Amazed at the ignorance

Quote:
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.
Click to expand...
True. Having said that, that comes out to more than 1,000 rounds a month.

Outside of fellow gun nuts, how many PoPo shoot even close to that? How many BGs? Absent the rarified air of higher echolon competition shooters and real paid tactical shooters, there's statistically very few people who shoot that much.
 
I said around San Antonio, there is probably a core of several hundred competitive shooters that shoot about 300 to 600 shots a month. A match usually takes about 150 ish rounds and quite a few folk shoot 2 to 4 a month.

That includes the IDPA, USPSA, cowboy and Steel challenge folks.

As far as police, we get a few. Some of the higher end officers (marksman unit, SWAT) are required to compete at some set number of times.
 
I think that at some point, it becomes a matter of diminishing returns for the time, effort and money expended, nothing more. In fact, at some point additional practice (shooting, that is) may even be detrimental, although I won't suggest what that point might be.

All practice and training have built-in shortcomings. For one thing, they tend to be done in relatively brief and infrequent periods, unless you're a professional shooter with your own facility. And for another, cost quickly looms large if you're paying for everything yourself. I'm not suggesting, however, that doing a lot of shooting isn't fun by no means, only that it won't necessarily increase your combat shooting ability to the same degree. By the same token, it shouldn't hurt it, either, unless you shoot to the extent that your hand and wrist begins to hurt.

On the other hand, maybe there are a lot of people who have more disposable income than I do. Most of my disposable income has already been disposed of.
 
I haven't been shooting as long as many here.
I haven't been shooting as much as I like lately. As the Summer draws to a close I may have more posts than rounds down range this year. That is sad to think about.

Still, I have thousands and thousands of rounds down range from a number of pistol and caliber combinations. I have no interest in a 40SW over a 9mm.
 
Then there is that part about becoming a victim. I have refused to be a victim. I have had some very interesting days.

F. Guffey
 
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.
Click to expand...
It certainly didn't me. I was shooting more than 500 a week at one time, though not through the winters of those years, only to prepare myself for IPSC. Granted, not all of that was for my .45, but that alone was probably 300 of my own reloads. I did become quite good with it and my friends all said I could shoot circles around them, but I certainly wouldn't have compared myself to those names.
 
IPSC originally was training and practice for the real thing. Then many 'gamers' took over and many of us left !! :mad:
Same with Sporting Clays ,originally training and practice for hunting , now has become just a game for many with their fancy guns. :mad:
 
Things are what one makes of them.
The action type competitions may well have become games, but they can still provide plenty of good practice for gun handling and quick shooting.
Very good skills to have.
 
IPSC originally was training and practice for the real thing. Then many 'gamers' took over and many of us left
Click to expand...

if they use a timer at the expense of tactics or strategics, how was it ever "training".
 
FireForged said:
if they use a timer at the expense of tactics or strategics, how was it ever "training".
Click to expand...
Because it's not about tactics or strategy. It is about basic skills -- shooting quickly and accurately; target identification; engaging multiple targets; moving safely with a loaded gun; safe and efficient gun handling; firing effectively from unconventional postures; etc.

Tactics and strategy are important, but one won't be able to really make use of tactical and strategic skills if he can't execute by managing his gun and shooting effectively.
 
There's no reason tactics and strategies can't be incorporated into action games courses of fire.
For example, the "Peek & Poke".
A single target with a no shoot tightly attached.
Shooter begins hidden behind a barricade.
At the sound of the buzzer, they peek out just enough to clear the barricade with their barrel and do a head shot on the target.
Can be included as just one target within the stage or as a standard with multiple repeats with score and time averaged.
A good shooter can do this in less than 1 second.
A good skill to know?
Seems like it.
 
Another one:
Going through doors in a live fire situation.
Where else but an action style game would most folks get experience with that?
Or lay on the ground and shoot under something.
Or hit a moving target, like a mover on a zip line, or a drop and turn target, or a Texas Star.
Just a thought.
 
Well, then, how about this: doing what someone else does because it works for them? If you want to be like Bill Jordan, then you have to have a Jordan holster. Right?

I realize it's more complicated than that but the general idea is that sometimes things don't work as well as you expect them to. Part of that is advertising hyperbole. Part of it might be that the method or whatnot doesn't fit your situation.

I practice as much as I can (but not religiously). Today I was trying two different guns, two different holsters, same method. Both holsters were thumb snap holsters, one a high-ride pancake style, which accepts both pistols that I was using. The other was a low riding Jordan style but which only accepted one of the pistols, for which it was made (a CZ 75 P-01). I was using the same method for both pistols, draw from chamber empty. Best draw time to get off a shot was under two-seconds but not from concealment.

My point here is that I was sure that the Jordan/police style holster would be faster. Not only was it not, but I tended to fumble the thumb snap. Not so with the other holster for either pistol. I do think, however, that automatics are a little easier to use, which is also slightly surprising when I think about it, although it's entirely my own opinion based only on my own experience.

I'm not sure that a good claim could be made that any draw is "natural." In starting out, one has to be very deliberate so that eventually the movements become learned. If not natural, then it has to be practiced until it becomes second nature. With practice, it becomes smooth and with that, speed. It can still be something done very deliberately. That's difficult to explain but some things have to be done carefully to avoid fumbling, like undoing the thumb snap. After that, everything seems to fall into place.

Although some might claim that using two different makes of guns might cause problems, I did not find that to be an issue (thought I would, though). But using two different holsters was another matter. I have yet a third, inside-waistband holster that I did not experiment with. I certain, though, that a draw from concealment will add a second or two on top of everything else and is way more fumble-prom, depending on the nature of the concealment. A full-flap holster that you might want to use in the deep woods is absolutely hopeless for speed.

I've also learned I'll never be a Jordan. But its been a long, long time since I dropped a gun trying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top