Transformation to shooter

Berger.Fan222 said:

I think a lot depends on the discipline and the level of proficiency desired.

Click to expand...

Agreed. And, as you also point out, the quality of practice and availability of good instruction play a big role too.

I have always tried to become proficient with my firearms regardless of how many or how few I had. It started with my first Daisy B-B gun when I was 7 years old. The competition back then was the rest of the kids in the neighborhood with B-B guns. Sometimes life and what it brings made so I couldn't keep that proficiency up, but I still focused on shooting what I had, as well as I could. Kinda figured that's what guns are all about. Iffin' I just wanted to make noise, I lit off firecrackers.

Concur with much of the above. Bought one, got "good" with it (whether hunting or plinking), then another, then another. When I started to store guns muzzle down in the safe due to constraint, I decided to get "proficient" with what I had before buying a bigger safe. Then I bought another safe.

hso said:

People aren't generally interested in expending effort.

Click to expand...

This is me!

Personally, it wasn't a linear progression. Grew up in the big city with no BB guns and few shooting opportunities. The family summer vacation to the relatives in rural areas allowed some .22 firing into the hillside.

Then, into the army infantry for 7 years, so I got some training and practice, but still didn't become a "fan". Lived out of a duffel bag for some years after the service, so firearm ownership wasn't much of a consideration.

Only after planting some roots and getting a house did it occur to me that I could then own and secure guns. I'll admit to starting more as a collector than a shooter, stumbling into mil-surps at the pawn shop.

Now, I'm working to gain proficiency out of a true love of the hobby. I do it slowly, informally, self guided at my own pace. That keeps me happy.

Do what keeps you happy!

wgp said:

At what point does one go from a person who mostly just loves to acquire more guns and shooting stuff, to someone who focuses on actually learning to shoot what he/she has really well? Have you done it, or do you even want to? You know the old saying, "Beware of the man with only one gun, he probably knows how to use it"? I don't think you need to limit yourself to one gun, but I recall a line from a book by Jack O'Connor, something like: "there are plenty of 400-yard rifles, but where are the 400-yard riflemen?"

Click to expand...

I don't think I fit either category. That is I don't think I've ever acquired more guns just for the sake of acquiring more guns, and I don't think I've ever had a gun I didn't want to learn to shoot well.
I've been around guns my whole life. My grandfather was a hunter, my mom and dad were hunters, my wife is a hunter, and I'm a hunter. Those two cliques - "Beware of the man with one gun..." and "plenty of 400-yard rifles..." are both partly true, I suppose. But they're no more true than, "To me, guns are just tools."
What I mean is sure, I like the looks of some guns more than others, but I've never bought a gun based on it's looks, much less bought one based on its future collector's value. I'll admit to buying a few guns over the years that I never did learn to shoot very well, but that was usually because they kicked harder than I thought they would when I bought them.
Disclaimer - I bought an AR the day before the election because I thought it would go up in value once Hillary got elected. But that wasn't my fault. The media lied! On the other hand, I should have known better. I knew about media lies and distortions for a long time before election day. And I shouldn't have dived into something I don't understand anyway. I understand hunting, NOT investing in guns!

MrBorland said:

Agreed. And, as you also point out, the quality of practice and availability of good instruction play a big role too.

Click to expand...

I'd hate to give the wrong impression that becoming a good shooter requires a large investment in paid instruction, because I've seen too many cases where it didn't. For me, "The Art of the Rifle" and the NRA Marksmanship Qualification Program, combined with my own initiative and following the structured program have worked pretty well. With a little self-motivation, self-discipline, and ability to track one's own progress, most money that might be spent on paid instruction is better spent on ammunition and gas to increase practice time.

I'm in a different space than either described by the OP... I grew up in the country and could shoot any time I wanted, or could afford the ammo. So we all shot small birds at distance. Sometimes to keep them out of the fruit (fruit farmers - prunes, pears, apples) - sometimes just for something to work on. We all shot a lot. Some got pretty good. I did OK. So qualifying in the Army was not a big deal ...

Fast forward to today. Now I want to shoot what I have which is 90% used rifles that I'm tweaking on. I don't know why the previous owner sold the rifle. I don't care. I just want the experience of finding out how to make it work, then work better

The 22's, from my target rifle down, get shot by me and friends for fun and plinking. They are curious about how they feel and what kind of accuracy they can get. I know, so I share at the range or on the ranch. It's the new-to-me guns that are the most fun. Get it dialed in and see what I can do with it...

Best teaching aid I know of is a 22 and a big old buckeye tree with some water balloons swinging on 10' fishing leaders at 50 yds or more. It'll make you crazy until you get it

Same tree, new balloons, 30-30 at 100 yds is a whole new lesson

Then move to the 22-250 at 200 yds

But even air rifles can be fun and they are dirt cheap. So I get trigger time 12 months out of the year. Sometimes, it's an actual range day with pic-nic basket and say 2 friends and 5 rifles between us. Sometimes it's just me and the squirrels keeping them away from the walnuts (wife sells the nuts and cooks with them)

For me it was competition. First USPSA match 5 years ago and I was hooked. This led into 3-Gun and recently Precision Rifle Series matches. I still shoot USPSA primarily, but love to learn from the other disciplines. It becomes an addiction and you want to do well in every division with every type of firearm.

I suppose higher round counts are likely necessary to become competitive in the action pistol disciplines at the national level (and maybe even some of the more competitive local areas), but I do not have the breadth of experience to be sure.

Click to expand...

To become nationally competitive in USPSA requires an absolute bare minimum of 25k rounds a year for three years, of good, focused training. And usually, much more... the Army AMU team for example, which reliably produces pro level USPSA guys, is often shooting thousands of rounds per week.

Everybody's definition of "shooter" is going to impact the answer here I think.