Good discussion and video of a skilled competitor demonstrating with actual concealed carry gear. Only a fool fails to recognize the obvious skill carry over.
The Myth of Competition Training Scars runs strong, as evidenced by some of the comments to this post.
Novices claim competition is bad because of match gear. Upon witnessing top tier results with actual carry gear, they instead focus on how preparation for the next string is gonna getcha killed. Had the shooter performed a currently-popular tactically-appropriate post shooting scan after each string, they’d instead complain about how the stage didn’t have the shooter moving, or the targets didn’t move, or there was no target identification, or the shooter only fired one shot on each, or… Novices gonna novice.
Note these complaints only apply to skilled competitive shooters. Ever hear someone complain how Marine, Army, or police training is gonna getcha killed in the streets, even when those courses and qualifications suffer from the same “problems” (and the shooting is at a ridiculously lower level of skill.)
Here is an example how this myth propagates:
“This is likely to be my last post. This morning I was told in no uncertain terms that using the sights is slow and I should point shoot ‘cause the fight will be less than three yards and I won’t have time to use the sights and shooting competition will likely get me killed on the streets and fine motor control…”
…such was the post from a friend of mine the other day on Facebook.
(Jump to the end for the TL;DR version, but first make sure to watch the video in the middle.)
Leaving aside the research on actual engagement distances for citizen self-defense situations, the research on sight usage (and the resulting effect on the various police departments that have updated their training methodology on sighted fire and have statistics on hit ratios that far exceed the national norms), our beyond-grade-school-level understanding of what the terms “gross motor…
View original post 812 more words