|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
Rule 4 in Real Life: The Danger of Hitting Bystanders
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://libertyparkpress.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Like so many things in the self-defense community, the issue of hitting bystanders with defensive gunfire is somewhat contested as to how real or pertinent a danger it proves to be. In my assessment, most leading experts in the firearms training field focus heavily on accountability with your shooting. Every round hits something, so being cognizant of what is behind, in front of, or around your target is of paramount importance. However, some “experts” seem to dismiss the issue as perhaps an important consideration but an unlikely eventuality, suggesting that it rarely happens. So, what is the truth regarding the possibility of hitting bystanders? Does it happen? Is it a pressing concern? |
| Comment by:
netsyscon
(3/29/2022)
|
| Every time you point your gun and pull the trigger it goes thru your mind. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right. [Nunn vs. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243, at 251 (1846)] |
|
|
