The problem with the anti-competition shooting zealots is they remain largely ignorant of the events and participants complained about. There is this popular myth that competition is somehow bad that some people are fond of repeating and this tendency to repeat it in the absence of any proper testing or reliable proof is what keeps the myth alive. It is “true” because enough people continue repeating the lie.

Here’s a synopsis from another go-around.

“1. All targets are single shot targets for the most part.”

This is a much larger problem for military, LEO, and tactical classes than the large variety of competitive disciplines where the number of targets and shots to engage them varies widely. Plus, steel is engaged to fall, kind of like he is suggesting.

“2. Speed reigns supreme in competition. Speed is important, but not at the expense of accuracy…”

Sounds like conventional bullseye to me. I’m certain he doesn’t like that because it is at the expense of speed.

“3. There’s no need to take cover.”

Except at matches that require it. PPC, NATO military, and various practical disciplines have mandated cover use and force competitors to shoot around it.

“4. You’re limiting your configuration possibilities.”

Compared to the fixed and rigid courses found in military, LEO, and tactical classes, this is laughably wrong. There are dozens of different competitive disciplines with varying types of configuration possibilities. Some disciplines, especially the practical events, are purposely made different at every event.

“5. Competition shooting breeds an environment of gizmos, gadgets, and race guns. Reflex sights are great, but batteries fail.”

Battery powered reflex sights have become the norm in military, LEO, and tactical use since the mid-1990s, as are lights, lasers and other “gizmos.”

Advertisements