4 ms·

Yep, that sounds like normal fear-mongering to me.

untog 12y ago
Not really. Even trained police officers often hurt bystanders when firing their weapons: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/26/nyregion/bystanders-shooting-wounds-caused-by-the-police.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/26/nyregion/bystanders-shooti... If a trained cop does it, I think it is legitimate to be concerned about a member of the public firing their weapon, no matter what their intent.
- hga 12y ago
  This is what happens when you extinguish a region's gun culture, as NY/NYC has done starting in 1911. You have "leaders" who both hate and don't understand guns and their use, outfit their men with poor tools (the infamous New York Trigger), and and those men's only experience with guns is very very limited training. Turns out citizens legally carrying concealed have a much better record. Given how anti-gun the MSM is, do you doubt for a second that if citizens had comitted such an atrocity it wouldn't be nationwide, probably world wide screaming headlines? Your concern is perhaps legitimate, but not after I point out the above.
  - untog 12y ago
    I'm sorry, but that's total nonsense. A much better record of what? Citizens legally carrying concealed weapons are rarely called upon to fire weapons in stressful situations with dozens of bystanders, so they only have a "better record" of doing so by virtue of having no record at all. "Gun culture" has absolutely nothing to do with trained police officers. New NYPD recruits go through 13 days of firearm training, and submit to semi-annual requalifications[1]. People with carry permits are never faced with the kind of stressful situation that an active shooter would provoke. It's utter lunacy to think that they would be able to stay calm and diffuse the situation. [1] http://home2.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/training_nypd/firearm_tatics.shtml http://home2.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/training_nypd/firearm_ta...
    - hga 12y ago
      Afraid the RAND institute disagrees with you WRT NYC, e.g. http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG717.html http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG717.html Look, NYC is infamous about cops handling their weapons poorly. I thought everyone who pays attention to current events knew this, but I guess I was wrong. As for your claim that we never face these stressful situations, that's flatly false. Guns are used ~ 2 million times a year to stop crimes (probably more now, those figures are some years old), and there are a number of active shooters who've been stopped by citizen concealed carriers. But you of course wouldn't know of them because the national MSM for some inexplicable reason doesn't report these incidents. If your Google Fu is up to snuff you can find them. Try including "mall" and "church" for starters
    - jessaustin 12y ago
      New NYPD recruits go through 13 days of firearm training... Is that impressive? The cops in flyover country come to the job with quite a bit more experience than that. 10-15 years of hunting, target shooting, safety training in school at multiple grade levels, and the supervision of experienced adults probably doesn't completely transfer to open carry as a peace officer. However, this "13 days" figure will make me a little nervous the next time I'm around a young cop in NYC.
  - Karunamon 12y ago
    Could you detail what you mean by "poor tools" a bit more? Everything I can find on the "New York Trigger" states that it was specially requested by law enforcement and designed by Glock so the trigger weight would more closely resemble that of the revolvers they were then transitioning away from. Were they more prone to failure or..?
    - hga 12y ago
      OK, I haven't pulled the trigger on a Glock with a New York trigger. But the travel of the two are very different. A double action trigger moves a long distance, as it steadily pulls back the hammer (they're found in semi-autos, BTW, and I recommend them to people for whom a single action M1911 isn't right). A Glock trigger inherently has a lot less travel, all it's doing is providing some travel and therefore physical feedback before it releases the already cocked striker inside the gun (cocked by the slide). So I don't personally know, but what I know from first principles per the that they're different, and the above matches with the reports I've read from people who have used them that say it's ... suboptimal. NYC street police marksmanship certainly doesn't contradict this. And here's a critical detail about "was specially requested by law enforcement": the whole exercise was not to make it feel like a revolver, but to decrease negligent discharges. Which almost every other law enforcement organization in the nation solved (as much as it can be solved :-) with training---see Rule 3 (Keep your finger out of the trigger...). Marksmanship was irrelevant. Another example of "poor tools" was their "leaders" insistence on using Full Metal Jacket (FMJ) bullets instead of eeeeeevil Hollow Points. Eventually the resulting needless injuries and deaths forced them to get with the program. I can't recall a single other major law enforcement unit with this policy, at least not for long. The 9 mm Europellet sucks, if you care about stopping people vs. killing them; much much MUCH more so with FMJ ammo. However I can understand law enforcement units going with it instead of .45 ACP before .40 S&W appeared on the scene, which I'm sure was some time after NYC adopted the Glock. Then again they've had many chances to upgrade caliber as they cycled through new batches of weapons. And, BTW, I think Glocks suck, but obviously lots of people disagree with me. Going back to training, the manual of arms of a Glock is point it and press the trigger. No manual safety for a criminal to have to engage before he can shoot you after grabbing your gun, no death lever to forget to engage before you can shoot. That also bears on training. For me the internal striker is a show stopper: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8460074 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8460074 Glock the company is pretty sleazy (hey, look at the brand new lawsuit, and there's been lots of other drama), not that this was necessarily recognized when they were first on the market. To my knowledge they've never had an official "recall"; let me assure you they're not that good, not with all the models and generations of models they've produced. Firing when out of battery, i.e. before the slide has locked home and the brass is sufficiently supported (which is iffy to begin with, especially with their .40 S&W models at least as of some time ago), is another HUGE no no in my book. And pretty much everyone else who's not the Glock equivalent of an Apple fanboi. As usual, take this with a grain of salt. The handguns I own and carry concealed were designed by John Moses Browning (PBUH), and adopted as standard issue by the US Army in 1911 (sic; the US military is still using a machine gun he designed 7 years later). With of course improvements, the trigger pulls are ~ 3.5 pounds. I carry one every time I walk out the door. I've never had a negligent discharge because I keep my finger off the #(*&$% trigger until I'm on target, and of course keep the safety on. Which from personal examination in detailed field stripping plus a century of experience shows it takes the super-magnet of an MRI machine to defeat. But I'd shot well over those 10,000 times you're supposed to need to become an expert before buying them, and I don't recommend the model to novices.
- Crito 12y ago
  I would put a very large amount of money on any randomly chosen civilian CCW holder outshooting any randomly chosen NYPD cop. This is partially the fault of the cop, CCW holders tend to spend more time at the range than cops, but to a certain degree it isn't: The NYPD has foolishly required all of their (normally single-action) guns have a 12lb trigger pull on all trigger pulls (http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/08/foghorn/nypds-choice-of-firearm-may-have-contributed-to-the-terrible-shooting/ http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/08/foghorn/nypds-choic...).
- mindslight 12y ago
  NYPD gang members also purposely ride horses into pedestrians. Should we thus infer that private equestrians cause greater mayhem?
  - untog 12y ago
    No, we should talk about the topic at hand and stop trying to make nonsensical comparisons.
UnoriginalGuy 12y ago
Then it should be easy to refute, right? Here's the scenario: People are screaming, someone is shooting, you don't know who. You see bodies on the ground, they're bleeding. Then you see someone come around the corner holding a handgun out, they are dressed like a student, you draw your concealed carry and out of fear for your own life you shoot that person. Turns out both you and them are concealed carry. Opps. Explain why that scenario is unlikely/won't happen/can't happen. If it is "fear mongering" that should be trivial for you.
- bitJericho 12y ago
  It's fear mongering because it hasn't happened and is incredibly unlikely to happen. At least untog up there provided some sort of actual reporting of similar events, even though it's innocent bystanders getting caught up in the shrapnel from the heros trying to protect themselves from getting shot. That's not this hollywood blockbuster scenario you two have conjured up.
  - UnoriginalGuy 12y ago
    > It's fear mongering because it hasn't happened and is incredibly unlikely to happen. Because, why? Again I see no refutement. Just empty words. Two concealed carry owners shoot each other[0]. Concealed carry almost shoots a police officer[1]. Concealed carry shoots the VICTIM in a robbery[2] during a cross-fire with the robbers. [0] http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/09/19/1239955/-Two-concealed-carry-permit-holders-shoot-and-kill-each-other-in-Michigan http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/09/19/1239955/-Two-concea... [1] http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-crestwood-concealed-carry-0730-20140730-story.html#page=1 http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-crestwood-concealed-ca... [2] http://blog.chron.com/newswatch/2012/05/man-arrested-in-family-dollar-slaying/ http://blog.chron.com/newswatch/2012/05/man-arrested-in-fami...
    - bitJericho 12y ago
      Again, none of these were actually two conceal carry shooters accidentally shooting eachother because one thought the other was the criminal. How would you like me to refute that? Shall I find an article titled "Two heros accidentally didn't shoot themselves thinking the other was the criminal." Because that's what I would need to find in order to "refute" your rediculous premise.

untog 12y ago

Not really. Even trained police officers often hurt bystanders when firing their weapons: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/26/nyregion/bystanders-shooting-wounds-caused-by-the-police.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/26/nyregion/bystanders-shooti... If a trained cop does it, I think it is legitimate to be concerned about a member of the public firing their weapon, no matter what their intent.

hga 12y ago
This is what happens when you extinguish a region's gun culture, as NY/NYC has done starting in 1911. You have "leaders" who both hate and don't understand guns and their use, outfit their men with poor tools (the infamous New York Trigger), and and those men's only experience with guns is very very limited training. Turns out citizens legally carrying concealed have a much better record. Given how anti-gun the MSM is, do you doubt for a second that if citizens had comitted such an atrocity it wouldn't be nationwide, probably world wide screaming headlines? Your concern is perhaps legitimate, but not after I point out the above.
- untog 12y ago
  I'm sorry, but that's total nonsense. A much better record of what? Citizens legally carrying concealed weapons are rarely called upon to fire weapons in stressful situations with dozens of bystanders, so they only have a "better record" of doing so by virtue of having no record at all. "Gun culture" has absolutely nothing to do with trained police officers. New NYPD recruits go through 13 days of firearm training, and submit to semi-annual requalifications[1]. People with carry permits are never faced with the kind of stressful situation that an active shooter would provoke. It's utter lunacy to think that they would be able to stay calm and diffuse the situation. [1] http://home2.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/training_nypd/firearm_tatics.shtml http://home2.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/training_nypd/firearm_ta...
  - hga 12y ago
    Afraid the RAND institute disagrees with you WRT NYC, e.g. http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG717.html http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG717.html Look, NYC is infamous about cops handling their weapons poorly. I thought everyone who pays attention to current events knew this, but I guess I was wrong. As for your claim that we never face these stressful situations, that's flatly false. Guns are used ~ 2 million times a year to stop crimes (probably more now, those figures are some years old), and there are a number of active shooters who've been stopped by citizen concealed carriers. But you of course wouldn't know of them because the national MSM for some inexplicable reason doesn't report these incidents. If your Google Fu is up to snuff you can find them. Try including "mall" and "church" for starters
  - jessaustin 12y ago
    New NYPD recruits go through 13 days of firearm training... Is that impressive? The cops in flyover country come to the job with quite a bit more experience than that. 10-15 years of hunting, target shooting, safety training in school at multiple grade levels, and the supervision of experienced adults probably doesn't completely transfer to open carry as a peace officer. However, this "13 days" figure will make me a little nervous the next time I'm around a young cop in NYC.
- Karunamon 12y ago
  Could you detail what you mean by "poor tools" a bit more? Everything I can find on the "New York Trigger" states that it was specially requested by law enforcement and designed by Glock so the trigger weight would more closely resemble that of the revolvers they were then transitioning away from. Were they more prone to failure or..?
  - hga 12y ago
    OK, I haven't pulled the trigger on a Glock with a New York trigger. But the travel of the two are very different. A double action trigger moves a long distance, as it steadily pulls back the hammer (they're found in semi-autos, BTW, and I recommend them to people for whom a single action M1911 isn't right). A Glock trigger inherently has a lot less travel, all it's doing is providing some travel and therefore physical feedback before it releases the already cocked striker inside the gun (cocked by the slide). So I don't personally know, but what I know from first principles per the that they're different, and the above matches with the reports I've read from people who have used them that say it's ... suboptimal. NYC street police marksmanship certainly doesn't contradict this. And here's a critical detail about "was specially requested by law enforcement": the whole exercise was not to make it feel like a revolver, but to decrease negligent discharges. Which almost every other law enforcement organization in the nation solved (as much as it can be solved :-) with training---see Rule 3 (Keep your finger out of the trigger...). Marksmanship was irrelevant. Another example of "poor tools" was their "leaders" insistence on using Full Metal Jacket (FMJ) bullets instead of eeeeeevil Hollow Points. Eventually the resulting needless injuries and deaths forced them to get with the program. I can't recall a single other major law enforcement unit with this policy, at least not for long. The 9 mm Europellet sucks, if you care about stopping people vs. killing them; much much MUCH more so with FMJ ammo. However I can understand law enforcement units going with it instead of .45 ACP before .40 S&W appeared on the scene, which I'm sure was some time after NYC adopted the Glock. Then again they've had many chances to upgrade caliber as they cycled through new batches of weapons. And, BTW, I think Glocks suck, but obviously lots of people disagree with me. Going back to training, the manual of arms of a Glock is point it and press the trigger. No manual safety for a criminal to have to engage before he can shoot you after grabbing your gun, no death lever to forget to engage before you can shoot. That also bears on training. For me the internal striker is a show stopper: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8460074 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8460074 Glock the company is pretty sleazy (hey, look at the brand new lawsuit, and there's been lots of other drama), not that this was necessarily recognized when they were first on the market. To my knowledge they've never had an official "recall"; let me assure you they're not that good, not with all the models and generations of models they've produced. Firing when out of battery, i.e. before the slide has locked home and the brass is sufficiently supported (which is iffy to begin with, especially with their .40 S&W models at least as of some time ago), is another HUGE no no in my book. And pretty much everyone else who's not the Glock equivalent of an Apple fanboi. As usual, take this with a grain of salt. The handguns I own and carry concealed were designed by John Moses Browning (PBUH), and adopted as standard issue by the US Army in 1911 (sic; the US military is still using a machine gun he designed 7 years later). With of course improvements, the trigger pulls are ~ 3.5 pounds. I carry one every time I walk out the door. I've never had a negligent discharge because I keep my finger off the #(*&$% trigger until I'm on target, and of course keep the safety on. Which from personal examination in detailed field stripping plus a century of experience shows it takes the super-magnet of an MRI machine to defeat. But I'd shot well over those 10,000 times you're supposed to need to become an expert before buying them, and I don't recommend the model to novices.
Crito 12y ago
I would put a very large amount of money on any randomly chosen civilian CCW holder outshooting any randomly chosen NYPD cop. This is partially the fault of the cop, CCW holders tend to spend more time at the range than cops, but to a certain degree it isn't: The NYPD has foolishly required all of their (normally single-action) guns have a 12lb trigger pull on all trigger pulls (http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/08/foghorn/nypds-choice-of-firearm-may-have-contributed-to-the-terrible-shooting/ http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/08/foghorn/nypds-choic...).
mindslight 12y ago
NYPD gang members also purposely ride horses into pedestrians. Should we thus infer that private equestrians cause greater mayhem?
- untog 12y ago
  No, we should talk about the topic at hand and stop trying to make nonsensical comparisons.

UnoriginalGuy 12y ago

Then it should be easy to refute, right? Here's the scenario: People are screaming, someone is shooting, you don't know who. You see bodies on the ground, they're bleeding. Then you see someone come around the corner holding a handgun out, they are dressed like a student, you draw your concealed carry and out of fear for your own life you shoot that person. Turns out both you and them are concealed carry. Opps. Explain why that scenario is unlikely/won't happen/can't happen. If it is "fear mongering" that should be trivial for you.

bitJericho 12y ago
It's fear mongering because it hasn't happened and is incredibly unlikely to happen. At least untog up there provided some sort of actual reporting of similar events, even though it's innocent bystanders getting caught up in the shrapnel from the heros trying to protect themselves from getting shot. That's not this hollywood blockbuster scenario you two have conjured up.
- UnoriginalGuy 12y ago
  > It's fear mongering because it hasn't happened and is incredibly unlikely to happen. Because, why? Again I see no refutement. Just empty words. Two concealed carry owners shoot each other[0]. Concealed carry almost shoots a police officer[1]. Concealed carry shoots the VICTIM in a robbery[2] during a cross-fire with the robbers. [0] http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/09/19/1239955/-Two-concealed-carry-permit-holders-shoot-and-kill-each-other-in-Michigan http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/09/19/1239955/-Two-concea... [1] http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-crestwood-concealed-carry-0730-20140730-story.html#page=1 http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-crestwood-concealed-ca... [2] http://blog.chron.com/newswatch/2012/05/man-arrested-in-family-dollar-slaying/ http://blog.chron.com/newswatch/2012/05/man-arrested-in-fami...
  - bitJericho 12y ago
    Again, none of these were actually two conceal carry shooters accidentally shooting eachother because one thought the other was the criminal. How would you like me to refute that? Shall I find an article titled "Two heros accidentally didn't shoot themselves thinking the other was the criminal." Because that's what I would need to find in order to "refute" your rediculous premise.