Practice

[pistolshooter]

Recently I talked with two female friends of mine about their hiking trips.
They travel a couple of miles back in to the woods from their car so I asked if they carried a handgun with them on their trips. To my suprise they told me that they carried three(why three, who knows). My next question was how often they practiced shooting them. I wasn't suprised to find out that they hardly ever practiced. I suggested that they practice at least once a month because if they ever needed to use them it should be an automatic response. Thats not the time to think about what to do or how to aim. How often do you think people buy a handgun and never practice with it? At the end of our conversation they both agreed that they needed to go practice.

 

[7.62FullMetalJacket]

Honestly, it will take a lot of practice to become proficient. Frequency is not important as quality time. They probably also need work at manual of arms. Load, unload, check, reload, switch mags, decock, speedloader, clean, maintain, rinse, lather, repeat, etc.

 

[BerettaNut92]

What I used to think was practice (i.e. plinking at the indoor range) wasn't nearly as important as the mindset, handling and all that other stuff they teach at gun camp.

 

[P95Carry]

That Pistolshooter is why I have one beef with my own state's CCW ... ''shall issue''. It is on the one hand pleasantly straightforward .. but on the other does nothing to try and ensure that the rank newbies have any means or need to go practice and become at least proficient.

The RIGHT itself is not at issue .. I am happy with that but ... even for a newbie's own sake .. some semblance of proficiency is both useful and IMO necessary ... both to safeguard themselves from accidental harm ... and others too.

Beyond which is the, more than useful fact that adequate competance does mean at least a fighting chance of defending successfully.

I am not a fan of some state's almost ''draconian'' requirements for training courses, at vast expense ........ but as a simple expedient, feel that a quick ''qualifier'' would be good for all.

 

[7.62FullMetalJacket]

Skunkabilly, If it was .308, I would do it in a minute.

 

[Kamicosmos]

all that other stuff they teach at gun camp.

I would pay to hear Allison Hanagan say:

"This one time, at Gun Camp..."

 

[CZ52GUY]

I wonder how many at Lexington & Concord...

...had received training from a "certified instructor".

The RIGHT itself is not at issue .. I am happy with that but ... even for a newbie's own sake .. some semblance of proficiency is both useful and IMO necessary ... both to safeguard themselves from accidental harm ... and others too.

Yes, it makes some sense to gain training, but any state imposition is an infringement.

Human beings have a fundamental right to defend themselves. Lacking claws and fangs, we identify and procure tools which allow us to provide a credible defense if necessary.

That these women had the mind set to procure and implement a meaningful defense if necessary is preferable to the alternative.

Yes, it is advisable for them to seek proficiency.

No, we have no right to impose that requirement upon them.

Best wishes,

CZ52'

 

[444]

"How often do you think people buy a handgun and never practice with it? "

90%

 

[P95Carry]

CZ-52 ... I thought hard about what I said and how to say it .... and should qualify that - in two directions..

First .. I abhor anything which even seems close to infringement of rights .. I detest ''regulation'' and ''mandatory'' this-and-that when it stifles rights. That is my prime thinking ...... however -

Second - Look at it this way re what I am trying to get at. I think many ''mandatory'' prescribed courses for CCW are way excessive and costly (almost as if they are that way to try and deter people!). So overall I am dead against them.

But consider this (imagine if you will, tongue in cheek!!) ..... say I have a little old lady who lives next door ... and she decides (having NEVER owned or even fired a gun of any sort - unlikely round here but bear with me!) .. that she feels things are not as safe as she'd like and so goes downtown, and picks up ''a gun'' ... hopefully directed halfways sensibly toward something manageable.

Legally she can do this ..... if she's clean ... bingo .. $300 or so Dollars later she leaves the shop with, say a snub (heaven forbid it should be a semi for a first gun!). She then same day trots by Sheriff's office .. signs this and that, gets checked again ... pays her $19 (plus $1.50 for reduced and laminated) .. and sets off for home 20 minutes later.

At day's end she has metamorphosed from an unarmed potential victim (no argument there) ... to a gun totin soul who now keeps the piece in her pocket, purse, whatever. We'll assume she bought a box of 50 rounds and has loaded it but beyond that??

She may decide that ''why bother to fire it and make it dirty'' ... ''why waste expensive ammo'' ..... and so keeps this on her person, against the time she ''might need it''.

Now my very long winded point is .. whilst she has dutifully and lawfully excercised her rights ...... is she safe?? If no one is around to help her and she does not seek advise or help for practice ... surely she is potentially a danger both to herself ... and maybe even some poor innocent who happens by when she is in a ''nervous'' frame of mind.

See what I am getting at ..... I am not worried that she has excercised her rights . I am worried she might shoot herself or the wrong person.

So - even if I too am essentially against any imposition of a proficiency test .. I do OTOH feel that a brief, very brief, assessment by someone who is experienced would go a long ways to helping the safety issue. It'd take five minutes to establish if someone is safe ... barring the need to then perhaps help with some tuition.

What might this lil ole lady's 4 safety rules be when asked .. I wonder ....

''Keep the damn gun loaded''

''Point it at anything that moves which seems a threat''

''Always keep finger on trigger for faster response''

''Bury the sucker before the cops arrive''

 

[CZ52GUY]

P95

Hey Guy,

Is she a human being with a God given right to defend herself?

Does the 2nd Amendment guarantee her the right to obtain tools to provide a credible defense?

End of discussion.

Not you, or I, or Rosie or Chuck or Diane have any right whatsoever to question that right.

Respectfully, either amend the 2nd to require little old ladies to pass a course, or deal with it. That "someone somewhere maybe doing something that I'm afraid of so we should pass a law" is how we got into this mess. That many gun owners became a fifth column by accepting these "common sense" laws is the same road that England traveled (doesn't seem to be working out too well for gun owners there...).

This has particular interest to me based on a crime committed against a real individual that fits the description of your hypothetical and is supported statistically by the CDC stats (often manipulated by the other side).

A waste of oxygen and space broke in a private home and raped and robbed a women about 60 years his senior about 18 months ago about 20 minutes from where I live...about 5 minutes from my in-laws.

When folks are considering "there should be a law", they need to consider the realities we live in.

Even by the CDC stats, a senior is much more likely to be murdered than the victim of an ND. The rest of us are much more likely to be the victim of crimes based on an unarmed infringed upon populace that has their 2nd Amendment guaranteed God given right of self-defense regulated (or litigated) away from them than being the victim of a ND by a novice senior.

Risk quantified = probabilty x consequence

While plausible, your scenario and concern is not probable. MMMer's do the same thing regarding (we must save the children...). Kids are many times more likely to die in a car accident than be the victim of gun (accompanied by its criminal accomplice) homicide. ND deaths involving kids are less frequent than falls.

Again, folks should practice, definitely!

Should there be a law requiring it, absolutely not!

As long as you are a living breathing law-abiding citizen of these United States, you have the God given right to buy a gun to protect yourself...there is no pre-requisite. That some states/cities have imposed unconstitutional infringements doesn't change the God given aspect of that right. As lawful gun owners, we need to be fighting to restore that right to every law abiding citizen throughout this country, not fretting that someone somewhere may not be getting in enough practice.

Solution to your concern, invite the little old lady to the range with you and give her a free lesson .

Best Wishes,

CZ52'

 

[Gordon Fink]

Those who care will get training and practice regulary. Those who don’t care won’t train, and if they need to carry, they probably won’t bother with permits either.

Once again, rules and regulations only apply to those who follow rules and regulations.

~G. Fink

 

[popbang]

I believe many people purchase a handgun just so they can say they have it, and practice isn't high on their lists of things to do. The gun sits on a shelf beside the half box of ammo they got with it.

As far as training I feel everybody should get it, but I do not feel mandatory training is needed. It is surprising just how few accidents happen in conjunction with people that have a concealed carry license.

People that are going to carry a firearm need to practice in variety of ways to maintain their abilities, yet it seems only the dyed in the wool gun types actually do it.

 

[P95Carry]

Thx for the reply CZ-52 ...

Is she a human being with a God given right to defend herself?

Sure is? Not disputing that .. so hope you didn't take my rather frivolous ''scenario'' too seriously!! I am not trying to minimalize the right at all ......... guess it is just that I can think back to one person in particular, admittedly not the old soul of my ''story'' ... but someone well younger. Someone who got so close to killing his brother it was scary .. and he knows that and admits it.

At the time tho ... he was an accident almost lookin for somewhere to happen .. and even he wishes, now, he had bothered to take some form of advise or training.... which he has since done, almost needless to say! He was lucky (and so was the bro!).

Not tryin to cross swords buddy .... we are on same page most of the way. Just the prob I have with guns in sometimes careless hands!

 

[CZ52GUY]

P95

I don't think we're crossing swords buddy.

There is danger in trying to impose common sense with legislation.

We can all agree that gun safety is essentially, and absent a mentor (like many of us have had) within ones circle of friends and family, that professional instruction is extremely desirable, and should be encouraged. Even those of us who have had the good fortune to have a mentor from within our inner circle can benefit from professional instruction.

My concern is with the "there ought to be a law" syndrome which has manifested itself in too many ways.

Next, they'll be villainizing Twinkies because of the "public nuisance" they cause because someone will try to link them to heart disease.

I think we need to encourage good behavior, but the greater risk is compromising God given rights with the best of intentions.

Best wishes,

CZ52'

 

[10-Ring]

Unfortunately, there are far too many that think they will automatically be proficient w/ their handgun w/o devoting the right amount of practice time. At that point they might as well have a really think security blanket or current medical insurance.

 

[El Tejon]

P95, the most effective way to address your concern is to cultivate the culture--turn a "Culture of Ignorance" (where people are proud of their ignorance) that we currently have regarding firearms into a "Culture of Learning." Some way or another, I have day to day experience in observing how ineffectual "the law" is in impacting human behavior.