Robert Hairless wrote:
It's no more amusing than advising her to become proficient with her choice of small arms. Then again, I thought we had a choice in the U.S.A. Advising and demanding are two different things, and I am not demanding that anyone be proficient when it comes to fitness or combat skills. I do know, however, that both types of proficiencies are statistically proven to help survive a combat scenario.
Let's be honest: by age 80, if you've neither taken efforts to improve your fitness nor learn anything about firearms, chances are your achievements past that point with either will be, at best, marginal.
But if a "fitness regime" consists of the older lady doing some light stretches and carrying 3 pound weights in either hand for 30 minutes, a couple of times a week, I won't be the one to tell her to stop. Likewise, if all she can manage is a break-open .22 revolver, and she can barely hit anything with it, I won't be the one to tell her not to keep it by the bedstand.
BullfrogKen wrote:
Of course mindset is key, but there are plenty of threads about that. Likewise there are plenty of threads about how, why, and where to point and shoot to stop a threat. But past that, I'm going to take any edge I can, within reason. Within reason meaning that I am not going to give up an inordinate amount of time, money, or freedom to avoid potential danger. Happily, I have personally found that it is fairly easy and enjoyable to increase my fitness levels, and thus that it falls well within my definition of "reasonable."
Here is what I am saying:
Improving your fitness proficiencies will likely improve your combat proficiencies (E&E, firearm skills, and hand-to-hand), no matter what level of fitness or combat proficiency you currently have. There is a reason that there are police and military fitness standards. There is a reason we practice things, no?
Here is what I am not saying:
That fitness is the end-all-be-all of combat.
That fitness is more important, in combat, than mindset or firearm proficiency.
That all people of all ages should have equal fitness proficiency (or for that matter, combat proficiency).
That anyone who does not choose the same path as me is wrong.
Thanks for the replies everyone.
It's no more amusing than advising her to become proficient with her choice of small arms. Then again, I thought we had a choice in the U.S.A. Advising and demanding are two different things, and I am not demanding that anyone be proficient when it comes to fitness or combat skills. I do know, however, that both types of proficiencies are statistically proven to help survive a combat scenario.
Let's be honest: by age 80, if you've neither taken efforts to improve your fitness nor learn anything about firearms, chances are your achievements past that point with either will be, at best, marginal.
But if a "fitness regime" consists of the older lady doing some light stretches and carrying 3 pound weights in either hand for 30 minutes, a couple of times a week, I won't be the one to tell her to stop. Likewise, if all she can manage is a break-open .22 revolver, and she can barely hit anything with it, I won't be the one to tell her not to keep it by the bedstand.
BullfrogKen wrote:
Of course mindset is key, but there are plenty of threads about that. Likewise there are plenty of threads about how, why, and where to point and shoot to stop a threat. But past that, I'm going to take any edge I can, within reason. Within reason meaning that I am not going to give up an inordinate amount of time, money, or freedom to avoid potential danger. Happily, I have personally found that it is fairly easy and enjoyable to increase my fitness levels, and thus that it falls well within my definition of "reasonable."
Here is what I am saying:
Improving your fitness proficiencies will likely improve your combat proficiencies (E&E, firearm skills, and hand-to-hand), no matter what level of fitness or combat proficiency you currently have. There is a reason that there are police and military fitness standards. There is a reason we practice things, no?
Here is what I am not saying:
That fitness is the end-all-be-all of combat.
That fitness is more important, in combat, than mindset or firearm proficiency.
That all people of all ages should have equal fitness proficiency (or for that matter, combat proficiency).
That anyone who does not choose the same path as me is wrong.
Thanks for the replies everyone.
But I'm really, really out of shape, in part due to my excessive use of computers and in part due to the long winters up here (ie, they're cold and inhospitable to life). I also smoke and don't get any exercise, and at times my diet is horrible (ie not enough food punctuated by periods of gorging myself on junk/unhealthy food, simply not eating enough regularly, or overeating in general).
