Great info from Karl Rehn

[Tom Givens]

http://blog.krtraining.com/notes-from-private-lessons-feb-2018/

Here is some commentary from Karl on his observations from a number of recent classes. His experience mirrors my own observations.

[Zincwarrior]

http://blog.krtraining.com/notes-from-private-lessons-feb-2018/

Here is some commentary from Karl on his observations from a number of recent classes. His experience mirrors my own observations.

I do not really understand the point on the 25 yards to 60 yard discussion. I would proffer few people shoot it well because few people ever have the opportunity to shoot handguns that distance. I certainly don't.

[GJM]

Interesting post. On one hand, I am struck by how poorly most gun owners shoot. On the other hand, I am seeing highly motivated competitive shooters using dry fire, live fire, expert instruction, frequent competition, and video analysis to technically shoot at an incredibly high level, literally light years ahead of most others.

[Trooper224]

Interesting post. On one hand, I am struck by how poorly most gun owners shoot. On the other hand, I am seeing highly motivated competitive shooters using dry fire, live fire, expert instruction, frequent competition, and video analysis to technically shoot at an incredibly high level, literally light years ahead of most others.

Just about anyone can own a gun, but that doesn't mean they have any interest in being a steely eyed gun Jedi. Just about anyone can own a car, but that doesn't mean they have any interest in driving the Indy 500. Ownership of a tool doesn't automatically correlate to the desire to excel with that tool. How many of those gamers do so out of a need to compete for admiration rather than the desire to defend themselves? How many are reviewing those vids because they're looking for tactical lessons and how many are doing so in order to shave a few hundredths of a second off their split times? Most I've associated with are in the trophy camp. Tom's talking apples and you're thinking oranges. The reality is that people engage in all kinds of activities without really thinking them through. Gun owners are no exception.

On the other hand, if you're saying you can't believe the amount of time some people spend trying for a stupid trophy, while comparing that to the amount of time most gun owners don't spend on learning how to defend themselves and how ridiculous that is, then in that case I'm right there with you.

[Trooper224]

I do not really understand the point on the 25 yards to 60 yard discussion. I would proffer few people shoot it well because few people ever have the opportunity to shoot handguns that distance. I certainly don't.

Most people I know don't shoot past seven yards, that doesn't mean that's advisable. At the very least, with a basic level of proficiency one should be able to place their shots accurately within a reasonable amount of time, from at least twenty five yards. One's tool box should be filled with tools instead of excuses.

[Peally]

Just about anyone can own a gun, but that doesn't mean they have any interest in being a steely eyed gun Jedi. Just about anyone can own a car, but that doesn't mean they have any interest in driving the Indy 500.

If I could afford a performance car you bet your ass I'd want to learn to race it around Road America. Some folks are work obsessed, I choose being poor and having cool hobbies ;)

[Trooper224]

If I could afford a performance car you bet your ass I'd want to learn to race it around Road America. Some folks are work obsessed, I choose being poor and having cool hobbies ;)

I'm picking up what you're putting down. :)

[YVK]

Totally agree on holsters, but my experience with long distance accuracy, especially with USPSA guys, has been different. Around here people build stages with mini-poppers past 15 all the time, and B shooters and above drop them like no big deal. My second to last match there was a 50 yards target, ever so slightly obscured by a light snowfall :). Some chose to run up, most went after that target from 50 without much deliberation. Again, squad of B class dudes, mostly iron sights, A/C hits across the board.

[Tom Givens]

Yep. Not everyone is limited to short ranges. i did some 50 yard work earlier this week on the outdoor range. It's comforting to know what you and your equipment can do if called upon.

[Zincwarrior]

Most people I know don't shoot past seven yards, that doesn't mean that's advisable. At the very least, with a basic level of proficiency one should be able to place their shots accurately within a reasonable amount of time, from at least twenty five yards. One's tool box should be filled with tools instead of excuses.

Except how many have the ability to shoot 60 yards at a range with a pistol? I am not knocking the measure but also not playing the superior dance on people for not having the opportunity to practice long distance shooting.

Edit: I agree completely on the holster issue.

[Trooper224]

Except how many have the ability to shoot 60 yards at a range with a pistol? I am not knocking the measure but also not playing the superior dance on people for not having the opportunity to practice long distance shooting.

Edit: I agree completely on the holster issue.

How would I know? I've never found it hard to find places to shoot a pistol at 100 yards, so I suppose it all depends on how hard you want to try. No superior dance going on here, I just have limited tolerance for lack of ability masked by excuses.

[Duelist]

Why did he keep saying "on it" at random times?

[GJM]

Many of the things mentioned, like holsters, sights and zeroes can be learned over the internet, or with simple instruction. The thing that can’t be bought, or fully learned through instruction, is what I believe is the single most important skill in shooting, regardless of whether you are a defensive or competitive shooter, and that is trigger control. Trigger control only comes from doing the work. As you develop trigger control, you extend the distances you shoot, shrink the target sizes, and increase the speed you shoot difficult targets at.

[revchuck38]

I was part of the March 3 class that Karl referenced in his blog post. I was impressed with the professionalism Karl and his instructors showed in that circumstance - no fussing at the student, just "Okay, try aiming here...not working, try aiming here..." while I was thinking "Why the <bleep> did you put out the time and expense to do this class without making sure your gun hits where you're aiming?". It was a lesson learned for those folks.

If you have a chance to train with Karl, do it. He's near Austin but is taking it to the road this year as well.

Tom Givens, looking forward to training with you at Karl's place this fall!

[Wayne Dobbs]

I routinely shoot out to 100 yards with a very stock G-19 daily carry gun. It's not hard to do if you don't tell yourself you can't do it!

[EVP]

I routinely shoot out to 100 yards with a very stock G-19 daily carry gun. It's not hard to do if you don't tell yourself you can't do it!

Hey Wayne could you go into any observations you have with your students using RDS in your classes?

Thanks

[Zincwarrior]

I routinely shoot out to 100 yards with a very stock G-19 daily carry gun. It's not hard to do if you don't tell yourself you can't do it!

In ancient times when Dinos roamed we would go to an open shooting area in Cali and shoot at boulders about 200 yards away with big hogleg revolvers. Not accurate but very fun! If you have the capacity distance shooting can be quite fun, at least until nature decides distance shooting is no longer for you. "is that the target?" "Nope its a mountain."

[Zincwarrior]

I was part of the March 3 class that Karl referenced in his blog post. I was impressed with the professionalism Karl and his instructors showed in that circumstance - no fussing at the student, just "Okay, try aiming here...not working, try aiming here..." while I was thinking "Why the <bleep> did you put out the time and expense to do this class without making sure your gun hits where you're aiming?". It was a lesson learned for those folks.

If you have a chance to train with Karl, do it. He's near Austin but is taking it to the road this year as well.

Tom Givens, looking forward to training with you at Karl's place this fall!

Its a very nice setup. They usually have a head instructor with multiple assistants helping everyone out. Its really great, especially for beginners. They treat everyone calmly and friendly. Really good if you are a bit of a skittish beginner.
Plus they are strategically located in driving distance of several very excellent BBQ joints. Precious cargo!

[revchuck38]

Its a very nice setup. They usually have a head instructor with multiple assistants helping everyone out. Its really great, especially for beginners. They treat everyone calmly and friendly. Really good if you are a bit of a skittish beginner.
Plus they are strategically located in driving distance of several very excellent BBQ joints. Precious cargo!

Wait, BBQ joints? Nobody told me about that!

[Pacioli]

Wait, BBQ joints? Nobody told me about that!

It's Texas, goes without saying. :)

[Zincwarrior]

It's Texas, goes without saying. :)

It's the law. There must be a barbeque joint within 21 miles of everyone.

[blues]

It's the law. There must be a barbeque joint within 21 miles of everyone.

It used to be 18 but what with the Dems trying to ban anything that's either fun or has cholesterol...well, was 21 really a surprise? ;)

[41magfan]

The flip-side of the same coin, if you will ....

While I can appreciate all the points made by Mr. Rehn concerning unknowing/unprepared students, I really don't see that disconnect being any more troubling or problematic than a hard core gun-guy (with a dozen schools under his belt) that only carries a few hours a day after work and on the weekends.

For a host of practical reasons, the majority of average gun-toters carry small guns in fairly "deep" places, but they’re still armed all the time. Having said that, who is really rolling the dice here? The lesser skilled that’s lesser armed and prepared, or the better skilled who is unarmed the majority of the time he’s “out and about”?

Along these same lines: Running to the store in the evening for a gallon of milk is the most dangerous activity most people participate in, but a disproportionate number of "gun people" seem to have no qualms carrying a small "errand gun" in an "errand holster" for those duties. I see that as fragmented logic, but that’s just me.

Regrettably, most of the teaching venues out there are fairly irrelevant to the collective majority who - statistically speaking - are much more likely to use their guns in self-defense. I know full well the challenges associated with conducting training from pockets, purses, bell-bands and crotch rigs, but that’s the reality for MOST citizen gun carriers and it’s not being addressed by the firearms training community at large.

Square range training doing square range drills is easy, that’s why everyone does it. While that model will always have its purpose, I do wish there were more trainers doing things relevant to preparing the average armed citizen who will NEVER be a gun enthusiast. Those folks outnumber "us" a zillion to one.

[octagon]

The flip-side of the same coin, if you will ....

While I can appreciate all the points made by Mr. Rehn concerning unknowing/unprepared students, I really don't see that disconnect being any more troubling or problematic than a hard core gun-guy (with a dozen schools under his belt) that only carries a few hours a day after work and on the weekends.

For a host of practical reasons, the majority of average gun-toters carry small guns in fairly "deep" places, but they’re still armed all the time. Having said that, who is really rolling the dice here? The lesser skilled that’s lesser armed and prepared, or the better skilled who is unarmed the majority of the time he’s “out and about”?

Along these same lines: Running to the store in the evening for a gallon of milk is the most dangerous activity most people participate in, but a disproportionate number of "gun people" seem to have no qualms carrying a small "errand gun" in an "errand holster" for those duties. I see that as fragmented logic, but that’s just me.

Regrettably, most of the teaching venues out there are fairly irrelevant to the collective majority who - statistically speaking - are much more likely to use their guns in self-defense. I know full well the challenges associated with conducting training from pockets, purses, bell-bands and crotch rigs, but that’s the reality for MOST citizen gun carriers and it’s not being addressed by the firearms training community at large.

Square range training doing square range drills is easy, that’s why everyone does it. While that model will always have its purpose, I do wish there were more trainers doing things relevant to preparing the average armed citizen who will NEVER be a gun enthusiast. Those folks outnumber "us" a zillion to one.

Excellent points. It's not just you. When you look at the availability of courses available you find 10 to 1 for shooting or higher round count square range type courses to every Force on Force or scenario based training program. It gets worse when comparing shooting courses to mindset which is probably 20:1 or worse. Probably can't blame the supply and demand market forces for being what they are but I don't see things changing anytime soon.

[revchuck38]

Excellent points. It's not just you. When you look at the availability of courses available you find 10 to 1 for shooting or higher round count square range type courses to every Force on Force or scenario based training program. It gets worse when comparing shooting courses to mindset which is probably 20:1 or worse. Probably can't blame the supply and demand market forces for being what they are but I don't see things changing anytime soon.

FWIW, that March 3 class was a long day. The morning was a somewhat-advanced shooting course, the afternoon was force-on-force and was the most stressful for me, then we had the low-light class. Karl made a remark along the same lines as yours about the force-on-force training - most people need the force-on-force training more than the shooting, but it's not fun like the shooting is.

[schüler]

I do not really understand the point on the 25 yards to 60 yard discussion. I would proffer few people shoot it well because few people ever have the opportunity to shoot handguns that distance. I certainly don't.50+ proves personal accuracy performance. It shows where your 7yd target bullet goes if you miss - and 99% of the time that long trajectory is higher than most people assume.

There have been a few times in history where it could have made all the difference in the world, Columbine for one.

I get the fact you don't get it. Saying it once is enough.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Karl is great, BBQ is great. He does great FOF. He brings in great guests. Some of which we know here. Interestingly, when I moved to TX, I found KRtraining through a intro gun continuing ed. course from UT - in the catalog of pottery and cooking classes. Every one needs to do FOF. In my first FOF run at Karl's I got shot in the hand at night and outside with a Code Eagle. It was some red goo and I though it was my hand's goo for a second - that gives you thought beyond the square range.

[GJM]

I wasn’t aware of their long history and scope of training:

https://krtraining.com/

[MVS]

I wasn’t aware of their long history and scope of training:

https://krtraining.com/

That is one of the reasons I find his stories interesting. He gets to see a LOT of stuff.

Well that and he is a C.O. GM

[Lomshek]

Regrettably, most of the teaching venues out there are fairly irrelevant to the collective majority who - statistically speaking - are much more likely to use their guns in self-defense. I know full well the challenges associated with conducting training from pockets, purses, bell-bands and crotch rigs, but that’s the reality for MOST citizen gun carriers and it’s not being addressed by the firearms training community at large.

Square range training doing square range drills is easy, that’s why everyone does it. While that model will always have its purpose, I do wish there were more trainers doing things relevant to preparing the average armed citizen who will NEVER be a gun enthusiast. Those folks outnumber "us" a zillion to one.

From his post.

Another student had an Urban Carry crotch holster, which sort of worked, but was completely impractical for doing multiple presentations and reholstering, which was the goal of the lesson.

Kind of hard to run a class where folks have all kinds of different holsters with sweep dangers and questionable trigger discipline habits. It's hard enough to maintain a safe line with OWB/AWB holsters much less when one guy has a coat holster that requires him sweeping his off hand that's holding the holster still, his chest and everyone down line to his left while the guy a few down is pointing his gun at his pubic bone while trying to stuff his piece in his codpiece.

Doing the very basic square range classes with the "average" shooter is all you can safely do. If you're one on one you can do a little more but not with a group.

[Zincwarrior]

FWIW, that March 3 class was a long day. The morning was a somewhat-advanced shooting course, the afternoon was force-on-force and was the most stressful for me, then we had the low-light class. Karl made a remark along the same lines as yours about the force-on-force training - most people need the force-on-force training more than the shooting, but it's not fun like the shooting is.

A bit if a digression but can you detail that more? How is it different?

[Zincwarrior]

50+ proves personal accuracy performance. It shows where your 7yd target bullet goes if you miss - and 99% of the time that long trajectory is higher than most people assume.

There have been a few times in history where it could have made all the difference in the world, Columbine for one.

I get the fact you don't get it. Saying it once is enough.

No you are missing the point. I am saying most people do not have the physical means to practice long range shooting due to distance limits at most ranges. I live in Central Texas and have access to 6 ranges in driving distance including clubs with shooting bays where we compete. Of those ranges maybe one has a bay you could shoot 40 yards with a pistol. Most people just physically do not have access to a location where they can practice longer range pistol shots.

I dry fire with small targets that are equal to 50 yards, but I do not have access to an actual range where I can shoot that.

[BobLoblaw]

Why did he keep saying "on it" at random times?
Cuz he's got that shit. ;)

Probably a nervous filler similar to people saying "um" during their presentations.

[revchuck38]

A bit if a digression but can you detail that more? How is it different?

I'm assuming you're referring to the force-on-force training.

In a shooting drill, you know you're going to shoot the target, and you usually know where and how many times and in what time frame. In a shoot-house situation or in a match, you'll usually have no-shoots, but they'll be plainly marked and hitting one only results in time or point penalties. In the scenarios we went through, you had to decide in real time if drawing your gun was merited and legally defensible and if so, if it was the appropriate response against a "target" that moved quickly and unpredictably and that verbally challenged you. Sometimes it was, other times it was better to un-ass the AO without drawing and call the cops, and other times it wasn't the appropriate response. My brain froze at least once, and that was common. My brain doesn't freeze shooting cardboard.

Karl and the other instructors emphasized to us that as legally armed private citizens we have the right to defend ourselves and our families with deadly force if necessary, but we have no duty to intervene in other situations. That's what the police are trained and obligated to do. Sometimes intervening can be the right thing to do, but that's a decision you have to make based on the circumstances and with the knowledge that you'll be held responsible for that decision. Processing that for the first time in a deadly force situation would be really, really hard. Going through that class began that processing for me, and I'm still thinking about the implications.

[octagon]

From his post.


Kind of hard to run a class where folks have all kinds of different holsters with sweep dangers and questionable trigger discipline habits. It's hard enough to maintain a safe line with OWB/AWB holsters much less when one guy has a coat holster that requires him sweeping his off hand that's holding the holster still, his chest and everyone down line to his left while the guy a few down is pointing his gun at his pubic bone while trying to stuff his piece in his codpiece.

Doing the very basic square range classes with the "average" shooter is all you can safely do. If you're one on one you can do a little more but not with a group.

This may be true of live fire and higher round count or higher repetition type training but is much less so for training done with Simunitions/UTM, Airsoft, Simulators, blue gun scenario based training. Having people draw and present lethal live firearms particularly in line square range setting has plenty of risks even with standard IWB and OWB holsters let alone alternative types of carry. Doing the same with Sims, airsoft or blue guns eliminates the lethal high injury aspects and allows students to both get in some reps at speed and discover the weaknesses of their chosen carry choice. By including scenario training a trainer does so much more for helping a student for what they face than just recoil management and gun running skills of live fire.

Safer, more realistic, incorporating decision making/thinking under pressure and pressure testing gear with a few less reps or less time doing full power recoil management development. This is what the masses need but what the minority (gun and training enthusiasts) want is what the market offers. The 1% er gun/training enthusiasts are willing and plan to go to multiple training courses so they are willing to get some gun skills in one class, some mindset in another class and some tactics in another and so on. The masses need a one stop shop or two to get what they need to cover all their needs as they don't want,plan or desire to go to several one or multi day training courses. If it is not close enough or cheap enough or it takes multiple days they don't sign up and go.

It is why you see the same people and types of people in class after class instead of every class filled with novices and newbies they are filled with "this is my second,third, tenth class" type people. This leads to another point of consideration. How intimidating is it for a new(er) person to take a class with loud lethal guns being used together and then comparing their target to the person next to them who is on their 4th class this year. Compare that to the same person going through a scenario with quieter, lower recoiling, non lethal Sim gun in a scenario related to their daily life. Then watching the same skilled people also makes mistakes or get it wrong when they go through.

[Lomshek]

This may be true of live fire and higher round count or higher repetition type training but is much less so for training done with Simunitions/UTM, Airsoft, Simulators, blue gun scenario based training. Having people draw and present lethal live firearms particularly in line square range setting has plenty of risks even with standard IWB and OWB holsters let alone alternative types of carry. Doing the same with Sims, airsoft or blue guns eliminates the lethal high injury aspects and allows students to both get in some reps at speed and discover the weaknesses of their chosen carry choice. By including scenario training a trainer does so much more for helping a student for what they face than just recoil management and gun running skills of live fire.

Safer, more realistic, incorporating decision making/thinking under pressure and pressure testing gear with a few less reps or less time doing full power recoil management development. This is what the masses need but what the minority (gun and training enthusiasts) want is what the market offers. The 1% er gun/training enthusiasts are willing and plan to go to multiple training courses so they are willing to get some gun skills in one class, some mindset in another class and some tactics in another and so on. The masses need a one stop shop or two to get what they need to cover all their needs as they don't want,plan or desire to go to several one or multi day training courses. If it is not close enough or cheap enough or it takes multiple days they don't sign up and go.

It is why you see the same people and types of people in class after class instead of every class filled with novices and newbies they are filled with "this is my second,third, tenth class" type people. This leads to another point of consideration. How intimidating is it for a new(er) person to take a class with loud lethal guns being used together and then comparing their target to the person next to them who is on their 4th class this year. Compare that to the same person going through a scenario with quieter, lower recoiling, non lethal Sim gun in a scenario related to their daily life. Then watching the same skilled people also makes mistakes or get it wrong when they go through.

The problem with that sims gun training class is now the instructor needs to provide weapons, holsters and ammo for the class which means the class that the unwashed masses already think is too expensive just doubled in price. Add to that the fact that the Bersa 380 that the guy carries in his SmartCarry holster is not available in blue gun or Sims so he can't use his carry method or gun type anyway.

I'm not arguing against any of the points you made. They are absolutely true and valid about what the gun carrying public should do. The reality is that the same 1% of us ever will seek out training and, just like cops, if you paid people and provided the ammo most people still wouldn't do it unless they had to.

Why did I not need anyone holding my hand or walking me through the steps of how to train or get started in competition 20+ years ago? Because the mindset of myself and most others on this forum is very self help oriented. Most of us researched for ourselves whether that was reading class reviews of Gunsite and Thunder Ranch in the 90's and earlier in American Handgunner and similar mags or the web in modern times then went and did it.

A majority of humans want to be spoonfed everything instead of doing the "hard" work of learning and then they reject the info anyway. Look at how many times someone asks for gun buying advice then goes out and buys a Taurus 24/7 because it was $50 bucks cheaper and the salesman said it was just as good as the G19.

Teach people who want to be taught. Do everything you can to make the training relevant while keeping it safe and if the want to use some kind of carry method that makes class practice unsafe they can take the lessons they learned in class and practice dry fire at home with the Thunderwear.

Karl's post seems like more of a gripe about un-prepared students than anything and he's absolutely right. Hopefully someone besides us fringe nuts will read it and learn from it.

[Zincwarrior]

I'm assuming you're referring to the force-on-force training.

In a shooting drill, you know you're going to shoot the target, and you usually know where and how many times and in what time frame. In a shoot-house situation or in a match, you'll usually have no-shoots, but they'll be plainly marked and hitting one only results in time or point penalties. In the scenarios we went through, you had to decide in real time if drawing your gun was merited and legally defensible and if so, if it was the appropriate response against a "target" that moved quickly and unpredictably and that verbally challenged you. Sometimes it was, other times it was better to un-ass the AO without drawing and call the cops, and other times it wasn't the appropriate response. My brain froze at least once, and that was common. My brain doesn't freeze shooting cardboard.

Karl and the other instructors emphasized to us that as legally armed private citizens we have the right to defend ourselves and our families with deadly force if necessary, but we have no duty to intervene in other situations. That's what the police are trained and obligated to do. Sometimes intervening can be the right thing to do, but that's a decision you have to make based on the circumstances and with the knowledge that you'll be held responsible for that decision. Processing that for the first time in a deadly force situation would be really, really hard. Going through that class began that processing for me, and I'm still thinking about the implications.

Thanks.sounds like a good class.

[schüler]

No you are missing the point. I am saying most people do not have the physical means to practice long range shooting due to distance limits at most ranges. I live in Central Texas
...

No, I get it.

Public: Red's southwest Austin has pistol to 100yd.

Private membership: Austin Rifle Club has dedicated 25/50 pistol range.

I'm sure Karl can accommodate any serious interest in private lessons.

[okie john]

Many of the things mentioned, like holsters, sights and zeroes can be learned over the internet, or with simple instruction. The thing that can’t be bought, or fully learned through instruction, is what I believe is the single most important skill in shooting, regardless of whether you are a defensive or competitive shooter, and that is trigger control. Trigger control only comes from doing the work. As you develop trigger control, you extend the distances you shoot, shrink the target sizes, and increase the speed you shoot difficult targets at.

Having worked on public ranges for several years, I firmly believe that 99% of shooters have no idea where their pistols hit or that it's possible/desirable/necessary to zero one. Even on websites that profess to be all about shooting, intelligent discussions of pistol zero are nonexistent--most of them devolve into the "combat accuracy" gibberish on the first page.

This thread once again reminds me of how poorly educated the average shooter is and how switched on the typical PF poster is. Yesterday I met a guy at the range who's about my age. Eventually the conversation drifted to shooting handguns at distances beyond 100 yards. When I mentioned Elmer Keith, he said, "Who's that?"

Facepalm.

I described Elmer's method, then used it to get a first-round hit at 100 yards with a G19 and ball ammo. Then I wrote Elmer's name on a Post-It note so this knucklehead can go do his homework.

Some days I don't know whether to feel experienced or just old.


Okie John

[Zincwarrior]

No, I get it.

Public: Red's southwest Austin has pistol to 100yd.

Private membership: Austin Rifle Club has dedicated 25/50 pistol range.

I'm sure Karl can accommodate any serious interest in private lessons.

Red's has a 100 yard range? didn't know that. Thanks!

[Duelist]

No you are missing the point. I am saying most people do not have the physical means to practice long range shooting due to distance limits at most ranges. I live in Central Texas and have access to 6 ranges in driving distance including clubs with shooting bays where we compete. Of those ranges maybe one has a bay you could shoot 40 yards with a pistol. Most people just physically do not have access to a location where they can practice longer range pistol shots.

I dry fire with small targets that are equal to 50 yards, but I do not have access to an actual range where I can shoot that.

They don't have rifle ranges near you?

[Zincwarrior]

They don't have rifle ranges near you?

To shoot pistol?
This is question not a criticism.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

One reason folks don't like FOF or shoot houses, is sometimes you stand there as a failure or looking like an idiot. That shatters your warrior mindset. One thing the old NTI did at initial intro briefing was to say when that happens - don't whine. I won't tell you why I didn't whine at some interactions. :rolleyes:

I did learn from them. About trigger control - typical gun guy - buys gun and it shoots off center, up for down. Well, who can handle the Glock grip (we all know it's ergonomically flawed). Those damn sights are off, better crank them almost off the gun. Been there with my friends. I used to shoot to right - why - Tom Givens saw my grip and now I am pretty accurate for me.

But who wants to be told it is you? That's a drop down the dominance hierarchy. Being a NY'er by birth and a scientist - I did not have the initial warrior ego investment and had a learning paradigm. Teach me!

Thus, when a 'warrior' friend of mine took his new semi to the range, it wouldn't shoot straight. Must be the sights. Could you give it a try? OK - dead, beautifully center in the bullseye. OH, well. Note, I did not fire a second shot. Just gave him the gun back with a knowing grin (I'm not stupid!).

Karl runs some great FOF where success is not guaranteed and the solution is not always a shoot'em up.

[Duelist]

To shoot pistol?
This is question not a criticism.

I can't pretend to know what the rules are everywhere, but rifle ranges typically have a minimum of 100 yards available to shoot at. My local range impact area is a mountain, and we have targets out to over 500 yards. I frequently shoot pistols at targets that are 100 or more yards away there. Not that I always hit them, but the range is there and the rules don't preclude the practice. If you want to shoot a pistol that far, it only makes sense to use a facility that is designed for extended range shooting.

[BN]

When I mentioned Elmer Keith, he said, "Who's that?"
Facepalm.
Some days I don't know whether to feel experienced or just old.
Okie John

I was at a State Pistol match one time. I don't remember if it was IDPA or an older USPSA. One stage was a cantina stage with table etc. On the table was a picture of Jeff Cooper. I overheard somebody asking who was the old man in the picture. Facepalm. :(

[okie john]

To shoot pistol?
This is question not a criticism.

Sure, it just depends on the rules.

At my club, members who have demonstrated a solid understanding of safety are allowed to do off-menu stuff if circumstances permit. The key is earning the range master's trust. It also helps to clear your activity on a case-by-case basis so you avoid inspiring the unwashed masses to outrun their headlights. For instance, don't expect to shoot rollover prone at 100 yards with a Roland Special on Hunter Sight-In Day. That's the day you should help Cletus zero his 30-30, and come back after deer season for the fun stuff.


Okie John

[Lomshek]

Originally Posted by okie john
When I mentioned Elmer Keith, he said, "Who's that?"
Facepalm.
Some days I don't know whether to feel experienced or just old.
Okie John


I was at a State Pistol match one time. I don't remember if it was IDPA or an older USPSA. One stage was a cantina stage with table etc. On the table was a picture of Jeff Cooper. I overheard somebody asking who was the old man in the picture. Facepalm. :(

To be honest though you have to bear in mind how long one has to have been into guns to have heard either of those names in more than passing reference. Yeah some of us lunatics read their writings in the 80's (Elmer's even then were re-postings obviously) but you have to have been into guns seriously and reading everything there was in the 90's to know anything about those two and other innovators from the early years of "modern" shooting (not sure if Elmer would count as a modern guy or just a guy who pushed the envelope in his day).

[45dotACP]

Very interesting...I've not heard much about Karl Rehn, but it sounds like I ought to try to make it down to train with him at some point.

In terms of shooting past 15 yards, I've found that I can shoot fairly well out to about 25 yards with no problems, and I can keep the magazine of my 1911 in a USPSA metric target at 50 yards.

I've really been wanting to try my 8-3/8" model 57 in a Silhouette match or to take it to 100 yards. The thing shoots about as well as I could expect to shoot a rifle at 25 yards good lord.

[CCT125US]

Having worked on public ranges for several years, I firmly believe that 99% of shooters have no idea where their pistols hit or that it's possible/desirable/necessary to zero one. Even on websites that profess to be all about shooting, intelligent discussions of pistol zero are nonexistent--most of them devolve into the "combat accuracy" gibberish on the first page.

This thread once again reminds me of how poorly educated the average shooter is and how switched on the typical PF poster is. Yesterday I met a guy at the range who's about my age. Eventually the conversation drifted to shooting handguns at distances beyond 100 yards. When I mentioned Elmer Keith, he said, "Who's that?"

Facepalm.

I described Elmer's method, then used it to get a first-round hit at 100 yards with a G19 and ball ammo. Then I wrote Elmer's name on a Post-It note so this knucklehead can go do his homework.

Some days I don't know whether to feel experienced or just old.


Okie John

His method works extremely well once understood.

[okie john]

To be honest though you have to bear in mind how long one has to have been into guns to have heard either of those names in more than passing reference. Yeah some of us lunatics read their writings in the 80's (Elmer's even then were re-postings obviously) but you have to have been into guns seriously and reading everything there was in the 90's to know anything about those two and other innovators from the early years of "modern" shooting (not sure if Elmer would count as a modern guy or just a guy who pushed the envelope in his day).

I think part of is is how long you've been into guns. Another part is how deep--a new shooter who does some research into action shooting will soon stumble across mentions of Jeff Cooper, and a new shooter who does some research into handgun hunting will run into mentions of Elmer Keith.

Keith was definitely a pioneer like McGivern, but I feel like the modern school started when Jeff Cooper opened API.

And just writing that sentence makes me feel old.


Okie John