|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
February 10, 2009, 06:47 PM | #76 |
Junior Member
Join Date: January 12, 2009
Location: Illinois
Posts: 8
|
Good thread. Thank you for posting, Gax.
__________________
Madferit. |
February 10, 2009, 06:49 PM | #77 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 5, 2008
Location: Renton, WA
Posts: 462
|
I was going to move along but some nut just pushed the wrong guy
Glaxicus,
Hmm, you just pushed the wrong button in me today. I was going to totally drop this thread and let it go. Where - ever you nut will take it. I was going to go away. But I think I'll take you up on your logic here. And attack. Not letting this go. No no no. I will review in pain staking detail over and over on this thread. As you probably know I do quite a bit. So, we will begin. Oh, after this short break... I have to go back to my patient :-) But, before I go. Let's do talk about credentials here. Oh, how did you put it? Hmm, oh measuring my penis to yours. I guess you don't have one since there is nothing to put up on the table. Will Be back.
__________________
"Shoot Safetly, Shoot Often and Share Your Sport." Jim Scoutten, Shooting USA Check out my new website: www.shootonthemove.org |
February 10, 2009, 06:52 PM | #78 | |||||
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by David Armstrong; February 10, 2009 at 06:58 PM. |
|||||
February 10, 2009, 06:55 PM | #79 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 28, 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 172
|
Quote:
Last edited by Gaxicus; February 10, 2009 at 07:25 PM. |
|
February 10, 2009, 07:22 PM | #80 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 16, 2000
Location: In a state of flux
Posts: 7,520
|
Hey everyone,
Take a deep breath. Think twice, post once. Thanks. pax |
February 10, 2009, 07:24 PM | #81 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 28, 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 172
|
One thing at a time
Quote:
Im going to try and distill things as best I can to the points of contention. Has this ever happened to you? All of the safety, technical, legal, and shooting is done. A person got through all of that fine comes up to you and expresses that even after everything they learned, they just cant see themselves shooting another human being. What is your approach to this circumstance? Thats what I am talking about here. Not most people, not average people, but these people. I've been chastized for not giving personal information or qualifications. I gave my reasons and said anything I say should stand on its own. You claim 30 years of experience and a PHD in your profile. With all of that, why so hesitant to offer up your approach here to the same scrutiny you are so willing to dish? I dont just mean this as part of a silly arguement. I, and probably many reading this thread, are very interested in how someone with your qualifications would approach this. |
|
February 10, 2009, 07:37 PM | #82 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 15, 2008
Location: Indiana
Posts: 286
|
Gaxicus, maybe you can find some of the information you are looking for at these sites.
http://www.faculty.mcneese.edu/armstrng/ http://pages.prodigy.net/darm441/index.html
__________________
Luck runs out. Boiler Up! |
February 10, 2009, 07:43 PM | #83 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: January 28, 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 172
|
A vote for not locking the thread?
Quote:
If you look at the part where Pax takes me to task it is really good stuff. I dont think we agree or disagree in huge ways but anyone reading that is going to get a full look at the issue without name calling or a pointless penis waving contest. Quote:
|
||
February 10, 2009, 07:46 PM | #84 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 28, 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 172
|
Quote:
Last edited by Gaxicus; February 10, 2009 at 08:02 PM. |
|
February 10, 2009, 08:06 PM | #85 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 28, 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 172
|
Lets move on
Quote:
Im sure you have stories or an approach that worked well for you. Please share a tidbit or two. |
|
February 10, 2009, 08:24 PM | #86 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 27, 2008
Posts: 1,032
|
Small game hunting . Than clean it & eat it.
For the one's no sure of protecting themself's. |
February 10, 2009, 08:35 PM | #87 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 28, 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 172
|
Quote:
Is that kind of where you are going with that? |
|
February 10, 2009, 09:10 PM | #88 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 28, 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 172
|
Rethinking "Predator Killer"
An open invitation to anyone who has read the entire thread, or at least the exchange between myself and Dax, to revise or replace the "Predator Killer" in the circumstances it was used.
I know it, or the words used in it, evoked a lot of discussion. I remain convinced I am onto something but must admit that it needs work, some would say trashing altogether. I asked for help improving it in the very post I outlined it in. So rather than just having people post criticisms of it, lets start building something that works better. Here is the scenario I want to address: A person learns safety, operation, troubleshooting, and marksmanship in a self defense class. The legal and ethical stuff has been gone over, they get it and pass all segments no problem. Then they approach you explaining that even with all that they have learned, they just cant see themselves shooting another human being under any circumstances. So, there they are with their new gun, they know they are unlikely to be able to use it, they are looking to you to help them, what do you say? One of my biggest concerns is that they will keep the gun and when they need it most, the predator will end up with it. Clearly there are a lot of mental and emotional obstacles on the part of the person asking for help. What is your approach? |
February 10, 2009, 09:21 PM | #89 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 1, 2007
Location: East Texas
Posts: 997
|
Talk to them about the four rules of gun safety, take them to the range a couple of times to re-enforce safety/handling. Show them where deadly force laws in TX are on the Internet.
Encourage them to take a real intro and intermediate shooting class and to at least come watch an IDPA or IPSC match. |
February 10, 2009, 09:53 PM | #90 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
Quote:
Interestingly, I did see once in FOF with a guy who claimed he was a big deal martial artist. Many folks teach mindset with terms that probably won't bite you in court. Also, in a DGU - you probably won't kill anybody - so can we talk about what usually happens as compared to fantasy blood/death scenarios? Here is the point - you have to be ready to use the gun - as Ayoob says (if one reads him - surprising to have missed that book) - deal with the Question - can you use lethal force. But someone who teaches should not say you will probably kill someone - that indicates a lack of knowledge of what actually happens. It's like the folks who say if someone comes into their house, they will be dead. No - you should be ready to act. So if one teaches Quote:
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
||
February 10, 2009, 10:29 PM | #91 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: May 16, 2000
Location: In a state of flux
Posts: 7,520
|
Gaxicus ~
You need to go back and re-read, maybe. I don't so much object to the words you used. But I do object -- strongly! -- to the entire concept you were expressing with those words. Earlier, you said something (to another poster) that showed how thoroughly you'd missed my original point. And you are still missing it. So let me try again. Here's what you said: Quote:
Unfortunately, immediately after that is where we part ways. And I think, if you look around on this thread, you will find a lot of very qualified people telling you the same thing: the goal of self-defense is NOT killing the attacker. The goal of self-defense is ... (drumroll please) ... SELF-DEFENSE. You do whatever it takes to defend yourself and you keep doing it until you know you are safe. You stop immediately as soon as you are safe. That's self-defense. So despite what you've said above, this isn't about the words you use. It isn't a plea to be gentler or kinder or whatever nonsense you've ascribed to this idea. This is a serious conversation about the goal you're presenting to your students. By telling your students that the goal is to kill the attacker, you're doing a disservice to your students. You're giving them a goal that is likely to lead them into practical and tactical trouble immediately, and into legal trouble later. Tactical trouble? Sure! Just as the martial artist trains to strike through the attacker (or the innocent pine board standing in for an attacker in the dojo), an intelligent person training for self-defense always, always, always keeps the ultimate goal in mind, striking through the attacker to the ultimate goal of survival and escape. Focusing on the attacker's death is stopping too soon, tactically speaking. As I said earlier: Quote:
**** Setting that aside for something even further back, more foundational, in your philosophy. I'm increasingly disturbed by the attitude I see in your posts toward your students. Frankly, as a student myself I would have a difficult time learning from an instructor who had as much contempt for me as your posts appear to express toward your students. My own philosophy toward beginning defensive shooters is simply this: they purchased guns for self-defense because they have made the decision that their lives are worth defending. They enrolled in a class because they already understand that using a firearm in self-defense is deadly serious stuff. So I believe these folks are adults who are capable of making their own choices when given good information, so they don't need cheerleading or brow-beating. They don't need motivational speeches or emotional tricks. What they need is good, solid instruction in the basics, including physical skills, some understanding of defensive tactics, and the legal underpinnings of lawful self-defense in our society. They need trigger time, realistic targets, and an honest discussion of the social, legal, and physical aftermath of shooting events. With those elements in place, there's no adult on the planet who would somehow fail to grasp that using a gun constitutes lethal force – and these educated people are much more emotionally and psychologically prepared to cope with the realities of self-defense than is someone who merely responded to an emotional pep talk full of powerful buzzwords. Defensive firearms students do need to come to the place where they are emotionally, psychologically, morally, and ethically okay with the idea of deliberately taking an attacker's life. No question about that. My contention is that a little more respect for your students' decision making process would go a long way in your credibility here. They're adults! Of course when you talk to people who have not yet been educated about the realities of self-defense, they are going to express some pretty silly ideas. Sometimes the newly educated haven't yet absorbed the full impact of what they've been taught, and they'll also have some strangely offbeat thoughts. But the way to get those silly ideas out of them isn't by browbeating them with emotional appeals. It's by educating them and presenting what they need to know. When given the full information they need, they'll make the right decision for themselves, and won't need the empty-of-content but full-of-emotion pep talk. If they are motivated only by a pep talk, they might walk out of your class feeling pretty good and energized and enthusiastic ... but it won't last. It'll wear off. Emotions always do. True education doesn't wear off. It changes the shape of the student's mind forever. A mind that's been stretched by a new idea, even one it later rejects, never returns to exactly its former shape... pax |
||
February 10, 2009, 11:00 PM | #92 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 16, 2000
Location: In a state of flux
Posts: 7,520
|
Moving along ...
Quote:
And I stop there. It is up to the student to make the connection for him- or herself from that point. And they do ... sometimes awhile later. As an example of this type of process, one friend of mine attended LFI-1, then put her gun away for nearly three months while she emotionally digested the class. She re-armed a few months after the class and has never stepped out of her house unarmed since then. She says that class deeply affected her because she suddenly understood the huge responsibility the firearm represented, and that it caused her to pull out her ethics and really look at them. That's a meaningful change -- though probably not within the comfort zone of enough instructors who want to force their students into the right mindset immediately. You just gotta have a little faith in what you're presenting, and enough faith in your students to let them find their own paths. pax |
|
February 10, 2009, 11:17 PM | #93 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 22, 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,222
|
Advice on new gun owners?
You know when I got my first gun, I wasn't sure how or exactly when I would use it (in a tight situation), defending myself or my family. I asked a lot of people what they thought (especially my LEO friends). Most said these three things:
1. Go to the range and practice shooting larger targets (center of mass). As you get more proficient, move target back and practice at that range and maybe go to smaller size targets. Then mix up the distance, close and up to 7-15 yards for example. After this, you will feel a lot more confident in handling your weapon (no matter the caliber). This is very important, because a lot of folks buy guns and end up never practicing loading/unloading and firing their guns. They have no confidence and when and if the time comes to have to use deadly force, they will no doubt have big problems. 2. After you have become proficient and confident with your weapon, you next need to become DELIBERATE........... This is extremely important. You must decide ahead of time what you will do if the time ever comes to defend yourself. It is a mind set that becomes easier as your think more about it. Plan ahead what you would do if you or your family member's life is ever placed in danger. How are you going to react? No time to really give it a lot of thought because you may just have seconds to react. Think about how would you handle different scenarios, at your home, auto or other areas (if you have a carry permit). 3. When and if the time ever comes, (React with a purpose and do not hesitate). When and if you are forced to have to use your weapon, USE IT................. I hope the day never comes that I have to put these steps in action. But, if it does, I know (without a doubt) that I will do what I have been training to do to, (protect myself and my family). Good luck to you. Last edited by skydiver3346; February 11, 2009 at 06:10 PM. |
February 11, 2009, 12:41 AM | #94 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 28, 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 172
|
Firearms are not tasers
Quote:
Ive spent some time shooting with police officers, on average, they arent super marksmen by any stretch but they are probably a bit better than the average joe. If you can hit your attacker in a shooting 15% of the time and fire 3-4 times per target with formal training, you can match the generally accepted shooting proficiency of the police. Interestingly, the revolver hit percentage was 25% in an older study. If you want to use stats, studies, etc, fine. But before you go crazy quoting them and quibbling over a few points, deal with this one. Depending on the statistics you want to use, 91-99% of the time a gun is used defensively, it is never fired. Statistically speaking, maybe we dont need training, to be able to pull the trigger, or even bullets. I dont think Im going to rely on those statistics to defend my life or family. I dont think anyone should. My point is let the numbers fall where they may, make your own choices and do your part to protect yourself. Whatever an "expert", statistics, or surveys might say, firearms are considered a lethal weapon in every state of the union. Use of a gun in a defensive situation is considered using a lethal weapon. Suggesting otherwise is not only incorrect but irresponsible. |
|
February 11, 2009, 12:48 AM | #95 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 27, 2008
Posts: 1,032
|
Quote:
No not quite. PAX has it all covered from A-Z & 1 to Infinity......gezzzz. I most definitely would not want to be on your bad side PAX . Excellent information PAX |
|
February 11, 2009, 01:18 AM | #96 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 28, 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 172
|
Adults
Quote:
I have struggled with what to do about that situation for quite some time. The only thing I would really take issue with is that I don’t think it is enough to say "you shouldn’t carry a firearm" and drop it at that. A list of decisions they need to make, some book references, maybe even a web site that specifically addresses this issue could really help people "digest" what they are truly undertaking. It probably wouldn’t hurt to make it a prerequisite for the class. There is really only one more major thing. In the above quote you chastise me for not treating people like adults. It could be argued that soft selling or avoiding the psychological issues and the harsh realities of defensive firearm use is treating people like children. I believe people need to face this stuff head on. I think that is treating them like adults. Again, I liked what you wrote. Im probably going to reread it again to make sure I didn’t miss anything I should respond to. Thanks again. |
|
February 11, 2009, 03:30 AM | #97 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 30, 2009
Location: Hamilton, Ohio
Posts: 213
|
just an observation
After reading and rereading just to be sure I still knew the point of the thread and it being based in tactics and training I would assume "The best advice we can give to new gun owners".... "who are planing to use it for home/personal defense" is the topic.
__________________
Basics VS Marlboros both will kill you one just tastes better Ohios Firearm Classifieds profirearm.com |
February 11, 2009, 04:29 AM | #98 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 28, 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 172
|
Nice read
I enjoyed reading that. Thank you.
Points taken. |
February 11, 2009, 01:20 PM | #99 | |||
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by David Armstrong; February 11, 2009 at 01:28 PM. |
|||
February 11, 2009, 04:35 PM | #100 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 7, 2008
Location: Upper midwest
Posts: 5,631
|
Interesting, thought-provoking thread.
Pax, thank you for doing such a fine job of pulling this one back from the realm of anatomical invective -- I was a little surprised to see it still open today. And thanks to all who've responded intelligently to each other's points of view. I've been following this from the perspective of a fairly new (5 years or so) gun owner, one who has struggled a lot with the issues raised here. I think Pax has it exactly right when she stresses the need to think in terms of self-defense -- survival, not killing someone, is the primary objective. But the words we use do matter: they influence how we think and how others see us. And a term like "predator killer"... I dunno, it sounds sort of like we're not talking about actual human beings any more, but some sort of animals. "Predators" is a popular term, around here, for "bad guys," violent criminals -- I've used it that way myself. But I'm wondering right now if this is a way of dehumanizing people we see as dangerous, and if so, is that a good idea? As a potential student rather than an instructor, I don't think I'd want to take any kind of self-defense training that encouraged me to think of a person who threatens me, no matter what he does, as less than human. OK, a rotten one, maybe -- but still a human being. I will do what I have to do to keep myself from being a victim, but it's the hell of a responsibility: I really, sincerely hope I never have to shoot someone in self-defense, no matter how much justification there is, and I don't think I want to try to "prepare myself" by thinking about potential attackers as less than human. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|