Sooner or later discussions of firearms training often get sidetracked into "fundamental rights" and whatnot. Fine.
Nothing prevents someone from doing something that's contrary to their best interests, counter-productive or even dumb when a "fundamental right" is involved.
Doesn't appear to be unusual for some folks to get so wrapped up around the axle worrying about some level of government maybe wanting to "trample" on their "fundamental rights", that they may not fully consider the extent to which those "rights" aren't guarantees of how their simple "use" is going to solve some potential, or immediate, problem.
Quite often discussions of training & gun rights also take a left turn into doing this "instinctively", or using "natural skills". Well, that's also no guarantee that someone is doing something correctly, lawfully, or otherwise in their best interests.
After all, "instinct" when humans are startled and frightened usually results in defaulting to the "Freeze, Flight or Fight" response, and any of those actions, done at the wrong moment, in the wrong manner, relative to the specific circumstances, can get you killed. Might result in unintentional serious injury or death to a loved one, or other innocent third person, too.
Then there's folks who want to mix instinct, fundamental rights and luck into the mix, as well as an outside influence (armed attacker, etc), and hope for the best.
Fine. Folks have lots of rights.
As far as how well trained folks of criminal ilk might be, on any given day? Well, while I've run across a criminal suspect and ex-con a time or two over my career, I've formed my own opinions over time.
Then, I attended a LEOKA class a couple years ago (traveling field class done with the help of the FBI teaching LE & first responders about Law Enforcement Officers Killed & Assaulted. Very interesting. Specific info provided about carefully selected interviews done with violent criminals who were in-custody, regarding their crimes and criminal activities. Deliberate actions they'd taken to improve their ability to use violence was discussed, including "practice" and sometimes daily experience in using their weapons. Studying how police train with firearms was also mentioned (lots of training videos available online nowadays).
Something else was mentioned, too, which was that the criminals interviewed didn't seem to be handicapped by the same concern over acting within the law when using weapons, compared to police or normal citizens.
Yep, our military training has apparently been willingly learned, practiced and absorbed by some gang members.
Then, of course, there are the "gang members" who have entered the US illegally, and who have acquired military or insurgency-type training in other countries. Imagine some of them being willing to employ their training and experience in the commission of criminal activities in this country.
Even if we weren't discussing whatever was being passed off as "training", though, there's always going to be the hardened mindset and attitudes of some people who plan to become willingly & deliberately engaged in violent criminal activities, and who will not hesitate to use violence against not only other criminals, but innocent citizens and police officers.
Innocent citizens and police officers are (hopefully) always concerned about acting within the confines of the laws, meaning in a prudent, reasonable, lawful and even moral manner. None of them want to act outside the law and find themselves prosecuted, convicted of a crime and sentenced to jail, prison or worse, right?
Imagine facing someone who doesn't necessarily consider themselves burdened with such concerns, and who is willing to use violence without warning or seeming provocation.
Maybe some training and occasional practice might not be such a bad thing?
Of course, there's always luck, and hoping to encounter an attacker who resorts to acting like a scared rabbit at the mere sight of a gun in the hands of what might seem to be a scared, hesitant victim who is unaccustomed to being involved in violence, right?
Don't mistake my words to mean I think each and every gun owner needs to receive military, police or competition-type training. I didn't say that, nor mean to imply it. I also don't intend to get sidetracked into the quagmire of to what extent, if any, states ought to be requiring any classes regarding basic proficiency & point-of-sale or classroom training for the purchase and carrying of firearms. (States are going to do what states do.)
Not everyone might be able to attend firearms training, either, or even participate in it if desired, for reasons of health, physical impairment or disability (but which individual conditions wouldn't prohibit ownership of firearms). I've done classes and range quals for folks who had to use motorized chairs out on the firing line, both retired cops and private citizens who possessed CCW licenses.
I don't claim to have any definitive answers, but neither do I believe in leaving all of my decisions to a coin toss, luck or just hoping for the best outcome. (Folks who practice an organized religion or other spiritual practice can certainly include their beliefs, prayers or trust in higher forces, too, as they feel is merited.)
Sometimes you can do everything right, even being highly trained & experienced, and still find yourself coming up short against some particular set of circumstances. No guarantees folks.
You can try to shade things in your favor, or leave it to happenstance, good fortune, lucky timing or Providence.
Anything resolved by this thread topic? Any minds changed? Any need for any minds to have changed?
Dunno, myself. I just try to muddle through ...
(Note: Not just talking about posters here; reckon most of you have had some training, regardless.)
