James Yeager is a Coward! ??? WHO CARES

[drillsgt]

As is stated in the Site Rules, you are free to debate as long as it doesn't degrade into name-calling. So let's keep it out of the thread.

Thanks.

Who do wannabe's wannabe?

 

[Amsdorf]

You don't find my argument substantial?

No, not any longer. I find your comments at this point simply tedious and unproductive. We've each had our say. I see no benefit in further discussion. You, of course, are free to disagree. That's ok by me.

 

[Double T]

No, not any longer. I find your comments at this point simply tedious and unproductive. We've each had our say. I see no benefit in further discussion. You, of course, are free to disagree. That's ok by me.

Seriously though, what are your credentials?

Have you trained anyone?
LEO/MIL?
How many training classes have you attended?

You mentioned earlier that you were at the class that Cory and Erika attended, how was that?



I don't claim to know much, but those things I DO know; I can verify. How can you validate yourself?

 

[Amsdorf]

Try to keep up, "Double T" ...

LOL

 

[Sylvain]

Seriously though, what are your credentials?

Have you trained anyone?
LEO/MIL?
How many training classes have you attended?

You mentioned earlier that you were at the class that Cory and Erika attended, how was that?



I don't claim to know much, but those things I DO know; I can verify. How can you validate yourself?

Why people keep asking questions about his credentials and his thoughts on tactics.He already avoided them dozens of time.

 

[Amsdorf]

No, silly bean, I already answered, several times. I have never claimed to be any sort of expert, never have, never will. Perhaps you if you would post less, and read more, it might improve your comprehension skills.

My assertions regarding Yeager's reprehensible online "challenges" and calling people out to duel him have nothing to do with anyone's experiences, his, mine or yours.

Now move along.

Oh, by the way, did you ever fill out that form I supplied? Here's another copy, in case you misplaced it.



But not to worry, I've decided Yeager is such a knuckle-dragging neanderthal that giving him any further publicity is precisely the only thing he is after.

 

[Sylvain]

No, silly bean, I already answered, several times. I have never claimed to be any sort of expert, never have, never will. Perhaps you if you would post less, and read more, it might improve your comprehension skills.

My assertions regarding Yeager's reprehensible online "challenges" and calling people out to duel him have nothing to do with anyone's experiences, his, mine or yours.

Now move along.

I never saw your answer the question about which of the 4 safety rules was broken for having people down range.
Maybe I missed it and you can show me your answer to that question.
That was asked you by a few members since you claimed that having a photographed down range was breaking the basic safety rules.

Not moving along and waiting for your answer.

 

[printcraft]

Having photographers or anyone down range is ****ing stupid.

 

[Sylvain]

Having photographers or anyone down range is ****ing stupid.

You can think that but if you train for self defense it's not stupid to practice with "non-shoot targets" just like it's the case in real life.It can be safe if it's done right.
The OP said it was a violation of the 4 safety rules.Im still waiting his explanations on that.

In real life friendly people are down range almost all the time.It's why 9 people got shot by accident by the police during the empire state building shooting.
They probably never practiced having "non shoot targets" down range.

 

[esrice]

Having photographers or anyone down range is ****ing stupid.

Right. And I agree (at least in the context of the debated practice).

But the question that's been proposed is "which of the 4-rules does it violate?". It was stated that it broke the safety rules, and I'm curious which ones.

 

[printcraft]

You can think that but if you train for self defense it's not stupid to practice with "non-shoot targets" just like it's the case in real life.It can be safe if it's done right.
.......

I agree.......... They make paper targets for that reason.

To everyone that thinks having someone down range during live fire is ever a "good" idea.........
Next time you go to the range and the line is cold and someone
is hanging targets downrange just start shooting at your target.

It is perfectly safe as you are only shooting at your target and not aiming at them.
Nothing bad could possibly happen.

 

[Sylvain]

Right. And I agree (at least in the context of the debated practice).

But the question that's been proposed is "which of the 4-rules does it violate?". It was stated that it broke the safety rules, and I'm curious which ones.

I think he also said that the photographer was actually shot.
I could be wrong about that.

 

[Hookeye]

Having photographers or anyone down range is ****ing stupid.

My mother in law has a camera...........

 

[printcraft]

My mother in law has a camera...........

Exceptions to every rule I suppose......

 

[Hookeye]

In all seriousness though, were the photogs behind any barriers?
Maybe one designed for camera usage?

 

[Sylvain]

I agree.......... They make paper targets for that reason.

To everyone that thinks having someone down range during live fire is ever a "good" idea.........
Next time you go to the range and the line is cold and someone
is hanging targets downrange just start shooting at your target.

It is perfectly safe as you are only shooting at your target and not aiming at them.
Nothing bad could possibly happen.

I said it's safe if it's done the right way with the right people.Many anti terrorists groups train that way but I would obviously not do that at the local range with random people.
In that case you wouldn't break any of the 4 safety rules but you would more likely break the range rule (no shooting while the line is cold) and in that case do something stupid.
Doing that during a class with trained people and a qualified instructor and doing that at your local range during regular practice is not the same thing.

 

[Hookeye]

BTW, having supposedly been involved with some legal matters before, having a photographer downrange without any safety barriers, the risk of more legal woes..........that might be considered brave, not cowardly

 

[Hookeye]

I said it's safe if it's done the right way with the right people.Many anti terrorists groups train that way but I would obviously not do that at the local range with random people.
In that case you wouldn't break any of the 4 safety rules but you would more likely break the range rule (no shooting while the line is cold) and in that case do something stupid.
Doing that during a class with trained people and a qualified instructor and doing that at your local range during regular practice is not the same thing.

Agreed. Add: cameras give a different view and can be foolers.

 

[printcraft]

In all seriousness though, were the photogs behind any barriers?
Maybe one designed for camera usage?

Nothing to see here......

 

[Sylvain]

Nothing to see here......

Do we know the name of the photograph to check if he's still alive?
The OP said he was hit.