how can this be justified


PDA






contender
June 16, 2009, 10:06 PM
a video of a gun training excerise with a photographer.

http://s717.photobucket.com/albums/ww177/Tactical_Resp/?action=view&current=MVI_1778.flv

i could not believe this when i saw it.

how can one even contemplate the legal ramifications, or even get insurance.........somehow, i don't think hold no harm waviers would hold up in court should an "accident" happen. This sort of thing could get ranges shut down everywhere.

If you enjoyed reading about "how can this be justified" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Black Knight
June 16, 2009, 10:12 PM
Just remember Darwin gets plenty of candidates for the awards every year. This seems to be one waiting for the right moment.

MisterMike
June 16, 2009, 10:12 PM
That is beyond incredibly stupid.

DAVIDSDIVAD
June 16, 2009, 10:13 PM
Guys like that get to a point in their egos where they say "I'm so good at being tactical and awesome that I'm above the rules and physics."


Also, IN B4 "U DONT NO WAT UR TALKING BOUT I TRAIN W/ THIS GUY AND HE IS SO TACTICAL

Birdmang
June 16, 2009, 10:16 PM
This is also a repost of a deleted thread.

alemonkey
June 16, 2009, 10:18 PM
Seriously, this video needs to come down immediately. All this is doing is providing fodder for the anti's that they can use to demonstrate how irresponsible gun owners are.

contender
June 16, 2009, 10:20 PM
my appologies as i was thinking the legal troubles it could cause......especially if the graduated students carry this practice back home with them.

does this belong in the general discussion forum instead of here? if so, moderators please feel free to move it.

contender
June 16, 2009, 10:25 PM
and removing the video from here will not make it go away........it has already spread around the net . Perhaps the ones who created this video need to be addressed along with their company. it is best to acknowledge, confront, and deal with a problem than to hide it and pretend it did not happen-----respectfully.

i've already emailed them.

Husaberg Man
June 16, 2009, 10:42 PM
All this is doing is providing fodder for the anti's that they can use to demonstrate how irresponsible gun owners are. It makes photographers look like rocket surgeons.

contender
June 16, 2009, 10:45 PM
not to mention giving insurance agents ulcers......wonder if the range was insured by the NRA?

LibShooter
June 16, 2009, 10:47 PM
That's crazy. I used to be a TV news photographer but never did anything that stupid.

I once shot a story at a body armor manufacturer. The reporter wanted to do the cliche "aim the pistol at the mannequin wearing vest with the camera over its shoulder" stand up. She claimed to be a very good shot and wouldn't hit me. I set up the camera and fled to a safe spot behind the reporter.

Above the report of the Glock we heard a metallic ring and saw the camera move. The shot took out a little hunk of the tripod leg right in front of where my pelvis would have been.

Luckily, my dad started teaching me about gun safety about the time I learned to talk. One of our photographers whose parents "kept him safe from guns" by pretending they didn't exist might not have known better and had his family jewels shot off.

TexasRifleman
June 16, 2009, 10:49 PM
Well there's one training source marked off the list anyway.

The photographer may be an idiot for doing that, but that "school" should be gone.

Deltaboy
June 16, 2009, 10:51 PM
What morons

PT1911
June 16, 2009, 10:52 PM
whats wrong... they are only 10 yards away or so, not like they could possibly miss. He is MUCH safer in his squatted position between targets spaced 3 feet apart than he would have been standing at the end of the firing line. and he got some wonderful pictures of 2 shooters.


Everyone involved in this video should be ashamed and embarrassed.

SHvar
June 16, 2009, 11:03 PM
Although for a school for average civilians I dont condone what is shown.
A few corrections, the firing line is 3 yards away, not 10.
I do know of a few training courses in the US where special military units, special law enforcement units and individuals from these units engage targets with live subjects in the room, or down range, but never a civilian training course.
One the trainers stand next to targets in a room when HRT (hostage rescue teams) enter and clear the rooms.
Once I had a news cameraman wanting to postion himself in front, but to the side of me while I was shooting on a range, I refused for lack of trust in his reactions, not my own.
Like I said, I dont condone this.
...and the next runner up for the Darwin award is....

contender
June 16, 2009, 11:25 PM
seriously, i know that a lot of folks who go to ranges or attend classes sometimes sign a "no harm" wavier concerning potential accidents or concerning the materials and training they cover in a classroom.

does these no-harm agreements really hold water? Does a simple signature release this guy and the range from liability?

how about taking these training practices home and doing them with the neighbor? its a sue happy world we live in. it would seem to me the firearms instructor is liable for what he teaches.

theQman23
June 17, 2009, 12:28 AM
who do I write? I mean, if this is a shooting, or tac or any other kind of school, can you publish an email or an address so I can write them and tell them why I would NEVER do business with them, because they are potentially DESTROYING the image of responsible shooters?
If you don't want to post publicly, pm me the info, but seriously, I would like to make sure these people know I will NEVER recommend them.

Extremely Pro Gun
June 17, 2009, 12:55 AM
I hate people who destroy the gun owners image.

toivo
June 17, 2009, 01:03 AM
That video is so out-of-control ridiculous that I have a hard time believing it isn't some kind of fake or spoof. If it is real, that is sad and disturbing. It violates everything I have ever learned about firearms safety, or plain common sense, for that matter.

209
June 17, 2009, 05:42 AM
I get nervous about setting a camera up on a tripod in front of the firing line and filming remotely because I always figure Murphy is hanging around ready to cause some mayhem. No way would I be willingly standing down by the targets.

mugsie
June 17, 2009, 06:40 AM
I used to do this all the time - oh wait.... I was in the Army and in Viet Nam!

Idiots. Darwin is alive and well.

rbernie
June 17, 2009, 06:54 AM
Guys - this thread does not exist so we can go about name-calling. The OP asked a question, appropriate for this forum, about the legal ramifications of such a training exercise.

Either address that point, or the thread gets locked. We do not engage in name-calling, either against folks on this forum or elsewhere.

kanook
June 17, 2009, 08:32 AM
I don't think it can be justified by any sane person. I don't believe any insurance company would continue to insure after they saw this video. All for a couple of "cool pictures of me shooting".

DHJenkins
June 17, 2009, 09:08 AM
What ever happened to using a tripod & a shutter switch?

testosterone
June 17, 2009, 09:39 AM
I do know of a few training courses in the US where special military units, special law enforcement units and individuals from these units engage targets with live subjects in the room, or down range, but never a civilian training course.

Honestly, do you actually know in the first person, anyone that is in one of these "units" where live humans stand next to targets and someone comes through a door with live ammunition and only shoots the targets?

Really?

CoRoMo
June 17, 2009, 09:40 AM
I don't suppose there are any legal ramifications without an accident happening. Was a law broken here? Maybe a reckless charge? I wouldn't hate to see charges for a legitimate violation, but I can't imagine that there are any ramifications if nothing went wrong, as ignorant of an event as it is.

However, other than legal, surely there are all kinds of civil ramifications. I would think this range, school, or whatever it is could be shut down immediately from this very video. BIMBW.

testosterone
June 17, 2009, 09:49 AM
reckless disregard for human life or reckless endangerment, if a cop saw it and wasn't participating...

highorder
June 17, 2009, 10:04 AM
Honestly, do you actually know in the first person, anyone that is in one of these "units" where live humans stand next to targets and someone comes through a door with live ammunition and only shoots the targets?

Really?


I do.

Federal Agency, non-military.

oron
June 17, 2009, 10:47 AM
could only remember, that photo of chinese
conscrip holding target.:what:

SHvar
June 17, 2009, 12:00 PM
Yes, one of these training courses is held in Ft Bragg NC, its a course for HRT units, some of the instructors were prior SEAL team members (and yes they stood next to targets and gave instruction, to the sides of them, and against walls in rooms) and former Delta force.
In fact I saw many videos and pictures from one class, with a now retired HRT team leader.
You would be amazed what these guys train for, in fact they spend around 6 months of the year training all over the country. They arent doing their normal duties that often.
But, as I said no normal citizens are there participating.

Maelstrom
June 17, 2009, 12:17 PM
some of the instructors were prior SEAL team members (and yes they stood next to targets and gave instruction

If had the confidence to stand next to a target with someone shooting at that target, I'd figure the guy shooting better not need instruction.

FlyinBryan
June 17, 2009, 12:24 PM
my rangemaster would fall over dead if he saw that.

Rockwell1
June 17, 2009, 12:28 PM
some of the instructors were idiots(and yes they stood next to targets and gave instruction, to the sides of them, and against walls in rooms)

There I fixed it for you ( I always wanted to do that)

I don't care who you are, there is no justification for stupidity on that level.

EdLaver
June 17, 2009, 12:38 PM
What ever happened to using a tripod & a shutter switch?

Thats what I was thinking too! Boy, whoever the instructor for this class was should be fired and never teach a class again. The photographer must be suicidal.

ilbob
June 17, 2009, 12:49 PM
I think it is an unnecessary risk to take. That makes it a bad idea.

Its not like the photographer was a trainee who might benefit from experiencing gun fire from the other side of the gun. I can understand the need for that kind of training for some people.

Just to take a few photographs, I don't get it.

CoRoMo
June 17, 2009, 12:53 PM
Advanced level training in CQB is one thing, but this video is not a group of HRT members in training. They are shooting from what... 4 yards? That, and from the look of a couple of the shooters, this is just a pistol class of some sort.

contender
June 17, 2009, 08:43 PM
the question still stands though. and i honestly don't know the answer.

in reference to this or any other type or range practices----do the so-called "release of liability waviers" hold water under this type of training?

further, would this type of training also be grounds for termination of the range insurance policy? And heaven forbid, should an accident had actually occoured, would the range insurance refuse to pay out because of these "accepted training tactics" used by this school which tends to go against the grain of other range techinques and practices that are accepted?

"cutting edge" training is one thing, but this seems to cut to the bone and is way outside the norm of accepted training methods.

If you enjoyed reading about "how can this be justified" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!