LFI-I: Judicious Use of Deadly Force - at Pittsburgh, PA
Lawrence V. Cipriani
LFI-I: Judicious Use of Deadly Force
Pittsburgh, PA June 1 - 4 , 2000
Massad Ayoob's classic Lethal Force Institute course, LFI-I The
Judicious Use of Deadly Force, will be offered again in Pittsburgh, PA,
June 1 through 4, 2000. Enrollment will be capped at 30. Tuition is
$600.
The course will be held at the Forest Grove Sportsmens Association,
convenient to Pittsburgh, its new international airport, I-79, and many
motels. Information on logistics, motels, equipment you will need, an
area map and directions to the range will be provided when you have
registered (see Reservation Form).
LFI-I assumes knowledge of firearm safety and basic facility with your
handgun. If you have any questions, you may call Preston Covey, LFI
sponsor and liason for the Pittsburgh region, at 412-268-8493. If a
reservation form is not included with this announcement, you may obtain
one by calling or writing or Faxing the Lethal Force Institute at
603-224-6814 or FAX (603) 226-3554 or P.O. Box 122, Concord NH
03301.
LFI-I is 40 hours and split roughly 60/40 between classroom
lecture/demo/video and range training. The basic LFI-I curriculum
includes: handgun safety, mechanics, care and handling; factors in
weapon selection; defensive shooting skills, with intensive range
exercises; wound ballistics and dynamics; principles of threat
management and the judicious use of deadly force -- tactical, legal,
ethical, psychological and physiological dimensions; managing the
aftermath of a defensive shooting; in short: self-defense in the home,
in the street, in court -- the tactical, legal, moral and psychological
survival of lethal threat.
Thus, while LFI-I very effectively covers the skills and dynamics of
defensive pistolcraft, it not only teaches how to shoot but also when
to shoot, when not to shoot, how to manage and survive a lethal
confrontation in all its aspects. If you own or carry a firearm for
professional or defensive purposes, this course is invaluable. If you
contemplate ever using a firearm in self-defense, this course is a
testbed for taking the measure of your skill and commitment. LFI-I is
about choice and empowerment, on the premise that power and
responsibility are commensurate.
Massad Ayoob is the Director of the Lethal Force Institute in Concord,
NH, National Chairman for Firearms Training for the American Society of
Law Enforcement Trainers (ASLET), and a member of the International
Association of Law Enforcement Firearms Instructors (IALEFI). An
international leader in self-defense and firearms training for both law
enforcement and civilians, Ayoob holds over two dozen professional
special weapons and tactics certifications, a dozen professional awards,
and dozens of competitive combat shooting awards. As a sworn police
officer presently at the rank of Captain, he has 20 years experience as
a patrol and training officer. In addition to enforcing the law, he has
extensive experience on both sides of the courtroom, for the prosecution
and for the defense, as a homicide investigator, as a certified police
prosecutor for the State of New Hampshire, as an expert witness, and as
Vice Chair of the Forensic Evidence Committee of the National
Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL), the only non-attorney
ever to hold this position. Ayoob has served as an expert witness,
consultant and defense architect in a multitude of court cases across
the nation on the defensive use of deadly force. His course for
attorneys entitled 'The Management of the Lethal Force/Deadly Weapons
Case' was, according to Jeffrey Weiner, past President of NACDL, 'the
best course for everything you need to know but are never taught in law
school.'
--
Lawrence V. Cipriani, l...@lucent.com, Lucent Technologies Inc.
"The worst thing about living in the declining era of a great
civilization, is knowing that you are." -- Robert A. Heinlein
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please find out about rec.guns at http://doubletap.cs.umd.edu/rec.guns
Jim Fry
l...@lucent.com (Lawrence V. Cipriani) wrote:
LFI-I: Judicious Use of Deadly Force
Pittsburgh, PA June 1 - 4 , 2000
Massad Ayoob's classic Lethal Force Institute course, LFI-I The
Judicious Use of Deadly Force, will be offered again in Pittsburgh,
PA, June 1 through 4, 2000. Enrollment will be capped at 30. Tuition
is $600. LFI-I is 40 hours and split roughly 60/40 between classroom
lecture/demo/video and range training
Massad Ayoob is the Director of the Lethal Force Institute in Concord,
NH,..YaDaYa.. and dozens of competitive combat shooting awards"
OK- One more time
Ayoob is many things to many people but one thing he is not is a
competent survival shooting instructor. Unless the LFI course of
firearms instruction has been updated in the last two years (which is
doubtful) there is no basis for practical reality within it.
Example-LFI teaches the student to use a hard surface to index the
firearm, as in resting the gun on a barricade. This is a competitive
shooting technique with several severe practical consequences. First -
the shooter is locked into a static position. Second - the shooter will
almost always extend the firearm muzzle beyond the barricade where it
can be easily deflected or grabbed.
Example - All competent survival-shooting instructors now teach movement
while firing. LFI does not.
Example - All shooting instructors teach that firearms should be treated
as loaded ALL OF THE TIME. LFI imposes a dual standard by conducting
range work on a "cold range." Students are presumed incompetent to
holster loaded firearms. This facilitates Ayoob's passion for CYA but
has serious consequences for practical reality. Students who are
trained that it is OK to holster an unloaded firearm will forever wonder
when they reach for it "is it loaded ?"
Perhaps the LFI course of shooting instruction has been brought into the
realm of currency. If anyone has experienced it in the past two years
would like to correct me, please do. Otherwise, I advise caution when
taking shooting instruction from the Ayoob!
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Jack Previdi
Jim Fry <at1...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8e7e80$rfd$1...@xring.cs.umd.edu...
# "In article <8e5rmg$n33$1...@xring.cs.umd.edu>,
# l...@lucent.com (Lawrence V. Cipriani) wrote:
#
# LFI-I: Judicious Use of Deadly Force
# Pittsburgh, PA June 1 - 4 , 2000
# Massad Ayoob's classic Lethal Force Institute course, LFI-I The
# Judicious Use of Deadly Force, will be offered again in Pittsburgh,
# PA, June 1 through 4, 2000. Enrollment will be capped at 30. Tuition
# is $600. LFI-I is 40 hours and split roughly 60/40 between classroom
# lecture/demo/video and range training
# Massad Ayoob is the Director of the Lethal Force Institute in Concord,
# NH,..YaDaYa.. and dozens of competitive combat shooting awards"
#
# OK- One more time
# Ayoob is many things to many people but one thing he is not is a
# competent survival shooting instructor. Unless the LFI course of
# firearms instruction has been updated in the last two years (which is
# doubtful) there is no basis for practical reality within it.
#
# Example-LFI teaches the student to use a hard surface to index the
# firearm, as in resting the gun on a barricade. This is a competitive
# shooting technique with several severe practical consequences. First -
# the shooter is locked into a static position. Second - the shooter will
# almost always extend the firearm muzzle beyond the barricade where it
# can be easily deflected or grabbed.
#
# Example - All competent survival-shooting instructors now teach movement
# while firing. LFI does not.
#
# Example - All shooting instructors teach that firearms should be treated
# as loaded ALL OF THE TIME. LFI imposes a dual standard by conducting
# range work on a "cold range." Students are presumed incompetent to
# holster loaded firearms. This facilitates Ayoob's passion for CYA but
# has serious consequences for practical reality. Students who are
# trained that it is OK to holster an unloaded firearm will forever wonder
# when they reach for it "is it loaded ?"
#
# Perhaps the LFI course of shooting instruction has been brought into the
# realm of currency. If anyone has experienced it in the past two years
# would like to correct me, please do. Otherwise, I advise caution when
# taking shooting instruction from the Ayoob!
Anyone who thinks a cop is going to tell you anything that *might* give
you the edge is nuts. No matter how friendly , their credo is
" Us against them." Don't ever forget they are NOT peace officers,
they are LAW ENFORCEMENT.
Jack Previdi
--
Disclose your Credit Card only to PayPal and you can buy and SELL
on the web without a Merchant Account. Get 5$ for signing up. It's FREE.
https://secure.paypal.com/refer/pal=jprevidi%40cyberonic.com
Julius Chang
#news:8e7e80$rfd$1...@xring.cs.umd.edu...
## Example - All shooting instructors teach that firearms should be treated
## as loaded ALL OF THE TIME. LFI imposes a dual standard by conducting
## range work on a "cold range." Students are presumed incompetent to
## holster loaded firearms. This facilitates Ayoob's passion for CYA but
## has serious consequences for practical reality. Students who are
## trained that it is OK to holster an unloaded firearm will forever wonder
## when they reach for it "is it loaded ?"
#1, Cooper's Rule 1, which I assume is what
you are referring to, says
"All guns are always loaded."
It is a statement of mindset. The "treat as loaded..."
approach embodies a different and weaker mindset.
#2, Ayoob has taught some LFI classes using a
hot range (e.g., LFI Survival Tactics).
Julius
Robert P. Firriolo
# #1, Cooper's Rule 1, which I assume is what
# you are referring to, says
#
# "All guns are always loaded."
#
# It is a statement of mindset. The "treat as loaded..."
# approach embodies a different and weaker mindset.
Some would say the rule as phrased by Cooper is better suited to those
with a weaker mind.
----------
I love the smell of CLP in the evening. It smells like ... freedom.
mark smalling
learned shooting on the move, the turret position, and changing angles
of fire, all while in motion. We also learned use of cover, and
barricade shooting and never were we told to have the weapon contact
cover. One must remember that LFI-1 is the basic course, and has much
more to do with the legal, moral, and ethical use of firearms, and the
minority of time is spent on the range. This changes from LFI-2 on up,
if you should continue in you're education. The defensive tactics taught
are sound, especially stressfire, however if you are looking for a
strictly shooting school you may be disappointed keep in mind that you
want to survive a shooting, and then survive the aftermath in court. I
always tell people that if they only attend one school in their life,
make it LFI-1, after that any of the reputable schools such as
frontsight, tftt, or thunder ranch will do to make you a better shooter.
But a high priority should be placed on a) surviving the attack and b)
staying free to provide for your family. There are prosecuting attorneys
out there who will, and have, sent good people to jail to further their
political careers. Stay safe.
Jack Previdi
mark smalling <M19...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:8ef55c$i20$1...@xring.cs.umd.edu...
# staying free to provide for your family. There are prosecuting attorneys
# out there who will, and have, sent good people to jail to further their
# political careers. Stay safe.
The Hell you say!
Jack
---
Sign up with PayPal and you can buy and SELL
on the web without a Merchant Account. Get 5$ for signing up. It's FREE.
https://secure.paypal.com/refer/pal=jprevidi%40cyberonic.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julius Chang
#Julius Chang wrote:
#
## #1, Cooper's Rule 1, which I assume is what
## you are referring to, says
##
## "All guns are always loaded."
##
## It is a statement of mindset. The "treat as loaded..."
## approach embodies a different and weaker mindset.
#
#Some would say the rule as phrased by Cooper is better suited to those
#with a weaker mind.
Perhaps. But if we all were of such a strong mind, there
would be no need for Cooper's Rules 2-4. "All guns
are always loaded" says it all. What kind of idiot would
point a loaded gun at someone he didn't intend to
shoot? What kind of idiot puts his finger on the trigger
of a loaded gun before the sights are on the target? And
what kind of idiot doesn't ID his target and what is behind
and beyond it?
Julius
Bruce Adams
#
# Perhaps. But if we all were of such a strong mind, there
# would be no need for Cooper's Rules 2-4. "All guns
# are always loaded" says it all. What kind of idiot would
# point a loaded gun at someone he didn't intend to
# shoot? What kind of idiot puts his finger on the trigger
# of a loaded gun before the sights are on the target? And
# what kind of idiot doesn't ID his target and what is behind
# and beyond it?
#
# Julius
Yes…And by the same logic. What kind of idiot would permanently mount a light
on a handgun that requires them to point that handgun at a person to then
determine if there is a threat? Lets see, pointing a loaded firearm at an
innocent. That might easily be considered reckless endangerment.
Robert P. Firriolo
#
# Robert P. Firriolo wrote in message <8ecu56$dhr$1...@xring.cs.umd.edu>...
# #Julius Chang wrote:
# #
# ## #1, Cooper's Rule 1, which I assume is what
# ##
# ## "All guns are always loaded."
# ##
# ## It is a statement of mindset. The "treat as loaded..."
# ## approach embodies a different and weaker mindset.
# #
# #Some would say the rule as phrased by Cooper is better suited to those
#
# Perhaps. But if we all were of such a strong mind, there
# would be no need for Cooper's Rules 2-4. "All guns
# are always loaded" says it all. What kind of idiot would
# point a loaded gun at someone he didn't intend to
# shoot? What kind of idiot puts his finger on the trigger
# of a loaded gun before the sights are on the target? And
# what kind of idiot doesn't ID his target and what is behind
# and beyond it?
Because I have considerable respect for Julius, I won't dispute his
point. I think this is a minor point on which we will hopefully agree to
disagree. I will explain my comment, though.
I consider the rule "All guns are always loaded" to be less useful than
"Treat every gun as if it is loaded" or "All guns are always loaded
until you determine otherwise" for the following reasons. Everybody
knows that guns are not always loaded, and all can be unloaded and made
safe. A gun a competant gun handler has personally determined to be
unloaded is indeed unloaded, and may be treated as such (e.g.,
disassembled, cleaned, dry fired, etc.). If "all guns are always
loaded" we could never do something countless shooters do -- safely dry
fire. But I can still dry fire while _treating_ the gun as if it is
loaded (e.g., keeping it pointing it in a safe direction at all times.)
Teaching a rule that one knows to be untrue invites contempt of the
rule. People _know_ that not every gun is always loaded. Expecting
them to adhere to a rule based on an erroneous premise is, IMHO,
unrealistic and less useful than having them remember a rule with no
exceptions and no false premise.
----------
I love the smell of CLP in the evening. It smells like ... freedom.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Thomen
"Robert P. Firriolo" wrote:
#
# Because I have considerable respect for Julius, I won't dispute his
# point. I think this is a minor point on which we will hopefully agree to
# disagree. I will explain my comment, though.
#
# I consider the rule "All guns are always loaded" to be less useful than
# "Treat every gun as if it is loaded" or "All guns are always loaded
# until you determine otherwise" for the following reasons. Everybody
# knows that guns are not always loaded, and all can be unloaded and made
# safe. A gun a competant gun handler has personally determined to be
# unloaded is indeed unloaded, and may be treated as such (e.g.,
# disassembled, cleaned, dry fired, etc.). If "all guns are always
# loaded" we could never do something countless shooters do -- safely dry
# fire. But I can still dry fire while _treating_ the gun as if it is
# loaded (e.g., keeping it pointing it in a safe direction at all times.)
#
# Teaching a rule that one knows to be untrue invites contempt of the
# rule. People _know_ that not every gun is always loaded. Expecting
# them to adhere to a rule based on an erroneous premise is, IMHO,
# unrealistic and less useful than having them remember a rule with no
# exceptions and no false premise.
I think you're reading too much into it; the expression "all guns are
always loaded" represents a mind-set - not a fact. Part of treating a
gun as always being loaded as a mind-set leads naturally to different
behavior.
It also avoids the problems of THINKING the gun is unloaded because
someone says it is, or because you know you unloaded it (but forgot
someone else may have loaded it - or even that YOU reloaded it -
absentmindedness has killed).
Obviously, disassembly of a weapon is not hampered by treating it as
loaded; once it is functionally disassembled unless you drop it on your
toe it is not likely to be a threat. Dry-firing is a different matter.
Just ask the hotels surrounding any of the major shooting schools. Ask
them how many TV's, toilets, pictures, and windows they've lost when
people were "dry firing".
Mark
Julius Chang
at someone as part of the threat ID process.
Julius
Bruce Adams wrote in message <8el2rr$282$1...@xring.cs.umd.edu>...
##
##
## Perhaps. But if we all were of such a strong mind, there
## would be no need for Cooper's Rules 2-4. "All guns
## are always loaded" says it all. What kind of idiot would
## point a loaded gun at someone he didn't intend to
## shoot? What kind of idiot puts his finger on the trigger
## of a loaded gun before the sights are on the target? And
## what kind of idiot doesn't ID his target and what is behind
## and beyond it?
##
## Julius
#
#Yes…And by the same logic. What kind of idiot would permanently mount a
light
#on a handgun that requires them to point that handgun at a person to then
#determine if there is a threat? Lets see, pointing a loaded firearm at an
#innocent. That might easily be considered reckless endangerment.
Julius Chang
#Julius Chang wrote:
##
## Robert P. Firriolo wrote in message <8ecu56$dhr$1...@xring.cs.umd.edu>...
## #Julius Chang wrote:
## #
## ## you are referring to, says
## ##
## ## "All guns are always loaded."
## ##
## ## It is a statement of mindset. The "treat as loaded..."
## ## approach embodies a different and weaker mindset.
## #
## #Some would say the rule as phrased by Cooper is better suited to those
## #with a weaker mind.
##
## Perhaps. But if we all were of such a strong mind, there
## would be no need for Cooper's Rules 2-4. "All guns
## are always loaded" says it all. What kind of idiot would
## point a loaded gun at someone he didn't intend to
## shoot? What kind of idiot puts his finger on the trigger
## of a loaded gun before the sights are on the target? And
## what kind of idiot doesn't ID his target and what is behind
## and beyond it?
#
#point. I think this is a minor point on which we will hopefully agree to
#disagree. I will explain my comment, though.
#
#I consider the rule "All guns are always loaded" to be less useful than
#"Treat every gun as if it is loaded" or "All guns are always loaded
#knows that guns are not always loaded, and all can be unloaded and made
All guns are always loaded. As soon as that action
closes, how do you know that the gun is unloaded?
Perhaps, you were distractet or whatever. You forgot
to check/clear the chamber. You only think that the gun
is unloaded. It happens to the best. It happened to
a friend of a friend who is a very experienced military
operator. Fortunately, his redundant gun handling
prevented any injury.
All guns are always loaded.
You have no redundancy otherwise.
#safe. A gun a competant gun handler has personally determined to be
#unloaded is indeed unloaded, and may be treated as such (e.g.,
#disassembled, cleaned, dry fired, etc.). If "all guns are always
#loaded" we could never do something countless shooters do -- safely dry
#fire. But I can still dry fire while _treating_ the gun as if it is
#loaded (e.g., keeping it pointing it in a safe direction at all times.)
All guns are always loaded, even in dry fire. That's why
you use a proper backstop when you dry fire. You aren't
breaking the rules. You *are willing to shoot the object*
you are pointing the gun at. Your sights *are on the target*
and you do *know your target and backstop*.
If you don't follow this procedure, I recommend not
dry firing. Because one day, you might screw up and
use a loaded gun in your dry fire routine because you only
"treated guns as if they were loaded".
When "all guns are always loaded", you aren't going
to screw up because you must obey the safety rules.
No exceptions.
#Teaching a rule that one knows to be untrue invites contempt of the
Sorry, disagree. The contempt comes when you only
"treat" guns "as if" they are loaded. That's when you
are telling someone that if they are skilled, smart,
clever, or whatever, then they can break the rules
"because we know that only the stupid people are
the ones who screw up".
All guns are always loaded says that you can never
break the rules.
Julius
Robert P. Firriolo
# Obviously, disassembly of a weapon is not hampered by treating it as
# loaded;
Really? Would you knowingly disassemble a loaded firearm? If it was
loaded, I wouldn't even attempt to disassemble it. And that is
precisely my point. We know we can safely do things with a gun we are
sure is unloaded that we would never think of doing with a loaded gun.
Another example. Would you look down the barrel of a gun you consider
loaded? I sure wouldn't. But I have looked down the barrel of loads of
guns I determined to be unloaded and made safe (i.e., bolt or cylinder
open, etc.).
----------
I love the smell of CLP in the evening. It smells like ... freedom.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Norman Yarvin
#
#
The problem with the statement "All guns are always loaded" is that it is
untrue. If it were true, we would never have to load guns, or check to
make sure they were loaded. We would never run out of ammo.
But the statement "All guns should be treated as if they were loaded" is
even worse. Rather than an untrue statement, it is an order to behave as
if that untrue statement were true. If we obeyed it completely, we would
never load guns, or check to make sure they were loaded. We might run
out of ammo, but would never acknowledge it. Thus it is just as
disrespectful of the truth; but it is worse because it is longer and
offers more opportunities for confusion.
Either way, this disrespect for the truth creates practical problems.
When teaching either of those two forms of the rule to beginners, one
always has to explain what it means -- and the explanation is almost
always that it means something like "Never assume that a gun is unloaded,
or take anyone's word for it."
But if we changed Rule 1 into:
"Never assume that a gun is unloaded, or take anyone's word for it."
then there would be no need for an explanation. There would still be a
need to illustrate the rule with examples of the awful things that
occasionally happen to people who disobey it, but there would be no need
to "interpret" the rule in the way that the Supreme Court "interprets"
the Constitution today.
--
Norman Yarvin yar...@cs.yale.edu
"A well-regulated death squad being the best defense of a tyrannical
government, the right of the government to selectively enforce
disarmament laws shall not be infringed."
David Steuber
' But if we changed Rule 1 into:
'
' "Never assume that a gun is unloaded, or take anyone's word for it."
I dislike this. It contains a negative. I would prefere something
more positive like,
"Treat a gun as loaded until personally confirmed otherwise."
I agree that, "All guns are loaded" is silly for the reasons you
stated. I make it a practice to really have loaded guns in my
holsters. I usually unload a gun before putting it in its box. When
I pick up a gun, I have to always check to see if it is loaded or not
before I do anything with it. It has become a routine practice.
--
David Steuber | Hi! My name is David Steuber, and I am
NRA Member | a hoploholic.
All bits are significant. Some bits are more significant than others.
-- Charles Babbage Orwell
Julius Chang
Norman Yarvin wrote in message <8ep8m2$eab$1...@xring.cs.umd.edu>...
#"Julius Chang" <jch...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
## #1, Cooper's Rule 1, which I assume is what
## you are referring to, says
##
## "All guns are always loaded."
##
## It is a statement of mindset. The "treat as loaded..."
## approach embodies a different and weaker mindset.
#
#The problem with the statement "All guns are always loaded" is that it is
#untrue. If it were true, we would never have to load guns, or check to
#make sure they were loaded. We would never run out of ammo.
You seem to be confused as to what "statement of mindset"
means.
When you dry fire, I hope that the gun is dry. However,
because your mindset is "All guns are always loaded",
your gun handling doesn't change just because this
is dry fire.
Running out of ammo and similar such arguments
are similarly not relevant since they don't affect your
proper mindset.
Or are you arguing that pointing a gun at your own
face is ok as long as you know the gun is empty?
I'll tell you what. If you believe that, someday you'll
make a judgment error and earn a Darwin Award.
#But the statement "All guns should be treated as if they were loaded" is
#even worse. Rather than an untrue statement, it is an order to behave as
#if that untrue statement were true. If we obeyed it completely, we would
#never load guns, or check to make sure they were loaded. We might run
#out of ammo, but would never acknowledge it. Thus it is just as
#disrespectful of the truth; but it is worse because it is longer and
#offers more opportunities for confusion.
#
#Either way, this disrespect for the truth creates practical problems.
As stated previously, it is a statement of mindset.
I hardly think that there is a disrespect for the truth.
If you really believe that Cooper's Rule 1 flaunts
the truth, I think that you don't understand what
his rules mean.
#When teaching either of those two forms of the rule to beginners, one
#always has to explain what it means -- and the explanation is almost
#always that it means something like "Never assume that a gun is unloaded,
#or take anyone's word for it."
#
#But if we changed Rule 1 into:
#
# "Never assume that a gun is unloaded, or take anyone's word for it."
Everyone has a better mousetrap. Frankly, yours
is rather wordy.
Julius
Julius Chang
#yarvin...@cs.yale.edu (Norman Yarvin) writes:
#
#' But if we changed Rule 1 into:
#'
#' "Never assume that a gun is unloaded, or take anyone's word for it."
#I dislike this. It contains a negative. I would prefere something
#more positive like,
#
# "Treat a gun as loaded until personally confirmed otherwise."
#
#I agree that, "All guns are loaded" is silly for the reasons you
#stated. I make it a practice to really have loaded guns in my
#holsters. I usually unload a gun before putting it in its box. When
#I pick up a gun, I have to always check to see if it is loaded or not
#before I do anything with it. It has become a routine practice.
If you "always check", that means you also check
the "unloaded" gun in your lock box.
So if the gun is unloaded, then why are you checking it?
All guns are always loaded. That's why.
The word "treat" is wishy-washy. It is a weak mindset.
IMO, it suggests that you can make exceptions, as your
version of Cooper's Rule 1 clearly shows.
With your rule, you apparently think that it is ok to
point guns at other people, once you personally
confirm that they are unloaded.
Another problem with your approach is that you
introduce human judgment, and thus the potential
for human error. Safety must be reflexive. If you
have to depend on clear thinking, someday
you are going to be tired, distracted, etc and
you will screw up.
Mark Thomen
it's no wonder we still have "unloaded" guns going off and killing
people.
Go back and reread my post, then reread it again. It's the MIND SET
that counts. Yes, I disassemble a weapon I have determined to be empty
immediately before starting disassembly, but that does NOT mean that I
ever treat it with less than the utmost care while doing so. And I
ALWAYS check it before disassembling it - because I BELIEVE the weapon
MUST be loaded (even if I *KNOW* that I unloaded it five minutes ago).
And no, I NEVER look down the business end of a barrel (even when the
weapon is disassembled). Call me anal, but I prefer to be that way.
"Robert P. Firriolo" wrote:
> ...
Mark Thomen
clock when they just ask what time it is - don't they?
The very simple statement (rule 1, below) embodies all that is important
in YOUR version of the rule. Not a lot of people go into the
metaphysical and psychological examination that you do to derive your
rule. They just realize that if they always treat them as loaded, they
are applying common sense to gun-handling and safety.
yarvin...@cs.yale.edu
#Norman Yarvin wrote in message <8ep8m2$eab$1...@xring.cs.umd.edu>...
##"Julius Chang" <jch...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
### #1, Cooper's Rule 1, which I assume is what
### you are referring to, says
###
### "All guns are always loaded."
###
### It is a statement of mindset. The "treat as loaded..."
### approach embodies a different and weaker mindset.
##
##The problem with the statement "All guns are always loaded" is that it is
##untrue. If it were true, we would never have to load guns, or check to
##make sure they were loaded. We would never run out of ammo.
#
# You seem to be confused as to what "statement of mindset"
# means.
#
# When you dry fire, I hope that the gun is dry. However,
# because your mindset is "All guns are always loaded",
# your gun handling doesn't change just because this
# is dry fire.
But that is because of Rules 2 and 3, which apply even to guns known to
be unloaded.
# Running out of ammo and similar such arguments
# are similarly not relevant since they don't affect your
# proper mindset.
#
# Or are you arguing that pointing a gun at your own
# face is ok as long as you know the gun is empty?
Again, another of the rules already prohibits this. It doesn't need to
be doubly prohibited.
##When teaching either of those two forms of the rule to beginners, one
##always has to explain what it means -- and the explanation is almost
##always that it means something like "Never assume that a gun is unloaded,
##or take anyone's word for it."
##
##But if we changed Rule 1 into:
##
## "Never assume that a gun is unloaded, or take anyone's word for it."
#
# Everyone has a better mousetrap. Frankly, yours
# is rather wordy.
Today, people use a lot more words than that, since they always have to
explain what the rule means after stating it. For that matter, this
whole thread would not exist if the rule's meaning were unambiguous.
--
Norman Yarvin yar...@cs.yale.edu
Robert P. Firriolo
#
# Yes, I disassemble a weapon I have determined to be empty
# immediately before starting disassembly, but that does NOT mean that I
# ever treat it with less than the utmost care while doing so.
Thank you for making my point for me. You just wrote that the firearm
to be disassembled is determined to be empty, and is therefore you know
it is not "always loaded," and further, that you "treat" it as if it is
loaded. You can repeat until your last breath your mantra of "Every gun
is always loaded," buy you are living by what I consider the preferred
version, "Treat every gun as if it is loaded."
----------
I love the smell of CLP in the evening. It smells like ... freedom.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Norman Yarvin
#yarvin...@cs.yale.edu (Norman Yarvin) writes:
#
#' But if we changed Rule 1 into:
#'
#' "Never assume that a gun is unloaded, or take anyone's word for it."
#
#I dislike this. It contains a negative.
A single negative is not a problem. Most of the Ten Commandments start
with "Thou shalt not...".
A double negative can be confusing, and the combination of "never" and
"un"-loaded could be considered a double negative, but "unloaded" is no
more complicated an idea than "loaded". Another aspect of double
negatives is that they usually can easily be eliminated without changing
the meaning of the sentence; but this one cannot.
# I would prefer something
#more positive like,
#
# "Treat a gun as loaded until personally confirmed otherwise."
That still says to treat a carry gun as loaded even when it isn't.
Also, saying "personally confirmed" is descending a bit too far into
detail. A single personal confirmation is not sufficient, since guns
must often be rechecked to guard against fading memory and/or the
possibility that someone else messed with them. You obviously know this,
since you offered it up as an example, but it is best if the rule is not
dependent on the examples of how to follow it. There always have to be
examples, but they should illustrate the rule rather than modifying it.
That way people can tailor the examples to suit a specific audience,
without worrying that they might lose an essential part of the rule.
--
Norman Yarvin yar...@cs.yale.edu
Julius Chang
<8eunvt$r8g$1...@xring.cs.umd.edu>...##Norman Yarvin wrote in message <8ep8m2$eab$1...@xring.cs.umd.edu>...
###"Julius Chang" <jch...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
#### #1, Cooper's Rule 1, which I assume is what
#### you are referring to, says
####
#### "All guns are always loaded."
####
#### It is a statement of mindset. The "treat as loaded..."
#### approach embodies a different and weaker mindset.
###
###The problem with the statement "All guns are always loaded" is that it is
###untrue. If it were true, we would never have to load guns, or check to
###make sure they were loaded. We would never run out of ammo.
##
## You seem to be confused as to what "statement of mindset"
## means.
##
## When you dry fire, I hope that the gun is dry. However,
## because your mindset is "All guns are always loaded",
## your gun handling doesn't change just because this
## is dry fire.
#
#But that is because of Rules 2 and 3, which apply even to guns known to
#be unloaded.
Man, you don't seem to get it.
Cooper's Rule 1 is a *statement of mindset*. It is the
mindset (mental training, mental discipline) that makes
you follow safe gun handling habits. The specific embodiment
of safe gun handling are in Cooper's Rules 2-4.
But if your mindset is wrong, then you probably aren't
going to apply the other rules universally.
Steinbeck wrote "The mind is the ultimate weapon. All
else is supplemental." Many teach that the priorities
of survival start with proper mindset.
Gun safety is the same way. All the fancy rules in
the world are useless if your mind isn't right.
Julius
David Steuber
' David Steuber wrote in message <8ert1a$kg9$1...@xring.cs.umd.edu>...
' #
' # "Treat a gun as loaded until personally confirmed otherwise."
'
' If you "always check", that means you also check
' the "unloaded" gun in your lock box.
Yes, I do.
' So if the gun is unloaded, then why are you checking it?
'
' All guns are always loaded. That's why.
Or because I don't trust my memory. Nor do I trust Schroedinger's
cat.
' The word "treat" is wishy-washy. It is a weak mindset.
' IMO, it suggests that you can make exceptions, as your
' version of Cooper's Rule 1 clearly shows.
Either a gun is loaded or it is not loaded. If it is loaded, it is
impossible to do dry fire practice.
' With your rule, you apparently think that it is ok to
' point guns at other people, once you personally
' confirm that they are unloaded.
This is an unwarranted leap in logic. I _never_ point my guns at
people.
' Another problem with your approach is that you
' introduce human judgment, and thus the potential
' for human error. Safety must be reflexive. If you
' have to depend on clear thinking, someday
' you are going to be tired, distracted, etc and
' you will screw up.
Accidents can happen anyway. People seem to forget the first rule
anyway. Or do they expect the gun to shoot a bullet through their
hand when they test the trigger?
--
David Steuber | Hi! My name is David Steuber, and I am
NRA Member | a hoploholic.
All bits are significant. Some bits are more significant than others.
-- Charles Babbage Orwell
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Steuber
' #I dislike this. It contains a negative.
'
' A single negative is not a problem. Most of the Ten Commandments start
' with "Thou shalt not...".
Doesn't help ;-)
' # I would prefer something
' #more positive like,
' #
' # "Treat a gun as loaded until personally confirmed otherwise."
'
' That still says to treat a carry gun as loaded even when it isn't.
I have a habit of keeping guns loaded. It behooves me to check their
condition before doing anything with them. When I am carrying the
gun, it really is loaded.
Julius Chang
#"Julius Chang" <jch...@alum.mit.edu> writes:
#
#' David Steuber wrote in message <8ert1a$kg9$1...@xring.cs.umd.edu>...
#' So if the gun is unloaded, then why are you checking it?
#'
#' All guns are always loaded. That's why.
#
#Or because I don't trust my memory. Nor do I trust Schroedinger's
#cat.
Right, all guns are always loaded.
#' The word "treat" is wishy-washy. It is a weak mindset.
#' IMO, it suggests that you can make exceptions, as your
#' version of Cooper's Rule 1 clearly shows.
#
#Either a gun is loaded or it is not loaded. If it is loaded, it is
#impossible to do dry fire practice.
Wrong. You obey Cooper's Rules 2-4 during
dry fire practice. Rule 1 is a statement of mindset.
Thus, dry fire is the same as live fire in terms of
gun handling safety.
Sorry, but you, like the others who are debating
Cooper's wording for Rule 1, clearly don't understand
what the rule means.
Julius
Jeffrey C. Dege
# the "unloaded" gun in your lock box.
#
# So if the gun is unloaded, then why are you checking it?
Because you don't want to make a mistake. Always check, all the time,
every time. People get distracted, make assumptions, and when working
with dangerous tools, these assumptions get people killed.
A pilot doesn't skip an item on his checklist, even if he "knows" that
that item is already taken cared of. A welder doesn't skip the safety
checks when using his equipment, even if he knows he's already done it.
Start skipping the safety checks, because you "know" that you've already
taken care of it, and sooner or later you're going to pick up the gun, get
interrupted, and then skip the check because you think you already did it.
You don't avoid accidents because you intend to be safe; we all intend to
be safe. You avoid accidents by creating circumstances where accidents
cannot happen.
Dry-firing, for example. When I do it, I use snap-caps. First, I unload
the gun. Then I put away all of the live rounds. Then I take out the
snap caps, then I unload the gun again. In other words, before I begin
dry-firing practice, I make sure that not only that there aren't any
rounds in the gun, but that there aren't any rounds around that I might
accidently put into the gun.
--
Die dulci fruere.
Keith A. Flick
## the "unloaded" gun in your lock box.
##
## So if the gun is unloaded, then why are you checking it?
#
#Because you don't want to make a mistake. Always check, all the time,
#every time. People get distracted, make assumptions, and when working
#with dangerous tools, these assumptions get people killed.
#
#A pilot doesn't skip an item on his checklist, even if he "knows" that
#that item is already taken cared of. A welder doesn't skip the safety
#checks when using his equipment, even if he knows he's already done it.
#
#Start skipping the safety checks, because you "know" that you've already
#taken care of it, and sooner or later you're going to pick up the gun, get
#interrupted, and then skip the check because you think you already did it.
#
#You don't avoid accidents because you intend to be safe; we all intend to
#be safe. You avoid accidents by creating circumstances where accidents
#cannot happen.
#
#Dry-firing, for example. When I do it, I use snap-caps. First, I unload
#the gun. Then I put away all of the live rounds. Then I take out the
#snap caps, then I unload the gun again. In other words, before I begin
#dry-firing practice, I make sure that not only that there aren't any
#rounds in the gun, but that there aren't any rounds around that I might
#accidently put into the gun.
#
#Die dulci fruere.
That's the way I do it too. In addition, when I am working for long
periods on the keyboard I put my Kimber (with a snap cap) next
to my computer. Every hour or so I pick it up and practice my
aim/dry fire (part of my anti carpal tunnel project). I make it a
always-do to check it to make sure that there is a snap cap in there
even though I just dry fired it a few minutes ago. I always check it
every time I pick it up, even if I just put it down a few minutes ago.
I just thought of something, this is another example of how guns are
not "just for killing" in that old anti-gun argument. I use mine for
medical reasons, carpal tunnel treatment.
Julius Chang
#On 5 May 2000 10:58:46 -0400, Julius Chang <jch...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
##
## If you "always check", that means you also check
## the "unloaded" gun in your lock box.
##
## So if the gun is unloaded, then why are you checking it?
#
#Because you don't want to make a mistake. Always check, all the time,
#every time. People get distracted, make assumptions, and when working
#with dangerous tools, these assumptions get people killed.
Correct. All guns are always loaded -- a statement of
mindset.
Julius
Norman Yarvin
# Man, you don't seem to get it.
#
# Cooper's Rule 1 is a *statement of mindset*. It is the
# mindset (mental training, mental discipline) that makes
# you follow safe gun handling habits. The specific embodiment
# of safe gun handling are in Cooper's Rules 2-4.
#
# But if your mindset is wrong, then you probably aren't
# going to apply the other rules universally.
#
# Steinbeck wrote "The mind is the ultimate weapon. All
# else is supplemental." Many teach that the priorities
# of survival start with proper mindset.
#
# Gun safety is the same way. All the fancy rules in
# the world are useless if your mind isn't right.
That argument about "mindset" is so vague that it is not even wrong.
The word "mindset" can mean a wide variety of things; that a lot of
people use the word, is mainly because it is a tolerable way of
introducing the meat of what one really has to say. This is not physics
or mathematics, where a fundamental statement is made, and then its
consequences are derived. Instead, what self-defense books and classes
mainly offer are observations of the world; and their introductions are
vague summaries of those observations, not rigorous theories of them.
--
Norman Yarvin yar...@cs.yale.edu
Nicholas Puryear
technical writer, and I spend many, many hours, often late into the night,
staring at the monitor. One of the ways I ease the tedium of reading over the
same text for the Nth time is to take out my Hi-Power and leave it on the desk
next to the keyboard. When I need a break, I dry fire. And like you, I always,
ALWAYS, check the chamber to verify that it holds that black A-Zoom snap cap. I
think of it as a ritual--kinda like Jimmy Connors before he serves a tennis
ball, he always bounces the ball a set number of times. Even at the range,
after reloading with a fresh mag and chambering a round, I pull the slide back
far enough to look in and see the brass. Making safety a HABIT is what it's
about.
Jeffrey C. Dege
#I had to chuckle when I read your post. (I thought I was the only one.) I'm a
#technical writer, and I spend many, many hours, often late into the night,
#staring at the monitor. One of the ways I ease the tedium of reading over the
#same text for the Nth time is to take out my Hi-Power and leave it on the desk
#next to the keyboard. When I need a break, I dry fire.
Odd. I keep a Webley Tempest .177 air pistol at my desk, and I don't
waste my time with dry-firing...
--
Many companies that have made themselves dependent on [the equipment of a
certain major manufacturer] (and in doing so have sold their soul to the
devil) will collapse under the sheer weight of the unmastered complexity of
their data processing systems.
-- Edsger W. Dijkstra, SIGPLAN Notices, Volume 17, Number 5
Bigdu...@webtv.net
before pulling the pin and throwing it out the window.Doesn't bother me
any,but sure upsets the neighbors.
"I didn't know that there were that many Indians!!" Custers Last Words
Demon Buddha
Julius Chang wrote:
#
# #1, Cooper's Rule 1, which I assume is what
# you are referring to, says
#
# "All guns are always loaded."
#
# It is a statement of mindset. The "treat as loaded..."
# approach embodies a different and weaker mindset.
This is silly. Not all guns are always loaded. Such
would make them somewhat difficult to clean and service.
"Treat as loaded" is not a weaker mindset, as you put it,
only another and perhaps more accurate way of approaching
any firearm. I wont argue Cooper's mode of expression,
because I don't believe it is to be taken literally.
Rather it is meant to convey an attitude about assumptions
made when picking up a firearm or finding oneself on the
wrong end of one, which is precisely what "treat as loaded"
means.
--
-Andy V.
Eventide Forge
Mad Science Inc.
Scottsdale, AZ
And in her fear she sought cracked pleasures.
The passion of lovers is for death said she,
and turned to feather
Demon Buddha
mark smalling wrote:
#
# But a high priority should be placed on a) surviving the attack and b)
# staying free to provide for your family. There are prosecuting attorneys
# out there who will, and have, sent good people to jail to further their
# political careers. Stay safe.
Well said. A prosecutor may pose a more serious threat than
your assailant. Remember that there are fates worse than death;
going to a state prison for many years for committing an act of
self defense would be one of them. Proper handling the legalities
after a shooting is every bit as important as surviving the
assault. Maybe more so. "Being dead don't hurt. No, only dying"
Jeffrey C. Dege
#
#
#Julius Chang wrote:
#
##
## you are referring to, says
##
## "All guns are always loaded."
##
## It is a statement of mindset. The "treat as loaded..."
## approach embodies a different and weaker mindset.
#
# This is silly. Not all guns are always loaded. Such
# would make them somewhat difficult to clean and service.
# "Treat as loaded" is not a weaker mindset, as you put it,
# only another and perhaps more accurate way of approaching
# any firearm. I wont argue Cooper's mode of expression,
# because I don't believe it is to be taken literally.
# Rather it is meant to convey an attitude about assumptions
# made when picking up a firearm or finding oneself on the
# wrong end of one, which is precisely what "treat as loaded"
# means.
In my mind, the rule is best expressed as "always handle them as if they
were loaded." Meaning that the basic handling rules apply regardless
of whether the firearm is loaded or not.
In other words, keep the muzzle pointing in a safe direction, keep
your finger off the trigger, etc., _always_. If you pull the trigger,
it should only be because you have aimed it where you intended to aim
it, and you pulled the trigger when you intended to pull it. And this
doesn't change whether you are firing on the range or dry-firing in your
living room. You practice safe handling so you do it even when you
don't think about it.
Pointing an unloaded gun at a friend and pulling the trigger as a joke,
isn't.
--
The Windows API has done more to retard skill development
than anything since COBOL maintenance.
--Larry O'Brien
Julius Chang
#
#
#Julius Chang wrote:
#
##
## #1, Cooper's Rule 1, which I assume is what
## you are referring to, says
##
## "All guns are always loaded."
##
## It is a statement of mindset. The "treat as loaded..."
## approach embodies a different and weaker mindset.
#
# This is silly. Not all guns are always loaded. Such
# would make them somewhat difficult to clean and service.
What part of "statement of mindset" don't you
understand?
Rule 1 in no way makes cleaning your guns
difficult. Sorry, but I don't think you really understand
Cooper's rules.
Julius