PDA

View Full Version : Safety Checks on Gun Channels - WTF?!?!?



TheTacDaddy
11-29-2012, 05:24 AM
I notice Tom rarely does checks on camera.... your thoughts?

http://youtu.be/u9cXEwn401M

Tux
11-29-2012, 06:30 AM
I notice Tom rarely does checks on camera.... your thoughts?

http://youtu.be/u9cXEwn401M

Personally I think the whole process is retarded. Rule #1. Treat every gun as if it was loaded.

Having to sit there and watch the presenter rack the slide and show you an empty chamber, then an empty magazine is just pure folly and a waste of time. Either just say "all weapons have been safety checked", or better yet just get on with the video.

Maybe it somehow comforts the presenter, but in all honesty you can demo a gun that is fully loaded. Just keep your finger out of the trigger.

I could see if you are doing a skill drill showing how to remove your gun from the holster, but still save the safety work off line and stay on topic.

TheTacDaddy
11-29-2012, 09:47 AM
exaaaaaaaaaaclty!

Gunnr
11-29-2012, 03:10 PM
Every one that does videos should just do them and don't worry about trolls. They aint worth it. James Yeager does danger checks on his videos and never shot himself yet. You can't get hurt by a video so everyone needs to get over it. Saftey checking on a video is a stupid waste of time. Nuff said...

funkymonkey1111
11-29-2012, 05:58 PM
i agree-i've never understood the safety checks on youtube videos. shear idiocy

blindshooter
11-29-2012, 07:47 PM
If only I could get back the time wasted on watching this video. I understand what he said by what person would do a gun video without safety checking the gun before they filmed the video. But even if you do it before and dureing your video it's still the right thing to do. We all know it only takes on screw up to add fuel to the ongoing fire between the pro gun and anti gun groups

norahc
11-29-2012, 08:54 PM
James Yeager does danger checks on his videos and never shot himself yet.
Well, he's not Tex Grebner....

MP Gunther
11-29-2012, 09:04 PM
http://youtu.be/AmRN00KbCr8

Yea right....safety checks are for wimps....check out this idiot....I feel much better now knowing people like that are out there protecting me

norahc
11-29-2012, 09:43 PM
http://youtu.be/AmRN00KbCr8

Yea right....safety checks are for wimps....check out this idiot....I feel much better now knowing people like that are out there protecting me

Remember, he was the only one there "professional enough" to handle that Glock. IIRC, he ended up suing the DEA because the video was made public somehow. Claimed it was a conspiracy and ruined his ability to work undercover.

Sent from my SCH-I800 using Tapatalk 2

TheTacDaddy
11-30-2012, 05:51 AM
if you don't get the point, that's on you. Who is going to upload a mess up or accident?!?!?!?

TheTacDaddy
11-30-2012, 06:03 AM
and as far as the idiot who took ammo with him to a school.....C'MON MAN!

Tux
11-30-2012, 06:08 AM
if you don't get the point, that's on you. Who is going to upload a mess up or accident?!?!?!?

Grebner did. :p

I mean I feel bad for the guy, but he deserved what he got. You never try to shoot at anyone who is 8 inches away from you. Just the plain fact that they could then grab your gun and you may have just armed them with your weapon. I fail to understand what he was doing, why he was doing it and what the *#@^% was he thinking by then posting the video.

norahc
11-30-2012, 01:22 PM
Grebner did. :p

I mean I feel bad for the guy, but he deserved what he got. You never try to shoot at anyone who is 8 inches away from you. Just the plain fact that they could then grab your gun and you may have just armed them with your weapon. I fail to understand what he was doing, why he was doing it and what the *#@^% was he thinking by then posting the video.
Actually, there are scenarios where you could be forced to shoot at that distance. And I understand the reasons why he uploaded the video, so I've got no issues with that.

Tux
11-30-2012, 06:29 PM
Actually, there are scenarios where you could be forced to shoot at that distance. And I understand the reasons why he uploaded the video, so I've got no issues with that.

One could imagine all types of scenarios, but having to draw and shoot at someone who is six inches away is highly, highly unlikely.

The end result of him getting shot shows just how dangerous it could be. If he was being robbed that close he most likely would of lost his wallet and his firearm, and potentially his life.

The far better option would of been to move lateral or two steps back to allow better processing.

Sorry, we will have to agree to disagree, what he was attempting to do was tactically stupid and dangerous.

GlassWolf
11-30-2012, 07:53 PM
Actually shooting at someone at extreme close quarters is something that can be done, and done well with the proper training (see: Rob Pincus)

The trick to it, mainly, is to shoot from retention, and don't extend the muzzle beyond the plane of your own body. You press into the assailant, not draw back and away, and while doing so, you raise your support hand up to both get it out of the way of your muzzle, and to block the view of your opponent, allowing for a quick, clean shot or three into the torso before your aggressor realizes you even have a handgun.

What you do NOT do, is back away from the attacker, and try to fully extend the weapon and use your sights to fire get a sight picture before shooting. Any time you have someone within 21 feet, chances are they can reach you before you can complete a reactionary OODA loop, draw, extend, and fire. For that reason, you make the decision to shoot, and use intuitive point and fire techniques for ECQB.

It's really all about proper training and practice. We (my friends/colleagues and I) do a lot of this sort of training, since most of the encounters we have at work are extreme close quarters, working armed outside at clubs and concerts.

MP Gunther
11-30-2012, 10:16 PM
Glasswolf, Your absolutely right! I've never studied the senerios myself but I believe there are more times than not that the bad guy is in your face, a reason for carrying a revolver.

MP Gunther
11-30-2012, 10:18 PM
Actually, there are scenarios where you could be forced to shoot at that distance. And I understand the reasons why he uploaded the video, so I've got no issues with that.

I think he said in an interview he posted it so others wouldn't make the same mistake

GlassWolf
12-01-2012, 08:32 AM
Glasswolf, Your absolutely right! I've never studied the senerios myself but I believe there are more times than not that the bad guy is in your face, a reason for carrying a revolver.

Truth be told, both semi-auto and revolver handguns have their share of issues in ECQB. A revolver, if your adversary grabs the gun and locks up the cylinder, the gun is rendered useless, since the cylinder has to be able to rotate to cycle and fire in double action mode, and since revolvers don't have a manual thumb safety, you can't carry "with a round chambered, hammer back, safety on" in the style of a 1911.
With a semi-auto, if you have to press the weapon into your target, you can easily press the slide out of battery, which will prevent the gun from firing unless you have both hands free to press on the rear of the slide as James yeager demonstrated in one of his videos if I recall, when atop his assailant on the ground.

Anyway, just some food for thought. There's always a way for a weapon to malfunction, or for Murphy's Law to kick in. If you know what can happen, you can prepare for it in training, and being prepared is key to avoiding a mishap.

Tux
12-01-2012, 09:10 AM
I think he said in an interview he posted it so others wouldn't make the same mistake

I guess my question would be what mistake was that? The only thing he demonstrated was ignorance and arrogance.

Unless you are police, security, or bank cash guards, the odds of having to shoot someone at 4" is highly improbable. Having been a follower of the Armed Citizen (http://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/armed-citizen.aspx) for decades, this kind of situation for the average person is very unlikely.

I suspect if any of the range officers at my gun club saw him doing that he would of been kicked off the range. If I was standing next to someone doing that, I would leave for fear of being injured. He could of hit his femoral artery and died on the scene, or killed an innicent bystander.

Rule #1 of any self defense situation. Put distance between you and the attacker.

The only mistake Tex made was not using common sense.

MP Gunther
12-01-2012, 10:13 AM
TUX "The only mistake Tex made was not using common sense"

There is definetly no argument here!

Gunnr
12-01-2012, 10:57 AM
Well, he's not Tex Grebner....
hahahahahahaha..... Maybe that incident got Tex to grow up a little. I hear he's a really nice guy and I'm glad he is OK after what happened. He did act a fool in his videos and maybe he is settled down now and a safty check in his video would have been stupid, he was showing a draw and shoot technique with live fire. Accidents do happen and his had nothing to do with safty checking anything. It would be nice if Tex was on our forum and could then defend himself and explain what happened. It might be a good lesson for some. Peace all, Gunnr

GlassWolf
12-02-2012, 12:06 PM
Unless you are police, security, or bank cash guards, the odds of having to shoot someone at 4" is highly improbable.

Rule #1 of any self defense situation. Put distance between you and the attacker.

I am going to mildly disagree with these statements, simply because every situation is different, and training for any possibility you could encounter will improve the chances of survival if you ever are in an encounter where the training would matter. Situations like being mugged in a parking lot after work, at night at the grocery store, or being carjacked and what not are examples of extreme CQB, and are very likely the type of thing from which we carry to defend ourselves. In these situations, it's actually taught to press into your attacker, as opposed to putting distance between you and your aggressor, since this limits their ability to swing a weapon, draw a gun, etc, and gives you the ability to draw and fire while blocking the aggressor's view of your actions, allowing you to shoot, in essence, point blank, from retention (from the hip, so to speak.)

I do agree that if you have the ability to fully extend, get a sight picture, and fire, that you should stay moving. That I fully agree with, but when you're up close and personal such as in a brawl, or hand to hand with someone who's chosen to rush you with a blitz type attack, sometimes that's just not an option, and having trained for that sort of situation can save your rump.

norahc
12-02-2012, 02:36 PM
I am going to mildly disagree with these statements, simply because every situation is different, and training for any possibility you could encounter will improve the chances of survival if you ever are in an encounter where the training would matter. Situations like being mugged in a parking lot after work, at night at the grocery store, or being carjacked and what not are examples of extreme CQB, and are very likely the type of thing from which we carry to defend ourselves. In these situations, it's actually taught to press into your attacker, as opposed to putting distance between you and your aggressor, since this limits their ability to swing a weapon, draw a gun, etc, and gives you the ability to draw and fire while blocking the aggressor's view of your actions, allowing you to shoot, in essence, point blank, from retention (from the hip, so to speak.)

I do agree that if you have the ability to fully extend, get a sight picture, and fire, that you should stay moving. That I fully agree with, but when you're up close and personal such as in a brawl, or hand to hand with someone who's chosen to rush you with a blitz type attack, sometimes that's just not an option, and having trained for that sort of situation can save your rump.
Exactly. If you're in the middle of getting stabbed, you don't have the luxury of creating distance and getting a good sight picture.

Tux
12-02-2012, 05:06 PM
I am going to mildly disagree with these statements, simply because every situation is different, and training for any possibility you could encounter will improve the chances of survival if you ever are in an encounter where the training would matter. Situations like being mugged in a parking lot after work, at night at the grocery store, or being carjacked and what not are examples of extreme CQB, and are very likely the type of thing from which we carry to defend ourselves. In these situations, it's actually taught to press into your attacker, as opposed to putting distance between you and your aggressor, since this limits their ability to swing a weapon, draw a gun, etc, and gives you the ability to draw and fire while blocking the aggressor's view of your actions, allowing you to shoot, in essence, point blank, from retention (from the hip, so to speak.)

I do agree that if you have the ability to fully extend, get a sight picture, and fire, that you should stay moving. That I fully agree with, but when you're up close and personal such as in a brawl, or hand to hand with someone who's chosen to rush you with a blitz type attack, sometimes that's just not an option, and having trained for that sort of situation can save your rump.

Disagreement is good, as it often brings up good dialog.

So where is this taught that you press your gun into your attacker?

I'm still failing to see what Tex was doing. Standing face to face literally 4". Either he does not have a weapon and you became the aggressor, or he does have a weapon and you let an armed person in your immediate space.

Sorry, I have to contend that what Tex was attempting to was tactically stupid. Situational awareness is the name of the game and there is not a person on the face of the planet I am going to let get within arms reach of me.

Standing there looking eyeball to eyeball and trying to out shoot an attacker at point blank range is a far fetched scenario and in Tex's case showed just how stupid it was. One could sit there all day and throw out hypothetical scenarios, but the reality is my instincts are to push you back.

I've been in two situations myself in life where a weapon was drawn, neither one involved having to draw at point blank range.

GlassWolf
12-02-2012, 06:23 PM
Every CBQ handgun class I've taken over the past 20 years has involved the methodology I've mentioned. Mind you, I'm not talking in relation to the original video or atricle in this thread, as I don't even recall if I watched it. I'm strictly speaking on the basis of close quarters combat technique. If you want some examples of this, go to youtube and search on "clowe quarters handgun" and see some of the videos by people like Rob Pincus and James yeager.

In regards to letting an aggressor that close to you, it's not always obvious who the aggressors will be until they are right next to you. We had a bouncer at our club recently who was shot to death at point blank range, because a kid he'd tossed out of the club earlier walked up to him, pulled a gun in the parking lot from under his shirt, and shot the bouncer in the back of his head, then fired 4 more times as the man fell dead to the ground. Situational awareness is great, but it's not always going to save you. Sometimes it's just a matter of training and reaction time. Fights happen, people are sometimes just crazy, disturbed, or in a rage over something that has nothing to do with you, but becomes your problem when they make it so. As I noted, every situation is different so you can't always predict what's going to happen before it does.

It's not always a gun your opponent has, either. If he pulls a knife, or a beer bottle, or whatever, you have to be ready to defend against that, and if he is close to you, you're better off stepping into him to prevent his ability to extend and swing, stab, or what have you, and by doing so, you can not just block hims attack, but stop it short, tie up his hands, and disarm him and subdue him... if you're trained, and practiced in how to do so.

MP Gunther
12-02-2012, 06:25 PM
"Standing there looking eyeball to eyeball and trying to out shoot an attacker at point blank range is a far fetched scenario and in Tex's case showed just how stupid it was. One could sit there all day and throw out hypothetical scenarios, but the reality is my instincts are to push you back.

I've been in two situations myself in life where a weapon was drawn, neither one involved having to draw at point blank range."

Maybe George Zimmerman can enlighten us on this topic?

Tux
12-02-2012, 08:36 PM
My previous instruction has always been create distance. But looking at this video is swaying my thought process some.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKso6R10OJ0

GlassWolf
12-03-2012, 07:45 AM
Ah! You found just the video I was hoping, too. That course is outstanding. I wanted to link to it directly for you, but lately if I open any video with this PC, the entire thing locks up and I have to reboot the machine, so I can't open youtube. (I need to build a new computer. This one is about ready to croak.) Much of what I'd tried to portray in our discussion is illustrated in that video. Rob Pincus does a few others about clearing corners in a building and such that further illustrate the dangers of holding the gun away from the body in certain settings as well that can be very helpful to watch. If you like his stuff, his course DVDs are actually 20% off through X-mas on his I.C.E. site. All of the videos. (He has a LOT of them)