View Single Post
 
Old 02-21-2017, 01:47 PM
Wise_A Wise_A is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 3,121
Likes: 2,661
Liked 4,324 Times in 1,793 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister X
I repeatedly see the possibility of being involved in an extreme close-quarter defense encounter presented as a reason why C3 carry is such a bad idea, yet when I bring up ECQ Force-on-Force training, a fairly sizable percentage of the responses have been snarky and dismissive.
Remember that thing I said about game theory? Same deal.

For me, carrying with a loaded chamber has no downside. I'm confident with it. Cheap, too!

What about this ECQ stuff you keep going on about? Okay, great--are you going to pay for my classes? How about my travel and lodging? Time off from work? I'm not married, but maybe for some of these other guys, you can write nice letters to their wives explaining why they need to watch the kids solo for a few days, maybe a week.

How about just practicing this stuff? Super--go find me a range within 150 miles of my current location with the facilities to allow me to do this. I'll wait.

If you feel I'm dismissive of you--and trust me, you'll know it when I am--then it's because you're advocating very expensive, hard-to-acquire training, when most people don't have the fundamentals down. And when I say, "fundamentals", read that as "basic handgun operation" and "remembering to turn the safety off".

People do not have unlimited resources, but it's very "in" to act like they do. So whether I hear the words "Simunition" or "Everyone should go to Gunsite!" or any one of a thousand other buzzwords and hard sells, I struggle not to be dismissive.

If you think I'm failing, sorry.

---

Now, this thread was about some dope managing to shoot a lady in a Dunkin Donuts. Wanna get back on topic? We can seek unity in our mutual derision of that mook.
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Like Post: