Guns

Could you look him in the eye and deny him?

/ hsoi / 8 Comments

In a prior posting I linked to this video:

It’s footage from the 1992 L.A. Riots (after the Rodney King verdict). It’s about the Korean shopkeepers arming themselves, standing on the roofs of their stores, defending them from the rioters and looters.

While searching for that footage, an NPR interview with Kee Whan Ha came up. He’s the store owner that organized and motivated the Koreatown shopkeepers to undertake their defensive action.

Why would he do such a thing? I mean, why didn’t he just give the looters what they wanted (because “just give them what they want” is the refrain we’re supposed to abide by):

MARTIN: I understand that, as the disturbance was beginning, you heard hosts on Radio Korea – which is L.A.’s major Korean-American radio station – tell people to leave their businesses and go home and pray. And you told one of our producers that that made you upset. Could you talk a little bit about that?

HA: Yeah. I was so upset. So I know the owner of that Radio Korea, so I brought my handgun and I put it on the table. I told him that we established Koreatown. It’s been more than 20 years (unintelligible) riot, even to be able – insurance and everything, but I want to protect my business, as well as all other Koreatown business.

He was one of the founders of Koreatown. He wasn’t going to see his life’s work, what defines him, be put to ruin.

Oh it’s just property, oh it’s just stuff. That’s true to you, but not to him. It was more than his castle, and it was something that, to him, was well-worth defending. Are you telling me he’s wrong? he’s unjustified in trying to preserve his legacy? his positive contribution to society? That the world would be better off if he gave in to the criminals, the leeches, the destructive forces?

So why didn’t he just call the police? Because the police are supposed to defend and protect us, right?

HA: From Wednesday, I don’t see any police patrol car whatsoever. That’s a wide-open area, so it is like Wild West in old days, like there’s nothing there. We are the only one left, so we have to do our own (unintelligible).

[…]

HA: …I was standing a few feet away, so I see that [our security guard’s] body has fallen down on the ground, but I was so scared. I – we tried to call the fire department. Please help us. But nobody listen. Then maybe after five or six hours in the evening – it start around the afternoon, about 1:00 or 2:00 p.m. But actual – the fire truck coming about 7:00 o’clock, late evening. So five hours, of course, is sitting between us and them.

Five hours with no response. No one could come to save them.

Can you imagine the fear, the stress, tha anxiety felt during that time? One hour goes by and still nothing. Every minute watching the chaos unfolding, wondering when someone will come to save you. How scared would you be if you were in his shoes?

But at least they had guns.

But at least they were able to do something for themselves. To pluck up their courage and stand firm. They weren’t helpless victims.

How would you have fared that day? Would you have been a helpless victim?

I would have been.

In 1992 I was in undergrad. I never was anti-gun, but I sure didn’t understand it. I recall questioning my pro-gun friends as to why anyone needed an automatic rifle to hunt Bambi. Looking back, I can see the many facets of my ignorance.

MARTIN: Did you have to fire your weapon?

HA: Yes. Actually, we are not shooting people. We are shooting the – in the air, so make afraid that these people coming to us. You’re not actually targeting people, so…

MARTIN: Sure. You were trying to create a – sort of a protective barrier, and you did succeed in saving your store.

HA: Yes.

So without guns, Kee Whan Ha and the other families of Koreatown would have lost everything. Not just their stores, but their legacy and contribution towards a better society.

Could you look Kee Whan Ha in the eye and tell him you want to deny him his business? his contribution? his legacy? The banning of effective tools of self-defense is precisely looking into the eyes of people like Kee Whan Ha and saying you will deny him.

 

A tidbit on handguns, from the 2012 FBI UCR

/ hsoi

I got this from Chuck Rives. From the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report for 2012, we have the Expanded Homicide Data Table 15 – Justifiable Homicide, by Weapon, Private Citizen (the killing of a felon, during the commission of a felony, by a private citizen.) 2008-2012. Link here but the link is kinda weird so hopefully it works for you (it ends in .xls, but opens a web page…). Anyways, here’s a screenshot:

So basically, this is what good people used to defend themselves.

Now, you have to be very specific in taking what this table tells us. There are a lot of unanswered questions, and a lot of deeper things that’d be interesting to know. For example, it’s only about the killing of a felon during the commission of a felony. What about the felons that didn’t die during the commission of a felony? That might provide a greater picture about what good people use to defend themselves in general. What was the nature of the crime? was it a drug deal that went bad (because I reckon some of those could wind up in this table, and then is that really a good statistic?)? was it muggings? how about rape? home invasion vs. “on the street”? There’s a lot of things that would be great to know. Alas, we can only take this table for what it’s worth.

You can look at the politics. Handguns are a primary tool in self-defense. Ban handguns, deny people (men, women, straight, gay, white, black, Christian, Jew, Muslim, whatever minority group you favor) the right and ability to keep themselves safe from harm.

I like to look at the practical.

One possible conclusion to draw from this is if you’re going to be attacked, a handgun is the more likely tool you’d use to defend yourself. Long guns (rifles, shotguns) tend to be a tool of the home-front; private citizens generally will not have them as they walk down the street. Long guns aren’t exclusive to the home; recall the Korean shopkeepers during the LA Riots in 1992 standing on the roofs of their buildings with long guns. But you get the point – long guns cannot be as ubiquitous as a handgun.

I know we prefer to have long guns for home and office defense. Why? Because we can, and they are a more effective tool. But if the one thing you can have all the time is your hand gun, doesn’t it make sense to be proficient with it? You carry it on your person all day. It’s in your bedside safe at night. It’s the one thing that’s always most accessible to you. If you have limited training and practice time, should you divide it amongst various tools? or focus on the one that has the most universal applicability?

Just having a gun isn’t enough. Just carrying it every day isn’t enough. To have passed some state-mandated test isn’t enough. There are issues of minimum competency. Is a handgun good enough for home defense? If it’s the tool you’re most proficient with, sure. It’s better to use a tool you know well and have confidence in using.

Fun facts about the AR-15

/ hsoi / 1 Comment

Fun Facts About the AR-15

  • The inventor of the AR-15 was Satan, though his patent has since expired.
  • Scientists have confirmed the deadly effects of an AR-15 by giving it to a chimpanzee who then murdered them.
  • Scientists agree that each year the AR-15 will grow more deadly until it kills everyone in the entire world.
  • Some believe that Hitler was in fact an AR-15 in a rubber mask.
  • In the Garden of Eden, God gave Adam and Eve access to every firearm out there except for the AR-15 which he told them not to touch because it was too evil. But then the NRA, in the guise of a serpent, told Eve that the AR-15 is really fun to shoot. So then Eve took the AR-15 and started shooting all the animals in the garden because she is one awesome chick.
  • The part that makes the AR-15 so extra deadly is the handle on top. The AR-15 would be used in less murders if it were more inconvenient to carry.
  • It was an AR-15 that told Miley Cyrus to dance like that.
  • Bullets that are normally harmless will kill instantly when fired out of the AR-15.
  • The reason AR-15s have that prominent handle on them is because the most requested feature for an assault rifle was to be able to carry it like a Hello Kitty lunch box.
  • If you find yourself surrounded by AR-15’s, know that they will fire automatically if they sense fear.
  • The AR-15 is easily concealable and can fit inside a matchbox.
  • The AR-15 is the leading cause of global warming from how its bullets shoot holes in the ozone.
  • A very small percentage of gun deaths are attributed to the AR-15 because it is very good at disguising itself as other guns to frame them.
  • What are the differences between an M16 and an AR-15? Scientists agree that it is something.
  • The AR-15 can be rendered harmless by giving it only a 10 round magazine as people always miss with the first ten rounds and an AR-15 takes an hour and a half to reload.
  • The AR-15 can shoot through schools.
  • In a battle between Aquaman and an AR-15, Aquaman would break down and buy it so people might think he’s more manly.
    There were no shooting deaths until the invention of an AR-15. No one even considered using a gun to shoot another human being until someone saw an AR-15 and said, “I bet I could use this to kill a lot of people.”
  • There was an assault musket similar to the AR-15 used by the world’s most evil pirates, but it was pronounced “Arrr-15.”
    The Assault Weapon ban was needed because it is well known that an AR-15 with both a pistol grip and a flash suppressor would be unstoppable by any modern military.
  • In Europe there is no such thing as an AR-15 and thus also no such thing as murders. Instead of being violent, people there just drink wine and smoke cigarettes all day.
  • If you are shot by an AR-15, you become one and kill others.
  • The AR-15 is responsible for 95% of all deaths each year. The rest of the deaths are from obesity and drone strikes.

I saw that on Claude Werner’s Facebook page. I have no idea who the original author is (I’ve seen it crop up in other places, no attributions).

 

Detect, Defuse, Defend – do we need more emphasis on the first two?

/ hsoi / 6 Comments

Tony Blauer asks the question: “What would it cost you if you didn’t fight back?”

I’m referring to the emotional/psychological taxes. Most people never consider violence’s deeper impact. The noxious effects that create PTSD, the memories that stain our mind’s-eye and silently agitate our nervous system.

When bad shit happens close-up, everything can change.

So what would you pay to avoid some of this? What would you pay to feel safer?

His answer?

Pay attention.

Some days ago, a man on a San Francisco Muni train pulled out a gun and flashed it around. A lot. There was nothing covert, hidden, or non-obvious about what he was doing – he was quite obvious and blatant. However, everyone around him was oblivious, noses buried in their phones and tablets. No one saw what was going on until the guy shot someone.  Apparently it was a random encounter, thus anyone on that train could have been the victim, and they never would have known… they never would have had a chance to do anything.

Now, everyone is quick to blame mobile devices. We have to remember that books and newspapers and Walkman’s existed long ago, and people found themselves just as engrossed and oblivious with those. However, I cannot deny that we’ve changed and find ourselves with our noses buried on the glass screen a lot more these days. In fact, people tend to consider that device of primary importance, more so than driving or walking. I admit, I’ve watched people walking around with their eyes on their phone and not on where they were going, and I’ve been tempted to step in front of them or simply insert my hand between their eyes and their phone. It’d be to make a point that perhaps they should pay more attention to the world around them, alas, I’d just be seen as an asshole and no lesson would be learned. *sigh*

Mr. Blauer talks about the 3 D’s:

1) DETECT (to avoid)

2) DEFUSE (to de-escalate)

3) DEFEND (to protect).

Two-thirds of your personal safety takes place before you even step on the “X” (The “X” being symbolic for the time & place of an ambush).

The Three D’s is the basis of your ‘ Personal Defense OS’.

Two-thirds of confrontation management relies on awareness, mental toughness and fear management strategies before any contact is made. Avoiding danger should be the primary directive.

Col. Jeff Cooper has his color codes of awareness. Insights Training has their street & vehicle tactics course. SouthNarc teaches about Managing Unknown Contacts (MUC). Karl Rehn has done much to further the utility and use of force-on-force training. Any good trainer in this area is going to stress the importance of such things. Granted, it’s #3 that sells the most because we all like to shoot guns, or practice kata and joint locks, or whatever. There’s not a lot of sexy appeal in #1 and #2, but it’s precisely those that will do the most to keep us alive and out of trouble.

Yes, this is where “force-on-force” training pays off. The thought of “FoF” scares a lot of people because it makes it sound like it’s going to be a UFC battle. Yes, there’s FoF classes (like SouthNarc’s ECQC) that are about going to some physical extremes. But a lot of FoF training is just scenarios, role playing, with little physicality (and a lot of people finding their inner thespian). What it does give you is a lot of understanding of how Detect and Defuse play a big role in your own personal safety. If the only training you’ve had is to “draw your gun” or “palm strike to the nose”, you only know how to do #3, and that’s not always going to be the right answer.

This sort of training helps you make a mental shift. It sinks in a lot of reality, and should enable you to give yourself permission to listen to yourself more. Blauer continues:

This strategically brings us into the next step in enhancing your personal safety: decide right now to respect and embrace your body’s survival signals. If an alarm goes off, respond to it. Got a bad feeling? Address it. Something nagging at you? Stop and look into it. Don’t ignore these signals. Don’t rationalize and mentally correct them. Don’t dismiss them without assessing them. Your body is built for survival and one of its hard-wired systems is designed to alert you to danger.

I know what some of you are thinking, “What if I mistake a feeling, body language, a gesture or movement and react to it.” And? What’s the downside? No one [important in your life] is going to be upset with you for facing fear. Don’t be shy or embarrassed about this. Accept that the human body will generally err on the side of survival. And so should you. There is no downside to being safe or safer. But there is a massive down side to ignoring these survival signals.

And don’t let peer pressure; socialization, fear of fear or other distractions mess with your survival instincts. We are physiological survival organisms, designed to adapt & survive. (FYI, in my courses I’ve re-named us #humanweapons, because that’s the mindset you need when the shit hits the fan, right? I’d rather remind myself “I’m a human-weapon”, and charge forward than scream, “I’m a Survival organism!” self-talk is key. Also, I can use the # on Twitter).

So make a contract with yourself right now that the moment your instincts & intuition raise an alarm that you will take steps to move to safety as soon as possible. Got a bad feeling? Address it now. Get off the “X” ASAP. Start moving when time and space are allies and options.

What’s the cost of learning the most the most important and practical part of self-defense? Zip. Just pay attention. Getting off the “X” is FREE.

More carry options for women

/ hsoi / 2 Comments

Let’s face it.

The world of carry options, of holsters and such, is geared heavily towards men. I don’t think the bias is intentional, I think it’s a combination of a few factors.

First, men and women are, thankfully, built differently. Generally speaking, the hip area of women tends to have more curves than men. Putting an inside-the-waistband holster on a curvy woman is going to direct the grip of the gun right into her side, which won’t be comfortable nor accessible. Plus, that makes the muzzle jut out, and that’s not very flattering nor practical. So you try to work with something like a “drop and offset” holster, and while that works, it does not conceal very well.

Second, women, thankfully, have different fashion sense than men. They do want things to work with their clothing, with their sense of fashion and style. I’ve spoken with numerous women that like their clothing to flatter their figure, thus wearing loose baggy clothing to conceal stuff really doesn’t jive with their goals. And of course, wearing their figure-flattering clothing isn’t good for concealment either.

Consequently, many women turn to off-body carry.

Alas, the options there aren’t great. Like Galco’s purses? Maybe they are functional, but they are ugly. Coronado Leather seems to have improved their offerings since the last time I checked.

Thankfully, with the rapid growth of women getting concealed handgun licenses, so to has the market grown for carry options.

A little over a year ago I mentioned the Lucky Squashbuckler. Gun Supply Store seems to have expanded their selection. Woolstenhulme Designer Bags has also expanded their line.

Looking around now I’ve found even more options.

I just found It’s in the Bag Boutique. They may not be your style, but it’s great to see various options.

GTM (Gun Tote’n Mams) has a line of purpose-built purses.

Urban Moxy

There’s a wide variety of what’s offered, in terms of both form and function.

But what prompted me to write this wasn’t any purse or handbag. It was something else entirely.

See, while the purse is alright, the disadvantage (amongst others) is drawing it from the purse. When I became certified to teach the NRA Personal Protection Outside the Home course, I had to work a good portion of the class drawing from a purse. Heck, I carry a Maxpedition Jumbo Versipack quite regularly, and it’s effectively a purse/shoulder bag. It’s not really an ideal way to carry and draw. But, better than nothing.

That’s why these belt packs from Warrior-Creek caught my eye.

I saw them posted to the Austin Sure Shots Facebook page, and Niki Jones reviewed them in Issue 3 of their magazine.

They kinda reminded me of the Sneaky Pete holster.

Nothing leads me to believe these are purpose-made for concealed carry. I haven’t seen any in person, only going off what I see on the above web pages and Niki’s review. But it does seem like they can be easily adapted for that purpose, perhaps with an after-market holster added to ensure proper positioning of the gun so it doesn’t shift around and is always where you want it. Then, just practice a lot. If it’s how you’re going to carry, it’s how you should practice. And drawing from a holster like this is certainly something you can do in dry practice at home.

This? It’s just an OWB belt holster. But it’s also drop-and-offset, and far better suited to a woman’s body shape. And maybe your fashion sense (or maybe not, they’ve certainly got a particular style). Me? I also like options like this because hooking everything on your belt, leaving hands free, it’s always more functional just going around in a day. I wore a fanny pack for many many years, and it’s quite handy to have free-hands yet still have close control and retention over your belongings.

I really dig these Warrior Creek packs. It’s quite evident that there’s a demand, and it’s awesome to see such creative answers to these problems.

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.