Firearms safety

[HKS]

Over the years I have gained appreciation for the various gun safety rules, and ultimately I have come up with several lists of my own.

I now divide these into smaller lists covering first firearms handling, then firearms shooting, and finally range safety rules.

Shorter lists are easier to remember.

My first list consisting of firearms safe handling rules are these things:

1 - Never point a firearm at anything or anyone that you don't intend to kill, whether loaded or unloaded.

2 - Keep your finger off the trigger until you are ready to shoot, whether loaded or unloaded.

3 - Keep your handgun in its holster except to shoot it or to clean it.

4 - When you handle any firearm first check to make sure it is unloaded even if someone else already checked it.

5 - Always treat all firearms as if they are loaded, whether they are loaded or not.

Then there are 5 more rules for shooting a firearm:

1 - Always consider everything around, in front of, and behind your target before touching the trigger.

2 - Change the angle of your shot by kneeling or moving if you must to avoid collateral damage behind your target before shooting.

3 - Squeeze the trigger not jerk it while holding the front site blade on target.

4 - Keep aiming after the shot.

5 - Scan the area for accomplices after taking down the main opponent.

Most shooting ranges have their list of rules posted. There are several versions of these, and rules for indoor ranges are different than at outdoor ranges. Two rules apply to all ranges however:

1 - Eye and ear protection is always required.

2 - Be aware of the other shooters and observe them carefully before you start shooting and be aware of their bad habits.

3 - Move to a different shooting station if it is warranted for better safety.

 

[SecureGuard]

Hi,

This is really important safety rules that should be considered while using Firearms.

Thanks for sharing the same.

Keep it up..

 

[Eidolon]

WTH? The 4 rules aren't enough?

 

[HKS]

WTH? The 4 rules aren't enough?

The 4 rules are definitely not enough, no.

 

[Blredneck13]

This is what pisses me off about the gun grabbers they can't understand that a gun is a tool anf can only do 3 things 1) function 2) fail 3) rust

Everything else that happens comes from not adhering to safety standards, lack of training, or generally use by bad/ evil people.

I believe there should be some level of firearms training everyone should poses, but hey that's just me.

 

[HKS]

This is what pisses me off about the gun grabbers they can't understand that a gun is a tool anf can only do 3 things 1) function 2) fail 3) rust

Everything else that happens comes from not adhering to safety standards, lack of training, or generally use by bad/ evil people.

I believe there should be some level of firearms training everyone should poses, but hey that's just me.

Guns are like sex however.

It's the dirty little secret that everybody does not want to talk about but everybody does it.

I like Massad Ayoob's viewpoint that public carry is a privilege like a drivers license and warrants training and testing.

But he freely admits that his view is viewed as too progressive by most gun enthusiasts.

Gun ownership in private is a right and should not be infringed. However that also requires training to be safe. And a whole lot of gun owners never get any formal professional training at all.

As far as the far left element like Feinstein and Pelosi who are all anti gun, they can have mine when they peel it from my cold dead hands.

 

[NavyLCDR]

I like Massad Ayoob's viewpoint that public carry is a privilege like a drivers license and warrants training and testing.

But he freely admits that his view is viewed as too progressive by most gun enthusiasts.

I prefer the good, old fashioned 2nd Amendment. You can keep your "progress".

 

[HKS]

I prefer the good, old fashioned 2nd Amendment. You can keep your "progress".

Well as explained by Scalia in "Heller" the "keep" clause means in your house and the "bear" clause means bring to a militia call-up.

But you really need to read it carefully to get this part.

He specifically leaves public possession to the various States to regulate.

Ergo you are off topic and uninformed, again.

 

[Eidolon]

I like Massad Ayoob's viewpoint that public carry is a privilege like a drivers license and warrants training and testing.

But he freely admits that his view is viewed as too progressive by most gun enthusiasts.

I actually know Massad Ayoob and he never said anything like this

 

[NavyLCDR]

Well as explained by Scalia in "Heller" the "keep" clause means in your house and the "bear" clause means bring to a militia call-up.

But you really need to read it carefully to get this part.

He specifically leaves public possession to the various States to regulate.

Ergo you are off topic and uninformed, again.

FAIL. In the Heller decision, the US Supreme held, "1. The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home."

Scalia never limited keeping a firearm to the home. He merely stated that the right to keep a firearm in the home existed. And he clearly stated that the operative clause of the 2nd Amendment "the right of the People to keep and bear arms" was unconnected with service in a militia.

The Supreme Court in 2008 made it clear that the right to “keep” a gun is a personal right, and that it means one has a right to keep a functioning firearm for self-defense within the home. But it has refused repeatedly since then to take on the question of whether that right exists also outside the home.

A court decision declaring that a right to do something under certain circumstances in no way limits that right in other circumstances unless that is also included in the ruling. The Heller decision did not address the right to bear arms in general public places - neither establishing it nor denying it.

 

[HKS]

FAIL. In the Heller decision, the US Supreme held, "1. The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home."

Scalia never limited keeping a firearm to the home. He merely stated that the right to keep a firearm in the home existed. And he clearly stated that the operative clause of the 2nd Amendment "the right of the People to keep and bear arms" was unconnected with service in a militia.

The Supreme Court in 2008 made it clear that the right to “keep” a gun is a personal right, and that it means one has a right to keep a functioning firearm for self-defense within the home. But it has refused repeatedly since then to take on the question of whether that right exists also outside the home.

A court decision declaring that a right to do something under certain circumstances in no way limits that right in other circumstances unless that is also included in the ruling. The Heller decision did not address the right to bear arms in general public places - neither establishing it nor denying it.

You have confused the militia clause with Scalia's definition of "to bear".

This is a straw man fallacy.

Here, you can read about straw man fallacies:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

 

[HKS]

I actually know Massad Ayoob and he never said anything like this

He is a cool guy.

He says it in one of the videos he sold to one of the CFP instructors whose courses I took.

 

[OnTheFence]

Gun safety isn't all that big of a deal. Fathers have been teaching their sons for generations. No need for classes and government oversight.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Eidolon]

He says it in one of the videos he sold to one of the CFP instructors whose courses I took.

You made the claim, you back it up

 

[mikestone967]

This is what pisses me off about the gun grabbers they can't understand that a gun is a tool anf can only do 3 things 1) function 2) fail 3) rust

Everything else that happens comes from not adhering to safety standards, lack of training, or generally use by bad/ evil people.

I believe there should be some level of firearms training everyone should poses, but hey that's just me.

Amen.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[kwc]

Well as explained by Scalia in "Heller" the "keep" clause means in your house and the "bear" clause means bring to a militia call-up.

Have you read the Heller decision?

This section seems particularly significant to me:

At the time of the founding, as now, to “bear” meant to “carry.”
...
In Muscarello v. United States, 524 U. S. 125 (1998), in the course of analyzing the meaning of “carries a firearm” in a federal criminal statute, JUSTICE GINSBURG wrote that “urely a most familiar meaning is, as the Constitution's Second Amendment . . . indicate: ‘wear, bear, or carry . . . upon the person or in the clothing or in a pocket, for the purpose . . . of being armed and ready for offensive or defensive action in a case of conflict with another person.' ” Id., at 143 (dissenting opinion) (quoting Black's Law Dictionary 214 (6th ed. 1998)).

We think that JUSTICE GINSBURG accurately captured the natural meaning of “bear arms.” Although the phrase implies that the carrying of the weapon is for the purpose of “offensive or defensive action,” it in no way connotes participation in a structured military organization.

 

[HKS]

Lot's of straw men in these replies so far.

Scalia does an excellent job of interpreting the 2nd Amendment for everyday people.

You just need to accept what he says.

The bottom line is that everyone is assured by the 2nd Amendment against any infringements to own a firearm in their homes.

And the states have the right to regulate public possession any way that their legislatures desire.

So if you live in a "shall-issue" state then be glad about it.

And if you live in a "no-issue" or a "may-issue but does not" state then there is nothing you can do about it except move.

 

[bofh]

Lot's of straw men in these replies so far.

Scalia does an excellent job of interpreting the 2nd Amendment for everyday people.

You just need to accept what he says.

The bottom line is that everyone is assured by the 2nd Amendment against any infringements to own a firearm in their homes.

And the states have the right to regulate public possession any way that their legislatures desire.

So if you live in a "shall-issue" state then be glad about it.

And if you live in a "no-issue" or a "may-issue but does not" state then there is nothing you can do about it except move.

This post is not for you as you have me on your ignore list anyway. This post is for those responding to HKS.

This poster really doesn't know what he is talking about. When called out on it, he resorts to the "straw man fallacy" argument, which doesn't even apply. Once getting called out on that, he puts you on his ignore list to preserve his safe space.

This poster made unsubstantiated claims regarding Massad Ayoob that were never backed up with facts. He also made unsubstantiated claims regarding the Heller decision, that were never backed up with facts.

 

[kwc]

He also made unsubstantiated claims regarding the Heller decision, that were never backed up with facts.

That's become clear so I won't feed it anymore.

 

[HKS]

Lots of people here who cannot read the plain English in Heller and they need to read and study it again.