Reality Check: Do you know how to shoot?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Everyone is apparently equal, faceless usually, subject to being judged only on what they have to say and how they say it.

It almost gives the impression that we ARE all equal
Click to expand...
Actually, we are all equal. Some people claim credentials; some people publish where to find their credentials; and some people keep quiet. Some people without "credentials" have a lot of experience in the subject at hand; some folks with a lot of credentials have only a surface knowledge of the specific topic.

So, it's (for me) not about who a person is, it's about what he says and how he says it. A guy says, "I'm so-and-so, what I say is right, and there is no discussion," well, that gets a predictable response. Even if he is right--and he may not be. (Disclaimer: this guy is fictional; any resemblence to an actual poster, living or dead, is purely co-incidental.)

A guy who tells you what he thinks, gives you his reason (maybe cites a reference, or relates an experience) and treats you like the equal you are? That person gets another response.

Sure: there are folks who say "This is the way it is" and they are flat wrong. It's tempting to slam them. For me, it's more helpful if responders just state the facts and give a reference...that is something besides "I say so." Even if they are experts.

"The appeal to authority;" it's a verson of an ad hominem argument: believe me because of who I am. Can be a valid technique; but we've all heard politicians claiming to be experts on gun control, and celebrities claiming to be experts on foreign policy. Some of us have even heard experts over-state their findings, claiming things their data doesn't support; or heard them comment erroneously on a topic that, while in their field, isn't within their specific expertise.

I don't think I'm unique: I'm considered an expert by some in certain subjects. Yet, most times when I get into discussions with folks who know "nothing" about those subjects, I can still find occasion to say: "That's a good question," or "That's an insightful comment"...

Or "I don't know." :eek:
 
Last edited:
In my house at 30ft or less with any of my handguns..yes I can. Outdoors on the target range with a scoped rifle out to 300 yds, yes I can. In a combat situation, nope, the pros and military kids are much better than I am. In a self defense situation who the hell knows what will prevail, panic, luck, an incompetent adversary. Hope I never have to find out.
 
Sam1911 said:
...Now I try pretty hard sometimes to make it come across as politely as possible and do attempt never to make someone feel bad about what they didn't know or were mistaken about, but how can I express (what I believe to be) a truth, especially in correcting someone's mistake, if I don't say in essence, "You're wrong, I'm right?...
Click to expand...
The thing is that often no matter how you say something someone is going to wind up taking it amiss or being offended. We all have differing degrees of tolerance for abrasion -- different thicknesses of skin.
 
different thicknesses of skin
Click to expand...
Agreed. And I think that most of us can exhibit different skin-thickness on different days. But that's not really the question.

The question is, how do we choose to respond to the thin-skinned? "No offense meant--that's just how I roll," or "Man-up, you wimp--that's just how I roll."

Not to mention the choice to roll a little more softly.
 
JohnKSa said:
The fact that a person is or isn't "restrained by the laws of man" has no bearing on what rights that person has. Only on what he's willing to do and can manage to pull off.

The fact that a person has the CAPABILITY to rape and murder and doesn't care about being caught doesn't mean he has the RIGHT to rape and murder.
Click to expand...
I'm gonna try to explain my point of view one more time.
I think most of us here at THR beleve this statement and hold it dear.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
Now if we are to beleve this that the right to life, the right to Liberty and the right to happiness are unalienable Rights. then the hungry mugger has the right to take your wallet so he can get something to eat and the rapist and murderer have the right to fulfill their needs.
Now the problem with that is as a society we realize the need to protect your right to keep your life(IE not be murdered), liberty (not be raped) and pursuit of happiness (keeping your hard earned cash) So man makes laws against murder, rape and robbery.
In these troubled economic times it would be a good thing to keep in mind that people in the end are no better than animals and will kill for their right to survive.
thanks for reading;)
 
mavracer said:
I'm gonna try to explain my point of view one more time.
I think most of us here at THR beleve this statement and hold it dear.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
Now if we are to beleve this that the right to life, the right to Liberty and the right to happiness are unalienable Rights. then the hungry mugger has the right to take your wallet so he can get something to eat and the rapist and murderer have the right to fulfill their needs.
Now the problem with that is as a society we realize the need to protect your right to keep your life(IE not be murdered), liberty (not be raped) and pursuit of happiness (keeping your hard earned cash) So man makes laws against murder, rape and robbery.
In these troubled economic times it would be a good thing to keep in mind that people in the end are no better than animals and will kill for their right to survive.
thanks for reading;)
Click to expand...

This really has gotten WAY off-topic, to the point it's not even about firearms anymore.

mavracer,
I'm no expert on Natural Law or Natural Rights, but I have some understanding of them. As I understand it, many of our man-made laws against "murder, rape and robbery" etc. have a basis in natural law. I won't be long-winded, so I recommend you read http://jim.com/rights.html before continuing your lectures here. It's a long read (I haven't finished it yet myself), but looking ahead, I noticed a long section on the right to bear arms. I'm looking forward to it.
 
The question is, how do we choose to respond to the thin-skinned? "No offense meant--that's just how I roll," or "Man-up, you wimp--that's just how I roll."

Not to mention the choice to roll a little more softly.
Click to expand...

Maybe the thin skinned are really those who become rude and condescending to others for not agreeing with them.
 
I remember the good old days. Cars had carburetors instead of computers, gasoline was cheap and it was women that were expensive, when going to church on Sunday was expected and when this THREAD WAS ABOUT SHOOTING!
 
orangeninja said:
I remember the good old days. Cars had carburetors instead of computers, gasoline was cheap and it was women that were expensive, when going to church on Sunday was expected and when this THREAD WAS ABOUT SHOOTING!
Click to expand...
I remember carburetors (and we went to temple on Saturday). But was this thread really ever about shooting?
 
I agree, the only place to offer unsolicited advice is on the internet
Click to expand...
I'm good with getting back to the OP, why do you feel that? I certainly have no problem saying something if I see something unsafe. I'd think if it really bothers you and you saw something in their technique that was obvious that you would be capable of politely asking if they'd mind a pointer. If your shooting that much better they shouldn't be offended. Even if they are working on something and can shoot better than you they shouldn't be offended if their target looks bad and maybe you can strike up a conversation an learn something from them.
I will give a caution sometimes when I'm practicing slow fire at 7 yards I use a B27 and shoot at the numbers, my targets at a glance might look bad.
 
Loosedhorse said:
Actually, we are all equal. Some people claim credentials; some people publish where to find their credentials; and some people keep quiet. Some people without "credentials" have a lot of experience in the subject at hand; some folks with a lot of credentials have only a surface knowledge of the specific topic.

So, it's (for me) not about who a person is, it's about what he says and how he says it. A guy says, "I'm so-and-so, what I say is right, and there is no discussion," well, that gets a predictable response. Even if he is right--and he may not be. (Disclaimer: this guy is fictional; any resemblence to an actual poster, living or dead, is purely co-incidental.)

A guy who tells you what he thinks, gives you his reason (maybe cites a reference, or relates an experience) and treats you like the equal you are? That person gets another response.
Click to expand...

I can see a good argument being made that we all deserve equal treatment, although FAIR treatment would be a much more appropriate phrase, IMO.

Adjective:
Being the same in quantity, size, degree, or value.
Noun:
A person or thing considered to be the same as another in status or quality.
Verb:
Be the same as in number or amount.
Synonyms:
adjective. even - level - like - same - similar - identical
noun. peer - match - compeer
verb. equalize - match
Click to expand...

The only one of those that seems to apply to your statement is "being the same in status" here on THR, which I'm all for. We are certainly not all the same size, degree (of experience or training), even, alike, same, even similar, certainly not identical. Peers? Sure.
 
I think we've drifted quite a ways from the OP and what started as a good question had been lost in the muddle.

I'm going to reluctantly close this and ask the OP, if he is still interested, to reform his question and star another thread. I'd highly recommend that he start off with a definition of how well someone needs to be able to shoot defensively to be knowledgeable.

That might even be a better thread...how, measurably, well does one need to be able to shoot to be competent
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

7
  • Locked
The integration of shooting techniques
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
7677
7
J
  • Locked
Muzzle blast and shooting at night.
Replies
11
Views
2K
JMusic
J
Matthew Temkin
  • Locked
why practice point shooting?
Replies
2
Views
387
Bartholomew Roberts
B
J
  • Locked
When is a new technique worth adopting and how do you know it's the real deal?
Replies
17
Views
721
El Tejon
E
S
  • Locked
Who are you?
Replies
5
Views
732
Rob Pincus
R
Back
Top