Comments for Firearm User Network

Comment on Sheriff Jim Wilson Makes Big Claims by John M. Buol Jr.

John M. Buol Jr. — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 23:54:48 +0000

I’m not arguing if any current competitive format is good or bad. My interest is encouraging more active participation among gun owners.

If a more proper tactical format will bring more folks in, I’m all for it. I’d like to hear details about what this better format is.

Comment on Sheriff Jim Wilson Makes Big Claims by cnspam@hotmail0.com

cnspam@hotmail0.com — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 18:12:32 +0000

The first thing required to learn anything is to check your ego at the door..

Jim Wilson’s commentary on the shooting sports overall was/is IMO correct.

I was shooting PPC 30+ years ago.. IPSEC, IPDA they are all good training tools.. But in all sincerity they do not reflect any experiences I or any of my friends have had in employing sidearms either as a GI or as a private citizen.

I am not sure how you would replicate an engagement with a man’s arm around your neck from behind attempting to choke you. Waking with armed men a few feet from you, How do you deal when the muzzle of your weapon is pressed against the chest and over the heart of you attacker? How do you deal with a Patrolmen on the Ground two committed BGs one sitting on his chest punching him in the face the other wrestling for his weapon. These are all actual occurrences I have experienced.. You cannot always just start blasting away as a solution.. In fact instances of conflict where you cannot just blast away but must perform a balance between defensive actions and measured aggression are far more common in this world than out and out violent engagements.

Just my 2 cents worth..

Comment on Sheriff Jim Wilson Makes Big Claims by KR

KR — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 16:53:45 +0000

To make either sport more realistic, a match would look like this: 5-10 stages in which no shots are ever fired, maybe one of those stages would require a gun to be drawn. All the rest would be “won” by walking across the street, leaving the bar, not stopping at that poorly-lit gas station at night, etc.

For the one “shoot” stage, there would be 1-2 targets. Stage would start with someone punching you in the head or maybe disabling one arm, and you’d fire 3-5 rounds, then spend hours and hours dealing with cops and lawyers and medics. Hit a no-shoot, or shoot a target that should not have been shot, and (to make it realistic), you’d be banned from ever competing again and assessed a hefty fine, maybe 20x or 200x the match fee.

Realistic is often not “entertaining”, and whether tactical types like it or not, one big reason people shoot matches is for fun, with the training benefit a secondary concern.

Comment on Student, Teacher, and the Why by Scott Bloom

Scott Bloom — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 11:21:13 +0000

The sad thing is the NRA seems to be the end all be all of certifaction. The NRA has done alot for gun ownership , but have been kinda behind the times with the evolving gun culture. I am 32 years old , my prefrance is handguns , specifly pistols. I was exposed to bullseye and it bored me to tears , not saying I was great at it or anything just the fun level wasn’t there for me. I play video games and 2 years ago I found USPSA a real life video game , and am hooked

Action sports are becoming more and more embraced because the video game generation is coming up. 3 gun , zombie shoots , fast draw , and all other kinds of action sports are becoming the norm. Bullseye and other games that are lenghty in time , and only provide accuracy skill building are dying and rightly so. Us kids want action sports look at MMA compared to boxing.