Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
...
I can put all 60 rounds downrange into a person size target at 20 yards in about 1 minute with nearly 100% accuracy.
I am the first to realize that the range is not reality but it gives me some confidence as a starting point.....
While 60 rounds is good and it will help you on your mechanics, how fast can you draw and put 3 rounds on target at 5 yards? Have someone there with you holding a shot timer. That adds some pressure to the training. When you start to feel good about that, have them load your mags but put a dummy round somewhere in each. You get all pumped up and on the 2nd or 3rd drill you draw and "click". You have to get to the point where you don't panic during those situations. You just tap-tap-rack and get back into the fight.
I've had trainers tell me the closest you get to a real-life situation is force on force training with simunition. I haven't been to one of those training classes yet but I want to.
when a cop pulls you over, he is fishing for everything (warrants, firearm violation, DUI, drugs, etc.) or maybe he is just bored and wanted to talk to you.
I don't know what made you think that CHP pulled you over only for firearm violation, but then again i'm not a mind reader so I can't tell you what was on that cop's mind.
It comes down from the top. Even here in Missouri it varies. If i encounter a city cop, I am harrassed for carrying. If I encounter a county one, I am congratulated for knowing my 2nd amendment right.
I have always thought Air Soft was a better training platform.
Providing the proper safety requirements this form of soft combat will enlighten one in their vulnerability.
It certainly woke me up.
My son and I did air soft, and I was amazed at how poorly I performed during this exercise. Getting older doesn't help.
Practice however does. They make guns that are almost perfect in the replication of real deal fire arms.
And the air soft guns give the opportunity to get trigger time in the convenience of your living room. cheaper to shoot.
While 60 rounds is good and it will help you on your mechanics, how fast can you draw and put 3 rounds on target at 5 yards? Have someone there with you holding a shot timer. That adds some pressure to the training. When you start to feel good about that, have them load your mags but put a dummy round somewhere in each. You get all pumped up and on the 2nd or 3rd drill you draw and "click". You have to get to the point where you don't panic during those situations. You just tap-tap-rack and get back into the fight.
I've had trainers tell me the closest you get to a real-life situation is force on force training with simunition. I haven't been to one of those training classes yet but I want to.
Simuunitions can smart. LOL...they get your attention. But they are an excellent training tool. Really anything that one can do to add pressure, anxiety, adrenaline to shooting practice is a good thing.
Serious competition was where I honed a lot of my pressure management skills which had me ahead of the curve in advanced tactical training. I got to play with SEALs in that once. Team 5 to be precise. Did OP4 with them in a preeployment regimine. Learned a LOT.
That was my introduction to sims. They're awsome. Theres no hiding being hit. If one is going to carry or even just have a gun at home for defensive use pressure management skills training is a must. You HAVE to be able to make adrenaline work for you not against you.
I've seen people just fall to pieces on the line in competition and that's just performance anxiety. The real adrenaline of the real deal is maximum overdrive. And it has to be mastered.
That's why I like to believe shooting is a 90% mental skill.
I have always thought Air Soft was a better training platform.
Providing the proper safety requirements this form of soft combat will enlighten one in their vulnerability.
It certainly woke me up.
My son and I did air soft, and I was amazed at how poorly I performed during this exercise. Getting older doesn't help.
Practice however does. They make guns that are almost perfect in the replication of real deal fire arms.
And the air soft guns give the opportunity to get trigger time in the convenience of your living room. cheaper to shoot.
Some SJW in the hood, called the cops on the kids having their weekly airsoft WAR. Now we call 311 to let them know the kids are having another airsoft WAR in the hood, just so they don't come rolling code 3 for some guys with guns.
Not at all, but if I am to chose armed or unarmed? I'll take, armed just in case for a thousand Alex.
Here is what amazes me, and I am not picking on you.
People who are anti-gun ownership, also tend to be anti-police, and yet are ok with only the police having guns. That absolutely amazes me. To them I say good luck. I honestly and truly wish them well. I hope no bad guys ever bother them. None have ever bothered me. Then again, I have never had a house fire, but I do have homeowners insurance just in case.
The debate over gun control can be summed up thusly: Those of us who don't like guns in the hands of our non-costumed brethren, will vote to ensure men with guns, under the guise of the "law," will come and take the property that is rightfully yours, killing you should you resist our will sufficiently.
This is what we call "violence by-proxy" and makes the voter for violence no less culpable in the extortion and death that will ensue.
Quote:
As Stefan Molyneux correctly observed; if a person claims they are non-violent and are for “gun control” they are not truly anti-gun nor are they non-violent people - because the reality is that guns and violence will be needed to disarm innocent law abiding people.
This is because those people who claim they are anti-gun and anti-violence, who claim to support “gun control,” will need the credible threat of police violence and the police’s guns to take away other people’s guns should they resist the attempt to further centralize their monopoly on violence.
So those who claim to be anti-gun and anti-violence are really very pro-gun and very pro-violence. They ultimately believe that only government officials (which are of course portrayed as reliable, honest, moral, and virtuous) should be allowed to have guns. This obviously flies in the face of reality as the 20th century has proven once and for all.
It’s important to note that those who advocate this type of centralized monopoly of violence do so as cowards, because it’s not their lives on the line, rather they advocate others using violence on their behalf in order to force their misguided views on innocent people who wish to do nothing other than protect themselves and other innocents.
There is no such thing as "gun control," there is only centralizing gun ownership in the hands of a small, political class and the forces they control which, as recent history has proven is a murderous nightmare for the peace loving, disenfranchised, and disarmed citizenry.--Ron Danielowski
Trying to figure out what democrats have to do with gun ownership other than republicans mouthing off to advance some nebulous agenda. I am a life long Democrat and armed. Get over it.
Nebulous agenda? You can't be that dense? I doubt that you are even "well armed". If so you'd be voting against your self interests. Only a fool would do that.
Quote:
"If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in, I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren't here."--Diane Feinstein, (D) U.S. Senator from California
"Instead, we should ban possession of military-style semiautomatic assault weapons, we should buy back such weapons from all who choose to abide by the law, and we should criminally prosecute any who choose to defy it by keeping their weapons," he wrote. "The ban would not apply to law enforcement agencies or shooting clubs."--Eric Swalwell (D) U.S. Representative from California
“I believe…..this is my final word……I believe that I’m supporting the Constitution of the United States which does not give the right for any individual to own a handgun….”--Jan Schakowsky, (D) U.S. Representative from Illinois
“No, we’re not looking at how to control criminals … we’re talking about banning the AK-47 and semi-automatic guns.”--Howard Metzenbaum, (D) former U.S. Senator
“If a bill to ban handguns came to the house floor, I would vote for it.”--Pete Stark, (D) U.S. Representative from California
” …we need much stricter gun control, and eventually should bar the ownership of handguns”--William Clay, (D) U.S. Representative from Missouri
“Banning guns is an idea whose time has come.”--Joseph Biden, (D) Vice President of the United States
“I shortly will introduce legislation banning the sale, manufacture or possession of handguns (with exceptions for law enforcement and licensed target clubs)… . It is time to act. We cannot go on like this. Ban them!”--John Chafee, (D) Former U.S. Senator from Rhode Island
“We have to start with a ban on the manufacturing and import of handguns. From there we register the guns which are currently owned, and follow that with additional bans and acquisitions of handguns and rifles with no sporting purpose.”--Major Owens, (D) U.S. Representative from New York
“My staff and I right now are working on a comprehensive gun-control bill. We don’t have all the details, but for instance, regulating the sale and purchase of bullets. Ultimately, I would like to see the manufacture and possession of handguns banned except for military and police use. But that’s the endgame. And in the meantime, there are some specific things that we can do with legislation.”--Bobby Rush, (D) U.S. Representative from Illinois
“Banning guns addresses a fundamental right of all Americans to feel safe. The National Guard fulfills the militia mentioned in the Second amendment. Citizens no longer need to protect the states or themselves.”--Dianne Feinstein, (D) U.S. Senator from California
“All of this has to be understood as part of a process leading ultimately to a treaty that will give an international body power over our domestic laws.”--Charles Pashayan, (D) U.S. Representative from California
“Confiscation could be an option…mandatory sale to the state could be an option.”--Andrew Cuomo, (D) Governor of New York
“I don’t believe people should to be able to own guns.”-- Barack Obama (D) former President of The United States (during conversation with economist and author John Lott Jr. at the University of Chicago Law School in the 1990s)
"We need a new paradigm because both sides are in the corner and they could come to the middle," Schumer said. "Those of who are pro-gun control have to admit that there is a Second Amendment right to bear arms... once we establish that there is a constitutional right to bear arms we should have the right admit, and maybe they'll be more willing to admit, that no amendment is absolute after all."--Chuck Schumer, (D) U.S. Senator from New York
"We can't just stand behind you and say we support our men and women in law enforcement community and then not have the laws on the books that help you do your job every day," he said. "And it's time as a city we have an assault weapon ban. And it's time as a state that we have an assault weapon ban. And it's time as a country that we have an assault weapon ban."--Rahm Emanuel, (D) Mayor Chicago, Illinois
"We need to do something, at the very least, perhaps, about the high-capacity magazines that were used in this crime."--Richard Blumenthal, (D) U.S. Senator from Connecticut
"We cannot let a minority of people—and that’s what it is, it is a minority of people—hold a viewpoint that terrorizes the majority of people." On Australia's gun ban "So I think that’s worth considering," Clinton said. "I don’t know enough details to tell you how we would do it or how it would work. But certainly, the Australian example is worth considering."----Hillary Clinton (D) former NY State Senator, Secretary of State, and Democrat candidate for president
George Stephanopoulos pushed Clinton twice on whether people have a right to own guns on ABC News’ "This Week": “But that's not what I asked. I said do you believe that their conclusion that an individual's right to bear arms is a constitutional right?” Clinton (D) could only say: “If it is a constitutional right...”
"I can find nothing in the Second Amendment’s text, history, or underlying rationale that could warrant characterizing it as ‘fundamental’ insofar as it seeks to protect the keeping and bearing of arms for private self-defense purposes.”--Steven Breyer, (D) Supreme Court Justice
Well, they may help keep those COVID-19 infected possums in the backyard at bay.
Unfortunately, being armed to the hilt isn't going to help anybody treat the virus though.
It's not about treating the virus, get a clue.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Firearms in the current environment...
