mountin man shoots finger off

[CraigC]

One of several dumb mistakes that could've and should've been avoided. Not an excuse to condemn "Africa carry".

 

[danez71]

Lots of half cocked theories but nothing of substance.

Pffft. I didn't give any theories.

It means it's commonly safely practiced by A LOT of individuals and other than the stupidity shown by the shooter referenced in the OP, there is ZERO evidence to the contrary.

But it still isn't even listed in any of the hunter safety literature. And there is some evidence.... a missing finger.

Your analogy is way off. There is no inherent danger in this method of carry

Apparently, there is inherent danger; as evidenced by a missing finger.

Live gun = live wires. In either case, it doesn't take much for something bad to happen. Analogy is good whether or not you understand it.

And I'm just asking if there are any that condemn it.

By you continuing to refuse to just answer my simple question, you must not be able to cite anything.

But to answer yours, I don't see anything specifically condemning it.


However, that it isn't included in the 4-5 methods listed in the hunters safety literature, that kind of sends the message that its not one of the top 4 or 5 ways to carry.

What's considered a safe distance from the muzzle? Anything like shooting a pocket pistol?

No.. it's really not like it since the slide is timed to open after the bullet, and most of the gases, leave the barrel

And your hand is clamping a grip that is at a roughly 90 degree angle to the barrel so there isn't anything close to the same inherent possibility that your hand is going to slip forward to the end, or over, the muzzle like it could if grasping close to the end the barrel.

What about the barrel/cylinder gap on a revolver?

The frame near the head/primer shield most of the gases forward. Grip is roughly at a 90 degree angle to the barrel. Really not very similar at all.

Did you put any thought whatsoever into this argument?

I think you should be asking yourself that based on your retorts.

You do realize we're talking about a flintlock here, right?

Uhh.... as eastbank pointed out... No, we're not talking about flintlocks. Were you trying to make a point with that comment?

If you're worried about gases and particles at the muzzle, you would be far too terrified to fire a shouldered flintlock

You don't win arguments by trying to attack someone's manliness.

 

[Steel Horse Rider]

Just for your enlightenment, my point was not to condemn anyone carrying using that method but to suggest that there were better and safer methods to carry. I have never hunted in Africa but I have walked probably hundreds of miles hunting in the Midwest, I guess doing it in Africa or on television carry's more weight in some folks world. Not mine....

 

[swathdiver]

This thread exposes the notion that common sense has given way to lawyering by a frightening number of shooters.

One must be suspect of the wisdom of modern organizations today because they are advised by and run by risk adverse lawyers.

Some of you fellas should have your man card confiscated for a time because y'all are lacking in common sense.

 

[eastbank]

common sense should tell you, wait a minute this action could cause me great bodily harm. if you want to over ride that and still go on, have at it. it has nothing to do with your so called man card or lawyering. i try to lower the odds of getting hurt on every thing i do, from hunting-motorcycle riding-ice fishing- reloading ect. if others want to do actions that can be dangerous to them selfs and others around them, i have no problem with that. i just don,t want to be there when they are doing it. there were times in vietnam when common sense was over rode and the dangers were accepted by me for the good of others involved in a heart beat, but not now. eastbank.

 

[CraigC]

I notice that everyone ignored the links I posted.

Common sense should've told the individual in question not to do what he did. Not to carry his rifle overhead, through overhead brush or low hanging branches and not to jerk a rifle by the muzzle with the hammer caught on said brush/branches. Same thing could've happened with an other carry method. In no way should you ever be handling a loaded rifle with any body part in front of the muzzle.

Nothing here to justify the demonization of the carry method he was IMPROPERLY APPLYING to his situation.

if others want to do actions that can be dangerous to them selfs and others around them

Again, there is nothing here but nanny pontificating, unfounded fears and uninformed opinions to support the notion that this carry method is inherently more dangerous than any other.

 

[CraigC]

But it still isn't even listed in any of the hunter safety literature. And there is some evidence.... a missing finger.

You need a government entity to tell you how to carry a rifle??? Are you unfamiliar with the concept that "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"? In other words, the fact that it is not included in a hunter's safety course is not proof that it is an unsafe practice.

Apparently, there is inherent danger; as evidenced by a missing finger.

Live gun = live wires. In either case, it doesn't take much for something bad to happen. Analogy is good whether or not you understand it.

No, there is inherent danger in jerking your rifle through brush by the muzzle. That should be obvious.

The analogy was not poor because I didn't understand it, thank you very much.

By you continuing to refuse to just answer my simple question, you must not be able to cite anything.

I'm not going to look but I did provide positive evidence from authoritative sources (not the gov't) support the notion that Africa carry is indeed safe and acceptable.

But to answer yours, I don't see anything specifically condemning it.

Exactly.

However, that it isn't included in the 4-5 methods listed in the hunters safety literature, that kind of sends the message that its not one of the top 4 or 5 ways to carry.

Yes, I'm sure the government researched and provided information on ALL possible, safe methods of carrying a rifle.

No.. it's really not like it since the slide is timed to open after the bullet, and most of the gases, leave the barrel

And your hand is clamping a grip that is at a roughly 90 degree angle to the barrel so there isn't anything close to the same inherent possibility that your hand is going to slip forward to the end, or over, the muzzle like it could if grasping close to the end the barrel.

You alluded to a great fear of escaping gases and particles. The angle of the grip is irrelevant. The proximity of the hands to the muzzle is.

The frame near the head/primer shield most of the gases forward. Grip is roughly at a 90 degree angle to the barrel. Really not very similar at all.

Same here. The escaping gases through the barrel/cylinder gap on a revolver may be generated by as much as 65,000psi of chamber pressure. Grip said revolver like one would an autoloader and bad things will happen to your weak thumb. By your logic, or lack thereof, this makes it too dangerous to fire a revolver two handed. Yet if done properly (there's that word again), we can fire them safely with our hands relatively close. Firing a 10,000psi muzzleloader with your hand near the muzzle is probably MORE safe, not less.

I think you should be asking yourself that based on your retorts.

It should be obvious where the logic and reason lie in this argument.

Uhh.... as eastbank pointed out... No, we're not talking about flintlocks. Were you trying to make a point with that comment?

The point remains. If you're 'that' afraid of having your hand anywhere near the muzzle, then my deductive reasoning tells me you'd be terrified to fire a shouldered flintlock.

You don't win arguments by trying to attack someone's manliness.

Masculinity has nothing to do with it. You described a fear of escaping gases and particles, I just extrapolated upon that.

 

[danez71]

You need a government entity to tell you how to carry a rifle???

No. And I didn'tallude to it either. You're making giant leaps in order to counter me and you fail to realize that I don't even 100% disagree with you.

Are you unfamiliar with the concept that "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"? In other words, the fact that it is not included in a hunter's safety course is not proof that it is an unsafe practice.

I never claimed that it was. In relation to this, the most I claimed is that it kind of indicates that it's not in the top 4-5.

Do you read with intent to understand or read to fabricate something to retort against?

No, there is inherent danger in jerking your rifle through brush by the muzzle. That should be obvious.

Uh... yeah. The guy let his guard down and it cost him

The analogy was not poor because I didn't understand it, thank you very much.

OK.... we'll just go with that.

I'm not going to look

That's obvious.

but I did provide positive evidence from authoritative sources (not the gov't) support the notion that Africa carry is indeed safe and acceptable.

Are you talking about those 2 links a few posts up? If so,..No you didnt.

In fact, the 1st links says, in part,

They do this partly because of tradition.

The 2nd link doesn't even talk about African carry.

Yes, I'm sure the government researched and provided information on ALL possible, safe methods of carrying a rifle.

I never claimed they did. You really seem to like to allude that I said something I didn't say.

Again, In relation to this, the most I claimed is that it kind of indicates that it's not in the top 4-5.

You alluded to a great fear of escaping gases and particles. The angle of the grip is irrelevant. The proximity of the hands to the muzzle is.

It IS relevant because it keeps your hand from sliding towards the muzzle and thereby removes the inherent danger of African carry.

If you can't recognize that then you are truly in denial or maybe just cant comprehend the difference.

The point remains. If you're 'that' afraid of having your hand anywhere near the muzzle, then my deductive reasoning tells me you'd be terrified to fire a shouldered flintlock.

Maybe theres the issue; your deductive reasoning.

Masculinity has nothing to do with it. You described a fear of escaping gases and particles, I just extrapolated upon that.

More accurately, you exaggerated upon that

 

[eastbank]

squach lost a finger carrying a loaded rifle muzzle first over his shoulder thru brush, thats a no no for me. one thing for sure if the rifle was not loaded it would not have happened. why did he think he would be faster to get a shot at game by having the hammer down on a live cap and carrying muzzle first? unless he normaly carried his rifle uncapped. if he was worried about a fast shot at game,you would think he would be holding his rifle by both hands at the ready. the fault is squach,s for carrying a loaded rifle hammer down on a capped nipple and moving thru brush with the rifle muzzle first. i think we all can agree that under those conditions it is-was dangerous. so where is the need to get nasty in our posts? eastbank.

 

[CraigC]

squach lost a finger carrying a loaded rifle muzzle first over his shoulder thru brush

No, he lost a finger because he jerked a rifle through the brush by the muzzle and violated rule #1. Has NOTHING to do with the carry method.

If I am "nasty", it's because you're erroneously demonizing his carry method as inherently dangerous and in doing so, condemning all who use the method as unsafe hacks you would never want to hunt with. Which is insulting and completely absurd.

 

[danez71]

Same thing could've happened with an other carry method.

There ARE plenty of other ways to carry that would have eliminated the risk.


So why not choose a safer method?


Now, I fully agree with you that its the guys fault. The rifle didn't do anything on its own. The guy initiated all actions. He chose the method of carry. Its the guys fault, 100%.


However, being that there are other carry methods that eliminate the risks associated with African carry (snag of firing mechanism & hand possibly sliding toward muzzle), it proves that African carry has more inherent risk than other carry methods.


To say, imply, or allude otherwise, is false.


I'm not demonizing it. I'm simply saying there are other better ways to carry that eliminate more risks than African carry. And I do agree, its the guys fault.

 

[danez71]

No, he lost a finger because he jerked a rifle through the brush by the muzzle and violated rule #1. Has NOTHING to do with the carry method.

.

Part of the firing mechanism got snagged.


Other methods of carrying would have prevented it.


So, YES, the method of carry has A LOT to do with it.

 

[CraigC]

...it proves that African carry has more inherent risk than other carry methods.

BS. It proves nothing, except that "it" happens when people aren't paying attention. It is NOT inherently more dangerous than any other method. This singular incident is exactly that and statistically insignificant.

"The guy shot his finger off using Africa carry, so Africa carry is inherently dangerous." That's the kind of "logic" the anti's use. It's nanny state nonsense. Not only is that an oversimplified misrepresentation of what actually happened, it's faulty logic. I agree with post #79.

Other methods of carrying would have prevented it.

So would staying home away from all the dangers one might encounter in the real world.

As I already said, you don't go carrying a rifle in ANY position where it might encounter low hanging branches or brush. Maybe YOU should stay home???

 

[Crawdad1]

I believe that is what Craig is trying to tell you that over the shoulder carry of a rifle and especially a 4 1/2 foot long Kentucky rifle, is perfectly safe in the right situation, through an open field with no one in front of you.

It goes without saying that you keep your frickin hand away from the muzzle at all times.

 

[CraigC]

Exactly! You don't go crawling under low hanging trees with your rifle over your shoulder any more than you would ford a chest deep creek with it hanging down by your side. I don't know why this is so difficult to understand.

 

[Hookeye]

I don't get the Outdoor Channel.
Guess I'm not missing much.
Not missing fingers either........

 

[danez71]

I believe that is what Craig is trying to tell you that over the shoulder carry of a rifle and especially a 4 1/2 foot long Kentucky rifle, is perfectly safe in the right situation, through an open field with no one in front of you.

It goes without saying that you keep your frickin hand away from the muzzle at all times.

And I agree with all that.

Exactly! You don't go crawling under low hanging trees with your rifle over your shoulder any more than you would ford a chest deep creek with it hanging down by your side. I don't know why this is so difficult to understand.

That you just noted that carry method IS relevant in 2 different situations, including the situation of missing finger man, is a contradiction of your statement of

Has NOTHING to do with the carry method

.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Part of the firing mechanism got snagged.


Other methods of carrying would have prevented it.


So, YES, the method of carry has A LOT to do with it.

Other methods might have prevented it in that circumstance, but other methods of carry might have resulted in snagging in other circumstances. This doesn't make all the methods bad carry methods. It just makes the carrier a bad carrier for not adapting his method of carry to the circumstances around him.

 

[Crawdad1]

I agree there and some if not all may question the guy's experience level by not adapting to the "circumstances around him."

Hunting 101.

 

[stoky]

A surgeon acquaintance of my fathers was standing around talking, during a break in black powder hunting season, leaning on his smoke pole, when he put a .58 caliber ball through both hands.

 

[ridgerunner1965]

there you go. dont put your hand over the hole and ther wont be no holes in your hand. how hard is that?

 

[Crawdad1]

A surgeon acquaintance of my fathers was standing around talking, during a break in black powder hunting season, leaning on his smoke pole, when he put a .58 caliber ball through both hands.

A surgeon???

What a tragedy.

 

[eastbank]

this post can be locked now. there are dangers that come with hunting and handleing loaded firearms, those that will maybe think twice before doing these things may profit from what others have done and learn to be carefull. no need to reply. eastbank.

 

[lobo9er]

That is awesome! Great pics, funny I will never look at Davey Crockett the same!

 

[frontiergander]

The biggest issues:

Carrying it through brush where you can not see or control the hammer

Keeping an uncocked hammer DOWN on top of a LIVE cap

Walking through the thick brush with the hammer down on top of the cap and with it in a position you can not see nor control

Plain and simple.

He left the cap down because he said hes had troubles in the past with moisture getting in through the nipple and causing a hang fire or no fire.

Okay, the live cap is ok, BUT, not with the hammer down on top of it! It doesn't take much of a strike with the hammer to set them off.

Lessons learned and taught to all who watched the show.