A bias about newbies and sd guns
- Thread starter woof
- Start date
- Status
You are born with the right to protect yourself. Let's not try and legislate what we think is best for people. For your own good laws can become scary quickly. And you often read of shop owners who do quite well defending themselves and their property even though they have never fired a shot before.
Aguila Blanca
Member
You are absolutely correct. People who don't follow your training regimen have no right to defend themselves.woof said:
How silly of those old guys who wrote the Constitution to think otherwise.
Let's not be hard on woof; he's expressing his opinions and we can be polite even if we disagree. I actually agree that everyone should start with a .22 or acquire one soon after starting, but think it's possible to get the needed skills without one.
If one of your loved ones came to you in fear of their life (stalker, battering ex, whatever) you wouldn't feel like you could get them proficient enough for basic self defense needs in a couple hours? It certainly wouldn't be ideal but in a couple hours I'd feel like I could teach someone who has never held a gun before to load, unload, and be generally safe with a gun as well as point it toward a bedroom door, pull the trigger, and get chest sized groups. Rifle, pistol, shotgun, whatever...anyone can learn enough skills for safety and basic self defense in a very short time.
While I find the .22 fun I also am not sure that its THAT necessary a training aid for defense. Perfect trigger contol is great for target shooting but dealing with recoil and letting trigger control slip a little is more important for defense to me. Ymmv.
While I find the .22 fun I also am not sure that its THAT necessary a training aid for defense. Perfect trigger contol is great for target shooting but dealing with recoil and letting trigger control slip a little is more important for defense to me. Ymmv.
Had it not been for this statement:
I would agree with you Candiru. But woof just said that anyone who disagrees with him doesn't care about RKBA. He's not trying too terribly hard to be polite to the rest of us, so I don't see the need to try either.
I don't disagree with the concept, just the implementation, and the smug know it all attitude. My first gun was a 12 gauge shotgun. I bought a 22 handgun after that, then a 9 mm, then a 45 (basically one per month). I'm up to about 21 guns now in just over 3 years, both long and short, have never had professional training, have a CCW, and carry nearly every day. I often shoot perfect scores on the Texas CHL target. But in woof's view, I'm not prepared. If only I'd started with that single shot . . . boy, then I'd be much better.
I don't consider myself a Rambo or a mall ninja. I'm not looking for a fight. I have a lot of fun shooting, and go regularly. I don't need some computer keyboard know it all telling me there is only one way to become proficient with firearms, and that it should take me at least a year before I get to take the training wheels off.
I would agree with you Candiru. But woof just said that anyone who disagrees with him doesn't care about RKBA. He's not trying too terribly hard to be polite to the rest of us, so I don't see the need to try either.
I don't disagree with the concept, just the implementation, and the smug know it all attitude. My first gun was a 12 gauge shotgun. I bought a 22 handgun after that, then a 9 mm, then a 45 (basically one per month). I'm up to about 21 guns now in just over 3 years, both long and short, have never had professional training, have a CCW, and carry nearly every day. I often shoot perfect scores on the Texas CHL target. But in woof's view, I'm not prepared. If only I'd started with that single shot . . . boy, then I'd be much better.
I don't consider myself a Rambo or a mall ninja. I'm not looking for a fight. I have a lot of fun shooting, and go regularly. I don't need some computer keyboard know it all telling me there is only one way to become proficient with firearms, and that it should take me at least a year before I get to take the training wheels off.
Well, I've got my .22lr single shot and have been practicing for a year. I've developed a string of bad shooting habits teaching myself on my .22, but I manage to hit the paper...some of the time. Now that the year is up I'm out to buy myself the latest tacticool 50 cal handcannon. I still really don't understand the 4 basic rules and have no trigger finger control, but I put my year in on a .22 so I must be ok.
/sarcasm
/sarcasm
woof
Member
I've long noticed that at THR and other forums, whenever anyone suggests that the gun loving community look inward for the source of ANY problems whatsoever, they get personally attacked. It's why I'm pessimistic about the future of RKBA.
Dismantler
Member
Interesting time line...
It is interesting to me that woof refers to the thread started by the person that he calls "an abortion doctor."
The doctor in question asked for new shooter/gun advice, as he claims that he has been threatened. Woof responded to that thread at 9:52 this morning with the following post:
Imagine the headlines if an abortion doctor guns down a protester because he "was afraid!"
Please note that I did woof the courtesy of quoting him EXACTLY, including his punctuation marks and quotation marks. He misrepresented what the doctor said, using words that the doctor did not write, and putting them in quotations.
At 10:00 this morning, woof posted this thread. So now I ask myself...is the honorable woof REALLY concerned about people having competent training...or is there a moral/political agenda behind this thread? It did not take him long to answer the doctor with his misquote, and then to start this thread. It is a crock of BS.
It is interesting to me that woof refers to the thread started by the person that he calls "an abortion doctor."
The doctor in question asked for new shooter/gun advice, as he claims that he has been threatened. Woof responded to that thread at 9:52 this morning with the following post:
Imagine the headlines if an abortion doctor guns down a protester because he "was afraid!"
Please note that I did woof the courtesy of quoting him EXACTLY, including his punctuation marks and quotation marks. He misrepresented what the doctor said, using words that the doctor did not write, and putting them in quotations.
At 10:00 this morning, woof posted this thread. So now I ask myself...is the honorable woof REALLY concerned about people having competent training...or is there a moral/political agenda behind this thread? It did not take him long to answer the doctor with his misquote, and then to start this thread. It is a crock of BS.
woof
Member
SuperNaught, Yes. The really constructive ones were the ones telling me to keep my opinions to myself and that my opinion makes a poster angry. Oh yeah, the one who thinks it would matter if the doctor shot a protester because he was "threatened" instead of "afraid." Did I say I wanted rules or regulations or laws? No. I said the exact opposite. Did I say shoot a single shot 22 for a year? no. I said start there and move up. And to think I actually spend time trying to convince fence-sitters that gun people are not angry, attack-prone radicals.
Dismantler
Member
You've been exposed woof. The party is over.
I've seen your posts in the abortion doctor thread, and you seem to think that his life is less important than the damage to the RKBA that could result should be shoot someone because he was afraid. Are you the one who gets to decide then when one of us is sufficiently qualified, and afraid enough, to actually USE the RKBA? What good is having the right if people like you are telling him not to use it just because it might inconvenience you. Consider the headlines when you defend yourself. "Professionally Trained Gunman Kills Intruder." Or "Weekend Warrior In Weekend Shooting. A man who spent the last 7 years becoming proficient in firearms use, including attendance in numerous courses desigend to give him the edge and take life quickly, has been involved in a shooting over the weekend . . ."
The press can turn anything into a problem. That shouldn't stop us from defending ourselves.
I'm not saying to keep your opinions to yourself. Just don't be so smug, and claim that anyone who disagrees with you is either not thoughtful or doesn't value their rights to the same extent as you. It's not what you say, it's how you say it.
The press can turn anything into a problem. That shouldn't stop us from defending ourselves.
I'm not saying to keep your opinions to yourself. Just don't be so smug, and claim that anyone who disagrees with you is either not thoughtful or doesn't value their rights to the same extent as you. It's not what you say, it's how you say it.
Jeff Cooper used to say, "It is long been a principal of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully."
I certainly see plenty of atrocious gun handling and abysmal marksmanship at our local public ranges. If one of these folks needed to use a firearm in defense in a genuine "serious situation", I'd be skeptical as to his ability to do so effectively and without becoming a menace to any non-combatants in the vicinity.
Proficiency with a handgun is neither innate nor intuitive.
I certainly would object to artificial standards, especially when set by government employees who don't know anything about shooting and who are generally antagonistic to the private ownership of guns. But I do wish that more of us would reinforce for new shooters the wisdom and desirability of proper training and practice.
I certainly see plenty of atrocious gun handling and abysmal marksmanship at our local public ranges. If one of these folks needed to use a firearm in defense in a genuine "serious situation", I'd be skeptical as to his ability to do so effectively and without becoming a menace to any non-combatants in the vicinity.
Proficiency with a handgun is neither innate nor intuitive.
I certainly would object to artificial standards, especially when set by government employees who don't know anything about shooting and who are generally antagonistic to the private ownership of guns. But I do wish that more of us would reinforce for new shooters the wisdom and desirability of proper training and practice.
woof
Member
TX, What I think is that if he shoots a protester because he is threatened or afraid or both, it will be bad for the protester, bad for the doctor and bad for all of us. How can anyone disagree with that?
woof
Member
fiddletown, Watch out, you're saying exactly the same thing I did.
woof
Member
Dismantler, you crack me up 
An example of how to state your opinion is provided excellently by fiddletown. He said basically the same thing, but in a much more palatable manner. I doubt anyone will criticize him.
As to your latest question, woof. My answer would be this: you are assuming his shoot will be a bad shoot. A bad shoot is a bad shoot, no matter how much training you have, and no matter how long you shot your 22 single shot. A good shoot is a good shoot, even if you bought the gun 5 minutes earlier and had to have help loading it. If the doctor was afraid for his life and the laws of his state allow him to use deadly force, then who cares if he even knows what a 22 is. If he has taken 13 Front Sight courses, and is so hyper keyed up from all his training that he sees a bad guy behind every bush and has a bad shoot, who cares how long he has been training.
You are placing the empahsis in the wrong place. Your comments here and on the abortion doctor post do not even accept the possibility that it is a good shoot. How many abortion doctors have been killed or injured? Many have. They have a right to feel threatened, especially if he has something specific. But you seem to think that he should have to wait a year before he does anything to protect himself. If he's dead it really won't matter how good he got with that little single shot, will it?
As to your latest question, woof. My answer would be this: you are assuming his shoot will be a bad shoot. A bad shoot is a bad shoot, no matter how much training you have, and no matter how long you shot your 22 single shot. A good shoot is a good shoot, even if you bought the gun 5 minutes earlier and had to have help loading it. If the doctor was afraid for his life and the laws of his state allow him to use deadly force, then who cares if he even knows what a 22 is. If he has taken 13 Front Sight courses, and is so hyper keyed up from all his training that he sees a bad guy behind every bush and has a bad shoot, who cares how long he has been training.
You are placing the empahsis in the wrong place. Your comments here and on the abortion doctor post do not even accept the possibility that it is a good shoot. How many abortion doctors have been killed or injured? Many have. They have a right to feel threatened, especially if he has something specific. But you seem to think that he should have to wait a year before he does anything to protect himself. If he's dead it really won't matter how good he got with that little single shot, will it?
fletcher
Member
What he's saying is actually quite different. fiddletown's post suggests that everyone just pursue training, and that we all encourage others to do the same. This differs from yours in that you possessed a hard belief of starting everyone off with a .22 for a year before even thinking about getting a handgun, or else the individual would be completely incompetent. While you both may have the same thought (more proficiency), the means by which that was expressed or should be obtained was significantly different.
woof
Member
TX, You act as if I want to restrict the doctors right to do what he wants and that is untrue and unfair. I think he, and others like him, should get more experience before carrying a weapon. Being more tolerant of different opinions than my detractors, I fully respect their right to disagree.
I'm fine with what you think, and you are certainly entitled to your opinion. I happen to think it is a dumb opinion, but I'm sure you think the same of mine. That's fine. We live in relatively free country. I didn't post anything until you said that anyone who disagrees with you are unthinking and don't care about the RKBA to the same extent as you. If you had kept that little tidbit out, I would have read your thread with interest and kept my comments to myself.
You did appear, however, to be rather unfeeling to the doctor who was asking how to defend himself from threats to his life by being concerned about headlines. That's like someone asking if it was ok to shoot the man raping his wife, and I respond "Eww, think of the mess it will make."
That's actually quite funny.
You did appear, however, to be rather unfeeling to the doctor who was asking how to defend himself from threats to his life by being concerned about headlines. That's like someone asking if it was ok to shoot the man raping his wife, and I respond "Eww, think of the mess it will make."
Educated Hillbilly
Member
Seems like a lot of semantics to me "Abortion doctor" -vs- "Planned Parenting". woof you did seem a little harsh in your post and the majority of people that would read that would be led to believe that you had ulterior motives.
You also could have stated your position better. As a father my son (who is now only 2) will start learning with a .22 because he has the time. Those who don't have the time will have to make do with whatever is available.
You also could have stated your position better. As a father my son (who is now only 2) will start learning with a .22 because he has the time. Those who don't have the time will have to make do with whatever is available.
Cosmoline
Member
As a general principle I'm inclined to agree with the OP. Choosing a handgun for personal defense as a FIRST WEAPON with nada experience is not the best idea. You should start with long guns if at all possible. Pref. a .22 LR bolt action and a 12 ga shotgun. From there you can work to high powered rifles and finally start with handguns. Ideally with training and mentoring along the way, like my nieces and nephews are getting. The long guns are easier to learn and more effective. The novice will see immediate positive results with minimal training. That is, he'll be able to hit the target at a respectable distance within day one if trained properly. I've seen many newbies at the pistol range overestimate their abilities and hit a lot of blue sky and ground their first day. It makes them upset, and rightly question how well they'd shoot in a real pinch.
That said, this isn't an ideal world and there may not be time or resources enough to do it right. And some folks will do fine with the short guns right away. Plus some of us have to learn the hard way. I started out with handguns before figuring out I was swimming way over my head so I scuttled back to the kiddie pool for awhile and ended up being a much better shot because of it.
That said, this isn't an ideal world and there may not be time or resources enough to do it right. And some folks will do fine with the short guns right away. Plus some of us have to learn the hard way. I started out with handguns before figuring out I was swimming way over my head so I scuttled back to the kiddie pool for awhile and ended up being a much better shot because of it.
There are folks who come under immediate threat. While it is good to get trained - one cannot say that they should not get a means of defense first.
If the person under threat realizes that they cannot shoot unless it is to prevent grievous bodily harm - what is the problem?
I assume that a physician might be able to understand this, you think?
One of the great arguments against waiting periods was that it prevented someone under threat to protect themselves.
Physicians such as in the other post have been killed and families threatened.
If the person under threat realizes that they cannot shoot unless it is to prevent grievous bodily harm - what is the problem?
I assume that a physician might be able to understand this, you think?
One of the great arguments against waiting periods was that it prevented someone under threat to protect themselves.
Physicians such as in the other post have been killed and families threatened.
- Status
Similar threads
