A few years ago I volunteered at my local club to instruct in an "Introduction to USPSA". I taught the Rules of Competition, and coached new shooters on techniques which they would find useful.
And although almost every student in the class was familiar with the Three Rules of Safe Shooting, I boiled it down to One Sacred Rule: DO NOT SCARE THE RANGE OFFICER!
If a student, at the end of a stage, reached down to pick up his dropped magazine before holstering his pistol, I yelled STOP!
I was scared that he would trigger a round into his hand. (Sure, he had already cleared his pistol because I was standing there to ensure that he had done so. But what if he was practicing alone on the range and there was nobody there to tell him to "unload and show clear" and "holster"?) The training was as much in safety as in competition; and if they didn't learn range safety ... they failed.
One of the stages I set up for them was to start facing up-range with a loaded gun; at the buzzer, turn and engage the targets.
I would stand one foot in front of them while they were facing uprange. I would look right in his eyes, and say: "okay, at the buzzer, turn and draw and engage the targets. If you draw before you turn, your gun will be pointed at my feet. Don't do that. "
Because Rule One was always: "Don't Scare The Range Officer!!!"
New shooters are usually apprehensive; the scary ones are those who are not apprehensive.
One weekend (the weekend immediately following the class) I attended a match where three of my new students were on their "maiden match". After one of the students (the cocky one) finished his stage and returned to the spectator area to reload magazines, I stood on the other side of the counter and confronted him, saying:
"Nice run. Now what did you do wrong?"I don't know. What did the RO say when you finished shooting? Exactly?Uh ... "if you are finished unload and show clear. If clear, hammer down and holster." And what did you do next?Uh ... I cleared, then picked up my magazine. And did you sweep yourself because you hadn't holstered?No, I did not. No, but The RO didn't say "The Range Is Clear" so you could be DQ'd even though you had finished the stage and the gun was unloaded.
That earned me a dirty look, because I was treating him like a newby. Which he was.
His range experience had been unsupervised for the years he had been shooting ... and he was a military veteran with lots of range time. He thought he knew all the important stuff.
But he had not learned to shoot competitively under the direction of Range Safety Officer who was using the required commands to ensure the safety of everyone ... not least the shooter himself.
Both USPSA and IPSC (and other organized competitive shooting sports) consider SAFETY to be the most important consideration; which is a difficult concept for very competitive people to assimilate because all they think about is to get good hits as quickly as humanly possible. They want to be winners.
Range officers accept that, but their most important consideration is the safety of everyone on the range. They want everybody to be survivors. (Okay, then there's obeying the stage rules, the range rules, and not using the "F-bomb" every time a reload fails ....)
It was just a normal “football play” that resulted in a serious injury for Tennessee State linebacker Christion Abercrombie. According to The Tennessean, TSU head coach Rod Reed said in a radio interview Sunday morning that Abercrombie “was taking on a block” in the second quarter against Vanderbilt when he suffered what has been deemed a serious head injury. “It wasn’t anything malicious or dirty or anything like that. Just an unfortunate situation,” Reed said.
(emphasis added)
Maybe he'll quit football and take up competitive shooting .. if he recovers.
Police are just people; if you treat them with respect (and don't take it personally when they pull over for speeding) they will return your respect.
So that's why I have never disrespected police for giving me speeding tickets .. which I quit doing!
I've talked before about carrying a weapon and being stopped by police for a traffic offense. I'm going to repeat it because of the following published story from a policeman:
Purse Carry, CCW, and Police Interactions | Active Response Training: I do what I can to avoid treating CCW carriers with paranoia. I work hard to ensure that should I stop a CCW licensee, the encounter goes positively for both of us. After all, if the person I’m stopping has gone to the trouble of getting a CCW license, I know he doesn’t have a serious criminal record. If the CCW carrier informs me that he or she is carrying, I know that the person is trying to obey our state’s LE notification law and probably isn’t trying to kill me.
After I was stopped (this wasn't the incident reported above), the police car sat behind me with red-lights flashing for two or three minutes while I fished out my drivers license Concealed Handgun License, and other identification cards ... plus my insurance form. I did this because I knew the cop had called in the license plate, identified me as the owner, and ran a check on my name. He knew I was (probably) carrying a gun and exercised proper diligence when he left the car and approached me.
When the cop finally got out ot the car, he had one hand on his pistol and the other hand held a flashlight. I had already killed the engine and turned on the interior lights (it was a night-time stop) so he could see clearly that I had both hands on the steering wheel, I was holding my papers in my left hand, the window was rolled all the way down ... and I had not opened my door.
When he asked for license and insurance, I simply gave them to him while my right hand remained on the steering wheel. I kept my face toward him, and wore a chagrined grin. (Well, I WAS speeding .. I was going to the drug store to get a refill of pain medication for my Significant Other.)
I explained why I was hurrying, admitted that I exercised poor judgement, and asked him to please just write the ticket and let me go before the pharmacy closed.
Perhaps I wasn't as calm as I should have been, but he recognized the situation as I explained it to him and returned my papers with a simple caution to obey the speed limit; it's better to be slow returning home than to not return due to an accident. Or something like that.
Abuse of Authority:
I know that there are "Bad Cops"; my distant cousin was married to one. I never liked him, and after a few years he lost his job. Not because of anything I said or did ... I was only 12 at the time.
My cousin divorced him, too, which was A Good Thing; I liked my cousin, but she wasn't the brightest bulb on the Christmas tree.
One nice thing about shooting matches, folks just naturally assume that if you're carrying a gun at a shooting match, you're probably not a convicted felon. Or a druggie.
For the past eight years, I have been the instructor at my local club in a program of "Introduction to USPSA". It was an opportunity to introduce new shooters to USPSA competition (which I have been active in since 1983), and gave me something to look forward to in every month.
I kept telling myself that I was donating my time as a way of "giving back to the sport". In truth, since my eyesight has degraded over the years, it was a way of keeping my hand in it, since I was no longer able to see well enough to be competitive.
But last month, I slept through the beginning of my class. I had to phone the range and tell them that I was unable to attend.
That was a personal disappointment to me, not only because I had several students who wondered where I was, but because it was one of the best parts of my month. And I slept through it!
The club thought I was "giving back to the sport"; while I enjoyed meeting new shooters and sharing the insights of rules of safety which I had learned over 30+ years of Competition. I had an intrinsic interest in teaching new shooters how to be safe. It was the best part of my month, and I always looked forward to it.
AS a consequence, I announced to my home club that I was retiring. Because I was unable to even show up for a scheduled class, it was obvious that I was no longer competent and they should no longer schedule the class. (I hope they found someone else to take over the class, but I haven't heard from them on that issue..)
It's disappointing to give up one of the few activities which allow me time on the range. And it was embarrassing to read the emails from the scheduled attendees who asked me "WTF?"
But when it's time to retire ... you know it. And I knew it.
The gun club was very understanding, and they even provided me an honorarium in the form of a gift card from WalMart. I hadn't expected that, but it was touching to learn that they appreciated my small contribution to gun-safety at USPSA matches there.
I don't think anyone realized that I had donated eight years of once-a-month class instruction because it was the only way I could enjoy the sport in which I had participated for so many decades. (In truth, while I was still able to compete, I wanted to ensure that the people I was competing against had the best instruction on rules and safety ... but it it eventually became more important that I got to meet New Shooters, and none of them ever disappointed me by being an unsafe shooter!)
I'll miss the class, and the opportunity to meet new shooters. But when your time is through, it's better to gracefully yield to the inevitable, than to fight against it.
Were in! This September, I get to shoot the IDPA National Championship match.
No, that's not me saying that; I'm too old and slow to go to a Nationals match any more (but then, I always was).
But for one young competitor, especially, it's the Dream Come true!
Competition makes Monsters of us all:
You have to qualify for the nationals, which isj't all that hard to do if you're a fast, young gun.
I remember my first USPSA National match back in the 1980's, when I was shooting C-class in Limited division.
That was in the period when USPSA was just beginning to add new divisions ... as I recall, we had only Open and "Stock" at the time; "Limited" division wasn't even envisioned, let alone all the divisions we contend with today.
I was having the hell kicked out of me by a young man whose skill-level in his (STOCK?) category was WAY beyond his rating. I couldn't believe he was still C-class, so I searched him on the internet. It turned out that he had recently been bumped up to B-class. He wasn't aware of it, but I brought it to the attention of the match staff, and in doing so was bumped up to third place in my class and category.
I'm not proud of it, I've never been "skilled" in competition pistol shooting, but I was at the peak of m form after spending months shooting thousands of rounds a month to be as competitive as I could, and I really wanted to win SOMETHING for the $400+ match fee.
The gentleman in question was disappointed, of course, but he never said a bad word to me. He was the better man, in more ways than one.
I guess this is something of a cautionary note to competitors. Sometimes winning isn't as important as playing the game, taking your licks, and shaking the hand of those who beat you.
I've become something of an expert at congratulating better shooters..
I only wish I had learned that lesson 20 years earlier.
Well, and I wish I was a better shooter ... but it's better to play and lose, than not to play at all.
I just read a blog article by Kathy Jackson at "The Cornered Cat" which pulled together a bunch of 'things learned', but I had never taken to heart.
The link is provided below, along with the two most salient paragraphs. But I want to add a couple of paragraphs describing my own experiences:
(1) Several years ago, I and my Significant Other ("She Who Must Be Obeyed", or SWMBO) were competing in a USPSA/IPSC match at *Un-named Gun Club*, when during a reload with her STI Race Gun her firearm discharged. She had held her pistol tilted dramatically high, and I KNOW it was a "Slam Fire" because I was the Range Officer and I was watching her carefully. I Disqualified ("DQ") her, not because I thought she had her finger on the trigger during a reload (which is a DQ-able offence in IPSC/USPSA ... and she did NOT!) but because her muzzle was pointed high and I was sure that the round had left the range. Read: Went Over The Berm
(2) Moving forward a decade or two, I now teach a class in "Introduction to USPSA" for new competitors, and I tell this story to every class. However, I don't make an effort to emphasize the lesson learned ... always keep the muzzle below the berm.
(3) Significantly, the same range where SWMBO had her Slam Fire episode has in the past few years added a new Range Rule: "Thou Shalt Endeavour to Keep Thy Muzzle Below The Berm, else suffer the Consequences of the Match DQ" (or words to that effect). Call this "Rule #3".
Local competitors who attended USPSA matches at *Un-named Gun Club* have addressed this to USPSA, which organization has 'disenfranchised" the club from holding "USPSA MATCHES" because the club enforces a rule which is not supported by USPSA. Or IPSC.
[So *Un-named Gun Club* continues to conduct "USPSA-TYPE" matches, but they call it something else. I'm told that they *generally* follow the conventions of USPSA competition (many of which are shared by Defensive Concealed Carry Competition), plus their own local rule, but they don't send the results in to USPSA and competitors are not compelled to shoot a "classifier" stage. Since USPSA doesn't acknowledge the club rules, and USPSA intellectual property (classifier stages, the rule book, and the name of the organization) are not involved, competitors are not credited with competing in an "organized" match. Essentially, it's just a Fun Match. It's also an opportunity to spend a pleasant day at the range with your friends, and to get some good solid gun-handling practice under your belt.]
Now, I had thought that Rule #3 was a bit of overkill (forgive the expression), but I had never actually thought it through ... despite my own personal experience. However, considering the lesson provided by Kathy Jackson (link, and some text, below) I think it's something that I ought to emphasize in future Introduction to USPSA classes.
NOW read Kathy Jackson's comments, or preferably follow the link to the full story (Read The Whole Thing).
There are far more instances where a gun fires upon slide forward (eg, “slam fire”) than I thought, and many instances where people in a hurry or new to the gun suffer a sympathetic squeeze reaction and fire the gun when they intend to either drop a slide or release a magazine. In most of these cases, the only thing that prevented serious injury or death was that the user fortuitously (sometimes deliberately, but more often fortuitously) pointed the gun in a safe direction. \
Why are so many instructors and accomplished shooters encouraging people not to keep the gun pointed in the safest possible direction — at the berm — during the reload? What benefit could possibly outweigh the risk of deliberately, repeatedly, and habitually violating one of the fundamental safeguards against death or injury while handling live firearms?
(a) TACCOM 9mm Extension for the 33 round 9mm Glock magazine.
The manufacturer claims:
We’ve come up with an extension and spring that will feed your PCC efficiently. Made from 6061 aluminum, it will take the abuse of competition and keep on running. The internals of the extension are smooth to allow for both the follower and the rounds to flow effortlessly thru for thousands of cycles. Easy to assemble too!!
Manufacturer also offers some supplementary advice:
Note: Keep in mind that the end user must chamfer the inside of their magazine as well as their follower so that you get a smooth transition when the follower re-enters the magazine.
An idea whose time has not come?
The curmudgeon in me refers back to Viet Nam where we couldn't get the 30-round "banana" magazines for M16's (apparently those of us 'in the field' had second or third call on equipment, including magazines, boots and replacement arms ... right after the Officers and the REMFs stole the good stuff) and in fact we used the straight 20-round magazines but downloaded them to 18 rounds, because the springs lost their resiliency when kept fully loaded for days at a time.
So I'm historically dubious about claims exceeding my experiences. These magazines are obviously not intended for the kind of abuse and poor maintenance suffered during a combat tour.
My experience competing in IPSC matches / "Open Division" was that the 25-round magazines had to be treated with kid gloves. We removed the springs (or at least the end caps) from the magazines so the springs were not under any tension between usages ... which is to say, right up to Match Day. That kept their 'strength' up so there were more or less reliable, but we still tended to down-load the magazines by a round or two.
But that was way-back-then, and the manufacturers claim here that:
We’ve come up with an extension and spring that will feed your PCC efficiently.
By that I presume that advances in metallurgy have resulted in springs which WILL perform reliably under the most grueling of conditions.
Actually, I doubt that.
On the other hand, I recall a couple of very smart fellows who once said: "640 kilobytes of memory should be enough for anyone", so I suppose it's possible that I've misjudged modern technology.
People are increasingly buying more lethal guns, and arming themselves for purposes of protection rather than for hunting or recreation, new research shows.
There's no doubt that people are buying "more lethal" guns, if one defines the term of "over .22 caliber".
And doubtless, many are purchasing firearms for no other purpose than protection of property, self and family. Also doubtless, the "Bad Guys" are also acquiring (read: stealing) Big Guns.
By the way, these firearms include AR15 variants .. which are usually, after all, .223 caliber.
But the AR15 (et al) have a SPECIAL entry; they are scary looking!
{shudder!}
The lead for the artical focuses on "more lethal guns" and "for purposes of protection rather than for hunting or recreation".
I submit that the author has insufficient experience or knowledge of current "Action Shooting Sports" to be competent to defend his statement.
In The First Place:
... there is nothing wrong with buying guns for protection. The American society itself has become more lethal without the "guns" entering into the equation.
"Drugs" and "Gangs" are the driving factors of the increased violence.
Look at the published statistics ... you virtually can't surf the net without finding a website which address these two words. Usually, they're used in the same sentence. The reason is, 90% of gun crimes ("gun violence") are committed by gangs and 90% of the assailants AND victims are gang members, or innocents who are caught in the crossfire.
This isn't a "GUN" problem; it's a "SOCIETY" problem.
The answer to THAT problem is going to be very, very expensive. Somebody needs to define the answer (see below), and more somebodys have to pay for it.
And the middle-class has to make that 5-year old Chevy last for another year.
The cops are always a minute farther away than they need to be, to be useful
And the Upper Class isn't directly affected by Crime In The Streets; they hire their guns.
In The Second Place:
This isn't about a congressman being shot in the ass on a baseball field.
This is about crime in the streets, home invasion; about old white people being attacked in public for no better reason than the rage of a young black man who can't make an honest living, and he blames it on the white man.
And he's probably right; he just chose the wrong old white man. That guy in the wheelchair never had a vote in Congress.
Congress doesn't have a solution:
Well, they do have one solution; they have introduced a bill to allow congressmen to carry a personal firearm any time, any place (except in certain governmental venues, and on airplanes".
They didn't do this to find a solution for YOUR benefit. They did it because they're running scared and the pusillanimous pussies are going to protect themselves and their loved ones.
(Note:THEIR SPOUSES are not covered under the terms of this bill, which indicative of .... something.)
"Okay, Job Well Done. It's Miller Time, and I'm buying down at Hamilton House" (or whatever the current senatorial watering hole is named.)
Essentially, Congress has shown that they don't consider GUNS to be the problem.
As far as they're concerned, the problem is they ... personally ... don't have ENOUGH guns!
(So they're making them available to those members of their own gang. Sound familiar?)
BUT
In The Third Place: HUNTING
The article (remember where we started out?) mentioned this: buying more lethal guns, and arming themselves for purposes of protection rather than for hunting or recreation
Most people are not aware that a HUGE number of firearms are being purchased for exactly those reasons. For example, the AR15 is legal for hunting critters up to DEER size in most states now so everyone of those AR15's might be purchased for hunting.
And the AR15 is not generally considered a "more lethal firearm" when compared to those customarily used for hunting such as the 12 gauge shotgun, the .30-06 rifle, and the less-frequently used ,but increasingly popular chosen handgun for hunting. the .44 Magnum pistol.
(SEE PERSONAL OPINION, BELOW)
In The Fourth Place: COMPETITION
Most people are entirely unaware that there are three styles of competition shooting which may or may not involve the acquisition of "more lethal guns" in pursuit of achieving either a competitive advantage, or qualifying to use the chosen caliber at all.
There are three (at least)
Although I assure you that many of these ladies and gentlemen could shoot your socks off and you wouldn't even realize you were bare-footed until you felt the gravel between your toes.
WHICH BRINGS US TO THE CRUX OF THE STORY:
IPSC and USPSA
The real thing when it comes to "MORE LETHAL GUNS".
IPSC stands for the International Practical Shooter's Confederation, and USPSA is the American Region .. United States Practical Shooter's Association.
USPSA is the original Association for the sport; IPSC is International body. Because many IPSC member regions have national firearms restrictions which are not recognized by Americans, not all IPSC competition rules are relevant to USPSA competitions. I have never participated in an international (IPSC) competition. Their target designs are different (USPSA targets have been accused of being "Silhouettes of Human Beings" which is illegal in some countries.)
The rules are than you must be using a pistol with a caliber of 9mm or larger. For the metric-confused (us Americans), that's .38 caliber. Which is, we assume, a "More Lethal Gun"
A VARIATION ON THE USPSA THEME!
IDPA: (International Defensive Pistol Association)
IDPA generally requires targets be engaged from behind cover.
IDPA doesn't consider firearms with a caliber smaller than 9mm to be "DEFENSIVE".
IDPA has requirements including (shooting behind cover) and (not dropping magazines with ammo still in them) and (pistol must be carried "concealed" at the start of the stage).
You know, Defensive stuff.
Other than that, and with a few important exceptions, the rules are much like IPSC/USPSA. ANOTHER VARIATION ON THE USPSA THEME!
SPEED STEEL: (CF: Steel Challenge)
You shoot only steel plates. You are penalized for every target you do not hit. Targets will not fall when hit; they are painted between shooters so the number of targets "marked" by impact of each shooter's bullet can be scored. You are judged based on the time you take to complete each of several turns, and your score is the time you time to complete she shooting problem. Misses are penalized.
Speed Steel is different from IPSC/USPSA and IDPA in that no cardboard targets are presented, and your score is only the total amount of time you take to complete three iterations of each stage.
The competitor with the fastest accumulated time wins each stage.
Speed Steel has a special division for competitors using .22 caliber pistols; they are not required to holster before starting each 'run' on a stage. None of the other sports mentioned have this allowance for "Less Than Lethal" calibers. There are variations in all these latter sports based on equipment, defined only to make competition more equitable between competitors with difference firearm definitions. Tip of the hat to variations such as cowboy action and quick-draw competitions. There are more! SUMMARY:
It should be obvious to the reader that "More Lethal Calibers" have become a large part of competitive shooting in recent years. Only one of the four"Action" firearm sports cited allow "Less Lethal" (eg: .22 caliber) weapons to be used.
And as these action shooting sport become increasingly popular with each passing year, more shooters will become interested, and more citizens will be purchasing "More Lethal" firearms to address their new favorite shooting sport.
What's their attraction?
These sports allow their owners to learn safe shooting skills, become acquainted with the manual-at-arms of each individual firearm, and at the same time meet new friends who are sportsmen with similar interests. You can say much the same for a pickup game at your neighborhood baseball game .. except hopefully without the INCOMING gunfire.
SO if it seems to the ignorami press that "People are increasingly buying more lethal guns, and arming themselves for purposes of protection rather than for hunting or recreation, new research shows ", it's possible that a great number of the purchase of "More Lethal Guns" has been driven by the dramatic expansion of choices between the various exciting and rewarding Shooting Sports.
In other words: people are buying guns so they can play "Gun Games".
Don't laugh, fellows ... if you get hooked on the challenge and the chance to meet new friends with similar interests in the shooting sports, you too may find yourself comparing the size of your magazines.
Ms. Golob wants shooting sports to look like . . . CrossFit. “The first rule of shooting competition is to talk about shooting competition,” she opines. Ms. Golob pitched the idea of simple (i.e. easy rules, common equipment) “virtual shooting competitions” around the U.S. to the NSSF audience, imagining a network of ranges connected by the Internet.
It's impossible to make sense of this press release .. Golob obviously has a vision but she has been Stuck in Stupid because everything she says has obviously been filtered by the press.
Basically, Ms. Golob thinks the current shooting sports associations suck. She wants to bring millions of people into the shooting sports by creating a new shooting sports organization, simplifying, standardizing, marketing and friendly-izing firearms competition.
Of course the goal of USPSA and IPSC has been to attract new shooters; that's how I got sucked into the sport in 1983 and have spend tens of thousands of dollars in ammunition, practice, competition, match fees, new equipment to meet my improvements and (not the least) Travel Expenses!
I wonder if her presentation will inspire someone in the audience to launch her dream league. Or whether the OFWG gestalt of current shooting orgs will continued unopposed. *
* (That quote is from the original TRUTH ABOUT GUNS article; incidently, OFWH stands for "Old Fat White Guys" ... which is a pejorative, and not something which we would expect from Mw. Golob.).
Actually, USPSA (United States Practical Shooting Association). and IPSC (International Practical Shooting Confederation) were established for exactly that goal.
I broke down and bought a Trigger Scale from Amazon last week. I never owned one before, and I was curious about just how heavy the trigger pull was on my pistols.
I rather wish I had not. The scale only measures to eight pounds ... most of them were way over the limit. Which is okay for certain uses, I suppose, but not for any purpose for which I bought the pistols. Even The Beloved Kimber, since I got the trigger replaced, now clocks in at "UGH!" pounds trigger pull.
I can understand it for DA-Only pistols, but even my SA pistols tend to over-do it.
The only exception is the STI Edge in 10mm, which still breaks at a crisp, clean 3-3/4 ounces.
Ah ... perfection! Unfortunately, my eyes have degenerated so badly in the past few years that I'm unable to use it as well in competition as I use to. I can't see the iron sights.
I'm sorely tempted to have it mounted with an AIMPOINT, and get back into the Pistol Game ... even if I do have to shoot in OPEN Division without a compensated barrel.
While I'm no admirer of politiciansSenator Warren, this ill-conceived and misbegotten attempt to interfere with legitimate consumer activity is nothing more than political grandstanding and should never even come to the table.
Earlier this week, GOA submitted a letter to the House Energy and Commerce Committee expressing their concern over House Bill 1652, Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s Over-the-Counter Hearing Aid Act.
According to GOA, the bill could adversely affect gun owners. By establishing this new regulation, “hearing enhancers,” used by hunters to amplify sound, would mean the government could regulate hunting.
Oh, no. It's MUCH worse than that!
A lot of people in shooting sports own and use "electronic ear muffs", which filter out sounds above a certain decibel level, but allow lower volumes (such as range commands) to be clearly heard.
Range Officers rely upon these "discriminatory amplifying" electronic devices, because if a downrange safety issue is observed by someone one in the audience who yells STOP!, for example ... that warning might be missed by the Range Officer who has his attention focused on the gun.
At the same time, the competitor is better served with amplification, because he is focused on his targets and the RO's range commands must be loud enough to attract this attention.
Amplifying low-decibel sound is an important range safety consideration.
Yes, you can conduct a shooting match without amplification ... but you can do a better job of it with amplification of background sounds.
So by the same sense ' ... the government could regulate target shooting ...', for example.
Regulation of any product often increases its price to the consumer, as well. It's unwise for a government to not only interfere with a constitutional right, but also to tax it. But don't tell the ruling class that there's a reason to butt out ... they're in the business of seeming to be "doing something" by passing laws. (Sort of a "Publish or Perish" for Politicos.)
The Shooting Wire today included an excellent commentary on the problems of training would-be gun handlers (AKS: "New Shooters") in the safe gunhandling practices, which include drawing from the holster.
We continue to face a huge number of new gun owners and new shooters – something that had its beginning in 1986 with the advent of 'shall-issue' concealed carry permits, continued through the years of the Clinton gun ban from 1994 until its sunset, and really ramped up in the age of internet forums, internet video and the Global War on Terror. Something that continued the drive to more private gun ownership was self-identification of the Democrat Party as the "Party of Infringement" (h/t, Stephen Wenger) and a federal government that continued to be threatening as certain individual states rushed to get state-level infringements of their own passed.
Still, to the new gun owners and new shooters, we've all been saying "Get Training!"
Grassi points out that there are so many new shooters, there are not enough experienced/qualified instructors to provide the training which they need. And again, even people who have some experience shooting pistols are usuallynot experienced in drawing from the holster.
Which is a special skill ... and that is not intuitively obvious!
Okay, NJT brought it up, so let's look at this misunderstanding again:
New Jovian Thunderbolt: Never understood that:
Never understood that The sentiment that "If you do handgun competitions, that is too much game and will get you killed in real life so don't ever do that!" What? I never understood that worry. Yeah, the whole when to reload and how, &c.and what have you might cement habits not ideal in every 'tactical' situation. I can see that part of the argument. But so what?
I never understood that mind-set either. The best I can do is go back to an article (under the title I've used) which was published in a gun magazine a decade or two ago. And people who have little or no understanding of what you can learn from competition 'heard that' from someone, and believed it.
I don't think they're talking about rifle and shotgun competition, not any kind of bulls-eye shooting, but 'action pistol' shooting such as IDPA and USPSA (IPSC).
(If you read the linked NJT article above, there's a link to an article from Lucky Gunner which provides a better detailed description.)
Here's the thing: Competition isn't possible without training and experience. Even without training, when you shoot an Action Pistol Match you need to know the rules and you need to be able do demonstrate Good Gun-Handling Techniques.
The rules are important for the match; the techniques are vital for self-defense. TRAINING IS THE KEY
People who criticize "competition" as being either unrealistic or impractical seem to miss the point.
Competition provides many opportunities for both training and experience which most shooters are unlikely to garner in any other venue. Sure, you can spend hundreds of dollars taking 'professional' courses (most of which teach you to react to a combat situation) but does that really provide them the opportunity to PRACTICE their gun-handling techniques under the pressure of time and necessity?
And since when is it necessary to grow a beard and wear green pants to learn to handle your pistol well enough that you can shoot accurately and consistently under pressure?
Lots of people teach courses in competition (I'm one of them) and the virtues of that training is that they teach you practical techniques and practices. When you go to an IPSC or IDPA match, you get to EXPERIENCE the effect of either knowing the techniques, or not knowing the techniques. If you don't know how to handle your pistol safely and effectively, the feedback is immediate:
That cute little blonde girl is going to kick your ass in the finals, and your friends will laugh at you.
(And you're going to practice more, and better!)
The pressure of competing under pressure, and comparing your performance against other shooters, is perhaps the best feedback to your training regimen you can find; and it's difficult to imagine a venue which might provide a comparable benefit.
SAFETY IS THE PRIORITY: COMPETENCE IS THE EXPECTATION
People shoot competitively for many reasons:
learn gun-handling techniques
learn the rules, practices and procedures of 'action pistol'.competition
get some range time with good targets and actual, interesting stages
meet new friends with similar interests, and share experiences
What they discover is that they learn things they never expected. Training is available, if not in private classes then at least during matches from more 'experienced' competitors. We correct their grip, and the proper placement of their finger on the trigger. We teach them how to draw from a holster, how to reload from the belt, and how to safely move from one shooting position to another. When someone violates a safety rule during the Live Fire Exercises, the rest of the class learns from their mistakes.
We learn the three kinds of Immediate Action Drills in response to the three basic kinds of firearms malfunctions:
Stovepipe
Tap/Rack/Bang (failure to feed: didn't seat your magazine properly during load/reload)
The Jam From Hell (another feeding failure)
IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER what kind of 'action pistol shooting' you do, there are always going to be some range safety rules, and some competition rules, which don't seem to apply to a self-defense situation. IDPA teaches you to use cover and concealment and ammunition retention because these are specific DEFENSIVE PISTOL TECHNIQUES which you need to at least be aware of. You may lose your head (zone out) in an emergency, but at least you have learned the drills and this is going to be an asset on 'the worst day of your life'.
In USPSA we do fire a lot more rounds per match and that may provide you with more opportunities to practice your reload, refine your grip and trigger-finger placement, and every round you fire for score is probably going to provide more effective training than taking yourself to the range for an hour a month and only practicing the things that you're already 'good at'.
PRACTICE is an issue with most folks. We don't know what to do in practice, so we do the things we already do well, because (a) we don't know any better and (b) it's fun.
When you engage in competition, you learn quickly and quite well what you do NOT do well!
Can you reload quickly without taking your eyes off the target? Can you keep track of the rounds you have expended, and know when you need to reload, without thinking about it? Can you engage a wide variety of targets at varying ranges? Can you move laterally, forward, or retreat to a new shooting position ... all without losing situational awareness (and maybe performing a reload on the move)?
Can you engage targets from a prone, kneeling or standing position, or shoot around a corner from cover or concealment? Can you hit targets which are moving? Can you hit targets while YOU are moving? Can you consistently hit small steel targets at 7 yards? Can you double-tap three targets at 10 yards, perform a reload, and hit them again in under 10 seconds? Can you accurately engage targets with either hand?
ALL of these techniques are commonly practiced in Action Shooting Competition.
Anyone who thinks that Competition just means standing in only place and plunking round after round into a bullseye target sitting placidly 50 feet downrange does not understand the full concept of Competition Shooting.
You may get killed, but it won't be because you've been honing your skills by competing in pistol matches.
This is a great video, depicting stereotypical GunGame shooters with issues. Thanks to ENDO for presenting a humorous video with a serious message.
(Go to the link, above, to view the video; I don't steal videos from primary sources.)
I've run into most of the characters depicted, over the past years. Mister Clueless is the most common version, but in all candor I have to admit that I expect many of my class participants to be unaware of a lot of the range rules of competition shooting.
That's why they sign up for the course of instruction, and they are all intrinsically motivated. They WANT to learn, because pistol competition is a quagmire of rules, regulations, and a long history of Range Etiquette.
The one character in the video that I cannot forgive is the one who won't share the work. I think we're suppose to hiss when he shows up.
Since it's a "Class-room environment" (actually on the range, but you know ..) there's no excuse for not doing your part. One of the primary lessons in the class, second only to safe gunhandling, is that IPSC/USPSA is a Volunteer Sport.
Everybody works.
Everybody is "special".
Well, everybody is packing.
An armed society is a polite society.
And last but not least,
Competition Shooting Competition shooting is fun and exciting, but can actually be hazardous to your long-term health should you ever get in a gun fight and apply some of the 'match winning' techniques to try and win the gunfight. You don't get a staged walk-through in a life-or-death situation, and there is no range officer to tell you to load and make ready. I bring this up because I have seen students in classes who shoot a lot of competition and repeatedly begin a drill with an empty weapon. This in an era when over 40 states have concealed carry! Unreal.
Nope. I've got no problem with what he said. He's right.
In competition we are accustomed to a "Cold Range" environment.
That's fair; USPSA is like a box o' Chawklets, you never know what you're gonna get.
Some of the folks who show up at a match ... well, most of them are very competent. But it takes a while to build the skills, so we're all just as happy that it's a Cold Range Policy.
So we're accustomed to the "Belt AND Suspenders" philosophy of Range Safety. Because we just want everyone to go home at the end of the day, and we are way finicky about "blood on the range".
But a lot of folks put away their competition gear at the end of the day, and when they start their drive home, they're back in Condition One.
Because when you drive out the gate, you're in a whole different world.
3Gun Nation has started official matches for Airsoft.
Say what you will about Airsoft, but have a look at this video. Racing is racing and this looks like a fun and challenging sport. It has the spirit of 3gun just without the long distance targets we typically see here in the US.
It's an equivalent 'indoor' sport which includes most of the elements of the 'full poweer' version, and the excellence of the competition obviates what I WOULD have said about the sport, before I saw the video.
In a world where so many nations are determined to dismiss the natural right to compete with firearms, this is the best that many people can do.
And it's a lot less expensive than using guns with gunpowder-powered ammunition ... but still just as exciting, still focuses on speed and accuracy.
Perhaps the DVC (Speed/Power/Accuracy) equation of IPSC isn't as important when you delete the "power" part of the equation.
Sometimes "the best you can do under the circumstances" doesn't really take away from the excitement of shooting.
A good shooter is a good shooter, no matter what tools are used in competition.
Oh, internet. You so special.
I’ve seen a bunch of people recommending new shooters who are interested, but haven’t shot their first match yet go buy a bunch of gear before they’re first match. What a lie.
Just go shoot your first match, you probably have a “good enough” holster, and if not I bet you can borrow one.
Good advice, and I entirely support the premise.
I've been training new USPSA shooters for 6 -7 years, and I've seen a lot of shooters who were initially enthusiastic about competition ... but soon tired of it.
A REAL-LIFE CASE IN POINT:
Mr. and Mrs. "X" came to te class and seemed to do just fine, except that Mrs. X couldn't seem to keep her finger off the trigger when reloading during a match. She came back for a 'refresher' class, then went to a match and still was Disqualified at the next match. They never came back. Pity; they both had potential but were discouraged.
In the meantime, they spent about $1,000 on new equipment; belts, holsters, etc.
Often people go through the class just to compare their skills with others; other people value the training for safety purposes (although my home club offers other classes to develop those skills).
But these people had sometimes spent hundreds of dollars on equipment which was specifically designed and marketed for competition purposes, even though they would have done as well with the generic gear they had at the first class.
At least 50% of the people who take the training never even attend the FIRST match, let alone work past a DQ and keep coming back until they have demonstrated the level of proficiency which they wish to attain.
I ALWAYS caution New Shooters to NOT spend money on new equipment until they have experienced at LEAST one match. Their perceptions may change as they get more experience.
Nobody is perfect, but we should be perfect; and that's a goal that all of us who compete in shooting sports which reward a fast "first shot A-zone hit" (IPSC, et al) strive to achieve.
At 0:07 seconds, the shooter has a full firing grip on the pistol and the support hand is close to the body. That’s good. His support hand is really low on his body though, compared to where it eventually needs to be.
I once spent an afternoon at the range, with an observer running the timer, where I tried to get first-shot A-zone hits at a standard IPSC target at 7 yards in the fastest time possible.
My experience was that when I used the standard two-handed grip, I couldn't get the desired hit in much under 1,5 seconds. It was only when I quit trying to get the weak hand on the gun that I managed to get a best-time hit in 0.83 seconds. Once.
The thing is .... I'm not sure that I was very safe in doing so. (Which is why I don't recommend this kind of testing; the time may not be impressive to most people, but I felt as if I was "pushing the edge".)
The "Draw Technique" video cited emphasizes safety, and when we compete we should always keep safety as the most important criteria in any shooting-sports criteria.
Most of us don't have the advantage of a slo-mo record of the way we draw, and how/when our finger actually curls onto the trigger. Trying to beat some kind of arbitrary 'best time" is a good way to find ourselves in an "I JUST****** SHOT MYSELF!" scenario ... and that's obviously not the very best way to learn that we have just put Performance above Safety. (Thank you, Tex, for performing a public service .. however unintended.)
SO, HOW DO WE SHOOT FAST, SAFELY?
(This section specifically applies to shooting sports which allow reloads with un-expended magazines, such as USPSA: YMMV):
When it comes to action-shooting competition, the best way to save time on a stage is to minimize the 'time-wasting' activities:
Plan reloads; a "standing reload" is the greatest 'time waster' in competition;
always reload when the stage requires you to do something else, such as moving to another shooting area or when you are waiting for an appearing target to start moving;
If you are competing in a "Limited Capacity" division (eg: Production, Single-stack, Limited 10, etc.) always plan your stage attack so that there is a logical point where you have PLANNED to make a reload ... that reduces your need to think about doing a reload. A Decision Matrix is something which should have been evaluated, and decided upon, before you start shooting the stage.
You can never have too much ammunition, or too many magazines: In some competitive games, you are allowed to reload when it seems appropriate to you; in other competitive games, you must abide to arbitrary rules which only allow you to reload when you have expended all of the rounds available in your magazine. In the more 'permissive' games, it's often competitively advantageous to drop a magazine which has remaining rounds because you can do so in 'dead time' and avoid the time-penalty inherent in doing a "standing reload". The option to reload to competitive advantage is significant. I won't spend much time discussing forced-reloads, because I think it's even less "practical" than USPSA has become. Essentially, reload when it is to your advantage. In a real-life self-defensive situation (where you might typically carry no more than 1 or 2 "extra" magazines) it would be a good idea to retain partially filled magazines; in competition, you may have a LOT more magazines, and so it would may be competitively advantageous to drop partial magazines,
In a 'real life' situation, you would probably carry no more than 2 or 3 magazines; in that case, it would be exceedingly advantageous to retain partial magazines.
When, oh when, do you wear the IDPA vest out in public? Who’s the gamer????
Okay, I admit it. This article is comparing IDPA vs USPSA (IPSC), and thanks a whole lot to Gun Nuts for opening the subject for discussion. Because IDPA is like the Spinach Rules of Pistol Competition; I've never tried it, but it smells yucky, so I've decided I don't like it and probably never WILL try it.
Back in a previous millenia, when IDPA first entered the competitive shooting scene, I thought: "Wow! Another pistol shooting venue! What a gas .. I can DO this!!!"
"Failure To Do Right" was the first thing that attracted my attention. WTF does that mean?
I don't know yet, but apparently if you 'game' a stage, and engage a stage in a manner which doesn't violate the published stage procedures but still provides you a significant competitive advantage over other competitors who didn't perceive the flaw in the stage design ... you might just be a Gamer.
Competition shooting isn't just about "Hitting the A-zone"; sometimes it's about the friends you make. Nobody talks about that any more.
I teach a monthly class (club sponsored) in "Introduction to USPSA". My only criteria in accepting new students is that they have previous experience in handgun shooting, and that they care enough about receiving training to actually spend an afternoon in the class. There is no charge for the class, I present the training just to encourage new shooters (or, sometimes, to discourage those who have neither the basic experience or skills to safely handle a pistol). The class is advertised as "an ADVANCED class, and students who cannot perform basic gun-handling skills will not successfully complete the course".
SOMEBODY needs to evaluate the two-part skills sets of "new shooters":
(1) basic gun-handling expertise
(2) 'advanced' gun-handling under the stress of time factors
This is essentially a method of allowing shooters to experience "stressful" competition situations, so they can decide for themselves whether they should enter the competition pistol milieu. It's sufficiently rigorous so that people who can't learn ... are discouraged. (Not by me, but by their own experience in a setting which loosely parallels the competition environment which they have decided to "try out").
Those who can learn are encouraged, because they advance their skills sets in a single afternoon of shooting.
Those who cannot learn usually never come back, because they have proved to themselves that they either need to get more training, or they just don't care enough about competitive pistol shooting to learn the skill sets needed to perform competitively.
Fifty percent of my students do not, historically, ever attempt to shoot in a match.
Fifty percent of those who do participate in competition never come back to shoot a second match.
Some of those who pass those two informal "filters" decide that they have learned what they need to know, but they are not really interested in competition.
A small minority of people who take this class go on to compete, and may or may not continue for more than a couple of matches.
But the people who do come back are hooked for life. And they learn more every time they shoot a match.
I've said most of that before, but for this month's class I was joined by my shooting-buddy "The Hobo Brasser" who volunteered to help me in the class. He was not rewarded by the club for his contribution (he's not a member of the same gun club) but he just wanted to get some trigger time in, and this seemed like a good opportunity to shoot without having to pay match fees.
