Originally posted by TunnelRat
I think there’s a difference between saying there’s a right and a wrong way to do a thing and pointing out that there might be more efficient ways to do a thing. You yourself have said that you could see how I might benefit from doing something and if so that’s great, so a reviewer or trainer pointing that out to others doesn’t seem unreasonable to me (and I have had techniques showed to me that did make meaningful differences in my comfort and performance).
There is nothing inherently wrong with pointing out or teaching a technique that might help some people shoot their particular pistol more efficiently. That being said, some of the trainers and reviewers I've seen hammer certain techniques to the point of being dogmatic. I've seen guns that didn't have trigger resets that a particular reviewer didn't like referred to as "garbage" because of this and I've seen trainers refer to grips and stances that weren't their preference as "worthless."
Originally posted by TunnelRat
Also, while you say there’s no wrong way to shoot a handgun, you added a lot of caveats. If there is no wrong way to shoot a handgun than complaining about the reset on a handgun isn’t necessarily wrong. It is wrong if you allow it to stop the reliable function (one of the caveats you mentioned), but if personal preference is a factor, and I completely agree that it is, then people will point out features they do or don’t like based on that personal preference. If someone doing that exposes a level of ignorance in your opinion I can understand that, but as related to before I also think people tend to take all of this a bit too personally, even when they then say it’s personal preference (I don’t mean you in particular).
The goal of shooting is to hit the target, I can think of no shooting technique in which a lack of safety, sight alignment, sight picture, and trigger control would not be detrimental to this goal. Also, since we're talking primarily defensive shooting of training for such, reliable function of the pistol is also of utmost importance. I think that those four caveats still leave a lot of room for varying ideas and techniques.
As far as whether riding the reset is right, wrong, or a matter of personal preference really depends on the shooter and gun. If you can do it effectively without short-stroking the trigger on a gun that allows for it, then it's personal preference. If, however, you can't do it effectively and/or have a gun that doesn't allow it to be done consistently without inducing malfunction, then I'd say it's wrong.
As far as people who complain about the reset, I notice that the same people I notice complaining about trigger reset tend to shoot/own/review/teach with one particular type of gun or something similar to it (usually something of the polymer-frame, striker-fired persuasion) and they seem to view almost anything substantially different from that with disdain. Some people it seems assume that because the technique that works well with their firearm of preference doesn't work with something else, then that something else must be of substandard quality or poor design. I agree that people do often take their preferences in gun and shooting technique personally and that, I think, is why so many become dogmatic about things like trigger reset.