One might learn from instruction, or from observation, or instead wait for actual experience to be their guide. The latter is not always pleasant.
From 1786, at New York City...
From 1811, John Warner of Rhode Island was killed in a sham battle in Massachusetts...
1860s veterans left many accounts of firing off ramrods by accident in battle, and men being struck by them.
Sure, the above was in combat. In Sham battles in camp the Soldiers learned how dangerous the flying ramrods could be too. Joseph R. Schwartz of the G.A.R. recalled of training in 1861-62 at Camp Chase:
John Pardington, of the Iron Brigade, regarding sham battles in camp near Washington in September, 1862:
And from Richmond, VA, in October, 1864:
In the Centennial of the Revolution, in 1876 at Trenton, New Jersey... left lasting memories of ramrods...
From 1877, Watertown, NY, there seems to have been some learning processes afoot, as the papers noted for an upcoming sham battle, the men would be using breechloaders, so no more trouble about flying ramrods...
From 1879:
Trenton again, 1883...
Also 1883:
Illinois, 1885:
Detroit, 1887:
Granted such incidents and injuries were rare considering the scale of sham battle events across the country, but they were ALWAYS unnecessary.
in 1960, with a long and cherished history of Sham Battles behind, the Civil War Centennial Committee, taking the above into account, publicly warned about the possible dangers of battle reenactment ramrod use... and the warning was generally abided to avoid the unnecessary dangers...
From 1994:
Rev. War by 1976:
But there's always those who want to reinvent the wheel.
Some may have since observed a flying ramrod or two at reenactments in spite of the warnings, but thankfully without injury... from a web search:
from 1978, From the Las Vegas Review:
Anyways, from 1998...
When such experiences occur and cause bodily injury or death, it will be one not soon forgotten.
Cannon rammers occasionally fly despite the care of cannon crews; usually from accidental discharges/cook-offs in loading.
From Fort Wayne, 1886:
From 1970:
and 1976:
The above led to a million dollar lawsuit.
Not a ramrod, but another reenactment musket ball accident...
Museum Musket accident...
All of the above incidents were "accidental" meaning the people involved (hopefully) had no intention for it to occur. That ranges from actual US soldiers of the 1860s, veterans post war, national guards, and reenactors, etc. The Civil War Centennial Committee recommended to watch out for such accidents, which historically pose a danger: and laying off the use of ramrods in battle reenactments has proven a good preventative probably.
When I was a young reenactor decades ago, when one fell in, their musket was instantly inspected to see that it was unloaded and clean; and their ammo checked to see that it included only blanks. And if for some reason we drew our ramrods during a battle reenactment we ignored the general instruction (for which, we were told, there was no excuse), our NCOs would have wrestled the gun from our hands. If one were inclined to argue about it, signaling they were incapable of learning by instruction, they were escorted from the field.
We were told there was two sides to the spectator-line. One side for reenactors, who followed tried and true reenactor rules, and the other side for everybody else. That said, Event and group rules differ in enforcement.
Other groups or events in recent years prefer the use of the ramrod, but I am under the impression these are smaller events, with few or no spectators, and the participants and site hosts aware of the risks.
Forum Host
Bringing the