Do we scare off would be shooters

[Frank Ettin]

...Say, I guess nobody else is going to ask, so what kind of instructor were you, anyway?

Actually, that has been asked: post 43, post 46, post 52, and post 59. Shaq hasn't provided a clear, direct answer. I guess it's a state secret or something.

 

[Warp]

It would be a safe assumption that if he has a CCW, he received some "training" or, at least testing in proficiency & basic safety." The point is, he was stupid enough to get intoxicated, then carry his gun & negligently discharge it. There is no training that would prevent an idiot from doing something idiotic. Gun safety is a matter of the person, not their training & no amount of training will change a reckless idiot into a responsible person.

That is not a safe assumption.

You are in way over your head.

(I have been licensed to carry by three different states...non required training)

 

[Shaq]

Your ignorance is showing, and folks should know better than to assume anything. The incident occurred in Washington State. There in no training required to get a CCW in Washington State, so there's no reason to assume that his kid had any training.

It is quite obvious that it is your ignorance that is showing.

And immaturity as well.

 

[Warp]

It is quite obvious that it is your ignorance that is showing.

And immaturity as well.

What ignorance are you referring to?

It has been pointed out to you that many, many people live in shall-issue states where no training is required to get a carry license. Therefore, it is NOT safe to assume a licensed carrier has necessarily received formal training (or any training)...particularly when they are in one of those shall-isse states that does not require training to get the license. That was your ignorant statement. Now you know.

What was Franks' ignorant statement?

 

[Shaq]

What ignorance are you referring to?

It has been pointed out to you that many, many people live in shall-issue states where no training is required to get a carry license. Therefore, it is NOT safe to assume a licensed carrier has necessarily received formal training (or any training)...particularly when they are in one of those shall-isse states that does not require training to get the license. That was your ignorant statement. Now you know.

What was Franks' ignorant statement?

I said "Training or at least testing in basic proficiency or safety. Unless you're saying you just sign your name & get a CCW permit?

 

[Warp]

I said "Training or at least testing in basic proficiency or safety. Unless you're saying you just sign your name & get a CCW permit?

Yes, that's exactly what we are saying!

This is the ignorance we are talking about. You are totally unaware of how this works.

Many people in MANY states can get shall-issue permits with no training or testing, and this includes states such as Washington

I personally have been licensed to carry by three different states with no required training or testing

 

[Frank Ettin]

...Unless you're saying you just sign your name & get a CCW permit?

And that is essentially how it's done in Washington State, together with a background check. Maybe you should have done a little research. Or is that as unnecessary as training?

 

[Theohazard]

I said "Training or at least testing in basic proficiency or safety". Unless you're saying you just sign your name & get a CCW permit?

Yep, that's what they've been repeatedly trying to tell you. Here in WA state, you walk into your local police headquarters or sheriff's office, show your ID, fill out a quick background check form, get fingerprinted on their machine, and pay $52.50 in cash or check. It took me about 15 minutes and that's only because the woman was pretty chatty. Then your permit arrives in the mail usually only a few weeks later.

Gun safety is a matter of the person, not their training & no amount of training will change a reckless idiot into a responsible person

And this comment again shows your ignorance. In the Marine Corps infantry I served with many reckless, irresponsible idiots. But through training and peer pressure (we referred to it as "policing our own") those idiots managed to be completely and utterly safe with firearms. They often did all sorts of other reckless things, but mis-handling firearms wasn't one of them.

Now, most civilians don't receive that level of safety training and constant reinforcement of that training, but the underlying principle is the same: If a civilian is taught proper safety and that training is emphasized and reinforced by their peers, they will be far safer with a firearm than without that training and peer pressure.

Shaq, I have to agree with Frank and 200Apples that you're showing the classic signs of succumbing to the Dunning-Kruger effect.

 

[wahsben]

"If your trainer has bad habits..."

Well sure, that's kind of a self defeating objection. If your drivers ed instructor teaches you bad habits you'll learn to be a bad driver. If your scuba instructor teaches you bad habits you'll... Probably not resurface.

You can't say "training's not that important because you might get a bad instructor" any more than you can say "life jackets aren't that important because you might get one that doesn't float."

Where did I say training is not important?
Plenty of people have managed to handle firearms safely without formal training.
There are people that will be safe no matter what and there are those that won't be safe no matter what.
As I said before training is a good idea as long as you get training from a competent trainer.

 

[grimjaw]

When I first became seriously interested in firearms, the cost of practice was different than it is now, and so were my economic circumstances. Today, if I didn't already own a gun, there would have to be a need for it. I couldn't afford it as a hobby. Hobbies today are more along the lines of the public library. Rimfire is scarce, and the cost savings obtaining by practicing with it versus centerfire ammunition is negligible. I could not afford to practice more than once a month unless I was willing to curtail other activities. By activities, I don't mean going to the movies or dining out, neither of which I can afford to do on a regular basis. Forget about classes or an instructor. The gun would have to be inexpensive, probably used.

My situation is a little extreme, but not so far removed from many, probably the majority of people, who have limited income to spend on their time outside of work.

 

[wahsben]

And on the other hand, with all the abysmal marksmanship and atrocious gun handling I see all the time at the ranges I frequent, the average person has a lot of difficulty learning to shoot.

And if one goes it alone, he will go only as far as whatever natural talent he has will take him. If he has a great deal of natural talent, that might get him fairly far. But no matter how far he might be able to get on his own, good training will take him further.

To most people those will just be words on paper. All one needs to do is watch untrained folks handle guns to see how difficult it is to put those safety rules into practice without some good help.

At our Basic Handgun classes, the students read the safety rules, we discuss them, we put them on our big screen TV and recite them together at various times during the class, and the instructors model safe gun handling at all times so that the students constantly and consistently see the safety rules in action.

And even with all of that, when our students do the various "hands-on" exercises, handling guns under the one-on-one supervision of an instructor, we must still correct their gun handling practices to reinforce and inculcate the application of the safety rules.

And how well you demonstrate that you really don't know what you don't know.

I suggest that you take some time to study a well documented phenomenon, the Dunning–Kruger effect:

​

Yes,some people will treat them just as words and some people will look at training as just something they have to go through in order to satisfy a state requirement and after they have successfully met that requirement the training pretty much goes out the window.
People tend to do what they feel like not necessarily what is best. It's like many of the people texting/talking on the phone while driving.

If a person can't understand treat all guns as if they are loaded.
Be sure of your target and whats behind it.
Keep your finger off the trigger until ready to shoot.
Don't point the gun at anything you don't intend to shoot.
They probably shouldn't be handling any mechanical devices.
As I said I think training is a good idea. I've taken training and would take training on a regular basis if I had the time and the money.

 

[hamp sandwich]

I could not afford to practice more than once a month unless I was willing to curtail other activities.

I understand this! At this stage in my life, it's more about the cost of time as opposed to cost of ammo. However, there are other types of gun related practice that one can enjoy any time. For instance, dry fire exercises, weapon handling, mag changes, etc. All these things are great for shooters at any level, and makes the range days more fun.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...Plenty of people have managed to handle firearms safely without formal training....

Really? Perhaps, but I've still seen plenty of people who, without training, are absolutely lousy.

...If a person can't understand...

And that describes the majority of people I see at the public ranges. However, that can, in most cases be fixed by training.

 

[grimjaw]

However, there are other types of gun related practice that one can enjoy any time.

I hesitate to use the word "enjoy", but I agree with you. Indeed, some weapon handling and safety can be practiced without ammunition, or even without a gun.

 

[wahsben]

Really? Perhaps, but I've still seen plenty of people who, without training, are absolutely lousy.

And that describes the majority of people I see at the public ranges. However, that can, in most cases be fixed by training.

Since there are estimates of between 80 to 100 million gun owners I would say yes really.
I would say many older gun owners probably had little to no formal training growing up and still managed not to shoot themselves and others.

I'm in a state that requires mandatory training to get a license and unfortunately I've seen lousy handling by some of these people too.
As I've said before I think training is a good idea. Mandatory training not a good idea.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...I would say many older gun owners probably had little to no formal training growing up and still managed not to shoot themselves and others.....

I've seen some of those guys and have not been impressed in many cases. And no doubt the ones who were actually proficient had some very good informal training along the way.

And as Sam pointed out (post 56):

...hunting and ... poaching (really? ) ... requires safe gun handling (so were those guys SAFE? Or did they just manage to kill deer?) but killing a deer just isn't that hard. Hitting an animal standing still 50 yards away (or whatever) really isn't that hard, but we all know how many game animals are missed, or wounded badly and lost.

You know hunters ... and poachers (great...) ... who kill deer "successfully" without any practice?

Fantastic! I know hunters who miss shots all the time and manage to wound and lose animals which will suffer, and/or die lost in a bramble somewhere.

What possible point could you have in suggesting that some manage to kill deer? So what? That is not evidence of safe or proficient gun handling....

...I'm in a state that requires mandatory training to get a license and unfortunately I've seen lousy handling by some of these people too....

So they'd do better without any training?

 

[BLB68]

Mandatory training not a good idea.

I don't think anyone has brought up mandatory training in this thread. The topic is scaring new gun owners away by giving out certain advice, including advice on training.

As far as advice to new shooters goes, getting some level of formal training is good advice for many. I've seen a lot of people come to this board for advice as new shooters because they have no one else to ask. Many people who are starting out don't have family members or friends who shoot. They're often advised to attend a basic class, or join an organization so that they can have access to people to help them in person, and maybe make some new friends in the process. Likewise, I've often seen board members encourage each other to be more outgoing and offer friendly advice to newer shooters they may encounter on the range who seem receptive to it. There's a certain element of community building in these face to face interaction that's important, too.

 

[Sam1911]

I don't think anyone has brought up mandatory training in this thread.

Yeah. Shaq did as sort of faltering way to discredit my views. Suggested that if I liked training so much I should ask the government to make it mandatory. (Post 36)

I guess that was sort of like kindergarteners taunting each other, "If you like training so much, why don't you MARRY it?!?"



I must say, it wasn't a terribly convincing rebuttal.

 

[BLB68]

Yeah. Shaq did as sort of faltering way to discredit my views. Suggested that if I liked training so much I should ask the government to make it mandatory. (Post 36)

I guess that was sort of like kindergarteners taunting each other, "If you like training so much, why don't you MARRY it?!?"



I must say, it wasn't a terribly convincing rebuttal.

Yeah, that's what I meant. I should have said "other than as a straw man."

 

[JohnBiltz]

We have states that require training and states that don't, last I heard there was no statistical evidence that says training makes a bit of difference.

We managed to conquer a continent without training courses.

Training courses are a relatively new thing. I think they are a good thing. I think for a new shooter its more economical to buy a course and a case of ammo than buying two cases of ammo. By economical I mean you will improve your shooting more for the same money.

But its not the end all and be all people make it out to be. People successfully defend themselves without it all the time.

There are a lot of trainers on this board who have a vested interest in promoting training.

I started taking personal instruction to overcome some bad habits I learned after an injury several months ago. It was a favorable experience for me as well as being cheaper than wasting ammo on my own trying blindly to fix it.

 

[Sauer Grapes]

We've probably had some new shooters leave the range thinking, ''I'm through with this BS''.
We have range officers and veteran shooters at our club. Not one of us will hesitate to approach another member that is not adhering to range/safety rules.
That said, I have never seen any one of us that wouldn't go out of our way to help new shooters with skills or safety issues.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...We managed to conquer a continent without training courses.....

Not really.

Humans know and can do very few things instinctually. We must learn the knowledge and skills we need to survive -- from what plants are edible to how to properly use tools and weapons. Every human society has had institutionalized processes for teaching people what they need to know and how to do the things they need to be able to do. Instruction might be centered in the family, the extended family, the community or some combination.

So while there may not have been a Gunsite 150 years ago, there were ways in which people were trained and learned what they need to know and how to do what they needed to be able to do. And how well they learned those lessons was often the difference between survival and death.

But our world is different today, and most people don't have access to many of those familial and community based resources -- at least with regard to certain subjects or pursuits. Much educational responsibility has been outsourced from the family to formal educational institutions.

And for many subjects, the resources available outside the family are far greater than those available in the family. The instructors I've had, like Louis Awerbuck, Bennie Coolie, Massad Ayoob and those at Gunsite represent a scope and breadth of knowledge and experience far beyond anything I could have expected at home (notwithstanding the fact that my father had never fired a gun in his life).

Humans have always needed and received training in important skills. It's just that as societies evolve the ways of providing that training change.

...People successfully defend themselves without it all the time....

But only when the problems they faced could be solved with the knowledge and skills they had. If those problems had been different, the results might not have been as satisfactory. The more you can do and the better you can do it, the luckier you're likely to be.

...There are a lot of trainers on this board who have a vested interest in promoting training....

A while ago I cautioned another member about assuming things.

I made my fortune practicing law. In all the years I've help teach people to shoot I've never asked for, or received, a penny. The folks I work with now are all professional who make, or have made, their money in various ways (and have all had multiple classes at schools like Gunsite and Front Sight). We teach for free. Our class fees cover our expenses (like range fees, the ammunition, which we supply, and the books we give the students), and we receive no compensation.

 

[jcwit]

I know a fellow club member that believes it's wrong to look down the muzzle of a bolt action with the bolt out of the rifle.

Wonder how he would load a muzzle loading rifle?

 

[BLB68]

I wasn't aware loading a muzzle loading rifle required you to point it at your face. I learn something every day on here.

 

[Warp]

I wasn't aware loading a muzzle loading rifle required you to point it at your face. I learn something every day on here.

Perhaps, but...can you load that muzzleloader without putting any part of your body in front of the muzzle?

Regardless, I think the point is that it is perfectly acceptable to look down the bore...from the muzzle end...of a rifle that has absolutely verifiably had it's bolt or action removed.

When I take the bolt carrier group out of my AR or the bolt out of my Mosin, nothing wrong with taking a close up look at the crown (or equivalent)