I think of a "serious shooter" (or "switched on" or whatever adjective you prefer) as someone who puts in concentrated mental and physical effort to become a better shooter, and who adopts new gear and technique based on actual trial rather than by popular opinion.
I think the real differentiator is whether they measure their performance. That would include a) using a timer in training, b) keeping logs, and c) shooting established tests/drills and scoring targets afterwards.
Okie John
Last edited by okie john; 02-03-2015 at 11:11 AM.
I think effort level summarizes it. Bubba don't care and Bubba don't try. Someone tracking input/output and learning or adjusting is "serious."
Think for yourself. Question authority.
I think this is a pretty good essential definition. Though 'serious shooter' is a term I think I stay away from, because it feels like it minimizes people with other priorities outside of however we might define a serious shooter. Now that I say that, I am really wondering whether I have used the term...
Technical excellence supports tactical preparedness
Lord of the Food Court
http://www.gabewhitetraining.com
I think these two sum up my views almost perfectly. In my mind, and to Todd's point, the only word I'd add to the two words being defined is: FOCUS.
If you're serious about your shooting, then you are likely focused in some way or another on it. How that manifested is influenced by the things BaiHu mentioned. Everybody's situation is different, budgets, time, etc... but the "serious" "focused" attitude can be displayed regardless of those realities of life. JMHO. Out.
If you can't taste the sarcasm, try licking the screen.
Gettin’ old and blind ain’t for sissies. ~ 41Magfan
I obviously disagree, as using the context clues it is pretty clear that people mean different things by it. Some would seem to exclude competition shooters. Some would seem to exclude anyone that doesn't do exactly what they do and how they do it with the equipment they use for the reasons they use. Some would seem to exclude anyone that doesn't carry every single day, 24 hours a day.
it seems to be becoming a catch-all that basically means "anyone I agree with that does what I do" and thereby excludes everyone else.
To that end, I'd like to know what people actually state that it means relative to the way they appear to use the term.
I never viewed it in terms of "serious" and whatever the antonym of that would be...recreational? Lackadaisical? Satirical? Idk...
To me, there are sport shooters, defensive/offensive shooters, and people to whom gun ownership is important because it is their right. These can overlap, or perhaps they never do. Some competitive shooters, like Bob Vogel, also focus on defensive shooting (he was a police officer at some point IIRC). Some defensive shooters, like Frank Proctor, or our very own King of Junk Carry, also shoot competition. Some people, like Eric Grauffel, shoot only competition, and some defensive shooting instructors never shoot competition. Some people own guns for those reasons, some people own guns because they can.
That last group I think is where many people started out. Some never move past that and as long as they're safe and responsible, that's great. If any of the above is unsafe and irresponsible, I will have notions about them. James Yeager or Tex Grebner are examples of just such derp from a few different categories. I would not seriously consider them for much, but I have no doubt that they consider themselves quite serious. JMHO
A serious shooter is someone who takes shooting seriously. I know that's a tautology, but come on, this is ridiculous.
"He's a serious USPSA shooter because he dry fires three times a week and trains hard in live fire."
"He's a serious self-defense shooter because he makes careful choices about his gear and attends a serious class every year."
This isn't rocket science, brah.