Sweeping the Universe

[Bapak2ja]

1. The Four Rules were not invented at INGO. They were created at Gunsite by Jeff Cooper and Clint Smith who reordered existing rules from various sources.

2. Training, no. Practice and culture, yes. Familiarity breeds contempt.

We at INGO do not want to go there, that's why we write, gripe, complain and post stories where guns go bang when they are not to go bang. We want to create a culture where the Four Rules are observed and become the accepted standard of practice and culture. We want gun safety to become "cool", or at least as cool as a Van Dyke and a dirty baseball cap at the range.

3. Superior to the poor gun skills of cops? No, we want to go home alive or without an extra hole.

Perhaps some point out the poor gun skills of the police as a retort to politicians who tell us how "trained" the police are. However, the majority of us are fearful for our safety and the safety of others.

The officer who pointed the pistol at me and waved it at joggers, bicyclists and dog walkers in Broad Ripple I am certain "just wanted to go home safe." However, I too have a right to go home safe. He is the one that chooses to wave the gun around and choose to endanger me and everyone else as he stares at the 1911 like an ape from 2001. (My good friend experienced something similar with a state cop and a P99, when the trooper did not know how to eject the magazine and pointed it at everyone, including the trooper).

Law enforcement has two options: 1) leave the stupid guns alone and stop endangering us or 2) seek knowledge and stop prattling about their "training".

Remember, everytime you load or unload a firearm, it can go bang without any fingers on triggers.

We don't like being endangered by this reckless handling and we don't have to stand for it. As well, I don't want the cop to get hurt, a passing soccer mom with a van full of kids, or ME.

Bak, imagine that you go to a place across from your county's courthouse or your county's Sheriff's department and fiddle with your gun in public, pointing it a traffic, waving it at deputies leaving the jail, maybe pointing it at a judge's passing car. How many felonies would you be facing and how high would your bond be? Oh, how quick would your carry license be revoked?

If we as dirty, nasty non-badges are expected not to do stupid stuff with firearms (a fair standard), then why are those with polyester shirts and tin pot badges somehow exempt from proper gun skills?

Kirk, thanks for the feedback. Remember, I do not dispute, or challenge, the no sweep principle. I am trying to learn the nuances of acceptable levels of sweep and the history of the development of the principle. Thanks for the information.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Bak, there is no acceptable level.

"But judge, my client only pointed his gun at the officer/deputy/trooper for a little bit."

Don't think of "acceptable sweeping" as there is no such critter. Think that the Four Rules light is always on.

Learn to move with a pistol and not endanger the world. *cough, cough* Buy a blue gun *cough, cough*

Remember, the foundation of being a responsible gun owner is gun handling. It's all about the gun handling, THEN its about the bling, bling (shooting and being all "tactical" and stuff).

Don't let someone grow a Van Dyke or put on a khaki baseball cap until they can demonstrate non-numbnuts behavior with firearms.

 

[Bapak2ja]

Bak, there is no acceptable level.

"But judge, my client only pointed his gun at the officer/deputy/trooper for a little bit."

Don't think of "acceptable sweeping" as there is no such critter. Think that the Four Rules light is always on.

Learn to move with a pistol and not endanger the world. *cough, cough* Buy a blue gun *cough, cough*

Remember, the foundation of being a responsible gun owner is gun handling. It's all about the gun handling, THEN its about the bling, bling (shooting and being all "tactical" and stuff).

Don't let someone grow a Van Dyke or put on a khaki baseball cap until they can demonstrate non-numbnuts behavior with firearms.

I hear you, Kirk, but your absolutes are unrealistic, as demonstrated by various comments above. Folks are being swept by holstered firearms, for example, which are able to fire under certain circumstances. Of course, the ideal is no sweep, ever; but that really is unrealistic.

For the record, i am not interested in bling or tactical or cool. I am interested in getting me and mine home safe every night.

 

[OWGEM]

^^ A holstered firearm is an entirely different topic.

Every method of carrying a holstered a firearm has the muzzle sweeping something occasionally...there is just no way around it. The controls of the firearm are protected by the holster, so that is not an issue.

I agree that a holstered firearm is generally not in danger of going off. However one must draw sometime. I referred to pocket carry and appendix carry, both of which one cannot draw and not sweep oneself.


As I said some will consider me over cautious, I imagine those who carry in the above mentioned fashions will be among that population.

 

[Bapak2ja]

I agree that a holstered firearm is generally not in danger of going off. However one must draw sometime. I referred to pocket carry and appendix carry, both of which one cannot draw and not sweep oneself.


As I said some will consider me over cautious, I imagine those who carry in the above mentioned fashions will be among that population.

OWGEM, thanks for your input. I am learning a great deal from this thread. There are far more issues involved than I considered when I raised the issue. Caution is good. So are the Four Rules. I am just trying to find the sweet spot where ideal meets reality. The more I ask and read on this forum, the more I am impressed with the wisdom to be found here. Thanks for contributing.

 

[japartridge]

Wasn't calling you anything...just explaining it.

You may not a shoulder holstered pistol pointing at you...that is an emotional reaction to something, that I share for the most part. It makes me uncomftorable as well. It is still "safe" because it is holstered.

You have sat in a restaurant with a pistol being pointed at you from countless shoulder and pocket holsters through your lifetime and never known a thing. They were perfectly safe.

A properly holstered firearm will not go off no matter what kind of holster, shoulder, IWB, Appendix, SOB, 3'Oclock, etc. The fact that is is pointing at you does not make it un-safe...it just makes you un-comftorable. The controls(trigger/safety) are inaccessable.

Now drawing from a shoulder - manipulating a firearm from such a position - has the ability to sweep people(along with your arm) while it is in your hands and coming around to aiming posiiton...it is a less-safe way to draw than from the 3'Oclock position, for example.

youngda, didn't mean to imply that you were calling me or anyone else anything, just calling myself out!

As for sweeping oneself... I'm not all that concerned about sweeping myself.... i figure if I have my boogerhook on the trigger and end up shooting myself, it's my own damn fault! .

Also, I'm not saying that I don't ever sweep anyone, I know I have...crowded gun shops are bad... gun shows are almost impossible to not accidentally sweep someone at some point... I take exception to people who do it consistently, and/or do it when there is no reason/explanation to do so. I don't think anyone here can say that they have never done something that someone else might classify as un-safe with a firearm. We do what we can, and try to make sure that we all go home safe, and "un-ventilated".

 

[JR50]

I like my avatar!

 

[Kirk Freeman]

gun shows are almost impossible to not accidentally sweep someone at some point

Geez, don't get me started on a gun show rant.

Then we need to learn not to finger guns when there is a crowd around . . . and we also need to learn to handle firearms in crowds, buy a blue gun.

 

[dross]

As a kid learning the one main rule of gun safety that my Dad taught - Don't point that F ing thing at people! - I always knew when I'd made a mistake. The way my skull would ring for minutes afterward, my brain having been bounced off of it courtesy of my Dad's construction worker hand always tipped me off.

 

[orange]

Insisting on absolute never ever happen is silly.

What do you people do at gun shows? How do you bring a gun from pointing at the floor to pointing at the ceiling while avoiding the crowd in between? The rules of safe handling are redundant specifically to allow for minor violations. Muzzle swept something? Well, my finger wasn't on the trigger so no harm done..not that I'm going to wave a gun wildly around, aim at folks and yell bang bang.

Here's something that will blow some minds. I point a .44 at my head on a regular basis. What a rebel, right! Horrible unsafe practice!

Well how else am I supposed to check the bore when I'm cleaning the thing?

 

[ATM]

...I watched him check the chamber, and even double check it, so both he and I knew the weapon was cleared. Still, as we talked he swept me, his wife and my wife with the weapon several times.

Many people are less diligent in proper gun handling when they know it's unloaded

...(Remember, we all know the drill about every gun is loaded and never sweep anyone, etc. I am not challenging it and do not need it to be reiterated here, wasting everyone's time.)

I challenge it. Reality dictates that the gun I just checked and still hold is in fact unloaded. I cannot escape that reality even by repeating the rule #1 mantra any number of times.

...While they are always safe, and always clear the weapons, etc., they clearly have a different standard about "sweeping" than I read about on INGO.

They can't help it. Rule #1 is not a fact, simply a mantra to help people be diligent with rules 2-4. If they truly thought it might still be loaded, they'd probably continue with their strict observance of those other rules.

...2. Is it at variance with long-standing police or military training?

It's at variance with reality and inescapable undeniable human logic.

Rule #1 has become the logical reason to follow rules 2-4. This causes people to be sloppy when they "know" it's unloaded.

I'm happier when people follow rules 2-4 regardless. Just don't do those with an empty gun either.

Without rule #1, the other rules would be all we needed.

The absurdity of rule #1 weakens the other rules in my opinion.

 

[Fishersjohn48]

Insisting on absolute never ever happen is silly.

What do you people do at gun shows? How do you bring a gun from pointing at the floor to pointing at the ceiling while avoiding the crowd in between? The rules of safe handling are redundant specifically to allow for minor violations. Muzzle swept something? Well, my finger wasn't on the trigger so no harm done..not that I'm going to wave a gun wildly around, aim at folks and yell bang bang.

Here's something that will blow some minds. I point a .44 at my head on a regular basis. What a rebel, right! Horrible unsafe practice!

Well how else am I supposed to check the bore when I'm cleaning the thing?

You know I fret about that myself. Whenever I clean a revolver the only way to check the barrell is to look down it muzzle first. It still makes me uneasy as ingrained in my skull is my dad's voice saying don't point it at anything you are not going to shoot.

I'm interested to hear how this is handled by those of us who say that there are no exceptions. If there is another way of checking the barrell without staring down the thing then I would like to know how you do it. On my revolvers the cylinder is either removed or open at which point you could make the case that it is now just a piece of metal pipe but it still bothers me.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Rule #1 is not a fact, simply a mantra to help people be diligent with rules 2-4.

This is correct as the first sign at API merely had one rule "All guns are always loaded." This was thought to be all that was needed. However, after a few classes the other three were added.

I'm happier when people follow rules 2-4 regardless. Just don't do those with an empty gun either.

Yes, all those empty guns, like at gun shows in Illinois, set people on fire.

 

[BigGuyinMuncie]

It is, to me, an obvious thing.....NEVER, EVER, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE POINT YOUR WEAPON AT SOMETHING YOU DON'T WANT TO SHOOT AT!!! (Man, did the voice of my dad come into your head and pound that in to all of you also? No? Ok, just checking.)

 

[ATM]

This is correct as the first sign at API merely had one rule "All guns are always loaded." This was thought to be all that was needed. However, after a few classes the other three were added.

I wish they had done away with the thought (1) and replaced it with the actions (2-4) rather than trying to keep them all together.

 

[VERT]

1. Is the current INGO standard a recent development?
2. Is it at variance with long-standing police or military training?
3. Does it have an element of "Gotcha" in it that makes us feel a bit superior because we get to chide someone, especially those "hated" LEOs, on their inferior gun handling skills?

.

1) Would not call it an INGO thing. Like somebody already mentioned the NRA has been preaching this for years. Been discussed and we were all told not to point guns at people or things we don't want to shoot.

2) Again No. I think it is as simple as those people who become comfortable with guns in their daily lives are comfortable with guns. This should not mean complacent, but lets face it, it is difficult to not accidently sweep something with a handgun. Especially with lots of outside stimulis. It is embarrassing when it happens to you. The important thing is to recognize your mistake and try not to let it happen again.

3) I think there may be a bit of "GOTCHA" going on. I have a hard time believing that there are people out there that have not made a gun handling mistake with a handgun. Experience is nothing more then learning from the mistakes we make. I have no doubt that the majority of those on this forum are safe and responsible gun owners, but not perfect. I know I have made my fair share of mistakes, some of which are more serious then I would like to admit.

As far as the "hated LEOs". I think some people are sensitive to the fact that law enforcement enjoy some freedoms that the rest of us don't. The general public can rationalize this because LEOs are "trained". Fact is LEOs are people too who make mistakes and the more times they handle guns during a work day the greater the chance of making a mistake.

 

[orange]

I'm interested to hear how this is handled by those of us who say that there are no exceptions. If there is another way of checking the barrell without staring down the thing then I would like to know how you do it. On my revolvers the cylinder is either removed or open at which point you could make the case that it is now just a piece of metal pipe but it still bothers me.

I just thought of something else; how many people don't take a moment to peek down the bore of a used gun they're buying?

Clearly the solution is to pick someone you don't like, point the gun at their eyes and ask. "Does this look okay to you?"

 

[PatriotPride]

I was taught never to have the firearm pointed at something I would not destroy. I'll admit that I am particular about being swept. If I'm one on one with a person and I have seen them clear the weapon and I myself have verified that the weapon is cleared, then I will relax to a certain extent. In other circumstances, I always have the "what-if" thought of "how do I know that the firearm is unloaded?" in the back of my mind.

 

[shibumiseeker]

When I am cleaning a gun or buying one and need to look down the bore, I have my finger hooked through somehow, making it impossible for it to fire because it won't be in battery. I use that too to reflect light so I can see down the barrel. This gets back to the "have a good reason to" vs. "doing so through carelessness."

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I wish they had done away with the thought (1) and replaced it with the actions (2-4) rather than trying to keep them all together.

They did . . . at the Chinese Gunsite.