Old krow
Member
To take this quote even one step further "Beware the man with one gun.....IN EACH HAND, because you're gonna sleep on the couch if you buy them both."
Beware the man with one gun
- Thread starter Hurricane
- Start date
- Status
To take this quote even one step further "Beware the man with one gun.....IN EACH HAND, because you're gonna sleep on the couch if you buy them both."
Like many gun enthusiasts, I own many handguns and used to rotate my carry guns. I have realized that you really need to have 1 or 2 that you are very proficient with. I have chosen my Glock 36 and my Ruger LCR as my carries, depending in what I wear. I use the other guns for target shooting.
Before reading this thread, it never occurred to me how many different meanings it would hold for different people.
The saying isn't about a man only owning one gun...one gun being enough...and it isn't about only being able to shoot one gun well. It refers to a person who has taken the time to learn one platform so well that he can use it to it's ultimate potential. It takes some experience to really understand this, because at lower levels of skill, many guns can be used at the same level.
I happen to shoot several different platforms, because students make different choices and it is my obligation to be able to shoot them all well enough to teach it's use. But I made this choice knowing that I was compromising really being able the get th most out of any one platform:
1. my reset will always be longer than needed...because I don't want to short stroke the reset.
2. my prep of the trigger for the next shoot will be less than optimal...because my finger won't know if it takes 4lbs or 4.5lbs to take it to the edge of release.
3. my seeing the aligned sights return to target will always be just a hair slower...because they will look different than I have been training to see.
4. a longer shot will take more conscious thought because I'll have to figure the holdover for extended ranges.
If you aren't shooting at this level, the saying will have much less meaning. It is the difference between being able to shoot at a rate of 4 shots per second and 6 shots per second
The saying isn't about a man only owning one gun...one gun being enough...and it isn't about only being able to shoot one gun well. It refers to a person who has taken the time to learn one platform so well that he can use it to it's ultimate potential. It takes some experience to really understand this, because at lower levels of skill, many guns can be used at the same level.
I happen to shoot several different platforms, because students make different choices and it is my obligation to be able to shoot them all well enough to teach it's use. But I made this choice knowing that I was compromising really being able the get th most out of any one platform:
1. my reset will always be longer than needed...because I don't want to short stroke the reset.
2. my prep of the trigger for the next shoot will be less than optimal...because my finger won't know if it takes 4lbs or 4.5lbs to take it to the edge of release.
3. my seeing the aligned sights return to target will always be just a hair slower...because they will look different than I have been training to see.
4. a longer shot will take more conscious thought because I'll have to figure the holdover for extended ranges.
If you aren't shooting at this level, the saying will have much less meaning. It is the difference between being able to shoot at a rate of 4 shots per second and 6 shots per second
Then why didn't the originator say "Beware the man who has taken the time to learn one platform, as he can probably use it to it's ultimate potential."?
I think the criticisms of the saying remain valid. It's telling that we have yet to have a response from a person who owns one gun and is a top 1% marksman, or a response from a person that knows someone in this category.
Ragnar Danneskjold
Member
Yeah, I know too many "men with one gun" who have an unloaded revolver or Fudd shotgun stashed in their closet, buried under piles of junk. Not too much to beware about that.
You could say "beware the man with many guns, for he actually enjoys shooting" with an equal amount of authority.
You could say "beware the man with many guns, for he actually enjoys shooting" with an equal amount of authority.
That wasn't Jeff Cooper's style...this was the equivalent of a sound bite in it's day. I don't think he ever conceived of someone who carried a gun, who wouldn't learn to use it to it's ultimate potential...it was beyond his ken
I didn't realize you were waiting for an example. You mocked, I thought tongue-in-cheek, an example in your previous post...surely, you didn't think the saying was literal.
I know several people who fall into this category. The first two that come to mind are Dave Sevigny and Jerry Miculek
jimmyraythomason
Member
I think that old saying refers to a time when folks didn't run out and buy the latest and greatest (wouldn't even if they could have afforded to). They used what they had and used it very well. They had to rely on that one gun for food and protection on a daily basis. During the great depression, my grand dad had a single shot .22 rifle(they used shorts because they were cheaper). My dad and his brothers had to account for EVERY cartridge they were given. Either bring back game or bring back the cartridge. Missing meant going hungry. No excuse for missing was accepted.
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
hardworker
Member
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2010
- Messages
- 301
I think the saying refers to how some people aren't into guns for the intrinsic coolness of them and view them as a tool for a job. Since you don't need 5 different half inch wrenches, one will work and you get to know it pretty well.
M2 Carbine
member
I first heard that saying as far back as 1960.
The saying is actually, "Beware the man with one gun because he probably knows how to use it".
It has always meant that the person owned only one gun. Not that he had more than one gun but was proficient with one gun.
The saying went on to assume that because the person had only one gun he practiced with only that one gun, so he must be good with it.
The assumption is wrong because a person that chooses to own only one gun does not have the interest in guns and shooting to be good at it.
Think about it. Do you know anyone that chooses to have only one gun that can shoot?
The saying is actually, "Beware the man with one gun because he probably knows how to use it".
It has always meant that the person owned only one gun. Not that he had more than one gun but was proficient with one gun.
The saying went on to assume that because the person had only one gun he practiced with only that one gun, so he must be good with it.
The assumption is wrong because a person that chooses to own only one gun does not have the interest in guns and shooting to be good at it.
Think about it. Do you know anyone that chooses to have only one gun that can shoot?
CoRoMo
Member
I don't know if anyone else has said this, but the saying is just an encouraging comment you throw out to a newbie that has bought his first gun. You try and make the guy feel better about only having one gun, so you tell him that he's some sort of mystical ninja. At least that's what I always thought it was about. You don't want to be some gun snob looking down your nose, and your arsenal that you brought to the range, to this kid who bought a Glock and it's all he owns. So you make him feel better about it all. I don't know. That's what I thought the saying was about.
jimmyraythomason
Member
You are using modern thinking and it is likely correct in today's circumstances HOWEVER in times past having only one gun wasn't a choice it was out of a lack of means to buy more.
huntsman
Member
Since I got my LCP I’ve got in the habit of always having it in my pocket, if I feel the need for a bigger gun that goes on the belt but I still carry the LCP.
One gun? Yeah I could live with that, as it is I’m a minimalist with less than ten guns; at least in my mind.
X-Rap
Member
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2006
- Messages
- 6,657
I think Jimmyray got it right in #34. I remember hearing the phrase in the woods in northern MN. In the old days when my dad was a kid people lived like that, they actually had at least 1 rifle, revolver, and shootgun + a 22 rifle most of the time but there were 4 of them and they hunted and lived way out of town, not much ammo to spread around so every shot needed to count.
SSN Vet
Member
I always suspected that this saying really had some kind of snobbish sentiment underlying it....
Never did like snobs.
SharpsDressedMan
member
If you have just one gun, and really learn how to use it, shouldn't you have another one just like it, in case #1 breaks and you have to fall back on #2 before you get #1 running again?
jimmyraythomason
Member
That would be an ideal situation assuming your circumstances allowed it. We aren't always blessed with an ideal situation.
9mm,
What I'm contending is that there doesn't appear to be even a grain of truth. The best anyone can offer is speculation from decades ago, a time when it may have been one gun and absolute skill set with it that kept a person alive. I'm a fan of COL Cooper and his writings, but this particular line is all flash and no bang.
What I'm contending is that there doesn't appear to be even a grain of truth. The best anyone can offer is speculation from decades ago, a time when it may have been one gun and absolute skill set with it that kept a person alive. I'm a fan of COL Cooper and his writings, but this particular line is all flash and no bang.
jimmyraythomason
Member
The opposite is just as true. I know several people who own many guns each. They also are terrible shots with everything they own. Remember the old adage,"Jack of all trades,master of none" also applies to skills/talents.
CoRoMo
Member
Beware the man with one gun because he PROBABLY knows how to use it
The key word is 'probably'. I read it to basically mean nothing at all (probably=probably not).
____________________________________________________________________________________________
"Beware the man with one gun because he allegedly knows how to use it".
"Beware the man with one gun because he possibly knows how to use it".
"Beware the man with one gun because he imaginably knows how to use it".
"Beware the man with one gun because he plausibly knows how to use it".
"Beware the man with one gun because he may or may not know how to use it".
"Beware the man with one gun because he presumptively knows how to use it".
"Beware the man with one gun because he ostensibly knows how to use it".
"Beware the man with one gun because he supposedly knows how to use it".
"Beware the man with one gun because he by chance knows how to use it".
The key word is 'probably'. I read it to basically mean nothing at all (probably=probably not).
____________________________________________________________________________________________
"Beware the man with one gun because he allegedly knows how to use it".
"Beware the man with one gun because he possibly knows how to use it".
"Beware the man with one gun because he imaginably knows how to use it".
"Beware the man with one gun because he plausibly knows how to use it".
"Beware the man with one gun because he may or may not know how to use it".
"Beware the man with one gun because he presumptively knows how to use it".
"Beware the man with one gun because he ostensibly knows how to use it".
"Beware the man with one gun because he supposedly knows how to use it".
"Beware the man with one gun because he by chance knows how to use it".
Last edited:
jimmyraythomason
Member
How about;"Beware the man who has A gun and is pointing it at you".?
SharpsDressedMan
member
below vvv
It really isn't any different than other sayings, such as:
A stitch in time saves nine or a penny saved is a penny earned.
Why are folks getting so wound up in this?
- Status
Similar threads
