Thread: Who the hell writes this stuff

I was at the Hunting outdoor and 4x4 expo in Rotorua over the weekend and the guys from the firearms registry outfit were there, I had a bit of a chat with them and when I mentioned mine and other users frustrations over the used friendliness of their website and the realme bullshit, they kind of smiled and cringed at the same time, they know the issues are there but can't do anything about it.
Anyway a bit later it had a look through some of the online info either on the firearms registry or linked to it. I found a 3 part quiz you could do online to test your firearms safety knowledge. There were some ridiculous answers to some of the questions but the one that really cracked me up was this one.
It asked what you should do if you are hunting with a mate and lost sight of them.
Apparently the correct answer to this is "stop and wait until you regain sight of your hunting partner".
Am I the only one that sees the stupidity of that answer? Assuming your mate is equally safety conscious, then he has also stopped and waited once he lost sight of you. How long do you think this would continue, minutes, hours, days, weeks?
Perhaps next time I go hunting with a mate I should take enough food to last a week or so just in case I loose sight of him??????

Fire 3 shots 5 seconds apart ( in a safe direction naturally, and without a suppressor)and repeat after 15 minutes, that will guide your "lost" partner to your location.

I think you ask a better question. Who wrote that?

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Marty Henry

Fire 3 shots 5 seconds apart ( in a safe direction naturally, and without a suppressor)and repeat after 15 minutes, that will guide your "lost" partner to your location.

the question says nothing about anyone being lost. they just can't visually see each other.

Here's another one for you.
"You are out hunting and make the decision to fire. Which of the seven rules is most important?"
Apparently the answer is. "Identify your target beyond all doubt"
I say this is not correct. Its the other way around. You can't make the decision to fire until you've identified you target beyond all doubt.
Again I say who write this stuff. this question is fundamentally wrong. Or at the very least poorly worded.

It would make more sense with adjusted additional wording;

"You are out hunting and make the decision to fire. Which of the seven rules is most important in making this decision?"

My partner is just applying for her license for the first time and I'm about to start coaching her through the semantics of the wording and testing. This is going to be interesting.

If you can’t see him, you probably won’t shoot him

Originally Posted by Marty Henry

Fire 3 shots 5 seconds apart ( in a safe direction naturally, and without a suppressor)and repeat after 15 minutes, that will guide your "lost" partner to your location.

Then you may as well go home, all the animals will know what’s going on?

Originally Posted by -BW-

It would make more sense with adjusted additional wording;

"You are out hunting and make the decision to fire. Which of the seven rules is most important in making this decision?"

My partner is just applying for her license for the first time and I'm about to start coaching her through the semantics of the wording and testing. This is going to be interesting.

Agree completely. Poorly worded. It would seem that applying for a firearms license and doing the written exam is more about knowing which answer you need to give rather than what is the technically correct answer.

Originally Posted by Maca49

If you can’t see him, you probably won’t shoot him

Most deaths are shots at movement or colour.

Originally Posted by Tahr

Most deaths are shots at movement or colour.

Ahhh, no - a lot of hunting accident related deaths are, but there are still the odd shot at a hunter carrying an animal, a duckshooter clipping the guy they don't know on the other side of the trees at the back of the pond, the mis-identifying a human as an animal (target fixation where the brain is expecting to see YYY and the brain fits the eyeball signals into this pattern) and the good old shooting the headlamp in the spotlight job. Just about lost a mate a while back where the two parties had no idea the other was there and one shot at an animal that both were stalking in on. The shot missed me mate by a few meters, and both parties got a hell of a shock as neither knew the other was there and it wasn't public land. Both had permission to be on the land, but had come in from opposite access points and met at the middle of the block. Unlikely/uncommon situation but it happened.

As far as the questions, this was raised as soon as the old MSC people were removed from the training process. The replacement types I think didn't have the experience to understand the confusion they were creating in the questions as they wrote them down.

Originally Posted by No.3

Ahhh, no - a lot of hunting accident related deaths are, but there are still the odd shot at a hunter carrying an animal, a duckshooter clipping the guy they don't know on the other side of the trees at the back of the pond, the mis-identifying a human as an animal (target fixation where the brain is expecting to see YYY and the brain fits the eyeball signals into this pattern) and the good old shooting the headlamp in the spotlight job. Just about lost a mate a while back where the two parties had no idea the other was there and one shot at an animal that both were stalking in on. The shot missed me mate by a few meters, and both parties got a hell of a shock as neither knew the other was there and it wasn't public land. Both had permission to be on the land, but had come in from opposite access points and met at the middle of the block. Unlikely/uncommon situation but it happened.

Whatever. Still supports "if you cant see him you wont shoot him" as being a fallacy.

They probably just missed a word, e.g. 'stop actively hunting until you regain sight...'

These are little language tweaks they may be easily able to fix in the training. Stuff like this happens when heaps of people review things. Make sure you email all the errors you spot to them when you're done with it, make the world a better place - certainly seems there's eyes on this board with the talent for a useful technical end-user review!

Originally Posted by LarryB

They probably just missed a word, e.g. 'stop actively hunting until you regain sight...'

These are little language tweaks they may be easily able to fix in the training. Stuff like this happens when heaps of people review things. Make sure you email all the errors you spot to them when you're done with it, make the world a better place - certainly seems there's eyes on this board with the talent for a useful technical end-user review!

...With the phenomenal quantity of funds they have ploughed into this behemoth one would expect them to have sought such technical end user input prior to launching....but no, lets launch the system with all these poor glitches, and instead lets spend tens of millions of dollars on nice new HQ's and uniforms