How Much Practice vs How Many Guns vs The Right Mindset

[Duck Killer]

Funny thing is with the light/short trigger pull of modern striker fire guns, I’m not sure it’s much different than holstering a cocked and unlocked 1911, or a SA P226/Bretta 92 no safety. From my understanding a large portion of the P320 bull**** could potentially be attributed more so to the light and short trigger pull and not a mechanical issue/malfunction.

That is causing the gun to go off in holsters? The gun has problems. Not all of them but at least enough.

[Duck Killer]

For personal protection, too many handguns is or can be a liability...

Sig226- decock and you are ready to fire again
Beretta- decock- gun stays on safe with a dead trigger
1911- the safety is forgotten when engaging a target.... trigger is dead, so you go to tap and rack flip - now it wont rack as the safety is on

1911 ok to holster with hammer cocked... safety on... Sig / brertta - must decock before holstering

Learning about different style guns is not a liability. It is an advantage. The more knowledge the better. If you think it is a liability you need to shoot more and learn more. The guns you carry can vary throughout the year based on situation and clothing choices.

[Duck Killer]

It doesn’t matter how many guns you have as long as you practice with them. The only thing that matters is round count. The more you shoot the more you will learn.

The whole idea that if you have one gun you must be good with it is the same as if you have a bunch of guns you must be good with guns. Both mean nothing. The only thing that matters is how much does someone shoot. Fear the man who shoots a lot.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

It doesn’t matter how many guns you have as long as you practice with them. The only thing that matters is round count. The more you shoot the more you will learn.

The whole idea that if you have one gun you must be good with it is the same as if you have a bunch of guns you must be good with guns. Both mean nothing. The only thing that matters is how much does someone shoot. Fear the man who shoots a lot.

More like... Fear the man who is willing to shoot.

Shooting a lot doesn't equate to being willing to shoot when it's necessary.

Remember, all it takes is a single round and getting that round on target can involve skill or luck or both.

[Duck Killer]

More like... Fear the man who is willing to shoot.

Shooting a lot doesn't equate to being willing to shoot when it's necessary.

Remember, all it takes is a single round and getting that round on target can involve skill or luck or both.

That is a fallacy. You can’t determine if someone is willing to shoot or what situation with make them shoot. So you treat everyone as if they are willing to shoot. The question is if they have the skills to shoot effectively. Your going to treat an old lady differently then a guy wearing body armor and handles a weapon well but you going to treat both of them as a threat.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

That is a fallacy. You can’t determine if someone is willing to shoot or what situation with make them shoot. So you treat everyone as if they are willing to shoot. The question is if they have the skills to shoot effectively. Your going to treat an old lady differently then a guy wearing body armor and handles a weapon well but you going to treat both of them as a threat.

The issue, as it is presented, isn't what someone else thinks about the individual with the firearm. The issue is what is important. No one, I repeat, NO ONE knows with certainty what they will or won't do when 'the moment' arrives. Those who think they're the bravest, toughest, etc. often fold and the 'old lady' who is timid, quiet, and wouldn't hurt a fly is often the meanest critter on the face of the Earth when 'the moment' happens.

I've never said that training doesn't help, but it has its limits in terms of actual use in a real situation. Again, that little old lady is just as deadly, potentially, as the hard case wearing body armor if both of them are willing to pull the trigger. In fact, the old lady might be more of a threat as she will tend to be underestimated and the guy wearing body armor might discourage someone from taking the shot out of concern that it won't work. Recall that even those who were 'fast' with a gun didn't often do the 'High Noon,' showdown in the street at noon. In fact, the showdown in High Noon wasn't even a standup gunfight and the 'winner' was a gal who didn't want anything to do with gunfights or her husband to have anything to do with them either or even with killing. Ultimately, however, it was about her valuing her husband's life and 'acting' to preserve her husband's life, which included shooting the one bad guy in the back.

Too many 'take up' a gun, but figure on shooting 'em in the leg or that simply brandishing one will discourage an assailant. I was taught that you don't pull a gun unless you need and intend to pull the trigger, period. What pulls that trigger isn't necessarily 'training.' It's a willingness to end the threat so as to preserve life.

[Duck Killer]

The issue, as it is presented, isn't what someone else thinks about the individual with the firearm. The issue is what is important. No one, I repeat, NO ONE knows with certainty what they will or won't do when 'the moment' arrives. Those who think they're the bravest, toughest, etc. often fold and the 'old lady' who is timid, quiet, and wouldn't hurt a fly is often the meanest critter on the face of the Earth when 'the moment' happens.

I've never said that training doesn't help, but it has its limits in terms of actual use in a real situation. Again, that little old lady is just as deadly, potentially, as the hard case wearing body armor if both of them are willing to pull the trigger. In fact, the old lady might be more of a threat as she will tend to be underestimated and the guy wearing body armor might discourage someone from taking the shot out of concern that it won't work. Recall that even those who were 'fast' with a gun didn't often do the 'High Noon,' showdown in the street at noon. In fact, the showdown in High Noon wasn't even a standup gunfight and the 'winner' was a gal who didn't want anything to do with gunfights or her husband to have anything to do with them either or even with killing. Ultimately, however, it was about her valuing her husband's life and 'acting' to preserve her husband's life, which included shooting the one bad guy in the back.

Too many 'take up' a gun, but figure on shooting 'em in the leg or that simply brandishing one will discourage an assailant. I was taught that you don't pull a gun unless you need and intend to pull the trigger, period. What pulls that trigger isn't necessarily 'training.' It's a willingness to end the threat so as to preserve life.

Many people know what they would do because they have done it before. Many people have killed people. Just think of all the veterans over the last 20 plus years. You’re letting your belief that you will know or understand the whole situation affect your opinions. Most likely you won’t understand the whole situations but that doesnt matter. A threat no matter the threat is handled the same way. But if the threat is higher you act like the threat is higher. A old lady is less of a threat than an heavily armed individual who is looking for a fight. It doesn’t mean you treat the old lady as not a threat. Of either one gives you a reason you punch that card.

It is a simple equation.
A + B=dead. It is simple. An active deadly threat plus a means of committing that threat equals dead. It doesn’t matter who it is but some situations need more caution than others.

you have to ask yourself

Do you wonder if talking a life is right or wrong or is it justified legally or not? Those are two totally different things. Depending on your answer is whether or not you are going to pull the trigger.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

Many people know what they would do because they have done it before. You’re letting your belief that you will know or understand the whole situation affect your opinions. A threat no matter the threat is handled the same way. But if the threat is higher you act like the threat is higher. A old lady is less of a threat than an heavily armed individual who is looking for a fight. It doesn’t mean you treat the old lady as not a threat. Of either one gives you a reason you punch that card.

It is a simple equation.
A + B=dead. It is simple. An active deadly threat plus a means of committing that threat equals dead. It doesn’t matter who it is but some situations need more caution than others.

"Many people" isn't "all people." You're the one allowing your beliefs to color your opinion. Again, you're looking at it from the perspective of 'who is a threat.' I posed the question from the perspective of actually meeting the threat when the time comes.

In your A+B example, the 'means' doesn't have to be a firearm from the standpoint of it being a threat or in meeting the threat. Not 'everyone' is willing to go through Life doing constant 'threat assessment,' or so they think. The Truth is that we ALL do so, to one degree or another, and that is how the human race has survived. It is also how the human race has devolved if you believe certain ways; e.g., Eve wanted 'more' knowledge so as to have more 'control' over her own existence.

Bear in mind that 'meeting the threat' isn't synonymous with 'killing before being killed.' One can end the threat by avoiding it altogether and that too doesn't necessarily involve training. In point of fact, it's the willingness to 'accept the increased possibility' of a potential threat which often gets one in trouble.

If someone has 'faced a threat' before, often times, they will seek to avoid the threat in the future. Even more, those who haven't faced a threat, often are more concerned with avoiding the threat, which can include the consequences of acting to end the threat. It's the very thing we hear, even on this site, when an incident occurs. How often do we hear the phrase: "Didn't anyone have a CCW so they could act?" The reality is that, in many cases, I'd be willing to bet there actually was someone who did, but they CHOSE not to, for a variety of reasons.

When one has and, particularly, when one carries a firearm, there has to be a willingness to use it or it is simply an inanimate object which has no effect. It's one of the things the military is constantly coming to grips with in terms of the soldier who never fires a shot. They give the soldiers training in firearms use, tactics, et al., but when the time comes, there are soldiers who never fire a shot in combat. Does more training counter that? Only to a point. It's why the ticked off 19 year old is the 'deadliest weapon' on the battle field. It's not so much about his 'training.' It's about his willingness to engage. The training only gives him more options.

[Duck Killer]

First a 19 year old has never been the deadliest tool on the battlefield. A old soldier who is experienced is. Once again someone who knows what they are doing is a lot more dangerous than someone who doesn’t who is making things up on the fly.

You also forget active threat part. An active threat is someone pointing a gun at you probably shooting at you. These situations are not avoidable as in they are currently happening. The avoidance stage of the situation has passed. Let’s say the person is not shooting at you any more and walking away. The active threat is gone.

Sadly you are putting to much thought into a theoretical situation. The situation doesn’t mater the only thing that does is how you handle the situation. That needs to be constant. You have to make a personal decision on if the situation needs lethal force will you apply it or not. You make that decision way before you wonder if you will pull the trigger or not. If you are worried if you will pull the trigger you probably won’t. If you know you will put the trigger then put the time into understanding when you should or shouldn’t.

All decisions you will make in the future are based on the person you are today.

[acaligunner]

I knew a girl that went on a ride with some gangsters - problem was they got shot at by the other gang, everyone ducked down - she did also, but panic set in and she sat up and got shot and killed.

I also heard a tale of a gunner who totted a gun and liked to brag, problem was he met another person who was also armed - 1st dude finally knew he was not about that life and only showed his pistol to scare 2nd armed dude.

Well, 2nd dude was about that life and blasted 1st talk about shooter dead.

Sometimes people fool themselves into thinking they are about that life and on some occasions they stumble when things get real.

Its true that experience can play into survival- my bro told a lot of new soldiers they were not going to be coming home alive - because by the time they figured things out it was a bit too late.

No one knows for certain what they will do, some can and some stumble.

Its not a game / and or some kind of fantasy- there are people that have no regards to ending you’re life - be it by gunfire, knife, rock or vehicle and I do know friends that passed away by the above.

Hopefully no one has to deal with such an event.

Good luck.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

First a 19 year old has never been the deadliest tool on the battlefield. A old soldier who is experienced is. Once again someone who knows what they are doing is a lot more dangerous than someone who doesn’t who is making things up on the fly.

You also forget active threat part. An active threat is someone pointing a gun at you probably shooting at you. These situations are not avoidable as in they are currently happening. The avoidance stage of the situation has passed. Let’s say the person is not shooting at you any more and walking away. The active threat is gone.

Sadly you are putting to much thought into a theoretical situation. The situation doesn’t mater the only thing that does is how you handle the situation. That needs to be constant. You have to make a personal decision on if the situation needs lethal force will you apply it or not. You make that decision way before you wonder if you will pull the trigger or not. If you are worried if you will pull the trigger you probably won’t. If you know you will put the trigger then put the time into understanding when you should or shouldn’t.

All decisions you will make in the future are based on the person you are today.

You've never met a ticked off, 19-year old Marine have you? 😉

Actually, the 'avoidable' part comes BEFORE someone points the gun at you. ANY self-defense class worthy of the name emphasizes avoiding the threat BEFORE it becomes a threat. Again, you're allowing your preconceived notions to color your responses. Too much thought is actually a good thing in that it is THINKING before needing to ACT which carries the day and you even just acknowledged it with... "You have to make a personal decision on if the situation needs lethal force will you apply it or not" and the need to make the decision before you wonder if you will pull the trigger.

As you just noted IF you KNOW you will pull the trigger, then put the time in. Okay. But, didn't we just establish that NO ONE will KNOW before the moment occurs if they will or won't pull the trigger? Most assume that by strapping on a firearm, they are expressing a willingness to use it when the time comes. That's not the case. In fact, those who strap on a firearm SHOULD be even less willing to use it and seek to avoid such a situation to begin with. The presence of the firearm simply provides for another type of opportunity should the willingness emerge.

I've told you that I'm not against training. What I am against is attributing something to training which is not brought about with training. Training enhances your ABILITY to utilize a 'weapon,' be it your hands and feet, a knife, a firearm, or something else. It provides for options. What it does NOT do is inculcate a sense of WILLINGNESS to utilize a 'weapon.'

It's what the character J.B. Books was getting at with "They'll blink an eye or draw a breath before they pull the trigger. I won't." Acting on the situation if it happens isn't as crucial as acting on the situation before it happens; e.g., avoiding being in the situation to begin with. It goes to your decisions of the future depend on who you are in the present. If you are a ticked off, 19-year old Marine, you tend to have 'bulletproof t-shirt' syndrome and act consistent with that. The old soldier knows his t-shirt ain't bulletproof and even being surrounded by armor doesn't ensure survival. Thus, his actions are more considered and circumspect. But, are those actions consistent with the job tasked? Remember, Marines are famous for 'kicking in the door.' The expression wasn't my invention. If you Google it, Google's AI will respond with...

This phrase is a well-known quote, often attributed to John Ligato, a Marine who fought in the Battle of Hue City during the Vietnam War.

Ligato used this description to highlight the adaptability and ferocity of young Marines when placed in extreme, high-pressure, or desperate combat situations.

Context and Meaning:

• The Origin: Ligato, speaking about his experiences with Alpha Company in Hue City, described his ill-equipped, heavily outnumbered unit being sent into a "deathtrap" and succeeding through raw aggression and adaptability.
• "The Most Ferocious Fighting Machine": The quote emphasizes that a 19-year-old Marine, having undergone rigorous Marine Corps boot camp, can be placed in a completely foreign, chaotic environment and will "adapt and improvise" to dominate.
• The "Pissed Off" Factor: The emotional state of being "pissed off" represents the adrenaline, fear, and focus that turns a young, trained soldier into a highly lethal combatant.
• Similar Quotes: Sometimes, this concept is attributed in varied forms to Gen. John J. Pershing, such as, "The deadliest weapon in the world is a Marine and his rifle".

The phrase is widely used in Marine Corps lore to honor the tenacity of junior enlisted Marines in combat.

Now, look at the definition of 'tenacity'...

Tenacity is the quality of being very determined, persistent, and firm in holding to a purpose, goal, or belief, even when facing significant obstacles, challenges, or, in some cases, maintaining a tight physical grip. It implies a strong,, unrelenting spirit that refuses to give up.

Willingness and tenacity are not synonyms. They are complements. It's why a 'survival' instructor worthy of the name will inform you that 'survival' is, primarily, a mental exercise rather than a physical one. It would surprise most to discover what the mind allows the body to do long after the body is ready to stop. Notice the origin of the 19-year old Marine phrase being based on 'raw aggression and adaptability.' Those are mental attributes. The training simply provides options, enhancing the adaptability and the aggressive spirit. Put another way, you have to WANT to survive and be WILLING to endure before you are physically able to do so. It's why there used to be the complaint that some can take a 105 howitzer shell through the chest and live while others get shot in the pinky and die.

[Scotty]

One thing people need to separate us marksmanship and tactical skills. Marksmanship is just your ability to effectively use a firearm. Tactical skills is your ability to learn how to problem solve.

Going every week to the range to shoot your gun is marksmanship. If you need to warm up first, you are not proficient. If you have to get in a couple range sessions before you do your CCW qualifications, you are not proficient. If you are thinking about the process of shooting like your grip, trigger press, you are not proficient. When you need to shoot a bad guy, you don't get a couple warm up shots. Then entire shooting process should be automatic. The only thing that isn't automatic is deciding where to place your shots.

Tactical skills (aka life skills) is about problem solving and doing it fast while under pressure. There's no playbook on how you solve every problem. Most people have heard about the OODA loop but few have actually read through John Boyd's slides and understand the process.

The OODA loop is Observe, Orient, Decide, and Act. You see the problem, then you figure out what to do base on your experiences, then decide what you are going to do, and finally carry out your plan. They key with training is to make your OODA loop smaller than your opponent. You need to process faster than your opponent. The key to winning is actually to shorten the process to just Observe and Act. A quick example is learning how to block a punch. When you first start you are thinking about each step of the process. When you become proficient, the moment you see the fist coming, blocking becomes a reflex.

In gun fighting, doing the same thing at the range isn't going to help you much. You need to be challenge with new problems to solve. Rob Leatham has mentioned when he trains Tier 1 guys, he takes them to do USPSA competitions. They have all said the competition is way harder than combat because they have all the time to think on how to solve the problem. They see the value of competitions in that you are put under pressure of a timer to execute a plan, but it test your ability to recover when the plan falls apart.

[SDDAVE56]

"You don’t need 10 different firearms. 2 with good training and a lot of ammo is the shizzle".

WTF? Does that mean I need to go buy a horse, and saddle so I can train with my Colt SAA?

[SigSauerP226]

That is causing the gun to go off in holsters? The gun has problems. Not all of them but at least enough.

If something gets into the holster and interacts with the trigger, a short light trigger pull would be less ideal than a longer heavier one. No idea if that happened or not, but it sounds like they haven’t been able to replicate the UD on any of the guns with problems that have been turned over for testing.

[GOEX FFF]

"You don’t need 10 different firearms. 2 with good training and a lot of ammo is the shizzle".

WTF? Does that mean I need to go buy a horse, and saddle so I can train with my Colt SAA?

lol yup. Saddle up, Partner! 🤠

You'll also have to buy a 2nd horse to train with a lever gun, too. Oh and you can forget about that SXS shotgun because you dont "need" more than that.

The second I read or hear anyone say "You dont "need" more than (x) number of firearms" all their credibility goes out the window.

That same mindset is you don't "need" more than 10rnds either.