Training vs gaming

[PegLeg45]

To me, Claude Werner's article hits the nail on the head. The statistics say that there are hundreds of thousand of incidents every year where a firearm  in the hands of ordinary citizens of both sexes has prevented a crime. I would guess that the great majority of those citizens have not had any great tactical training. In fact I would guess that the training they got was more like the training we get when we learn to ride a bicycle. My Grandfather and my Father taught me how to shoot. They also taught me about gun safety.

I shot trap for some years and I know that helped me in the downing of Pheasants and Grouse. I guess if I could hit a Grouse I could hit a bad guy coming into my house without having had any "Tactical" training. Putting rounds downrange under any circumstance can not be anything but good. My Grandfather and Father were very adamant about accuracy. If you can't hit your target what good is having a gun? It is the same as the old joke about how you get to Carnegie Hall. The answer of course is Practice, Practice, Practice.

From what I can see there is not much difference between people that want to be tactically trained and those that compete in shooting games. I carried the 1911 when I in the Army and I went through the minimal training that the Army uses. It was less than what Dad taught me about shooting Trap. I think average citizens that get serious enough about guns and self protection and spend thousands of dollars to be tactically trained are deluding themselves. Go to the range, learn how to hit a target, if you are any good enter some competitions, but forget the Ninja crap. And I agree the best caliber weapon to have is the one you are willing to carry on a daily basis and that includes .22s. And don't tell me that getting hit with three rapidly fired .22s won't make you rethink what you are attempting to do. It ruins your whole day.

I've never met anyone who likes to leak either....regardless of the hole size. 

[tombogan03884]

I just did some unscientific research.
I grabbed 3 random copies of American Rifleman.
Of the 21 "Armed Citizen" entries one specified the intended victim was a veteran, 12 were men of unspecified experience,
however 7 were women who were unlikely to have had any formal training, 2 were under age 18, and the last was an 11 year old boy with a BB gun

[Timothy]

I've been pretty clear on my skepticism on "tactical training", "defensive training" and the like.  If I was an operator, a security person or other armed person who made his living with a gun, I most certainly would require more training and I would seek it out though my BS detector would be on high alert.

I'm a shooter who'd like to get out more often, I still don't think that there is a one in a million chance that I'll ever need to draw my firearm on another human being but more likely on some critter I encounter on my weekly hikes in the state forest!

I was offered a free class from one of these so called trainers and turned him down.  It wasn't the price of training, the cost of the ammo or the four days loss of pay to attend his class at my range!  It was because I thought he was an arrogant ass!  I think that's a job requirement in the industry...

Give me a few weeks at the Sig Academy or Gunsite and I'd take that in a heartbeat!

[locnload]

I'm new here and hope I can get my two cents in without ruflling any feathers as this seems to be a hot button issue.  I have shot in a number of competition matches and no matter what I do I come out "average" in the standings.  I carry concealed and take defensive training and mindset seriously. I have listened to and read various opinions on the subject of gun games verses defensive shooting or combat. I understand what people mean by "mall ninja" allthough I think many people who are quick to pin that tag on someone else may be just like the people they are talking about. I also know folks who are so into the "gaming" aspects of competitions, that shooting becomes all about the wiz bang gadgets the magic techniques, and planning the stage for the fastest possible sequence. If that is your entire preperation for self defense then you are going to be in trouble when you find yourself faced with a real and determined attacker that didn't give you a chance to "walk through" or pre-plan, and you are carrying a 38 snubbie instead of your tricked out "Sunday go to IDPA gun".
Trigger time is all good, and the chance to shoot senarios of someone elses design will broaden your scope, and point out your strengths and weaknesses. It can tell you what you need to work on and what skills you are ready to take to the next level. The bigest problem I see is that we get so accustomed to shooting per gun game rules that we are likely to do that in a real defensive incident as well. The trigger control, reloading skills, use of cover, and safety learned in competition are good things but the habbit of two shots and moving on could get you killed.  As Clint Smith points out, people will fire two shots, in one case the target falls after the first shot and the second round go's through you kids bedroom wall, or the guy you just hit COM twice is standing there with an evil grin because he is wearing body armour and is about to kill you while you are already changing your focus to look for the next BG.  The point is, enjoy the games but remember there is a huge deference between winning an IDPA match and winning a fight fo your life. 

[Magoo541]

I also know folks who are so into the "gaming" aspects of competitions, that shooting becomes all about the wiz bang gadgets the magic techniques, and planning the stage for the fastest possible sequence. If that is your entire preperation for self defense then you are going to be in trouble when you find yourself faced with a real and determined attacker that didn't give you a chance to "walk through" or pre-plan, and you are carrying a 38 snubbie instead of your tricked out "Sunday go to IDPA gun".

I started shooting USPSA last year and while some try to buy their skills the majority I shoot with will tell you that gear does little for your shooting.  In my studies I've found that to be the case as well, in fact Rob Leatham's intro to Brian Enos' book even says as much.

EDIT: FWIW my daily carry is the same gun I shoot in USPSA Limited an XDM 4.5 in 45 ACP

Trigger time is all good, and the chance to shoot senarios of someone elses design will broaden your scope, and point out your strengths and weaknesses. It can tell you what you need to work on and what skills you are ready to take to the next level. The bigest problem I see is that we get so accustomed to shooting per gun game rules that we are likely to do that in a real defensive incident as well. The trigger control, reloading skills, use of cover, and safety learned in competition are good things but the habbit of two shots and moving on could get you killed.  As Clint Smith points out, people will fire two shots, in one case the target falls after the first shot and the second round go's through you kids bedroom wall, or the guy you just hit COM twice is standing there with an evil grin because he is wearing body armour and is about to kill you while you are already changing your focus to look for the next BG.  The point is, enjoy the games but remember there is a huge deference between winning an IDPA match and winning a fight fo your life.  

In the previously mentioned book by Brian Enos he states that if he ever had to save someone from drowning he'd like to be an Olympic swimmer.  I'd add to that "rather than an avid golfer."  Bob Mayne has a Podcast "Handgun World" and his co-host is Ben Brannon, a Marine with a tour or two in the Middle East and his experience with IDPA and "action" in combat is very positive.  This is not only games vs real life but civilian vs military shooting.  Putting yourself under stress and shooting a course of fire that may contain steel (1 shot), paper targets (2-5 rounds to neutralize-I've shot as many as 6 rounds on swingers) and no shoots is as close as most of us will get to the real thing.  I've heard interviews with people that have had to shoot in combat or law enforcement that the most difficult part is identifying who is the threat.

[Sponsor]

[fightingquaker13]

There are two kinds of people that shoot skeet. Those that are into the game, and those are practising for dove and duck season. Both are cool. But, you can tell the difference as one group is worried about their score, the other about their form. Two different objectives. Same with IDPA type gun games. There are the competitors who view it as a sport (and good for them) and there are the LEOs and CCW holders who see it as practice. You just need to remember why you're there. No virtue to one over the other as both will teach you to put a bullet on target. But are you worried about winning, or just shooting the course? Two valid choices, but you make the call.