Dont most untrained good guys at the very least go to a static range and at least shoot a paper target at least once before carrying?
Some, maybe even most...eventually. I've lost count at the number of times people have told me they bought a gun, put ammo in it. and either put it in the nightstand or started carrying it. No cleaning, no test fire, no practice. Many others explained they got to the range a few months later. This doesn't qualify as "training" to me. It's just shooting. How many shotguns sit in the back corner of a closet / gun safe with spiders in barrels for years untouched? Lots.
 
Messages
3,453
Reactions
8,272
First off I voted no on 114. I needed to say that before I asked this question. So if we've got to be trained, how about something useful like nutralizing the threat in an active shooter situation? That ought to twist the libitards us fighting back and doing good and all.
 
Messages
8,752
Reactions
14,928
Some, maybe even most...eventually. I've lost count at the number of times people have told me they bought a gun, put ammo in it. and either put it in the nightstand or started carrying it. No cleaning, no test fire, no practice. Many others explained they got to the range a few months later. This doesn't qualify as "training" to me. It's just shooting. How many shotguns sit in the back corner of a closet / gun safe with spiders in barrels for years untouched? Lots.
I think those people are in the minority. Id agree a bit more do carry a few weeks before they hit the range but as long as they get there.
Im not certain "target practice" doesnt qualify as some sort of basic training. I think if some newbes first time at the range shows he cant hit the target he probably will go back. I think most who never hit the range dont carry and just bought one to have one "in case"...

Im not justifying not training. But just if im in a store and some bad guy starts shooting Im ok with some random newbe next to me trying to take him out with no training... I at least have a few more seconds to escape or defend myself while the bad guy takes out the untrained good guy.
 
Im not justifying not training. But just if im in a store and some bad guy starts shooting Im ok with some random newbe next to me trying to take him out with no training... I at least have a few more seconds to escape or defend myself while the bad guy takes out the untrained good guy.
I know we are basically on the same page from all your past posts on this topic. And again, training shouldn't be required by the government, but the likelihood of these two random, untrained shooters hitting me, my family and other innocents is high. I'm betting out of the 50 people sitting in front of the gun counter at Sportsmans in Salem right now, very few will do any type of training. I think the 1% number is pretty accurate that Rehn came up with in Texas.

Don't disagree that any shooting helps, but this is not the same as preparing yourself for and actual encounter with a bad guy. Nor is it preparing yourself for an encounter where lethal force is not justified and the only tool you have is a hammer. Think of all the times we hear about someone (good guy) bringing a gun to a non-gun fight. You can train often and still do it very wrong. But you improve your chances, substantially. For many the Dunning Kruger effect is high.

I have found the below to be sage advice on many topics, including this one:
We don’t rise to the occasion but fall to our level of training.
 
Messages
5,418
Reactions
10,779
No. The senses of humor issued to some Marines on an experimental basis were all rejected because they--the senses of humor--were insufficient raunchy. New cruder ruder versions are under development.
Just when you thought the humor couldn’t get any darker…..

In walked a Marine and delivered an all new low. I love the Marine Corps. I should have stayed in.
 
Messages
8,752
Reactions
14,928
And again, training shouldn't be required by the government, but the likelihood of these two random, untrained shooters hitting me, my family and other innocents is high.
I have not seen this as a common occurrence enough to worry about. And the liberal media would love to cover negligent shooters. I think the biggest risk comes from their unsecured firearms at home but thats another topic.
 
Training is needed However.....

Training is no guarantee of safety or even good practices , depending on just what was taught.
Training should also not be mandated.

What is safe and works for me....is just that...it is safe and works for me.
For someone else in a different situation ...it may not be safe or work at all.

Who gets to decide what is training...what is safe...and why should I care or be interested in their standards...?
Their standards may not be helpful or useful for me at all.

Look into training...and choose your trainer wisely.
Make sure what you are taught actually is useful and applies to you and your living situation.
Andy
 
Messages
954
Reactions
1,485
It wasn't the politicians that wrote it...
^ - What @solv3nt said.

BM 114 was a direct to voter initiative.

My understanding was that Washington SB 5078 originally had language similar to Oregon BM 114 regarding the possession of 11+ mags.

But, because SB 5078 went through the state legislative process (committees, house, senate, etc.) the pro-2A legislators were able to REMOVE the language about only possessing an 11+ mag on your private property, or at a competition, range, educational event or hunting, and that you can only transport those mags separately from the firearm in a locked container.

Please don't misunderstand me, I DO NOT think SB 5078 is a "good compromise" bill.

But the 14 states in the union that have the option of direct voter initiative legislation continue to be at great risk for continued attacks like BM 114.

I realize this doesn't address the OP's training issue. I was just agreeing with @solv3nt.

Just babbling - like an old dude.

Take what you like and leave the rest.

Cheers.
 
Messages
1,383
Reactions
3,466
Why is that? The Air Force has many personnel that are highly trained in the use of small arms. Probably most numerous are the Air Force Security Police. They receive infantry training and are responsible for ground defense of Air Force assets. The Air Force also has special force units that serve in a number of roles. Not to be forgotten are the combat search and rescue folks who have balls of steel.

Historically, I have always given the Air Force guys a hard time. Just having fun with you.
 
Messages
1,079
Reactions
1,571
OP: I wouldn't get involved as much as were possible- In real life and without context, who are the good guys and who are the bad guys isn't always clear- One mans' group of "gang bangers" is another mans' group of loud teens in baggy clothing and sneakers. I have one of those at home.

As far as training and mindset- a sidearm is but one tool in the box. If you are seriously concerned about defending yourself and your sole solution is to buy a gun and a holster and feel all clever, then you will likely not do well.

Now I'm old, slow and creaky, but I used to be a decent boxer, ok at Muay Thai, spent 6 years give or take practicing Krav, and bounced at some pubs back in the homeland- all to say that I know I can keep my wits about me if someone is trying to punch me in the face or threaten me, and close up, arms length self defense is frankly, way more likely to occur than having to draw on someone at some distance. More likely, I'll be stabbing someone rather shooting them....( though hopefully not that either )- Used to do force on force where you'd walk through a group of six or seven people- one of them, you don't know who will attack. You try and draw, control and aim your pistol when someone is on top of you, striking and fighting for control of gun. It is incredibly difficult with a determined opponent.
As far as training- maybe every time I'm at the range it's just beginners there, but it's fairly unusual to see people able to keep a full mag within dinner plate sized group at 7 yards and that's slow, relaxed stress free shooting from the bench.
The members responding in this thread are, I fear, not at all typical of gun owners. I'd be massively surprised if anything like 1% got any training outside of Youtube.....
 
Last Edited:
Messages
954
Reactions
1,485
I'd be massively surprised if anything like 1% got any training outside of Youtube.....
Don't be dissin' Instructor Earl ...

InstructorEarl.jpg
 
Messages
4,179
Reactions
10,784
For many the Dunning Kruger effect is high.
I had to look this one up. For casual handgun owners, this is very true!

I've been shooting with two different coworkers in the last year or so, both long-time gun owners who have owned and shot handguns for many years, but I got the feeling that neither had really gone much beyond bouncing tin cans across the yard.

I felt bad both times, for showing them up so badly. They were equally embarrassed when I was repeatedly ringing targets at any range, that they couldn't hit at all. I told them it's just practice. I'm far from the best shot around, but I've had lots of practice, and I keep at it because I enjoy it.

I have another acquaintance who's been talking about going to the range with me. He says he has a pistol he hasn't shot in a very long time, but he's a "great shot". He's a nice guy, but a bit of a know-it-all. Should be interesting.
 
Messages
747
Reactions
850
Historically, I have always given the Air Force guys a hard time. Just having fun with you.
Guess I am one step below the Airforce as a former member in the Air National Guard. Basic training with the M16 had far less live fire than I expected or wanted for that matter. Except for shooting and using our non-dominant side, and from that I learned I needed a lot more practice. I don't even pick my nose or wipe my butt with my left hand for crying out loud! :)

I do agree, without a lot of practice and good training, you could be a danger to yourself and others, but a lot comes down to good ole common sense which it seems a lot of people are missing nowadays.
 
Last Edited:
Messages
6,706
Reactions
17,822
It’s less of a “train every week” issue and more of a “what level of skill did the person attain and retain with what they are carrying.”

I haven’t shot my carry pistol in almost over a year, but I’d be able to draw and put all rounds on a 4-6” target at 20-30 feet in quick order just because it is not difficult to do that when basic fundamentals are applied. Further distances that circle would grow, but it would still be consistent in hitting the target. If you’ve taken the time to really train with the weapon, the skills will still be there.

I think the worry of the “hero” mentality is far greater than the reality of it. I am not generally concerned about someone trying to be a hero in a public setting and endangering me with gunfire. In my life I’ve only been in 1 situation where a gun was pulled due to an altercation, and I was the person and it wasn’t fired. The more realistic concern I have is with someone in another house handling a firearm negligently and discharging a round in the direction of my house.

Thankfully, despite there being more guns than people in this country, the amount of injuries due to negligent discharges is still extremely small when compared to the percentage of gun and people who own guns.
 
I had to look this one up. For casual handgun owners, this is very true!
My bad for not defining Dunning Kruger, not like it comes up in everyday conversation. For others who might not be familiar with the term, in short, people think they are better at things than they actually are. As in, some folks go to the range a few times and think are John Wick. I think your story is well stated and fairly common.

The group on this forum overall, and especially ones who tend to discuss these threads, I'm betting are some of the better trained, more experienced folks compared to the average person who owns a gun or even CHL holders.
 

Latest Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top