IF you carry have you considered?

[CraigAPS]

They could get lucky, you mean. You can get a very good idea of how you'll behave in an adrenaline dump by engaging in realistic Simunition training with pain feedback (ie, it hurts when you do it wrong). My real shooting was very much like a scenario shooting I'd previously done, so much so the similarity actually came to mind during the event, and I reacted the same. Of course there are no guarantees in life. You could have a squib load and no matter how good you are your gun is out of commission. It's foolish to not train and practice based on "there's no guarantee", though. I want the odds tilted as heavily in my favor as possible.

On a side note, I had a victim recently go 0 for 2 shooting at his robber at very close distances. The robber decided to forfeit the field, he missed fast enough to win. It happens. I'd not want to rely on it, but it happens. Might as well carry a blank gun if you're relying on loud noises to run the bad guy off.

Yes, I did mean get lucky.

The point that I was trying to make was that the questions the OP asked were not directly related to training and practice. I do agree that training/practice definitely gives one an edge in a self-defense situation. One should tilt the odds in his/her favor, but I just don't feel that the answers to things the OP posited are found ONLY in training. They can be answered through research, introspection, or only definitively in an actual situation, IMO. I have only had one gun pointed at me in my life, and it was before I owned or carried one myself. I know after my experiences since that point, that my reaction would be different now, but if you asked me before it happened, I'm sure my answer would've been much different not having had that experience.

 

[CraigAPS]

In reading his full reply and the post he was replying to, I think his point was, no one knows if they can actually pull the trigger and take that life when decision time comes.

This was my point in reference to the OP's first question about mindset.

As you like, but a shot going wide doesn't sound like "can you take a life". Although that's also a question you need to decide now, not when it's actually decision time. Forethought, mental simulation, and pre-planned actions make it pretty likely you can do what you plan to do.

I agree. I do those things as well to cut down on reaction time, which, to me, are pretty much situational awareness things (Where are the exits? If someone came through that door with a gun, can I safely leave? where's cover? etc.)

 

[BehindBlueI's]

... but I just don't feel that the answers to things the OP posited are found ONLY in training. They can be answered through research, introspection, or only definitively in an actual situation, IMO.

Ah, then I think it's primarily a difference of definition and not of opinion. I don't consider training to be limited to just going to a range and having someone teach you. I'd consider that "formal instruction" and a subset of training vs the totality. Watching an instructional video from Travis Haley and applying it is, to me, training. Mental simulation, etc. is also training.

 

[CraigAPS]

Ah, then I think it's primarily a difference of definition and not of opinion. I don't consider training to be limited to just going to a range and having someone teach you. I'd consider that "formal instruction" and a subset of training vs the totality. Watching an instructional video from Travis Haley and applying it is, to me, training. Mental simulation, etc. is also training.

Okay. That makes sense. When I think of training, I see it as probably what you define as "formal training" (i.e. an instructor there with you in person). Watching a video from a renowned trainer or the mental simulation, to me, is more practice. Training would require someone to be there to make adjustments or corrections.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Okay. That makes sense. When I think of training, I see it as probably what you define as "formal training" (i.e. an instructor there with you in person). Watching a video from a renowned trainer or the mental simulation, to me, is more practice. Training would require someone to be there to make adjustments or corrections.

I don't recall where I picked it up, instructor development or adult learning theory, but as I recall it:

1) Training is acquiring a new skill (also includes improving an existing one, if I know how to draw but get instruction on a method that increases my efficiency, that's still training even though I knew how to draw before). It can be via coaching where someone provides you with individualized feedback, but doesn't have to be.

2) Practice is honing or maintaining an existing skill via repeated application

So, I watch Ron Avery's tutorial video on drawing. That's training. Then I attempt to replicate it and offer self critique, still training. Then when I think I've got it and do repeated draw strokes to "burn it muscle memory", that's practice. Then if I go to "Shrek" McPhee and get coached on my draws, that's training again, etc.

There's problem different definitions for different applications, but that's how I've come to see and use them.

 

[CraigAPS]

I don't recall where I picked it up, instructor development or adult learning theory, but as I recall it:

1) Training is acquiring a new skill (also includes improving an existing one, if I know how to draw but get instruction on a method that increases my efficiency, that's still training even though I knew how to draw before). It can be via coaching where someone provides you with individualized feedback, but doesn't have to be.

2) Practice is honing or maintaining an existing skill via repeated application

So, I watch Ron Avery's tutorial video on drawing. That's training. Then I attempt to replicate it and offer self critique, still training. Then when I think I've got it and do repeated draw strokes to "burn it muscle memory", that's practice. Then if I go to "Shrek" McPhee and get coached on my draws, that's training again, etc.

There's problem different definitions for different applications, but that's how I've come to see and use them.

And that totally makes sense. I've just got it somehow ingrained in my head that "training" is instructor led, while "practice" is solo.

 

[churchmouse]

So....do I get this correctly? We now have a pro gun nanny?

Where in the second amendment does it say that Joe SixPack has to win a local turkey shoot to carry?

The only thing worse than someone wanting to take my gun away, is someone who thinks they know better than me about when and if I should carry.

Come on Alpo....follow the line of thinking and stop twisting this up. I see exactly what he is pointing out.

We as a group are our own worst enemy's. This is one area we need to address. The question here is how to do it "WITHOUT" mandating.

 

[Goodcat]

I believe everyone carrying SHOULD train well. But should not HAVE to. Did our founding fathers disallow the carry of firearms for those not proficient or even decent with them? Same answer for my consideration of requiring training.

 

[NHT3]

My original premise was to provoke thought. I'm convinced that most people carrying a firearm have not considered any of the possible ramifications of what they are doing. The just "strap it on (or drop in their pocket) and go". Like CM said we are our own worst enemy. As I said originally, if you haven't done some soul searching on those three questions, just maybe you should do some soul searching on your decision to carry a firearm. Carrying is a right, I'm not disputing that and so is looking like an idiot. IMHO the latter is not a good idea and reflects on everyone else that carries.
[FONT=&amp]NRA Life Member / [/FONT]Basic Pistol instructor[FONT=&amp] / RSO[/FONT][FONT=&amp]

[/FONT][FONT=&amp]"Under pressure, you don't rise to the occasion, you sink to the level of your training. That's why we train so hard" [/FONT][FONT=&amp]
[/FONT][FONT=&amp]Unnamed Navy Seal[/FONT][FONT=&amp]
“Ego is the reason many men do not shoot competition. They don't want to suck in public”

[/FONT][FONT=&amp]Aron Bright[/FONT]

 

[Coach]

I believe everyone carrying SHOULD train well. But should not HAVE to. Did our founding fathers disallow the carry of firearms for those not proficient or even decent with them? Same answer for my consideration of requiring training.

While there is logic in your point, and I agree with the fact that there should be no mandated stipulations to carrying. The world is different now than in the founding father's day. The number of people that owned guns and did not shoot them I would guess to be much higher now than then. Many of those guns were putting meat on the table regularly and defending home and hearth more regularly. My point being I would anticipate that those that were armed then were more practiced and capable than many that carry now.

 

[Brad69]

Our founding fathers considered the people that do not train and practice incompetent and a dangerous just like we do now.
About 10% of the male population is stupid regardless of income, formal education ect. and living on borrowed time after birth and fall into the category of untrainable you can train them forever they will not retain it. The other 90% can retain training to various degrees and those can practice to retain a level of proficiency at a given task most of us are in the center mass of this pack.
Mandatory or any and all training will not cure an idiot from being a idiot.

As far as being ready when you “see the elephant” most sane people do not want to kill another person.
A mature sane human normally kills another human because of hate, vengeance or fear often the personal level of one of those emotions has not been reached and they will not kill while others relish in killing and display extreme “violence of action” most of us are somewhere around center mass.
The more you practice drills your reaction can become almost automatic without much thought that in turn takes some of the emotional decision out of the act. Force on force training is invaluable in this arena it helps when you can put another human in the sights.
BLUF you can’t sit crossed legged on the floor with soft music and candles lit to find out what you will do in the face of killing it’s a trial by fire thing.

 

[MCgrease08]

I believe everyone carrying SHOULD train well. But should not HAVE to. Did our founding fathers disallow the carry of firearms for those not proficient or even decent with them? Same answer for my consideration of requiring training.

They didn't have to, because those that owned and used firearms at the time were proficient with them.

 

[Expat]

So when the Founders wrote the Second, it was only allowed because most of our citizenry was proficient with guns at the time. Since that is no longer the case, what? Sounds like the gun grabbers may be on to something then... times change... we only had muskets back then...

 

[churchmouse]

They didn't have to, because those that owned and used firearms at the time were proficient with them.

There were no real restrictions. Walk out back and practice. Going out of town to practice was no real big deal.
I have to drive over an hour to the places I use to practice. As we all get older folks are selling off these property's and downsizing/moving away. 3 of these have been lost to us this year. It is getting harder to find a place to shoot.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Another armed victim. 9mm didn't do him any good, just armed a criminal. Luckily due to fast response and getting a description out, suspect was arrested and gun recovered. He used a toy gun to rob someone of their real one...

 

[bwframe]

Another armed victim. 9mm didn't do him any good, just armed a criminal. Luckily due to fast response and getting a description out, suspect was arrested and gun recovered. He used a toy gun to rob someone of their real one...

Wow, was the real gun the target for the robbery?

 

[luger fan]

This has ALWAYS been my complaint about Indiana CCW permits. A blind man can get one.......seriously.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Wow, was the real gun the target for the robbery?

No, not this time. Just a bonus.

 

[Coach]

So when the Founders wrote the Second, it was only allowed because most of our citizenry was proficient with guns at the time. Since that is no longer the case, what? Sounds like the gun grabbers may be on to something then... times change... we only had muskets back then...

No one said any of that.

 

[WanderingSol07]

Just like with driving there could be motivation for training by using economics. Those that have taken certified training and passed exams would get a discount on liability insurance. Since the NRA offers training and testing by certified instructors and they also offer insurance they could offer a discount to those that have passed courses on gun safety and defensive training. Same thing with gun stores, gun ranges, gun clubs, if you have passed specified training courses you get a discount of some type.