• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Don't miss the unloading for transportation ND story in the Michigan forum

Interceptor_Knight

Regular Member
Joined
May 18, 2007
Messages
2,851
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

I support a general proctice of not chambering a round at a OC picnic. If a situation arises where you need your weapon, you can rack the slide as you draw andare not loosing any time. If you can not do this, then you have not spent near enough time at the range. An OC picnic is different than general OC in town. If you mess up in town, you are an isolated person messing up. If you mess up at the picnic, it casts a shadow onthe picnic.
 

Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,180
Location
Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin,
imported post

Interceptor_Knight wrote:
I support a general proctice of not chambering a round at a OC picnic. If a situation arises where you need your weapon, you can rack the slide as you draw andare not loosing any time. If you can not do this, then you have not spent near enough time at the range. An OC picnic is different than general OC in town. If you mess up in town, you are an isolated person messing up. If you mess up at the picnic, it casts a shadow onthe picnic.
If you mess up on this forum does it cast a shadow on the forum? An unloaded gun is a poor paper weight like a computer is a poor boat anchor.
 

Passive101

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2008
Messages
223
Location
, ,
imported post

Carrying a paper weight isn't much use to anyone.

Having to unload a firearm in the rain, dark, and attempting to hide it from the public like people do here is just increasing the risk of ND's.
 

Interceptor_Knight

Regular Member
Joined
May 18, 2007
Messages
2,851
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:
If you mess up on this forum does it cast a shadow on the forum? An unloaded gun is a poor paper weight like a computer is a poor boat anchor.

The actions of 1 member reflect on the group. If people make stupid public statements on the forum and the public reads it, it does reflect poorly on the forum...That is why there are forum rules.

A paper weight in skilled hands can be used to effectively apply deadly force ;).

There is a reason that according to WI law,a firearm with a magazineinserted is NOT "unloaded". The absence of a round in the chamberwhileholstered does not by any stretch of the imagination make a firearm less effective. This is carry condition 3. It is a legitimate form of carry.

Due to someone's lack of training and experience, they may find it difficult to draw the weapon, chamber a round and aim it without loosing their balance, tripping on their face or dropping the weapon on their own toes, wetting themselvesor breaking out in tears. If this is the case, thenthey have no business carrying in the first place and need to spend more time at the range before they seriously consider doing so.:dude:
 

Interceptor_Knight

Regular Member
Joined
May 18, 2007
Messages
2,851
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Passive101 wrote:
Carrying a paper weight isn't much use to anyone.
Refer to the above post....


Passive101 wrote:
Having to unload a firearm in the rain, dark, and attempting to hide it from the public like people do here is just increasing the risk of ND's.
If you can not clear your weapon with your eyes closed, then you need to spend more time at home andat the range getting intimate with your weapon before you seriously consider carrying it.

The facts are that most people do not spend enough time at home dry firing and doing their manual of arms. They do not spend enough time at the range getting proficient. If you do not support mandatory training, then youshould support safety standards so that the inexperienced Open Carrier standing next to you doesnot shoot you or themselves.
 

Passive101

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2008
Messages
223
Location
, ,
imported post

You can have any amount of training you want. The fact is that if LE officers had to unload constantly they would have ND's in the field as well. Even many of them only use their weapons during required training only a few times a year and sometimes only annually.

Most people have firearms for a need for self defense and do not train to be as proficient as many of us. We are a very small minority unfortunately. I wish people did and would want to train more. I find it fun.
 

hardballer

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2009
Messages
925
Location
West Coast of Wisconsin
imported post

I have never had a problem with speaking up when I see someone mis-handling a firearm.

I don't like barrels pointed at me at the range, in the gun shop or in someones gun room or garage.

I can't tell you how many times I have said something about that and hear this in response.

"It's not loaded, what's the big deal?"

The big deal is that you never point a barrel at something or someone you are not willing to destroy or kill.

While loading or un-loading a firearm, the barrel needs to be pointed down or away at the very least, down range.

The point to this is that we should speak up. Don't be afraid to let someone know they are screwing up and putting you in danger.

Also, any time you are in a position to teach, emphasize proper training and handling while loading or un-loading a firearm. You may repeat this every time you are able till you say the words in your sleep. It bears repeating over and over again that proper firearms safety and handling techniques while handling your sidearm is of paramount importance.

Never allow your mind to wander and always think about what you are doing.

By teaching, I mean when you're at the range with your buddies, wife, kids, in the garage or basement showing off your cache or whatever. etc.

I was taught by a retired Army Ranger armorer. He said the same things many of you have said here. Know your weapon.

If you own a firearm, proficiency with it in all areas seems to be a no brainer to me.

If more of us speak up more often, we can make a positive impact on safety and the public's view of our right to carry.

Write, speak, do.

P.S. Keep your finger off the trigger.
 

Brass Magnet

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2009
Messages
2,818
Location
Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

After a point it truly doesn't matter how much training or experience you've had. The more you handle a weapon the greater the opportunity for a ND. The unnecessary loading and unloading definitely DOES make the problem worse.

A perfect example is a machinist I know. He had 20 years of experience before he had an accident. He was running a machine which he knew to be dangerous, and hadran hundreds of timesbefore but lost one of his fingers anyway.

Was experience or training the problem? No. Diligence and Vigilance are the problem. In fact, the more used to something you are the more important it is to keep those two qualities in mind. In some cases one could even argue that too much training and experience is a bad thing.
 

Interceptor_Knight

Regular Member
Joined
May 18, 2007
Messages
2,851
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Let's get real. We aren't talking about individuals who have 20 years experience with handling firearms 8 hours a day 5 days a week and who get complacent. We are talking about people who seldom get to the range and who have likely never had any formal training other than maybe hunters' safety when they were 12 years old.

If you truly believe that this is an issue, then you should keep your handgun in condition 3 and you do not have to worry about bullet set back along with your predicted inevitable ND. I dissagree that "eventually it will happen" to everyone. I know of people with 30+ years experience in high risk manufacturing jobs who have never been injured. Some individuals are prone to make stupid safety mistakes. If you train to do things methodically and do this whether you are at home or out in public, the odds are reduced down to a level that it will likely never happen.
 

Brass Magnet

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2009
Messages
2,818
Location
Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Interceptor_Knight wrote:
Let's get real. We aren't talking about individuals who have 20 years experience with handling firearms 8 hours a day 5 days a week and who get complacent. We are talking about people who seldom get to the range and who have likely never had any formal training other than maybe hunters' safety when they were 12 years old.

If you truly believe that this is an issue, then you should keep your handgun in condition 3 and you do not have to worry about bullet set back along with your predicted inevitable ND. I dissagree that "eventually it will happen" to everyone. I know of people with 30+ years experience in high risk manufacturing jobs who have never been injured. Some individuals are prone to make stupid safety mistakes. If you train to do things methodically and do this whether you are at home or out in public, the odds are reduced down to a level that it will likely never happen.
Let's get real? Yes, lets.

If you truly don't believe that exessive handling of firearms statistically increases your risk to have something happen then you are the one that needs to get real.

Might as well straw-man as that seems to be ideal here: If I never go swimming will I be attacked by a shark? If I never get near Rosie O'Donnelsdinner plateI will be eaten?

Also, I never said that "eventually it will happen". Why try to put those words in my mouth?

My point is that any unnecessary handling is a bad thing.

If you know the basic rules of firearms safety and are Diligent you are far better off than one who has years of tacti-cool training and sacrifices diligence for complacency. Lest we forget "familiarity breeds complacency." It's as true as it always has been.
 

Interceptor_Knight

Regular Member
Joined
May 18, 2007
Messages
2,851
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

You are speaking generally in relation to statistical probability. I am addressing a specific statistical sub group of all the people handling firearms.

I amstating that your premise of a "greater opportunity" does not equate to higher statistical probabilityof a ND. There is a disproportunately higher statistical probability of the untrained inexperienced individual having a ND for every 1000 handlings of a firearm than for the properly trained and experienced individual. Most people do not place their hands in front of the barrel when they discharge the firearm. Many people put their hands near nips, etc in manufactuting settings which can do as much or more physical harm. Those who follow the basic safety rules in these settingssimply do not get hurt. Those who do not, end up bleeding.We do not place the least experienced people in the most dangerous situations.

Carrying your handgun in Condition 3 isin effect a less dangerous situation than condition 2. You can stil play stupid games and win stupid prizes,but the odds are diminished.
 

Interceptor_Knight

Regular Member
Joined
May 18, 2007
Messages
2,851
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

You are speaking generally in relation to statistical probability. I am addressing a specific statistical sub group of all the people handling firearms.

I amstating that your premise of a "greater opportunity" does not equate to higher statistical probabilityof a ND. There is a disproportunately higher statistical probability of the untrained inexperienced individual having a ND for every 1000 handlings of a firearm than for the properly trained and experienced individual. Most people do not place their hands in front of the barrel when they discharge the firearm. Many people put their hands near nips, etc in manufactuting settings which can do as much or more physical harm. Those who follow the basic safety rules in these settingssimply do not get hurt. Those who do not, end up bleeding.We do not place the least experienced people in the most dangerous situations.

Carrying your handgun in Condition 3 isin effect a less dangerous situation than condition 2. You can stil play stupid games and win stupid prizes,but the odds are diminished.
 

Brass Magnet

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2009
Messages
2,818
Location
Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Interceptor_Knight wrote:
I amstating that your premise of a "greater opportunity" does not equate to higher statistical probabilityof a ND.
Honestly? Really? Did you really just write that? How in the world does it not equate?
There is a disproportunately higher statistical probability of the untrained inexperienced individual having a ND for every 1000 handlings of a firearm than for the properly trained and experienced individual.
I would agree; however, I beleive the that the statistical difference between the trained and the untrained is much less than one would think. You are alot more careful with things you aren't intimately familar with. The first time you drove a car you had both hands on the wheel and no distractions. Now you may drive a car with one hand on the wheel, the other wrapped around a quarter pounder with cheese while talking on the cell phone held up to your ear with your shoulder.
Most people do not place their hands in front of the barrel when they discharge the firearm. Many people put their hands near nips, etc in manufactuting settings which can do as much or more physical harm. Those who follow the basic safety rules in these settingssimply do not get hurt. Those who do not, end up bleeding.We do not place the least experienced people in the most dangerous situations.
Point: "Those who follow the basic safety rules simply do not get hurt." Of course that's true but what would ever keep you from following those rules? The reason's could be two: Not knowing them (an untrained individual) or complacency. That's pretty much it.
Carrying your handgun in Condition 3 isin effect a less dangerous situation than condition 2. You can stil play stupid games and win stupid prizes,but the odds are diminished.
Once again; agree, but that wasn't the point.
 

Rick Finsta

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2007
Messages
232
Location
Saukville, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

The four rules are not designed to stop ADs* and NDs, they are meant to prevent injury in the event of an AD or ND. Sounds to me like they worked in this instance.

The probability of discharge upon handling of a weaponcannot be developed in a vacuum based on arbitrary numbers; itmust becalculated based on the number of times it actually happens versus the times opportunity existed. Herego, it follows that given the probability of discharge is a function of the number of times weapons are handled,if you increase the number of times a weapon is handled,the probability of a discharge has increased proportionally. While I think that Condition 3 carry is a good option for me, I don't think that everyone feels the same way.

I also disagree that this looks bad for all of us as a community in any way. No press is bad press, as they say.

This is just one more opportunity to turn the situation around (in mass media outlets, no doubt) and raise awareness of the fact that current state law forced this man to handle his firearm in a situation where he would not have done so by choice. Remember when this happened to the pilot? Remember when we got to all get out in the mass media and say "we told you so!" We got to point out that we thought the holster design and unneccesary handling were all going to increase the chances of an accident, and that's EXACTLY what we should do here. We're in a fight, and we need to use rhetoric sometimes to our advantage, even if we are not being individually philosophically pure while doing so.

*Yes, I realize that there is no difference under the law in WI between AD and ND, however there is a difference. A fire-by-malfunction is certainly not a ND, for instance.
 

Interceptor_Knight

Regular Member
Joined
May 18, 2007
Messages
2,851
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Rick Finsta wrote:
The probability of discharge upon handling of a weaponcannot be developed in a vacuum based on arbitrary numbers; itmust becalculated based on the number of times it actually happens versus the times opportunity existed. Herego, it follows that given the probability of discharge is a function of the number of times weapons are handled,if you increase the number of times a weapon is handled,the probability of a discharge has increased proportionally. While I think that Condition 3 carry is a good option for me, I don't think that everyone feels the same way.

In strict accordance to your opening premise.....

The more times thatweaponsare handled safely, the lower the statistical odds become that a negligent discharge will occur with each handling.:cool:
 

Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,180
Location
Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin,
imported post

Interceptor_Knight wrote:
Rick Finsta wrote:
itmust becalculated based on the number of times it actually happens versus the times opportunity existed.
In strict accordance to your opening premise.....

The more times thatweaponsare handled safely, the lower the statistical odds become that a negligent discharge will occur with each handling.:cool:
"Versus" is hardly an arithmetic operation and does not specify proportionality or inverse proportionality. It might mean 'against' and its root is 'overthrow'.
 

Nutczak

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Messages
2,165
Location
The Northwoods, lakeland area, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Interceptor_Knight wrote:
The more times thatweaponsare handled safely, the lower the statistical odds become that a negligent discharge will occur with each handling.:cool:
And I will counter with this statement, If the firearm does not need to be handled at all, I would be willing to bet the chances of having it discharge in any wayare absolutely ZERO!
 

Interceptor_Knight

Regular Member
Joined
May 18, 2007
Messages
2,851
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Nutczak wrote:
And I will counter with this statement, If the firearm does not need to be handled at all, I would be willing to bet the chances of having it discharge in any wayare absolutely ZERO!

Essentially you are stating the fact that if you are never going to remove your firearm from the gun safe, then your ability to Open Carryis absolutely ZERO...:cool:
 
Top