Gun Philosophy Internal Conflict

This is a discussion on Gun Philosophy Internal Conflict within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Tangle, I hear what you say and agree with you on every point, with a few exceptions based more on personal requirements and needs than ...

Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567
Results 91 to 105 of 105

Thread: Gun Philosophy Internal Conflict

  1. #91
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    8,703
    Tangle, I hear what you say and agree with you on every point, with a few exceptions based more on personal requirements and needs than technical reasons.

    I have never had the fatalistic mindset of if I can't do it with...if I did, I wouldn't be here today. I think it all boils down to user preference, for a specific requirement based on realistic needs as to the perceptions of the operator based on experience and role that needs filled.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #92
    Distinguished Member Array Dragman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Vandergrift PA
    Posts
    1,275
    Quote Originally Posted by Tangle View Post
    I admire your mindset and tactical philosophy! Right on.

    However, there is far more to it than personal preference. If one runs his gun dry in the midst of a gunfight, the gunfight is then over for him.
    Thats kinda what I ment by personal preference. You have to chose what your comfortable with and understand the possibilitys. thats why I carry 2 G19's and two extra mags keeping 60 rounds on me and a couple of 30 rounders in the truck.
    To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women

  4. #93
    VIP Member Array 10thmtn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,898
    Quote Originally Posted by glockman10mm View Post
    Anyway, that really can't be compared to civillian applications of self defense. I suspect like most people here, I live in a place that would not be worth a terrorist time to attemt to harm. And if so, it would realistically be either an attack where a firearm of any type would be useless, such as a bombing. And in the very unlikely senario of it being against bullet proof clad attackers, anything short of a rifle would be pretty much useless. But in that senario, distance and cover is your commodity, not the ammo capacity. In with that said, if I had to engage from a distance, the accuracy of a good revolver over the auto pistol would give me alot more comfort. But these are still pretty unrealistic scenarios. But they are fun to talk about, and give self defense shooting schools something to add to the program.

    No, the everyday reality is that for basic reality based situations, the revolver or 1911 with will do just fine.
    I suspect like most people here, I live in a place that would not be worth a terrorist time to attemt to harm. - "It won't happen here...it won't happen to me." Isn't that the same attitude we decry in the "sheep" who do not carry?

    And if so, it would realistically be either an attack where a firearm of any type would be useless, such as a bombing. - Wrong. Al Quaeda is telling its minions to quit trying (and failing) to make bombs, and instead to get guns and go shoot people.

    And in the very unlikely senario of it being against bullet proof clad attackers, anything short of a rifle would be pretty much useless - Also wrong, and the reason for the failure to stop drill. If 2-3 shots to the torso have little effect other than to stun the attacker, shift your aim to the head.

    if I had to engage from a distance, the accuracy of a good revolver over the auto pistol would give me alot more comfort - With a handgun, the limiting factor in accuracy is the shooter, not the equipment.

    No, the everyday reality is that for basic reality based situations, the revolver or 1911 with will do just fine - It all depends what you want to be equipped to deal with. If you can carry a G26 as easily as a snubbie, I just don't see why you wouldn't.

    Look, I would prefer to carry a snubbie as my secondary, as my experience with pistols smaller than the G26 is that they are finicky. I carry my secondary in my left pocket, and unfortunately the snubbie just prints too much for the manner in which I must dress. So, I carry a LCP instead.

    I could save a lot of gas money by putting my kids in a sub-compact car, but I'd be kidding myself if I thought they'd be as safe in an accident as they are in our larger, heavier SUV.

    Carry a revolver as your primary if you wish, just understand the limitations, and do not kid yourself into thinking they don't matter.

    Cheers all - good discussion, and thanks for keeping it civil.
    The more good folks carry guns, the fewer shots the crazies can get off.
    www.armedcitizensnetwork.org - member
    Glock 30, 19, 26; Ruger SP101, LCR, LCP (2), Mini 14; Marlin 336 .30-30
    CT Lasers

  5. #94
    Senior Moderator
    Array Tangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    9,669
    Quote Originally Posted by glockman10mm View Post
    Tangle, I hear what you say and agree with you on every point, with a few exceptions based more on personal requirements and needs than technical reasons.

    I have never had the fatalistic mindset of if I can't do it with...if I did, I wouldn't be here today. I think it all boils down to user preference, for a specific requirement based on realistic needs as to the perceptions of the operator based on experience and role that needs filled.
    glockman10mm,

    The 'fatalistic' statement I posted was not directed at you or anyone specifically, it's just something I hear a lot.
    I'm too young to be this old!
    Getting old isn't good for you!

  6. #95
    Senior Member Array wjh2657's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Lafayette, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,166
    The problem with logic is that you must follow it to its conclusion. Saying you are using logic and leaving critical elements out is not conclusive.

    The multiple, well armed ,body armored target scenarios that are argued so readily on this and other forums are based on simulated school scenarios that are modified versions of real military and police incidents. They are for the most part, aggressive scenarios and not defensive scenarios.

    That aside, the argument is that a high capacity pistol would allow survival in these scenarios. The so called" proof" of this is hits on cardboard or metal targets and paintball exercises.

    Let us follow our logic to its end. The only real test of weapon effectiveness is actual use against human targets. LEA incidents for the most part are botched tactics against softer targets who are not really well trained with their weapons. The real data base to follow is that of the military.

    The military has found that the only true effective weapons against hardened (Body armor) well trained targets are automatic shoulder fired weapons firing rifle caliber cartridges. Nobody in the military enters a fire fight against a well armed and armored opponent with a handgun!

    Entering the real life multiple armored assailant scenarios represented by the targets at tactical schools and competitions would be futile with anything less than an assault rifle or a M249 SAW. Anything less could not assure survival.

    Since everything else is inefficient and foolhardy, discussing their relative levels of inefficiency is a useless exercise.

    Do I base this on GOOGLE? No, I base it on over six years of combat through a thirty year Marine Corps career. I grow weary of self-styled gurus who preach the gospel of tactics for guns. Most of these pistoleros have never been shot nor have killed another man, the only experience that really counts. I have experienced both and have a very realistic idea of what I would need to take on one of these school scenarios.

    My choice of weapon for these "tactical scenarios" is below. Anything less is just "p*****g in the wind."

    MGySgt of Marines (Retired)

    Retired Marine, Retired School Teacher, Independent voter, Goldwater Conservative.

  7. #96
    Senior Moderator
    Array Tangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    9,669
    Your assumptions are incorrect. SD shooting schools don't spend a lot of time at all dealing with vests, except to introduce the non-standard response. And they don't set them in a offensive setting at all. The purpose of a Self-Defense shooting school is defensive deployment of a handgun for personal protection. And, no one is claiming a handgun will defeat a vest, the ideas presented is to shoot around the vest, not through it.

    It is not the argument that the hicap would survive necessarily, but improve the chances of survival.

    You may want to consider that these SD schools you denigrate so and misrepresent, have assess to more street data than you do. Their focus is defense with a handgun if that's the course being taken. The tactics they do teach about dealing with unexpected discoveries such as a vest is to give the best possible responses to maximize the chance of surviving or perhaps prevailing such an encounter, otherwise....

    It appears to me the only self-styled guru here is you. Our thoughts are not necessary original but things we've learned via training which includes the experience of others. And it is not required that one be shot at or having shot at someone to understand the principles of SD. Thousands of soldiers and LEO go about their jobs without ever having shot anyone. Even the people that train them may not have shot or been shot. But they are still able to take information they were taught that is based on data from the streets and teach it to others and see it work for them when the time comes.
    I'm too young to be this old!
    Getting old isn't good for you!

  8. #97
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    8,703
    Wjh2657, or should I say Top, I have alot of the same thoughts many times. I remember one time capacity was a priority to me, was when I decided to leave my A2 in a vehicle to keep my hands free, when I was assisting the S2 officer gather intel in a bunker that was supposed to be clear. While we were in there all hell broke loose between us and them and we were trapped in between. At that time I would have given anything for that rifle and it's 30 rounder. I was glad for the 15 rounder in the M9. But since I have been a civillian except for being an LE, and even now, I feel ok with pretty much anything, capacity isn't a priority for me. Being in the $&@$ really puts a perspective on things.

  9. #98
    Senior Member Array wjh2657's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Lafayette, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,166
    I am not denigrating any kind of training. All training is helpful and good. I train weekly, including drawing and moving to fire. But it is not real and any inferences drawn from it must be taken as just what it is , simulation. Training is necessary to build brain-muscle memory (reflexes.) but simulated combat results from training does not give the same effects and results as the real thing. I went to Vietnam 3 times. I watched trained people, trained by other people without real combat experience. I dragged a lot of their bullet ridden dead bodies back to the LZ too.

    Most LEOs and all Military types would never attempt the multiple target scenarios practiced in the name of Practical Pistol Combat Training. They would seek solid cover and wait for backup (SWAT or another maneuver element.) The impression all too often on forums is that a high capacity pistol is going to allow you to overcome multiple target attacks. It is simply not enough, so it's admitted advantage over a lower capacity weapon although to some extent valid, still is actually not as great as claimed.

    I never claimed "street experience", I have combat experience, in a war zone. They are nowhere near the same thing. However the 4-5 BG scenarios are much closer to combat than to street. And my thoughts are also based on my own and fellow Marines experiences. I know six years in a combat zone doesn't seem to be as important as a certificate, but I can assure you Vietnam wasn't just a TV show. I am not a "guru". The gurus are in the hills of Afganistan.

    As far having a BG pop up within threat range wearing body armor means I am in all likelihood in very deep trouble. Heads bob and are almost impossible to hit. Combat training says to aim at crotch and thighs with hope of hitting femoral artery. Even this is very iffy and wouldn't guarantee a quick dispatch. To be armed with just a handgun in this particular situation would probably mean I was SOL, regardless of how much training or what kind of training I have.

    All of above is why I have Mossberg 500 with buckshot as primary HD "bump in the night" weapon. In a real nasty situation, a pistol, of any capacity is very chancy at best.

    I again believe that all training has benefit, but realize its limitations in reality. My advice to someone caught with just a handgun in a firefight with MS13? Run away fast and hide if you can. You are in a no win situation if you need 20-50 shots to stop your enemy. Also, in this case, your Situational Awareness really sucks!
    Retired Marine, Retired School Teacher, Independent voter, Goldwater Conservative.

  10. #99
    VIP Member Array 10thmtn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,898
    I think you're getting hung up on the body armor. The larger lesson is that if 2-3 hits to the torso are not having the desired effect - shoot something else important, preferably the head if possible. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different result. Don't keep shooting the torso if those hits aren't working - shoot something else!

    There are many reasons 2-3 torso hits may not have the desired effect - body armor is only one possibility. As you say, all handguns are marginal as defensive tools...but we can't legally walk down the street with a SAW. The best way to make up for the marginal effectiveness of handguns is...to have lots of bullets available, and preferably a second handgun as well.

    By all means, I am not suggesting you go on the offensive against a squad of AK-wielding terrorists. But, you may need to dispatch one or more to get out of their kill zone.
    The more good folks carry guns, the fewer shots the crazies can get off.
    www.armedcitizensnetwork.org - member
    Glock 30, 19, 26; Ruger SP101, LCR, LCP (2), Mini 14; Marlin 336 .30-30
    CT Lasers

  11. #100
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    8,703
    I just hope and pray none of my friends here or myself never have to put theorys to the test. Not knowing anyone here personaly, just what I sense from exchange and info provided, I feel sorry for the dummy who takes any of you all on.

  12. #101
    VIP Member Array 10thmtn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,898
    Quote Originally Posted by glockman10mm View Post
    I just hope and pray none of my friends here or myself never have to put theorys to the test. Not knowing anyone here personaly, just what I sense from exchange and info provided, I feel sorry for the dummy who takes any of you all on.
    Big Amen to that!
    The more good folks carry guns, the fewer shots the crazies can get off.
    www.armedcitizensnetwork.org - member
    Glock 30, 19, 26; Ruger SP101, LCR, LCP (2), Mini 14; Marlin 336 .30-30
    CT Lasers

  13. #102
    Senior Member Array wjh2657's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Lafayette, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,166
    Now I am really going to mix everything up. When I depart for more dangerous environments (City, Travelling long distances, etc) I leave the 642 at home and carry my Glock 23 with an extra magazine on me and one in the car. I do this mainly because a car breakdown could anchor me into a fixed defensive position and I actually may need more firepower. I just don't carry it around my little town because I know the environment and I stay awake (Situational Awareness) to anything unusual. In such cases I feel confident with "five for sure" as a last ditch tactic.
    Retired Marine, Retired School Teacher, Independent voter, Goldwater Conservative.

  14. #103
    Moderator
    Array bmcgilvray's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    9,991
    Hi wjh2657;

    I do the same thing on out-of-town trips except it's the .30 Carbine. Both sons live out of state (one is currently out of the country courtesy the USMC) and we often travel. The M1 Carbine is compact, can be wielded readily enough inside the passenger compartment of our large car, and is easy to cover and hide from prying eyes.

    This has been a great thread and very though-provoking, even for old coots like me. How can I accomplish my kitchen remodel with several good thread percolating on the Forum?
    “No possible rapidity of fire can atone for habitual carelessness of aim with the first shot.”

    Theodore Roosevelt, The Wilderness Hunter, 1893

  15. #104
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    8,703
    Thank god for the iPhone! I can stay in touch at work, even in the courtroom!

    The reason this forum is so interesting to me, is because some years back I went thru a similar conflict. I really loved revolvers, but the what ifs kept me in autos loaders. Then one day for no particular reason, I decided it was ok to enjoy and carry what I really liked. I came out of the closet , so to speak. I AM A REVOLVER GUY! I LIKE REVOLVERS! Gosh that felt good! So since that day, I have devoted myself to train with them, adapt to their limitations, and enjoy shooting them.

    Having said that, I still admire classic autos like the hi power and 1911, and the CZ 75. I own several Glocks which I turn to for specific needs. If I go into an area where there is a very high potential for trouble, I will either opt for an auto, or compliment my revolver with a long gun, and an extra speedloader.

    My biggest problem with this thread is its making me want a Browning HP or Cz.
    Last edited by glockman10mm; December 1st, 2010 at 05:33 PM.

  16. #105
    Senior Moderator
    Array Tangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    9,669
    Quote Originally Posted by wjh2657 View Post
    I am not denigrating any kind of training. All training is helpful and good. I train weekly, including drawing and moving to fire. But it is not real and any inferences drawn from it must be taken as just what it is , simulation. Training is necessary to build brain-muscle memory (reflexes.) but simulated combat results from training does not give the same effects and results as the real thing. I went to Vietnam 3 times. I watched trained people, trained by other people without real combat experience. I dragged a lot of their bullet ridden dead bodies back to the LZ too.
    Likewise all that military experience may be of little help on the streets in a civilian world - it is very, very different. Training does far more than build muscle memory, it teaches tactics. And sure, something may not work, but knowing sound, proven tactics based on feedback from the battlefield, the 'street', is far better than having no tactical knowledge at all. E.g. Evasion and escape is the primary tactic in the defensive world, but if those fail, we may have to rely on our gun and our tactics. There's a saying around trainers, "I'll take a man with sound tactics over an expert marksman every time."

    And if you keep up with the SD training schools, you'd see the feedback from students that were actually in gunfights that prevailed because of the training they got at a SD school.

    Quote Originally Posted by wjh2657 View Post
    ...Most LEOs and all Military types would never attempt the multiple target scenarios practiced in the name of Practical Pistol Combat Training.
    I think you've got competitive shooting schools confused with SD shooting schools.

    Quote Originally Posted by wjh2657 View Post
    ...They would seek solid cover and wait for backup (SWAT or another maneuver element.)
    ...SD schools teach avoid first, if you can't avoid or evade then seek cover if you aren't already behind cover. There is no run and gun unless you are shooting your way to cover or escape. If the threat is face-to-face they teach various ways to deal with that, one being a face smash with a simletaneous draw and fire as you begin backing away. You continue to fire if the threat remains a threat.

    Quote Originally Posted by wjh2657 View Post
    ...The impression all too often on forums is that a high capacity pistol is going to allow you to overcome multiple target attacks. It is simply not enough, so it's admitted advantage over a lower capacity weapon although to some extent valid, still is actually not as great as claimed.
    Well that's gonna be a problem. We've seen in this thread that in a study by Gary Kleck, he discovered that in confrontations, only 25% of the time is there only one assailant. 50% of the time there are two, and 25% of the time there are three or more. IOW 75% of the time there is more than one assailant. There's an equal chance of it being one assailant or three or more. So given those odds, what do we do? Stand there and die or shoot to defend ourself? If we opt to shoot would we be any better off with a high cap or low cap gun? A high cap obviously and it does have a significant advantage.

    The focus in the SD schools I've been to is essentially two threats. I have seen one shooting skill drill with three targets but that was only to hone shooting skills not tactics.

    Then there's the moving targets. For many, that's one of the most eye opening drills they experience. They find out how difficult it is to hit a moving target like one would likely see in a real fight although with not as much motions.

    Then there's the FOF, real-world scenario drills to emphasize tactics. One drill I was in was a guy had just killed a guy with a knife and was threatening to kill more and that's where I entered the scenario. I got behind cover as trained, and as trained exposed no more than absolutely necessary. I yelled for the man to drop the knife and he did. I yelled for him to turn around and he did (facing away from me). I yelled for him to get on his knees and he did. He began talking to me telling me how bad it had been for him and sneaking peaks at me over his shoulder. Thinking that he might run, I decided to close the distance a bit for a better shot if he tried to grab the knife and run. He stood up, which put him even further away from the knife. He was very distraught and apologetic as he reached quickly up on a refrigerator, grabbed a gun and we shot each other at the same time. I died. Why? I broke a tactical rule and the FOF drill was designed to show us the consequence of that. Know what my mistake was? I left my cover and it seemed like the most logical thing to do at the time. That's one of many, many FOF real-world scenarios I went through at Gunsite. Oh, we were using Simunitions and I actually got shot.

    So it's gonna be rather pointless to try to tell me all training does is teach you to shoot. Wanna here some others? How about the broken car scenario? Or the clerk at gunpoint. Here's a good one, an enraged man holding a cook by the throat in the kitchen of a resturant screaming he's gonna kill him. Here's the set up. I'm in the restroom, I hear the shouting and peek out of the rest room to assess the situation. I see the customers on their knees with their hands behind their head and see the BG about 30 feet away about to shoot the cook. I draw my trusty Sig (Simunitions) handgun take careful aim and shoot the BG. It is about that time that I feel the sting of a Simunitions round hit my right hand. It's the BGs buddy that was among the customers. I died again. What'd I do wrong that time, after all I held my cover? I failed to take into account there could be a second BG. I became threat focused on the primary threat and had no idea his buddy was lining me up in his sights.

    But, I didn't die in all of them, in fact in one I wound up being a hero. I'm in a resturant with some friends, and strangers, eating when a very irrate man comes in with a long club. He is very upset, ranting that he's gonna kill his no good girlfriend. He slams the club down hard on my table and asks if I'd seen her. My first thought was I need to draw and shoot this guy before he whacks me when I tell him I haven't seen her. But then I think, use tactics, not your gun. So I say, I think I saw somebody that fits that description go out the back door with another woman and it looked like they were going out for a smoke. Of course I made all that up, but I was starting to learn. He went storming off to the back door and I got everybody safely out the front without firing a shot!

    Still think you only learn to shoot?

    Quote Originally Posted by wjh2657 View Post
    ...I never claimed "street experience",
    I realize that, but that didn't stop you from telling us how flawed our knowledge and thinking is.

    Quote Originally Posted by wjh2657 View Post
    ...I have combat experience, in a war zone. They are nowhere near the same thing. However the 4-5 BG scenarios are much closer to combat than to street.
    You're correct on all counts except one: nobody ever said anything about dealing with 4-5 bad guys. But again, if that's my gunfight and I can't change it, do I fight or just stand there and let them kill me. If I decide to take my chances fighting would I be much better off with a hicap pistol? Absolutely! A hicap doesn't guarantee I'll survive, but it gives me more options.

    Quote Originally Posted by wjh2657 View Post
    ...As far having a BG pop up within threat range wearing body armor means I am in all likelihood in very deep trouble. Heads bob and are almost impossible to hit. Combat training says to aim at crotch and thighs with hope of hitting femoral artery. Even this is very iffy and wouldn't guarantee a quick dispatch. To be armed with just a handgun in this particular situation would probably mean I was SOL, regardless of how much training or what kind of training I have.
    I strongly disagree with that fatalistic point of view. Plus if we're in any kind of civilian gunfight we are in "very deep trouble". But the training is two shots to the COM and one to the head - that's called the standard response. What can be done varys with the distance to the threat. If he's really close we've probably go better odds of getting a hit. Hopefully, we can respond before he gets too close and we can first, just like the courses teach, get to cover. Now we're armored better than he is.

    It is true that groins, thighs, shoulders and heads are harder to hit, but the pelvic area is big and moves much more slowly than the limbs and head. The idea is shots to the pelvic area robs him of mobility which slows him down, which buys us time and makes him a bit easier to hit if we choose to shoot this partially or perhaps fully immobilized threat again. Or it may give us the opportunity to escape.

    Are these things guaranteed to work? Of course not. Do they give us some ways to significantly improve our chances? Absolutely!

    Quote Originally Posted by wjh2657 View Post
    ...All of above is why I have Mossberg 500 with buckshot as primary HD "bump in the night" weapon. In a real nasty situation, a pistol, of any capacity is very chancy at best.
    ...Sure a shotgun at home is great if you can hole up and wait for the police, again tactics over firepower that comes from training even if the training is reading this on the internet. But we can't carry a shotgun around with us.

    Quote Originally Posted by wjh2657 View Post
    ...I again believe that all training has benefit, but realize its limitations in reality. My advice to someone caught with just a handgun in a firefight with MS13? Run away fast and hide if you can. You are in a no win situation if you need 20-50 shots to stop your enemy. Also, in this case, your Situational Awareness really sucks!
    Everything has limitations, no one has ever implied otherwise. Good advice "to someone caught with just a handgun in a firefight..." with even one assailant would be to "...Run away fast and hide if you can..." That's exactly what the SD schools teach and train you to do and as you can see the FOF real-world scenarios (Gunsite) are designed to punish you if you do fight. The training focuses on escape if at all possible whether there's one or more.

    We're not talking about taking on an army of MS13; we're talking from one to three assailants and for the sake of enlightenment and discussion we are discussing the ramifications where escape is not an option.

    And yes situational awareness is another major tenet taught at SD schools. It is the situation awareness that allows us to escape in the first place and they teach and train you about situational awarness. It's emphsized so much that I began pie-ing my way into public restrooms and peeing from a Weaver stance. I'm kidding of course, well.....But this actually happened.

    I took the Gunsite Advanced Tactical Pistol course (5 days), with a revolver I might add, and a buddy took the Intermediate Handgun course the same week. Situational awareness was drilled into him so well that when we stopped to check into a hotel, as I signed the register and turned toward him I noticed him standing with his back to the wall behind another man. Later he said were you aware a man came in behind you? I hadn't noticed him; fatigue had gotten the better of me. But my buddy was still practicing what he'd been taught that week.

    So it's pointless to tell me training isn't effective; it is and it's a huge advantage. Want to hear the one where I discover a BG in the house and he runs down a hallway where my sister is? Training matters and it is far more than just learning to shoot although your shooting skills will be addressed too, but the tactics learned can be the difference between fighting and not fighting or fighting and winning or losing.
    I'm too young to be this old!
    Getting old isn't good for you!

Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. AK and AR peronsal conflict
    By PRSOrator in forum Defensive Rifles & Shotgun Discussion
    Replies: 65
    Last Post: July 28th, 2010, 05:47 PM
  2. HD philosophy change and new AR
    By jbum in forum Defensive Rifles & Shotgun Discussion
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: April 10th, 2010, 10:33 AM
  3. .357 Sig Philosophy Sig Sauer P229
    By SaddleSC in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: April 16th, 2009, 08:25 AM
  4. A Local Politician's Philosophy on Freedom
    By BigEFan in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: May 30th, 2008, 03:17 AM
  5. Philosophy Of Concealed Carry Gun Selection
    By QKShooter in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: March 2nd, 2005, 05:32 PM

Search tags for this page

business philosophy for gun business
,

gun philosophy

,
gun philosophy forum discussion
,
guns philosophy
,
j frame gunfights
,

marine shooting guns

,

philosophy

,
philosophy of guns
,
real gunfights involving j frames
,
self defense, philosophy and guns
,
two gun philosophy
,
what distance do leo's use rifles in conflict
Click on a term to search for related topics.