"Works for me" ... a slippery slope?

[45dotACP]

A guy local to me has been getting back into USPSA production with a SD9 from Smith and Wesson. He ordinarily shoots M&Ps but he's shredding like he usually does with a 300 dollar pistol.



Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

[ReverendMeat]

Agreed. I know of exactly 0 people who train and shoot crappy guns.

I actually know one depending on how you define "Crappy". Dude I used to work with shot pistol competitions with springfield XDs. He shot the piss out of them and had a bin full of spare parts which I've never seen any other XD guy have.

Good point about assembly. I do trust my work as do several others who carry rifles into harm’s way daily. I was privileged to be twice certified by Will Larson (RIP). I have and use the proper tools and techniques.

Shit I had no idea Will Larson died, he's one of the few gun dudes I've actually met, that sucks

[einherjarvalk]

"Works for me" needs to be replaced with "works for my purposes." Getting people to be honest about why they own what they own would immediately clear up a huge amount of derp on the internet about guns.

If your purpose is impressing the 19-year-old you're dating that year with a single trip to the range and a target hosed at 7 yards, you can get away with any gun. If the purpose is cost-efficiency and reliability for a given "mission" (in this case, defense of self and family), that spectrum narrows and an old 6920 with an Aimpoint and a Surefire clamped to the FSB are just as valid as a $2,500 BCM SBR with all the tactical trimmings.

The statement remains true in both circumstances, but only one of the two users' input is valuable on the subject.

[ViniVidivici]

There’s a significant difference in the dismissive “it works for me” usually used to justify sub-optimal gear choices and the world of “I have practiced and trained with my particular setup and can meet or exceed established standards that have been found to require a degree of proficiency/reliability. Therefore, I can attest that my choices are sufficient for my needs.”

Nailed it.

[rob_s]

“Works for me” is one of those phrases I’ve always loved, as it’s an easy way to know when the conversation is over.

Maybe it’s a way to dismiss sub-optimal gear or technique, but it’s also a way to dismiss self-righteous know-it-all busy-bodies who seem incapable of keeping their opinions to themselves.

[Cory]

I'd like to see the rifle. Just cause I like guns.

I think it was @AsianJedi I saw mention his hatred for "Works for me". I could be wrong. But the video I watched was about using the phrase to justify things like an inefficent draw. If you're looking for peak performance than "works for me" software is a great way to justify poor performance.

As far as hardware, I think there is more wiggle room. What meets my financial ability and what meets yours might not match. So something might "work" for your finances that wont for mine. At the same time, there is a definite bottom level of acceptable quality. And each person makes there own choice on where that is.

-Cory

[rob_s]

I think it was @AsianJedi I saw mention his hatred for "Works for me". I could be wrong. But the video I watched was about using the phrase to justify things like an inefficent draw. If you're looking for peak performance than "works for me" software is a great way to justify poor performance.

I don’t understand why anyone give a shit about someone else’s inefficient draw? This is what I mean about busy-body know-it-all’s that just can’t seem to keep from meddling in other people’s shit. They see sumdude at the local idpa match with an “inefficient draw” and they just can’t keep their goddamn tongue in their head and insist on wandering over to the guy and telling him all his problems. You know what “works for me” really means in that context? It’s a polite way of saying “go fuck yourself, I did t ask your opinion”.

The funny thing is, I can’t recall ever seeing a GM wander over to someone and tell them their draw was shittty. It’s always some a/b-class smart guy that thinks he has it all figured out. Some jagoff trying to get YouTube clicks making a response video to some other jagoff all while sighing ironically along the way. Some guy that just qualified Marksman last week and hasn’t even got the new membership card yet.

Now, the flip side is the guy that goes to a class, pays money, takes time off work, purportedly is seeking instruction and improvement who then shrugs it off when Ben Stoeger suggests he make a change to his draw and replies with “works for me”.

[Cory]

I don’t understand why anyone give a shit about someone else’s inefficient draw? This is what I mean about busy-body know-it-all’s that just can’t seem to keep from meddling in other people’s shit. They see sumdude at the local idpa match with an “inefficient draw” and they just can’t keep their goddamn tongue in their head and insist on wandering over to the guy and telling him all his problems. You know what “works for me” really means in that context? It’s a polite way of saying “go fuck yourself, I did t ask your opinion”.

The funny thing is, I can’t recall ever seeing a GM wander over to someone and tell them their draw was shittty. It’s always some a/b-class smart guy that thinks he has it all figured out. Some jagoff trying to get YouTube clicks making a response video to some other jagoff all while sighing ironically along the way. Some guy that just qualified Marksman last week and hasn’t even got the new membership card yet.

Now, the flip side is the guy that goes to a class, pays money, takes time off work, purportedly is seeking instruction and improvement who then shrugs it off when Ben Stoeger suggests he make a change to his draw and replies with “works for me”.

I think when someone is an instructor of recognized ability and others are seeking them out for help improving than offering advice is warranted. Your opinion may be different.

In that scenerio, "works for me" is nothing but a hinderance for improvment by justifying janky bullshit, like uou mentioned at the end of your post. Nobody said anything about offering unsolicited advice to those who dont want it.

-Cory

[okie john]

It's more about a self-check-up to make sure that I'm not rationalizing my way into a sub-par setup.

The fact that you're asking yourself this question indicates that you already know the answer and that you're on the right track.


Okie John

[rob_s]

I think when someone is an instructor of recognized ability and others are seeking them out for help improving than offering advice is warranted. Your opinion may be different.

In that scenerio, "works for me" is nothing but a hinderance for improvment by justifying janky bullshit, like uou mentioned at the end of your post. Nobody said anything about offering unsolicited advice to those who dont want it.

-Cory

I’ve seen far, far, far more of the former situation in my guy travels than the latter, and many of the posts in this very thread are in that vein.

But even in the latter, while I agree it’s stupid, any instructor worth their salt just walks away and puts that person in ignore for the rest of the class. I learned that the first time I so much as ran a drills night at my local club. Walk up to a guy, offer his some advice (he’s purported,y to learn, possibly even from me since he came to my drills) get a “works for me” type response and it’s the best news I heard all night. Now instead of everyone else getting 1/24th of my attention, they all get 1/23rd.