I recommended a 22LR for self defense/conceal carry today

Mister X · #**151** 10-13-2018, 09:51 AM

Untrained people with absolutely no training or range time successfully defend themselves with firearms all the time. Even children. Usually just producing a weapon does indeed end the conflict or firing off shots does. If not, the gun itself does most of the physical work and the distances involved in civilian self-defense are extremely short, so a high level of marksmanship skill is not necessary. I just don't think it takes much(or perhaps any) range time to likely be able to defend oneself with a suitable firearm in many possible defense scenarios, so much of what is prioritized by many shooters is irrelevant IMO. It's just not that difficult to shoot someone that is two to three feet away.

Does anybody have any stats on incidents of people who were armed during their assault, but unable to get to their weapon? Civilian shootings are relatively rare, but violent crime isn't and most people don't carry a gun. The problem(s) that needs addressing are the most likely potential points of failure in defending oneself and choosing a weapon that is inherently more efficient in that contex. Thise things are often completely overlooked by many shooters, and it's not lack of marksmanship since longer range civilian shoot-out are astronomically rare, but an inability to see the situation soon enough to avoid or escape the situation or get the gun out. Beyond that, protecting against the initial assault, effectively using the gun due to contact, movement, instability, or an inability to retain the gun. And yes, I think caliber matters in instances where the (determined) attacker(s) is not deterred by the defender simply having or firing their weapon or even being shot.

These are not advanced skills when conducted in the proper context, but can be taught immediately. I used to hold corporate self-defense and sexual assault prevention courses for executives when I lived in the city. These were relatively short-lived classes, so no time was wasted and functional skills were taught from the get-go. I don't see basic avoidance tactics and ECQ gun skills being any different or more difficult to learn.

Ziggy2525 · #**152** 10-13-2018, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister X

...
These are not advanced skills when conducted in the proper context, but can be taught immediately. I used to hold corporate self-defense and sexual assault prevention courses for executives when I lived in the city. These were relatively short-lived classes, so no time was wasted and functional skills were taught from the get-go. I don't see basic avoidance tactics and ECQ gun skills being any different or more difficult to learn.

You keep saying that you have this special knowledge, based on your 30 years as a DT instructor, of a few simple skills that can be taught immediately with no time wasted that can save peoples lives. What are they?

Why not either start a new thread about it (like some here have requested) or just post them right here. Think how many lives you could potentially save with a single post.

buzzkillbob · #**153** 10-13-2018, 10:52 AM

It's easy to be a tough guy on the interwebs. Heck, a true lion doesn't need to tell you he's a lion! There's something to be said for quiet professionals... :-|

BB57 · #**154** 10-13-2018, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crazyphil

The NRA tells us that every year there are approximately 2 million
incidents where people use guns for self defense. In 96% of these
incidents shots are not necessary because of the intimidation value
of the gun.

When shots are necessary, about two thirds of the remaining 4%
stop voluntarily. Maybe they were not even hit. Maybe they were
hit but it did not cause a deadly wound. Whatever the cause, they
don't want to get shot at again, so they run, or stop and surrender.

The remaining approximately 1.36% is our main concern. Up to this
point the lowly .22 can, and does, fill the bill. But when the S.H.T.F.
we need to stop the attack.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziggy2525

It’s all about assessing your risk, right? There’s something like 225 million adults in the US. Using your numbers from the NRA, that would mean there’s a .01% (1x10e-4) chance in any year of being in a circumstance that a .22 might not work. That doen’t factor in any skew that occurs due to people’s bad lifestyles choices (people that buy illegal drugs, etc.) or the crime rate where people live. I don’t carry a .22, but even a .22 improves your odds a lot.

These posts pretty well nail it and it's why both armed citizens and police officers get away with carrying and even shooting firearms that they in no way shoot effectively in a real world shoot.

If you already shoot an Airweight .38 badly, carrying a .22 LR that you shoot better isn't much if any of a handicap.

And that's the irony I see in the arguments in this thread. Shot badly, no handgun cartridge is significantly more effective than any other, but most of the time you just need a handgun that is "good enough". It goes like this:

1) carry a concealed handgun, and you may start displaying better situational awareness and/or appear less afraid in the face of an approaching threat and your odds of avoiding a life threatening situation increase, even though the gun is never even drawn.

2) Draw a gun in the face of an imminent threat and a competent petty street criminal will do what he or she is trained to do - turn and run to avoid getting shot - and your odds of getting killed or injured again decrease because a gun is present, even if you never fire it.

3) If you shoot it and miss, a fair percentage of assailants will turn and run because they are facing an armed victim who is actively shooting at them, even if they are shooting badly.

4) If you do have to shoot and hit your assailant - anywhere - the statistics are pretty clear that about half the time the assailant will stop the assault once he or she has been shot, in order to avoid being shot again.

5) However, in that other half of self defense shoot, you're going to need to keep shooting until the assailant is down.

6) If he or she is also armed with a hand gun you'll need to shoot effectively while receiving fire, which will produce a great deal of stress and your shooting will need to be second nature as there will be no mental bandwidth available to focus on any thing you have not completely mastered.

6 1/2) This should include the ability to move away from the attacker and toward cover.

7) If the assailant is armed with a knife or blunt object, then you again need to know how to move to get off the X, how to create space to employ a handgun, and how to retain and shoot a handgun from a close in retention position.

----

In 1 through 4 above, it doesn't matter what you carry. Anything is better than nothing.

In 5 and 6 above, if you learn to shoot the way I described above, you are covered. Here, what you shoot matters but what matters more is that you start with a handgun that fits you well and doesn't cause you to develop a flinch or other bad habit. You can always move to a more effective cartridge later once you've mastered the basics.

In 6 1/2 and 7 it matters a great deal what you carry as you need to be able to shoot it well and you need a cartridge with good terminal performance. However 6 1/6 and 7 also require another skill set that blends the use of a handgun with movement, and with other self defense techniques.

You'll note I never discussed focusing on a tactical reload, as a reload is almost never required in an armed citizen self defense shoot. That said, it's not a big deal to add it to your training. Make every reload, including administrative reloads, a tactical reload. If you practice once a day you'll get 365 repetitions per year. Practice 3 times each day an you'd have over a 1000 reps a year, and you'll start to get good at it under stress.

If you carry a revolver learn how to reload it quickly using a speed loader and the FBI, Universal or Stress Fire methods. There are pros and cons to each.

The FBI reload is fastest, but it was designed for revolvers with full length ejector rods shooting .38 Special, it has reliability issues with short ejector rod revolvers (barrels less than 3 inches, and with the longer and often sticky .357 Magnum cases.

The Stress Fire reload is a bit slower, but it works with DA revolver with a swing out crane, and with sticky .357 Magnum cases.

The Universal reload is a bit of a hybrid. It's slightly slower but much more reliable than the FBI reload. It's also slightly faster and slightly less reliable than the Stress Fire reload.

All of these methods use the strong hand to manipulate the speed loader, and it should be carried on the strong hand side.

Mister X · #**155** 10-13-2018, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziggy2525

You keep saying that you have this special knowledge, based on your 30 years as a DT instructor, of a few simple skills that can be taught immediately with no time wasted that can save peoples lives. What are they?

Why not either start a new thread about it (like some here have requested) or just post them right here. Think how many lives you could potentially save with a single post.

I'm not sure what you're wanting, am I supposed to write a book on here? There are too many variables to give overly simple solutions although people do it all the time. Trying to learn to fight by the numbers simply doesn't work. It's like asking me for an easy solution and fail-safe moves to win a street-fight. It's not as simple and as straight-forward as target shooting, but it's not necessarily as complex as many make it out to be as being some super-advanced set of skills.

I've already gave the outline of what I would address. I hold no special knowledge that you can't find through many sources. Most of my self-defense understanding and knowledge comes from my martial art background, not defensive tactics. The DT came later and was simply a branch-off from my martial arts background. Armed ECQ training is very similar to training unarmed skills and pretty much any instructor well-versed in it will have an extensive H2H/Combatives/Martial Art foundation. It's very different from pure shooting, but shooters want to approach the issue like they do pure shooting problems, when effective solutions are better achieved by addressing it as a Combatives problem, which is what it truly is.

The self-defense/sexual assault prevention courses I mentioned usually took place in three hour blocks over three days, but some applicable skills were learned over the first hour. Longer term training is obviously much better, but few will commit to it and you never know when an assault could happen, so learning some effective skills as soon as possible makes sense and how I recommend approaching the issue.

Kanewpadle · #**156** 10-13-2018, 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister X

I'm not sure what you're wanting, am I supposed to write a book on here? There are too many variables to give overly simple solutions although people do it all the time. Trying to learn to fight by the numbers simply doesn't work. It's like asking me for an easy solution and fail-safe moves to win a street-fight. It's not as simple and as straight-forward as target shooting, but it's not necessarily as complex as many make it out to be as being some super-advanced set of skills.

I've already gave the outline of what I would address. I hold no special knowledge that you can't find through many sources. Most of my self-defense understanding and knowledge comes from my martial art background, not defensive tactics. The DT came later and was simply a branch-off from my martial arts background. Armed ECQ training is very similar to training unarmed skills and pretty much any instructor well-versed in it will have an extensive H2H/Combatives/Martial Art foundation. It's very different from pure shooting, but shooters want to approach the issue like they do pure shooting problems, when effective solutions are better achieved by addressing it as a Combatives problem, which is what it truly is.

The self-defense/sexual assault prevention courses I mentioned usually took place in three hour blocks over three days, but some applicable skills were learned over the first hour. Longer term training is obviously much better, but few will commit to it and you never know when an assault could happen, so learning some effective skills as soon as possible makes sense and how I recommend approaching the issue.

I think he’s asking what certifications do you hold? That’s assuming that a piece of paper means anything.

eb07 · #**157** 10-13-2018, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kanewpadle

I think he’s asking what certifications do you hold? That’s assuming that a piece of paper means anything.

I already asked and was ignored. That means a lot.

Mister X · #**158** 10-13-2018, 04:16 PM

Certifications are generally for shooting instructors, which I'm not. I've already previously discussed my background on numerous occasions.

Muss Muggins · #**159** 10-13-2018, 04:22 PM

How much? Send me a quote for 11 participants, two hours . . .

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister X

I'm not sure what you're wanting, am I supposed to write a book on here? There are too many variables to give overly simple solutions although people do it all the time. Trying to learn to fight by the numbers simply doesn't work. It's like asking me for an easy solution and fail-safe moves to win a street-fight. It's not as simple and as straight-forward as target shooting, but it's not necessarily as complex as many make it out to be as being some super-advanced set of skills.

I've already gave the outline of what I would address. I hold no special knowledge that you can't find through many sources. Most of my self-defense understanding and knowledge comes from my martial art background, not defensive tactics. The DT came later and was simply a branch-off from my martial arts background. Armed ECQ training is very similar to training unarmed skills and pretty much any instructor well-versed in it will have an extensive H2H/Combatives/Martial Art foundation. It's very different from pure shooting, but shooters want to approach the issue like they do pure shooting problems, when effective solutions are better achieved by addressing it as a Combatives problem, which is what it truly is.

The self-defense/sexual assault prevention courses I mentioned usually took place in three hour blocks over three days, but some applicable skills were learned over the first hour. Longer term training is obviously much better, but few will commit to it and you never know when an assault could happen, so learning some effective skills as soon as possible makes sense and how I recommend approaching the issue.

Ziggy2525 · #**160** 10-13-2018, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister X

...
These are not advanced skills when conducted in the proper context, but can be taught immediately. I used to hold corporate self-defense and sexual assault prevention courses for executives when I lived in the city. These were relatively short-lived classes, so no time was wasted and functional skills were taught from the get-go. I don't see basic avoidance tactics and ECQ gun skills being any different or more difficult to learn.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister X

I'm not sure what you're wanting, am I supposed to write a book on here? There are too many variables to give overly simple solutions although people do it all the time.
...

The self-defense/sexual assault prevention courses I mentioned usually took place in three hour blocks over three days, but some applicable skills were learned over the first hour. Longer term training is obviously much better, but few will commit to it and you never know when an assault could happen, so learning some effective skills as soon as possible makes sense and how I recommend approaching the issue.

Why would it take a book? You taught these basic skills over a few hours.

I'm not interested in your certifications like @Kanewpadle suggested. I could care less about your resume. You've been pretty vocal with your critique that pistol people just don't get it. Cool. You're right, they're all wrong. What's your solution that you're able to teach to non-athletic business women in 9 hours that's better than the OP teaching his wife's friend to protect herself with a .22 as a starting point?

Kanewpadle · #**161** 10-13-2018, 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister X

Certifications are generally for shooting instructors, which I'm not. I've already previously discussed my background on numerous occasions.

No sir. It wasn’t discussed. It was stated.

Mister X · #**162** 10-13-2018, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Muss Muggins

How much? Send me a quote for 11 participants, two hours . . .

Those were in the mid-90's in Chicago. I honestly have no clue what I was paid.

Muss Muggins · #**163** 10-13-2018, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister X

Those were in the mid-90's in Chicago. I honestly have no clue what I was paid.

I’m interested in now. We’ll pay hotel and air for two-three hours training, 11 participants, mostly female. Of course, we’ll need to see a CV and references first. Totally not kidding. How much?

Mister X · #**164** 10-13-2018, 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziggy2525

Why would it take a book? You taught these basic skills over a few hours.

I'm not interested in your certifications like @Kanewpadle suggested. I could care less about your resume. You've been pretty vocal with your critique that pistol people just don't get it. Cool. You're right, they're all wrong. What's your solution that you're able to teach to non-athletic business women in 9 hours that's better than the OP teaching his wife's friend to protect herself with a .22 as a starting point?

There is a reason why most folks generally recommend getting such training in person rather than through books and video. You can ask me how to defend against a punch, but unless you can give me specific details about the type, angle, positioning and distance between the participants as well as some basic physical characteristics of those involved, it's hard to give a detailed answer. There are general principles and concepts, but if you're looking for specific detailed solutions, you have to define the specific problem in detail.

In terms of this topic I would recommend learning to recognize pre-attack indicators, go over avoidance strategies(including physical movement) and stress situational awareness from the start.

In terms of physical fighting skills...
-Basic unarmed defensive skills to survive the initial assault.
-How to access the weapon while physically engaged.
-Retention shooting positions.
-Basic weapon retention
-Incorporate some movement into dry-fire practice.

All these things can be done pretty much anywhere and should be introduced as soon as possible. In terms of actual range shooting methods, I would include retention, one handed firing from natural postures and incorporated some limited movement at very close-range from the get-go. Outside of ECQ scenarios, there simply isn't much to learn IMO. And I would highly recommend she get a enclosed hammer snub in .38 special and explain the reasoning behind it and demonstrate how the inherent advantages it offers fits in with what I'm teaching her.

Muss Muggins · #**165** 10-13-2018, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister X

Those were in the mid-90's in Chicago. I honestly have no clue what I was paid.

The last time you taught a class was 25 years ago?

Muss Muggins · #**166** 10-13-2018, 05:34 PM

I have discussed this with my boss. We will pay airfare and hotel for a 2-3 hour class. Eleven participants, maybe a couple more. Give me available dates, a CV, and references . . .

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister X

There is a reason why most folks generally recommend getting such training in person rather than through books and video. You can ask me how to defend against a punch, but unless you can give me specific details about the type, angle, positioning and distance between the participants as well as some basic physical characteristics of those involved, it's hard to give a detailed answer. There are general principles and concepts, but if you're looking for specific detailed solutions, you have to define the specific problem in detail.

In terms of this topic I would recommend learning to recognize pre-attack indicators, go over avoidance strategies(including physical movement) and stress situational awareness from the start.

In terms of physical fighting skills...
-Basic unarmed defensive skills to survive the initial assault.
-How to access the weapon while physically engaged.
-Retention shooting positions.
-Basic weapon retention
-Incorporate some movement into dry-fire practice.

All these things can be done pretty much anywhere and should be introduced as soon as possible. In terms of actual range shooting methods, I would include retention, one handed firing from natural postures and incorporated some limited movement at very close-range from the get-go. Outside of ECQ scenarios, there simply isn't much to learn IMO. And I would highly recommend she get a enclosed hammer snub in .38 special and explain the reasoning behind it and demonstrate how the inherent advantages it offers fits in with what I'm teaching her.

Mister X · #**167** 10-13-2018, 05:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Muss Muggins

The last time you taught a class was 25 years ago?

I was referencing the corporate self-defense and sexual assault courses. I was only involved with those when I lived in the City.

Muss Muggins · #**168** 10-13-2018, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister X

I was referencing the corporate self-defense and sexual assault courses. I was only involved with those when I lived in the City.

Lots of deflection going on. All of my offers still stand. Send me a CV . . .

Mister X · #**169** 10-13-2018, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Muss Muggins

Lots of deflection going on. All of my offers still stand. Send me a CV . . .

Not at all, I'm just not interested. I don't need the money and I only travel to help out long established friends and colleagues. Plus I don't think you're actually sincere.

http://smith-wessonforum.com/139555350-post108.html

Muss Muggins · #**170** 10-13-2018, 06:20 PM

A: That link isn't a CV.

B:

Quote:

Plus I don't think you're actually sincere.

Same here. I don't think you're anything but an internet commando, and nothing you do from here forward, short of sending me a CV, will convince me otherwise.

This interaction convinced me. You are all hat and no cattle.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister X

Not at all, I'm just not interested. I don't need the money and I only travel to help out long established friends and colleagues. Plus I don't think you're actually sincere.

http://smith-wessonforum.com/139555350-post108.html

Mister X · #**171** 10-13-2018, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Muss Muggins

A: That link isn't a CV.

B:

Same here. I don't think you're anything but an internet commando, and nothing you do from here forward, short of sending me a CV, will convince me otherwise.

This interaction convinced me. You are all hat and no cattle.

It has always been quite obvious you and many others here think that. I don't really care, otherwise I wouldn't choose to remain anonymous. There is absolutely nothing to be gained by sending you a CV. You would think if I was going to make up things, I would pick things a lot more sexy and exciting, but whatever. This is a forum, I use it for entertainment and folks are free to believe whatever they wish.

Muss Muggins · #**172** 10-13-2018, 06:32 PM

Duly noted . . .

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister X

It has always been quite obvious you and many others here think that. I don't really care, otherwise I wouldn't choose to remain anonymous. There is absolutely nothing to be gained by sending you a CV. You would think if I was going to make up things, I would pick things a lot more sexy and exciting, but whatever. This is a forum, I use it for entertainment and folks are free to believe whatever they wish.

kwh · #**173** 10-13-2018, 06:54 PM

Enjoy learning on the SR22. Next, try the Walther PK380.

Kanewpadle · #**174** 10-13-2018, 07:00 PM

Now back to regular scheduled programming.

Most of us are in agreement that 22 lr is not the ideal caliber for self defense. Depending on the velocity and bullet design some 22 lr does not penetrate very well.

Knowing this, the right bullet and choice of gun are important. Short barrels with the wrong bullet won’t be as effective. Of course shot placement is extremely important when using a small caliber. I think a four inch barrel and a quality high speed copper hollow point would be best. Since most guns with four inch barrels hold ten or more rounds, hopefully one of those ten will be placed where it needs to be.

Hapworth · #**175** 10-13-2018, 07:32 PM

The pile-on's ugly and off-topic; particularly the public baiting under false pretenses.

Agree or disagree with aspects of Mister X's assertions, his essential points about armed self-defense generally being closer to combatives with an added firearm component rather than a range session practicing bullseye is fundamentally correct.

Argue the points -- not the individual -- if you're sincerely here for the discussion, and save the ad hominems for elsewhere.

keith44spl · #**176** 10-13-2018, 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Muss Muggins

A: That link isn't a CV.

B:

Same here. I don't think you're anything but an internet commando, and nothing you do from here forward, short of sending me a CV, will convince me otherwise.

This interaction convinced me. You are all hat and no cattle.

Has it yet to be established wither or not that Mr X knows what curriculum vitae means???

Jest askin'

.

Kanewpadle · #**177** 10-13-2018, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hapworth

The pile-on's ugly and off-topic; particularly the public baiting under false pretenses.

Agree or disagree with aspects of Mister X's assertions, his essential points about armed self-defense generally being closer to combatives with an added firearm component rather than a range session practicing bullseye is fundamentally correct.

Argue the points -- not the individual -- if you're sincerely here for the discussion, and save the ad hominems for elsewhere.

Hap, your missing the point.

Hapworth · #**178** 10-13-2018, 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kanewpadle

Hap, your missing the point.

Well, I was going back to delete my post since I saw after I submitted it you were already putting things back on track...then this.

So -- apart from the irony that you made an assertion without explaining it, the same complaint made about M-X

-- help me see the point.

eb07 · #**179** 10-13-2018, 07:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hapworth

The pile-on's ugly and off-topic; particularly the public baiting under false pretenses.

Agree or disagree with aspects of Mister X's assertions, his essential points about armed self-defense generally being closer to combatives with an added firearm component rather than a range session practicing bullseye is fundamentally correct.

Argue the points -- not the individual -- if you're sincerely here for the discussion, and save the ad hominems for elsewhere.

I told him repeatedly this wasn’t a thread for it. This is for a brand spanking new shooter and a former firearm shunner.

I asked him to create a new thread. He just likes to cause problems. I realize that now. I also realize he is not for real and is just regurgitating others info from online sources. Anyone can do that and be anything they want online.

Hapworth · #**180** 10-13-2018, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eb07

I told him repeatedly this wasn’t a thread for it. This is for a brand spanking new shooter and a former firearm shunner.

I asked him to create a new thread. He just likes to cause problems. I realize that now. I also realize he is not for real and is just regurgitating others info from online sources. Anyone can do that and be anything they want online.

I get that. And I have no dog in the fight. I think you steered the new shooter well; and I think both your and Mister X's positions have their place, and by-and-large can be complementary under most circumstances.

Anyhow, dead nuts reliability and being able to run the gun always topped caliber for me.

Mister X · #**181** 10-13-2018, 08:52 PM

I'm not real sure why me presenting an alternative perspective spawns ad hominem attacks and demands for me to produce my credentials to somehow prove I'm "for real" despite me preferring to remain anonymous just as most members on here choose to. Either the ideas have merit or they don't.

How am I a fraud? What claims or lofty achievements have I presented that some are finding hard to believe?

Honestly, I would prefer to stick to constructively discussing and debating actual topics and I think what I offered was a perspective many may not have considered that I felt was relevant to the OP. Disagreements are expected and spirited debate is welcome, but it should remain relatively civil.

Ziggy2525 · #**182** 10-13-2018, 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister X

I'm not real sure why me presenting an alternative perspective spawns ad hominem attacks and demands for me to produce my credentials to somehow prove I'm "for real" despite me preferring to remain anonymous just as most members on here choose to. Either the ideas have merit or they don't.

How am I a fraud? What claims or lofty achievements have I presented that some are finding hard to believe?

Honestly, I would prefer to stick to constructively discussing and debating actual topics and I think what I offered was a perspective many may not have considered that I felt was relevant to the OP. Disagreements are expected and spirited debate is welcome, but it should remain relatively civil.

IMO, seems like most of the posters have expressed what’s right for them, based on their experience. You’ve called people out as being “wrong” based on your experience, so they want to know who you are so they can validate your claim. When you aren’t willing to provide that info, you come across as a troll. Doesn’t seem so complicated. Good luck.

nachogrande · #**183** 10-13-2018, 09:06 PM

SO, what's the distance to beat in this "contest".

Ziggy2525 · #**184** 10-13-2018, 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nachogrande

SO, what's the distance to beat in this "contest".

Two hundred and thirteen.

Mister X · #**185** 10-13-2018, 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziggy2525

IMO, seems like most of the posters have expressed what’s right for them, based on their experience. You’ve called people out as being “wrong” based on your experience, so they want to know who you are so they can validate your claim. When you aren’t willing to provide that info, you come across as a troll. Doen’t seem so complicated. Good luck.

Why is my identity needed to determine the validity of my statements? I don't expect that, let alone demand it from people who disagree with me on forums. I simply want to know why they disagree and for them to explain why they are right and why they think I'm wrong. I presented a fairly thorough counter-perspective and either you agree with it or you don't.

eb07 · #**186** 10-13-2018, 10:03 PM

When you stereotyped the forum demographics and started calling people you don’t know untrained target shooters you showed yourself. Then when people called you to put your cards on the table you started acting a victim claiming you are just trying to have a civil debate and deflected the calls for you to prove your claims that you are more knowledgeable than them. I believe you are a troll who regurgitates others experiences in an attempt to start arguments and appear superior to others then you deflect and play the victim when called out. This is my assessment after looking at your post history not only in his thread but many others. Until you prove me wrong that is my honest take on you.

I expect more deflection and evasion. But it’s cool. It proves my assessment time and time again.

Muss Muggins · #**187** 10-13-2018, 10:06 PM

I just think she's a little full of herself and way too sensitive . . .

Ziggy2525 · #**188** 10-13-2018, 10:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister X

Why is my identity needed to determine the validity of my statements? I don't expect that, let alone demand it from people who disagree with me on forums. I simply want to know why they disagree and for them to explain why they are right and why they think I'm wrong. I presented a fairly thorough counter-perspective and either you agree with it or you don't.

If someone was giving you medical advice that seemed interesting, but outside what you considered mainstream, wouldn't you want to know who they were so you could better evaluate their info? A physician would probably get more credibility than a cook, right?

Same idea, different topic.

marinevet · #**189** 10-13-2018, 10:07 PM

I am not going to read this thread..........a .22.........I am by no means an expert, but a .22 has killed a lot of people. It has also pissed off a lot of people. If you are going to discharge a firearm, and shoot someone...........my choice is the bigger, the better.........38..357..44..45.........multiple hits are better than singles

Troll Hunter · #**190** 10-13-2018, 11:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister X

Considering the demographics and background of those that make up the majority of this forum, I'd expect most members will disagree with me on this topic. I'm ok with that.

What skills is she honing that will help her in an actual defense scenario?

Being a better shooter on the context you presented will not necessarily make her more capable of defending herself effectively.

Yeah. Right. Skip all that silly BS about basic gun handling, loading, operational controls, and gun safety. Their importance is way overblown.

Just load up the gun you chose for her, toss it to her, and tell her to get all zenny and "be the defender".

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister X

What an uninformed, uneducated and untrained individual likes is largely irrelevant. They have no knowledge or experience in which to make any kind of informed decision. What they prefer in the context of shooting after one range visit means little in the context of what would be an effective self-defense choice. Most gun guys tend to be "shooters", whose training is limited to static range shooting, who want to get people involved in range shooting in the same manner they do it and approach personal defense from this perspective, but shooting and armed self-defense(fighting with a gun) are two very different things, just like there is a big difference between certain martial arts and practical unarmed self-defense.

Exactly. Slap her around till she agrees with you. Women are too dumb to know what they need. Never listen to any whining about what they prefer.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister X

I think she would be much better armed with an enclosed hammer snub in .38 special. Standard pressure ammunition is extremely mild and neither my wife, mother or even grandmother(in her 90's) have any significant problems with it. If she absolutely insists on a .22, there are choices available in revolvers.

From Massad Ayoob...

The Real Ladies Gun -- Handguns

I actually agree with you here.
An excellent choice.
Maybe a few months, and much plinking time down the road, perhaps with a few malfunctions with the 22 auto, eb07 can gently slide her into liking the certain reliability and easy simplicity of it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BC38

I applaud you eb07. You introduced a new shooter to firearms in a way that likely started her on the path to more effective self defense. And you did it despite the fact that she was already turned off by someone taking the exact approach advocated by those most critical of what you did and how you did it.

It's called baby steps. New shooters have to start somewhere and you have to start them at the level they are comfortable with. Anything else will elicit the response that this new shooter had in the past. They won't pursue it any further.

Exactly!

or you could have chosen Mister x's method:
Load a 442 with blanks.
Put it in her purse with a load of junk.
Hang the purse on her weak arm.
Have her wear heavy work gloves to simulate cold, stiff winter hands.
Tie a cord to her gun hand wrist.
Strap a life size training dummy to her back. It should weigh at least 170 pounds. If she weighs over 130, dummy should weigh 200.
Punch her in the face a couple of times. Make them good ones. Maybe one in the kidney for good measure. We want to keep it real!
Slam her to the ground on her face.
Now, while jerking the cord occasionally, have her dig for the gun in the purse.
Might want to choke her a little now and then.
Definitely stomp the dummy occasionally, or just jump on it with full body weight.
Continue till she can draw and put 3 powder burns on the dummy. If she whimpers a lot or seems physically stressed, you can drop it to 2 burns outa 5 rds.
Do not give her any familiarization training or range time first. That is just for sissies, and you want her to be tough and ready!

[/SARCASM]

I really enjoy reading this board most of the time, but you people are way too willing to feed trolls!

I gave him a snack to make the point, but that's all he will get.
If he made his point one time about a hammerless revolver and some 'practical' scenario training, it would have validity. He wants you all to capitulate and admit he is smarter than all of you combined.
CUT HIM OFF!

I recommended a 22LR for self defense/conceal carry today-388554_828866265134_193305984_37095493_1647424391_n-jpg

I recommended a 22LR for self defense/conceal carry today-trolls-4-jpg

I recommended a 22LR for self defense/conceal carry today-1tox3z-jpg

I recommended a 22LR for self defense/conceal carry today-191zuj-jpg

I recommended a 22LR for self defense/conceal carry today-w7t3qj6-jpg-jpg

Troll Hunter · #**191** 10-13-2018, 11:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BC38

I applaud you eb07. You introduced a new shooter to firearms in a way that likely started her on the path to more effective self defense. And you did it despite the fact that she was already turned off by someone taking the exact approach advocated by those most critical of what you did and how you did it.

It's called baby steps. New shooters have to start somewhere and you have to start them at the level they are comfortable with. Anything else will elicit the response that this new shooter had in the past. They won't pursue it any further.

eb07,
I forgot to say BC38 stated a great summary of what you did.
You took a negative mindset and turned it into a positive, enjoyable experience.

Well done, sir!
Keep teaching her.

ImprovedModel56Fan · #**192** 10-14-2018, 07:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziggy2525

If someone was giving you medical advice that seemed interesting, but outside what you considered mainstream, wouldn't you want to know who they were so you could better evaluate their info? A physician would probably get more credibility than a cook, right?

Same idea, different topic.

IMO, his positions weren't even outside mainstream, or controversial, but they didn't really apply to the case at hand (the original post). They also seemed to be putting down the OP's justified enthusiasm over what most of us considered a good deed.

It is quite possible that the crowd here can see Mister X's motives better than he himself can see them, but I'm not so sure that his "quals" are an issue. Again, his view is not, IMO, mistaken, just not appropriate here.

crazyphil · #**193** 10-14-2018, 08:52 AM

William James said "The deepest principle of human nature is the craving
to be appreciated". Some folks just go after it in a way that some of us
find a bit abrasive. I have graduated from resentment to pity, and this
old dead horse has been beaten just about enough. Over and Out.