[jimcon]

After coming from a range in Las Vegas last week with my sister and future? brother-in-law. They were shooting a Colt Woodsman and I was shooting a Gunsite Commander 45 ACP.

The (idiot) brother-in-law to be makes the following remarks
"A .22 is only used for target shooting and .45 is only used for killing."

"There is a Federal law that a state must issue a CCW to anyone that wants one"

When he found out that I had just come from a 4 day defensive handgun course at Frontsight, he stated that the only reason to take such a course was to learn to kill.

[Jim Watson]

Tell your sister to keep looking, this isn't the ONE.

[Outlander]

Sounds like my doctor, he said "Rifles are made for hunting but handguns are ONLY made for killing".
I told him that was the most idiotic statement I ever heard by someone other than a politician.
After he laughed I'd swear he pumped the blood pressure cuff up a little higher than normal.

[Skunkabilly]

Quill pens are for writing, but computers are made only for downloading pornography.

[sanchezero]

Well, what else can you use your computer for?

:what:

[Oleg Volk]

ah, for world domination. Haven't you seen Terminator, Tron and Space Odyssey!?

[J Miller]

Stupidity - the number one sexually transmitted disease.

sanchezero's signature line covers those mentioned in this thread.

[caz223]

I asked my dad when I was 19 or so, why don't you have a pistol?
(He has .22 rifles and 12 gauge, and 20 gauge shotguns.)
"Pistols? , they're man-killers. That's all they're good for."
The problem is, he was deadly serious.
Years, later with much disdain, when both me, and my nephew purchased magnum revolvers, he kinda accepted that he wasn't going to talk me out of buying multiple handguns.
He is one of the wisest men I have ever met, so arguing the point would have been moot.
Many years later, I came to accept the fact that he was prolly as much right as wrong.
They ARE for killing. When killing is better than dying.
People don't seem to understand this.
When some people train on paper or steel, they try to B.S. themselves into thinking that you're hunting or something.
I hate to break it to you, but regulation silhouette targets are silhouettes of people. You shoot them to stop them from taking your life.
That means you kill them.
If you can't accept that, maybe you should buy rifles. (Or .22s)
(But they are just as good for killing most things, maybe a little better.) :rolleyes:
Same with .22s and other calibers.
.22s prolly kill more people in a year than .45s do, so I don't understand his malfunction on that.
There's no pretending that .22s don't kill.
They work dandy for varminting, and for personal protection.
It's really hard to say that a .22 rifle isn't intimidating, even if it's a 10/22....
***EDIT***
I do understand that there are silhouette targets of various animals, and other stuff, but the most common targets at the range that I go to (Besides sheets of paper or paper plates.) are the little round targets, or big BG type outline.
As for me and my dad, I got him to understand that acceptable accuracy can be had from a pistol with a little practice. Enough to make me a better shot at most ranges with a pistol than an average person with a rifle. At 70 yards, a rifle is easier to shoot, no doubt.

[caz223]

I went in stages from bb gun, .22 rifle, 12 gauge shotgun, SA magnum revolver, .223 bolt action rifle, .45 automatic, wonder-nines, and various caliber pistols including 10mm, and 357SIG. (And .22 pistols!!)
I have owned as many action types as possible, including semi-auto rifles, break action (Single, o/u, s/s), bolt action, pump-action, sa/da auto pistols, DAO, safe action, SA autos, DA revolvers, SA revolvers, etc.
I still have and shoot most of the guns that I went through to get to where I am today, including the various rifles and shotguns.
Accurately placed, any of them will kill you just as dead as the others.
Everybody that I know is in a stage similar to those that I have been through. (Or the many that I have not.)
I find that I can tell what "stage" most people are in by just talking to them for a few minutes.
Most people that haven't gone through many stages seem to think that their way of thinking is right, and everyone else is wrong.
Having been there as much as not, I can often find common ground with almost anybody.
But one thing we're all trying to do.
Hitting what we aim at.
Let's all try to "help" our fellow shooter along, and not try to "correct" or "talk down" or "straighten him out".
If we try really hard and remember we were starting out once too, that makes it a little easier.
When you were first introduced to guns, you didn't want people to talk down to you, but talk TO you.
Will glockers suddenly accept wheelgunners?
Will 1911 types ever agree that maybe polymer pistols have their place?
Who knows.
But it will be a little easier on us all if we try to get along, and remember when we were first starting out...

[larryw]

They ARE for killing. When killing is better than dying.

Well said!

[NapAttack]

Sorry caz223, I can't accept your interpretation.

When I shoot, I shoot to stop the attack. Period.

If the person dies in the process then that's an unavoidable side effect. When they stop attacking, I stop shooting. If I am lucky, they will not die. But if they do, I'm not going into paroxyisms(sp?) of guilt over it either.

If I thought the way you do I would get rid of all of my firearms.

When I shoot at the range I am usually shooting the round targets as they give me the best indication of my accuracy. I am competing against myself to challenge myself to get better. I shot IPSC for a few years until I became a starving college student again. When I was shooting IPSC I was not training to kill people as you seem to believe. I was competing against myself to improve my speed and accuracy. When I plink it is simply to relax.

I have many reasons for owning and shooting firearms, handguns in particular, self defense is only one of the reasons. Many of the handguns I own would be completely unsuitable for self defense.

[Standing Wolf]

From the sound of it, your sister is about to marry a pig-headed nitwit.

My sister nearly did that, but had sense enough to call off the wedding a few weeks before the big day, and eventually married one of the most level-headed men I've ever met.

[P95Carry]

Tragic thing is ...... (and I would be first to say ...... ''guns are designed primarily for killing'' )......... that this definition is almost all the anti's ever consider. Bows and arrows - same applies!

But - they make it seem as if every inanimate gun is by itself going on a shooting spree (note my sig).

We exploit this killing facility most often, to put meat on the table ..... and beyond that we train on paper ..... against the unlikely event that some idiot perp has it in mind to rob, kill, rape .... whatever. At which point we might have to intercede .... to save our own necks or those around us.

ANY gun in fact has the same prime purpose .. it just so happens that handguns, being small and compact .. are more readily concealed and carried ....... the main reason they are so villified.

[jmbg29]

I can't abide a man that wouldn't stand ready to kill to protect the innocent.

As such, I have abso-freakin'-lutely no idea how a woman can abide marrying a pantywaist like that. [/SIGH] :banghead: :fire: :banghead: :barf:

[Gordy Wesen]

That makes my day...thinking about you having to be around this guy for the next 50 years...Christmas, summer vacation, funerals. You got lots to look forward to.:p

[Deuce]

Shooting a .22 is no doubt fun and inexpensive.

But, am I the only one who also get's a kick out of shooting 9mm, .40sw, .45acp, .38spl, .357mag, .44spl, and .44mag?

The way I see it, most men have instincts for hunting, war, and defense of himself, his family, friends, and neighbors. Ever since the first man figured out that a stick/club was more effective than his fist, the arms race has been on .

The Red Dawn scenario is very unlikely, but, these days, it's the closest thing to an example of where these instincts might be useful. Still, if it's not ok for any man to realize these instincts and allow them to influence his desires, then it's also not ok for a country to have a military. I'm sure we can all agree that we'll always sleep a little better knowing the U.S. has THE most powerful military in the world.

Regardless, I see anyone's statement such as "rifles are for hunting and handguns are for killing men" as very misguided. Rifles are very effective at killing men and many handguns are very effective, and in many cases more convenient, than rifles for hunting. A gun is a gun. Obviously, most of us would prefer not to use a j-frame .38spl for hunting, but, anyone who's got a problem with a citizen carrying a pistol for self-defense is ignorant as far as I'm concerned.

[cool45auto]

Reminds me of something my cousin told me once: "The only people that carry with a round in the chamber are law enforcement or people up to no good.":rolleyes: :banghead:

[firestar]

I just thought of a new slogan for handguns!

"Handguns are not just for man killing anymore!" :D

Seriously, I carry but I know that I will probably never have to shoot anyone but there are a lot of people with mean dogs that might attack one of my dogs when I am walking them (Springer and a Brittany) and I would not hesitate for a second to shoot a dog that was loose and was going to hurt my dogs. My dogs are good natured and I don't think they could fight off a Pit Bull or a Rottweirler.

[tiberius]

Pistols? , they're man-killers. That's all they're good for."


I have no problem with this statement. While I'm sure that I would have a problem with the person that bothered to say it.

The purpose of a pistol is to have a means of self defense on your person. They are defensive weapons that are indeed designed to kill people. Just because we are all required to "shoot to stop" we should not deny that the intent of the device is to provide lethal force.

Most of us will never fire our pistols in anger, but the reason most of us plink, compete and otherwise practice is because it is fun AND it makes us more capable with our weapons of choice.

I carry a pistol with me almost every day specifically because it is a deadly weapon designed to be effective against people. I also pray that I never have to use it in such a way.

[GitSome45]

Guns are MERE tools...

Rifles kill men the BEST...(that`s why we issue M16A2, M4`s to our troops, a pistol is used to FIGHT your way to your RIFLE...)

I don`t shoot to kill, I SHOOT TO LIVE...!

P.S.

(HELL YES guns are DANGEROUS, THAT is their FUNCTION...
A Police Officer carries a HANDGUN, not to harm or intimidate the PUBLIC, but because they are the most appropriate/accessibly convenient/most expedient way to deal with a BAD GUY who is determined to do IMMEDIATE HARM TO THEM OR OTHERS... No HIDDEN AGENDA, or ALTERIOR MOTIVES, just the BEST TOOL for the job...

THAT IS WHY I CARRY ONE...PERIOD !) (No I am not LEO)

NUFF- SAID

Howard

[caz223]

One of the first things that I accepted when I purchased a weapon was that I needed training.
I took several classes in many different categories.
In the first class that I went to the basic fundamentals of ethics and survival were covered.
Rule #1 If you cannot accept the consequences of the use of deadly force you should not have a gun (For self defense.).
By definition, it IS deadly force.
If it is against your religion or upbringing to use deadly force, you should not use a gun in self defense.
When you shoot, keep it simple.
Shoot to stop the threat, shoot the center of exposed mass.
Hips to shoulders, if possible.
If not, shoot center of EXPOSED mass.
Shoot until you have neutralized the threat.
Do not shoot to injure, wound, or frighten.
That means that you do not think deadly force is warranted, and you may have doubts that what you are doing is the best (Last possible.) course of action.
The only time you should even have a weapon pointing at someone is when the use of deadly force is indicated as your last resort.
You have used up all your other options, and you believe that your life is in danger (Or your family.).
You have called 911, and they are listening to what's going on.
You have issued a verbal challenge "STOP, DO NOT GET ANY CLOSER, I HAVE A GUN, AND I'LL SHOOT YOU IF YOU COME IN THE ROOM." You have screamed this as loud as humanly possible.
The operator on the other end of the phone should be recording this, and the recording is admissible in court.
And the BG is still trying to close the distance, or appears to be drawing a weapon. Use of deadly force then ok.
All that's left for the BG to do is assume room temperature.

[jdkelly]

Quote from Caz223:

"Many years later, I came to accept the fact that he was prolly as much right as wrong.
They ARE for killing. When killing is better than dying.
People don't seem to understand this.
When some people train on paper or steel, they try to B.S. themselves into thinking that you're hunting or something.
I hate to break it to you, but regulation silhouette targets are silhouettes of people. You shoot them to stop them from taking your life.
That means you kill them."


Cas223,

When I train with a handgun using paper or steel targets, that are human silhouette like, I'm training to shoot paper or steel regardless of its shape. My intent is only to increase my gaming skills, period.

When I played Risk (a board game) I was not training to take over the world. When I played Operation I was not training to be a doctor. And when I played doctor, well, that had nothing to do with medicine either.

Respectfully,

jkelly

[tiberius]

jkelly,

Your statement applies to you, and that's fine. Many people have pistols for self defense purposes though and practice with them is well advised for this purpose.


Your Boardgame analogy is silly of course, but I am glad that you are NOT practicing to take over the world. :)

[caz223]

jdkelly, ever stop to consider the purpose of the game that you're practicing for?
Why was that game invented?
Spell out the letters and try to find the point of what it is that you are doing.
CAS is prolly the only game that readily comes to mind that I can't take seriously.
All that being said, I don't plan on challenging CAS types to a duel. Why? Their skill. They have practiced until they are so good at what they do that they can prolly wield old SA revolvers better in a gunfight than average LEO types can wield the more modern weapons that they carry.
But the skills accumulated by focused practice (For gaming.) make a fearsome statement of purpose.
As games go, they are also a lot of fun, and a great way to increase your skills.

[Island Beretta]

I think you should chase him off before your sister is forced to have a "shotgun wedding".:D :fire: :scrutiny: :what:

[justice4all]

I agree with firestar; I've said many times here and on TFL that I'm much more concerned about dogs running loose than BGs. A handgun is designed to stop whatever threat arises. K9, BG, ObL, etc. And most of the time, from what I read, display is all that's necessary. So it would be more accurate to say that handguns are for threatening serious bodily injury, and if that doesn't stop the assault, then for carrying out the same.

[themic]

agree with napattack...

you shoot to STOP, not to kill. if the dude happens to die, well, that's his fault.

i'm still in a personal debate about the load "I HAVE A GUN" warning. in many situations, yes. in some, no.

handguns are desinged to launch projectiles at high speeds. they are tailored to the wants of the market, which in theory would like to launch said projectiles at humans. invisible hands at work.

Still, though, years have gone by, and still, I have not seen the Smith and Wesson Cam (http://www.geocities.com/robert_frenchu/guns_watch.html) move on its own. :p

[caz223]

You DO shoot to stop the attack, but it's not like you're shooting a water pistol.
You still have to accept the consequences of using lethal force before you consider using a handgun in self defense.
That's all I'm saying.
Many people I talk to seem to think the BG will be frightened away when you present your gun.
You can always hope for this, but if life were always this easy, you wouldn't need to prepare for it.

[Handy]

When you shoot to stop, and you're shooting a "lethal weapon", you're shooting to kill and mincing words.


What the hell were you learning at Frontsite? Was there a big section on hitting shoulders and kneecaps? 100 yard sillouette?


The brother in law made a generalization about the PRIMARY use of the combat handgun (notice the term "combat").

This is just like saying that the Army exists to kill people. It does! But you have to ask yourself why.

With certain exceptions, a reliable .45 is not a target gun. You can shoot targets with it, just like you can race your Camaro. You can also use it as a bottle opener. But let's not kid ourselves, combat guns are mainly for combat. If all you cared about was bullseyes, you'd be better off with something else.

I would have pointed out that my .45 is a decent target gun, but can protect my family as well. His .22 is not so flexible.

[jimcon]

Handy:
It is you who should be thinking more clearly. When I shoot, if it ever happens, I will shoot to stop the threat. I clearly realize the death is one of the possibe results. The language that you "shoot to kill is" a very dangerous thought process, which you could express to the wrong person at the wrong time.
You asked what I learned at Frontsight. It was 2 shots to the COM and, if necessary one to the ocular cavity. I am a First Family member of Frontsight and am there frequently, because I learn to shoot better each time. No we do not shoot for "shoulders and kneecaps" and longest shots are 25 yards

You mentioned that my .45 ACP can kill and that could happen. Before you think that I am agreeing with you, please take a look at hospital statistics relative to handgun wounds. For example, over 80% of those admitted for a gunshot wound are released the same day and less than 5% die of their wounds. A handgun is a very poor weapon for self defense. The best use of a handgun, to quote Clint Smith, is to fight your way to your long gun.

[caz223]

It sounds like you are agreeing.
If you accept the fact that death may result, and shoot to center of mass, and failure drill to the head, then that's not shooting to frighten, or being afraid to use the gun properly.
The problem is that today, the average person who has a gun seems to think that they don't need to use it, or want to fire a warning shot, or shoot to scare or wound.
We are in agreement, and the statement I would give to my lawyer, and we would give to the police would not include the word kill, if at all possible. But that's wording after the fact.

Basically, if you're shooting a defensive gun caliber, and are shooting to COM, you're not shooting to give the BG a stomachache.
And as for your stats, the gunshot wounds that make it to the hospital usually live.
If you connected with two to COM, and one to the head before they went down, they aren't going to the hospital. They are going to the coroner. They wouldn't be included in your stats.

[Strings]

... that I'm not the only person here familiar with the 4 rules...

1: treat every gun as if it's loaded
2: never point a gun at anything you aren't willing to destroy (in human terms, that's kill, people)
3: always be sure of your target and what's beyond it
4: keep your finger off the trigger until ready to shoot

Now, some may state #2 differently, but that's the way *I* was taught (and the way I teach). YMMV

[Teufelhunden]

The way I see it, most men have instincts for hunting, war, and defense of himself, his family, friends, and neighbors. Ever since the first man figured out that a stick/club was more effective than his fist, the arms race has been on .

Men aren't allowed to operate off of instincts anymore--didn't you get the memo? We might offend or oppress someone in the course of succumbing to our primitive urges...

[/sarcasm]

-Teuf

[arinvolvo]

I own handguns for two reasons...

1. recreation...they are fun to shoot.

2. to protect myself and my family..if that means someone will die...so be it. I will have to live with the consequences, and as long as those consequences are lesser than my death, or the death of a loved one...then I will consider it a victory.

[themic]

"shoot to stop" means, essentially, that you aren't out to kill BG's and aren't out for vigilante justice. it's a term used to indicate that you aren't out to kill the dude specifically, you are out to stop his/her violent imminent attack. you are using lethal force to do so. so, although you recognize that you are using lethal force, your overall intent is to stop the attack. sometimes a shot to the head is the best way to do so.

this is more than a legal subtlety in the event of a self defense scenario.. if you're shooting to kill, then if you shoot a BG once in the chest, and he collapses or is incapacitated, you do not continue to shoot the dude.

remember the legal rules of self defense, they're written quite well:

in the opinion of a reasonable human being,
1) the attacker must have the ability to threaten your life
2) the attacker must have the opportunity to threaten your life
3) the attacker must have the intent to threaten your life

where "you" means yourself or members of your immediate family

if the following are all present, then you may use lethal force to stop the attack.

at least, that's how they're done in virginia

[caz223]

Well put.

[Handy]

Jimcon,

Not sure what you meant about thinking more clearly.

The term "stop" is a tool we use to discuss defense shooting without setting ourselves up for a second degree murder charge. We all want to "stop" the attack, and we're going to do it by imposing death on the attacker, because there aren't many options at that point. Your training especially underlines that point. ("Is he going to be all right?" "Sure, it was just an ocular wound.")

If you object to me breaking the polite code of calling head shots "stops", I apologize. But this is just a form of political correctness that the gun community practices and it sounds like your in-law was mainly guilty of breaking that code, rather than stating an un-truth.

[jimcon]

I think that enough has been said on this subject. All that we are argueing now is symantics. In closing, I will offer his other dumb remark. He insisted that the only proper way to hold a handgun is with the support side thumb wrapped around to the firing side. When I explained that this could be painful, he commented that he shoots his .44 Magnum this way and it is the only correct way to do it. He said that he was taught to shoot this way in the Navy. Could someone post a list of top Navy shooters who use the technique.

[Handy]

That sounds like how we were shown (I'm Navy). If the thumb is low and behind (rather than on top of) the web area it is well out of the way of the slide and hammer.

Obviously, not the "only way to do it", but it is an effective method that helps control muzzle rise.

[jimcon]

"If the thumb is low and behind (rather than on top of) the web area it is well out of the way of the slide and hammer."
I his case the thumb was high and very close the the hammer and slide

[Handy]

Well, if he's getting hit by the hammer or slide I'm sure he'll see the error in his ways.


So, no closure on my lack of "clear thinking"?

[jimcon]

Handy:

When I used the phrase "clear thinking" I was refering to your words about shooting to kill. If ever you had to use a handgun in self defense and used those words or anything even like them near a witness or a police officer, you could be in a world of hurt.
What people have said after a shoting, while trying to cope with an attack and a death, could very well hang them in court.

Mas Ayoob had a column a few months ago that mentioned a few police officer's comments that caused them a great deal of grief.

While I dispise the phrase "politically correct", there are times when it is best to bite the bullet and say the right words. The wrong words could , at best, significantly lighten your wallet and, at worst, cause you to spend time in a very unpleasant resort.

I guess that my message that if you do not think the words then you will not say them. Hopefully, this is advise that you will never need.

[TheMariner]

Interesting that there is discussion on whether shooting to kill and shooting to stop are different or the same.... I would assume that shooting to kill, in this case, does not main chasing the BG out the door just cause he isn't dead yet...

WIth this in mind, given the statement that handguns are not effective lethal weapons, comapred to other weapons (I'd like to go of the record as saying this paraphrase is grossing understated), I would shooting to kill as mandatory... it being an ineffective weapon for killing then it must be ineffective for wounding and causing a will to cease and desist aggressive activities...

Unfortunely, a handgun is very lethal. It is, also, the most difficult to control, even under the best conditions. Under the duress of combat, it becomes a STATISTICALLY inefficient weapon.

[cratz2]

I can't abide a man that wouldn't stand ready to kill to protect the innocent.

Ditto... that would extend to women as well.

I would not be comfortable with my sister being married to someone not willing to shoot, stab, batter, beat, tackle and die for my sister and their children.

My wife's differing outlook on shooting to stop didn't bother me much until we had our first child... maybe even out second child. She made the comment on more that one occasion that she didn't know if she could shoot someone that had broken into the house. I put it in very unpleasant terms whey she should shoot said someone. I asked her how she would feel if, through some unlikely twist of fate, someone broke in the house, encountered her with the gun went up stairs and raped and butchered our 6 year old and 2 year old. I painted it in a very very ugly manner.

Now the bad guy would have a couple rounds of 12 gaugs in him before he touched the first step.

Call me whatever you want to call me but if I were home alone and someone happened into the house and made a threatening move or declaration, I'm not entirely sure what I would do. On a conscience level, I don't fully think that I would be comfortable witih taking a life if mine was only casually threatened... From someone not visibly armed 7 yards away. But that darn muscle memory may kick in and he'd get a double tap COM before I had a chance to really think about it. I'm not sure I'd have a problem with either response. ;)

On the other hand, I stay up pretty late most nights and if the wrong guy walked through the door with the wife and kids up stairs, I really don't think he'd have a chance to turn around. Where we live, it isn't likely he was drunk and wandered into the wrong house. And if lights didn't come up the driveway and he didn't knock or ring the bell, he's up to no good. If he was 14 or 15, it would probably be different, but if you live to be 30 years old and don't realize to knock on a stranger's doorbell, then this one just might be the last one you walk through. :scrutiny:

[zpo]

I really need the knocking on a strangers doorbell thing clarified...:D

[Erik]

Several dumb remarks, actually.

[Boiler_G]

First off, Caz, I agree with everything you said! Second, Hunter Rose, those are my rules too, and every shooter, new or old that shoots with me, hears those 4 rules.

Now, for my statement ... I think everyone is missing the point here. I don't think it is about WHY you shoot, or WHEN to shoot, or whether you are STOPPING or KILLING. I think it has to go back to why the original gun/handgun was invented. That was to kill, plain and simple. Whether you use it for that, that is up to your own conscious and definition.

[bad_dad_brad]

Don't be so hard on the guy (future brother in law). Take him to the range and educate him on the differences in caliber and gun.

Shooting is fun.
It is zen.
It is impowering.
It is an art and yet, a science.
And, yes, it can defend your (and more importantly - your loved ones lives).

I have oft been amazed how a calm explanation, coupled with a hands on demonstration, can change an opinion. Every caliber has a reason and many are equal when it comes to target shooting and/or defending.

[P95Carry]

BDB .... succinct logic ...... :)