Safety controversy

If anyone missed it from the original post: http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/06/17/highly-controversial-training-video/

And if you look at the guy in the white shirt who is shooting in the general direction of the target of the soon-to-be late photographer's right, he has some sort of misfire, looks around totally clueless, stands up and finally puts another magazine in his gun and starts firing again. These aren't some mercenaries training for jungle duty! These are just ordinary city folk that appear to be handling a firearm for the first time.

Scott
 
Last edited:
B.O.T.D???
Benefit of the doubt...
The more I read of this feller, the more I question his ability to provide quality training to anyone! Not the paparazzi.. the yaeger guy! Not much in his google history says he is qualified to train citizens in the free world!
Brent
 
I was struck by the wild variation in skills displayed. Two folks were "Zebco-ing" their draw stroke and the guy who did a 360 seemed to be following some bizarre dance steps to a tune only he could hear.

Ditto on the "Yeager and Suarez - two of a kind" thoughts..

:(
 
This kind of stupidity is typical of Yeager. If he had any sense, he would have admitted fault, made corrections and move on. This guy's ego won't allow him to do anything but self promote. I have never seen a bigger, "I am super warrior" self promoter. The truth is, the one time in this guy's life that he had a chance to prove himself, he failed miserably. I could forgive the guy for his failings and even give him credit as an instructor (those who can do those who can't teach). But, he's just too stupid to accept the fact that he is not the world's greatest ninja and that he's made mistakes. I challenge anyone to tell me how this training course was "enhanced" by having a moron down range?
 
No where in my post did I say this was 'usual' for the training..in fact I said quite the contrary. "it is NOT any training doctrine nor curriculum that the students must shoot".
Click to expand...
I'm not interested in debating the definition of the word: "usual". The point is that it is not UNusual for this to happen during training at TR. Yeager's rebuttal clearly made it sound like it was not only something that was done regularly but he also made it sound like it was important in the training.

The point is that the stuff going on in that video happens at TR all the time. Maybe that doesn't fit your definition of "usual" or "representative", but people who go there/train there should expect to see it and that fits most people's definition of "usual" and "representative".
The ambush on BIAP as a catalyst for hatred is insanely blown out of proportion and that, to me, has spilled over to opinion of his school.
Click to expand...
I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. This isn't about what Yeager has done in the past (I don't even know what he's done in the past), it's about what he is doing today and what he's defending in his rebuttal video.

That said, I have to say that it wouldn't surprise me to find that there were some sort of SNAFU in Mr. Yeager's past. And it won't surprise me when he has his next one either.
So, YES there is a risk and YES it could have gone south with huge consequences...but so can everything else whether or not I had a say in it.
Click to expand...
Bad things happen. The goal of intelligent people is to be able to walk away after a bad thing happens knowing that they didn't do stupid things to help create the problem.
 
Creature, of course they are and they will continue to be. They have a loyal following of people who consider themselves to be "warriors." He is big on the "warrior mentality" as expressed in his rebuttal video. Yeager, to a certain extent, is another gun school guru that is blindly followed because "he has been there and done that" and the like. So until people start getting hurt, no doubt his school will remain in business.

As noted, his "warriors" in that video are awfully neophytic. Being "warriors" doesn't make the students competent.
 
I remember doing a live-fire exercise with an M16 in Marine Combat Training, and moving the barrel past about 40 degrees off of straight-ahead downrange... and that was the last thing I remember for a minute or so, because a couple of instructors tackled me so hard I blacked out. I can't imagine any safe and sane instructor intentionally putting anyone IN FRONT OF the line of fire.
 
Unbelievable! As I was reading these posts about a photographer 'downrange', and then saw Yeager's rebuttal video, with him talking about the 180-degree rule, I imagined that perhaps the photographer had been somewhere in front of, but -off to the side- of the firing line...

Whoa! then I saw the actual video, and there is the photographer crouched down between two silhouette targets that there is barely room for him to squeeze in between...

Inexcusable - unsafe - it leaves me almost speechless. I can't understand how anybody could even attempt to defend this type of behavior.
 
Just thinking about this - my mind flashed back to an IDPA match where a competitor who I'd seen shoot several times draw his 1911 and shoot around into the ground about an inch from the foot of the SO and a foot from the foot of the Score keeper (me). :eek:

I also know that that the IDPA indoor champ match just a few months ago a long time competitor shot himself down the leg and luckily the EMTs there saved him from a bleed out.

So squatting down isn't a gurantee of squat.
 
Are there any links to this? There must be a lesson to be learned here.

I also know that that the IDPA indoor champ match just a few months ago a long time competitor shot himself down the leg and luckily the EMTs there saved him from a bleed out.
Click to expand...
 
There must be a lesson to be learned here.
Click to expand...
Yep. A pretty simple one. Lots of folks who consider themselves experts or warriors or who master one aspect of shooting get very arrogant when it comes to safety and wind up needlessly putting themselves or others in harm's way. I've seen plenty of these folks at various ranges, and whenever I do see one, I exit immediately.
 
1993, Ft. Sill, Oklahoma.
We crawled down one lane, came over, and then crawled up onto a firing M-60 firing 1 in 5 tracer mix. The shots were going about 3' over our heads. Just so long as everyone is doing like they are supposed to, then what's the problem?
 
I bet that ft.sill incident is following a lot of previous official military training. Just a guess....
I still say if you want photo ops on a live fire range, you could opt for remotely operated gear. Then if something goes wrong yer out a simple replaceable camera and motorized mount... No one would have their mental stability jeopardized for shooting a BTDT camera feller!

Brent
 
So until people start getting hurt, no doubt his school will remain in business.
Click to expand...

So my question remains: undoubtedly no-liability waivers are being signed before commencement of any training. But is a school like this required to carry some kind of insurance, permit or license?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top