I audited an NRA handgun safety course Saturday that my wife was
attending for her concealed permit.

I was appalled. The instructor was a really nice fellow, and obviously
an experienced shooter, but his course was inadequate to the nth degree.

The sum-total of ALL safety instruction in the course consisted of his
reading a poster twice. The poster had three safety rules -- "always
point the weapon in a safe direction", "keep your finger off the trigger
until ready to fire", and "don't load the weapon until ready to fire".

All in all, those ARE the bases for safe handling, but this was a class
of 50-ish women and soft-handed men who'd never picked up a gun before.
They couldn't extrapolate from that scant reading anything about safe
transfer of weapons from one to another, safe cleaning practices, routine
muscle-memory checking of every weapon you touch, safe transport, etc.,
etc.

Then he left me puzzled when he told the class that a revolver is NOT a
pistol; only slide-action automatics are pistols. (so, what do you call a
muzzle-loading lock-fired handgun? And, does that mean that a cylinder-
fed rifle isn't a rifle?)

He spent exactly twenty seconds describing a sight picture. And his
drawing was wrong for short range pistol.

The rest of the four hour classroom session consisted of recollections,
instructions to immediately shoot to kill any home invader, and rants
about the local liberal newspaper, then finally a full half hour devoted
to how to answer the questions on the application.

Can it really BE that gun classes have devolved to this level? If so,
what hope have we that the liberalocrats won't finally strip all the
metal from our hands?

LLoyd

"Lloyd E. Sponenburgh" lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:


Can it really BE that gun classes have devolved to this level? If so,
what hope have we that the liberalocrats won't finally strip all the
metal from our hands?

I think you experienced the isolated example. I took a class at my club and
was really impressed on how professional the club members that are NRA
certified conducted the training.

No politics, strong emphases on gun safety, indoor range time using each
students personal defensive weapon, and a lot of getting the message across
that if you are carrying you need to think non-conflict, deescalating, be
aware of surroundings.

Explanations of cover vs concealment, what to do if there is a shooting
situation, more emphases on how you really want to avoid situations where
you may need to defend yourself as in a gun isn't a shield to let you go
into more dangerous areas than you would with out it.

The most I can remember about distinctions between revolvers and self
loading pistols is that the instructors drove home that pulling the magazine
out doesn't unload the round in the barrel.

To put some metal working content in this, my interest in machining has deep
roots in handloading and firearms. My earliest lathe project was to single
point a piece of round stock to fit my press, drill and tap it for a tapered
plug to expand .30-30 cases to something I could continue to form into .357
Herret cases.

I am facinated by how arms were mass produced in the pre-cnc days and would
have loved to fly on the wall at Paul Mausers factory.

Wes

On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 16:01:35 -0000, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:

I audited an NRA handgun safety course Saturday that my wife was
attending for her concealed permit.

I was appalled. The instructor was a really nice fellow, and obviously
an experienced shooter, but his course was inadequate to the nth degree.

snip details
LLoyd
===============
long response follows --

While complicated by a governmental bureaucracy containing many
fanatical anti-gun functionaries, who in many cases had
"concealed carry" pounded up their nose by voter initiative, and
thus would be glad for the entire "armed citizen" program to
fail, this is unfortunately not a unique situation, but normal
for any subject involving motor skills, ethical considerations,
legal concerns, and personal motivation. Another example is
driving, and of course machine tool operation.

What this example shows is that even an "expert" may be a poor
teacher for a novice group although they may be a good roll
model/mentor for more experienced individual learner(s).

This is compounded by the tendency to teach the way we were
taught, even though the circumstances may be entirely different
(e.g. level of knowledge of students), and substantial progress
may have been made in training aids. The existing level of
skills and knowledge (and attitude) may be critical, for example,
when an "expert" who grew up in the country, teaches a firearms
class to a group composed mainly of second or third generation
inner-city urban residents.

There is also considerable differences in the type of learning.
In the traditional method of observation and imitation (which by
the way most of our skills and knowledge that we use are still
acquired) skills, and to a small degree knowledge, are mainly
transmitted tacitly and subliminally.

By contrast, in a formal learning situation, such as the
concealed carry class, disjointed knowledge "nuggets" are
stressed, with some skills, as explicit items, which the student
is expected to practice (on their own time) until these become
internalized to the extent they don't have to think [too much]
about them. This is like driver education, where the new student
may indeed get their drivers' license, but it will be several
YEARS before they become an expert driver, for example
automatically steering in the direction of a skid to regain
control.

IMNSHO there is no magic bullet or panacea for this instructional
problem. The only thing that occurs as the "solutions" are
cycled through is to change the undesirable results.

I can offer some suggestions.

This appears to be a good opportunity for "outcomes" or
"competency" analysis, in that certain identifiable skills exist.
This is by no means a simple or easy process, and the complete
list may include 100 or more specific skills/competencies.
Indeed, it may require multiple experts in several areas
including firearms, ethics, and law to [adequately] perform.

If you are curious about this approach click on
http://www.reproline.jhu.edu/english...ng/cbt/cbt.htm
http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Mar_04/article02.htm
http://www.pro-ductivity.com/LMS/Competency/index.htm


Or google on "competency based" course-development for 28,400
hits and
"outcomes based" course-development for 11,600 hits.

Much of this is based on Bloom's taxonomy, which was developed
using a DoD/DARPA grant. For an explication of this bit of
educationspeak click on
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxonom...nal_Objectives
http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/bloom.html
http://www.coun.uvic.ca/learn/progra...uts/bloom.html

The major defect is that every organization and instructor wants
to develop their own set of competencies/objectives. This is
compounded by instructional "drift" as the teacher becomes bored,
forgets what has been covered, etc.

It can also be a paper work nightmare to track item presentations
and student attainments.

I suggest that the state develop a competency list, possibly
using the fees they have collected over the years, and then
developing instructional VCR/DVD to cover each of the items. For
example, a 20 to 30 minutes segment covering sight pictures for
several different firearms in daylight, night sights, and laser
sights, stressing combat, not target situations.

FWIW - this appears to be an ideal project for the NRA for the
firearms related content. The ABA needs to step up and do their
fair share on the legal aspects. Much of it can be done
collectively over the internet, possibly using the Wikipedia
methodology. Most will be common from state to state with only
slight variation in the legal aspects.


Unka' George [George McDuffee]
============
Merchants have no country.
The mere spot they stand on
does not constitute so strong an attachment
as that from which they draw their gains.

Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826),
U.S. president. Letter, 17 March 1814.

On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 16:01:35 -0000, with neither quill nor qualm,
"Lloyd E. Sponenburgh" lloydspinsidemindspring.com quickly quoth:

I audited an NRA handgun safety course Saturday that my wife was
attending for her concealed permit.

I was appalled. The instructor was a really nice fellow, and obviously
an experienced shooter, but his course was inadequate to the nth degree.

I recommend an anonymous call to the NRA department who staffs those
classes to recommend that they audit it, too.

--snip of horror story--

Can it really BE that gun classes have devolved to this level? If so,
what hope have we that the liberalocrats won't finally strip all the
metal from our hands?

My concealed carry class wasn't anything like that and we went
shooting with our own guns at the local range for a test. He wanted to
make damned sure that all of us were following his safety instructions
in the flesh and that all of us could competently handle a pistol on
the range. It was first class all the way.

--
Learn to value yourself, which means: to fight for your happiness.
-- Ayn Rand

On Aug 20, 11:01 am, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:
I audited an NRA handgun safety course Saturday that my wife was
attending for her concealed permit.

I was appalled. The instructor was a really nice fellow, and obviously
an experienced shooter, but his course was inadequate to the nth degree.

The sum-total of ALL safety instruction in the course consisted of his
reading a poster twice. The poster had three safety rules -- "always
point the weapon in a safe direction", "keep your finger off the trigger
until ready to fire", and "don't load the weapon until ready to fire".

All in all, those ARE the bases for safe handling, but this was a class
of 50-ish women and soft-handed men who'd never picked up a gun before.
They couldn't extrapolate from that scant reading anything about safe
transfer of weapons from one to another, safe cleaning practices, routine
muscle-memory checking of every weapon you touch, safe transport, etc.,
etc.

Then he left me puzzled when he told the class that a revolver is NOT a
pistol; only slide-action automatics are pistols. (so, what do you call a
muzzle-loading lock-fired handgun? And, does that mean that a cylinder-
fed rifle isn't a rifle?)

He spent exactly twenty seconds describing a sight picture. And his
drawing was wrong for short range pistol.

The rest of the four hour classroom session consisted of recollections,
instructions to immediately shoot to kill any home invader, and rants
about the local liberal newspaper, then finally a full half hour devoted
to how to answer the questions on the application.

Can it really BE that gun classes have devolved to this level? If so,
what hope have we that the liberalocrats won't finally strip all the
metal from our hands?

LLoyd
From Wikipedia, FWIW
"In American usage, the term "pistol" refers to a handgun whose
chamber is integral with the barrel, making pistols distinct from the
other main type of handgun, the revolver, which has a revolving
cylinder containing multiple chambers." After 20 years of gunsmithing,
that is the I see it as well

How about Boxes - Pepper boxes.....

Multiple barrels.

Martin

Martin H. Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
TSRA, Life; NRA LOH & Endowment Member, Golden Eagle, Patriot's Medal.
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder
IHMSA and NRA Metallic Silhouette maker & member.
http://lufkinced.com/


Gerry wrote:
On Aug 20, 11:01 am, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:
I audited an NRA handgun safety course Saturday that my wife was
attending for her concealed permit.

I was appalled. The instructor was a really nice fellow, and obviously
an experienced shooter, but his course was inadequate to the nth degree.

The sum-total of ALL safety instruction in the course consisted of his
reading a poster twice. The poster had three safety rules -- "always
point the weapon in a safe direction", "keep your finger off the trigger
until ready to fire", and "don't load the weapon until ready to fire".

All in all, those ARE the bases for safe handling, but this was a class
of 50-ish women and soft-handed men who'd never picked up a gun before.
They couldn't extrapolate from that scant reading anything about safe
transfer of weapons from one to another, safe cleaning practices, routine
muscle-memory checking of every weapon you touch, safe transport, etc.,
etc.

Then he left me puzzled when he told the class that a revolver is NOT a
pistol; only slide-action automatics are pistols. (so, what do you call a
muzzle-loading lock-fired handgun? And, does that mean that a cylinder-
fed rifle isn't a rifle?)

He spent exactly twenty seconds describing a sight picture. And his
drawing was wrong for short range pistol.

The rest of the four hour classroom session consisted of recollections,
instructions to immediately shoot to kill any home invader, and rants
about the local liberal newspaper, then finally a full half hour devoted
to how to answer the questions on the application.

Can it really BE that gun classes have devolved to this level? If so,
what hope have we that the liberalocrats won't finally strip all the
metal from our hands?

LLoyd
From Wikipedia, FWIW
"In American usage, the term "pistol" refers to a handgun whose
chamber is integral with the barrel, making pistols distinct from the
other main type of handgun, the revolver, which has a revolving
cylinder containing multiple chambers." After 20 years of gunsmithing,
that is the I see it as well


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 16:01:35 -0000, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:



He spent exactly twenty seconds describing a sight picture. And his
drawing was wrong for short range pistol.

What is a right sight picture for short range pistol? What range? I
intend no nitpick, I'd really like to know. My current understanding
is that there is no right sight picture for short-range pistol because
the shooter won't see the sights at all in a pucker sit.

Don Foreman fired this volley in
:

What is a right sight picture for short range pistol? What range? I
intend no nitpick, I'd really like to know.

My current understanding
is that there is no right sight picture for short-range pistol because
the shooter won't see the sights at all in a pucker sit.



That's not a nit. It's fine. "Defense range" shooting is "point-n-
click", not "aim".

But these folks were being taught to aim at a 50-yard repair target from
7 yards. He had the whole ball on the post. That would be roughly
"about right" for 50-yard iron sights. That's about six inches low at 7
yards.

LLoyd

Gerry fired this volley in
ups.com:

From Wikipedia, FWIW
"In American usage, the term "pistol" refers to a handgun whose
chamber is integral with the barrel, making pistols distinct from the
other main type of handgun, the revolver, which has a revolving
cylinder containing multiple chambers." After 20 years of gunsmithing,
that is the I see it as well


I seldom trust Wiki, but if you're a gunsmith, and you say that's the way
it is, then I'll bow to that.

Hmmm.... I've been shooting for fifty-two years. I'd never heard that
distinction, and have distinctly heard otherwise in the military. But I
know enough about how wrong they are on other counts to realize they
could've been wrong about that, too.

But didn't Colt call his first revolver "a repeating pistol"?

LLoyd

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 12:02:37 -0000, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:

Gerry fired this volley in
oups.com:

From Wikipedia, FWIW
"In American usage, the term "pistol" refers to a handgun whose
chamber is integral with the barrel, making pistols distinct from the
other main type of handgun, the revolver, which has a revolving
cylinder containing multiple chambers." After 20 years of gunsmithing,
that is the I see it as well


I seldom trust Wiki, but if you're a gunsmith, and you say that's the way
it is, then I'll bow to that.

Hmmm.... I've been shooting for fifty-two years. I'd never heard that
distinction, and have distinctly heard otherwise in the military. But I
know enough about how wrong they are on other counts to realize they
could've been wrong about that, too.

But didn't Colt call his first revolver "a repeating pistol"?

LLoyd


I don' think there is a firm distinction, perhaps some local
difference in use. For example we refer to "target pistols", "pocket
pistols", etc., with no difference between automatic, single shot or
revolvers.

On the other hand I suspect I'd ask to see that "pistol" if it were an
automatic, but use the term revolver if it was a wheel gun.

BUT it is not a gun since "this is my rifle, this is my gun" was
learned by millions of young men. =:-)



Bruce in Bangkok
(brucepaigeATgmailDOTcom)

Don Foreman wrote:

On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 16:01:35 -0000, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:



He spent exactly twenty seconds describing a sight picture. And his
drawing was wrong for short range pistol.

What is a right sight picture for short range pistol? What range? I
intend no nitpick, I'd really like to know. My current understanding
is that there is no right sight picture for short-range pistol because
the shooter won't see the sights at all in a pucker sit.


I seem to remember shooting targets at 7ft. No sight picture. Just point
firing. Use of a PDW is a close in thing.

Wes

On Aug 20, 9:01 am, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:
I audited an NRA handgun safety course Saturday that my wife was
attending for her concealed permit.

I was appalled. The instructor was a really nice fellow, and obviously
an experienced shooter, but his course was inadequate to the nth degree.

The sum-total of ALL safety instruction in the course consisted of his
reading a poster twice. The poster had three safety rules -- "always
point the weapon in a safe direction", "keep your finger off the trigger
until ready to fire", and "don't load the weapon until ready to fire".

All in all, those ARE the bases for safe handling, but this was a class
of 50-ish women and soft-handed men who'd never picked up a gun before.
They couldn't extrapolate from that scant reading anything about safe
transfer of weapons from one to another, safe cleaning practices, routine
muscle-memory checking of every weapon you touch, safe transport, etc.,
etc.

Then he left me puzzled when he told the class that a revolver is NOT a
pistol; only slide-action automatics are pistols. (so, what do you call a
muzzle-loading lock-fired handgun? And, does that mean that a cylinder-
fed rifle isn't a rifle?)

He spent exactly twenty seconds describing a sight picture. And his
drawing was wrong for short range pistol.

The rest of the four hour classroom session consisted of recollections,
instructions to immediately shoot to kill any home invader, and rants
about the local liberal newspaper, then finally a full half hour devoted
to how to answer the questions on the application.

Can it really BE that gun classes have devolved to this level? If so,
what hope have we that the liberalocrats won't finally strip all the
metal from our hands?

LLoyd

Handguns: pistol...revolver....It's just a matter of common usage.
Take
a look at Auction Arms or one of the other online arms sales locations
and you'll see hundreds of handguns differentiated in this manner

"But these folks were being taught to aim at a 50-yard repair target from
7 yards. He had the whole ball on the post. That would be roughly
"about right" for 50-yard iron sights. That's about six inches low at 7
yards."

I'm not familiar with the sight you're describing. If you raise the
rear of
your weapon this will bring the POI downward, not only on a 7 yard
target but also on a 50 yard target. Could you explain in more
detail?
IIRC drop at 50 yards is only an inch or so, even on a slow mover like
a .45.

dennis
in nca

On Aug 21, 7:59 am, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:


There is only one sight picture,
The top of the front sight even with the top of the rear and
centered.
There is NO other proper sight picture.

A semi-auto is a "pistol".

Whose fault is it that your wife has a bad instructor ?

It's like picking a car mechanic or a doctor, it's your
responsibility. Ask for credentials.

Fortunately around here we've a retired FBI arms instructor to go to.

rigger fired this volley in
ups.com:

On Aug 20, 9:01 am, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:
I audited an NRA handgun safety course Saturday that my wife was
attending for her concealed permit.

I was appalled. The instructor was a really nice fellow, and
obviously an experienced shooter, but his course was inadequate to
the nth degree.

The sum-total of ALL safety instruction in the course consisted of
his reading a poster twice. The poster had three safety rules --
"always point the weapon in a safe direction", "keep your finger off
the trigger until ready to fire", and "don't load the weapon until
ready to fire".

All in all, those ARE the bases for safe handling, but this was a
class of 50-ish women and soft-handed men who'd never picked up a gun
before. They couldn't extrapolate from that scant reading anything
about safe transfer of weapons from one to another, safe cleaning
practices, routine muscle-memory checking of every weapon you touch,
safe transport, etc., etc.

Then he left me puzzled when he told the class that a revolver is NOT
a pistol; only slide-action automatics are pistols. (so, what do you
call a muzzle-loading lock-fired handgun? And, does that mean that a
cylinder- fed rifle isn't a rifle?)

He spent exactly twenty seconds describing a sight picture. And his
drawing was wrong for short range pistol.

The rest of the four hour classroom session consisted of
recollections, instructions to immediately shoot to kill any home
invader, and rants about the local liberal newspaper, then finally a
full half hour devoted to how to answer the questions on the
application.

Can it really BE that gun classes have devolved to this level? If
so, what hope have we that the liberalocrats won't finally strip all
the metal from our hands?

LLoyd

Handguns: pistol...revolver....It's just a matter of common usage.
Take
a look at Auction Arms or one of the other online arms sales locations
and you'll see hundreds of handguns differentiated in this manner

"But these folks were being taught to aim at a 50-yard repair target
from 7 yards. He had the whole ball on the post. That would be
roughly "about right" for 50-yard iron sights. That's about six
inches low at 7 yards."

I'm not familiar with the sight you're describing. If you raise the
rear of
your weapon this will bring the POI downward, not only on a 7 yard
target but also on a 50 yard target. Could you explain in more
detail?
IIRC drop at 50 yards is only an inch or so, even on a slow mover like
a .45.

dennis
in nca
I'm sure you're familiar with the "pumpkin on the post" analogy for an
iron sights view.

At seven yards, the "pumpkin" would be the tiny white X marking the dead
center of the bull.

Although a good shooter would do that same picture at 50, 100, or 500
yards, most recreational shooters I've worked with put the entire black
spot on the post at longer ranges, simply because they can't really see
it that well -- the bullseye substends such a small angle, that they
cannot discern where "center" on the bull really is. It's just an easier
picture to develop and hold. They make up for the three or four inches
low they're actually shooting by adjusting sight elevation.

But with his (that) picture at 21 feet, anybody who was capable of doing
what he taught was painting the bottom edge of the black, not the center.
Not a one of them had ever adjusted the sights on any weapon and the
revolver they were using didn't have adjustable sights.

FWIW, most of them "got it" about ten rounds into the shooting, and
adjusted their own sighting to make it work. That was nice to see.

One poor guy never put it on the paper, much less the black. And the
instructor gave him his certificate, anyway. I don't think he should
have denied him, but he should have worked with him to get it right. The
first time this fellow uses a weapon in anger, it's going to be a scene
right out of Mark Twain's story "Those Extraordinary Twins".

LLoyd


LLoyd

GatherNoMoss fired this volley in
ups.com:

On Aug 21, 7:59 am, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:


There is only one sight picture,
The top of the front sight even with the top of the rear and
centered.
There is NO other proper sight picture.

Duh. But where you put the bull in that picture is just a _little_
important.


A semi-auto is a "pistol".

Whose fault is it that your wife has a bad instructor ?

It's like picking a car mechanic or a doctor, it's your
responsibility. Ask for credentials.

In this case, since she had no knowlege about the course except a
recommendation from a local gun shop, I'd say it's the shop offered the
credentials by referral. They now have our opinion of the course, and
maybe they'll actually check it out.

It's no big thing for her. Everyone in the family shoots.


Fortunately around here we've a retired FBI arms instructor to go to.


We don't.

LLoyd

On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 19:01:12 -0700, Gerry wrote:



LLoyd
From Wikipedia, FWIW
"In American usage, the term "pistol" refers to a handgun whose
chamber is integral with the barrel, making pistols distinct from the
other main type of handgun, the revolver, which has a revolving
cylinder containing multiple chambers." After 20 years of gunsmithing,
that is the I see it as well

It's a fine point sometimes observed by those who strongly prefer
revolvers and call semiautos "bottom feeders". The Federal Cartridge
ammo ballistics charts are catagorized as pistol, rifle, rimfire,
shotshell, etc. Revolver ammo is included in the pistol category.

If you hit Google with define: pistol, you'll get five definitions
with cites. Only one of them makes any distinction between revolvers
and other handguns, says "that distinction is often lost today".

On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 16:01:35 -0000, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:


Can it really BE that gun classes have devolved to this level? If so,
what hope have we that the liberalocrats won't finally strip all the
metal from our hands?

LLoyd

There are good hammers, and bad hammers.

Not all hammers are bad.

The guy is a clown. Fortunately most instructors are very good.

Gunner

"Don Foreman" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 16:01:35 -0000, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:



He spent exactly twenty seconds describing a sight picture. And his
drawing was wrong for short range pistol.

What is a right sight picture for short range pistol? What range? I
intend no nitpick, I'd really like to know. My current understanding
is that there is no right sight picture for short-range pistol because
the shooter won't see the sights at all in a pucker sit.

And the percentages of hits in close range gunfights is horrible, either for
trained POs, and lowly "civilians" alike. The POs only score slightly
higher than civilians, and IIRC from my training classes, it's in the
twenties percent range.

And I have a question. What's a short range pistol?

One of my favorite things when plinking with my Ruger Mk I .22 cal semi-auto
is to hip shoot. Hold the pistol at my side, belt high, and shoot at cans
or targets 10 to 20 feet. I can hit close enough to know if I'm in a
firefight and have to shoot without having the time to come to a full stance
and aim, I'll probably hit the person I'm shooting at. Most shootings
happen at less than 15 feet.

Besides, there's one BIG point here that is being missed. An instructor who
is knowledgeable and experienced will tell you that if you are at a distance
where you have to come to a full stance and aim, that you need to run.
Because that's what the smart assed lawyer from the other side is going to
ask you. "So, Mr. Foreman ............ you had a distance between you and
the deceased client that would allow you to flee, and you chose to stand
there, carefully take aim, and then shoot the deceased straight through the
nose? Why didn't you choose to flee instead of executing this nice young
man?"

My last (4th now) class was given by the head instructor for the Las Vegas
Metropolitan Police Department. He is also high on the board of officers
who examine every time an officer even draws his weapon, let alone fire it.
He participates in all IAD reviews of officer involved shootings from the
department's standpoint before they reach the coroner's inquest stage. He
changed my mind and mentality so much in this class about the myths and
misconception of imagined and perceived scenarios of CCF applicants. The
real experiences he talked about were far from the Wild West shootout
scenarios half of the bozos imagined. He kicked one guy out for fiddling
with his gun during lecture. Just told him to take his things and leave.

What he conveyed to me was that if you shoot, your life is ruined. If you
do shoot, make it your last act before you pass out from being beaten or
knifed or shot. Only then will you have a defense that will stand a chance
in court.

Short range pistol? I think I used to have one. It was called a Spud Gun.
I understand you can get them on Ebay. They used to cost about $3, and now
are probably ten times that much. We used to have lots of fun running
around with a potato in one hand and a Spud Gun in the other. Of course,
they were short range pistols, you understand.

Today, someone would call in a (413) man with a gun, and the place would be
swarming with POs in a couple of minutes. How did we ever survive out
childhoods to become such outstanding adults? ;-)

Steve

On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 19:01:12 -0700, Gerry wrote:

On Aug 20, 11:01 am, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:
I audited an NRA handgun safety course Saturday that my wife was
attending for her concealed permit.

I was appalled. The instructor was a really nice fellow, and obviously
an experienced shooter, but his course was inadequate to the nth degree.

The sum-total of ALL safety instruction in the course consisted of his
reading a poster twice. The poster had three safety rules -- "always
point the weapon in a safe direction", "keep your finger off the trigger
until ready to fire", and "don't load the weapon until ready to fire".

All in all, those ARE the bases for safe handling, but this was a class
of 50-ish women and soft-handed men who'd never picked up a gun before.
They couldn't extrapolate from that scant reading anything about safe
transfer of weapons from one to another, safe cleaning practices, routine
muscle-memory checking of every weapon you touch, safe transport, etc.,
etc.

Then he left me puzzled when he told the class that a revolver is NOT a
pistol; only slide-action automatics are pistols. (so, what do you call a
muzzle-loading lock-fired handgun? And, does that mean that a cylinder-
fed rifle isn't a rifle?)

He spent exactly twenty seconds describing a sight picture. And his
drawing was wrong for short range pistol.

The rest of the four hour classroom session consisted of recollections,
instructions to immediately shoot to kill any home invader, and rants
about the local liberal newspaper, then finally a full half hour devoted
to how to answer the questions on the application.

Can it really BE that gun classes have devolved to this level? If so,
what hope have we that the liberalocrats won't finally strip all the
metal from our hands?

LLoyd
From Wikipedia, FWIW
"In American usage, the term "pistol" refers to a handgun whose
chamber is integral with the barrel, making pistols distinct from the
other main type of handgun, the revolver, which has a revolving
cylinder containing multiple chambers." After 20 years of gunsmithing,
that is the I see it as well

True indeed.

however...like calling magazines "clips"...its been *******ized in
common usage.

Gunner

"GatherNoMoss" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Aug 21, 7:59 am, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:


There is only one sight picture,
The top of the front sight even with the top of the rear and
centered.
There is NO other proper sight picture.

What about point and shoot? Things are happening furiously fast at close
range.

"Lemme see here................. the front little dot goes in between the
back two little dots ........ or is it the other way around ........... wait
wait .......... quit shooting at me until I get this figured
out.............."

If you're in a scenario with a "sight picture" of reasonable distance, you
have violated the rule of flee whenever possible.

Steve

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 01:26:16 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 16:01:35 -0000, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:



He spent exactly twenty seconds describing a sight picture. And his
drawing was wrong for short range pistol.

What is a right sight picture for short range pistol? What range? I
intend no nitpick, I'd really like to know. My current understanding
is that there is no right sight picture for short-range pistol because
the shooter won't see the sights at all in a pucker sit.


In CQB...close quarter battle...you use the front sight. You damned
WELL better use the front sight or you are gonna miss..and in a close
in gunfight...there is no second place winner.

You look over the barrel and put that front sight on the spot you want
the hole to go. You will shoot high...but when its up close and
personal..it wont be that high and if you are shooting center of
mass..it dont matter if its 3" high or not.

Gunner

"Lloyd E. Sponenburgh" lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote in message
. 3.70...
Gerry fired this volley in
ups.com:

From Wikipedia, FWIW
"In American usage, the term "pistol" refers to a handgun whose
chamber is integral with the barrel, making pistols distinct from the
other main type of handgun, the revolver, which has a revolving
cylinder containing multiple chambers." After 20 years of gunsmithing,
that is the I see it as well


I seldom trust Wiki, but if you're a gunsmith, and you say that's the way
it is, then I'll bow to that.

Hmmm.... I've been shooting for fifty-two years. I'd never heard that
distinction, and have distinctly heard otherwise in the military. But I
know enough about how wrong they are on other counts to realize they
could've been wrong about that, too.

But didn't Colt call his first revolver "a repeating pistol"?

LLoyd


And I seem to remember a classic "rifle" that was a revolver with a LONG
barrel and stock. But I must have been imagining that, as all the educated
nitpickers here have stated that such a thing does not exist.

Steve

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 11:05:08 -0700, "SteveB"
wrote:


"Don Foreman" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 16:01:35 -0000, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:



He spent exactly twenty seconds describing a sight picture. And his
drawing was wrong for short range pistol.

What is a right sight picture for short range pistol? What range? I
intend no nitpick, I'd really like to know. My current understanding
is that there is no right sight picture for short-range pistol because
the shooter won't see the sights at all in a pucker sit.

And the percentages of hits in close range gunfights is horrible, either for
trained POs, and lowly "civilians" alike. The POs only score slightly
higher than civilians, and IIRC from my training classes, it's in the
twenties percent range.

And I have a question. What's a short range pistol?

One of my favorite things when plinking with my Ruger Mk I .22 cal semi-auto
is to hip shoot. Hold the pistol at my side, belt high, and shoot at cans
or targets 10 to 20 feet. I can hit close enough to know if I'm in a
firefight and have to shoot without having the time to come to a full stance
and aim, I'll probably hit the person I'm shooting at. Most shootings
happen at less than 15 feet.

Besides, there's one BIG point here that is being missed. An instructor who
is knowledgeable and experienced will tell you that if you are at a distance
where you have to come to a full stance and aim, that you need to run.
Because that's what the smart assed lawyer from the other side is going to
ask you. "So, Mr. Foreman ............ you had a distance between you and
the deceased client that would allow you to flee, and you chose to stand
there, carefully take aim, and then shoot the deceased straight through the
nose? Why didn't you choose to flee instead of executing this nice young
man?"

My last (4th now) class was given by the head instructor for the Las Vegas
Metropolitan Police Department. He is also high on the board of officers
who examine every time an officer even draws his weapon, let alone fire it.
He participates in all IAD reviews of officer involved shootings from the
department's standpoint before they reach the coroner's inquest stage. He
changed my mind and mentality so much in this class about the myths and
misconception of imagined and perceived scenarios of CCF applicants. The
real experiences he talked about were far from the Wild West shootout
scenarios half of the bozos imagined. He kicked one guy out for fiddling
with his gun during lecture. Just told him to take his things and leave.

What he conveyed to me was that if you shoot, your life is ruined. If you
do shoot, make it your last act before you pass out from being beaten or
knifed or shot. Only then will you have a defense that will stand a chance
in court.

Short range pistol? I think I used to have one. It was called a Spud Gun.
I understand you can get them on Ebay. They used to cost about $3, and now
are probably ten times that much. We used to have lots of fun running
around with a potato in one hand and a Spud Gun in the other. Of course,
they were short range pistols, you understand.

Today, someone would call in a (413) man with a gun, and the place would be
swarming with POs in a couple of minutes. How did we ever survive out
childhoods to become such outstanding adults? ;-)

Steve

Good information if you live in Vegas. YMMV if you live in other
jurisdiictions.

Gunner

OT ........... DANGER DO NOT READ .................

What are those auction sites again on the Internet?

I have a 1925 Meiji I want to sell ..........

TIA

Steve

Interesting site for a couple of revolving rifles.

http://www.ingenting.f2s.com/western/repeters.htm

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 16:27:35 -0000, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:

One poor guy never put it on the paper, much less the black. And the
instructor gave him his certificate, anyway. I don't think he should
have denied him, but he should have worked with him to get it right. The
first time this fellow uses a weapon in anger, it's going to be a scene
right out of Mark Twain's story "Those Extraordinary Twins".

LLoyd


I instruct..and assist the local CCW instructor (he also trains the
corrections officer classes at the local JC.

No pass the range..no tickee.

If you dont pass the drivers training course..you aint gonna get your
drivers license. Same should apply with CCW paper.

Anyone can be taught to shoot. Some take longer than others. I worked
with a blind woman once. Taught her to shoot, but strongly recommended
she get a couple dogs and a good sharp knive to tuck away on her
person, both suggestions she followed. Taught her some up close and
personal knife work. She never has the lights on in her home, for
obvious reasons (other than outside lighting and some token security
lighting. Anyone trying to take her on at night..is gonna be doing it
in the dark..where she lives.

Gunner

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 16:27:35 -0000, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:

But with his (that) picture at 21 feet, anybody who was capable of doing
what he taught was painting the bottom edge of the black, not the center.
Not a one of them had ever adjusted the sights on any weapon and the
revolver they were using didn't have adjustable sights.


Normal combat range is indeed 21 feet or under. Simply put the top of
the front sight IN the area you want the hole to appear and squeeze.
Repeat.
Repeat as necessary. Double Taps show you really care.

We are not shooting for score, we are not shooting for X rings. We are
shooting to put fast moving projectiles into the Central Nervous
System of an agressor.

The "kill zone: of a human being is an area about 6" wide by 12" tall

Think of it as an oval paper plate. If you can keep your rounds in a
paper plate, under any and all conditions at 21 feet or less..thats
really as good as you need to be.

That however..can be a real trick in the dark, grokked to the eyeballs
on adrenaline or having run your ass off and are out of breath etc...

Its far far better to give than receive..and anything worth doing one,
is worth repeating. Never shoot just once when you are up close and
personal. Thats why single shot firearms make **** poor combat
weapons.

And remember..even if you blow a junkies heart out..it takes about 18
seconds for the brain to realize he is dead. So disrupt the CNS as
much as possible. There are few "instant stops" unless you remove the
brain..and even then they can keep running, or fall on you while
holding that pig sticker.

Oh..and if you use your left hand to fend off the bad guy while hip
shooting..try not to shoot your left hand, ok?

And contact wounds..where you push the weapon into the body of the
perp and fire..are really nasty and can ruin the perps whole day.
You however..will need a shower afterwards.

Gunner

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 11:05:08 -0700, "SteveB"
wrote:


"Don Foreman" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 16:01:35 -0000, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:



He spent exactly twenty seconds describing a sight picture. And his
drawing was wrong for short range pistol.

What is a right sight picture for short range pistol? What range? I
intend no nitpick, I'd really like to know. My current understanding
is that there is no right sight picture for short-range pistol because
the shooter won't see the sights at all in a pucker sit.

And the percentages of hits in close range gunfights is horrible, either for
trained POs, and lowly "civilians" alike. The POs only score slightly
higher than civilians, and IIRC from my training classes, it's in the
twenties percent range.

And I have a question. What's a short range pistol?

I should have said use of handgun at less than 21 feet.


What he conveyed to me was that if you shoot, your life is ruined. If you
do shoot, make it your last act before you pass out from being beaten or
knifed or shot. Only then will you have a defense that will stand a chance
in court.

My instructors made and emphasized exactly the same points. I think
most good ones do.

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 16:27:35 -0000, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:



One poor guy never put it on the paper, much less the black. And the
instructor gave him his certificate, anyway. I don't think he should
have denied him, but he should have worked with him to get it right.

Instructors here will not pass a trainee until he or she shoots a
qualifying score -- but they will work with them until they do.

Lloyd E. Sponenburgh wrote:
GatherNoMoss fired this volley in
ups.com:

On Aug 21, 7:59 am, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:


There is only one sight picture,
The top of the front sight even with the top of the rear and
centered.
There is NO other proper sight picture.

Duh. But where you put the bull in that picture is just a _little_
important.

My CD HiPower manual says to put the front sight ball in the vee of the
rear sight.
For long range work, put the bull center at the top of the front sight
For close range, the bull sits atop the front sight.

Only place I've ever heard of that.

After a Computer crash and the demise of civilization, it was learned
Gunner wrote on Tue, 21 Aug 2007 11:19:05
-0700 in rec.crafts.metalworking :
Anyone can be taught to shoot. Some take longer than others. I worked
with a blind woman once. Taught her to shoot, but strongly recommended
she get a couple dogs and a good sharp knive to tuck away on her
person, both suggestions she followed. Taught her some up close and
personal knife work. She never has the lights on in her home, for
obvious reasons (other than outside lighting and some token security
lighting. Anyone trying to take her on at night..is gonna be doing it
in the dark..where she lives.

Serious tactical and strategic advantage.

Wasn't there a movie about some guys trying to take out a blind
lady, in the dark?


--
pyotr filipivich
"Quemadmoeum gladuis neminem occidit, occidentis telum est. "
Lucius Annaeus Seneca, circa 45 AD
(A sword is never a killer, it is a tool in the killer's hands.)

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 11:30:47 -0700, with neither quill nor qualm,
Gunner quickly quoth:

Double Taps show you really care.

Bwahahaha!


We are not shooting for score, we are not shooting for X rings. We are
shooting to put fast moving projectiles into the Central Nervous
System of an agressor.

The "kill zone: of a human being is an area about 6" wide by 12" tall

Think of it as an oval paper plate. If you can keep your rounds in a
paper plate, under any and all conditions at 21 feet or less..thats
really as good as you need to be.

Yabbut, what if the perp isn't wearing a paper plate?


That however..can be a real trick in the dark, grokked to the eyeballs
on adrenaline or having run your ass off and are out of breath etc...

Its far far better to give than receive..and anything worth doing one,
is worth repeating. Never shoot just once when you are up close and
personal. Thats why single shot firearms make **** poor combat
weapons.

In that case, make sure you aim well.


And remember..even if you blow a junkies heart out..it takes about 18
seconds for the brain to realize he is dead. So disrupt the CNS as
much as possible. There are few "instant stops" unless you remove the
brain..and even then they can keep running, or fall on you while
holding that pig sticker.

Heart to kill 'em, gut to stop 'em?


Oh..and if you use your left hand to fend off the bad guy while hip
shooting..try not to shoot your left hand, ok?

Good advice. (Or right hand, if left-handed.)


And contact wounds..where you push the weapon into the body of the
perp and fire..are really nasty and can ruin the perps whole day.
You however..will need a shower afterwards.

A shower is _much_ preferable to a body bag, wot?


I got a belated BD present from my sister today. The _SAS Survival
Handbook_ by John "Lofty" Wiseman. 560 pages of interesting goodness.
Methinks it's a keeper.

--
Learn to value yourself, which means: to fight for your happiness.
-- Ayn Rand

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 11:11:14 -0700, "SteveB"
wrote:


"Lloyd E. Sponenburgh" lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote in message
.3.70...
Gerry fired this volley in
ups.com:

From Wikipedia, FWIW
"In American usage, the term "pistol" refers to a handgun whose
chamber is integral with the barrel, making pistols distinct from the
other main type of handgun, the revolver, which has a revolving
cylinder containing multiple chambers." After 20 years of gunsmithing,
that is the I see it as well


I seldom trust Wiki, but if you're a gunsmith, and you say that's the way
it is, then I'll bow to that.

Hmmm.... I've been shooting for fifty-two years. I'd never heard that
distinction, and have distinctly heard otherwise in the military. But I
know enough about how wrong they are on other counts to realize they
could've been wrong about that, too.

But didn't Colt call his first revolver "a repeating pistol"?

LLoyd


And I seem to remember a classic "rifle" that was a revolver with a LONG
barrel and stock. But I must have been imagining that, as all the educated
nitpickers here have stated that such a thing does not exist.

Steve

If you are talking about the colt I think it was called a revolving
rifle.....
Bruce in Bangkok
(brucepaigeATgmailDOTcom)

"SteveB" fired this volley in
news
And I have a question. What's a short range pistol?

You're not ex-military, no? "Short range pistol" describes the exercise,
not the weapon.

Besides, there's one BIG point here that is being missed. An
instructor who is knowledgeable and experienced will tell you that if
you are at a distance where you have to come to a full stance and aim,
that you need to run. Because that's what the smart assed lawyer from
the other side is going to ask you. "So, Mr. Foreman ............ you
had a distance between you and the deceased client that would allow
you to flee, and you chose to stand there, carefully take aim, and
then shoot the deceased straight through the nose? Why didn't you
choose to flee instead of executing this nice young man?"

Sorry, sir, but that's not the case in Florida. The law actually uses
the words, "has no duty to retreat" and "may meet the assailant with
force."

LLoyd

On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 11:35:10 -0000, Lloyd E. Sponenburgh lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:
"SteveB" fired this volley in
news

"So, Mr. Foreman ............ you
had a distance between you and the deceased client that would allow
you to flee, and you chose to stand there, carefully take aim, and
then shoot the deceased straight through the nose? Why didn't you
choose to flee instead of executing this nice young man?"

Sorry, sir, but that's not the case in Florida. The law actually uses
the words, "has no duty to retreat" and "may meet the assailant with
force."

Exactly. Keyword being, of course, "assailant". As in, he has initiated the
attack. That's kind of key, of course, and is the part that the anti's
gloss over. They pretend this is a license to shoot people who cut you
off on the freeway or chew gum the wrong way but, of course, the facts
are that it's just saying that good people don't have to just put up
with being attacked by bad people.

I still can't understand why the left so often comes out in support of
things that make the bad people safer rather than the good people.

In article , Dave Hinz wrote:
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 11:35:10 -0000, Lloyd E. Sponenburgh
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:
"SteveB" fired this volley in
news

"So, Mr. Foreman ............ you
had a distance between you and the deceased client that would allow
you to flee, and you chose to stand there, carefully take aim, and
then shoot the deceased straight through the nose? Why didn't you
choose to flee instead of executing this nice young man?"

Sorry, sir, but that's not the case in Florida. The law actually uses
the words, "has no duty to retreat" and "may meet the assailant with
force."

Exactly. Keyword being, of course, "assailant". As in, he has initiated the
attack. That's kind of key, of course, and is the part that the anti's
gloss over. They pretend this is a license to shoot people who cut you
off on the freeway or chew gum the wrong way but, of course, the facts
are that it's just saying that good people don't have to just put up
with being attacked by bad people.

I still can't understand why the left so often comes out in support of
things that make the bad people safer rather than the good people.

Because it suits their purposes for society to become so dangerous that the
masses will *insist* upon a police state, just to restore domestic order.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

pyotr filipivich wrote:

After a Computer crash and the demise of civilization, it was learned
Gunner wrote on Tue, 21 Aug 2007 11:19:05
-0700 in rec.crafts.metalworking :
Anyone can be taught to shoot. Some take longer than others. I worked
with a blind woman once. Taught her to shoot, but strongly recommended
she get a couple dogs and a good sharp knive to tuck away on her
person, both suggestions she followed. Taught her some up close and
personal knife work. She never has the lights on in her home, for
obvious reasons (other than outside lighting and some token security
lighting. Anyone trying to take her on at night..is gonna be doing it
in the dark..where she lives.

Serious tactical and strategic advantage.

Wasn't there a movie about some guys trying to take out a blind
lady, in the dark?


http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062467/usercomments

--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

still waiting to see what part of this thread is slightly on topic


"Lloyd E. Sponenburgh" lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote in message
. 3.70...
I audited an NRA handgun safety course Saturday that my wife was
attending for her concealed permit.

I was appalled. The instructor was a really nice fellow, and obviously
an experienced shooter, but his course was inadequate to the nth degree.

The sum-total of ALL safety instruction in the course consisted of his
reading a poster twice. The poster had three safety rules -- "always
point the weapon in a safe direction", "keep your finger off the trigger
until ready to fire", and "don't load the weapon until ready to fire".

All in all, those ARE the bases for safe handling, but this was a class
of 50-ish women and soft-handed men who'd never picked up a gun before.
They couldn't extrapolate from that scant reading anything about safe
transfer of weapons from one to another, safe cleaning practices, routine
muscle-memory checking of every weapon you touch, safe transport, etc.,
etc.

Then he left me puzzled when he told the class that a revolver is NOT a
pistol; only slide-action automatics are pistols. (so, what do you call a
muzzle-loading lock-fired handgun? And, does that mean that a cylinder-
fed rifle isn't a rifle?)

He spent exactly twenty seconds describing a sight picture. And his
drawing was wrong for short range pistol.

The rest of the four hour classroom session consisted of recollections,
instructions to immediately shoot to kill any home invader, and rants
about the local liberal newspaper, then finally a full half hour devoted
to how to answer the questions on the application.

Can it really BE that gun classes have devolved to this level? If so,
what hope have we that the liberalocrats won't finally strip all the
metal from our hands?

LLoyd

According to Tony :
still waiting to see what part of this thread is slightly on topic

The iron sights used in the "sight picture" being taught?

In other words -- not much. :-)

Enjoy,
DoN.
--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---