Everything you think you know about handguns is dead wrong...

Dawson, yes, generally speaking the longer the sight radius the easier to shoot a gun more accurately. Longer barrels may or may not be more accurate given gun barrel length, quality of rifling, crown, powder load, slug, etc. Some short barrels acually shoot very accurately. I have a Kimber Ultra Elite (3.16" barrel) that could group as well as a full sized 1911 (5" that belonged to another guy) from a Ransom Rest out to 25 yards. The rest proved the gun could shoot accurately and that my problems in hitting at 25 yards were shooter-related, not a problem of the gun.

More for John's list, partially based on insight from this thread...

- A Garand is not a handgun, nor are other rifles and shotguns.
- Handguns are only good for killing people
- Handguns are inherently evil/bad
- .22 lr pistols are good for self defense since trained assassins such as the Mossad and Mafia use them
 

Pistolenschutze

New member
Double Naught Spy:
"Some short barrels acually shoot very accurately. I have a Kimber Ultra Elite (3.16" barrel) that could group as well as a full sized 1911 (5" that belonged to another guy) from a Ransom Rest out to 25 yards. The rest proved the gun could shoot accurately and that my problems in hitting at 25 yards were shooter-related, not a problem of the gun."

Good point, Double. I tried out one of my snubbie Smith 637s using a Ransom Rest at 25 yards and was amazed at the accuracy it was capable of achieving. It was putting five straight rounds into about a 2.5 inch circle. Ransom Rests, however, should be banned as the Devil's own invention. Once you use one, all your excuses for missing disappear! :rolleyes: :D
 

T. O'Heir

New member
"...because there weren't enough Garands available..." Nope. The U.S. Navy didn't accept the M-1 for the Marines until the Fall of 1942. October, I think it was.
The myth that the M-1 was made to shoot M2 ammo and that shooting bullets heavier than 180's will instantly damage the op rod. 220 Silvertips didn't bother mine a bit. They did do some amazing damage to a ground hog though.
Women are inherently better shots than men are and they're generally much easier to teach. The theory is that they don't have John Wayne and Roy Rogers to live up to. It amazes me how furious some guys get when their girl friend or wife does shoot better than they do.
 

JohnKSa

Administrator
Is that some of them, some of the time are true. Its impossible to say that they all are WRONG all of the time.
Exactly correct, and exactly correct. A neophyte searches for absolutes and grasps at any "hard and fast rule" presented. Problem is that hard and fast rules and absolutes are few and far between as Pistolenshutze points out.
longer barrels putting more distance between the sights makes them easier to shoot more accurately
Increased SIGHT RADIUS makes a gun easier to shoot more acccurately, but I've seen long barrelled guns with short sight radii and short barrelled gun with relatively long sight radii. It's not the barrel length that makes the difference.
Nope, not true.
Well, actually it is true based on comments from every firearms instructor I've actually talked to as well as my own experience as a certified instructor. It's not an issue of natural ability or of a fundamental difference between the sexes so much as it is a difference in the perception of the newbie as to his/her knowledge/proficiency level. Guys tend to think they know about guns (or feel like they should know about guns) and therefore don't listen the way they should while women tend to feel that they don't know about firearms and therefore listen to the instructor better. I'm not talking about women being better shooters than men in general, but most particularly about NEW women shooters being better than NEW men shooters who have the same level of instruction. Besides, I DID say "ALMOST always"... ;)
They are fallacies because they are conclusions without sufficient premises to sustain them, or for which all contrary arguments are simply ignored in an effort to create a false but believable position.
True and not true. You're right from a purely logical standpoint, but this is also about those who THINK they are informed but aren't, besides those who are just using faulty logic.
 

mogsniper94

New member
Most of those are right but...

The one about women being better with the same amount of training is just wrong. I been training Marines and cops for years and very rarely do the females outshoot the males. They usually get extra help and still suck . IN fact we got a 700 person dept, and not one of the ladies can shoot for sh#t.
 

JohnKSa

Administrator
The one about women being better with the same amount of training is just wrong.
Well, there you go... What can I say--I guess that's my cue to go back and re-read my own thread and take my own advice. :D
 

pax

New member
John ~

My point was that women come in different flavors just like men do, and present different challenges to their instructors.

Some men come onto the range ready to listen, ready to follow suggestions, ready to learn. Some don't. Some really want to learn, but can't seem to make their hands do what their ears are told. And some are there only to stroke their own egos or to show off their abilities and thus will never hear a single word the instructor has to say to them.

Some women come onto the range ready to listen, ready to follow suggestions, ready to learn. Some don't. Some really want to learn, but can't seem to make their hands do what their minds are told. And some are there only to please a boyfriend or placate a nagging husband and thus will never hear a single word the instructor has to say to them.

The biggest difference between men & women in this context is that, culturally, a guy who isn't ready to learn for whatever reason will say so, straight up. He'll argue with the instructor and annoy the snot out of people next to him. That's how people in our culture teach their male children to deal with such situations.

But a woman who isn't ready to learn generally won't say so out loud and thus her attitude will often escape the notice of her classmates & even her instructor. She'll smile and be pleasant and curl just a little further into herself and keep doing it her own way when no one's looking. That's how people in our culture teach their female children to deal with such situations.

The woman with this attitude is not going to learn a whole lot more than the guy will, but because of the cultural difference in the way they deal with their frustrations, at the end of the day the instructor thinks the woman was truly trying and the guy was not.

Furthermore, a woman who hasn't learned nearly as much as she could have in class often escapes notice for one more reason: most people, in their guts, are surprised when a woman shoots even moderately well. Even if she does poorly, it's kind of like the old saw about the dancing bear. You know, "The wonder isn't how well the bear dances, it's that it dances at all." A lot of guys are just so thrilled to see a woman shooting that they look at her actual accomplishments through rose-colored lenses. They remember her doing better than she did ... or they remember her being soooo lousy at the beginning of the day that a very very mild improvement is touted as being something wonderful.

And that's why I say that women aren't necessarily better shooting school students than men are, nor are they any more apt to learn to shoot easily. For both men & women, there is a wide spectrum of abilities and attitudes students bring to the school. Neither sex is born knowing how to shoot and, once you realize what's going on, neither sex has a lock on being the best students.

They're just different.

pax
 
"Everything you think you know about handguns is dead wrong..."

I think you encapsulated, in a nutshell, why I've gotten so tired with firearms boards and have been visiting them, and posting to them, less and less.
 

Skyguy

New member
>>Given the same amount of training, women almost always shoot better than men.<<
-------------------

I actually did 'laugh out loud' when I read that 'fact'. LOL!

Don't believe everything you read, kids.
 
I've trained more than my fair share of women AND men, probably 30 to 40, who are totally new to both handgun and rifle shooting.

In my experience, women will do better at first.

Why?

Because they approach the concepts using their brains instead of their testicles.

The general concept I've witnessed more than once when teaching men to shoot is that, because he's a man, he's going to be Dead Eye Dick and really doesn't need anything more than to be shown how to load the gun and which end the bullet comes out.

I'M AN AMERICAN MAN! GUNS ARE IN MY BLOOD! (Belch, crotch grab, belch, grunt, swagger, obscene sexual expletive, 1 shot into the ground, 5 shots into the sky, 0 shots on paper).

I finally gave up teaching people how to shoot when a coworker INSISTED I show him how to shoot, and he spent the lesson doing everything he could to ignor what I was trying to teach him. (What? I don't need sights, I'm a MAN! Sights are for *****es!).

He was getting more and more pissed, I was getting more and more pissed, and finally told him to either grow up or go to hell, but to put the gun down and get away from the bench after he put a shot into the sidewall about a foot in front of my stomach.

Occasionally you'll get a guy who doesn't have the Dick Dead Eye syndrom, contracted from one too many games of Cowboys and Indians/Cops and Robbers. They are a pleasure to teach.
 

Skyguy

New member
>>(What? I don't need sights, I'm a MAN! Sights are for *****es!).<<
------------------------------

There's a time and a place for sights, but rarely in a shootout.

Sights are for recreational shooting;....paper, bowling pins, tin cans, unsuspecting animals and such. Things that don't shoot back.
 

azurefly

Moderator
Just a short list...

It's an interesting list, lotta truth to it.


Here's one that's true.

Given the same amount of training, women almost always shoot better than men.

Know why?

Cause they are willing to admit that they're not experts and are willing to listen and are willing to learn.

Think about it...


I think that's just as dangerous a generalization as the rest of the statements in the list.

I don't think it's valid to assert that "women" as a rule are generally willing to accept instruction and "men" as a rule are generally not. I believe that I am. I'm sure many other men are, too.


-azurefly
 

JohnKSa

Administrator
Mike Irwin said:
I think you encapsulated, in a nutshell, why I've gotten so tired with firearms boards and have been visiting them, and posting to them, less and less.
Yup, I'm beginning to slowly lean that way myself. It's sad when you open a thread on a relatively simple topic and find that most of the people posting authoritatively on the subject are completely misinformed and yet are militantly evangelistic about passing on their misinformation to others.

It would be one thing if people would say "I think it's like this..." but it's not. It's more like "This is how it is, no question about it, this is the absolute and complete truth... Final Answer."
I don't think it's valid to assert that "women" as a rule are generally willing to accept instruction and "men" as a rule are generally not.
I don't think it's valid to assert that either. However, in the case of firearms, it does seem to be generally true. As with any generalization, there are certainly exceptions...

However, my point wasn't about the differences between men and women. The point was that a willingness to listen, to admit a knowledge deficit and then to learn or relearn is a valuable skill. One that will give a person a significant advantage over someone without it.
 
"There's a time and a place for sights, but rarely in a shootout."

Had this walking bung gotten himself into a shootout I have no doubt at all that he would have killed himself.

You have to walk before you can run, but he wasn't even up to the crawling stage yet, and he was fully entrapped in the "I'm a natural with firearms because I watched Ponderosa and Gun Smoke on TV" syndrome.
 

Skyguy

New member
However, my point wasn't about the differences between men and women.
The point was that a willingness to listen, to admit a knowledge deficit and then to learn
or relearn is a valuable skill. One that will give a person a significant advantage over someone without it.
But, but, but......you said this "about the differences between men and women":

"Here's one that's true.
Given the same amount of training, women almost always shoot better than men."


Enough CYA, guy. Time to belly up and admit that you too generalize and help to continue silly gun myths.

So, follow your own directive and....."do some real research before posting your opinion as fact".

Oh, and how do you like your crow done, medium or well? :))
 

Sundance62

New member
This post was just throwing a match into a powder keg, and wasn't very productive unless you measure by "argument-starting". As has been pointed out, there are very few absolutes.
 

JohnKSa

Administrator
Skyguy,

Read post #26 on this thread--start of the second page.

Sundance62,

If a few people read this thread and realize that "there are very few absolutes" then this post would be very productive. ;)
 
Top