This is a discussion on lots of malfunctions within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; ugh... Maybe it's just cause it's late, or that I'm tired, or that I have heart burn, but I really get tired of these, "Lets ...
Maybe it's just cause it's late, or that I'm tired, or that I have heart burn, but I really get tired of these, "Lets make fun of the new people" posts.
So what if a bunch of people JUST GETTING their carry license suck at firearms? Do you really think posts like this help the 2A cause? If I were an anti I'd love to come to a forum that is supposed to be in favor of the right to bear arms, and read those very people talking about how loose gun restrictions are, and how dangerous they are in the hands of the common citizen, and how there should be even more hurdles that people should have to get over in order to legally carry a firearm. If I were an anti I'd love to have ammunition like that.
"Look.. even the people who own guns think it should be harder for people to have a gun."
Maybe we should pass some new rules, some greater restrictions, or even better yet.... a national standard for who should and shouldn't have a gun.
Aside from shooting ourselves in the foot with these posts... Pun Intended.
I think it's just basically a jerkish thing to do to point our how someone new to anything sucks at the hobby. Someones first time on the golf course... lets make fun of them because they can't hit like Tiger Woods. First time on the basket ball court... lets make fun of them cause they can't handle as good as Kobe Bryant.
Personally... I'd take the example above as a sign of a good thing. A bunch of people that don't know what they're doing at a CCL class? GOOD!!!! That means there are new people being introduced to firearms. That means that there might be a few more people who will vote IN FAVOR of gun rights who might not have before. But what are we doing instead of encouraging them? We're making fun of em. "Look at that idiot who doesn't know how to clear his weapon", or "Look at that dumbo who spent $1,000 on his gun and can't (fill in the blank)"
People who spend money on a gun are a good thing. They're likely to support your local gun shop, and tell their friends, and who knows... maybe even get more people to get into guns, and vote for gun rights. But if it's their first time out, and all they find are dickish people who make fun of them then they're likely not going to want to continue with it, and they're more likely to vote against us when it's on the line.
How about instead of pointing, snickering, or posting about how your so much cooler than all the newbies, you maybe take a second and offer a word of encouragement. "Dude.. when I first started I couldn't hit crap.. but hey... join Jim Bob's Gun Club.. shoot a hundred rounds a month, and you'll be hitting pennies at 100 yard. Also.. there is a really cool defensive pistol class at 'so-and-so's' Gun Club that is awesome. I tell everyone I know that getting your CCL is just the beginning. Take that class man, I'm telling ya... it's a blast. And shoot every month."
You know... I'm sorry for coming off the way that I know that I am.. but I've read this same kind of post over and over again at different forums and it just !@#$%'s me off. There's no better way to help the anti's than to discourage those that are just starting to take an interest in what we love.
No disrespect, but I had to throw out the flag.
Its a shame that, even among gun enthusiasts and pro 2A folks, there has become a sort of divisive "click".
- Those that are stupid and untrained and shouldn't carry a gun,
- Those that teach courses, or have taken a bunch of training, and should be the only ones qualified to carry a gun for defense.
The more of this crap I hear the less I want to even think about taking a class or training from these elitists.
I think there are people who certainly need some training and those that need a lot of training but the 2A doesn't stipulate the necessity of training in order to carry and use a firearm in self defense.
And to say that most people survive a gunfight out of pure "dumb luck" is just not accurate. There certainly are some scenarios where luck plays a huge role, but, I believe in the ability of the human being to do incredible things when their life is threatened.
“I am consistently on record and will continue to be on record as opposing concealed carry.”
- Barack Obama Chicago Tribune, April 27, 2004
while i live in Pennsylvania where basically nothing is needed to obtain a permit, which is fine by me because i know i can shoot well, i wish for the sake of others that there was a rather strict qualification necessary.
i get mad when i cant double-tap a 2" circle at 7 yards and while that may be really strict, a typical magazine for me at 5 or 7 yards will be entirely within a 2-3" circle shooting at a pretty rapid pace...and i have owned my xdm 45c for 8 days
When I took my class a few yrs back the was an older guy with a 90's model S&W auto in .45. His weapon jammed after every shot. Apparently he didnt think he need to lube his pistol. But by the time he finished his target appeared to have one large hole in the dead center.
"He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." – Luke 22:36
"If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so." – Thomas Jefferson
I don't see posts that are directed or derogatory towards the individuals. I see discussion about whether or not revolvers would be better to qualify with or semi auto. I see discussions about whether or not the state approved proficiency is good enough or should be made more difficult.
I certainly don't see any posts that say if you can't empty a full mag or cylinder into the X ring at 45 feet in under 3.6 seconds you should not even consider carrying a gun.
I will put myself on the spot regarding my post.
My comments are spot on in my mind. The CHL permit should be their starting point. I didn't say they need to be able to outshoot me before taking my class, or that they should attend my Basic Pistol class before attending the CHL class. There are some instuctors in this area that won't teach a new shooter until they take one of their other classes. I don't care. As long as you are not unsafe on the range or a complete tool, you can take my CHL class and my wife and I will do what we can to help you get your permit. So far probably 10-15% of the people who come through our classes haven't ever shot before. Most have passed and get their permits, the few that didn't pass the proficiency failed to take me up on the offer to go back out and work with them some more on their shooting techniques and requalify free of charge. I can't really offer any more encouragement to a new shooter realistically.At the end of each class I have them watch a video about a watchmaker, and tell them that the piece of plastic they get back from the state should be a starting point for each of them. They need to practice and learn how to run their gun, figure out carry methods and get in the mindset that they will need if they ever have to use their gun. My class just makes them legal, and a little more prepared, it certainly doesn't make them ready.
Again, I certainly don't see anti 2A posts in this thread.
Encouraging someone who is going to be licensed to carry a firearm to spend more time training or learning how to make their gun work properly should be part of any instruction or come from other shooters that they know.
Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.
Texas CHL Instructor
Texas Hunter Education Instructor
It is truly rewarding seeing absolute newbies become more proficient (as the class progresses), than some of the so-called experienced shooters that come through.
I believe one reason I see this happen in every single class in which I've been involved is, absolute "newbies" are a LOT more open to proper instruction than experienced shooters that insist on following poorly learned techniques.
Back to original post. I was trained as an armorer in the USMC so maybe my philosophy of maintenance is "overkill." That said, my carry S&W snubbie (I own several) is given the S&W "short check" at least once a week. I check each day for cylinder "play", lockup and clearance distances. It basically the same check we did before we issued a pistol to a shooter from the armory. I do the same with my Glock G23 if I carry it. All guns are lightly lubed at least once a week if I am going to carry it. All of the above is repeated for my Mossberg 500 "House gun" weekly. I purchased the AGI Videos on all of my guns and have the maintenance manuals for all off them. As a Marine I was trained to believe that the only gun I can trust is one that I have maintained to functional performance. Guns I fire at the range are automatically given the function check so the more range time, the more maintenance has been performed.
Buy a quality weapon, learn how to maintain it and then keep it maintained. If a weapon jams on the range, it will jam when the shtf. Blaming it on ammo or limp wristing is not going to help when that druggy-psycho is stabbing you to death. Whatever your "mistakes" are on the range will be your "mistakes" in an SD situation. IMHO shooters should buy the visual aids and learn how to do at least minimum maintenance on their carry weapon. They will cost less than another holster you probablyly didn't need anyway. I go with the Corps on this one, maintaining a weapon is just as important as being able to fire it accurately. They taught us how to strip, clean and lube our rifle Weeks before they taught us how to fire them
Retired Marine, Retired School Teacher, Independent voter, Goldwater Conservative.
All that said, I agree that across all possible variables, the revo is generally more reliable than the auto. But, of course, all generalizations are false. Including this one. :)
A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.
[QUOTE=OPFOR;2143960]I suppose it's possible, but these were both using high quality factory ammunition (though two different brands, so it wasn't a case of a bad "lot" of ammo). I am by no means a revolver expert, but I did inspect, clean, and lube each before going to the range. I didn't notice any pre-existing conditions but, again, I am not an expert and may have missed something. It was a relatively heavy shooting day - perhaps 250 rounds per gun. Both revos locked up - tight - and I couldn't get them running again (my lack of expertise showing yet again). Both were using .38 SPL loads, as well, and I do know enough to know that the S&W19 and SP101 are tough, robust pistols that should be able to handle even the hottest loaded .38s...
All that said, I agree that across all possible variables, the revo is generally more reliable than the auto. But, of course, all generalizations are false. Including this one. :)[/QUOTE
The key here is the number of rounds expended. I am willing to bet that you had Carbon/lead buildup between cylinder and forcing cone (barrel). I have a M&P (ca. 1951 revolver not auto!) that was factory plated. The plating process closed the clearance (gap) between the cylinder and forcibng cone drastically. Every 50 rounds or so I have to use a toothbrush on the cylinder and forcing cone to clear the "gunk" or it will lock up. This doesn't invalidate it as a carry weapon as I should never be in a situation where I reload 10X. (If I do, I really needed an M60 not a snubbie!) Some of the models (K-Frame and I-Frames usually) were built to such close tolerances tht they get this build up. It will lock up the gun tight! Newer S&W revolvers have a little more "slop factor" built in with larger gaps. I have never had this happeen in my L-Frames or J-Frames.
Retired Marine, Retired School Teacher, Independent voter, Goldwater Conservative.
Another comment: I do find it a bit difficult to comprehend that I took the course with my 22, which never became my CC firearm. Then again, although interesting and some good learning points, the overall course, at least as dictated and defined in SC, is pretty basic and leaves many with a permit and really no experience whatsoever.