You said its "Likely" and "lack of Skill". What you wrote implies that most people that shoot them do so for the reasons stated. I will submit to you that "most" gun owners are pretty unskilled and that you are just seeing the ones that are unskilled, mostly. I see the same attitude with people and Hicap pistols.
Blue Press Publishes Rebuttals to "Why the .45 ACP Failed" Article
- Thread starter COSteve
- Start date
You said its "Likely" and "lack of Skill". What you wrote implies that most people that shoot them do so for the reasons stated. I will submit to you that "most" gun owners are pretty unskilled and that you are just seeing the ones that are unskilled, mostly. I see the same attitude with people and Hicap pistols.
Nice, now we can debate the implications of "likely". We're making progress.
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
stagpanther
New member
I'm on my fourth beer...keep going.
No it doesn't.
Here's what I wrote.
"Ironically, I think it's likely that a person who doesn't train enough will often choose a larger caliber because they think it will make up for their lack of skill."
This is a statement about what I think is likely that untrained people often do. It doesn't make any assertions at all about "most people" who shoot/choose large calibers.
It doesn't mean that "most people" who choose/shoot large calibers are untrained.
It is incorrect to assume that the converse of a statement is true; more importantly you can't take the converse of someone's statement and say that's what they said.
If I say that most cats are aloof, that doesn't imply that I think that most aloof things are cats--the two concepts certainly aren't equivalent.
The fact that the vast majority of prime numbers are odd, doesn't mean that it's true that most odd numbers are prime. In fact, the first statement is true (all prime numbers except for one are odd) but the converse is false (most odd numbers are not prime).
The fact that most dogs have four legs doesn't mean that most things with four legs are dogs. Cats are not dogs, spiders missing two legs are not dogs, 4 legged tables are not dogs.
In other words, my assertion that I think it's likely that untrained people often do a particular thing, doesn't mean that I am also asserting that the converse is true--that it's likely that people who do that particular thing are untrained people.
I stand by what I said. But your attempt to attribute its converse to me is not going to work because I didn't claim that the converse was true and because, in fact, I don't believe that the converse is true.
Look, maybe you really don't understand all this converse stuff and really think I said what you are claiming I said.
If that's the case, forget all that and just go with this:
I said what I said. It's clear. We can talk about what I said as much as you want.
I didn't say what you are claiming I said. I can't help it if you don't understand why that's true, but it is true. I've done the best I can do trying to explain it to you and if you want to keep talking about that, feel free, but I've spent as much effort in that direction as I'm going to.
From my last post, here are some very clear statements that I made and stand by and that may help straighten things out:
There are clearly people who choose large caliber handguns for reasons having nothing to do with lack of training.
There are certainly trained people who choose large caliber handguns.
There are certainly many reasons that people might choose large caliber handguns other than out of a hope that it will make up for a lack of skill.
https://www.dillonprecision.com/blue-press-catalog.html
Here's a link to Dillon Precision's "Blue Press" catalogs. As I type this, the November 2019 is not yet available online, but I'm also looking forward to reading the subject issue once it does become available online. I did read the October 2019 issue and thought the .45ACP article was ok or good.
I usually carrying 9mm, but still have four .45ACP handguns which I'll occasionally carry.
Before the various written articles began being published, which I estimate I began seeing around 2011, I usually carried a .40 (issued for most of my LE career) or .45ACP.
Around 2012 I was issued a Glock 17Gen4, a 9mm, from the prior Glock 22Gen3, a .40. I started reading even more about how the current, high-end 9mm JHP ammo was doing fine in anti-personnel situations, along with the various barrier penetration testing.
I must admit some of my coworkers & I did have some anxieties leaving behind the .40 for work (off-duty we could carry any caliber we wanted) but we got over it. By the time my prior employer changes guns again, it'll be interesting to see what gets chosen. I suspect this will closer to the year 2030 (I fully retired in 2017).
Here's a link to Dillon Precision's "Blue Press" catalogs. As I type this, the November 2019 is not yet available online, but I'm also looking forward to reading the subject issue once it does become available online. I did read the October 2019 issue and thought the .45ACP article was ok or good.
I usually carrying 9mm, but still have four .45ACP handguns which I'll occasionally carry.
Before the various written articles began being published, which I estimate I began seeing around 2011, I usually carried a .40 (issued for most of my LE career) or .45ACP.
Around 2012 I was issued a Glock 17Gen4, a 9mm, from the prior Glock 22Gen3, a .40. I started reading even more about how the current, high-end 9mm JHP ammo was doing fine in anti-personnel situations, along with the various barrier penetration testing.
I must admit some of my coworkers & I did have some anxieties leaving behind the .40 for work (off-duty we could carry any caliber we wanted) but we got over it. By the time my prior employer changes guns again, it'll be interesting to see what gets chosen. I suspect this will closer to the year 2030 (I fully retired in 2017).
stagpanther
New member
Between John's and Nanuk's firefight of grammatical correctness--my judgement is that you are both correct.
There is a sweeping generalization stated that people who don't train enough are likely to use larger calibers as a crutch for lack of training. That may or may not be true, but no evidence is given to back it up. "Enough training" is also ambiguous without qualification.
However, John does qualify his statement with "I believe"--in other words he says this is his personal impression. It's no less proper than saying " I believe in the flying spaghetti monster" I do this all the time myself, because I don't want people to take what I say as having some implied stamp of expertise or authority (or rigorous gathering of empirical evidence)--even though I have a modest amount of experience, and frankly, simply have fun as a sport shooter and handloader and like to share what I have experienced. Isn't that why most of us are here?
Here's another example of a sweeping generalization:
"If all sweeping generalizations were culled from this forum, then likely 90% of the content would disappear."
There is a sweeping generalization stated that people who don't train enough are likely to use larger calibers as a crutch for lack of training. That may or may not be true, but no evidence is given to back it up. "Enough training" is also ambiguous without qualification.
However, John does qualify his statement with "I believe"--in other words he says this is his personal impression. It's no less proper than saying " I believe in the flying spaghetti monster" I do this all the time myself, because I don't want people to take what I say as having some implied stamp of expertise or authority (or rigorous gathering of empirical evidence)--even though I have a modest amount of experience, and frankly, simply have fun as a sport shooter and handloader and like to share what I have experienced. Isn't that why most of us are here?
Here's another example of a sweeping generalization:
"If all sweeping generalizations were culled from this forum, then likely 90% of the content would disappear."
Meanwhile, my .45-70 is leaning against the desk chuckling softly to itself.
All handgun loadings are a compromise in one way or another. We can split fine hairs on the ballistics, but if the .45 or the 9mm (or .40 S&W or .38 Special) were blatantly deficient, they wouldn't enjoy the widespread popularity they have.
All handgun loadings are a compromise in one way or another. We can split fine hairs on the ballistics, but if the .45 or the 9mm (or .40 S&W or .38 Special) were blatantly deficient, they wouldn't enjoy the widespread popularity they have.
Which is why I stated it to be something that "I think is likely to often be the case" as opposed to something I know to be fact. I don't even say it is "often the case", I say I "think" is it "likely" to often be the case.
Correct.
But even more than that, the statement of opinion makes no claim about what "most" untrained people do (i.e. There is no claim that "often" is equivalent to "the majority or "most".), nor does it make any statement about what is likely to be true about people who have chosen large calibers. i.e. There is no claim that the statement of opinion is also believed to be true in converse.