According to Tim Herron of Team Sig Sauer there is a lot of misinformation from Armchair Experts. He breaks down five things he advises to be a better shooter.
- Dryfire. It’s real. And it works. It also costs NOTHING but an investment of your time and the benefits are endless.
- Training Classes do not make a better shooter. Practicing what you learn from those classes is what makes you a better shooter. Training classes merely gives you new ideas to practice on.
- Gear is never the answer. You can improve with what you have.
- Focus your practice on purposeful things. Things that really apply. Literal tons of repetitions both in dryfire and live fire and immense amount of PURPOSEFUL rounds down range.
- Finally, stop with the delusions of self grandeur. Want to start truly improving? Quit BS’ing each other on the Internet and get your rear end to work. You don’t learn this stuff by osmosis. And you certainly don’t get better at any of this by repeating the baseless BS you read or heard some supposed “hardcore operator or competitor” say out of context to someone else 3rd person.
Tim has some good points and some of them seem obvious. However I do argue against the “gear is never the answer”. If gear is not the answer then why do people not compete with Hipoints? To a certain degree gear matters. There is a reason people don’t use Uncle Mike’s holsters for serious shooting. Also gear can help with some shortcomings one may have. For example, red dots on handguns is easier and quicker for people with poor eyesight.
What are you thoughts on Tim’s analysis and advice? To read his entire article check it out here at MASF.
Being an ‘armchair expert’, I resemble that remark! 🙂 Seriously, I no longer have the means to get to the range (or the desert) on a regular basis. And my ‘edge’ (if I ever had one) has significantly rounded. 😦
Having said that, dreaming of more or better gear (if only I had another, different, newer gun…) or (if I had the opportunity) tossing lead downrange at paper villains willy-nilly doesn’t solve the problem! It doesn’t even address it.
Because there’s no focus. No purpose (see above).
Yeah, plinking is loads of fun, but doesn’t sharpen one’s skill set. Muscle memory is degradable.
HOWEVER, dry practice (the aforementioned dry firing), coupled with presentation, trigger control, sight picture and compressed-surprise brake can make for a fun and valuable learning experience! And an inexpensive means of keeping up one’s skill set.
(my Dad’s general exclamation when an opinion – usually unsolicited or wanted – made itself known)
I’m participating in my usual morning routine. Shower, dress, readings, meditation, email, blog etc. When I see a notification on my cellular telephone that there was an attempt to log into my Facebook account. Last night, about 0030. From Mainland China!
I was long asleep at the time, and no where near the PRC. Apparently, they used Windows XP, Internet Explorer 9, and something resembling my FB password!
WHAT! Everyone knows I haven’t used XP in years, and loathe IE!
It IS a little disconcerting they could approximate my password, though. AND, would even care about accessing MY FB account. After all, I’m not a registered Democrat! 🙂
SO, per FB instructions, I changed my password to something completely different.
It IS good to know someone on the other side of the World thinks I’m important enough to hack, though…
(I am on FB, but under my real name. Perhaps I need to change that?)
I’ve friends who work ‘in the media’. They become annoyed with me when I criticize the media en mass, as though all were tentacles connected to the same head.
While I DO recognize that even some big media outlets offer disparate opinions, one does have to wonder about the editorial power being used…
New York Times Stumbles onto the Truth About Baltimore
Jared Taylor, American Renaissance, April 29, 2015
Discovers why blacks riot.
An article from yesterday’s New York Times about the relative calm in Baltimore stumbled by accident onto something like the real reason why blacks were rioting. Near the famous burned-out CVS–the city had begged the company to “invest” in a dodgy neighborhood–the Times reporter found someone it identified as “Robert Wilson, a college student who went to high school in Baltimore.” The article concludes with Mr. Wilson’s explanation of why blacks rioted. He said nothing about Freddie Gray or police brutality. Instead, he said this:
We’re just angry at the surroundings–like this is all that is given to us?–and we’re tired of this, like nobody wants to wake up and see broken-down buildings. They take away the community centers, they take away our fathers, and now we have traffic lights that don’t work, we have houses that are crumbling, falling down.
This quote almost perfectly captures the black mentality that leads to rioting. Blacks live in neighborhoods that they, themselves, have wrecked, and then ask, “This is all that is given to us?”
Hard-working white people built the “broken-down” buildings Mr. Wilson is complaining about. Many had parquet floors, high ceilings, and fine moldings found today only in the most expensive new construction.
After the riots in Baltimore in 1968, whites panicked and sold their property at desperation prices. Now, these houses are “broken down” because blacks didn’t maintain them. This pattern of white flight and “broken down” houses was repeated in Detroit, Philadelphia, Chicago, New York, Washington, St. Louis, Memphis, Atlanta, Birmingham, Jacksonville, and countless other American cities. Some of the best city housing in the world was handed over to blacks who wrecked it. Neighborhoods filled with irreplaceable architecture are now wastelands.
Mr. Wilson complains that “we have houses that are crumbling, falling down.” The remedy for crumbling houses is for the people who live in them to fix them, but instead, Mr. Wilson asks, “Is this all that is given to us?”
Like so many blacks, Mr. Wilson doesn’t realize how perverse it is even to think in terms of pleasant houses and neighborhoods being “given” to anyone. Does he imagine the white authorities “giving” nice neighborhoods to whites and cruelly handing out slums to blacks? They didn’t start out as slums. Whites saved and worked hard to build those neighborhoods. They maintained them, repaired them, and loved them.
But in today’s world of welfare, food stamps, government housing, and white guilt, Mr. Wilson doesn’t know any better than to ask for handouts. Jesse Jackson is just as self-absorbed. At the funeral for Freddie Gray he wanted to know, “Why can’t the [black] West Side get the same things downtown gets?” Jesse Jackson is asking the same question: “Is this all that is given to us?”
And who, exactly, is not giving enough? Baltimore elected its first black mayor in 1987. Today, the mayor, the police chief, the fire chief, and half the police force are black. Two thirds of the population and most of the city council are black. But when Mr. Wilson and Jesse Jackson complain about stinginess, they are not blaming Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake; they are blaming white people.
Mr. Wilson says Baltimore’s blacks rioted because they are “angry at the surroundings.” Blacks make their surroundings ugly and miserable, and then make them even more ugly and miserable by burning them down. And then they ask, “Is this all that is given us?
Mr. Wilson has more complaints: “They take away the community centers, they take away our fathers.” Mayor Rawlings-Blake cut funding for 20 of 55 city-run community centers
in 2013, but private foundations and neighborhood organizations kept most of them going. Rioters burned one down
And fathers? In 1983, Baltimore had the highest black illegitimacy rate in the country: 76 percent
, at a time when the national rate for blacks was about 55 percent. Now that the national black rate is 72 percent
, what is the figure likely to be for Baltimore? Ninety percent? Ninety-five percent? Whoever “they” are didn’t have to work very hard to “take away our fathers.” Black fathers were never there to begin with
It’s no surprise that Mr. Wilson thinks blacks haven’t been “given” what they deserve, and that “they” took away his father. He’s a college student–probably on scholarship–and that’s what blacks are taught from grade school.
The New York Times invariably blames “racism” and white privilege for the plight of blacks. It assumes that if only whites could curb their bigotry, blacks would bloom and flourish. It is remarkable that it concluded this article with a quotation that so brutally undercuts its own assumptions. People who think “they” have taken away their fathers, who blame others for their “broken down buildings,” who look at misery of their own making and ask “Is this all that is given to us?”–such people will not bloom and flourish no matter what white people do. Nor do they deserve to.
Presented without comment.
h/t Doc in Yuma
(from The Firearm Blog, in part)
The last few months in the US have been pretty tumultuous if you have been watching the news. Without getting too political, we have seen terror attacks, hate crimes, and a multitude of other criminal activity. It is truly unsettling and has a lot of people on edge. Some people want to scream gun control or make other arguments, but I digress. What is interesting is what firearms some Americans think should be legal or illegal. Vox, an internet news site, tried to delve into that exact topic.
Vox teamed up with Morning Consult and tried to ask the question of firearm legality. They asked 2,000 people whether certain firearms should be legal or illegal merely based on appearance and their name. The infographic below is very telling. The less it looks like a hunting firearm and the more scary it appears lead whoever they surveyed to believe it should be illegal!
Results from 2,000 people surveyed on whether certain firearms should be LEGAL or ILLEGAL [Credit: Vox/Morning Consult]
You get some interesting, and maybe not surprising results, when you start to identify respondents by their political affiliation. Vox and Morning Consult took it a few steps further by dividing results from their survey by gender. Their full story and results can be found HERE.
Yeah, regardless of what the polls think (democracy), I will keep my guns and, if at all possible add more.
BECAUSE MY INDIVIDUAL NATURAL RIGHTS ARE NOT UP FOR DEBATE OR PLEBISCITE!
(Here we are, revisiting a common theme in this blog. It’s as if they are not listening!)
I was fully prepared (okay, 85% prepared) to post last night for today, as this morning I was to be occupied during my blogging time-frame. Another medical procedure. Sigh.
Another endoscopy. A camera-down-the-throat (and biopsy) to see the ‘progress’ of my esophageal erosion due to chronic acid reflux. Which might lead to cancer and/or surgery.
Otherwise, I probably wouldn’t be doing it!
This was set-up by my primary physician, as she saw I was suffering from this condition, and wanted to see the progression of the disease.
SO…I was referred to a specialist who saw me six weeks ago, and scheduled this procedure. One day, outpatient, a few hours. Roomie J will be driving, as I will be rendered unconscious by propofol (the Michael Jackson drug) for the procedure.
Last time I had this done, the clinic-de-jour called me (and sent me a letter) a month in advance to ask me questions about medical power-of-attorney, organ donation, that kind of icky stuff. And advised me there would be an intake charge. Up front.
I was grateful for the heads-up, as being on disability I don’t have lot’s of spare cash lying around for unexpected expenses. I still wasn’t thrilled at the charge, of course.
But this time, the different facility (I changed doctors as the previous guy seemed to want to get as much Medicare money out of me as possible) had not called or sent a letter. I assumed (NEVER do that – D. Brown) that if there were a charge, they would bill me.
They called me yesterday afternoon at 1630 hours (I was to be at the hospital at 0700 this morning) and advised me there would be a charge of over one hundred dollars! They would not bill me, and if I didn’t have the funds, I would have to reschedule!
Of course, I don’t have the money. And the caller had NO IDEA why I was upset, that this was in the very least an inconvenience and poor customer service!
THEN, she hung-up on me!
But not before telling me to reschedule I had to call my specialist’s office – THEY couldn’t do that! At 1630 in the afternoon.
(I did rant, but used no foul language.)
Fortunately, my doctor’s office was still open.
SO…it’s been rescheduled for August 16.
PS – While I was writing this, the hospital called to see where I was. I advised them of yesterday’s conversation and the rescheduling. Must I do everything?
aka, the rifle who never was(?)
My friend Murphy’s Law recently acquired a piece-of-ordinance that sparked a memory for me.
The Fabrique Nationale de Herstal Fusil Automatique Léger, aka FN FAL
(or sometimes colloquially pronounced fin’fall)
Regular, long-time readers know I got into riflery late in my gun ‘career’. My focus had largely been police and self defense oriented arms, until Bill Clinton’s assault weapon ban came to be. (#$&%^(@!)
Then, as the almighty government told me I was not allowed to have a particular sub-set of firearms, I had to have one. Or two. Or more!
Friends gifted me with a semi AK copy. Eventually, I acquired three more, in AR configuration (and one parts AR carbine in 9mm, which was never completed.) And magazines, ammunition, cleaning tools, slings and other acoutrement.
Followed by a domestically-assembled H&K 91 clone. And an M1 Garand.
Yeah, I’m a completionist!
But, I never did acquire an FN. Heard stories from shooting buddies who had, and the guy who owned Royal Bookstore (a Belgian emigre’ who became an American citizen and fought in Vietnam.) And read about them in Cooper’s Gunsite Gossip.
Of course, you know the end to the story. Burglary, 800 pound safe stolen – with all her contents.
So the FN would have been gone, regardless.
Some Yale University students are demanding changes to the English Department curriculum: specifically, they don’t think it should feature so many English poets who were straight, white, wealthy, and male.
“It is your responsibility as educators to listen to student voices,” the students wrote in a petition to the faculty. “We have spoken. We are speaking. Pay attention.”
The “Major English Poets” sequence, a mandatory two-course commitment for English majors, is particularly problematic, according to the students. These classes cover Geoffrey Chaucer, Edmund Spenser, William Shakespeare, John Donne, John Milton, Alexander Pope, William Wordsworth, and T.S. Eliot. It’s not the most diverse line up, to be sure, but it’s the one that best reflects history the way it actually happened. Inarguably, these are the most influential poets in the English language.
But students think this sequence “creates a culture that is hostile to students of color.”
I don’t know where to begin on this. Seriously.
Let’s ask the Incas, or the Aztecs or the Sioux. Or the Australian aboriginal peoples. Or the Bantu.
Did predominantly White cultures subjugate, control and kill these people?* Yes. Have we spent the last one hundred + years or more trying to preserve primitive cultures, history, culture, etc. as a direct reaction to what happened before? Of course.
Is that enough? Maybe not.
But, eliminating Whiteness is not an answer. Show us the great Bantu poets and we will include them in poetry curricula!
Oh! Don’t forget to petition the Romans about the Etruscans or the Carthaginians.
Sorry, can’t do that – no one is left…
Perhaps they should consider attending a university in Zimbabwe?
*Did persons of the same color ALSO subjugate, control and kill these people? Yep.
I don’t pretend to even understand it.
Historical examples include Socrates, who took poison voluntarily; Numerous Samurai, who committed seppuku because they violated The Bushido Code.
It’s not always about suicide, though.
And sadly, the antithetical, so-called ‘honor’ killings…
There are select folks in service to the United States, who have it. Like this example given us by my friend Old NFO.
As compared to a certain Presidential candidate.
By The Book
Phillip Jennings is an investment banker and entrepreneur, former Marine Corps Captain who flew missions in Vietnam and, after leaving the Marine Corps, flew for Air America in Laos. He won the Pirate’s Alley Faulkner Society short fiction award in 1998. He has a degree in business administration and is the CEO of Mayfair Capital Partners. He is the author of two novels and one non-fiction book.
He authored the following article which appeared in the May 26, 2016 edition of USA Today. It is short and should be required reading for everyone.
Secretary without honor
When I hear people say Clinton emails don’t matter, I remember a young Marine captain who owned up to his career-ruining mistake.
Apologists for Hillary Clinton’s alleged criminal mishandling of classified documents say that it doesn’t matter, that she really did nothing wrong, or nothing significant. But the real question is not so much what she did as how she has responded to being found out.
Once during the mid-1960s when I was on active duty in the Marine Corps, I was the air liaison officer for a battalion of Marines aboard 11 ships in the Mediterranean. As the air officer and a senior captain, I had a rotating responsibility for the nuclear code book, kept in the safe in the operations room of the lead amphibious squadron command ship. I shared that duty with another captain, a squared away young man, liked by all he commanded and the son of a very high-ranking Marine.
On the day our ships were leaving the Mediterranean, we met the new amphibious squadron near Gibraltar and made preparations to transfer security codes and other sensitive material to the incoming Marine battalion. The young captain was on duty and went to the operations office to pick up the code book. He was alone in the office. He removed the code book and placed it on the desk while closing the safe. In a rushed moment, he stepped across the passageway to retrieve something he needed from his quarters. Seconds later, he stepped back into the operations office and found the operations sergeant having just entered, looking down at the code book.
Against all regulations, the code book had been out of the safe and unattended. It mattered not that it was unattended for only seconds, that the ship was 5 miles at sea, or that it was certain no one unauthorized had seen the code. The captain could have explained this to the operations sergeant. He could have told the sergeant that he “would take care of it.” He could have hinted that his high-ranking dad could smooth it over.
But the Marine Corps’ values are honor, courage and commitment. Honor is the bedrock of our character. The young captain could not ask the sergeant to betray his duty to report the infraction, no matter how small. Instead, the captain simply said, “Let’s go see the colonel.”
That captain had wanted to be a Marine officer all of his life. It was the only career he ever wanted. When he reported the incident to the colonel, he knew he was jeopardizing his life’s dream. But he did it.
The results went by the book. The amphibious squadron stood down. Military couriers flew in from NATO. The codes were changed all over Europe. The battalion was a day late in leaving the Mediterranean. The captain, Leonard F. Chapman III, received a letter of reprimand, damaging his career. He stayed in the corps and died in a tragic accident aboard another ship.
I saw some heroic acts in combat in Vietnam, things that made me proud to be an American and a Marine. But that young captain stood for what makes our corps and our country great.
Clinton is the antithesis of that young captain, someone with no honor, little courage and commitment only to her endless ambition. This has nothing to do with gender, party affiliation, ideology or policy. It is a question of character — not just hers, but ours. Electing Clinton would mean abandoning holding people accountable for grievous errors of integrity and responsibility. What we already know about her security infractions should disqualify her for any government position that deals in information critical to mission success, domestic or foreign. But beyond that, her responses to being found out — dismissing its importance, claiming ignorance, blaming others — indict her beyond anything the investigation can reveal. Those elements reveal her character. And the saddest thing is that so many in America seem not to care.
And I cannot understand why people are letting this slide… NONE of the veterans I know are, that’s for sure…
I hold out that someone, somewhere will eventually grok honor…
It does seem as though it is missing from the national character, though…
from Free North Carolina
A federal appeals court says people do not have a right to carry concealed weapons in public under the 2nd Amendment.
An 11-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued the ruling Thursday.
The panel says law enforcement officials can require applicants for a concealed weapons permit to show they are in immediate danger or otherwise have a good reason for a permit beyond self-defense.
It was bound to happen. While the Supreme Court affirmed firearms ownership to be an individual right, it said so in the home. There had to be a case further defining the terms. Of course, in this post-Scalia court, the fear is that the eight Justices (or 9, with a progressive appointee) will deny you, me and every other law-abiding citizen their natural right!
Time will tell…
Speaking for myself, I believe weapon possession, ownership, and method-of-carry should be entirely up to the individual! This solves the CCW vs. OC debate. It is NOT the business of the State to decide what or how, or when or where I can so do!
And (while we’re at it) didn’t Miller
(1939 – the case affirming the 1934 National Firearms Act
– full auto, etc.) mention commonly-carried military, individually-operated arms are the purview of the Second Amendment?
I call this ‘the Stinger in the basement’ principle.
(Yeah, I know, I’m rambling. I’m tired this morning)