Guns

Mandated training?

/ hsoi / 17 Comments

Back when I wrote my series on “Minimum Competency for Defensive Pistol“, the notion of legality kept swimming in my head.

Not if things are legal or not, but rather how minimums should be defined by law, if at all. I mean, here in Texas we have the CHL shooting test, which is what the State considers as acceptable minimum. But as I discussed, is it really a minimum? Or of course, we have to ask the question “minimum for what?”. And if I have a discussion and say it’s not an acceptable minimum (for whatever), does that open the door for changing the minimum? Could someone try to set the bar so high that it puts it out of reach of most or all people, and thus denies the right?

It’s a tricky and sticky subject.

Todd Louis-Green recently wrote about this. Like most, he’s not a fan of legislatively mandated training. And yes, it sounds funny to hear that coming from him, who is a trainer. And me, who is a trainer (that stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night).

Do we advocate more education? Of course! Name me any facet of life where you are not better served by more knowledge and education! The more you know, the better life can generally be. Why would that be any different here?

But again, should it be mandated?

How many CNN talking heads would be OK with a state-designed, state-mandated English test that had to be passed before you could become a news reporter? Who would support a mandatory Constitutional law exam before you could exercise your 4th & 5th Amendment rights?

Self-defense is a natural right that was recognized by the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights and reiterated by two recent Supreme Court cases (Heller and McDonald). Period. Full stop.

I would have used MSNBC instead of CNN, but either way.

What I thought was interesting about Todd’s piece was his suggestion:

Rather than mandatory training, what I would like to see is a two-tiered system. Simply carrying concealed should be legal without a permit (or training). But because it is legitimately in the government’s interest (and the community’s interest) to encourage training, instead create benefits — incentives — for gun owners who get serious training

Incentives. I think that’s an interesting take on things. And wouldn’t it be nice if we could see more of that in our country? Instead of basing everything upon lowest common denominators and penalties for doing wrong, why don’t we do more to incentivize doing right? reward people for doing better and going above and beyond? Help raise people up, help people truly become better. Granted, this happens in certain areas, but gee wouldn’t it be nice to see it more widespread?

Alas, I doubt we’ll see it regarding gun laws, because offering incentives would be seen as legitimizing and accepting, instead of stigmatizing and divisive. It seems all the mainstream folks want these days is the latter… because for all their talk of the joys of “unity” and “diversity” and “acceptance”, they don’t practice it very much.

Later thoughts on the M&P Shield

/ hsoi / 13 Comments

The Smith & Wesson M&P Shield. Oh hotness of hotness for the perfect concealed carry gun, right?

I dunno.

If you search my blog about the Shield, you’ll find thoughts here and there about shooting it and carrying it. Back in June 2012 I carried it for a little while. Well, I ended up carrying it again for the past couple months.

Did my opinion change?

I opted to do it again because of an interesting combination of factors.

First, it was Texas summer. Hot. That means you want to wear less clothing, or lighter/thinner (material) clothing. Consequently, concealment is more difficult. The Shield does conceal quite well, at least on a body of my size.

Second, my clothing doesn’t fit the same any more. All this weight lifting that I’m doing, and I’m a bigger guy than I was before. Some shirts, some pants… there’s just not as much spare and loose cloth any more. 🙂  And so, that makes things harder to conceal. I don’t like tight clothing, but it just takes time to update the wardrobe.

Third, I just wanted to give the thing another try. I’m exploring AIWB more, and I’ve wondered if this might make a fair AIWB gun.

Well….

I maintain that this gun is comfortable, but not comforting. No question there’s great comfort in wearing it. There’s no butt sticking out, knocking into the backs of chairs, making it uncomfortable or awkward to sit and lean back. The slimmer size means there’s less waistband consumed by the thickness of the gun. The general lack of bulk and corners jutting out just makes it more comfortable on a daily basis, even with things like your arms dangling or swinging at your side as you walk — nothing bumps.

I found myself doing more dry work with the Shield, and found myself constantly frustrated with it. I just can’t get a really tight grip on the gun. I cannot get my hand to tuck itself up hard and close under the beavertail. There’s always some small gap. It’s just the nature of my hand vs. the shape/size of this grip. It’s not very comforting.

I still have only the Apex hard sear in there. I did purchase the full Shield trigger kit, but I have still yet to install it. Low priority.

So I don’t know. There’s a part of me that really wants to love this gun, but I just keep finding it doesn’t measure up. If I can’t get a good grip on the draw, if capacity will be so limited, if it provides more wearable comfort than “gee this is the reason I carry a gun” comfort… well….

Again, this is me. We all have different circumstances, and the Shield may be right for you. I’m begrudgingly coming to terms with it not being right for me.

That said, I’ve been throwing around the notion of an M&P9c. Again, I really would prefer a full-sized gun. But with my exploration into AIWB, I’d like to see if a compact might work. Heck, I’ve even wondered about a Glock 19, but I’m more reluctant to go there just because it would be a larger cost (gun, holster, mag pouches, lots of magazines, better sights, better trigger, etc..). But the 9c and 19 have similar enough dimensions that trying out a 9c may cure me of some Glock desires. 🙂

Continuing to explore….

If they stand down, can you stand up?

/ hsoi / 5 Comments

Take a step back for a moment and ask yourself a question – and honestly answer it.

When it gets down to it, who is responsible for you?

Or perhaps instead ask, who is best able to take care of you? Who are you best able to count on? Or when everything else goes south, who is there, able to do things for you?

As of this writing, word is that when the shooting started at the Navy Yard, the police were told to stand down:

Four heavily-armed members of the Containment and Emergency Response Team (CERT) [of the US Capitol Police] were nearby when the initial report of an active shooter was announced, sources told BBC.

An officer with the Metropolitan Police Department told the tactical officers, who were wearing full tactical gear and armed with HK-416 weapons, that they were the only officers on the scene with long guns and their help was needed to stop Aaron Alexis.

When the CERT team radioed their superiors, they were told to leave the scene, according to the report.

Again, it’s still under investigation if this happened, and if so why.

But think about it.

With all the heightened sensitivity to “active shooter” situations, when there’s not just police but a special team equiped and trained for such events right there and able to respond… and they don’t.

Yeah, that’s not good.

Who knows. It may have been an honest, but tragic, mistake on the part of the police supervisors to not respond. They are human too.

But here’s the thing.

It really doesn’t matter if they were there or not. It really doesn’t matter if they were there, why they were told to stand down. Or even if they were there and started an immediate response, how much impact they could have had; I’m sure it would have been some improvement, but there would still be innocent lives lost.

What matters is, they didn’t come.

What this shows is that, in the end, you cannot count on someone to come and save you. Yes, there will be people who will try, but it may not always happen. It may not always work out. They may not come at all, or if they do, it may be too late.

You have no control over someone coming to save you or not.

And it’s not just good people with guns showing up to save the day. Consider medics. Medics will not be permitted into the scene until it is considered safe. What happens if you’re bleeding? Can you stop your own bleeding? Look how long it takes to consider a scene safe: hours. Do you know how quickly you can die from blood loss? Can you really bleed for hours? can you really wait? Can you really count on medics arriving in time? Again, this isn’t to say they won’t try, but there are circumstances beyond their control which forces delays in getting you care; and if they don’t have control, you really don’t have control.

Step back even further. Do you have any control over bad things happening in a day? Do you have any control over if “that guy” at the office chooses today to be the day he decides to share his disgruntledness with you?

Think about it folks. You don’t have a lot of control over things (a fact of life, applying to far more areas than just the above topics). This includes the ability for others to take care of you. The ability for others to be there when you need them. The ability for others to respond quickly when you need them at your side. This isn’t to say there aren’t good people out there, that these people are unwilling to respond, but rather there are realities of time, geography, physics, and other matters of the world that you just cannot control, change, nor bend.

But what you can do is control yourself.

When you need someone, you are there.

When you have to count on someone, you can count on yourself.

Who is on the scene right now? You are.

Why are we encouraging a system, lifestyles, and choices, that require a dependence upon others? Yes sometimes dependencies happen, but step back and think about how you can often fare better when you have the capabilities to handle things yourself. That doesn’t mean you always have to, but then at least you have options. Then at least if you must, you can.

If no one can stand up for you, can you stand up for yourself?

AAR – KR Training, 2013-10-05 – Basic Pistol 1

/ hsoi

The last Basic Pistol 1 of 2013. Things “go dark” for KR Training next month due to deer hunting season. Well, not totally dark — still stuff on the schedule, just stuff that’s not as loud that would scare the deer. 🙂

Weather was typical. Forecasts of rain, doom, and gloom, then when class time comes around, it’s gorgeous. A cold front was on its way, so there were clouds in the sky and the pressure was towards cooling. So it really made for a great day to be outside. We did worry tho a little about the rain. We’ve been getting some heavy rains here in Central Texas, and stock tanks have been filling up. Then last weekend was when the dam broke — literally. The tanks at the A-Zone Range couldn’t hold any more due to the 7.5″ of rain that fell that weekend. Where the tanks flow out, they then flow through 3 large pipes that go under the road — the road that leads to the range. Well, it couldn’t take it and the road partially collapsed! Some pictures posted to the KR Training Facebook page. Thankfully the county responded fairly quickly and got things patched up. This is just a temporary fix, but it makes the road passable. Hopefully it won’t be too long before the county has a proper fix in place.

But with no rain and a patched up road, class went ahead.

All in all, a fairly typical Basic Pistol 1 class. Seems everyone had a lot of fun, and had a fair introduction to the world of shooting sports.

I did want to use this opportunity to point out a few things to one gentleman that was having issues with trigger yank. We spoke about it briefly in class, but I wanted to give him some reference materials.

Again, there is no magic pill to cure this. I wish there was, because I’d be taking the pill too. 😉  But things we discussed in class should help.

First, that magical “trigger reset”? Work on that. So that your trigger presses aren’t one large motion of putting the finger on the trigger, slapping it, then removing the finger. If you learn to “ride” the trigger, that can help work towards a smoother motion, instead of the “slap” that can come by always putting your finger on the trigger and then taking it off, and then slapping it back down again because you’re trying to get that second shot off quickly.

Second, dry practice. The Wall Drill helps a lot in terms of training your fingers and your brain. Start slow, then work up towards your “normal” speed. It helps everything learn how to press properly, without having to combat recoil, noise, and so on.

Third, a live fire drill is Ball & Dummy. While the linked-to explanation talks about random distribution of the dummy rounds, sometimes try known distribution, like live/dummy/live/dummy/live/dummy/etc. So yes, you KNOW this shot will be live and this shot will be dummy. It works your brain differently due to knowledge and expectation.  Both can be useful approaches.

And it just takes time and practice and patience. One thing to be sure of when you practice is to not chastise yourself when you do yank it. This isn’t to say to not be critical nor correct your mistakes. But rather, I’ve often found when people chastise themselves for their mistakes, they phrase things negatively: “Don’t do that” or “Don’t yank the trigger”. Or the simple fact they get mad at themselves. This doesn’t put you in a mindset for success. If you’re angry, that won’t serve you well to improve yourself. If you think about “Don’t yank the trigger”, you’re telling your body… yank the trigger. Phrase things in terms of what you should do: “Slow, smooth press”. “Slow down”. “Press the trigger”. “Even pressure”. Or whatever you find you need to do. Be relaxed, take a couple breaths, smile, then tell yourself what you should do.

You’ll get there. 🙂

Deconstructing the argument

/ hsoi

Trends. We look for them, we see them, we read a lot into them. We put a lot of stock in trends, whether it’s hairstyles, clothing, music, the stock market, the business world, or just how people behave.

When you see that pattern emerge, then when you see the pattern repeated again and again, you can gain some insight into the pattern-maker.

I think it was Kathy Jackson that posted this article by Chris Hernandez about Everything that’s wrong with the argument against protecting schools with guns

It’s a good read that deconstructs the common arguments given as to why we shouldn’t use people armed with guns to protect our schools, or why we shouldn’t have lawful concealed carry, or other such topics. I think what’s most insightful is Chris’ examination of where these patterns come from: their assumptions, their bias. He works to go to the root of the matter and address those and how, because of those misconceptions, any argument built on top of them just doesn’t hold. It’s tough to build upon a false foundation.

“Killing a human crosses a line that most people can’t do.”

Standing there and doing nothing before someone kills you crosses a line. Taking no action at all as a murder massacres children crosses a line. You think the resistance to killing another human is so great, people would literally rather watch someone murder dozens of children than take action to stop them?

It’s a good read. Gave me a different perspective. Go read.

Examining the data: are “Stand Your Ground” laws racist?

/ hsoi / 4 Comments

Howard Nemerov examines all the data (not just cherry picked numbers) to see if “stand your ground” laws are racist.

You may be surprised by what Howard uncovers.

Or not.

Isn’t using partial datasets to justify an anti-self-defense agenda racist in itself, and especially when restricted self-defense laws create racial disparities by inhibiting blacks’ civil right of self-defense?

Howard used to be anti-gun. Then he examined facts and data and realized that gun control doesn’t work. In fact, he wrote a book about it filled with his data analysis and findings: 400 Years of Gun Control: Why isn’t it Working? It’s not a book to shrug off, no matter what your stance is on guns.

Sheepdog Fallacy

/ hsoi / 12 Comments

In his book On Combat, Lt. Col. David Grossman speaks about the notion of “sheep, wolves, and sheepdogs”.

…“Most of the people in our society are sheep. They are kind, gentle, productive creatures who can only hurt one another by accident.” …. “Then there are sheepdogs,” he went on, “and I’m a sheepdog. I live to protect the flock and confront the wolf.”

Via Claude Werner, an article by Jack Feldman examining if the sheepdog analogy is a fallacy. He examines what a sheepdog actually is – that is, the actual dogs that are owned and used by a shepherd to guard his flock. It takes the analogy to task and makes the case that the police are actually sheepdogs, and armed private citizens are… something else.

Armed citizens are a problem for the shepherds. Not being sheep, they’re not afraid of the sheepdogs and are prepared to take on the wolves, hyenas or whoever. They mean no harm to anyone, have no desire to control others, but are much harder to control and therefore to exploit. Worse, their example might spread. They’re not wolves, but not sheepdogs either. The shepherds, expecting obedience from everything but wolves, have no clue how to deal with them. Their common response is to try to get rid of armed citizens one way or another, typically by removing the arms. Acting like a sheepdog when you’re not gives the shepherds that opportunity.

It’s an interesting examination of the analogy.

Control and awareness

/ hsoi / 1 Comment

Alas, this video was posted to Facebook, so you have to click through to watch it (and have a Facebook account).

If you can’t or don’t want to see it, it’s a video of Glock Team captain KC Eusebio shooting a stage at an indoor shooting range. As KC was moving to a new position, a magazine was on the concrete floor… and wound up under his foot. He slipped, landed on his side, got to his knees, and finished the course of fire.

Nice work.

Many things to take from this.

First, his trigger discipline. He was moving, so his finger was off the trigger and out of the trigger guard, indexed along the frame. Think about falling like that – you’re fingers are going to go, and if they were on the trigger….

Second, his muzzles discipline. He kept the muzzle pointed in a safe direction at all times, even while he was falling and recovering.

Both of these things take practice (mostly on the finger positioning, making it habit that when you are off the target you are fully off the trigger, indexed along the frame/slide), and awareness of what you are doing and your gun is doing. Focus.

It also shows that despite something totally unexpected happening, you keep going. He didn’t give up. He didn’t stop and laugh, or freeze, or go “oh shit”, nor did he let the pain stop him (obviously it hurt, given his actions after the shooting was over). I’m sure there was a bit of a “oh shit” in his head, but he maintained his action and finished the string. He stayed in, until things were truly over.

Really awesome performance.

Stop being a dick. You’re not helping.

/ hsoi / 11 Comments

So push came to shove and Starbucks went public with a stance on guns in their stores.

I can’t say I blame them. They got pulled into and caught in the middle of something they didn’t ask to be a part of. And let’s be real here; if you got pulled into a sticky messy issue caught between two warring parties, how would you feel? and how would you react?

Now of course, they could have reacted the other way, but I reckon either 1. they believe this is going to do less damage to their bottom line (they have shareholders to deal with, insurance and lawyers, etc.), 2. they are anti-gun (I do suspect a bit of this given how CEO Howard Schultz worded things), 3. some other third thing. I suspect it’s probably 1 and 2, but I’m guessing.  And yes, they have every right to do what they did.

So an article is going around about how we did this to ourselves. It struck me.

Now let me say, I’m conflicted on open carry. I think there are tactical issues and there are political issues. I can see both sides of it, and I don’t fall squarely in either camp (yet). I would like to see open carry be legal and not prohibited, but remember that legal doesn’t mean “good” or “moral” or that it’s a good thing to do (and illegal doesn’t mean bad or immoral or a bad thing to do). I would like to see a day where people carrying a gun openly isn’t considered a big deal; in fact, it may be seen as a positive and responsible act. But, is it always tactically sound to show your hand? Maybe; I’ve heard anecdotes on both sides that show how it can be good and be bad. And politically it can make a powerful statement, but you’ve got to be mindful of how you make your statement and the message you’re sending (here comes my undergraduate and graduate education in speech and human communication).

One reason open carriers do this as a political statement is to help normalize it. But some say it’s stupid and should be kept hidden. Well, politically or tactically? Tactically? Sure. But politically? Well, are you saying my parents – my white father and Korean mother – should have kept themselves hidden during the late 1960’s? They faced massive rejection and racism (even from within our own family). Should they have let all that stop them? Should they have kept themselves hidden? Granted, racism still exists today, but we can argue that we’re at least a little better than we were back then. To see people of other races, of other cultures, to have it always around… it’s normalizing. And so, yes I can understand why open carriers take this approach in their use of open carry as a political statement and action.

But when you make a statement, you have to choose how you make your statement and craft it in a manner that will make your audience receptive to your message; else, naturally, they will reject it.

And I think that’s really what we gun folk have done to ourselves:

We have turned the debate into a joke. Yes, we are all responsible.

Whether youre an (A) “in your face activist” as previously mentioned, or a (B) gun owner who doesnt agree with them but remains silent and thereby complicit, we are all responsible. Own it.

Personally I fall into the latter category (B). I think the first category are a bunch of fools, and open carry is a piss-poor method of carry outside of a few distinct instances. I have remained silent on the issue, but that ends today. I don’t want to be represented as a gun owner by those who choose to act as those described above. A tactical victory is never worth a strategic defeat. In the end this has hurt us in a battle where we are making progress. If we dont “eat our own” and correct these issues, the OTHER SIDE will. We have lost ground due to tomfoolery, chicanery, and general shenanigans. If we don’t get on the same page, we will continue to give up ground.

Much like how we get irritated when the “not terrorist” muslims dont come out and outright condemn muslim terrorist acts and organizations…we are taking the same track by not raising the bullshit flag when we ought to. We have to police our own. No successful organization, entity, or cause embraces personnel or spokesmen who damage the image and value of the brand.

If I can only choose between camp (A) and camp (B), I’m in (B). But I guess by my present writing, that’s stopping. I’ve felt the following for some time, but for whatever reason opted to be quiet about it.

Here’s the problem.

You’re being a dick.

I see this a lot by the visible pro-gun folk out there.

I see various bloggers, on Twitter, on Facebook. It’s really a problem. It’s really bad on Twitter. I see various pro-gun folk even seeking out anti-gun people, engaging them in “debate”, and being a total fucking asshole while doing it.

Oh sure, you are right. Your facts are sound. The other person is totally irrational and emotional. Yes yes, I’m not going to deny any of that.

But it’s your presentation that’s the problem; and that also cannot be denied.

When you tell someone “you’re wrong”, you force them to double-down more strongly on their (wrong) stance.

When you curse them, call them names, engage in the same childish behaviors that you call them out for, you’re making things worse.

I debated calling out some of these pro-gun folks by name, but I’m not ready to do that yet.

But really, think about it. You want them to see your side of things. How are you going to accomplish that if you treat your audience like shit? If you are rude, mean, condescending, and inconsiderate?

That whole “attract more flies with honey than vinegar” thing.

Or maybe better… learn how to win friends and influence people.

The reason these open carry things aren’t working out is because some of those engaging in the act are being assholes about it all. And so when you do this, when you act like an asshole, when the news reports you being an asshole (because face it, most of the mainstream media is anti-gun and so they will relish any opportunity they can to make gun owners look like stupid evil asshats that need to be controlled and broken and driven out of society)… what do you think that’s going to do? That’s going to reinforce the stereotypes, that’s going to strengthen the anti resolve, and it only makes things worse and more difficult to overcome.

Of course, the same can and should be said for anti-gun folk. When you engage in lies, sensationalizing, blood-dancing, knee-jerk reactions, suggestions that have been proven to not work to solve problems that aren’t there, what do you think that’s going to do? How do you think you’ll be perceived?

Maybe take one from LZ Granderson here.

There is no one enemy.

Thus there is no one solution.

Because like it or not, the folks spraying our cities with bullets are not NRA members or legal gun owners. And despite the tendency to tie it all together, they have nothing to do with the Adam Lanzas of the world.

And it’s too early to know how Alexis fits in the conversation.

According to a count by USA Today, more than 900 people have been killed in mass shootings since 2006. The thousands of other victims of gun violence over the past seven years died from many different circumstances, requiring different conversations.

This is why gun-control advocates need to abandon the routine of using mass shootings to turn law-abiding citizens into social pariahs and instead focus on something that could work.

In the end, it doesn’t matter what you are trying to do, what the debate is about, or what side you are on. You will never convince anyone to see your side of things if you’re a dick.

Stop being a dick. Start being more considerate of others.

Or if your whole point is to be a dick? Please grow up, or go away.

“3 seconds or less” love

/ hsoi

Greg Ellifritz runs KR Training’s “3 Seconds or Less” drill.

It’s really a good drill, and I hope this helps it become more popular as a way to convey the notion of true minimum competency with a handgun.