Amazed at the ignorance

[4V50 Gary]

I generally find women easier to train. Their difficulty is lack of grip strength (hard to do DA trigger pull) or ability to pull the slide.

BTW, I used to teach ready rest which is gun held down (I'm guessing 45 degrees). No full sabrina or half-sabrina. That's movie stuff. Most useful if you want the actor/actress' face and a firearm in one screen shot.

[Snyper]

Quote:
My intention was to point out the ignorance in teaching someone to aim first shot low and let the recoil bring follow up shots up

It's not "aiming"

It's rapid fire point shooting and it works very well.

I learned to do it over 50 years ago with a 357 revolver (shooting 38 Spcls), and could "stitch" a standard silhouette target from navel to head with 6 shots, drawing from the hip, in 4-5 seconds, with all shots in the "kill zone"

It's done when you don't have time to "aim"

[sliponby]

Yes, Snyper, the point shooting method you describe definitely has merit and is a tactic to use in a close-in defensive situation. However, as I pointed out in earlier posts, with new shooters you must keep it simple and instruct them on all the basics that most of us take for granted.

Once they've mastered the fundamentals (proper grip, stance, sight alignment/picture) and progress in their training, then you can move to more advanced tactics such as rapid fire point shooting.

Moving too fast in the training of a new shooter would be like trying to teach calculus to a first grader.

[zach_]

Back to the big box gun shop.

When I bought my pocket pistol, the guy selling it to me was somebody that I have talked to many times, and bought another gun from in the past. The salesman's co-worker (new guy), walked up and said that I needed several extra magazines with my S&W Bodyguard because the magazines wear out after 200 to 300 rounds. It looked like the guy that I was talking to wanted to strangle the other salesman. Another employee heard the comment, saw the reaction of the guy I was talking to, and asked the new guy to help him in another area. I have never seen the "new guy" again in that store. I stop there at least once a week.

[tirod]

So, it's bad to teach an effective technique that uses the natural reaction to gunfire to a student who needs a first time result?

As said, most of the time, the gun will sit in a drawer. New gun buyers get the gun, shoot a box or two, consider themselves adequate, and move on. They now have a security blanket to soothe their distressed feelings watching their neighborhood/town changing in ways they don't want and can't fix.

Most are trapped in their home and can no longer sell for what it would take to move. It's an older neighborhood, as their contemporaries pass on, the kids - who wouldn't live there on a bet - are renting it out. From the perspective of a property owner, the neighbor starts getting sketchy.

"We need a gun!" becomes an answer.

Spending hours at a range or joining a club isn't their cup of tea - they just want something to intimidate the potential home intruder. Frankly, all the boring classroom exercise and paper shooting isn't getting them up to speed.

The old jarhead put it in a working perspective for them - it may have been "rude" to intrude on the conversation, but - no telling maybe he was a multiple tour combat veteran (unlike the poster who claims all Marines aren't all that.) He's been there done that, the functional results of training boiled down to how to put down the target as quickly and effectively as possible.

That IS NOT the point of NRA handgun training - one that is implicity expressed in their choice of targets vs those used in shoot-move competition. NRA prefers the non political bullseye, competition uses silhouettes. Images of human beings, to be more blunt.

That line in the sand is why so many won't go to NRA classes - the effective point of the teaching is the fundamentals of precision shooting, whereas CCW and other instructors focus on effective defense against aggressive humans.

How the couple received the ol jarheads advice is something else - typically we do see it as an intrusion into the conversation. I sell auto parts, and it happens about a dozen times daily. For the most part I don't refer to the mechanic who might be standing there - it's HIS decision to get involved based on what his schedule is that day. Many do, tho. As for the others, the sooner you can disengage the better. And sometimes the phone won't ring soon enough.

The point tho is that there are some who only have more ignorance to express - but - on the rare instance, you get a different point of view that causes the listener to rethink what they were trying to solve.

Me, .22 International target shooter in High School, doing moderately well. Those trigger discipline skills transferred very nicely to marksmanship on a mowed grass range. But - as training scenarios kept pointing out - hostile moving targets are another discipline entirely. Instead of a steady bullseye waiting to be perforated, the live human is doing everything they can to overcome your skill and defeat you.

If you have to use the natural recoil of the weapon and target the pelvis first, working up, why not? It's going to happen anyway, you don't have to manhandle the handgun, you can drive it and use it's natural recoil tendencies in your favor. For the new shooter, they learn a natural and aggressive technique that will inspire confidence in their immediate lethality and which does work. Combat shooting is something entirely different from square range target shooting as I learned 22 years USAR.

At this point I have to ask - how much combat shooting experience does the OP have? Or, less politely, how much do they know about it to question a tactic?

Ol jarhead may have been doing everyone a favor - he gave the buyers a reality check about what they really plan to use the weapon for, and introduced the idea that maybe it's not going be what they think. NRA isn't combat - even the targets represent that.

[poboyspecial]

Yes, I have ran into a couple of firearms "salesmen" who were more interested in selling a particular brand or caliber, and not focused on the purpose of the purchase. Listen to the customer... they will let you know the need.

[sliponby]

As I stated earlier, tirod, I do not claim to be an "expert". I go to the recognized experts for training such as Tom Givens, Gabe Suarez and Tiger McKee. I'm going back to Tiger McKee in November for more training. I have much to learn. No, I've never been in combat or in a gunfight, thank God, and pray I never will.

I agree, the NRA plays it "politically correct" in asking their instructors to not use humanoid targets. They even ask that we not use the term "weapon" when referring to a gun. However, they have put together an outstanding program for NEW, inexperienced shooters in the NRA Basic Pistol Course. They get a large packet of materials with textbook and brochures covering concealed carry, holster selection, SAFETY, and more. I have a wide variety of pistol sizes, calibers and platforms that I demonstrate to the class and for them to use on the range. They will know a striker fired Glock from a DA/SA Sig and a single action only 1911. Same with revolvers. They learn all the terminology by seeing and handling and asking questions.

The classroom portion, with the powerpoint presentation, introduces the student to a wide and in-depth array of knowledge. They learn many things related to this field such as different types of ammo; different pistol platforms, and the fundamentals of proper grip, sights, etc. You would be surprised at how little most new shooters know.

I am fortunate to have land with a range and a dwelling for indoor class. We go to the range after lunch where I have one or two (depending on class size) active LEO's as my assistants. One has had combat experience in Afghanistan. The instruction the students received in the classroom gives them a foundation of knowledge and confidence that will help them progress when the firing starts on the range. I start new shooters with Ruger SR22;s (I have 4) and progress them to a 9mm as soon as they're ready, usually after about 50 rounds of .22 cal. Once we see they have the fundamentals down (grip, sight alignment/picture, etc.) they are usually chomping at the bit to go to a 9mm. We help them overcome any fears they may have that will hinder their progress. They leave at the end of the day with a great START on the road to becoming proficient with a firearm.

Me and my assistants know why most of our students are coming to us. The majority, 60%, are female and they are concerned for their safety and want to learn how to use a pistol to defend themselves. We discuss their fears and concerns and my LEO assistants are invaluable in this area. We want them to be ready to stop a threat if need be. We do our best to give them a good start.

So, an expert I'm not. I'm constantly on the prowl for knowledge; from forums such as this; my training from recognized experts in this ever evolving field of firearms training; and even my students who challenge me to keep progressing.

You can check out my website, www.defensivefirearmstraining.net if you like.
I encourage anyone with the knowledge and skills to help the new and inexperienced shooters. They far outnumber those of us with some experience. Sorry for going on so long. I'm not a big forum poster but I follow you guys regularly and I'm always learning from y'all. For that you have my gratitude.

[F. Guffey]

I've used running away as fast as I could--worked for me.
__________________

That does not work for everyone, I run like a tree. I have had some very interesting days.

F. Guffey

[Double Naught Spy]

I really think there was a good bit of ignorance on both sides of the conversation of two well-intentioned parties who both think they had the best information and both of whom failed to realize the merits of the other's considerations. Vanity is a thing.

[g.willikers]

sliponby,
Boy, you've really thrown yourself into the fray.
Good for you and for your students.
One thing you could add to your agenda is using blowback airsoft replicas for the first step, even before the .22 rimfires.
The airsoft guns can be incorporated in the classroom, to help new folks get past the fear of making deadly mistakes that can plague them for quite awhile.
The ones that are licensed by the major gun makers are very realistic and pretty much shoot like a rimfire, anyway.
Just a thought.

[FireForged]

Yes, Snyper, the point shooting method you describe definitely has merit and is a tactic to use in a close-in defensive situation. However,

can we not simply concede that what the old Marine said has some realistic merit but perhaps its not something you should cover in the first 15 minutes of a persons "formal" introduction to shooting.

[sliponby]

[QUOTE]can we not simply concede that what the old Marine said has some realistic merit but perhaps its not something you should cover in the first 15 minutes of a persons "formal" introduction to shooting.[QUOTE]

I believe you nailed it FireForged.

[kraigwy]

Everyone has their opinion on what's the best gun for this and that.

The opinions are not necessary wrong. It may be right for them, but not for the next guy who has different needs, he may be of a different size, he may have some sort of handicap.

ONE SIZE DOESN'T FIT ALL.

Even the OP, in the first post recommends a mid size semi with the 9MM. That may work for him, but it wouldn't work for me. Not saying he's wrong, not saying I'm wrong. We could both be right.

When I conduct a class students always ask what gun should they buy. What should they bring to the class.

I say don't buy a gun until they've been in the class for a while.

Our club provides a variety of guns for the students to try. Only after they determine their needs and try several deferent guns then THEY THE STUDENT determines what's best for them.

Even if they bring their own gun to the class, I insist they still try as many different guns as possible.

Take the mid size semi in 9mm mentioned in the original post. I have a couple, I like them, I'm quite fond of the Beretta 92FS. My wife cant draw the slide back. I've taken her to several gun stores to try every semi we can find to find one she can operate the slide. Only found one and that was a Ruger 22

Yes I know the method of getting small women to rack the slide. But my with broke her back twice, the has three rods between her shoulder blades. She simply cannot work the slide. She carries a Smith J frame and shoots it quite well.

Once side does not fit all. Guns, shoes, trucks or cars. We are all different.

I've seen a lot of firearms instructors over the years, (the last 50 plus), good ones and bad ones.

I've learned from a lot of instructors over the years, good ones AND BAD ones.

You can learn something from anyone if we listen. We can even learn from the would be expert we like to condemn that we meet a gun counters .

The real ignorance is to discount people because we disagree with them on a certain subject. There is something we can learn from everyone. We just need to listen instead of condemning.

An example, I had an 82 year old lady in my women's self defense/firearms safety class. She had no experience with guns until the class. She said why don't we do X, hmmm, I've been a certified LE firearms instructor since 77, a military firearms instructor long before that. I never hard of X, I now use X in all my classes dealing with that style gun.

Where we screw up is when we stop learning or shut out people we don't agree with.

[Stevie-Ray]

Once on the range I start them out with a .22 cal semi-auto (SR22), allow them to grasp the fundamentals of proper grip, sight alignment/picture, etc. then move them to a 9mm.

Of all the ladies I taught to shoot, I never found a single one that complained about this logic. Some wanted to go further up the scale of blast and recoil, to find out if they could indeed, handle more. Some ended up with .45 ACPs. By far, most preferred to stay with 9mm, many didn't even want to try more.

On the groin shots, in the 90s, it was being taught to at least one Metro-Detroit PD, as my BIL, during one of our range trips, remarked that they were being taught 1 COM, 1 in the groin, supposedly in case of body armor.

[BlueTrain]

I can easily see how teaching civilians how to use a firearm can be very difficult, at least compared with teaching soldiers in basic training. For one thing, they're all going to go out and acquire whatever handgun or long gun that strikes their fancy, although the instructor may have had considerable influence in the matter. And also, the instructor can't really force those in the class to do anything. That is, his only remedy is to drop the person from the class. Soldiers are the for the duration, so to speak. But a civilian instructor, on the other hand, can teach whatever he cares to teach, after a fashion.

Regarding the groin shot, I suspect that the really good instructors teach how to shoot the gun from the other person's hand. That's how it used to be done on television, after all. It's harder than it looks, though.

[Tuzo]

Don't recall when Louisiana concealed carry began but about 1992 a few coworkers were acquiring their CCW. The lunch time discussion centered on the firearm they were going to buy based on "stopping power." Fables started making their rounds and the favorite was - y'all must have guessed by now - the magical .45ACP.

Military experience taught me the importance of good training. Mentioned this to the lunch table bunch. They kind of discounted it and said they practiced enough at the range. I left them to their fantasies but not before explaining that, without proper training, in a nervous situation they will either 1) pee in their pants or 2) shoot themselves in the foot or 3) end up with wet pants and a bleeding foot.

[sliponby]

BlueTrain posted: I can easily see how teaching civilians how to use a firearm can be very difficult, at least compared with teaching soldiers in basic training.

One of my assistant instructors is an LEO and an instructor in his department. After the first class he did assisting me he remarked at how much more difficult it was working with new shooters with little or no experience as opposed to his LEO students. He even asked if I ever considered wearing a vest...

[Glenn E. Meyer]

It's common in beginner classes for the students to want to talk about stopping power and gun types over how to actually use the gun, mindset and tactics.

[sicumj]

That is an excellent point and not used often in training senereos for ccw. Recently took mine (ccw) test recently with my family. Focus was on the merrits of the 9mm the NRA instructors go to weapon. Very little talk on awareness or avoidness of dangerous situations.

[g.willikers]

Unfortunately, too many folks think their CCW class is all the training they need.
Not knowing what they don't know, they think they are prepared.
Too bad the people conducting the CCW classes don't emphasize to their students on the need for further training.

[FireForged]

Unfortunately, too many folks think their CCW class is all the training they need.

In many cases it might be and at the same time those who have never taken a ccw class may be capable enough to successfully defend themselves against criminal attack. Training is good and more training is better but I tend to shy away from diminishing a persons willingness to fight by suggesting they are not good enough.


Training certainly has an impact on how well a person will fight or how effective your defense in varying circumstances. I am always a proponent of training BUT: If a person is prepared mentally to fight and has physical ability to fight and has reasonable knowledge of how you use the weapon they carry.. then they are in fact prepared to fight. Fighting prowess is an entirely different subject altogether. Prepared also has alot to do with what you are up against

[BlueTrain]

This may get me in trouble but I don't think the average person needs a lot of training to effectively use a handgun. That is, beyond actually being familiar with how the thing actually works. It really isn't that complicated. Of course, if you're like many people here, you have a whole box full of guns that work slightly differently. Most folks have just one gun if they have one at all. It's all those people with 20 guns that push the average up.

I'm still astonished at the amount of weekly shooting some folks say they do. to shoot 250 rounds a week out of anything should make you an accomplished trick shot, probably much better than Elmer Keith and maybe even Skeeter Skelton. Are you folks that good?

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by BlueTrain

This may get me in trouble but I don't think the average person needs a lot of training to effectively use a handgun. That is, beyond actually being familiar with how the thing actually works. It really isn't that complicated....

On the other hand, most people I see at the ranges I frequent consistently display atrocious gun handling and abysmal marksmanship. Perhaps managing a gun isn't that complicated, but it sure seems to be too complicated for a lot of people (at least until they get some decent, basic instruction).

A lot of folks seem to have no trouble making their guns fire, but they have a lot of trouble getting decent hits on target.

[g.willikers]

It depends on what is meant by the effective use of a handgun.
Knowing how to safely shoot and hit a target is one thing.
Knowing how to survive a deadly encounter is quite another.
As the saying goes, when it comes to staying alive, the gun is the least of it.
The knowledge for doing so only comes with training focused specifically on the subject.

[g.willikers]

to shoot 250 rounds a week out of anything should make you an accomplished trick shot, probably much better than Elmer Keith and maybe even Skeeter Skelton.

That works out to a mere 13K rounds a year.
Top shooters and especially trick shots do a whole lot more than that.
Probably at least 4 or 5 times as much, according to interviews they've given.
We ordinary hacks have little idea of the effort it takes to be really, really good.