Author Topic: Gun control laws do they work ?  (Read 21898 times)

Offline Jayhawk

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3909
Re: Gun control laws do they work ?
« Reply #300 on: August 27, 2012, 01:46:45 PM »

well,  based on the fact that your average gun owner doesnt do as much training with arms as your average police officer, then most likely that is the proof that your average police officer is better trained than your average gun owner.  

you are dreaming if you think your average gun owner is equally or better trained than the police.



semp



Well it's not realistic to group ALL gun owners into that statement.  A fair comparison would be to look at the ability of concealed carriers vs. law enforcement.  That area is much more murky and I bet you would be surprised at some of the results.
LOOK EVERYBODY!  I GOT MY NAME IN LIGHTS!

Folks, play nice.

Offline Jayhawk

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3909
Re: Gun control laws do they work ?
« Reply #301 on: August 27, 2012, 01:49:20 PM »
Out of the ~35000 deaths due to guns, ~12000 were homicides, the rest were accidents and suicides. Statistically speaking, one has greater chance at killing themselves than being killed by someone else.


Oh, good 'ole Ardy, for not wanting to get involved in these conversations on here, you sure post a lot.  :cheers:

Using a firearm for a suicide is not an indication that having firearms make you more likely to commit suicide.
LOOK EVERYBODY!  I GOT MY NAME IN LIGHTS!

Folks, play nice.

Offline Ardy123

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3417
Re: Gun control laws do they work ?
« Reply #302 on: August 27, 2012, 01:51:45 PM »
Oh, good 'ole Ardy, for not wanting to get involved in these conversations on here, you sure post a lot.  :cheers:
hehe, the tone calmed down, so I felt it was 'safe' :)  :cheers:

Using a firearm for a suicide is not an indication that having firearms make you more likely to commit suicide.
Agreed, one would need to extrapolate the number of accidental deaths from the suicide rate. I bet the suicide success rate is higher when guns are used though :) (Most suicides tend to be a plea for help)

EDIT: Where the F' is scuzzy? this thread is in violation of so many bbs rules its amazing....
I hope he's feeling alright, not sick or something.... :uhoh

« Last Edit: August 27, 2012, 02:07:05 PM by Ardy123 »
Yeah, that's right, you just got your rear handed to you by a fuggly puppet!
==Army of Muppets==
(Bunnies)

Offline ink

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11274
Re: Gun control laws do they work ?
« Reply #303 on: August 27, 2012, 03:24:26 PM »
Not everyone lives where you do.  I, however, have been up to your place.

I'm thinking 911 response time to be 30-45 minutes MINIMUM, in good weather.

Then again, from having the opportunity to meet a bunch of folks while in your area and witnessing the breed of people up there, my bet is that most conflicts would be "resolved" before help could arrive and that a 911 call up there is more like a call for a clean-up crew.  :devil



Live free or die :D



Offline guncrasher

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17360
Re: Gun control laws do they work ?
« Reply #304 on: August 27, 2012, 05:21:53 PM »
Well it's not realistic to group ALL gun owners into that statement.  A fair comparison would be to look at the ability of concealed carriers vs. law enforcement.  That area is much more murky and I bet you would be surprised at some of the results.


I was just replying to this statement.

Most police are not highly trained. Many leagal gun owners are far better trained than the police.

The 2 officers in NY made many mistakes.

so we just talking about the average police officer being better trained than your average gun owner.

semp
you dont want me to ho, dont point your plane at me.

Offline bustr

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12436
Re: Gun control laws do they work ?
« Reply #305 on: August 27, 2012, 06:39:11 PM »
Hlbly,

The group that pulled the statistics which comes from the article: Prevalence of Household Firearms and Firearm-Storage Practices in the 50 States and the District of Columbia: Findings From the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, 2002. That is the source of the VPC ratings Ardy posted for firearms deaths and are a shill for the CDC sub group: NCIPC.

NCIPC was exposed to congress in 1995 for their politicaly biased, and shoddy research that slanted all of their findings to support the CDC's assertion that US gun ownership has to be eliminated for it's own health(good).

It's now a "Firearms Suicide" tracking system the CDC gives grants to states who are willing to take part in called: BRFSS

Congress pulled the funding for NCIPC becasue they performing politicaly biased research to help the CDC try to demonise firearms with the public in the same manner they did with smoking. The CDC wanted to subvert the constitution by showing an epidemic existed which was 100% fatal and could only be controlled by outlawing private firearms ownership in the US.

So first the NCIPC and it's supporters then, now the BRFSS and it's data manipulators, which is only a number tracking system. Is being abused by supporters of the CDC's unconstitutional ploy to support a total ban of private gun ownership in the US. The plan is to scare the US public into forcing congress to save them from an epidemic of firearms suicide by violating the constitution and banning privately owned firearms.

The 1995 NCIPC reasearch and then again the 2002 survey was found to be heavely biased becasue firarms owners would not answer survey questions when asked. Everyone who owns firearms knows it's unlawful to create registries of gun owners to protect the privacy of firearms owners from the governemnt. The CDC wanted access to ownership records to more accuratly track the epidemic and they innocently justified the need becasue of the firearms death epidemic. The NCIPC sopposidly inadvertently started an ownership database in the 90's during their research. Becasue gun owners for the most part told them to get lost, they had to call citizens from the local registered role of democrat voters in the hopes they would be willing to talk about their neighbors who owned firearms. They also relyed on the answers from young children in these surveys who we all know are the best and most reliable witnesses when coherced by adults to freely talk about other people.

Congress was not happy with them when they voted to cut their funding directly out of the CDC budget. But, they got it back through the usual deals made behind closed doors. And BRFSS was born.  The numbers Ardy posted into this discussion are for suicides, not homicides which have been falling off. A person who wants to off themsleves will off themsleves. Suicide is suicide how ever it's conducted. Guns don't make people commite suicide anymore than they make people commite murder. If that were the case my whole neighborhood would have all hung themselves long ago becasue I own guns.

Suicide is being used as a trojan horse to get around the constitution by people who are afraid of anyone with any kind of a weapon becasue it might be premeditatedly or accidentaly used to kill them. They are terrified of their own mortality more than feeling others lives are as sacred or worthy of life as their own. They will deny everyone else the ability to protect themselves out of this fear, while requiring others to place their lives in jepordy to protect their life.
bustr - POTW 1st Wing


This is like the old joke that voters are harsher to their beer brewer if he has an outage, than their politicians after raising their taxes. Death and taxes are certain but, fun and sex is only now.

Offline hlbly

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1013
Re: Gun control laws do they work ?
« Reply #306 on: August 27, 2012, 07:28:33 PM »
you cant actually prove that first statement.  not saying is wrong but you cant prove it.  have seen this quoted in one form or another since I was in high school back in the 80's.  however I remember the newsweeks (i believe) story about people who died in one week of gunshots back in the 90's.  A good portion of those were either accidental or self inflicted.  trying to find the story but google dont want to help.

semp




Actually I can read the book .

Offline guncrasher

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17360
Re: Gun control laws do they work ?
« Reply #307 on: August 27, 2012, 07:39:56 PM »
Actually I can read the book .

that only proves you can read.


semp
you dont want me to ho, dont point your plane at me.

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8800
Re: Gun control laws do they work ?
« Reply #308 on: August 27, 2012, 08:17:40 PM »

I was just replying to this statement.

so we just talking about the average police officer being better trained than your average gun owner.

semp

My wife and I attended a birthday party for a friend Saturday evening. Her son-in-law is an NYPD Lieutenant. I asked if he had seen the security camera video of the shooting incident between the two officers and the gunman. He said no (which surprised me). Using our friend's computer, I located the video and we watched it. I asked if he saw any errors by the cops, he said, "no, nothing major."

"Really?", I asked. "Let's watch it again, stopping at various points."

After going over it twice, he admitted that the two officers had screwed up royally in virtually every aspect of the encounter.

We talked about the training NYPD gets... He admitted that there should be comprehensive training relative to how to apprehend an armed killer... Yet, it took a non-police person to point out the mistakes. Granted, I'm a shooter who trains on a regular basis. Within the capacity of my job (we design and develop hardware for military small arms), I've worked with and done firearms training with Marines, Army and SPEC OPS personnel many times. I've seen the tactics and the procedures in action, and these cops didn't have a clue as to what to do, how to do it and where to do it. That's what caused the wounding of 9 bystanders. Had combat trained military personnel been there, they would not have made those errors and it's very unlikely that anyone but the perp would have been injured (assuming he even would have had the opportunity to resist).

Most police forces I'm familiar with have minimal semi-annual re-qualification requirements. NYPD doesn't have a comprehensive training program that meets current needs. A study was commissioned by the City to determine where NYPD could improve. The Rand Corporation conducted the study and released a report. Their recommendations relative to firearms training is as follows:

Recommendations
To facilitate training effectiveness, we recommend that the NYPD take the following
actions:
•Develop standards of performance for all basic policing skills and evaluate recruits accordingly, not passing them until they have demonstrated they have mastered the skill at an appropriate level.
•Upgrade computer simulations to incorporate the latest use-of-force scenarios now available from simulator vendors.
•Expose recruits to scenario-based training and role-playing workshops throughout training.
•Design scenario-based training to increase the department’s confidence that recruits have learned basic principles.
•Have recruits practice on a wide set of scenarios.
•Focus debriefings primarily on the big principles, not the potential nuances that exist in every situation.
•Develop detailed evaluation guides and assess training-outcome data to determine whether the training was successful.
•Require recruits to pass proficiency standards in real-life and scenario-based tests of complex decisionmaking before graduating them from the police academy.
•Collect detailed training records from the various recruit-training activities and store them in one location.
•Substantially increase the availability of simulators, including scenarios using Simunition systems, to allow recruits to practice and then demonstrate that they have mastered the requisite skills, particularly those associated with the use of force.
•Take the lead: Partner with one or more virtual-simulation companies to determine whether technological advances can be used to create simulators for judgment in potential use-of-force scenarios that might operate on stand-alone laptop computers without an instructor’s or operator’s intervention. This might start with the issuing of a request for qualification (RFQ) to determine the interest and qualifications of potential collaborating firms.
•Undertake a full cost-benefit analysis of resequencing recruit training. Given the importance of scenario-based training and the high cost of equipment (such as simulators), the analysis should include all tangible and intangible costs and benefits. A rolling induction of recruits with classes starting every two weeks instead of having large, semiannual recruit classes should allow for a much higher utilization of simulators, spreading their use over the entire year and giving recruits more opportunities to practice and be graded on their performance using simulators.
•Investigate alternatives to the current semiannual firearm-requalification paradigm to provide enhanced firearm instruction that would focus on the officer’s proficiency rather than just the score on a static target.

I'm not aware that these recommendations have been acted upon.....

The following is from the NYPD Firearm use guidelines:

•A police officer shall not use deadly force against another person unless the officer has probable cause to believe that he or she must protect self or another person present from imminent death or serious physical injury.
•A police officer shall not discharge his or her weapon when doing so will unnecessarily endanger innocent persons. This rule was completely violated in that shootout, RE: 9 wounded civilians.
•A police officer shall not discharge his or her firearm in defense of property.
•A police officer shall not discharge his or her firearm to subdue a fleeing felon who presents no threat of imminent death or serious physical injury to self or another person present. This does not mean that you don't unholster the weapon to be ready for a possible resistance with a firearm. Those cops were told that the suspect had just shot and killed a man, yet they were completely unprepared, with their guns holstered.
•A police officer shall not fire warning shots. A police officer shall not discharge his or her firearm to summon assistance, except in emergency situations in which someone’s personal safety is endangered and unless no other reasonable means is available.
•A police officer shall not discharge his or her firearm at or from a moving vehicle unless deadly physical force is being used against the police officer or another person present by means other than a moving vehicle, e.g., being fired at from the vehicle.
•A police officer shall not discharge his or her firearm at a dog or other animal except to protect self or another person from physical injury and when there is no other reasonable means to eliminate the threat.
•A police officer shall not, under any circumstances, cock a firearm. Firearms must be fired double action at all times. This is because NYPD buys double action only pistols, Sigs, Glocks or a revolver if the officer prefers. All guns received get a trigger job before issue, increasing trigger pull from 6 lbs to 12 lbs to minimize risk of AD (accidental discharge). Of course, this greatly effects accuracy in the negative and contributes to wild misses when under stress.
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline guncrasher

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17360
Re: Gun control laws do they work ?
« Reply #309 on: August 27, 2012, 08:27:29 PM »
My wife and I attended a birthday party for a friend Saturday evening. Her son-in-law is an NYPD Lieutenant. I asked if he had seen the security camera video of the shooting incident between the two officers and the gunman. He said no (which surprised me). Using our friend's computer, I located the video and we watched it. I asked if he saw any errors by the cops, he said, "no, nothing major."

"Really?", I asked. "Let's watch it again, stopping at various points."

After going over it twice, he admitted that the two officers had screwed up royally in virtually every aspect of the encounter.

We talked about the training NYPD gets... He admitted that there should be comprehensive training relative to how to apprehend an armed killer... Yet, it took a non-police person to point out the mistakes. Granted, I'm a shooter who trains on a regular basis. Within the capacity of my job (we design and develop hardware for military small arms), I've worked with and done firearms training with Marines, Army and SPEC OPS personnel many times. I've seen the tactics and the procedures in action, and these cops didn't have a clue as to what to do, how to do it and where to do it. That's what caused the wounding of 9 bystanders. Had combat trained military personnel been there, they would not have made those errors and it's very unlikely that anyone but the perp would have been injured (assuming he even would have had the opportunity to resist).

Most police forces I'm familiar with have minimal semi-annual re-qualification requirements. NYPD doesn't have a comprehensive training program that meets current needs. A study was commissioned by the City to determine where NYPD could improve. The Rand Corporation conducted the study and released a report. Their recommendations relative to firearms training is as follows:

Recommendations
To facilitate training effectiveness, we recommend that the NYPD take the following
actions:
•Develop standards of performance for all basic policing skills and evaluate recruits accordingly, not passing them until they have demonstrated they have mastered the skill at an appropriate level.
•Upgrade computer simulations to incorporate the latest use-of-force scenarios now available from simulator vendors.
•Expose recruits to scenario-based training and role-playing workshops throughout training.
•Design scenario-based training to increase the department’s confidence that recruits have learned basic principles.
•Have recruits practice on a wide set of scenarios.
•Focus debriefings primarily on the big principles, not the potential nuances that exist in every situation.
•Develop detailed evaluation guides and assess training-outcome data to determine whether the training was successful.
•Require recruits to pass proficiency standards in real-life and scenario-based tests of complex decisionmaking before graduating them from the police academy.
•Collect detailed training records from the various recruit-training activities and store them in one location.
•Substantially increase the availability of simulators, including scenarios using Simunition systems, to allow recruits to practice and then demonstrate that they have mastered the requisite skills, particularly those associated with the use of force.
•Take the lead: Partner with one or more virtual-simulation companies to determine whether technological advances can be used to create simulators for judgment in potential use-of-force scenarios that might operate on stand-alone laptop computers without an instructor’s or operator’s intervention. This might start with the issuing of a request for qualification (RFQ) to determine the interest and qualifications of potential collaborating firms.
•Undertake a full cost-benefit analysis of resequencing recruit training. Given the importance of scenario-based training and the high cost of equipment (such as simulators), the analysis should include all tangible and intangible costs and benefits. A rolling induction of recruits with classes starting every two weeks instead of having large, semiannual recruit classes should allow for a much higher utilization of simulators, spreading their use over the entire year and giving recruits more opportunities to practice and be graded on their performance using simulators.
•Investigate alternatives to the current semiannual firearm-requalification paradigm to provide enhanced firearm instruction that would focus on the officer’s proficiency rather than just the score on a static target.

I'm not aware that these recommendations have been acted upon.....

The following is from the NYPD Firearm use guidelines:

•A police officer shall not use deadly force against another person unless the officer has probable cause to believe that he or she must protect self or another person present from imminent death or serious physical injury.
•A police officer shall not discharge his or her weapon when doing so will unnecessarily endanger innocent persons. This rule was completely violated in that shootout, RE: 9 wounded civilians.
•A police officer shall not discharge his or her firearm in defense of property.
•A police officer shall not discharge his or her firearm to subdue a fleeing felon who presents no threat of imminent death or serious physical injury to self or another person present. This does not mean that you don't unholster the weapon to be ready for a possible resistance with a firearm. Those cops were told that the suspect had just shot and killed a man, yet they were completely unprepared, with their guns holstered.
•A police officer shall not fire warning shots. A police officer shall not discharge his or her firearm to summon assistance, except in emergency situations in which someone’s personal safety is endangered and unless no other reasonable means is available.
•A police officer shall not discharge his or her firearm at or from a moving vehicle unless deadly physical force is being used against the police officer or another person present by means other than a moving vehicle, e.g., being fired at from the vehicle.
•A police officer shall not discharge his or her firearm at a dog or other animal except to protect self or another person from physical injury and when there is no other reasonable means to eliminate the threat.
•A police officer shall not, under any circumstances, cock a firearm. Firearms must be fired double action at all times. This is because NYPD buys double action only pistols, Sigs, Glocks or a revolver if the officer prefers. All guns received get a trigger job before issue, increasing trigger pull from 6 lbs to 12 lbs to minimize risk of AD (accidental discharge). Of course, this greatly effects accuracy in the negative and contributes to wild misses when under stress.

what does that above has to do to prove this wrong? 


so we just talking about the average police officer being better trained than your average gun owner.

semp



semp
you dont want me to ho, dont point your plane at me.

Offline Ardy123

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3417
Re: Gun control laws do they work ?
« Reply #310 on: August 27, 2012, 08:38:51 PM »
Hlbly,
I am not sure what bustr is talking about... all but 2(maybe 3) of my posts were from the '07 CDC report.

http://www.cdc.gov/NCHS/data/nvsr/nvsr58/nvsr58_19.pdf

Page 35: has both the suicide numbers and the homicide numbers.
FYI: The 12,632 number was the homicide number not the suicide number, and that was the number I posted...
« Last Edit: August 27, 2012, 08:47:05 PM by Ardy123 »
Yeah, that's right, you just got your rear handed to you by a fuggly puppet!
==Army of Muppets==
(Bunnies)

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8800
Re: Gun control laws do they work ?
« Reply #311 on: August 27, 2012, 08:46:49 PM »
what does that above has to do to prove this wrong? 



semp

One of the unsaid points is that the average firearm hobbiest is frequently more proficient with his weapon than police officers. Some cops are recreational shooters, but the majority are not.

I'm not talking about the guy who buys a 9mm, shoots it once in a blue moon and then puts it in his night stand... These guys are not prepared for anything, really.

One other point... A idiot with a firearm was still an idiot first. Too bad there's no requirement to screen out idiots. One has the right to bear arms, but one does not have the right to endanger those around them with carelessness and stupidity. I could tell you stories of what I've seen at ranges that would make your blood run cold.... Drunks, gangbangers, irresponsible dolts and some simply devoid of common sense. Usually, range personnel or other shooters will police these guys. Still, at the range, I watch my fellow shooters like a hawk....
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline Maverick

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13920
Re: Gun control laws do they work ?
« Reply #312 on: August 27, 2012, 08:53:13 PM »
Lots of folks making some pretty dramatic claims about accuracy. I'd say that the folks making the claims are doing so from the perspective of range shooting where the rounds only go one direction. As to accuracy claims, I am perfectly willing to stipulate that the average gun enthusiast who practices often easily can shoot better on the range than the average police officer suddenly thrust into a life and death situation can during the life and death crisis. Range shooting does not equally transfer to real combat, especially in a sudden incident situation where you are having to react to the threat.  But those of you who have range time are welcome to continue to think how good you really are. Talk to me after you have seen the elephant, you'll have credibility then.

Not all cops are good shots. Some are plain bad shots, just like the folks who get their ccw and then don't go to the range and maintain their skills. It's perishable.

Widewing, nice training syllabus there. Did you ever to a cost analysis to see how much it would take to run it for say a 500 man department including recurrent training? I'd be interested to hear if you have had the opportunity to do that and find out how much training budget a department might have on an annual basis in today's economy and if your ideas fit in it.
DEFINITION OF A VETERAN
A Veteran - whether active duty, retired, national guard or reserve - is someone who, at one point in their life, wrote a check made payable to "The United States of America", for an amount of "up to and including my life."
Author Unknown

Offline VonMessa

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11922
Re: Gun control laws do they work ?
« Reply #313 on: August 27, 2012, 09:11:08 PM »
One of the unsaid points is that the average firearm hobbiest is frequently more proficient with his weapon than police officers. Some cops are recreational shooters, but the majority are not.

I'm not talking about the guy who buys a 9mm, shoots it once in a blue moon and then puts it in his night stand... These guys are not prepared for anything, really.

One other point... A idiot with a firearm was still an idiot first. Too bad there's no requirement to screen out idiots. One has the right to bear arms, but one does not have the right to endanger those around them with carelessness and stupidity. I could tell you stories of what I've seen at ranges that would make your blood run cold.... Drunks, gangbangers, irresponsible dolts and some simply devoid of common sense. Usually, range personnel or other shooters will police these guys. Still, at the range, I watch my fellow shooters like a hawk....

I would wager that the average firearm hobbiest puts more practice lead downrange than any two NYPD officers.  The advantage may lie simply in the muscle memory of practicing more often.  Also, the average, legally armed citizen is also not as constrained with regard to use of deadly force, when legally applicable, whereas deadly force is reserved for when all other options have been exhausted by law enforcement for multiple reasons.  For the situation being discussed, this is the first time these officers have ever had to discharge their weapons in the line of duty.  As a rule, police are trained to create as little as carnage as possible whereas Joe Citizen does not have to negotiate when his life is threatened and doesn't need to ignore instinct.

I get the heebie-jeebies when I recall some of the things I have seen on the range.  I will add the fact that I have seen more unsafe behavior on public ranges on  state game lands, here in PA than I have at private clubs, but it is never prudent to be ignorant about what others are doing with loaded weapons.

EDIT:
On a side note, Widewing, have you ever had the chance to shoot at Hogan's Alley?   :D
« Last Edit: August 27, 2012, 09:15:24 PM by VonMessa »
Braümeister und Schmutziger Hund von JG11


We are all here because we are not all there.

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8800
Re: Gun control laws do they work ?
« Reply #314 on: August 27, 2012, 10:18:38 PM »
I would wager that the average firearm hobbiest puts more practice lead downrange than any two NYPD officers.  The advantage may lie simply in the muscle memory of practicing more often.  Also, the average, legally armed citizen is also not as constrained with regard to use of deadly force, when legally applicable, whereas deadly force is reserved for when all other options have been exhausted by law enforcement for multiple reasons.  For the situation being discussed, this is the first time these officers have ever had to discharge their weapons in the line of duty.  As a rule, police are trained to create as little as carnage as possible whereas Joe Citizen does not have to negotiate when his life is threatened and doesn't need to ignore instinct.

I get the heebie-jeebies when I recall some of the things I have seen on the range.  I will add the fact that I have seen more unsafe behavior on public ranges on  state game lands, here in PA than I have at private clubs, but it is never prudent to be ignorant about what others are doing with loaded weapons.

EDIT:
On a side note, Widewing, have you ever had the chance to shoot at Hogan's Alley?   :D

Yes, I did actually. Maybe 10-12 years ago.. We were developing shot-counters for a pilot program with the FBI. FBI agents reserved the Hogan's Alley operated by the Suffolk County PD. We spent the afternoon running the alley with 10mm S&W Model 1076, MP5 and MP5/10 subguns.. Was a hoot. At the end of the day, we still had ammo remaining. Two boxes of 9mm and about 70 rounds of 10mm. Because the paperwork involved to return ammo was daunting, the agents simply handed the ammunition to us. I still have the 10mm ammo, in my safe... Shot out the 9mm stuff within a week.

Like you, I've seen some insane behavior on public ranges. Seen some stupid stuff on Military ranges too. About 12 or so years ago, I led a team down to Fort Benning to test shot-counters on issue M16A2s (they worked well on new rifles, we wanted data on well used rifles). We were given a range position just down from where recruits were getting live fire training. Two recruits, on the last and nearest rifle pit position were grabassing. The one in the pit, with a magazine in his rifle, swept us as he turned around to jabber with the other. About 10 seconds later, he did it again, and then again! We were there with two civilian Army employees (who had requisitioned and provided the two M16s we were using). After the third sweep, I ran out of patience. I climbed out of the pit and walked over to the nearest instructor holding a cleaning rod (used to check for empty chambers or obstructed bores). I was really hot... I walked up and shoved my face into the instructor's and said, "the next time that soldier sweeps us with that weapon, I'm going to break it over his &%#@%$ head, and then I'm going take whatever is left of it and go find you."

He looked stunned...

Pointing at the recruit, I continued. "Three &%$@#&% times that man swept us with his weapon, playing grabass with his buddy there. Three times! It had better not happen again." I spun around and walked off as profuse apologies and "won't happen again, Sir" followed me...

Needless to say, things got really exciting for those two knuckleheads. Just as I headed back to our group, an officer walks over to my guys. He was the officer responsible for supporting our testing program. He overheard my raising hell, but didn't hear the details. We told him what had occurred and he said he would attend to the problem. I looked over at two recruits doing push-ups in a mud puddle and said, "I think I made my point, Major, but that's your call."

Follow up... The Army didn't buy the shot counters. The Navy did! 12,200 of them for installation in M4 carbines. Colt, who manufacture the M4 is negotiating with the services to install the counters as OEM. FN makes the M16A2, and they have been trying to develop their own shot counter design, thus far without success. Since they also make the SCAR, we haven't gotten on that yet, although we passed the testing and the SEALs want it. Politics, as usual.

Yes sir, you can find dumb almost anywhere....
« Last Edit: August 27, 2012, 10:31:58 PM by Widewing »
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.