Home Forums Miscellaneous Topics Second Amendment CCW and Dropped Guns

In the past year there have been two incidents in public places where a licensed gun carrier dropped his piece resulting in dischages. One incident occurred in a restaurant. The other in a food court in a major shopping mall. The second incident resulted in an injury but not life threatening.
<br>
<br>I never did hear what they were carrying but I suspect something other than quality firearms.
<br>
<br>I hate to see Indiana add restrictions on types of firearms and modes of carry but I wonder if some training might be needed to keep the uneducated from putting our carry rights in danger.
<br>
<br>Any one who has not dropped a gun may cast the first stone. One time I dropped an M60 (S&W not machine gun) in the squad room. You should see how fast my colleagues ducked for shelter. The gun didn't go off.
<br>A friend one time dropped a derringer and it did go off.
<br>The difference was in the firearm.
<br>
<br>Norm

Once a model 60 fell out of a cheap IWB, and landed on the hammer. No discharge, and no one saw. It was like 20 years ago.

Hawk,
<br>
<br>Sure makes your heart skip a beat though, doesn't it?
<br>
<br>N

Definitely. A couple of janitors were just coming around the corner at the time, but I picked it up pretty quick.
<br>
<br>You know (just as an aside), a Government Model is prone to going off when dropped. It is not just low quality guns that will go off that way.

The Govt. Model, 1911 Colts don't go off easily if dropped. I've seen a number of them dropped and banged around.
<br> They have what's known as a flying firing pin. If the hammer is resing on the frame - not half cock - they usually can't give the firing pin enough momentum to propell the firing pin forward and cause a discharge. A very heavy blow on the hammer can cause a discharge however.
<br> The safest way to carry them is Condition Three (or four), on an empty chamber. Very close to that is Condition One, Cocked and Locked. E

TRH,
<br>
<br>You are right about expensive guns going off when dropped. That's why the 80 series had a firing pin safety added.
<br>
<br>A friend, active in law enforcement at the time, dropped his Model 39 on it's nose and it went off. Usually inertial firing pins would not have enough momentum unless dropped straight down on the barrel. Probably the least bad in a bad situation.
<br>
<br>I don't carry semiautos with out firing pin safety any more. When I did it was always cocked and locked.
<br>Funny though Browing High Power was always recommended to be carried hammer down in an empty chamber. Fortunately now a days Browning has added a firing pin safety to its HP.
<br>
<br>Maybe I should have said a "quality" gun will not discharge.
<br>
<br>In any case, having a licenced carrier drop his piece in a public place and having it go off is very bad for our side.
<br>
<br>N

E
<br>
<br>A heavy blow on the hammer or dropping directly on the muzzle. Let's here it for the firing pin safety device on series 80 and later.
<br>
<br>N

Honest to God, I have never dropped any kind of firearm. I even had my service revolver still in my hand after getting shot and my partner had to take for the ambulance crew. I was unconcious at the time.

T,
<br>
<br>I believe you, honest to God. I never dropped one in a stressful situation just in a stupid squad room situation.
<br>
<br>Good work I might add in keeping your firearm after being shot. Good instincts. Most guys I've seen shot seem to want to get rid of the darned thing and drop 'em like hot potatoes.
<br>
<br>Except for the bad guys. The just keep in ticking.
<br>
<br>N

I don't know for sure, but he said he had to carefully pry it from my fingers.
<br>
<br>I was in the squad room one shift change when one of our Sgts., who was want to carry a Commander off duty in his back pocket cocked with the safety off, slipped on the steps and shot himself in the butt cheek. Actually it just burned him. He said he thought the grip safety was enough to keep it from fireing. Like you said we did a whole lot of duckin' and coverin' in that concrete room lined with steel wall lockers!

T Lee,
<br>
<br>To quote my grandson: "Well Duh!"
<br>
<br>N

Yeah, the Sheriff took a very dim view of the procedings, "Sarge" returned to work minus the stripes. Oh yeah, got put back to revolvers only till the next NRA Poice handgun course was given, by me!

I had a remington xp-100 fall out of the holster while climbing a tree stand. You can bet there was some puckering as it it fell hitting branches on the was down had visions of 140 grain 7mm bullet making it's way thru my body from bottom up. afterwards I remembered I had done the right thing and unloaded it before climbing. oh and yes pistol was undamaged. tom

Norm, you are quite right. A fall, that lands on the muzzle, can do it too.
<br> I don't like the firing pin safety guns - they are really hard to get a good trigger break.
<br> I much prefer Condition One, when I carry. I don't have a problem with Condition Three. I do know how to chamber a round one handed.
<br> Come to think of it, I usually carry my 1006 in Condition Two. It rides in a Bianchi Mil. Spec. holster. Darn DA guns don't allow Condition One carry. Now that S&W is up and running, I need to see if they will convert it to single action.
<br> BTW, what's your opinion on magazine safeties ? I refuse to have them. I've seen a magazine, or two, drop out at the wrong time. Thus rendering the gun to the club status. I'd much rather have a single shot, than a club. E
<br>

E,
<br>
<br>I've got two Kimbers, two Sigs and two Glocks with firing pin safeties. All six have good triggers.
<br>
<br>As for magazine safeties I have mixed emotions.
<br>First I only have one with one and don't carry it.
<br>Long years ago when I carried a M39 I removed the
<br>rear sight and deactivated the mag safety.
<br>
<br>But for a house gun with a round chambered and a magazine close but out of the gun a mag safety could be an asset.
<br>
<br>I have always envisioned a mag safety as being for semi- or non-skilled shooters.
<br>
<br>I have carried single actions semiautos over the years. Depending on whether the guns was holstered or in my belt I made a cocked and locked, hammer down or chamber empty decision.
<br>
<br>I can chamber a round one handed but don't really want to have to do it with some azzh_le blazing away at me. Nowadays if I carry a semiauto it has a round chambered-period.
<br>
<br>Norm

At the risk of sounding trite. "Cocked and Locked" since 1911, works for me!
<br>
<br>
<br>

T Lee,
<br>
<br>Thanks for the photo of the worthy war horse.
<br>
<br>Interestingly, I carried cocked and lock today. I went the the range and shot Sig and Glock. So I packed the Kimber Officers Model Size C&L--Securely in a Fobus paddle holster.
<br>
<br>Norm

I carry IWB in either a Milt Sparks "Executive Companion", Alessi "Hideout" or a holster I had made that is an IWB cross draw design. All depending on dress and where I will be most of the day.
<br>
<br>Thanks for the compliment, my Dad bought her in 1952 for $55.00 brand new and I have had her for 30+ years.

Yes, it is a beaut. I also like the Executive Companion by Milt Sparks. Never consider any other holster anymore.

What's the brand on all the "accidental discharges" from being dropped???
<br>
<br>Not since the early 70's and the Ruger recalls have I heard of any major manufacture have to deal with this problem.
<br>
<br>Hell even cheapies like Charter Arms or H&R have a transfer bar design.
<br>
<br>What are these people buying, RG's ????

RAM,
<br>
<br>The to incidents that got me thinking about this thread happened in Indianapolis. One in Castleton Square Mall. When the CCW GA sat down in the Food Court to have his lunch the back of the chair knocked his gun out on to the floor which caused it to discharge. Unfortunately the newsie didn't see fit to ask the paramount question. What type and make of gun was it?
<br>
<br>The other incident occurred near the same time and I do not remember the details or where. Both incidents were reported in the Indianapolis Star and on local TV news.
<br>
<br>From what I see for sale at the gun shows and on the shelves at my local gun dealer there are lots of guns out there that will go bang when dropped if not properly loaded by the CCW GA. NAA sells a bunch of useless (IMHO) small .22 LR and .22 Mag 5-shot revolvers. If the CCW GA isn't smart enough to put the hammer in the safety notch-Kablam!! if dropped.
<br>
<br>Lots of little .22 and .25 single action striker fired pot metal being sold. If carried with a round in the chamber an accidental discharge is possible.
<br>
<br>Yes the Majors have made their guns more idiot-proof but believe me the idiots will prevail.
<br>
<br>If I were a dealer I'd certainly clean the junque out of my stock and only sell guns with proper safety designed in.
<br>
<br>There is some argument that firing pin safeties effect the trigger pull. I don't doubt this but a carry gun without a firing pin safety is a potential disaster waiting to happen.
<br>
<br>Personally the four makes of semiautos I have all have trigger safeties including two Kimber II's. I cannot tell that these triggers are any different that older guns without trigger safeties.
<br>
<br>Windy aren't I?
<br>
<br>Norm
<br>
<br>Norm

I have both, 1911 pre 70 Colts as well as early 50's and 60' "D" frame revolvers. I then go on to a couple S&W "K" frames with the hammer block feature as well as an early 39-2 and a 6906 of later manufacture. They all work well when your brain is engaged, no amount of "idiot proofing" will keep an idiot from screwing up! Lets face it, the most importent safety item is between your ears, not on the firearm.

T LEE,
<br>
<br>I couldn't agree with you more.
<br>
<br>But idiots will buy guns and carry them. And even not so dumb people will do dumb things like drop a gun.
<br>All guns sold today should be drop proof with a round chambered. The only thing that should be able to make a gun go "BANG!" is pulling the trigger.
<br>
<br>Selling less that safe guns indicates to me that the dealer doesn't understand that people might drop them or carry them with a round chambered when they shouldn't or that he doesn't care.
<br>
<br>At a bear minimum they should hang a sign on each gun in the display cabinet "UNSAFE FOR CARRY WITH A ROUND CHAMBERED."
<br>
<br>Now back down off my soap box.
<br>
<br>Norm

I am sorry, but I am fed up with people excusing responsability with government regulation and "idiot proof" add on's to mechanical devices of any kind. We need people to return to self responsability rather than fitting crutches to all even if they don't need them.
<br>
<br>I am tired of adding "safety" devices to replace education and knowledge. Training is more important IMHO. Heck, Idiots still have access to kitchen knives and automobiles and kill themselves and others with such items. What would you have us do about that?
<br>
<br>OK, off my soap box as well.

I gotta hang with T LEE on this one.
<br>
<br>There's more than enough government regulation on our lives and properties now without adding more.
<br>
<br>The world can't be idiot proofed, and the herd needs to be culled.
<br>
<br>Unfrotunately there may be some tradegies of innocents as the idiots eliminate themselves, but that is the price I am willing to pay to be free.
<br>
<br>Idiots drive cars, pry with screw drivers, drink too much, smoke, operate machinery, bash thumbs with hammers, get fish hooks in themselves and others, cut themselves, etc. etc. etc.
<br>
<br>You can't legislate common sence, don't try.

T LEE,
<br>
<br>Actually I don't think we are too far apart on this. My unfortunate use of the term "idiot proof" was not exactly what I meant.
<br>
<br>I don't want gun locks built in or stuff like that. I just
<br>think that guns that can discharge when dropped are a problem for we Americans who are struggling to keep our gun rights.
<br>
<br>Or to say it another way, gun manfuactureres should certify that the firearms they manufacture will not discharge when dropped.
<br>
<br>I appreaciate your comments. You usually have a good measure of common sense.
<br>
<br>Thanks,
<br>
<br>Norm
<br>
<br>

T LEE, I accidentally addressed a response to me and not to you.
<br>
<br>N

RAM,
<br>
<br>As I just stated to T LEE I really don't want guns idiot proofed since that could lead to all sorts of problems.
<br>
<br>People will continue to drop guns. At a minimum gun manufactures should certify that their guns will not discharge when dropped. These manufacturers generally do that now.
<br>
<br>What do we do with the guys who make guns of unsafe design?
<br>
<br>What do we do if someone carries a striker fired pot metal .25 ACP with a round in the chamber?
<br>
<br>I'm open to suggestion. But if too many CCW GA's drop their guns in public and these guns discharge we could be in for a bunch of restrictions we don't want.
<br>
<br>Norm

Thanks, I think. My contention is you aren't suppose to drop firearms. And most won't discharge unless they land just right any way. We tried to make a number of handguns fire primed cases in testing for new issue for our dept back in the 70's. Unless dropped from inordinate heights, even 1911 pattern guns as well as ALL revolvers tested would not go off. The 1911 and BHP guns would if they landed straight up and down on the muzzle from fifteen (15) FEET at minumim. The S & W, Colt and Ruger revolvers would not, they would not go off if dropped on their hammers either, many of the Colt and Smith's were the earlier type with hammer mounted firing pins BTW. We actually had two Smiths and one Ruger have the hammer break off, still without firing the primer.
<br>
<br>Some Ravens and Jennings as well as a sample of other confiscated el cheapo's WOULD, from as little as 3 feet however. The derringers of Remington pattern were the worst offenders by far. Even my Colt Model "N" wouldn't AD with the safety off or on!
<br>
<br>All guns were dropped on concrete and asphalt surfaces with no padding (I had to recrown my personal Colt).

T LEE,
<br>
<br>The thanks was warranted. My comments were meant to be conciliatory. From your posts I have learned to respect your positions.
<br>
<br>And even here I understand your position but think selling a little of our souls for a greater good is prudent.
<br>
<br>"My contention is you aren't suppose to drop firearms."
<br>OK we are 100% in agreement. I think the guys that recently dropped their guns in Indy and had them go off will also agree. But the guns were dropped and discharged.
<br>
<br>And as you pointed out "And most won't discharge unless they land just right any way. . . ." These are the quality guns.
<br>
<br>"Some Ravens and Jennings as well as a sample of other confiscated el cheapo's WOULD, from as little as 3 feet however. The derringers of Remington pattern were the worst offenders by far."
<br>
<br>Oh yes here we are. What do we with the el cheapos?
<br>As for me I'd outlaw them. Better outlaw the el cheapos than lose the righ to carry all together.
<br>
<br>"All guns were dropped on concrete and asphalt surfaces with no padding (I had to recrown my personal Colt)." Now that's dedication. I'm not sure I'd put one of my pieces into that test arena.
<br>
<br>I'm not sure what's all bad about mandating automatic firing pin locks in semiautomatics. I had a friend who is in the final days of a 30 year career as a deputy sheriff including 8 years as high sheriff. In Jim's early days he dropped his S&W M39 from waist high. The 39 landed on its muzzle and went "Kaboom." Jim believed in carrying his 39 with the safety off. Not a bad position for a person who just might need to return fire on a moments notice. Had the early model 39's firing pin lock safeties the gun would not have discharge scaring Jim and the lady motorist he was talking to at the time.
<br>
<br>I would be an ideal world if we could count on our fellow CCW folks to do the right thing. In Indiana there is no training requirement for CCW since it is a right under the Indiana constitution. That means the ignorant are still ignorant when they get their little pink card in the mail.
<br>
<br>Respectfully submitted rebuttal.
<br>
<br>Norm
<br>

Deputy Norm,
<br>
<br>Your either a troll, or a closet socialist liberal.
<br>
<br>"as for me I'ld outlaw them"
<br>
<br>There are a bizzilion gun laws on the books of this nation and the nation isn't idiot proofed yet. And you want to add more laws, this time to limit free enterprize.
<br>
<br>Who determines what's safe? Who and how do you put these "unsafe manufacturers out of business? Oh! you don't put them out of business? the government will just control them??? Sounds like communism to me.
<br>
<br>Let the market control itself. If a company has an inferior product they lose market share and $$$$. They are in business to profit, so THEY will change themselves.
<br>
<br>If a gun is dropped and an innocent is hurt or killed, there are legal remidies ALREADY in place to deal with the situation. Sue the responsible party. The IDIOT who dropped his gun.

I gotta plead ignorance. Norm, explain this "...When the CCW GA sat down in the Food Court to have his lunch the back of the chair ...."
<br>
<br>What the #@!#$ is a CCW GA? and how did you use this ....as a noun??
<br>
<br>CCW to me = Concealed Carry Weapon (adjective)
<br>
<br>I have no idea what you mean by "GA"
<br>
<br>And grammaticly if my understanding of CCW is correct it ...............just explain it to me. Maybe it will help me to try to understand where your coming from.

Sorry RAM,
<br>
<br>I meant a person licensed to carry a concealed handgun.
<br>In Indiana that's all an unlimited handgun license authorizes.
<br>
<br>N

RAM,
<br>
<br>I'll have to admit to being a troll. My politics are to the right of Atilla the Hun.
<br>
<br>And OUTLAW scares me too. BUT . . . . .
<br>
<br>I don't want idiots with guns that go off when dropped
<br>to cost me my rights.
<br>
<br>OK what do you suggest? These two incidents where civilians licensed to carry concealed handguns and dropped them resulting in discharges with one injury
<br>resulted in a flury of bad press. It could have been worse it seems that only the local antigunners wrote letters to their state legislators and local newspapers.
<br>
<br>The guns they carried were unsafe for untrained persons to carry. As a trained person if I only had a striker fired semiauto without a trigger safety that I got for $49 or a pot metal derringer that cost me as much I'd have no rounds under the firing pin. With the semiauto that means empty chamber and with the el cheapo derringer that means empty.
<br>
<br>Actually I would carry neither and opt for a bigger knife
<br>and running shoes.
<br>
<br>I am just thinking that if nothing is done by the shooters, sellers, and manufacturers of firearms the state will step in and do it for us in a way that we will not exactly like.
<br>
<br>It is my opinion that since we license everyone who applies for a license guns should be "drop proof." The question remains how do we get there?
<br>
<br>Clearly since these things are still for sale at guns shows and on the shelves of some dealers self-regulation is not working.
<br>
<br>Again what do you suggest?
<br>
<br>Norm

Norm,
<br>
<br>I would MUCH rather see the CCW holders demonstrate safe handlng and profeciency than add all the Jim cracks and gegaws to the tool. Much like driving, one must demonstrate a minimum of proficiency with the tools to be certified. Common sense cannot be taught , I know, but even the slowest of us are trainable to a degree. I find this approach better than placing such restrictions on manufactures that firearms are priced out of reach of those that need them the most.
<br>
<br>As to dedication in dropping my Colt, I wanted it certified so I could keep carring it as BUG and off duty. Quite selfish in motivation I assure you.

Norm, much better to allow the civil law (tort) system to take care of it. If, when my Model 60 popped out of my cheapo IWB 20 years ago, it went off (it didn't, thank God), then the appropriate action would have been for the injured party (low probability anyone would be injured) to sue my but off. They would lose, because I used the product properly, and the product failed. They could then take their suit to the manufacturor of the IWB holster for selling me a defective product. This results in two things. Firstly, I will never again use a cheapo IWB, and will switch to an auto pistol, which is less likely to wriggle out of an IWB, and Secondly, the manufacturer of the cheapo IWB will either go out of business or produce a product that will not allow a Model 60 to wriggle out of it when properly used. They could also sue the gun manufacturer for making a product that goes off when dropped. We cannot have a perfectly safe society. Well, we can, but it's called tyranny. Much better to have a society where everyone is held individually accountable for their individual negligences. This is the best comprimise that allows both freedom and relative safety in the same environment.

T LEE,
<br>
<br>Yes training is paramount. Trained people make fewer mistakes.
<br>
<br>As far as raising costs this is also a concern.
<br>
<br>My concern remains firearms that are not drop proof.
<br>The trigger or grip safety (as in Kimber II's) activated
<br>firepin safety devices are one way of reducing discharge if dropped.
<br>
<br>Double action revolvers have met this criteria for many years. I seldom go into a gun shop and don't see a used Taurus in the $150 price range.
<br>
<br>Thanks,
<br>
<br>Norm

"My concern remains firearms that are not drop proof."
<br>
<br>Neither are eggs, wine glasses or babies.
<br>
<br>Are we gonna outlaw them too?
<br>
<br>What you seem to be missing Norm, is it is not the object. It is the careless act of an individule.
<br>
<br>Its like when you were a kid, and your Mom said, "no grape juice in the living room" why? cuz YOU were irresponsible and would spill it on her rug. (do they make stain free grape juice? no.)
<br>
<br>Hopefully you matured and out grew that.
<br>
<br>As to dropping of your weapon - apply the same principal.

RAM, I agree with you.
<br>
<br>Careless individuals are the problem. Hell I carelessly dropped a loaded gun in a squad room in 1968. I knew better. I had been trained that it was a bad thing to drop a gun. I was a Distinguished Expert. But I had a lapse. The gun, a quality piece from S&W didn't discharge. Thirty four year later and still carrying handguns I have yet to drop one a second time.
<br>
<br>A respondent to this thread stated that during tests it was the "el cheapo" handguns that were the problem during drop tests. Dropped guns discharging in public will put pressure on our legislators to "do something about it."
<br>
<br>I asked you "What do you suggest?" I think your suggestion is to do nothing to prevent accidental discharges caused by defective firearms being dropped.
<br>Is that your suggestion?
<br>
<br>Accidents happen. Just drive by a junk yard. People know not to have accidents but sill have them.
<br>
<br>Since I cannot convince you and you certainly cannot convice me. I say end it here. You can have the last word. I just ask think about it.
<br>
<br>The Troll.

TRH,
<br>
<br>What about state legislators using these accidents to reduce our gun rights? What about the person who catches a slug in the head from a dropped gun?
<br>
<br>Why not insist that guns be drop proof? All quality makers guns do not discharge when dropped. Why
<br>let a few pot metal junkers and ill designed pieces put our gun rights and public safety in danger?
<br>
<br>Hawk, I cannot believe letting these events so easily prevented go into the courts is best for gun owners and gun rights.
<br>
<br>Someone communicated concern that raising the safety of firearms will raise the cost to the point where people cannot buy them. I see used Taurus .38's at gun shows for under $200 dollars. Taurus revolvers can be dropped all day and will not discharge.
<br>
<br>Any way as I told RAM I am not apt to convince you nor you me. So for the sake of courtesy I'll let you have the last word. And we'll go on to other things.
<br>
<br>Norm
<br>

Norm;
<br>
<br>I gave you my suggestion, but you are so focused on your own thoughts, you musta missed it.
<br>
<br>
<br>Let the market take care of it self.

Norm, You are correct about SOME of the lower quality handguns (i.e. Davis semi's, Lorcins, Jennings/Bryco,etc.)in that they have a marginaly effective safety. The Davis derringer has a crossbolt hammer block and a halfcock "safety" , but it seems that many owners elect not to use them because of the time factor to make the gun usable in time of need. You have seen me time after time, explain safety operation and maintenance procedures to customers, but it is up to them to use that knowledge. The burden of blame in these Inept Discharges is on the owner more than on the device.

Norm, why do you think they are making guns safer these days? It's because they get sued when they don't. That is the solution. It's the same dynamic that results in safer and safer power saws and chain saws, and the like. If you pass legislation, then what about all the antique guns? Will they be confiscated? In a free society we need to stand up against legislation that restricts our freedom, or by gradualism we lose that freedom. Holding individuals responsible for their individual negligences is the answer that preserves both relative safety (you cannot have perfect safety) and liberty.
<br>
<br>P.S. Norm, what did the doc say?

TRH,
<br>
<br>Ticker OK thanks.
<br>
<br>I am abandoning this thread to spend time rethinking the situation. I have some up with a pretty solid wall of resistence to forcing manufacturers to make safe guns.
<br>
<br>And since I started to be called names on some quarters I have decided to stand down.
<br>
<br>This is supposed to be fun but when I get called a "liberal" it is serious. Other names (SOB, etc.) I can take with a smile but "liberal" that's a fighting word.
<br>
<br>Norm
<br>
<br>

Don't blame ya a bit on the "liberal" tag. Them's fightin' words in my estimation. I save that one for people I REALLY dislike!
<br>
<br>I don't think you are a liberal by any streatch of the imagination. We just seem to disagree on who's responsable for safety, I say the operator, you say the machine. Let's leave it at that. Everybody is entitled to their take on an issue like this one.
<br>
<br>My biggest problem is, I MISS the days when people were responsable and good to their word, a world lost to time, sad, very sad when we have to try to engineer a tool to be smarter than the operator. Very sad indeed!

T LEE,
<br>
<br>I can't remember a time when I wasn't a "cowboy" and I also can't remember a time when I didn't know that you carried a Single Action with the hammer over an empty chamber. I didn't come from a gunowning family but I knew about SAA's.
<br>
<br>Must have been TV or the movies or some such that taught me the basics of carrying a SAA safely. Now that I think about it it might have been Hoppy.
<br>
<br>Years later a friend showed me his Old Model Ruger Superblack Hawk .44 Mag. He had the darned thing stoked with six rounds. I got him to understand that the Ruger was unsafe with six rounds in it.
<br>
<br>More years later he was showing me a like new Colt Cobra 2" that he had recently bought. He had it loaded too but with only five rounds. I told him he could put six in the Cobra safely if he wanted but if he was going to error his error was in the right direction.
<br>
<br>I haven't seen Fred for many years. I wonder if he is still loading his Cobra one round light.

Funny the things that stay with you, one of our officers in Will county always carried 1 round lite also. He had grown up on SAA's and couldn't shake the habit, just was not comfortable with one under the hammer no matter how hard we tried to convince him hoe safe the newer Colt and S & W double actions were.
<br>
<br>I was very fortunate to grow up in farm country and have access to many different types of firearms. Learned at an early age (got my first .22 at 6) how to safely handle all types of them.
<br>Under the tuteledge of my Dad and Grandad and a couple of Uncles, all hunters, shooters and all also involved in Lawman work at one time or another.
<br>
<br>Too bad that more kids nowdays can't be exposed as I was. There would be a whole lot less mischief and stupidity evident I am sure. The movies, violent cartoons and TV just don't teach right and wrong like family, heck even TV then, showed good over evil and doing the right thing was normal!

T LEE,
<br>
<br>Back about 35 years ago the Marion County Indiana SD required deputies to carry their Colt Trooper .38 Special revolvers with an empty chamber under the hammer.
<br>
<br>Two jail deputies were horsing around on the roof of the jail and one of the Troopers went off. The deputy swore (to save his job) that it just went off. The official (Sheriff or Deputy Chief) made an arbitrary decision about 5 rounds vs 6.
<br>
<br>The rule was completely ignored except when on station. Funny to see guys in squad cars removing one bullet to on on station and then put it back in when going on patrol.
<br>
<br>The silliness was put to bed by cooler heads after a couple of weeks.
<br>
<br>N.

Norm: Since we spoke this p.m. another "sniper" hit has occurred. The media hype on the caliber and suspect weapon is obviously designed to demonize their ownership by AMERICAN CITIZENS, which will send thrills of joy thru Democratic (Socialist) Party ranks if typical firearms are banned from our possession, as that will put us closer to becoming unarmed, compliant, submissive U.N. Socialist subjects. Stripped of all civilian firearms and personal freedoms, the Democratic Socialists will have kept their promise to the League of Nations in the 1930's and the United Nations (Socialist) organization that we, as a Socialist Nation, would take our place as a fellow leader in The New World Order.

Me,again with an afterthought; This "sniper" has picked an area where the majority of population has already lost their 2nd Amendment right and are now sheep in the presence of wolves. If their Political Masters had not disarmed them or if they had not become so dependent on so limited a police presence to show up after an event and make a report, the end result would have been a hail of return fire from multiple sources from which there would be no chance of the sniper's survival. That would also have deprived a Judge,two lawers and a Bailbondsman of several paychecks by elimination of a lengthy court circus of prosecution and defense.

What if it ain't a sniper, what if its some idiot with a "non-dropable" gun, and he keeps dropping it?
<br>
<br>Norms right, the government will have to force the manufacture of dropable guns to stop these heinous acts and "protect us from ourselves"

Glockbuster, I agree that if responsible people armed themselves, the chance of neutralizing this sniper would be higher, but he is a very smart sniper, unfortunately, and knows to take only one shot per day, and then change his location. This is rule number one in sniper school. When this is held to, it is very difficult to even know where the shot came from, so how could anyone return fire. If he keeps this up, I'm afraid he will never be caught, no matter how many people are armed. Really a bad situation, but it is the price of liberty. I'd rather remain free with a little danger than lose my freedom and reduce the danger from random snipers. When freedom is gone there will arise a much greater threat to our safety, and that will be the knock on the door in the middle of the night from our friendly Federal Government representatives. Under tyranny, death comes to your door in a policeman's uniform and a badge, not necessarily in sniper garb. Governments have murdered far more of their own citizens in the 20th Century than all the random murderers put together from the beginning of time. This is why I believe in every man being armed, and that the right to keep and bear arms is the linch-pin of all our other rights. Remove it, and the rest are out the window before you know what hit you.

T R H ,
<br> Glockblaster, not Glockbuster. Sometimes I forget that sheep run hystericaly away from the wolves as that is alien to my instinct to run towards the threat and make it wish it had never seen me.
<br> If the people in the "sniper's" area had been armed as other American CITIZENS in non-socialist controlled areas have the right to be, more of them would have taken the responsibility to protect their comunity and locate/ eliminate the "sniper" instead of hysterical flight for cover,leaving it to the police to show up later and investigate.
<br> Alas, it would not bode well for the brave citizen that would take the initiave to neutralize the sniper, as that would deprive a Judge, two lawyers and a bailbondsman of several big paychhecks in a long, long court circus of legal trickery and shyster lawer showcasing designed to produce yet another corrupt politician. Don't forget that politicians are usually just lawyers that have been corrupted by money and power, ultimately degtenerating even further than their already despicable position in our society.

Glockblaster, I'm not sure if you are responding to what I said, or to someone else. You seem, in any event, to have missed my point entirely. I believe that every man aught to be armed, and that the Federal Government aught not interfere with this, but in this case we have a sniper who knows what the heck he is doing, apparently. He doesn't stick around for good citizens to send a hail of bullets his way. You may not be aware of this fact, but if you fire just one shot from 200 or 300 yards away, and then leave, there is no way in hell you are going to have any idea from which direction the shot was fired. Even if you are armed with a counter sniper weapon, you will not be able to neutralized the sniper 99 times out of 100. It is almost impossible to locate the direction of one single shot fired, when you are not ready for it.

Sorry guys, guess the debate has ended. Normie sent me a nasty-gram and says he's tired of me slamming him. (for the record Norm, I never slammed "you", I just pointed out how ludicris and illogical you position was . Attack the arguement, not the person - the first rule of debate)
<br>
<br>Norm, wasn't you who started the topic? Do you always debate this way? Lose the debate, get mad, pick up your marbles and go home in a huff.
<br>
<br>Lighten up Norm, its not like were curing cancer here. Its just a stupid message board.
<br>

RAM, maybe you should take your own advice and stick to real arguments, instead of mixing in the insults, both implied and overt. Wasn't it you that called Norm a Troll?

Things that make you go Hhmmmmm!
<br>
<br>Suit targets gun as overly dangerous - Washington Post 10/15
<br>
<br> WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. (AP) � Last year, Nathaniel Brazill was sentenced to 28 years behind bars for killing his teacher. Now the gun he used in the murder is the centerpiece of a lawsuit that seeks to get cheap guns off the streets.
<br> The design of the .25-caliber Raven handgun will be on trial this week as the widow of Brazill's victim pushes her case against its distributor, saying the gun is unreasonably dangerous and lacks safety devices that would prevent a minor from using it.
<br> The case, brought by Pam Grunow, has drawn national attention because it is the first to address both the pistol's absence of a gun lock and the flaws associated with a cheap, easily concealable weapon.
<br> Valor Corp., the gun's distributor with 14,000 licensed firearms dealers nationwide, maintains the gun did what it was designed to do when it fired a bullet.
<br> "With any gun, if you pull the trigger, it will go off," said Valor attorney John Renzulli. "You set this gun on a table and it doesn't go off. You don't pull the trigger and it doesn't go off."
<br> Mrs. Grunow's attorney compared their case with lawsuits against large tobacco companies. Initially, they said, the public believed a similar premise: People who bought cigarettes knew they were dangerous.
<br> "But the more people learned about what the tobacco industry did and about how they could have done things to make cigarettes safer, the tide turned," said Allen Rostron, an attorney for the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence.
<br> Brazill was 13 when he killed 35-year-old English teacher Barry Grunow in Lake Worth Middle School on May 26, 2000. Brazill was convicted last year of second-degree murder.
<br>
<br>

RAM - You are really a prick. If this is a stupid message board it's people like you who make it that way.
<br>
<br>Mitch, Hawk, T LEE, and the other. It's been real.
<br>
<br>Adios.
<br>
<br>N

Why don't they sentence the gun to a life term too. In old English common law, if a tree dropped a branch and it fell on someone, killing them, they would sentence the tree for murder and burn it down. Seems like this is the quality of thought behind some of the laws the leftists are persuing.
<br>
<br>Norm, I'm not referring to you when I say leftist above. The above statement relates to those who want to outlaw this or that gun because someone aimed it, and pulled the trigger on it. Has nothing to do with the issue of guns going off when dropped, which I happen to think should be resolved in the civil court system, rather than by national legislation. Hope you decide to come back.

Why slam anybody? Offer intelliget counter arguments and let any and all make up their own mind. I believe one way, somebody believes another. That does not mean one is right and one is wrong, all it means is there are different view points and both CAN be right in their own way.
<br>
<br>I'll never believe the tool should be smarter than the operator, there may be cases where it is a good idea, as some are not overly bright and still have rights.

Hawk,
<br>
<br>I think I presumed earlier he had to be a Troll or a Socialist Liberal from the HCI/Sarah Brady/Feinstein/Schumer/Kennedy/Clinton tone of his arguements position.
<br>
<br>Troll was meant from the internet perspectiive, not the fairy tale perspective. So, personally I didn't slam him.
<br>
<br>Point of order - In Libel Law, the truth is an absolute defence

Yes, in defamation, truth is a complete defense, but what is a "troll in the internet sense?" Sounds to me like an insult.
<br>
<br>By the way, Norm is anything but a liberal on guns. He just had a different view on how to prevent accidents, and I think he changed that view during our debate.

T R H,
<br> Sorry if I injected some confusion into the cyberswamp.With over 33 years experience as an Automotive Tech ,I had learned very early into it that when you hear any unusual noise you have to locate where it came from and if anything is flying in your direction almost instantly. Now, I'm working in a gun shop and always assume Murphy's Law is attached to any customer who walks in with a gun in his hand.
<br> My point is, that I believe that even if the average person has no experience in threat evaluation, basic instinct should make them look to the area from where the sound came. Any movement in that area should focus more attention on that area and that could lead to identification of the cause of the threat. To hide behind any available cover without knowledge of threat location seems to go against Mother Nature's basic sense of survival, but it could be that our "civilized society" has diminished that in many of us.
<br> All the more reason for those of us that do own firearms to make sure that we can keep them. It's up to us to defend and protect ourselves against the "snipers" and the like in our lives and communities.

As I understant the term Troll in an internet sence, one who's Spamming.
<br>You've never heard the word troll used at a web site?
<br>You've never seen phrases like "don't feed the trolls" used at web pages, particularly BBS's ?

Glockblaster, when a rifle is fired at a great distance, the bullet reaches the target area before the report of the rifle shot. If you are in the target area, your experience is going to be that you hear nothing, but see blood and body parts splatter from a human being standing near to you, and the victim falling to the ground. Only after that will you hear a report (you may not even notice it if you are responding to the blood and guts flying through the air). How long after that the report comes depends on how far away the shooter was. Only now that you are alerted to the danger will you be in any sense ready to evaluate the origin point of the report, but too late. He doesn't give you another chance because he's done for the day. This is why I say that this sniper knows his craft very well, and is highly disciplined in what he does. He is apparently not just some nut with a death wish. Evil, yes. A monster, yes. Needs killing, yes, but he's someone who knows his craft well, and will be damned hard to neutralize.

Norm invited me to join this site and even computer coached me on how to get here because he felt my knowledge of and passion for firearms would be a valuable addition to the site. I did not appreciate the inferrence of "troll or closet liberal" directed at him or the "maybe the sniper is just a guy that keeps dropping his non-droppable gun" thing. Did Norm and I intrude on a Net Clique that insults newbies until they leave? Correct me if I'm wrong.
<br> My apparent off-track tangent of thought in a previous post was merely an extrapolation of parameters on both the dropped gun discharge (which started this whole thread) and the sniper terrorizing a socialist stronghold. Neither will be corrected by legislation forced additional safety requirements or registration/confiscation trickery. Both will be exploited by the socialist controlled media as justification to eliminate our RKBA. Just because Slick Willy is no longer ruining perfectly good cigars in the W.H. and directing that the "gun culture" in America must be eliminated so that we can join the ranks of socialist "states" in the New World Order does not alter our potential to lose what rights we have left, except to make it worse.

Glockblaster, I'm with you on that 100%.
<br>
<br>P.S. sorry I keep getting your name wrong. It really is an accident every time.

Glockblaster:
<br>
<br>Both you and Norm are very valuable additions to this website. I've told Norm so privately, and want to say that publicly here as well.
<br>
<br>For the record, 1] on an internet BB, "troll" is an insult; 2] private messages are just that, and should be respected; 3] there are no cliques here that would preclude the intelligent, respectful exchange of opposing viewpoints.
<br>
<br>As a reminder, the first rule of engagement around here is: No personal attacks. Said another way, I won't be losing any more "Norms" around here.
<br>
<br>I hope that's 'nuff said.
<br>
<br>Rick

glockblaster, I consider you and Deputy_Norm real assets to this board, please take with a grain of salt any infighting. It is mostly harmless and sometimes gets out of hand but this is probably the best board for shooters and hunters on the net.
<br>
<br>Different perspectives are what makes the world go around and this board interesting. I don't always agree with everybody either, all I ask is keep it civil and agree to disagree if you must, don't let your feelings get hurt over words on a CRT.
<br>
<br>I have exchanged a couple PM with norm, I respect his opinions whether we agree or not and appreciate his service to his community as well as his concern for gun rights in general. He is one of the good guys.

Norm, I was gonna PM ya but you shut it off. So here it is, if you wanna leave this is a free country. I think it is a mistake, this is a very good board and you are a real asset here, we need varing opinions and approaches the keep it real. 'Sides , you got your blade forum dint ya? Give it a chance and any that want to be azzholes, well let em, just scroll on by and enjoy the talk with the rest of us. Hell, I don't agree with everybody and have been known to really pop off a time or two, the dust settles and things are OK again.
<br>
<br>Please note, I don't do the please don't leave thing, this is a first for me!

Rick, well put. We all have our tiff's now and then, I know I been known to light into somebody a time or two myself. All we gotta do is keep it on an intelligent level and not an emotional one and were OK. I know it gets emotional time to time, but mostly stay's civil anyway.
<br>
<br>I hope Norm sticks around, he is a good guy and is entitled to his thought's as are the rest of us. Name calling is just school yard S H I T! and most of us are aware of it.
<br>
<br>'Nuff from my corner, sorry for the rant. I just hate to lose good members to TRASH POSTING.

Thanks for the pat on the back, guys! It's always good to feel appreciated and I'll face to face with Norm about getting back onto his dry spot in the Cyberswamp but it's the horse to water thing, you know.
<br> I have always felt a major feeling of obligation to pass along my knowledge and experience to any who want and/or need it, which is why I became an NRA Rifle and Pistol Instructor . Indiana DNR promoted me to county co-ordinator and main firearms instructor for the DNR Hunter Education Program, for which I and three of my instructors donate freely our time,talent and knowledge for kids and adulta alike. My last DNR Hunter Education course was two weeks ago and we certified 42 people.
<br> I constantly almost harass nearly every gun owner I come into contact with to make the effort to vote and vote for only those who support our gun rights since a vote for those who don't is a vote for a traitor to even their Oath of Office. Technically, most Democratic( Socialist) Party members are already guilty of that!
<br> We must all do more to safeguard what few freedoms were not obliterated or infringed upon by eight years of criminal activity by the Democratic(Socialist) Party in the White House. Agreed?

troll
<br>
<br>1. v.,n. [From the Usenet group alt.folklore.urban] To utter a posting on Usenet designed to attract predictable responses or flames; or, the post itself. Derives from the phrase "trolling for newbies" which in turn comes from mainstream "trolling", a style of fishing in which one trails bait through a likely spot hoping for a bite. The well-constructed troll is a post that induces lots of newbies and flamers to make themselves look even more clueless than they already do, while subtly conveying to the more savvy and experienced that it is in fact a deliberate troll. If you don't fall for the joke, you get to be in on it. See also YHBT. 2. n. An individual who chronically trolls in sense 1; regularly posts specious arguments, flames or personal attacks to a newsgroup, discussion list, or in email for no other purpose than to annoy someone or disrupt a discussion. Trolls are recognizable by the fact that they have no real interest in learning about the topic at hand - they simply want to utter flame bait. Like the ugly creatures they are named after, they exhibit no redeeming characteristics, and as such, they are recognized as a lower form of life on the net, as in, "Oh, ignore him, he's just a troll." Compare kook. 3. n. [Berkeley] Computer lab monitor. A popular campus job for CS students. Duties include helping newbies and ensuring that lab policies are followed. Probably so-called because it involves lurking in dark cavelike corners.
<br>
<br>Some people claim that the troll (sense 1) is properly a narrower category than flame bait, that a troll is categorized by containing some assertion that is wrong but not overtly controversial. See also Troll-O-Meter.
<br>
<br>The use of `troll' in either sense is a live metaphor that readily produces elaborations and combining forms. For example, one not infrequently sees the warning "Do not feed the troll" as part of a followup to troll postings.
<br>
<br>Rick,
<br>There's the definition from usenet.
<br>
<br>1.) How is the term troll an insult, particularly in this context as I used it? I think I inquired 100% accurately to Norm, he posted on a Second Amendment board in support of further governmental restriction on a free Americans right.
<br>Would not that person be of the same mind as a socialist liberal or acting as a troll given the definition above?
<br>2.) I have a hard time "respecting" a threat, And I beleive any personal messages sent to me, "I'll" decide if "I" wish to keep them private. I was gracious enough to say "Norm dosen't wish to play anymore." I coulda copy and pasted exactly what he sent to me.
<br>3.) It would seem you may be supporting "cliques" by your responce to Glockblaster. Visavee, "you really are a Prick" apparently is not a personal attack? If stated by a "Norm" because you don't want to loose anymore of them?
<br>
<br>If the boards here are going to be censored to the point that every time a poster looses a debate they complain to the moderator, what kind of place will this be?
<br>
<br>This catty, immature, "run and tell mom" stuff is chickensh*t. If a discussion is moot, usually the posters respect a differance of mind, and agree to disagree. And move on to discuss another topic another day.
<br>
<br>I hope thats the way these boards will stay.
<br>
<br>

Ram, Why don't you stifle? The discussion is over and you are now, IMHO, "trolling" give it a rest. Sounds like you have an axe to grind, don't know why but we all have and are entitled to our opinions without calling names. I disagreed with Norm on the extra safety thing as well and we didn't get into a pissing contest, just voiced our opinions. If I don't change your mind it's no skin off my nose. You are entitled to yours as I am mine.
<br>
<br>Maybe you should re-evaluate your signature line and apply it here:
<br>Lest not we forget, America is a Republic, NOT a democracy. Learn the difference, spread your knowledge, help end the lie. Fear a government that fears your guns.
<br>
<br>The Republic part means your rights are inviolate till they violate mine and verse visa. The Democracy means majority RULE and you must comply even if you disagree. Am I right or wrong?

RAM, according to your definition, the word troll fits you a lot better than Norm. In fact, I don't see how it fits Norm at all.

T LEE,
<br>
<br>I never planned to leave permanently. I am run down and going through a series of medical tests to see if the quacks can find out why.
<br>
<br>The little hassle kind of pushed me over the edge. I needed a break.
<br>
<br>Thanks for your kind comments.
<br>
<br>Norm

As we used to say in the Nam, Aint no thing man! Ain't nothing!
<br>
<br>BTW, been there done that with the Docs. Mine ended up with several Angioplasties and a Quad bypass. I sure hope your luck is better than mine was! Thats why I had to retire early, really sucks but life goes on. Take care.

Dang, Dennis I didn't want people to I am responsible for introducing you to the board.
<br>
<br>And to you other guys I definitely didn't bring "another vote" to the board. Dennis and often don't agree on somethings.
<br>
<br>Some days the only thing we agree on is that I'm a better shot than he is.
<br>
<br>Norm

" Some days a better shot"? I hope you took a picture because I wasn't there at the time!
<br> With regards to the health problems you described earlier: shortness of breath and chest pains, but not the pump means one other possibility and my concern is that at your age, physical condition and being male , a late in life pregnancy could be VERY dangerous! Besides, how would you nurse the damn thing after you cranked it out? Can I sell tickets to watch ? How are you gonna explain that to Mrs. Norm?
<br> Didn't want the other guys to know you intro'd me to the site? Association with short people , especially over the net will not cause Vertical Impairment in others.
<br> On the "sniper"thing: a "witness" positively(?) identified the weapon as an AK74 and the socialist media crows that it fires the "powerful .223 round. The standard AK74 fires the 5.45 round, not the 5.56( the .223 won't work in it! The media also touts that the "witness" could not offer any info about the person they saw firing the rifle which is odd, because if the witness could discriminate between an AK47, an AK74, a Saiga 7.62, .308, .223, Romarm Sporter, Galil, etc., he was close enough to do a deodorant check. Kinda makes you wonder about the credibility of either the media, the witness, or all involved ,huh?
<br> Glad to have you back,Norm, even if we shoot on different days and you're pregnant. It's real hard for me to picture you growing boobs to feed Junior Norm, though.

Well at least Norm brought somebody with a wicked sense of humor! Don't start on the verticaly challenged thing though, I'll be kicking you in the kneecap! I have always been the shortest cop on the Department till they started hireing women, and even some of them are taller than me.

T LEE,
<br>
<br>Re vertically challenged lawman.
<br>
<br>I saw the following from my office window overlooking the scene.
<br>
<br>Many years back the company I worked for was plagued with wildcat strikes. During one, a iron pumping massive 6' union official, violating a court order was ordered to stop blocking the driveway by an Indianapolis Police Officer on the scene to enforce the law. He refused and gave the officer a ration of crap.
<br>
<br>The officer, maybe 5'5" in shoes, bounced the big buy off the top of a car and then to the ground and into cuffs much quicker than you can describe it.
<br>
<br>Later, after the local bailed him out, I asked the union guy what happened. He didn't really want to talk about it. I noticed his usual swagger was somewhat subdued.
<br>
<br>I looked closely at the officer and really couldn't see enough there to do what he did, but he did it.
<br>
<br>At least on that day Randy Newman was wrong.
<br>
<br>N.

Yeah, I have fooled more than one in my day. Just do what ya gotta do and don't talk it to death beforehand! 'Sides most just saw a short guy in uniform, never looked at my arms and shoulders before they started their stuff, ya know what I mean, Vern!
<br>
<br>Back at ya later, going to the range and try shooting the board match with a few of my long guns.

TLee, Not directed at you (just the closest reply button)!
<br>
<br>I'm a little late into the fray, but one thing to consider regarding cheap or inexpensive guns...
<br>
<br>There are many honest law abiding citizens that just can't afford a quality gun but the deserve the right to defend themselves with what they can afford to buy at the time.
<br>
<br>Banning the cheap ones would disarm many that don't have the financial resources we do.
<br>
<br>red

Part of "the wicked sense of humor "was inherited, all of the heighth was. Tall women can be fun because if you bump into them your face lands where it wanted to be in the first place.

Glockblaster, the guy who I.D.ed the AK-74 is now being charged with giving a false statement to a police officer in a murder investigation. I was perplexed about the AK-74 too, because I knew it was a tad smaller than .223, but thought that perhaps the round was so deformed that they couldn't tell the difference.
<br>
<br>I am always amazed at how little reporters know about firearms in general (You'd think they'd only assign people with some familiarity with firearms, but they must be few and far between among "newsmen."). I've heard it described as an AR-74, and AK-47 and a number of others. Also, they speak of the .223 round as if it is one of the most powerful rounds out there. Perhaps they would like to introduce legislation outlawing any round that powerful and above. We'd have to hunt our elk with the .221 Fireball.

Don't you mean lands where you were LOOKING? LOL Men hardly ever look into a womans eyes, do they?
<br>
<br>Just woke up from a nap, was up at 0330 this AM to take Wife, Daughter and son-in-law to the airport. Guess I'll go try to shoot that match at the range now. Man, CAT and Dave King are gonna rag me to death if I don't send Dave some targets soon.
<br>
<br>Why don't Y'all give it a try, it's free and fun.
<br>
<br>https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbt...&sb=5&o=21&fpart

The 5.45 mm round used in the AK74 is a higher velocity, smaller diameter round than that of the U.S.counterpart, the 5.56 (.223). The primary lethality is the result of cavitation and fragmentation. the secondary result of it's use is psychological because it can also tend to cause very nasty, very dramatic and terrible wounds with slow, lingering death instead of the quick, heroic death that Hollywood portrays and that extremist martyrs hope for.
<br> As to the so called witness i.d. of the weapon and not a glimpse of the shooter, refer to my theory on that earlier yesterday , while I jump up and down yelling "told you so, told you so!" The reason why you find no knowledge or expertise in the rank and file of the socialist controlled media is just that. It is owned and controlled by a political base that could not exist in a free society where there are citizens instead of subjects and rights instead of a few bartered for priveleges. The few so-called experts they do produce for the TV spots are the ones who will say whatever the Masters want heard to get there moment of glory in the national media spotlight, and others simply seem to have an exagerrated Walter Mitty complex to the point they believe they fought side by side with Rambo in all of the movies Stallone did. That further promotes the Democratic Socialist party agenda that we must be disarmed as civilians for our own protection , but mostly for theirs.
<br>