What happened to the good ole days?

[SpookBoy]

First off i'm not that old,but i am a student of the gun & with that being said,I've noticed a trend over the years.Its kinda funny that as soon as anything new or more hi-tech comes out, people seem to forget about the standard that used to be! Just think of how many people were shot with a .38 beetween 1910 or so until the mid fiftys when the 357mag came about,i.e. a better cartrige. It seems that now we have "Mall ninjas" with 17 or 33 round mags for their pistols that cant hit anything!When 60 years ago the police or military could do it with 6 or 7 shots.

It is kind of sickening that shot placement is not as "important" as it used to be in some peoples shooting training.I envy revolver shooters for that reason,useing what they've "got" to get the job done.Now I do understand the concept of more firepower,but what if SHTF and your batteries run out or your out of(low on) ammo?Bet you wished you had practiced more, huh?

If you died from a .22 or a 500S&W mag. wich one killed you more?.....Give up?.. neither your still shot & not around to tell about it!What happened to the days when being a marksman meant just that?Useing What you have to get the job done.Not knocking someone for useing a .380 or whatever the cal. choice?

 

[Socrates]

It seems that now we have "Mall ninjas" with 17 or 33 round mags for their pistols that cant hit anything!When 60 years ago the police or military could do it with 6 or 7 shots.

The "Mall ninjas" are now New York Police officers, who can't get it done with 33 round mags. Usually takes at least two of those to shoot an unarmed man, at least in New York.

As for military 'getting it done' with 6 or 7, that has to be the biggest misstatment EVER. Unless of course you are talking about my Dad and his 5" gun, or, something like this:

 

[kristop64089]

Theoretically speaking the military trains on ACCURACY. That is why the resist fully automatic weapons. They found that it was more cost effective to train us to shoot accurate in short groups, rather than to spray an pray(this was how it was force fed to me)

 

[Creature]

That is a GREAT photo!

 

[Socrates]

Thanks. Nothing like battleships, ever.

Did get me thinking. In the 80's, I shot 3-5 times a week, at the police range, no fee, pretty much alone, for a couple hours a day, for about 5 years. Today, in this area, range fees would be 260 per month, not including actually shooting anything!!

So, I'd be paying 12 grand a year in range fees, actually a little more, to shoot like I did when I was younger...

S

 

[jakeswensonmt]

Today, in this area, range fees would be 260 per month, not including actually shooting anything!!

Ouch! I pay $50 a year here in MT for a great outdoor range. Course, in January you have to shoot in the deep freeze, but I call that good training.

 

[Socrates]

Anybody notice the Iowa could take out an outhouse at 20 miles???

S

 

[Walter]

Theoretically speaking the military trains on ACCURACY. That is why the resist fully automatic weapons. They found that it was more cost effective to train us to shoot accurate in short groups, rather than to spray an pray(this was how it was force fed to me)

Riiiiggghht! That's why I was trained by the Marine Corps to shoot an M-14.
We spent two weeks at Edson Range at Camp Pendleton (1968) learning to
"snap in", then learning to ACCURATELY shoot the M-14, in SEMI-AUTO mode,
from 100 to 500meters. I was a pretty good shot. I shot "expert" on the pre-qual
shoot the day before actual qualifications. On "qual." day, I got nervous and pulled a
couple of shots standing at the 300 meter line and missed expert by 2 points.
Oh, well, shooting "expert" wasn't likely to change my future disposition anyway.

Four months later I was in Viet Nam, issued a worn-out select-fire M-16A-1
and sent into combat without ever having been allowed to test fire it, much
less set the battle sights. Maybe experiences like mine are why the US military
went to the 3-shot burst on the M-16, but I still wish to hell I
could have gotten my hands on an M-14 while I was over there. That gun
can shoot!

BTW, the "good old days" weren't really that good. It was nearly
impossible to get a CCL, and getting caught carrying a pistol almost
always meant a trip to jail.

Walter

 

[CajunBass]

BTW, the "good old days" weren't really that good. It was nearly impossible to get a CCL, and getting caught carrying a pistol almost always meant a trip to jail

Don't forget. Both guns and ammo were more expensive based on hours worked than they are today.

 

[Hallucinator]

Socrates: I was on infantry operations in Vietnam that were supported by the New Jersey. You could see those big rounds coming over at night like freight trains trailing sparks. The problem with those battleships is that the turrets are powered by bags of unprotected powder that have been known to blow up on occasion and kill everybody in the turret. Nevertheless, it makes me nostalgic.

 

[Hallucinator]

Walter: I was with marines 3/1 when the M14 was phased out. We got the Stoner first: it was an AR15 but it looked like something from Star Trek. Nobody trusted them, and when we got the M16, nobody trusted them either: they jammed a lot. There was something comforting about the M14: you could butt stroke somebody and shatter their skull, and you could put few of them on full auto and literally tear down a building.

 

[Socrates]

Hallucinator:

Never had the pleasure of watching those Mustang sized shells as incoming. Only heard of one turret blowing up, and,
I have heard the powder made in the 40's, along with the fire control system, still works. Sort of the SR-71 of aiming equipment, amazing stuff.

I have heard in the Gulf War that the guns were so accurate, the bad guys would wave white flags at the spotter plane, to surrender before the battleships fired.

On a flat sea, take out a football field at 20 miles. That's shooting...

As for the M14 vs. AR battle: I only got to play with supermatchgrade weapons, of both kinds, maintained by a former Navy armour, and, a Lockheed worker, who's job was to take pictures of det cord for rate, and, projectiles breaching barriers, with the worlds fastest camera.

Each had their place. Of his four guns,at 100 yards, if you shot over an inch with open sites, you sucked, because they would shoot under that all day long. One was an E2 stock, and the AR's
one was a shorty. ALL went full auto, at least until he was put on probation when he got caught by the Feds. He also had a few suppressors laying around, and, all the parts for an M60 he liked to shoot.

My memories are the lack of a decent pads on the M1A's, and, both guns being pretty much uncontrollable under full auto, at least for well aimed bursts on a man sized target, at long range.

The AR's were a bit more controllable, but, I felt were best for close quarters stuff, like clearing houses in a rural setting, and, they came out second best to Mac 10's, of which we also had 4 or 5, for that. The AR's were fun because, with matchgrade ammo, and tight tolerances, they could, and would shoot very accurately, with no recoil.
I do remember shooting circles around my friends Mini 14, the biggest POS in the bunch. How Ruger ever took such a fabulous design, and turned it into an inaccurate piece of junk, I'll never know.

On the ammo and gun cost argument:

I bought 3 detonics for under 500 each, and, they are, and will stand, as the best 1911's I've shot.

The Colts back then were over priced for what they were. 700 bucks for a Gold Cup 70 series, or a Colt Python, and, frankly, they weren't that good. The AR's were expensive as well. Somethings don't change. More collectors items then shooting items.

John Linebaugh was just getting started, and, for the cost of a Colt Gold Cup, I bought a 45 Seville/Linebaugh that shot 3" at 100 yards, not 3" at 11 yards, like the Gold Cup.

S

 

[sholling]

It seems that now we have "Mall ninjas" with 17 or 33 round mags for their pistols that cant hit anything!

I like that description a lot. I hope you don't mind if I borrow it.

 

[HammerBite]

I bought a 45 Seville/Linebaugh that shot 3" at 100 yards, not 3" at 11 yards, like the Gold Cup.

Hmmm, my old Gold Cup shot (and still does) one inch at fifty yards.

 

[w_houle]

I could never figure out why some people who feel they need to tell people that they are SEAL, Ranger and Sniper qualified; then tell the world the biggest pile of BS stories ever!

 

[Lurper]

The reality is the good ole days as described here never existed.

 

[MrBorland]

Just think of how many people were shot with a .38 beetween 1910 or so until the mid fiftys when the 357mag came about,i.e. a better cartrige. It seems that now we have "Mall ninjas" with 17 or 33 round mags for their pistols that cant hit anything!When 60 years ago the police or military could do it with 6 or 7 shots.

I'm all for developing good shooting skills, and that there's a lot of emphasis on equipment, but we also have to be careful about looking at the past through rose colored glasses. We're influenced by writers of old like Bill Jordan, who was an LEO and great shot, and the beauty and grace of those old blued revolvers, and it may lead us to believe that police were all excellent shots back then. Others ought to chime in, but I don't know if the average shooter was any better shot then than now, or that the police really "could do it with 6 or 7 shots". Ever notice that a lot of the old blued revolvers you see are in great shape? We tend to think it's because "they really knew how to make 'em back then", but it could also be that they didn't get shot very much. In the Old West, for example, guns and ammo were very expensive, and few practiced like many practice now. They weren't supermen, after all, and little practice = poor shooting.

 

[Wildalaska]

I dont remember much about the good old days, but I stayed in Holiday Inn once

WildsleepyAlaska TM

 

[madmag]

until the mid fiftys when the 357mag

BTW, I think the .357 came out about circa 1937. One of General Patton's pistols was a S&W .357 which he carried during WWII. It now rests in the Patton museum at Ft. Know Ky. The other was a single action colt (.45 long colt), also at the museum. Yes, I am almost as old as Patton's .357...not quite, but too close for comfort.

 

[Manedwolf]

Don't generalize about hi-caps being the only domain of the mall ninjas.

I'm also amused by people who show up at a range with a massive revolver with a scope the size of the Hubble on it, and then proceed to miss the paper at 15 feet.