"Gun Training as Crime Deterrent Not Realistic"

Jim V

New member
Form "phone trees" so your neighbors can watch you get your home invaded and your wife raped and you killed? Sheeple, Baaaaaaaaaaaa.

I'll keep my 1911s, thank you.
 

El Rojo

New member
This just amazes me.

Lets think about this. If they were in those situations in the FATS without a gun, what would they have done? Nothing. Their options? Zero. I would much rather have the option (and I do) of drawing and losing in a gunfight than just sitting there and taking a bullet. And since I don't want to draw and lose in a gun fight, I don't just carry a gun without training. I train often and practice. Front sight, front sight, front sight! Just because these people don't seem capable of carrying guns nor do they want to become capable, doesn't mean they should stop my proficient use of a gun for self-defense.
 

croyance

New member
I believe that this has already been posted.

It is wrong to blame your gun for missing the target. Especially when you are motivated to show that it in inaccurate. It truely is a poor workman who blames his tools first.

A point of the IDPA is to have a more realistic training with the only type of pressure we can safetly provide - competition.

If you want to sit still and die, that is certainly your option. And it does keep more police in buisness. The odds are against their being around to protect you, if only because it is an inopportune time for a criminal to ply his trade. However, the ME will cart your body away, a chalk outline made around your body, and all kinds of reports filled out. I would like to believe that most police officers would prefer to have uneventful shifts.

People do survive gunfights, and I would like to have the option of it being me. Maybe I will have wet pants. Maybe the adrenaline surge will make it hard to focus. But without a gun, the options really narrowed down.

I do not face the ambiguous situations that police do. When somebody is breaking in, or coming at me on the street, it is very clear who and what the threat is. This is confirmed by CCW shootings versus police shootings. I stress again that it is unfair to compare, but it is instructive. CCW holders are more likely to fire upon a guilty (for lack of a better term) person, and hit with a much higher percentage of shots. Part of this is the closer ranges, and the fact that my life does not require me to be in bad neighborhoods enforcing laws.

Selective arguements, facts, and interpretations will always give you the conclusion you seek. This has nothing to do with the search for truth, any truth. But, as Lincoln noted, you can fool some of the people all of the time.

De-evolution continues.
 
Top