guns in a holster or case, and guns with the action locked open can be pointed differently. I have, for example, looked down the barrel of a revolver to check its bore with the action open, and this wording makes clear I haven't violated the rule by doing so.

As to our "missing rule" about checking if a handled gun is loaded, I might say, "Unless you must shoot immediately, always check the loaded status of any gun as soon as you pick it up." (Thanks for the 20 words!) Of course if I wanted to emulate Cooper's enigmatic style, I might say:

"All guns can load or unload themselves." That (to me) is "no more untrue" than the current Rule 1, and more clearly implies you'd better check what that rascal's been up to lately!

 

[HorseSoldier]

Changing Rule 2 to a positive, for example: "Always point the muzzle of a handled, closed-action gun at a safe backstop."

That's not always possible if you're talking about rules that apply to using firearms in the real world. Sometimes the thing or person you're willing to destroy is the only backstop you get. Sometimes you have to take the least poor option and accept the potential consequences of mistakes on your part.

And it absolutely misses the point of attaching responsibility for the consequences of poor handling to the individual.

Cooper wasn't writing rules for range practices. He was writing rules for the safe and professional use of arms by soldiers, cops, hunters, etc.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...Changing Rule 2 to a positive, for example: "Always point the muzzle of a handled, closed-action gun at a safe backstop."...

What does "closed action" mean for a revolver? What is a safe backstop? Perhaps your TV or your grandmother's favorite hutch will stop a bullet.

..."Unless you must shoot immediately, always check the loaded status of any gun as soon as you pick it up."...

If you must shoot immediately, are you sure there really is a round chambered.

And I'm afraid that your rules fail the "simple, direct, straight forward, actionable and unequivocal" test. They have internal qualifications and conditions.

...Cooper's enigmatic style,...

Nothing enigmatic about Cooper's writing. It's succinct and to the point.

• All guns are always loaded.
  
  That's a gun, so it's loaded. Handle it accordingly.
  
  
• Never let the muzzle cover something you're not willing to destroy.
  
  If you aren't willing to see a hole in it, don't point your gun there.
  
  
• Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on target.
  
  Don't touch the trigger until you're on target.
  
  
• Always be sure of your target.
  
  If you don't know what it is, don't be shooting it.

All short and to the point -- saying what needs to be said and no more.

 

[Justin]

This modification makes clear that guns in a holster or case, and guns with the action locked open can be pointed differently.

EPIC FAIL.

If you imply that it's ok to point a gun with an action that is locked open anywhere at all (including people, pets, or expensive property) you are creating an inbuilt bad habit where people end up pointing guns where they shouldn't be.

If you get used to pointing a gun with an opened action at other people, it's a much smaller step to pointing one with a closed action, rather than firmly and directly stating that a gun should not be pointed at such things ever, no matter the condition.

I don't care if the action is locked open or not. If you point a gun at me, I'm going to get bent out of shape about it.

 

[Buzzard]

The version that I've been using for about a decade....

• It is loaded until you prove otherwise

• If you don't want a hole in it, don't point the weapon at it

• Your finger stays clear of the trigger until the moment you want to fire

• Beware of your target and what is beyond it, not merely behind it

 

[Loosedhorse]

What does "closed action" mean for a revolver?

It means "closed action." (The cylinder is part of the action, big guy! )

If you must shoot immediately, are you sure there really is a round chambered.

Oh, you'll find out soon enough when you pull the trigger--it's actually a pretty good way of checking if a gun is loaded. If you've got a guy with a knife coming at you, and you want to do a chamber-check, be my guest. Me, I'd go with draw/aim/press.

All guns are always loaded.

It's a false statement, and it's a fundamental safety rule! Not an enigma to you, but to some, it is puzzling.

If you imply that it's ok to point a gun with an action that is locked open anywhere at all

So, it's okay to point that barrel at my eye--just not anywhere dangerous...

I don't care if the action is locked open or not. If you point a gun at me, I'm going to get bent out of shape about it.

EPIC MAD! Hey, that's fine. You'd fit right in at some gun stores, where they never cross anyone.

If it's just a disassembled frame, can I point it at you then?

 

[Cosmoline]

then how does one clean their gun?

Because when you clean it, you should have it broken down sufficiently to safely do so. In that condition it is NO LONGER a "firearm" in the sense of the rule. If you just casually start cleaning you may be breaking the rule, and this has been a problem before. That's why each firearm type has a standard cleaning regime that includes making it safe and often breaking it partly down. So for a bolt action, you unload it and pull the bolt. With a levergun at least the lever should be fully opened, and I prefer to disassemble it enough to run a patch from the receiver end. For handguns (where the real threat is) you must remove the mag or cartridges and for autos pop the slide and barrel off before you clean.

-Cleaning. It's unloaded, so it's safe. Exception? No. Anything that teaches your brain a firearm is safe and it's ok to ignore safe handling is setting you up for failure.

Then you'd never be able to clean any firearm. Let alone do smithing work on them. I think the answer is to follow the accepted protocols for the firearm in question to render it safe for cleaning.

And you have to remember the rules were dealing with modern firearms. Different rules apply to muzzleloaders, since parts of your body must cover the barrel in order to load the things and clean them. But those predate Cooper and predate modern firearms. They have different safety protocols and procedures which you must learn.

Also, if a firearm is secured in a holster it can "sweep" any number of things without violating the rules. You don't have it in hand, and it's secured.

 

[Frank Ettin]

What does "closed action" mean for a revolver?

It means "closed action." (The cylinder is part of the action, big guy! )

And when is the last time you referred to a DA revolver with the cylinder swung open as having an open action? And when is the last time you referred to a single action revolver with the loading gate open as having an open action?

In general, it's very rare to use this terminology with respect to revolvers, so relying on such uncommon terminology in a safety rule is confusing and thus ludicrous.

Furthermore, how is a single action revolver with its loading gate open safe to point at other than a safe backstop (or safe to point at things you're unwilling to destroy)? You may not be able to fire a stock Ruger with its loading gate open.But you can sure fire a Colt SAA (or clone) with its loading gate open.

If you must shoot immediately, are you sure there really is a round chambered.

Oh, you'll find out soon enough when you pull the trigger--it's actually a pretty good way of checking if a gun is loaded. If you've got a guy with a knife coming at you, and you want to do a chamber-check, be my guest. Me, I'd go with draw/aim/press.

Further confusion. In the Gunsite formulation, the safety rule has nothing to do with whether you're going to shoot right now. Indeed it has nothing to do with what you're planning to do.

It's simple. That's a gun. You therefore are expected to know that it's loaded and handle it accordingly.

Now, we also train that if you're preparing to shoot an exercise or course of fire in competition, or if you're gearing up for a day in the outside world, SOP is to do a chamber check -- just to make absolutely sure.

All guns are always loaded.

It's a false statement, and it's a fundamental safety rule! Not an enigma to you, but to some, it is puzzling.

It's a rule of safe gun handling. It's purpose is to help assure that you don't go and shoot things that ought not be shot, especially with a gun you thought wasn't loaded but actually was. As long as you know the gun is loaded and you deal with it accordingly, you should not wind up shooting things with it by mistake.

 

[Loosedhorse]

And when is the last time you referred to a DA revolver with the cylinder swung open as having an open action?

Every time I handle one. Obviously, your words are different. And that's a problem for the rule. Freely admitted.

it's very rare to use this terminology with respect to revolvers

If you say so, I believe it. But to me, it is common, accurate and clear.

It would be less clear with regard to SA revolvers--a true problem.

SOP is to do a chamber check -- just to make absolutely sure.

But not if you're doing an emergency draw to shoot immediately. Further confusion.

It's a rule of safe gun handling.

Yes, it is, as I said. And a false statement.

It's purpose is to help assure

I know what its purpose is. I'm not sure that's always its effect. Its effect is often to confuse, or worse to convince the student that the 4 Rules aren't really rules.

Because when you clean it, you should have it broken down sufficiently to safely do so.

I take it, then, I am supposed to remove the front sideplate screw and cylinder from my DA revolvers before I clean them, so they're "broken down enough?" It is a pity that neither the SW manual nor the NRA basic pistol course informed me of that.

Or does Rule 2 not apply to revolver cleaning?

 

[robMaine]

Everyone who says "If you don't want a hole in it, don't point a gun at it, it is that simple" is lying to us and themselves. It is impossible to handle guns without pointing them at something you don't explicitly want a hole in. I don't want a hole in my floor, but guess where I point my EDC when I am handling it in my home.

I am fine with the Rules as guidelines but don't state them as these super serious rules when there are obviously exceptions. A rule implies it should never be broken, if there are times it is ok to break, guess what, it isn't a rule.

 

[Frank Ettin]

And when is the last time you referred to a DA revolver with the cylinder swung open as having an open action?

Every time I handle one. Obviously, your words are different. And that's a problem for the rule. Freely admitted.

And I don't recall ever doing so. Nor do I recall anyone else. Common terminology with a DA revolver is "open the cylinder."

It would be less clear with regard to SA revolvers--a true problem.

And a pretty significant problem it is too. So that pretty much blows away the universality of your proposed revised rule two.

SOP is to do a chamber check -- just to make absolutely sure.

But not if you're doing an emergency draw to shoot immediately. Further confusion.

But you left out what I wrote about, "...if you're gearing up for a day in the outside world...". If you're out and about and need to draw your gun in an emergency, you had already done your chamber check when you started your day.

It's [Rule One} a rule of safe gun handling.

Yes, it is, as I said. And a false statement.

It's purpose is to promote safe gun handling not deal with questions of existential reality.

It's purpose is to help assure

I know what its purpose is. I'm not sure that's always its effect.

It will always have its effect as long as one conducts himself in accordance with it. It has also been around for a long time, and you haven't come up with anything that is likely to accomplish its purpose better.

Everyone who says "If you don't want a hole in it, don't point a gun at it, it is that simple" is lying to us and themselves. It is impossible to handle guns without pointing them at something you don't explicitly want a hole in....

As pointed out earlier, the word is not "want." Rule Two as properly formulated is, "Never let the muzzle cover something you're not willing to destroy." (emphasis added)

And that is indeed accurate. Anything you point a gun at may be destroyed, and will certainly have a hole in it, if the gun fires. So you better make some choices. If you're not willing to see a hole one place, you better find some place where you'd be more willing to see a hole.

Destroying something is a risk you take when you point a gun at it. If you're not willing to see a particular thing destroyed, you need to find some place else, preferably someplace you care less about, to point the gun.

 

[Loosedhorse]

If you're out and about and need to draw your gun in an emergency, you had already done your chamber check when you started your day.

So, you are saying that if I need to draw my gun and I do have time for a chamber check, I shouldn't do it because I did it this morning? Disagree.

It's purpose is to promote safe gun handling not deal with [STRIKE]questions of existential[/STRIKE] reality

Fixed it.

you haven't come up with anything that is likely to accomplish its purpose better.

Well, if what I use is easier to understand, I actually think that will accomplish the purpose better. YMV.

 

[Frank Ettin]

It's purpose is to promote safe gun handling not deal with questions of existential reality

Fixed it.

You may disagree, but you are not authorized to change my copy. Don't do it.

 

[ElvinWarrior]

It seems that words are our greatest enemies at times.

I am reminded of Bill Clinton's statement during his presidential sex scandal.

"I did not have sex with that woman."

Well, by common intrepretation he did, but by his modified intrepration of the word "sex", he didn't, according to him.

Sincerely

ElvinWarrior... aka.. David, "EW"

 

[Bonesinium]

The version that I've been using for about a decade....

Perfect. I like that.

 

[HorseSoldier]

So, you are saying that if I need to draw my gun and I do have time for a chamber check, I shouldn't do it because I did it this morning? Disagree.

I press check my weapon before going on shift, before going on patrol, before leaving the house CCW'ing or whatever. If I maintain possession of my weapon and have not altered its condition, what possible reason would I have to worry that it's condition had changed from what I had put it at when I made it ready?

Weapon goes out of my possession (which would almost always mean cleared and locked anyway), it gets put back how I want it or status verified before I recommence carrying, etc.

Press checking unnecessarily is pointless and a waste of time if you have faith in your own competence.

 

[Loosedhorse]

Don't do it.

Or what? Geez, put a smiley on it, or sue me. You made a silly comment, and I riposted. Using a strike face so it would be clear what you had said, and what I had changed. Politely. On a discussion forum.

Well guys, I guess when someone resorts to "ordering" discussants about what they can and can't do--including vague implied threats from a lawyer about the consequences of "unauthorized actions"--honestly fiddle, that's beneath you--the good-natured discussion is over (at least for that poster).

Let me just say that, other than that, I've enjoyed the discussion. I've brought this topic up before, and it has devolved into "you're an idiot" and "you're unsafe--your goinng to get someone killed." That didn't happen here, and I thank you all.

After sleeping on it, this thread can be sumarized below, IMHO:

I think Rule 2 and the 4 Rules could be improved.

What do you mean?

Well, they're not worded idealy, they have to be explained, I think we can do better if we try.

Give me an example.

Well, try this one here.

That'll never work. It's got this problem and this problem.

True. But the 4 Rules have problems.

No, they don't.

OR

So what? They've been around a long time. Even though other rules have been around longer.

OR

They were written by Col. Cooper. [Llyoyd Bentsen arrives.] I met Col. Cooper, and, member, you're no Col. Cooper.

OR

I disagree.

That last one, I respect--and it even puts this on the plane where it belongs, individual opinion. The other responses give absolute authority to "oldness"--but a very specific oldness--or to a great teacher, who's style is not for everyone; or simply claim perfection.

(Perhaps I should apologize to Mr. Bentsen's memory. I don't think I was authorized to change his quote. )

Meanwhile, there's been a side discussion of folks sharing their (very good to excellent) variations.

In any case, thanks, everyone. I've enjoyed the suggestions and the critiques. Just not the orders and veiled threats.

Press checking unnecessarily is pointless and a waste of time if you have faith in your own competence.

I would have phrased it "...if the gun is always actually loaded when you think it is." But of course, I'm not authorized to change that.

Keeping your phrase as is: Yes, I do not have enough faith in my competence to assume a gun is loaded when I need it to be (unless, in a shoot-it-now emergency, I'm forced to), or to assume it is unloaded when I need it to be (and I know of no emergency need of an unloaded gun). You may suppose my humility on these points is a fault.

 

[AZ Hawkeye]

You will really like this post by Gabe Suarez. He wrote it back in 2004.

Control Your Muzzle - The Firing Line

"Don't Let the Muzzle Cover Anything You Are Not Willing To Destroy".

Let's keep an open mind boys and girls. Is this a ALWAYS viable tactical safety principle? Now before you raise your voices and fists and get the heretic-burning-kit open, hear me out.

First of all, I am not in the business of teaching lowest common denominator shooters, police academy conscripts, or low dedication folks. I have nothing against training them and think they should be taught sound basics. But I also believe that limiting high end shooters to white-belt techniques because that is all a particular trainer has the knowledge to teach is not only a disservice to everyone, but holds the art back in the dark ages.

Thus the focus of Suarez International courses is to teach everyone to their level. Advanced shooters (such as those who attend our Close Range Gunfighting and Interactive Gunfight Tactics) need more than what the grandma with the S&W Ladysmith gets.

Now about the muzzle. Do innocent people get covered with gun muzzles in gunfights? Certainly they do. Its a fact of life and those who say "no" haven't been in too many gunfights. Gunfights are not safe clinical events like we see in a classic shooting class "shoot house" drill. Rather, they are loud, dangerous, confused affairs where you may not be able to tell good guy from bad guy.

Who is the most important player in the gunfight? If you answered anything but "ME"!! , you need to revisit the mind set lecture. Unless there are rules of engagement that mitigate pointing in with the muzzle (in which case - adapt, overcome, and do what you must) point at the perceived source of the threat, not at the floor. Yes Virginia, its OK to point your gun at a man who is threatening you.

If a man has caused you enough stress that you grabbed your gun to begin with, you are probably justified in shooting him. If you are not justified in shooting, leave the gun in the holster. But if you do go to guns, make sure you are sending the right message. Point in!!

Now there are other situations relating to muzzles. Specifically covering yourself with the muzzle. Good Heavens Batman!

Certainly to be avoided, but let's not go to extremes. I'll bet most of us cover ourselves with our muzzles every single time we draw! Right now. Stand up with your holstered pistol, take your special approved stance and draw. Notice how your muzzle covers part of your leg on an angle as you exit the holster??

Now go sit in your car and pretend an adversary was coming to kill you and you had to do a surprise "stress draw" right toward him. How would you do it??? You would draw right to the threat as is human nature to do. Do you think you would do some roundabout draw "over-the-steering-wheel" draw? Be honest, you'd "skin that smokewagon" and point right in, giving no thought to the fact you just swept your legs on the way out. Again, covering yourself with the muzzle.

Look, the bottom line is that I'm not trying to sink anyone's boat. However, reality is reality and we must take it into consideration when we train. Its probably going to happen so instead of getting "goosy" about muzzles, educate your trigger finger to rest on the Index Point until you make a conscious decission to shoot.

So -

Control Your Muzzle And Do Not Allow It To Cover Anything or Anyone..... Unintentionally.


Cheers,


Gabe Suarez
Suarez International USA
http://www.suarezinternational.com

 

[Frank Ettin]

Or what? Geez, put a smiley on it, or sue me. You made a silly comment, and I riposted. Using a strike face so it would be clear what you had said, and what I had changed. Politely. On a discussion forum.

...--honestly fiddle, that's beneath you--the good-natured discussion is over (at least for that poster). ..

Whatever. The fact is that if you want to disagree with something I wrote, do so. But I consider this tactic of changing someone's words to be sloppy, insulting and improper. I resent it and never do it myself. I've been disputing for a living for more than thirty years. Surely you can find a better way in which to express yourself.

In any case, as far as I'm concerned, your proposed changes to various of the Four Rules have not been helpful.