Hobby versus proficiency. Is there a conflict?

[B!ngo]

I suspect that many of the participants in THR consider a firearm to be a very critical tool in home- and/or self-defense. Whether just inside the house, or carrying a weapon daily, most comments about shot placement, well-honed familiarity and frequent practice are in the context of using a gun as a defensive tool.
But many threads point to firearms, and particularly firearms collecting as a hobby. Where small or large collections of dissimilar firearms, often carried by the batch to the range, provide a great deal of satisfaction to the owner/shooter/collector.
I understand both of these perspectives, but wonder about whether they are in conflict. That is, it would seem that if you honed your skill at the range with just one handgun design, one rifle/carbine design and/or one shotgun design, you'd be a faster, more accurate shooter, and one that could take care of emergency procedures with the weapon more efficiently.
I was wondering how people feel about this apparent tradeoff. Is it in fact a tradeoff, or can many experienced shooters move from one weapon to the other, whether recently practiced or not, with no loss in effectiveness?
Thx,
B

 

[HOOfan_1]

Special Operations troops train with all kinds of weapons because they don't know what they will end up with. Of course the government is footing their ammo bill and that is their full time job, but they seem pretty proficient.

Sure if you familiarize yourself with 1 weapon, you will be better than jumping around, but some people are better at adapting to situations than others. In the end if you are not someone who thinks they will have extremely bad tunnel vision in a stressful situation, then practice is practice and practice is good with any weapon.

I think Mario Andretti could probably school most of us in any car he climbs into.

If you are the type of person who must rely on routine in stressful situations and you can't multitask to save your life...you might be better practicing 99% of the time with your main weapon.

 

[k4swb]

Every gun I have ever bought was purchased for fun.

I have never acquired any firearm for personal or home defense. All have been for just shooting and a couple for hunting.

I do not have any idea what I will do if I ever need to use a gun offensively. My goal has always been for me to shoot the best I can while having fun and hope I will stay calm when needed and let things take care of themselves.

I have never trained for combat and do not plan to in the future.

Training for combat would be absolutely no fun to me.

I don't care if others do and I applaud anyone getting into the shooting sports for any reason but when it comes to SD/combat shooting, I'll just sit and watch.

 

[browningguy]

I really don't see a trade off, I practice with many different types of rifles and pistols and just don't see a problem.

 

[happygeek]

I bought the same pistol that's used at work partly so the training would carry over, partly because of familiarity, and partly because I don't shoot much centerfire off-duty so it's good to have a pistol I'm already trained on.

I'd say 95% + of my off-duty shooting is 22LR, but my evil black semi-auto 22LR mimics the issue rifle at work so again training carries over.

I collect centerfires, but I don't attempt to gain or maintain some high standard of proficiency with them, with the exception of that one pistol. Realistically though, how many of the people from the NRA's Armed Citizen column went to Gunsite or a carbine course? How many of them trained even monthly? I'd guess almost none of them.

 

[BSA1]

The basics of fine shooting are the same regardless of firearm.

 

[rcmodel]

or can many experienced shooters move from one weapon to the other, whether recently practiced or not, with no loss in effectiveness?

Yes, they can.

Shooting skill is kind of like riding a bicycle.

Once you have the basics down, it doesn't matter what kind of bicycle you jump on.

In shooting, once you have the basics of front sight, breathing & trigger control down, it doesn't matter much what kind of gun you are shooting.

In the service I shot .22 pistols, 38 revolvers, .45 ACP 1911's, and several kinds of match rifles all in the same week.

The finest fine edge may have taken a while to get back with each gun, but the worst day was still better then a lot of shooters days.

While I am not nearly as good now as I was back then, I still don't feel handicapped at all by changing from a revolver, to an auto pistol, to a shotgun, to a rifle.
I can still hold my own with a lot of younger guys I betcha.

rc

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

Personally, I don't see where there is necessarily a trade off.

If one owns firearms for the primary purpose of personal protection, his focus is on proficient use of any such weapon for that purpose...including carrying concealed and holster training on the range.

If one owns firearms for the primary purpose of collecting/hobby shooting, then his focus is necessarily on that. He may do little, if any, actual shooting if his interest is solely in collecting. Or he may do extensive target shooting or hunting, in which he will again focus on gaining proficiency in using the weapon for that purpose.

And some own firearms for both purposes.

The skills of one lend themselves directly to the skills required for the other. There are many benefits to doing both...and few, if any, detractions.

I target shoot with a variety of weapons in my small collection. But I only use a few for concealed carry. Those I will put in some extra time training to maintain a minimum proficiency in additional characteristics that I do not for weapons I would not carry for personal defense.

For example, I don't practice drawing a rifle from a holster under a jacket because I don't carry a full sized rifle in a holster under a jacket.

And the training/skills inherent in each (hobby versus defense) are complimentary, in my opinion.

Consider, for example, eating utensils...butter knife, fork, salad fork, steak knife, spoon, soup spoon. Each has a different or similar function and use. But when the time comes to eat, we don't have problems with mistakenly attempting to use a fork or knife to eat soup...and using a regular spoon instead of a soup spoon is perfectly functional for the need.

The same principle applies to owning a variety of guns for a variety of purposes. We collect and train on them for the purposes we intend to use them for. And the principles behind all that training is similar enough not to conflict.

My opinion. I'm willing to debate this with anybody.

 

[B!ngo]

Every gun I have ever bought was purchased for fun.

I have never acquired any firearm for personal or home defense. All have been for just shooting and a couple for hunting.

I do not have any idea what I will do if I ever need to use a gun offensively. My goal has always been for me to shoot the best I can while having fun and hope I will stay calm when needed and let things take care of themselves.

I have never trained for combat and do not plan to in the future.

Training for combat would be absolutely no fun to me.

I don't care if others do and I applaud anyone getting into the shooting sports for any reason but when it comes to SD/combat shooting, I'll just sit and watch.

I was going to add a caveat that stated something like, 'this question only applies if you are both an SD'er and a collector/hunter/hobbyist' but I didn't. But you know what I mean...
B

 

[Teachu2]

Not a conflict. The skills transfer. I shot S&W revolvers and Colt 1911s for three decades, and didn't want to try a Glock. My views changed, and I found that I didn't shoot Glocks as well as 1911s - until I changed my hold on them. Now - about a thousand rounds later, I can shoot a G34, a G30, and a G21 well enough to put up the top three scores in last Sunday's GSSF Indoor event locally.

Skills transfer. Adaptations to particular weapons have to be made, but the core skills remain.

Jay Leno has a huge collection of cars, including steamers, and can drive them all.

 

[GunnerShotz]

Consider, for example, eating utensils...butter knife, fork, salad fork, steak knife, spoon, soup spoon. Each has a different or similar function and use. But when the time comes to eat, we don't have problems with mistakenly attempting to use a fork or knife to eat soup...and using a regular spoon instead of a soup spoon is perfectly functional for the need.

The same principle applies to owning a variety of guns for a variety of purposes. We collect and train on them for the purposes we intend to use them for. And the principles behind all that training is similar enough not to conflict.

My opinion. I'm willing to debate this with anybody.

No argument here

I figure as long as there's no confusing the fundamentals of any given tool for it's task, and the purpose for it is clearly understood, then there's no conflict.

 

[LeonCarr]

My firearms are tools. Tools for hunting, self-defense, and challenging the psyche through proficiency in shooting.

YMMV, but I personally think it is just plain foolish to have firearms in your home and not know how to use them. Your firearms related hobby should include being proficient with them. Shooting from time to time with a group of folks so the group can experience different types of firearms is a good thing, for the fellowship and also the familiarization.

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

 

[beatledog7]

Skills transfer.

I would imagine a Formula One driver can also parallel park.

 

[enjine]

Every gun I have ever bought was purchased for fun.

I have never acquired any firearm for personal or home defense. All have been for just shooting and a couple for hunting.

I do not have any idea what I will do if I ever need to use a gun offensively. My goal has always been for me to shoot the best I can while having fun and hope I will stay calm when needed and let things take care of themselves.

I have never trained for combat and do not plan to in the future.

Training for combat would be absolutely no fun to me.

I don't care if others do and I applaud anyone getting into the shooting sports for any reason but when it comes to SD/combat shooting, I'll just sit and watch.

Interesting and refreshing post.
I didn't think many others on the various gun sites felt the same way, and this is pretty much exactly my view as well.

 

[David E]

Yes, skills transfer.....but only if you have them to start with.

If you only shoot "for fun," then you have damn few skills that'll instantly transfer over into a rapidly unfolding combat/defensive situation.

To think otherwise is foolish.

 

[taraquian]

Other than the already mentioned skills transfer, I train with my carry weapon during every trip to the range. That way even though I use many different firearms my ' natural' movements are with that weapon, its all the OTHER guns that require me to use motions I am less familiar with

 

[B!ngo]

I would imagine a Formula One driver can also parallel park.

Yes, I would imagine that most can as well. But comparing the typical shooter to the gun equivalent of Seb Vetel would hardly be playing fair. And even young Seb may not be able to parallel park as well as some other motor sport athlete that does it numerous times per day (likely a hypothetical). Separately, just as most anyone can parallel park, most anyone can shoot a gun. The point of my question was determining whether shooting many weapons dilutes your ability to shoot your best with a single weapon (of your choice). I don't think many people would disagree that, for the moment you need a weapon for SD/HD, and for however much you'd trained, you'd want to know that you trained your best.
Seems like a better comparison is with golf - a very high skill hand-eye coordination sport. Playing every day with three or four different brands of clubs, different angles, different grips, etc. is not something a pro does. They lock in the fewest number of variables that they reasonably can and then train from there.
But I do accept that there are many on this thread who are likely much better shooters than I and who claim otherwise and I have no reason to disbelieve them other than it's non-intuitive. I own a few handguns but in general, they are variants of the same model for the reason I posed the question. I look and lust at other handguns but am always concerned that it would be dilutive to my already weak skills.
Perhaps not.
B

 

[mavracer]

As long as the sights are on top and the trigger is on the bottom I'll probably be OK.

 

[David E]

As long as the sights are on top and the trigger is on the bottom I'll probably be OK.

If slow-fire recreational shooting is all you're comparing, you're correct.

 

[1911 guy]

I have some firearms that are strictly for hobbies like hunting or target shooting. I also have a few that are for defense. I think the biggest difference is how seriously I take the practice and how often I practice. I stop shooting for fun when it becomes "unfun". I stop serious practice when the bad habit is broken, the good habit is ingrained or the principle behind the drill is mastered.

 

[GRIZ22]

Miyamoto said in the 17th century "a warrior should not have a favorite weapon".

This is why special ops troops train with just about everything out there. If you don't have your M4 you'll be just as comfortable with an AK, H&K, FN or whatever is at hand.

For the rest of us you just have to decide how much of a warrior you want to be.

 

[Davek1977]

I'd rather be averagely proficient with many styles than an expert with one. I like the fact I can pick up a rifle or handgun of nearly any make or model and be able to operate it safely.

 

[Sam1911]

We have had a number of very similar threads on this question. Here's a good one: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=648113

In it, I responded:

I DO practice with, compete with, and carry several different styles of handgun. (1911, xDM, 629, CZ75 (SA or DA/SA), and others on occasion.)

I tend to concentrate on one platform at a time. When I switch between them I expect to need 1,000 rounds or so (maybe a couple months) of weekly practice to get back on top of my game with them. I can pick up any of them, any day, and make a shot -- but to really RUN a gun well, to be in top form with it, I need to concentrate on that one and re-establish the habits that make me do what needs done with that gun seamlessly, every time, without conscious effort.

If you want to get the most out of your training dollar, pick one gun, put the others in the safe, and dedicate yourself to becoming ONE with that weapon for a period of time (like, maybe one full year).

That's not the "gun nut" perspective -- which wants to play with all the cool, pretty, fun, interesting, and different guns -- but more the shooting mastery view.

(I also firmly believe that we're trending toward a common best type of pistol -- one basic form that does the very best job for the very largest number of skilled shooters with the highest return on the practice & training investment. But which one is a debate for another time.)

Now, that's all defensive and/or competition stuff (for me, very similar). I also will shoot hunting rifles, shotguns at clay birds, .22s with the kids, etc. etc. I don't feel that detracts from the focus of my primary concentration.

To reiterate my main point: I can pick up any of them, any day, and make a shot -- but to really RUN a gun well, to be in top form with it, I need to concentrate on that one and re-establish the habits that make me do what needs done with that gun seamlessly, every time, without conscious effort.

 

[mavracer]

If slow-fire recreational shooting is all you're comparing, you're correct.

By all means since your a self proclaimed expert in my abilities what guns can I not shoot OK with rapid fire at SD ranges?

 

[holdencm9]

I'd rather be averagely proficient with many styles than an expert with one. I like the fact I can pick up a rifle or handgun of nearly any make or model and be able to operate it safely.

Agreed!

Would I be better if I ONLY ever practiced with my SD/HD weapon platforms, of course. But only marginally, and then if I don't have them available to me, I am SOL. It is part hobby, part "tool for self-defense" to me. I like shooting a variety of platforms, it is fun. I like owning them and learning how they function and looking at the different designs. If shooting a mosin or plinking with a .22 makes makes me less proficient with my AR, so be it. I think it is still beneficial practice, just not AS beneficial as if I were to practice only with the AR.