Notes on High Power Prone

Leave a comment

From J. C. Tate, CDR USN (Ret.) – Distinguished in 1991

A good prone position is a make-or-break position - for one thing 300 of 500 points are prone.  Also, they say you win at offhand and lose at 600.  I can't argue with that either.  And, as you say, prone ought to be the most stable, all bone & sling, no muscle, relaxed position ... if you build a good one.  How do you know if it's good?  When you fire a shot, your rifle will naturally, effortlessly settle back almost where it was before the shot broke.

Of course, that last comment applies to sitting rapid too.  Which is why I see good shooters spending up to 30 seconds in sitting and 35 in prone rapid, just to build a good, relaxed, natural-point-of-aim position.

That said, here are my comments.  My context is for a right handed shooter.  I am mainly thinking of service rifle/EIC shooting, that's almost all I did.  Also, I shot M1/M14, so recoil was much more an issue than with M16/M4:
  1. Get your sling as high up on your left upper arm as possible. (A bit of spray adhesive will help keep it from slipping down.)
  2. Put the rifle’s forend on the bones where your hand meets your forearm; your fingers should be ‘floppy loose,’ not gripping the forend at all. Position your support/left elbow as close to directly under the rifle as possible. A perfectly vertical support arm is easy to duplicate. If your elbow is not under the rifle, any amount of variance will move the point of impact; if that variance is not the same, your point of impact will also vary. You may need to roll slightly on your left side to get your elbow under the rifle. If that’s the case, then pull your right elbow closer into your side … if possible, dig it into the ground a bit to help avoid slipping on recoil.
  3. Depending on what sort of shooting jacket is allowed (if any) use your shooting/right hand to position the butt well into the chest-shoulder ‘pocket.’ When you then move that shooting hand forward to grip the small of the stock, the pocket will tighten and your jacket folds will grip the stock and help hold it in place. (A little spray adhesive on the butt and on your jacket will help prevent slipping too.)
  4. After building this solid position, you will need to refine it to achieve a relaxed, natural-point-of-aim. To do this:
    a. First wiggle your hips to get as close as possible to that relaxed, on-target position.
    b. If your sights aren’t dead on, slide your right foot to the left or right a bit to move the muzzle in the opposite direction. (Try it! This works for a gentle, lateral adjustment.)
  5. Three peripheral comments. Practice getting into prone, then getting up, and getting down … until you have a reliable routine. When practicing getting into a good prone position, don’t forget to do it with your scorebook and shooting scope so that you know where to place them for use with little or no movement. Finally, practice dry fire with a helper whacking the muzzle to simulate recoil and consistent, on-target recovery. (On an M1/M14, the helper can hit the oprod to cycle the action.)
    I hope these are helpful. They helped me!


Army Qualification Practice

Leave a comment

Learn how the U.S. Army has updated shooting for qualification. This is a simple overview of conducting practice for Table III.

Firearm purchasing and firearm violence during the coronavirus pandemic in the United States: a cross-sectional study

1 Comment

Injury Epidemiology
Volume 8, Article number: 43 (2021)

Authors: Julia P. Schleimer, Christopher D. McCort, Aaron B. Shev, Veronica A. Pear, Elizabeth Tomsich, Alaina De Biasi, Shani Buggs, Hannah S. Laqueur & Garen J. Wintemute


A surge in firearm purchasing following the onset of the coronavirus pandemic may have contributed to an increase in firearm violence. We sought to estimate the state-level association between firearm purchasing and interpersonal firearm violence during the pandemic.


Cross-sectional study of the 48 contiguous states and the District of Columbia from January 2018 through July 2020. Data were obtained from the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (a proxy for firearm purchasing) and the Gun Violence Archive. Using negative binomial regression models, we estimated the association between cumulative excess firearm purchases in March through July 2020 (measured as the difference between observed rates and those expected from autoregressive integrated moving average models) and injuries (including nonfatal and fatal) from intentional, interpersonal firearm violence (non-domestic and domestic violence).


We estimated that there were 4.3 million excess firearm purchases nationally from March through July 2020 and a total of 4075 more firearm injuries than expected from April through July. We found no relationship between state-level excess purchasing and non-domestic firearm violence, e.g., each excess purchase per 100 population was associated with a rate ratio (RR) of firearm injury from non-domestic violence of 0.76 (95% CI: 0.50–1.02) in April; 0.99 (95% CI: 0.72–1.25) in May; 1.10 (95% CI: 0.93–1.32) in June; and 0.98 (95% CI: 0.85–1.12) in July. Excess firearm purchasing within states was associated with an increase in firearm injuries from domestic violence in April (RR: 2.60; 95% CI: 1.32–5.93) and May (RR: 1.79; 95% CI: 1.19–2.91), though estimates were sensitive to model specification.


Nationwide, firearm purchasing and firearm violence increased substantially during the first months of the coronavirus pandemic. At the state level, the magnitude of the increase in purchasing was not associated with the magnitude of the increase in firearm violence. Increases in purchasing may have contributed to additional firearm injuries from domestic violence in April and May. Results suggest much of the rise in firearm violence during our study period was attributable to other factors, indicating a need for additional research.

Kim Rhode vs MSM


Memes about Kim Rhode and her lack of mainstream media attention have been circulating recently.

It’s easy to blame MSM for lack of pro-gun coverage. It is also inaccurate. First, this ignores the demographics of shooting and pro-gun involvement compared to more mainstream interests, such as sport ball athletes and movie celebrities. MSM does not care about you or your issues. They care about three things:

  1. How many people watch/read/use their outlet/broadcast.
  2. How much time those people spend on viewing/reading/listening.
  3. How many dollars marketers will pay them for access to those viewers/readers/listeners.

The same can be said for all media outlets. Replace the name of any broadcast or print media outlet or news program and this is still true. I’ve found some pro-gun media outlets resistant to publishing information on competition shooting because it doesn’t cater to their readership. If it’s true for pro-gun publications and websites, even though they are focused on the specific niche and demographic of “gun owner” instead of the public at large, then it shouldn’t be surprising that general media at large is disinterested.

After Kim Rhode medalled in six Olympics in a row, some claimed her lack of media coverage was due to media bias. However, USA Today, the New York Times, CBS Sports, SB Nation, NBC, WGN, People Magazine, NBC 9News, and the Chicago Tribune published articles about her. Other publications such as Time, Forbes, the Huffington Post, The Wall Street Journal, and NPR published articles about Rhode’s accomplishments that highlighted her views on the Second Amendment.

Tokyo 2020(2021) Olympics

NBC Sports: Shooting Highlights
NBC Sports: Shooting Replays

Shooting Sports USA Wrap up:
U.S. Earns Six Olympic Shooting Medals In Tokyo, Best Performance Since 1964

On Her Turf: Olympic Shooter Mary Tucker
An exclusive interview with Team USA Air Rifle Shooter Mary Tucker, who competed in the first medal match of the 2020 Olympic Games. Tucker talks about gender equality in her sport, and how YouTube helped her train. Mary Tucker discusses Olympic, Collegiate, and Women’s rifle competitions.

Wall Street Journal: Mary Tucker

Washington Post:


ABC News (from AP)
Olympic air rifles turning heads with futuristic looks

Metro (Schneps Media publishes the leading free weekday daily newspapers in New York City and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania)

Tech Radar: How to Watch Olympic Shooting

BBC Sport

The Bridge: Olympic Shooting overview

Republic World

British Olympic Association (Team GB): Olympic Shooting guide:

The Guardian: Gun rights and Gold medals

NBC Today Show

NBC Today Show: Amber English and Vincent Hancock Skeet Gold Women, Skeet Gold Men

Will Shaner:
USA Today

Boston Globe:

Denver Post:


Fox News:

NBC Sports: Will Shaner
NBC Sports: Vincent Hancock


NBC New York: Kayle Browning (USA) and Alessandra Perilli (San Marino)

NPR: Alessandra Perilli (San Marino)


Star Tribune: Patrick Sunderman

How Japan’s gun laws impact competition shooting

This isn’t some nefarious anti-gun plot, it is simply catering to the majority. Gun owners are largely ignorant of organized shooting activity. Non-gun owners are even less aware and interested. This is the simple result of a market in action, not back-room politics trying to steal your guns. If the issue is controversial but of interest to a small minority, it’s probably easier to just avoid dealings and prevent alienating the majority, and especially alienating people and companies buying advertising/marketing trying to reach that general public.

Even among those gun owners that are active, activities such as golf eclipse them by a large margin. Again, the market speaks. If more people golf and are willing to pay for it, then more golf courses are built and more golf coverage is seen in the mainstream media because more people are voting with their dollars and feet. Gun owners are simply not as active, even when various reports claim that they are.

This is not an anti-gun plot. Garnering publicity and inspiring public interest is a tough row to hoe for every organization.

Common, accepted estimates place somewhere between 50-80 million Americans as owning at least one firearm. I don’t know why there is such a vast lack of interest in organized shooting events among them but given that there is, shooting will never be a mainstream activity. It’s not politics. It’s not anti-gun policy. It’s the result of the market voting with their dollars and feet.

Read another take here:

Canadian Rangers

Leave a comment

The Canadian Rangers compete in Service Conditions competitions using their issue Lee-Enfield bolt action rifles, recently replaced by the Colt Canada C19, a license-built, Finnish-designed Tikka T3 CTR bolt action rifle.

Here are links to examples of them shooting at CAFSAC, Connaught Range (CRPTC)

Being A Gun Professional

Leave a comment

By Steven Cline
The Deadeye Method

What’s it take to be considered a gun professional? Should that term be reserved for law enforcement or military members only? Maybe only top end competitors? How about being a full-time firearm instructor with pages of credentials? Can a gun professional be only someone of some elite status? Certainly those suggestions might give the appearance of being a gun professional. But, I humble submit for your consideration that a person can be defined as a gun professional by the following 5 tests. And, no matter how professional a person claims to be, if they fail one or more of these test, a professional they certainly are not.

1) The Professional follows all gun safety rules, always and forever.
In some case law the gun is declared an inherently dangerous object. This places it in a unique category of items because their very use (shooting them) imparts a serious risk of harm or death. Extra care is required in the handling and shooting of firearms. For practice we have specifically and carefully constructed ranges. We have rules that demand that we be certain of our target, and what is beyond it. The first of Coopers Rules demands that we treat the firearm as if it were loaded, even when it is not. A firearm can kill and we must always remind ourselves of that. It is why were never point the gun at things we are unwilling to destroy (innocent people being foremost on the list) and we don’t place our finger on the trigger until we intend to fire it. The professional is intentional about every handling of the gun. This brings us to the second rule of being a gun professional.

2) The Professional is never cavalier about un-holstering.
Properly holstered, the firearm cannot be discharged. Removing the firearm from the holster makes it “fireable” and therefor un-holstering should always be an intentional act. The reason or purpose for un-holstering should always be reasonable and the professional considers how they will un-holstering and conduct all subsequent handling before “skinnin’ that hog leg”. A professional gun handler never finds themselves with an un-holstered gun in hand and then tries to figure out what is the safest way to do whatever they were trying to do. Examples of cavalier gun handling includes things like, “Hey check out my new gat/holster/ammo.” Or, “I am the only one professional enough in this room (that I know of) to carry this Glock 40.” Please know that the constant carrying of a gun can quickly lead to a very cavalier attitude towards the firearm with the resulting unintentional discharges. Professionals can discuss a particular model of gun, holster, carry ammo, or anything gun related without yanking the gun. Speaking of holsters.

3) The Professional uses quality equipment.
A professional does not carry a gun of dubious reputation or in an inferior holster. A high end holster is essential. Professionals do not carry in low cost, poorly designed holsters. Tom Givens of Rangemaster will not let you participate in classes with a cheap, floppy, nylon holster. I will tell you that the holster is the most under rated piece of safety equipment and that you should be spending around $50 or more on your holster alone. I’ll also tell you not to string a cheap, flimsy, light-weight belt through that holster. Some instructors will not let you attend instruction with a Serpa holster (rightly or wrongly). Of course, the Professional invests in a firearm of sufficient quality and then confirms that quality with much practice.

4) The Professional improves.
A professional constantly seeks improvement and is not satisfied with attending a single Conceal Carry class. The professional practices regularly; weekly if not more so. Are you aware that the FBI interviewed criminal who had attacked cops and found that they practiced, on average, 23 times each year? That’s almost twice a month. If you are not practicing at least that much how could you ever consider yourself a gun professional? The professional is above average in skill amongst the gun carrying community, not the general population. It’s entirely too easy to be better than the average American. The average American sucks at gun handling and shooting.
The consensus amongst quality trainers is that you should be able to draw and place an accurate shot in under 2 seconds, and the closer you get to one second the better. Most persons who carry will be at three to four seconds when tested cold and rarely approach the sub two second standard when warmed to the draw. We’ve all watched in horror as the West Freeway Church of Christ safety team member fumbled his draw for four seconds before being shot. Four seconds and he hadn’t even managed to bring the gun to bear. I can’t believe if the man knew his draw was that slow he would not have been carrying under a suit jacket and an untucked shirt. He didn’t know his ability.

5) The Professional knows their ability, intimately.
A professional is not afraid to know their real skill level by competing in shooting competition, under a timer, and in front of witnesses to hold them accountable. Many a cop and military member got a rude awakenings attending a shooting competition and found that virtually everyone there was far better (faster and more accurate with less fundamental errors). Many took the lesson to heart and sought to improve. Sadly, the unprofessional ones offered excuses and never returned less the truth be reinforced. A professional knows how fast their draw is. They know their ability to make a shot at various distances. The amateur cannot tell you how long their splits are (the time required for them to recover from recoil, reacquire a sight picture, and reset the trigger and properly press it a second time). This knowledge comes from practice and competition with a timer.

In summation, you could say that the professional is never lazy in their thinking or doing as it relates to guns. If you are careless an inattentive when you un-holster your gun, sweep others while touching the trigger, carry in a cheap holster on a flimsy belt, never practice, never improve, have no idea how poor of a shooter you are, and are relying on a single training class years ago then you are the very definition of an gun amateur. If that observation convicted you, then buy a better holster and belt, practice, get some additional training, compete, and start following the fundamental rules of firearm safety. If you passed the above five tests, welcome to the ranks of the gun professional.

Does Carrying A Pistol Make You Safer?

Leave a comment

It’s puzzling that so many Americans are choosing to arm themselves at a time when the FBI tells us violent crime and property crime have been falling dramatically for two decades.

John Burnett, NPR

“It’s puzzling that so many homeowners are choosing to maintain fire extinguishers at a time when the data tells us fire incidents have been falling dramatically” would sound about the same. Also, this has been the trend for three decades, since the early 1990s.

There is no correlation between homocide and gun ownership. Tools don’t do anything by themselves and their presence can not make you more or less safe. BJ Campbell has a tremendous article on this that thoroughly looks at the numbers and analyzes how a series of less-thorough reports got this wrong.

Everybody’s Lying About the Link Between Gun Ownership and Homicide
There is no clear correlation whatsoever between gun ownership rate and gun homicide rate. Not within the USA. Not regionally. Not internationally. Not among peaceful societies. Not among violent ones. Gun ownership doesn’t make us safer. It doesn’t make us less safe. A bivariate correlation simply isn’t there. It is blatantly not-there. It is so tremendously not-there that the “not-there-ness” of it alone should be a huge news story.

Gun Murder Rate is not correlated with firearm ownership rate in the United States, on a state by state basis. Firearm Homicide Rate is not correlated with guns per capita globally. It’s not correlated with guns per capita among peaceful countries, nor among violent countries, nor among European countries.

BJ Campbell


Gov’t Study: Buyback programs do not work

Leave a comment

My conversations with shooters in Australia indicate that their massive buyback program was used by many to dump unsellable firearms they no longer wanted.

Government agencies that have formally studied the result found the scheme failed to produce claimed results.

“Although gun buybacks appear to be a logical and sensible policy that helps to placate the public’s fears, the evidence so far suggests that in the Australian context, the high expenditure incurred to fund the 1996 gun buyback has not translated into any tangible reductions in terms of firearms deaths”

– National Criminal Justice Reference Service

ABOUT National Criminal Justice Reference Service
Established in 1972, the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS) is a federally funded resource offering justice and drug-related information to support research, policy, and program development worldwide.


Anti-gun Professor Stops Stereotyping Gun Owners After Talking To Gun Owners


Even though this English professor still claims to not like guns, even after learning the basics of shooting, she does admit that she no longer stereotypes gun owners. Not ideal, but it is progress. And it’s something we hear of often. If people are willing to be open-minded and try shooting or even just talking to gun owners they often walk away with a vastly different take on the Second Amendment and those of us who believe so strongly in it.

To that end, we as gun owners need to do our part to win over anyone willing to hear us out. That means being open and friendly to those who may not necessarily share our exact views on freedom, gun ownership and self-defense.

This happens one person at a time, and one conversation at a time. But before that process can begin those non-gun owners have to feel comfortable approaching us. And more often than not that process begins by being open and approachable.

Major kudos to the instructor at the Butch Olafson Range who took that phone call from a very nervous English professor. And kudos to Ms. Spaulding-Kruse for owning up to and overcoming your fear, as well as moving past your preconceived stereotype of gun owners. You still may not like guns, but if you ever want to go shooting again look us up. We’re happy to continue your education on shooting sports and gun ownership.

Strength Training Effects on Endurance

Leave a comment

Three groups of runners were equalized as Novices (layoff from any training for an equal amount of time) and then conducted the same running program. The training difference was the three groups used a 5×5 strength training program (“heavy strength training”), 3×5 lifting with plyometrics (“complex training”), and high repetition (“endurance strength training”).

The two group training with sets of five (5×5 or 3×5 with plyo) had similar good benefits to their running results while the high rep group had the worst results despite being novice trainees in an endurance sport.

“HST (heavy strength training) and CPX (complex training, mix of strength training with plyo) produced similar improvements in maximum strength, power (as ascertained through the squat jump and countermovement jump) running economy and vV02max. Additionally, HST and CPX resulted in greater eccentric strength and running economy improvements than the low weight, high repetition EST (endurance strength training), which showed some marginal and not significant improvement. This adds to the body of literature that overall favors heavy and/or plyometric strength training being superior to low weight, high repetition strength training specifically for running (and in many cases other types of endurance) performance.

“In addition to this, one of the interesting ways the research team standardized the groups was that all of them abstained from strength training for the prior 6 months before the intervention. Normally when this is the case, any intervention results in a meaningful positive adaptation simply because the training stimulus is novel as well as an overall increase in training load (you are adding strength training on top of your normal run training). So, when you look at the fact that the EST (low weight, high rep) produced basically no response despite the intervention being additive to the underlying run training load and despite it being novel, you could easily say that it was a waste of the athlete’s time.

“The literature is starting to demonstrate more and more, you are better off taking that time you are spending doing a billion bodyweight step-ups and redirecting it into a handful of heavy squats”

Older Entries Newer Entries

%d bloggers like this: