-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Weapons drawn at AFS
- Thread starter Moderator
- Start date
Everyone should know to only take a newspaper story with a grain of salt…
The whole "cleaning up brass" thing was just what started ”butting-heads" mentality, and problem between AFS and the group that was shooting there.
Brinks armed guards were shooting there, and just like with any group like that "qualifying" you get some idiots. (sorry to say but it is true)
The problem came in the "cleaning room" that is adjacent to the range where supposedly a member from brinks was cleaning his gun pointed directly at the AFS instructor. The instructor then went to get the "person in charge" of the group, and was speaking with him in the hallway.
Supposedly/Allegedly, the instructor said something like; “How would you like it if this gun was pointed at you?”
The complainant says the instructor took out his gun and pointed it at him when he said that.
The instructor says he took his gun out and pointed it at the wall, when saying that phrase (using it as a “prop” if you will).
Bottom line, it is the whole “he said/she said” two versions of a story against each other, like everything else in life.
The problem isn't the newspaper, no matter how poorly written the story is or how many facts are left out. The issue at hand is for the fact that basic firearms safety rules where probably broken and the situation was poorly handled by the staff and or management of AFS.
Had all the rules of safety been followed or had the situation been handled correctly the cops would not have been called or showed up, the instructor would not be facing charges, and the media would not have written the story. The bottom line is that you can't blame the media for ignorant people.
Garys
NES Member
Yet ANOTHER reason not to live in NYC.
ochmude
Marine Veteran
Everyone should know to only take a newspaper story with a grain of salt…
The whole "cleaning up brass" thing was just what started ”butting-heads" mentality, and problem between AFS and the group that was shooting there.
Brinks armed guards were shooting there, and just like with any group like that "qualifying" you get some idiots. (sorry to say but it is true)
The problem came in the "cleaning room" that is adjacent to the range where supposedly a member from brinks was cleaning his gun pointed directly at the AFS instructor. The instructor then went to get the "person in charge" of the group, and was speaking with him in the hallway.
Supposedly/Allegedly, the instructor said something like; “How would you like it if this gun was pointed at you?”
The complainant says the instructor took out his gun and pointed it at him when he said that.
The instructor says he took his gun out and pointed it at the wall, when saying that phrase (using it as a “prop” if you will).
Bottom line, it is the whole “he said/she said” two versions of a story against each other, like everything else in life.
A) I agree completely with taking the story with a grain of salt. It's very poorly written and gives few details.
B) If this is true
then the instructor is still a dumbass. Even pointing a firearm at a wall in that situation calls to mind such words as "brandishing", "menacing", and "assault". A firearm isn't prop.
That statement unfortunately shows the deep seeded fears that MA gun owners have and even start to adopt the anti mindset towards firearms. If that example is the case with the instructor (with pointing his pistol at the wall) I would think, that he being an instructor, was demonstrating to the other guy exactly what the member in his group did at the wall. "Look, your guy was doing this with his firearm. Tell him not to do this when others are picking up brass." If the guy teaches safety I would think he would demonstrate what not to do, in a safe direction, with an unloaded firearm. I'm amazed how much "tattling" goes on...and how quickly some here are quick to burn others.
I'll bet under some circumstances, that could be considered assault or brandishing as well.
![[thinking]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/010.gif "Thinking [thinking]")
I'm sure he could've used a pen/pencil as well...but even using fingers gets kids on the playground suspended from school. By that logic as well firearms should be banned in safety classes because using "the finger" is safer. Again, this comes down to tattling on each other like children.
I agree with this completely. My comment about taking the story with a grain of salt isnt meant to blame ignorant people, but it is a common occurance that people read a story from a newspaper and make judgements from that article, but the fact is the article doesnt have all the facts all the time or is just completely inncorrect.
That is the first thing I said to the person that told me the complete true story about this incident (that I wrote earlier).
I think I said: "couldn't he have just pointed to his firearm in the holster when relaying the message: "Would you like it if I pointed a gun at you?"
I think they should have dueled it out with airsofts.
ochmude
Marine Veteran
The scenario you describe, demonstrating the error and explaining how to properly handle a situation when someone goes downrange while you're on the line, is completely different from what sf3pox1 described, which had a more threatening connotation. Holding up my fist and saying "How would you like it if I punched you in the face?" could be reasonably interpreted as a threat. Saying "You shouldn't punch people in the face." is much more likely to be viewed as instructional rather than threatening. That's just my opinion on the matter, though. I'd also like to point out that I said
and I will make no assumptions as to what actually is true because I wasn't there.
We both weren't there so of course assuming that both of the men were acting like adults and were able to understand the gravity of the situation. I think it was uncalled for that the one guy called the cops for what it seems like he got his feelings hurt instead of feeling truly scared for his life. He took the easy way out IMO at the expense of another guy's rights.
ochmude
Marine Veteran
I agree completely.
EDIT: After reading your post again, I REALLY agree, and am a little pissed. If sf3pox1's account of the situation is true, then the instructor could have definitely handled things better. But calling the cops??? That's BS.
Last edited:
We are talking about a range / school of instruction not a playground. Apples and oranges
It's kind of hard to show students how to operate a safety, change a magazine, open a cylinder or disassemble a firearms for cleaning using your finger as a gun. There is a time and a place for everything, and withdrawing a firearm during a verbal disagreement or scolding is never the time or place.
I respectfully disagree with this statement as well. This is not about "tattling" it's about ignorant people not respecting the basic fundamentals of firearms safety and the staff/management handling a potential situation the wrong way.
Having worked in two separate gun shops I have been swept more times than I can count. I don't yell at the customer or draw my pistol, I respectfully remind the customer about the safety rules.
pdm
NES Member
Of course safety can't be demonstrated with a finger, my point was that they were both adults in an adult situation acting in an "adult" (I'm using that term loosely) manner. It seems like the days of "teaching someone a lesson, tough love style" are over because people are wetting themselves when they get their feelings hurt. It's also my opinion that is a security guard gets scared by an instructor because of a stern example then he should find a gentler line of work. I myself worked a gun counter for 5+ years and served the military for 17+ before getting medically retired so I've had my share of guns pointed at me, but I NEVER called the cops on anyone.
Sounds like a rock-solid case to me.
You guys are all quick to jump on this guy but it could as easily be that the other guy has a bone to pick and made up the story to screw him. If there is no video or other witness there is no "beyond reasonable doubt" to either version. Isn't that how our justice system is supposed to work?
You are drawing some mighty powerful conclusions without sufficient facts. Let's wait and see what happens as more information, hopefully, becomes available. One could just as easily make the case that they weren't acting like adults and tough love doesn't necessarily include "teaching one a lesson." That's an interesting concept.
I've had my share of tough love lessons, I suppose over the years, but the people I really respected and from whom I learned the most treated me with at least a modicum of civility if not respect.
Last edited:
But did anyone ever point a gun at you on purpose because they were upset with something you said or did? Or because they were trying to get their point across to you? If that is was happened at AFS than calling the cops may not have been such a bad idea.
You don't unholster your weapon in public unless you absolutely have to, especially when your not on a range with the muzzle pointing in a safe direction. Though the article says the pistol was unloaded (kinda defeats the purpose of carrying a gun) Could you even imagine what the media would have written if the instructor had a ND?
I'm drawing my conclusions from the same story as everyone else. I wasn't there but I am basing my opinion on the behavior of adults and some common sense. I would think that under the circumstances that a person could get killed in their previous encounter on the range, some tact is not out of line when he took the guard out in the hallway...which the instructor did use some courtesy to not chew the guy out in front of his co-workers. Liberal jurnalism is great for leaving out key facts to let the assumptions fly and of course to condemn people without the benefit much, if at all, any proof of any wrong doing and enforcing the "guilty until proven innocent" mentality.
Last edited:
From what I gather the guy pointed his pistol at the wall...not at the person who he had an issue with. Again, if the security guard felt that his life was in danger or a serious threat was given then by all accounts call the police...but if the instructor pointed his pistol at the wall to show a point then the guard jumped the gun by calling the cops. I think the instructor used some courtesy by taking the head guard in the hallway and not berating him in front of his co-workers. I would think that the guard would "relate" to an example of an unloaded pistol pointed at a wall, "How would you like it if this was pointed at you??" kinda question and not crap all over himself. As far as carrying an unloaded gun defeating the purpose of carrying in the first place, it is possible that it was purposely unloaded in that building (club house?) or was unloaded in front of the guard to show him that it was in fact unloaded before his "demonstration" against the wall. There are of course facts missing and it is really between the two involved (no other witnesses) but there is a lot of fearmongering going on. People should lighten up and stop pointing the "bad" finger at others. If I made an honest safety violation, something that could possibly kill someone, and I was taken to the side by a safety instructor who possibly called me some names and did a demonstration of what NOT to do might hurt my pride a bit but the point would've been driven home. Calling the cops is tattling...that's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.
I'm not exactly sure what "liberal jurnalism" is
![[grin]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/041.gif "Grin [grin]")
...but there is an inherent liability in making assumptions. I don't know how much life experience you have, so therefore cannot comment on your self-proclaimed knowledge of the human condition. You say you have common sense, then if that is so common sense implies or dictates that no real conclusion can be reached until more facts are made available. Until that time you can have an opinion, an inkling, or a hunch or you can speculate, but I would have to share with you as one who makes his living coming to conclusions based on incomplete information most of the time the following: be prepared to revise your theory, and be very cautious in presenting scenarios based on supposition as absolute truth. If you prove to be correct in the end, then you get kudos ("atta boys") all around for astutely analyzing the situation. If not then you get an "oh shit" and remember in my line of work just 1 "oh shit" cancels out 10,000 "atta boys." I'd have to see more of your analysis before I could deem you a worthy source...no offense intended or implied here, but predictive analysis based on minimal fact serves no useful purpose. If you are correct I'll be the first to congratulate you but in my book it is extremely premature to draw any conclusions.All the best,
Mark056
As what I put in my post(s) it is my opinion from the information given and of course the "I wasn't there" should imply that my opinions are based on speculation. I do believe that I have common sense and my life experiences come from interactions in close to 40 states, 20 or so foreign countries (and their citizens), 4 continents along with some war zones. I don't claim to be a know it all, but I do have my opinions ![[smile]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/001.gif "Smile [smile]")
I'm not exactly sure what "liberal jurnalism" is
All the best,
Mark056
Last edited:
you guys can kick this thing around all you want but at the end of the day the C.O.P. will pull his ticket!!!![[crying]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/006.gif "Crying [crying]")
Brick:
1. Welcome to NES.
2. What did you mean by your post? I'm confused..
