Respect (or lack there of) for older Gun Writers

[Mike J]

In all honesty I never really did the gun magazine thing much. Growing up my dad wasn't a gun guy. In my 30's I got into hunting. I made it a point to have adequate firearms to be able to hunt whatever I wanted to. I married late & when my oldest two girls were about a year and a half and two and a half years old I realized I needed to carry a handgun. Of course, I needed to develop proficiency. I went at it backwards trying to teach myself using what I read on the forum boards & saw on youtube. My wife gave me Massad Ayoob's book, " The Gun Digest Book of Combat Handgunnery". I read it & then took it out with me when I shot. I would try things & then look at the book to troubleshoot what I was doing wrong. In a way Ayoob taught me to shoot a pistol.
I'm not saying I agree with everything I see he or any of them put out in print or video, but I always sift things for useful information.
As for arfcom I have browsed there on occasion. I have went there to find useful information about how to assemble an AR but I don't care for the site as a whole.

 

[tdbmd]

Interesting thread. I have read/own a number of books from those "old school" writers and still find their information and experiences interesting. Are there new techniques? Sure. Does that mean everything that has been previously written on shooting and self defense is obsolete, I don't think so. I agree with the observations regarding some of the keyboard commandos who just seem to be itching to get in a fight, either online or in the real world.

 

[Riomouse911]

I guess it’s a bit like The Circle of Life.

The first generation experiments with the technology they have on hand, and relay their trials and successes to others.

The next generation comes along using newer technology and dismisses the old as outdated, behind the times, etc.

Many of the first generation tries out newer things and blends them with older techniques and improve, before they move on to the great range in the sky.

The younger generation comes along and dismisses both prior generations as old, outdated, etc.

The next generation waxes nostalgjc and realizes the first generation had many good things going on. They heed the lessons and blend some old into the new and improve. They are now on the precipice of moving on to the great range in the sky.

The youngest generation comes along and dismisses the prior generations as old, outdated, etc…

On and on and on.

Reading the older Jim Cirilo, Bill Jordan, Elmer Keith, Jeff Cooper, Massad Ayoob stuff is very good foundational information. Yes, guns and optics and ammo technology and performance have progressed greatly over the decades. But the fundamentals of good shooting; with revolver or auto, rifle or shotgun, haven’t changed that much at all. And once you learn, practice and master those fundamental things, you are well on your way.

Now if I could just figure out how to master them…

Stay safe.

 

[Hokkmike]

View attachment 1194374

The other expression I have heard is, "Don't get into a pissing match with a skunk. Either way - you lose!"

 

[Old Dog]

In all honesty I never really did the gun magazine thing much.

Here's the thing: the great gunwriters of the past weren't published only in the "gun magazines" - periodicals with strictly firearm content from the 1930s through the 1960s.

Outdoor Life, Sports Afield, Field and Stream were only a few of the notable outdoor magazines at the time, but there were a myriad of pulp "men's magazines" that published gun=related content as well as stuff such as True magazine.

Anyone remember Man's Life? Adventure magazine?

Even mainstream television had hunting shows -- ABC's Wide World of Sports, for example.

Then there was the fact that many of these guys wrote and published actual hardcover books.

I guess those that came of age in the internet era have had no exposure to the widespread variety of what was out there in the print medium back in the day. As a young boy, it was glorious. And a heckava lot more interesting than a lot of what's out there on the internet these days. No AI, and a lot better (more literate) writing.

 

[.308 Norma]

My biggest gripe is misuse of grammar and spelling by the new breed.

I guess those that came of age in the internet era have had no exposure to the widespread variety of what was out there in the print medium back in the day. As a young boy, it was glorious. And a heckava lot more interesting than a lot of what's out there on the internet these days. No AI, and a lot better (more literate) writing.

I also enjoyed reading the great stuff the older guns and hunting authors wrote. And, because I actually have a half-dozen or so books by Keith, and a few more by Capstick, every once in a while, I still enjoy reading what a couple of those "old" guys wrote.
However, I don't think it's fair to compare the grammar, spelling and overall literacy used in the way those guys wrote to the way posters on internet forums write. We need to remember that those "old" gun writers had editors that reviewed and corrected (grammar, spelling, punctuation, etc.) their work long before it ever went to the printing press. In fact, I remember reading somewhere that editing Elmer Keith's work was a real challenge because Keith, as intelligent as he was, had no formal education.

 

[Jim Watson]

Keith said he agreed to do 'Hell, I Was There' only when the publisher said he could dictate it.

Jeff Cooper was a Stanford grad, and surely learned to write reports to USMC standard.
Jack O'Connor and Henry Stebbins were English professors.

 

[Kleanbore]

Outdoor Life, Sports Afield, Field and Stream were only a few of the notable outdoor magazines at the time, but there were a myriad of pulp "men's magazines" that published gun=related content as well as stuff such as True magazine.

The True Magazine gun editor, Lucian Cary, wrote the great J. M. Pyne stories that were published in The Saturday Evening Post.

 

[Miami_JBT]

Here's the thing: the great gunwriters of the past weren't published only in the "gun magazines" - periodicals with strictly firearm content from the 1930s through the 1960s.

Outdoor Life, Sports Afield, Field and Stream were only a few of the notable outdoor magazines at the time, but there were a myriad of pulp "men's magazines" that published gun=related content as well as stuff such as True magazine.

Anyone remember Man's Life? Adventure magazine?

Even mainstream television had hunting shows -- ABC's Wide World of Sports, for example.

Then there was the fact that many of these guys wrote and published actual hardcover books.

I guess those that came of age in the internet era have had no exposure to the widespread variety of what was out there in the print medium back in the day. As a young boy, it was glorious. And a heckava lot more interesting than a lot of what's out there on the internet these days. No AI, and a lot better (more literate) writing.

Famed US Civil War artist, Mort Künstler, got his start as an artist doing cover work for men's pulp magazines like For Men Only, Man's Life, and Adventure.

 

[P5 Guy]

Reminds me of a Mothers of Invention album cover.

 

[Ridgerunner665]

I believe its because those old guys are past the point of caring about the latest trend... they speak from their experience, not what someone sold them on.

Optics on handguns is a prime example... my thoughts on it are the same as Hackathorns... I'm faster with irons, that isn't talk, it's my experience (which is NOTHING compared to his)... but its not popular opinion these days, and it doesn't sell stuff.

I've had optics on 1 pistol...a Glock 40 10mm, set up for hunting with a Leupold Deltapoint Pro.... very accurate at the range, but the very first time I needed it while hunting, the angle of the sun put such a glare on the optic it was as useless as tits on a boar hog.... that 1 experience told me everything I need to know about that subject... no more optics on handguns for me.

Mas used to post here some, I bet he still reads some...

I'll listen carefully to what guys like Ayoob, Hackathorn, Howe, Smith, etc have to say... every time and always... some of it might not fit me perfectly from time to time, but I still respect their experience.

 

[Miami_JBT]

RDS on pistols is the future. I recognize it and it takes a complete different mindset and method of training in using then.

Now, does that mean I'll personally go and buy the latest and greatest pistol out there? Nope. But I might just have a spare Gen 4 G26 machined for one.

Why? Because I do recognize progress and it can be the one pistol that gets me able to use one.

 

[Old Dog]

RDS on pistols is the future.

For some. Amazing we got along for so many hundreds of years without "carry optics."

 

[trackskippy]

LOL. Or cars, airplanes, computers, phones, miniguns, drones with Reapers, or whatever else Im forgetting.

 

[goon]

It’s kind of like small lightweight revolvers: J frame 38’s, the LCR, 327 mag, LCR’s in 22 LR, NAA revolvers. On paper there’s no reason for anyone to use these anymore. But in practice, they are so useful and trouble free that gunmakers

Keith said he agreed to do 'Hell, I Was There' only when the publisher said he could dictate it.

Jeff Cooper was a Stanford grad, and surely learned to write reports to USMC standard.
Jack O'Connor and Henry Stebbins were English professors.

What a great era it must have been when English professors were also gun writers.

 

[Miami_JBT]

For some. Amazing we got along for so many hundreds of years without "carry optics."

We got along with blood letting for centuries too. Times change.... I accept it and take from the past what works and use it in the present to kake the future better.

 

[Howland937]

I'll listen carefully to what guys like Ayoob, Hackathorn, Howe, Smith, etc have to say

It took me a long time to figure out, but the people with the most "experience" don't always make the best teachers. Dumb people never make good teachers. Hell, a monkey can pull a trigger. Guys like you mention, who've spent years learning, analyzing, repeating the process...I'll listen to 'em too.

 

[benEzra]

For some. Amazing we got along for so many hundreds of years without "carry optics."

We did, but the slow decline of older shooters’ ability through their 40s and 50s to focus sharply on irons in low light was just accepted as a loss with few remedies, too.

Red dots on pistols may be no better than irons for those who can still see irons crisply in less-than-ideal lighting, but for those of us who can’t focus as sharply up close as we once could without changing glasses, red dots can be a big help, especially in adverse lighting conditions.

 

[Howland937]

red dots can be a big help, especially in adverse lighting conditions

Think we're all just trying to make our inevitable decline a little more like a ramp and less like a cliff.

 

[Miami_JBT]

Think we're all just trying to make our inevitable decline a little more like a ramp and less like a cliff.

Getting old sucks, being dead sucks worse.

 

[Bob Willman]

I met Elmer Keith twice at NRA Annual Meetings. I had "Hell I Was There" , another of his books and he autographed an article in a magazine he had written. Lost all of them in a house fire. My favorite writer now is Craig Boddington. They both write in plain language with a sense of honesty.

NRA Benefactor

 

[.308 Norma]

Lost all of them in a house fire.

Sorry.

 

[dranrab]

Social media, be it forums or Facebook, can be an absolute schidt show. It's a playground where people thrive on being contrarian or adversarial just for the sake of being so. Few people explore topics with genuine curiosity and few truly try to understand other's viewpoints. When you accept that as part and parcel of the landscape, it's much easier to cope with it.

 

[thump_rrr]

I always enjoyed reading The Ayoob Files in American Handgunner.

One of the stories published is a self defense shooting by one of the members of ARFCOM.

 

[CherokeeGunslinger]

Browsing one of the other gun forums (the black rifle associated one), I noticed that once again folks were attacking Massad Ayoob. I just don't get the hate. I'm not 40 years old yet, but I read Ayoob's In the Gravest Extreme: The Role of the Firearm in Personal Protection when I was young, and it was insightful. I've spoken with Ayoob a few times and learned a lot from him. But those folks attacking him are doing so because he wasn't a GWOT Operator.

So what! Ayoob came about in an era before the internet. In fact, he came about in an era where pretty much the idea of teaching the general public anything self-defense related wasn't done. Heck Jeff Cooper only opened up Gunsite in 1976 and Ayoob released In the Gravest Extreme in 1980. Self-defense instruction was just starting and Ayoob was one of the early folks that got it off the ground. He tackled self-defense in a manner that previously, was never done. He gathered data on laws and situations from around the country and developed a training curriculum around that information. He also became an expert witness and helped a number of folks being railroaded not be railroaded.

Same goes for Jeff Cooper, Elmer Keith, Ken Hackathorn, "Skeeter" Skelton, and the rest of 'em. I see folks now bemoaning and admonishing them too, especially Jeff Cooper and his ideas on the scout rifle.

The folks that came from yesteryear are the ones who laid the foundations that today's GunTubers get to build careers on. They were the pioneers of and settled the frontier to make what today's industry is. Even folks knock Lenny Magill. Yet he took basic gun instruction and slapped it on a VHS tape and that truly spawned the GunTubers.

Are some of these folks past their prime? And are some of their earlier works outdated? Sure. But at the time, many of them weren't outdated and they worked with the knowledge and tools that they had available. But more importantly, they built entire industries that the shooting public enjoys today.

I'm 23 and I feel that while Massad Ayoob has some dated opinions and teachings, he still has quite some useful information to share.

I don't like his opinion on dropping the slide on an empty chamber. I also don't like his opinion on downgrading to a different firearm because "the jury will be more likely to convict someone using an AR-15!" I do think some of his seminars from LFI and his self-defense books are chock-full of good info.

Ken Hackathorn is the one I really don't like. His being against red dot sights and weapon-mounted lights just really doesn't sit well with me. I just find him to be stuck in the 1990s. Some of the logic he uses is very similar to the logic that anti-gunners use.

ETA that I don't get the "Massad Ayoob has no experience! He's just some auxiliary cop in rural New Hampshire that does it for the creds!" I don't see a point there when a lot of what he teaches on self-defense law is backed-up by "experienced professionals."