Interesting comment from Shooting Industry Magazine

[Glenn E. Meyer]

This is from the current issue and a discussion of how training benefits gun stores:

“We sell at least one gun per class — in addition to student
tuition, of course,” Strayer said. “Typically, the buyer is either
someone who came with an unreliable low-price pistol, and
buys something better after the class, or someone who bought
an Airweight .38 for its size and found out it’s difficult and
uncomfortable to shoot well, so they buy something like a
GLOCK 19 or a compact Springfield XD or S&W SHIELD.

Words to take to heart, IMHO. I cringe sometimes when I see gun recommendations for carry on the Internet. Maybe I'm a snob but ...

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Words to take to heart, IMHO. I cringe sometimes when I see gun recommendations for carry on the Internet.

I can remmber when the collective gun shop wisdom was the best gun for a new shooter was a 2-3" .357 revolver. You could practice with .38 and then leave it loaded with .357 for serious business.

[Doyle]

I can remember when the collective gun shop wisdom was the best gun for a new shooter was a 2-3" .357 revolver.

That wasn't too terrible in the days of normal-weight snubnose revolvers. It was the proliferation of super light weight snubbies that changed things. I had one and agree that shooting it was significantly different than shooting my snubnose Security Six.

[Nathan]

So, this is why classes often ask question like how will you handle 3-5 attackers with rifles, or talk about wearing a jacket in the summer? I took several classes that had those images thrown out there.

When you throw those things out, you need a Glock 19, 3 mags and that built for 100deg direct sun jacket.

Or, maybe we could train for 1-2 attackers and carry a P9 + 1 extra mag under a light polo shirt or unbuttoned short sleeve.

Or God allowing...shorts with a cw380 in one pocket and mag in the other and no shirt???

But what if 5 guys with ak's shoot up the beach??? I'm good for 1-2....you?

[g.willikers]

Wonder if buying an easier to shoot gun trumps learning to shoot.
Just a thought.

[aarondhgraham]

Wonder if buying an easier to shoot gun trumps learning to shoot.
Just a thought.

It's a good thought though.

My answer is it does trump learning,,,
When the gun you have is very difficult to learn with.

One example is a lady friend of mine,,,
Her hubby bought her a Ruger LCR in .357 Mag.

When they divorced she decided to learn how to use it,,,
Even with pedestrian .38 special loads in it,,,
The recoil prevented any "learning".

She's not a dainty lady at all,,,
In fact she's 5'9" of barrel racing cowgirl.

She eventually bought a Bersa UC Pro in 9mm,,,
That pistol turned out to be something good to learn with.

Aarond

.

[pax]

Wonder if buying an easier to shoot gun trumps learning to shoot.
Just a thought.

Not either/or -- but both/and.

I've taught enough people to shoot over the years that I can tell you honestly: good gear does make a difference.

A lot of the popular concealed-carry guns we're seeing now, are frankly horrible for new shooters. They tend to create bad habits and make it much much harder for the shooter to learn what they need to learn. In some cases, they prevent learning altogether -- as is the case with a lightweight little gun that creates obnoxious recoil, and thus creates a nasty flinch (when it doesn't stop the shooter from practicing at all). Slides on tiny guns are harder to work than slides on real guns, controls harder to manipulate (on big guns, controls are harder to reach - pick your poison) and so on. All of that really does matter.

That said? Any gun will do, if YOU will do.

There is no gun that takes the place of education, training, and practice (those are three different things and they all matter).

There is no such thing as a gun that can be used safely and reliably by someone too ____ to learn how to use it.

One of the things I've learned, as a serious trainer, is to listen to the guys who came before me. They haven't always gotten everything right, but there's a lot of accumulated wisdom stacked up in those brains. Smart people learn from the experience of others. Anyway, here's what training great John Farnam has to say on the subject:

"There is no substitute for competent firearms training and continuous practice. When you've never taken lessons, it is unlikely you'll be able to suddenly sit down in front of a piano and make music, no matter how nice a piano it is!" – John Farnam

And that's the bottom line. Get some good gear to make your learning process easier. But don't expect the gear to teach you how to shoot.

Also: don't think shooting is all there is to defending yourself from violence. Those are two different things. Many a good shooter hasn't the foggiest idea how to effectively deal with violence.

pax

[BlueTrain]

I disagree. A piano is not a good comparison. But what about a car?

When you finally are old enough to get your learner's permit or driver's license, you probably haven't had one minute of professional instruction or even a single word of advice from your parents. But you've been sitting next to them for the previous fifteen years learning to drive. Is driving difficult? No, not really, although your parents may still not let you have the car on Saturday night. Is shooting a handgun at a target across the room difficult? No, not really. You don't have to go through a box of ammo every weekend to become proficient.

No, you won't do very well at the local practical shooting match or the target shooting match no more than you'd do very well at the local dirt track with your stock car on Saturday night. They don't really drive stock cars in a stock car race, though, do they? But you drive back and forth to work every day in all kinds of weather with nary a problem.

I realize it's only logical for a professional trainer to tell everyone they need all the training they can afford but it's a little like asking a barber if you need a haircut. But your last line says volumes. Ultimately, you have to be mentally prepared to kill someone. The mechanical part is easy.

[buckhorn_cortez]

A piano is not a good comparison

Actually, it is. There is an often quoted musical meme that says, "Owning a piano doesn't make you a musician - it makes you a piano owner."

The same thing can be said about guns. Owing a gun doesn't make you a competent shooter - it makes you a gun owner.

The gist of both being - it takes practice and dedication to becoming better to be a musician; and it takes practice and dedication to becoming better to be a competent shooter.

Piano / gun - not really all that much of a dichotomy.

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by BlueTrain

....Is shooting a handgun at a target across the room difficult? No, not really. You don't have to go through a box of ammo every weekend to become proficient....

You've made similar comments here before. I think what it boils down to is that you have very low standards and are easily satisfied.

As far as I'm concerned, most folks I see at the range are pretty lousy shots and pretty poor gun handlers. They might meet your standards for being proficient, but they don't meet mine.

Yes, I'm being judgmental; but I think that being judgmental gets an undeserved bad rap in our society. I think that there are some things which are appropriate to be judgmental about -- like one's safety and proficiency with deadly weapons.

[g.willikers]

Was it Jeff Cooper who said,
"This is the era of the common man, who is proving to be all too common."
Color me judgmental, too.
Whatever the activity, I'm most comfortable being around those who know at least as much as me, and preferably more.
Especially where there's an element of danger involved.
I much prefer being with folks where I don't have to worry about watching my back.
Could be why I'm still here.

[JC57]

It's not just new shooters that have problems with small, easy to conceal guns. I had professional training for a week while I was in the police academy, plus I was "into" shooting before and after that and practiced and trained to the point where my qualification scores were typically in the 98-100 range (out of 100) consistently. This was in the 1980s so we carried 4" .38s at the time. So I was a consistently good shot on the timed police qualification courses of the day.

In the mid 80s I moved into the detective division and bought the standard J-frame model 60 that was the typical plainclothes carry (meaning jacket and tie, not undercover). I could barely qualify with that thing, having to use the larger Pachmayr grips to do so, defeating the whole purpose of the small size.

Rather than depend on that, I switched to a 2 1/2" K-frame Model 66 and my qualification scores went back up to the upper 90s where they belonged. Part of that was because we fired a number of rounds at 25 yards and having the better sight picture was a big plus at that distance. That, and the trigger pull on that model 60 was miserable compared to the glass smooth action on the K-frame.

Nowadays, being retired from law enforcement and working in the private sector in a typical office job, I don't need to do semi-annual qualifications and my only concern is self defense rather than criminal apprehension, so my practice is typically at 15yds and shorter. My modern S&W 642 was purchased with a factory trigger job so that helped a lot with the trigger pull, and at those shorter ranges I have no problem putting rounds on target in center of mass but I am not the shooter I once was. I have also been shooting handguns for about 40 years now and am not particularly recoil sensitive. But I sure would not want to have to learn from scratch using the 642.

So in short - I agree that the best guns to learn and become proficient with are not necessarily the best guns to carry, and that even experienced shooters may have difficulty being effective with the smaller guns that are easy to conceal. Always a trade off.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Our local area is starting to run a monthly small gun match to get practice with such. Shooting a regular match with a J frame or 380 can be done.

I was surprised I did quite decently with a 642 or G42. I did take a snubby course and the G42 handles like a bigger Glock. When I hit a far steel with the 642, I got a round of applause.

I am not sanguine about folks who don't train or practice in a truly stressful incident. Sorry if one disagrees.

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by g.willikers

Was it Jeff Cooper who said,
"This is the era of the common man, who is proving to be all too common."....

I haven't seen where he's said exactly that. One of my favorite comments of his on "the age of the common man" was (Commentaries, 12/5, pg 25, emphasis in original):

...This preoccupation with equality is another symptom of the degeneracy of The Age of the Common Man. In the first place it is an illusion, since men are not created equal, except in the political sense. Everyone is better or worse than someone else in a particular example of his capacities, and pretending that this is not so is simply silly. Excellence, not mediocrity, should be everyone's goal, and it is hard to think of anything, from gardening to crossword puzzles, at which someone may not excel. In some cases, such as Benjamin Franklin or Theodore Roosevelt, excellence is quite obvious. But excellence need not be obvious in order to be worthy....

Here's another (Commentaries, 3/2, pg 7, emphasis in original):

...Funny we did not have all this trouble with accidental discharge, either with revolvers or with single−action auto−pistols, in my youth. Apparently nitwittedness is one of the flowers of the Age of the Common Man.....

And another (Commentaries, 8/1, pg 5, emphasis in original):

..As we hold discussion about errors in millennia and such, I propose the following titles for recent centuries. The 18th century was the Century of the Superior Man, producing as it did the minds of the Founding Fathers of the United States. The 19th century was the Age of the Industrious Man, during which machinery and machinists took over the world. The 20th century was (God Help Us!) the Age of the Common Man, so designated by Teddy Kennedy. And now the 21st century may be regarded as the Century of the Superfluous Man, since now we have machines to do our thinking for us. Surely you have noticed the extent to which thinking is going out of style....

[OldMarksman]

Posted by BlueTrain:

Is shooting a handgun at a target across the room difficult? No, not really.

No, not if you have been planning to do so and are ready to do it, the target is stationary, there's no hurry, and you are neither threatened nor under great stress.

But if you are ambushed--attacked by surprise--and you do not immediately recognize what is happening, your gun is not in your hands, the target is moving very fast, it's a life or death situation, and several very quick hits are needed to defend yourself, it's not a matter of how "difficult" it is, it's a matter of what you can do timely.

[T. O'Heir]

"We sell at least one gun per class..." is pretty much the purpose of gun shops running those classes.
"...practice with .38 and then leave it loaded with .357..." That is extremely bad advice for anybody. You need to practice with the ammo you intend carrying.
"...3-5 attackers with rifles..." You're in over your head with just a handgun. Give 'em the picnic basket.
"...5 guys with AK's...I'm good for 1-2..." At what distance? 5 guys with AK's trump one guy with a hand gun, every time.
"...monthly small gun match..." None of the shooting games are practice for anything. Better than nothing, but they're still just games.

[pax]

Originally Posted by Blue Train

I disagree. A piano is not a good comparison. But what about a car?

When you finally are old enough to get your learner's permit or driver's license, you probably haven't had one minute of professional instruction or even a single word of advice from your parents.

In Washington state, in order to even apply for a learner's permit, teenagers have to be signed up for a driver's training class. They cannot get a permit until they have signed up for the class, and the permit will become active within one week of the time the class starts. They can't get a permit before that.

To get the license, they have to finish the driver's training class (which in addition to a bunch of classroom time, also includes a minimum of 6 hrs behind the wheel being formally instructed by a professional trainer). *AND* they have to spend a minimum of 50 hours behind the wheel (10 of it at night) being supervised by an experienced driver who has been driving at least 5 years.

But you've been sitting next to them for the previous fifteen years learning to drive. Is driving difficult? No, not really, although your parents may still not let you have the car on Saturday night.

When he was 17, after going through the process above and finally getting his license, my second-born son rolled his vehicle, which eventually came to rest upside down. When I arrived on scene, he was crouched in the middle of the street, crying over the body of his best friend and saying over and over to the responders, "Have you seen my brother? He was in the truck too. Please find him!"

The first responders looked at me and gestured helplessly to the completely flattened passenger compartment. One of them said, "We're looking for your other son, ma'am, but ..."

We found his brother ten long minutes later.

Don't talk to me about how easy it is for young people to learn to drive.

Is shooting a handgun at a target across the room difficult? No, not really. You don't have to go through a box of ammo every weekend to become proficient.

That's quite true. As long as you have abysmally low standards and aren't under any stress whatsoever, shooting is easy.

No, you won't do very well at the local practical shooting match or the target shooting match no more than you'd do very well at the local dirt track with your stock car on Saturday night. They don't really drive stock cars in a stock car race, though, do they? But you drive back and forth to work every day in all kinds of weather with nary a problem.

Right. Carrying the gun around isn't that hard. Using it with reliable efficiency in a moment of life-threatening stress -- that's hard. Which is why action pistol games are somewhat more challenging than just standing in a booth and putting rounds more-or-less somewhere in the general vicinity of the paper.

That's also why 16,000 people a year (that's one every half hour or so) show up at hospital emergency rooms seeking medical treatment for unintentional gunshot injuries. This doesn't include suicides or homicides or assaults. Just arrogant ignoramuses who think they know how to handle a gun, because it's not that hard.

I realize it's only logical for a professional trainer to tell everyone they need all the training they can afford but it's a little like asking a barber if you need a haircut. But your last line says volumes. Ultimately, you have to be mentally prepared to kill someone. The mechanical part is easy.

Right. The only reason I might suggest other people get training is because I'm a professional trainer. (You know, I remember back in the days when "capitalism" wasn't a dirty word; it was what made America great. And I'm not really that old.)

And the only reason John Farnam might suggest that other people get training is because he's getting rich on it. (Hint: there's no fortune in firearms training.) His experiences in Vietnam, and the anger fueled by watching his friends die from the horrendously inadequate training they received before being sent into harm's way, had nothing to do with it. He's obviously on the make. (Note for the humor-impaired: find a sarcastic friend to explain this paragraph to you.)

But let me tell you a little about my background, and how I became one of those eeeeeeevvvvillll people who make money teaching other people how to protect themselves and the people they love.

When I first started shooting more than fifteen years ago, my husband and I had five young children at home, and our family lived entirely on my husband’s low-end salary. Not an easy life, just the one we deliberately chose in order to rear our own homegrown children. Neither time nor money were easy to come by in those years, but when I decided to keep a defensive handgun on my hip, I made the decision to do whatever it took to get good training. A family friend purchased my first class for me, as a gift and as an encouragement. Bless him!

After that, I worked my tail off to learn as much as I could possibly manage, despite our financial circumstances. I scrounged and I wheeled and dealed and I just plain worked at finding ways to do it. I owe a deep and abiding debt to the friends who worked out three-cornered barter deals with me to get me into classes. I sorted and recycled brass, worked grungy weekend jobs, traded babysitting with friends (since I had five and most have two, those swaps always took far more of my time than a straight across swap could have done). To save money on ammunition, I learned to reload even though I hate reloading. I volunteered as an RO so that I could be the fly on the wall in other people’s classes. I started writing articles for magazines so that I could beg for comp-spots in classes that weren’t quite filled. Then I turned around and used my “spare time” (hah!) to volunteer and help train others so I could pay my karmic debts as well as my personal debts of gratitude. And I remain very, very grateful to several specific people who saw my plight and took pity on me and helped me learn what I needed to learn.

Gun people are some of the best, most generous people in the world. If I state this more strongly than others might, it’s because I have more reason to know it than others do.

All of the above means that I do understand how hard it is to get training when you’re broke. I know something about not being able to buy classes outright, and having to get there “creatively.” I know about having to make hard choices and I know about the guilt that goes with making those choices. I know about being crunched for time and not having the resources you’d like to have in order to get the training you think you need. I know how embarrassing it can be to ask friends for ideas, and I know how eagerly good people will help when they see that you’re serious.

Finally, because I have had such depressingly thorough experience at being broke, I can tell you this much with brutal honesty: If something is important to you, you can find a way to do it, no matter how broke you are. If it’s not, you can always find an excuse not to.

pax

[Glenn E. Meyer]

"...monthly small gun match..." None of the shooting games are practice for anything. Better than nothing, but they're still just games.

This is an old debate but that's silly.

1. I have taken a snubby class from Claude Werner, one of the best trainers on this specific area.

2. How do you practice? Shooting a rock at Daddy's ranch or at a square target on a pay range - rather trivial.

The competitions (while not teaching tactics specifically), do give you skills practice at shooting at targets. Sometimes it is on the move. You practice reloads under speed, malfunction drills (with most guns - ha). Good clubs give you hints as to shooting problems.

You build motor skills for gun manipulation and accuracy.

So I ask you - how do you practice? Do you engage in FOF every weekend?

I note that local PDs around me are having their special teams compete to keep up skills and it is mandatory for some. I shoot with them at matches. Many experts emphasize that competitions are useful for skill improvement and maintenance.

I suppose some guy with a 5 shot revolver that they shot once is an instinctive gun master.

I prefer to learn how to use such a gun and then get practice with it beyond Daddy's rock at the ranch.

[pax]

Originally Posted by T. O'Heir

"...3-5 attackers with rifles..." You're in over your head with just a handgun. Give 'em the picnic basket.
"...5 guys with AK's...I'm good for 1-2..." At what distance? 5 guys with AK's trump one guy with a hand gun, every time.

From CNN, reporting on an incident that happened May 5, 2015:

Originally Posted by CNN report

(CNN)It wasn't a fair fight.

On one side, you had two men in body armor, toting assault rifles and showing every willingness to open fire now and count their victims later. On the other, you had a security officer -- a traffic officer by day -- with a pistol.

Somehow, the officer won.

..."When that car pulled up and stopped, those officers began to exit that vehicle, and two men exited the dark-colored sedan," Harn said. "Both of them had assault rifles, came around the back of the car and started shooting...

... "It speaks to his skill level," Fairburn, who is a firearms trainer for law enforcement, said of the Garland officer. "In terms of weaponry, he was far outgunned. But he was far better trained."

Every person reading this has the ability to get more training than that officer had, and to get better training than that off-duty officer's department ever paid for.

It's okay if you don't want to, for whatever reason. But don't tell yourself you can't, and don't tell yourself it's hopeless. One man with courage makes a majority.

As for me, if I'm going to die from a stupid terrorist attack, I'm going to die on my feet -- head up and trying hard to win. And in the meanwhile I'm going to get a decent level of training so that I can live a happy, alert lifestyle where I don't have to cringe and cower in fear every time some stupid terrorist event gets splashed all over the news.

pax

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by BlueTrain

...I realize it's only logical for a professional trainer to tell everyone they need all the training they can afford....

And let me say a little something about my background. I've helped teach shooting, primarily to complete novices, for over 15 years. That's included helping with NRA Basic Handgun classes, NRA Personal Protection classes, shotgun/wingshooting classes and coaching a youth trapshooting group. I have never accepted a penny for doing so.

In 2010 when I was invited to help Massad Ayoob teach a MAG-40 class in Sierra Vista, AZ, not only wasn't I compensated, but I paid my expenses out of my pocket.

For the last seven years or so, I've been with a group of instructors putting on monthly NRA Basic Handgun classes. None of us receive any compensation. We all have lengthy training resumes ourselves, including multiple classes at major schools, like Gunsite and Front Sight. But we volunteer our time and energy because we all believe in the importance of training. Foregoing compensation allows us to charge only enough to cover our expenses.

And even among instructors who are compensated, I don't know anyone who's getting rich at it.

[OldMarksman]

"We sell at least one gun per class..." is pretty much the purpose of gun shops running those classes.

I replaced my carry firearm after my last class.

The class was not run by a gun store. It's just that I learned enough in two full days to have a better idea about what to carry.

[jmhyer]

Everyone needs training. You can never get too much good training. You can never practice too much.

Having said that (and I certainly don't want to offend anyone), I am hesitant to go the next step and say that everyone who owns a gun should be REQUIRED to have training. After all, some of the activities we've discussed are privileges. Those are things for which training can be required. Keeping and bearing arms, on the other hand, is our right as citizens. And that right shall not be infringed.

[pax]

Originally Posted by jmheyer

Having said that (and I certainly don't want to offend anyone), I am hesitant to go the next step and say that everyone who owns a gun should be REQUIRED to have training.

Strong agreement here!

This sometimes surprises people who know what a big fan I am of training, but I am very much against any law that requires people to take a class before they’re allowed to carry a firearm for self defense. There are three reasons for this.

• Self defense is the most basic of all human rights. As a matter of principle, I oppose any government action that impinges on that right. I oppose any set of laws that creates a bureaucratic bottleneck through which human rights must squeeze.
  .
• Laws that make it harder for ordinary people to carry necessary tools for self defense have a disproportionate impact on the poor. As a matter of ethics, I oppose any government act that makes staying alive harder for people who already face an uphill struggle doing that.
  .
• Laws that require training often function paradoxically: they force people to take minimal training while making it less likely that they will pursue good training. As a practical matter, I oppose training-required laws because I’m a fan of ongoing, personally-motivated training that encourages each individual to reach the highest level they are able to achieve given their own unique set of needs and circumstances.

Taken together, these principles mean I am not a fan of any type of legally-required training under any circumstances whatsoever. The one possible exception I might be willing to entertain would be requiring some type of firearms safety education before graduating high school. But not if that education is later used as a condition for permission to exercise the basic human right to protect your own life.

Now, with that said, guns actually do require some level of knowledge and skill in order to be used effectively for self defense. On a practical level, if you’re not going to learn how to use the tool, it does not do you much good to own one. Of course it's anyone's right to make silly choices if they want to, but that doesn't mean they aren't silly.

pax

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I agree with Pax. My view is that while strict governmental training rules are not the best idea (should we have them for voting - that has a bad past).

If you are going to use a firearm in a manner that puts others at risk, you might want to have some competence and try to get that in accord with your available resources.

[BlueTrain]

I see that people have noted that I've made similar comments before. Well, my opinion stands. For those of you whose boys rolled the family car the first chance they did, where did they learn to drive like that? I see a lot of drivers who clearly need no training but rather restraint. Driver's education is probably useless by the time a teenager takes it. They've already learned all their parent's bad habits (and bad language). And someone here confirmed it, too. Is Washington State considered conservative or liberal?

Someone explain to my why you think hitting a man (it would have to be a man) sized target eight feet away is so difficult?

I've also said you can practice too much. How often have I read in this forum how certain guns are difficult to shoot and how much their hand hurts after shooting a box of ammo. You should be reminded that you'll never shoot up a box of ammo in a gun fight unless your firearm comes with a belt feed (some do). But I have also said that is problematic if you are like most people and have to shoot at an indoor range. The one I used to belong to had a lot of restrictions, others have even more, but obviously it's better than none. Anyway, doing a lot of shooting all at once in my opinion may do more harm than good, although the question of what a lot of shooting is remains. It would also tend to make you gravitate to a weapon that is simply easier to use. That's not necessarily a bad thing but out of step with a lot of people's ideas of an effective weapon. I still think some .380s are effective weapons.

Yes, you have a right to keep and bear arms and it says well-regulated, too. Join the militia if can. This country needs young men and women. This business of overthrowing a tyrannical government is very disturbing to voters, you know. That kind of talk is bad. The purpose of the militia, now referred to as the national guard (refer to your state laws) is to put down rebellion.

I have mixed feelings about competition. I've seen people do some amazing things in competition and others have total failures (jams). There is a certain amount of fads and fashions in competition, of course, and the ones that win use guns that are adapted to the course. Just like in club-type sports car competition, the ones that win are not the ones that drive their car to the event.

Don't mean to offend everyone. I'm pleased that anyone remembers what I've written at other times. I just hope I'm consistent. After all, I'm old and set in my ways; even a little stiff in places. But getting old is a sign you've doing the right things or you've just been lucky. Good luck is an essential element to all human endeavors. Make your own luck and don't miss with the first shot.