NYPD/Bloomberg press conference points hundreds of guns at reporters

D

dakota.potts

New member
http://bearingarms.com/in-the-best-...ference-points-hundreds-of-guns-at-reporters/

In a pretty blatant safety violation, this NYPD/Bloomberg press conference featured many guns pointed directly at the reporters. These are everything from SAA revolvers to Tec 9 pistols all pointed in the direction of the audience. No bolts are open, magazines are in, and many safeties are off. I'm not sure they know what a chamber flag is.

I could almost forgive a single egregious safety error, but it seems as if they literally made no effort to make it safer at all. Is it to make people afraid and make the fear seem more real of these "street guns"? Is it SOP?

I'm a little puzzled.
 
It's rude, but not really unsafe unless someone reaches for one. There is no one with his hands anywhere near the table.
 
It's only as unsafe as any gun show table or gun store display. Is it possibly bad form? Yes. Do we expect any better from someone who's using them for political gain? Probably not.
 
Just for the record, if one clicks on the image and looks at it full-size, there are no magazines visible in any of the pistols.

So it's not quite as bad as the article makes it out to be. :rolleyes:
 
Vanya, did we not just have a thread about "All guns are always loaded," vs "keep guns unloaded until ready to use"?

I don't recall if you contributed to that particular thread, but according to pax, Brian Pfleuger, and many others (me too), the lack of magazines doesn't excuse bad handling.

LE should know better.

My 12yo cousin knew better. He asked me once what I'd do, when I was preparing to teach him to shoot, if he accidentally pointed a gun at me. I told him I'd punch him in the head.

He didn't believe me.

His mother and grandmother then told him, "he will punch you in the head, and if he doesn't, we will."

Kid nailed his hunter safety course. Best shot in his class (mix of kids and adults), and safest gun handler.

Cops should know better than a 12yo...
 
Bloomberg is an amateur. Chicago's Mayor Daley, at a similar press conference, once threatened to stick a rifle up a reporter's butt and fire it as he held said rifle, while Diane Feinstein held up an AK-47, drum magazine inserted, finger on the trigger, not pointed in a safe direction at one of her anti-gun press conferences. Notice the woman to Feinstein's left is none other than Colorado Rep. Diana "magazines are bullets" DeGette, supposedly (according to her supporters anyway) one of the biggest firearms experts in Congress.

Talk about gun nuts...
 
There is a magazine in the AK and the Tec-9.

At a gun show, you sometimes get swept, but I am also disgusted when I see gun shows were tables have guns blatantly pointing at people walking the rows. The big difference with gunshows is that, frankly, there is NO safe direction for a muzzle to point unless the entire show is one long hall with all of the rifles pointed at a solid wall that makes a good backstop with all vendors standing in front of the tables. Otherwise, someone's going to get swept.

In this circumstance, there is no reason they couldn't be hung up on a wall facing the roof or the floor or one of the side walls. They didn't even make an attempt at trying to follow the rules. There aren't even chamber flags. It's not like a gun show, in my opinion. The safety violations are much worse.
 
there is NO safe direction for a muzzle
Click to expand...

If one includes the time when no one is physically touching a firearm(or in the process of, ie set the gun down while at the range etc), this is the realistic truth in most circumstances. Pointing at the ceiling, floor or wall is not inherently safer without knowing the building and most buildings are not going to create safety. Just because you can't see what on the other side does not mean there aren't people there, or that they're any safer.

I certainly wouldn't advocate for unsafe gun handling, but is a firearm on a table being handled? Do guns just go off without human interaction? I'd say no to both.
 
It's only as unsafe as any gun show table or gun store display.
Click to expand...

Around here, gun shows since the late 80s or so have required that the actions be ziptied open so you have both a way to prevent rounds from being chambered and a visual indicator the weapon is clear.
 
And still we get NDs at TX shows. It's usually the fault of the dealer.

Anyway, go to Bass Pro, Academy or Cabelas or many TX LGS. Rows of close semis with magazines. I find the outrage at touch disingenuous. Who has fled Bass Pro or Cabela's in terror or complained the management? Good stores clear the weapon before letting you handle it.
 
In my NRA RSO class (me: student) this Sunday, the instructor said "somebody's been watching too much tv".
The gun is an inanimate object. The gun cannot fire itself.
The 'anti's' 'freak out' if they see a gun. They 'freak out' if they know a gun exists. They 'freak out' if they know there is a gun in the same city as where they are.
Then they come to the conclusion that 'no gun must exist'. All guns must be destroyed. That is the only way we can be "safe".
Guns are really not quite that dangerous.
dc
 
I do personally complain when muzzles are pointing at people if there is an obvious solution otherwise. My local shop has the muzzles pointed directly upward on rifles and the pistols in the cases point either to the side (facing neither dealer no buyer) or directly down. It is still not a perfectly safe direction, but concessions are made.

My biggest issue here is that there was not a single attempt made in any fashion. Magazines in, safeties off, bolts closed, all weapons pointed directly at the audience. IF they had even chamber flags or something it wouldn't be that big a deal. I go to a gunshow knowing that I may get swept by a less-than-safety conscious dealer or someone picking up a gun, but I expect more from a mayor and police force.
 
the pistols in the cases point either to the side (facing neither dealer no buyer)
Click to expand...

You seem to be entirely focused on the visible people. Just because they're not pointing at the dealer or buyer doesn't mean they're not pointing at people in the store next door or outside.

You we're just asking about pocket pistols for guitar performances. Some of which would have been in a seated position, other times while you would be jumping around with a loaded pistol. Both of which would end up muzzling people with a loaded pistol. Somehow this is less of a danger than a pistol just sitting there in a case or on a table because it can't be seen?
 
We accept that a holstered pistol will sweep over some people and precautions must be taken. Trigger guards are covered and some people clear that entire part of their body that they're carrying on so nothing can interfere.

My issue isn't that the guns were pointing at the people, but that every single one was blatantly arranged to do so with not a single concession towards at least respecting any of the safety rules. A police department doesn't have access to trigger locks or chamber flags? They don't know how to remove a magazine and lock a slide back?

I know, when I'm at the range, if I set my gun down facing a target that I implicitly want to fill with holes, I still am supposed to put the safety on, remove the magazine, and open the bolt. That is at a scenario where I WANT the gun to go off in that direction, yet we still set it like that so others around us can confirm it's safe when not being handled.

Like I said, I am much more upset at the principle that not a single precaution seems to have been taken for this event. We don't even know if the guns have been cleared prior to coming off the street. We assume they are, but we don't know that.
 
The room was full of reporters? Maybe they were intentionally arranged that way to make the guns look more dangerous.
 
I am thinking that is the case. Maybe they hoped the emotional appeal of looking into the barrels of guns would help them write more "persuasive" articles.
 
The room was full of reporters? Maybe they were intentionally arranged that way to make the guns look more dangerous.
Click to expand...

Of course they were. A high profile dog-and-pony show like Bloom's anti-gun campaign is surely micro analyzed by dozens of ad experts, politico consultants, image experts. "If we point the dangerous end at the reporters, it will have a bigger impact".

The Bloom campaign is surely not the least bit interested in demonstrating safe gun handling ie empty chamber flags and so forth.


Sgt Lumpy
 
Something makes me think that it was NOT an accident, but a very purposeful subliminal message.

By having all of those firearms pointing at the members of the audience, it helps reinforce the discomfort many of them already have about firearms.



Whoops. I see a number of other people have already had that thought.
 
This is a bunch of nothing. No one was touching any of those guns - they were all lying on tables; like at a gun show. No one was pointing muzzles at reporters.

A loaded gun, by itself sitting on a table, is about as dangerous as a car parked in a garage.
 
You know that, I know that, but the anti-gunners don't want anyone to think that.

They've spent decades villifying the gun as a threat with its own personality, it's own sinister will, and its own ability to act.

They're psychologically, emotionally, and financially invested in the lie that guns are the real problem, not people and their actions.

If we just get rid of those evil guns, we'll be living in a utopian harmony in a matter of minutes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top