Shooting – Page 10 – Shall Not Be Questioned

More on Gun Culture 2.0

The Gun Culture 1.0 broke down for a number of reasons, including the urbanization of the U.S. and single-parent families becoming the norm, and Gun Culture 2.0 reflects that fact, as well as the fact that in todayâ€™s media environment,Â the deer now have guns.

The deer in this case being us, and the hunters being the media. Bitter grew up in Gun Culture 1.0 in Oklahoma, where they didn’t teach the girls the ways of the gun culture. She was brought into GC 2.0 in Massachusetts by a friend from Colorado, who was also raised in GC 1.0, except she was taught to hunt, and is still primarily a hunter. I’m not entirely certain GC 1.0 vs. GC 2.0 really has to do with how you shoot, or what you shoot (be they pepper poppers or Bambi), so much as your attitudes, and how you understand it and relate to the gun culture. I’ve met people who primarily hunt that I would say are thoroughly GC 2.0, and people who primarily shoot who are thoroughly GC 1.0. I think we need to be very careful about taking attitudes like, “Oh, hunting.. that’s so Gun Culture 1.0” and “Bullseye shooting? That’s so 1970s man. Get with the times!” The biggest drivers of the change involve attitudes, not what you shoot, or what sports you participate in. Much of thisÂ cultural shift has come from the concealed carry revolution, which has necessarily come with a whole host of new attitudes, beliefs, and new shooting sports.

For instance, there are often different ideas about gun safety between GC 1.0 and 2.0. GC 1.0 folks are more inclined to believe drawing from holster or moving with a firearm is an activity that is inherently dangerous. This is particularly funny in Pennsylvania, where we’ve had concealed carry for a while, and you hear this attitude from GC 1.0 people who have LTCs and carry! Let me express my GC 2.0 attitude and exclaim, “Dear god, if you ever need your pistol, how the hell do you plan to employ it without blowing a hole in your ass?” Also, again expressing 2.0 sentiments, and having attended both 1.0 and 2.0 matches, I’ve been corrected for minor safety issues at 2.0 matches that no 1.0 match would ever bat an eye over. The 2.0 culture accommodates the fact that they do engage in riskier activities by having absolutely zero tolerance for unsafe gun handling.

There is also a difference in how the two cultures approach their right to keep and bear arms. In GC 1.0 people either gave it little or no thought, or more heavily emphasized resistance to tyrannical government as the primary purpose for keeping and bearing arms. I think they were right. It’s pretty clear from the early debates on the Second Amendment that keeping the people empowered to resist tyranny was its primary purpose. Gun Culture 2.0 tends to focus more on the self-defense aspects of the Second Amendment, or tends to view resistance to tyranny as a subset of the overriding self-defense purpose. While the resistance to tyranny aspect may have been more what was on the founder’s minds, the self-defense aspects resonates more broadly with a modern and more urbanized audience, and particularly resonates much more strongly with women.

But if there’s one trait I would hope for in Gun Culture 2.0 people, it’s tolerance. We define ourselves, I think, by tolerance to people who haven’t traditionally participated in the gun culture, namely women and minorities, but I would also hope for a different kind of tolerance, and that is for people who participate in GC 1.0, and who reciprocate that tolerance to us. Whether you’re 1.0 or 2.0, you’re doing the entire issue a grave disservice if you’re taking a divisive and intolerant attitude towards the people in the other camp. I’ve met plenty of GC 1.0 who think IDPA is recklessly dangerous, and plenty of GC 2.0 people who think hunting is for “Fudds”, and sports like Bullseye shooting is for grouchy old men clinging to the past. I think both 1.0 and 2.0, along with their favored sports and favored guns, can both survive and move forward together into the a new gun culture, let’s call it 3.0, who’s overriding value is tolerance for all things shooty, and that is intolerant only of intolerance.

LAPD Combat Qualification

Joe Huffman discusses the LAPD combat qualification course he set up for a local gun club in Idaho. Barron Barnett worked up this this excellent video:

I suspect the reaction of our opponents to this will be not remarkably different from the strategy ostriches employ. Ordinary citizens can never shoot better than the police. This is just not possible. They don’t have the training!

LAPD Police Qualifier Test: How Gun Nuts Did

Joe Huffman decided to set up the LAPD Combat Course qualifier at a USPSA match:

What this means is that in a little over a week we will have data on how the shooting skills of “a bunch of beer guzzling, uneducated hillbillies” stack up to the qualification course for a major metropolitan police force.

You’ll also note that in order to comply with USPSA rules, Joe actually had to make the course more difficult. Well, the results are in.

“We put 22 people through the stages. 20 people passed with a 60% or greater. That is 90.9% passage. The best results were by Roger who scored 95.1%. Roger was shooting a revolver.”

Now, could we please dispense with this notion that gun nuts are just wild-eyed mad men who will just kill all manner of innocents if they are ever forced to recklessly defend themselves? Would a police academy class have a 90.9% passage rate on a combat qualifier?

It’s Reloading Time

Several days of ridiculously nice weather had me itching to take the AR-15 to the range, but suddenly realizing I’m way too low on .223 ammo interfered with my plans. Looking online, ammunition is still scarce and expensive, so it’s time to dust off the reloading bench. Fortunately, I still have plenty of Varget, plenty of 55gr bullets, and a metric crapload of once fired .223 brass. I’m going to fill up all my plastic containers, so my goal is 250 rounds.

I also figure as long as I’m getting everything together, I might as well finish off all my once fired 6.8 Remington SPC and get the rest of those loaded. It’s not more than 50 rounds, but I never really shoot the 6.8 AR. I don’t look all that favorably on boutique rounds these days, and I’d sort of sorry I made an investment in it. My remaining 6.8 once fired brass is stuff I brought back from the Gun Blogger Rendezvous in Reno, years ago, so it gives you an idea of how seldom I shoot that caliber.

I think the next AR I build needs to be a .22LR. It’s hard to have less than several thousand rounds on hand, and it’s cheap.

RAND Study on NYPD Firearms Training

Chris in Alaska has a link to a RAND study on the NYPD which confirms much of what was said here. From Chris’s conclusion regarding the RAND study:

As for the competency ofÂ civiliansÂ vs. police… Â It looks like best case a NYPD police recruit gets around two to four days at the range plus maybe up to 33 hours of classroom academics that could relate in some manner to weapons. Â Every six months they get one day at the range and 95 rounds of ammo for practice on a scripted known-distance target practice style range.

Alaska Tactical’s Defensive Handgun IÂ course is 24 hours of instruction over three range days. Â It also has pre-requisites, so applicants probably have some previous experience bringing them up to match or exceed the 33 hours at NYPD. Â Finally, the class size is small with a good coach to student ratio. Â Front Sight’s basic defensive pistol course is 4 days with 32 hours of instruction. Â That is clearly at least on par with if not exceeding the NYPD police academy requirements.

Furthermore, any civilian who attends IDPA or USPSA matches once every six months or more is getting more refresher training than NYPD. Â Heck, the civilian who goes to the range once every few months and puts a box or two of ammo through their pistol, alongÂ withÂ maybe a little dry fire at home, is doing WAY more than NYPD.

This is not to pooh pooh the profession, but to dispel the myth that a badge imparts magical gun handling competence. I think the officers in the NYPD case were correct to use lethal force, and everyone knows that firing under stress makes your groups go to shit. But a great way to inoculate against that effect is competition. Anyone know of any IPSC or IDPA matches run in New York City? I’d bet there’s not a one.

Great Social Commentary on Ammunition

Over at Joe Huffman’s. I will excerpt a portion:

Hollow points are evil because they’re made to inflict maximum damage upon soft flesh. Jacketed rounds are evil because they’re designed for military use, and penetrate armor. Lead rounds are evil because they poison our beloved vultures. Non-lead rounds are evil because they start fires and/or penetrate armor.

In response to concerns over the innate evilness of so much of their product line, in January of this year ammunition manufacturer ATK/Teksystems began investigating the possibility of crafting bullets exclusively from puppy love and rainbows, to be dubbed their new PLRB line of politically sensitive ammunition.

RTWT. I have nothing to add either.

NY Police Officer on NYPD Training

A reader sent this along, from a NY cop detailing how much training the typical New York Cop receives. Someone in the comment section brought up citizen concealed carry holders, and he remarks:

Any average CCW citizen who practices more then twice a year pretty much has most of the department beat in terms of training.

That’s scary. I’m also struck by this admission:

The NYPD offers once a month training for members to use, on their own time. However, all that is done during these sessions are the same basic dumbed down qualification exercises. You will only receive real help if you outright fail. Missed 12 out of fifty @ 7 yards? GOOD ENOUGH!

MOST NYPD officers fire their FIRST gun, ever in their entire lives, at the police academy, some as young as 21 to as old as 35 shooting for their very first time, and on a DAO pistol.

As I mentioned, when you destroy your civilian gun culture, you have nothing to draw from when you need a cadre of men proficient at arms, and bureaucracies are very very bad at providing this kind of training. This is merely dangerous when you can’t hire competent gunmen to be police, when you can’t find them for military purposes, it represents an existential threat to national security.

This would have been no surprise to William Church, New Yorker, Civil War veteran, founder of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Journalist for the New York Times, and founder of the National Rifle Association. Nor would it have been any great revelation to General George Wingate, New Yorker, Civil War veteran, and also a founder of the National Rifle Association. These men started the NRA to address the very problem Bloomberg now faces today, who believed the solution was a healthy civilian shooting culture, even in New York City. Indeed, the NRA’s first range wasn’t far:

The first President of the “National Rifle Association,” as it was called, wasÂ General Ambrose E. BURNSIDE, who made a very good figure-head, but under whose leadershipÂ nothing was accomplished. It was not till the second year of its existence that any realÂ progress was made. Then, by the efforts of the new President, Colonel CHURCH of theÂ “Army and Navy Journal,” and the Secretary, Mr. George W. WINGATE, the New York LegislatureÂ of 1872 was induced to appropriate $25,000 for the purchase of a range near New York city,Â the Association agreeing to raise $5,000 on its part.

Can you imagine the State of New York helping NRA build a range near New York City today, and allocating money for its construction? Witness Chicago doing everything it possibly can to keep ranges out of its city. Witness New York City, whose Mayor goes into fits any time we dare to speak of restoring the Second Amendment for New Yorkers, including for its police officers. Other, more sensible New Yorkers, from an earlier time when people did not recoil at the thought of firearms, knew the solution. It’s a pity Bloomberg never will.

Excellent Analysis of Empire State Building Shooting

From When the Balloon Goes Up.

The Changing Demographic of Gun Show Attendees

While the silly season is not yet in full swing, Bitter and I are still trying to fill seats at the county Friends of the NRA dinner, so that means working gun shows (don’t forget to sing the fun show song). The most popular area gun show used to be hosted at the Valley Forge Convention Center, but they’ve recently turned that into a casino, forcing the shows to move to a convention hall just up the road in Oaks. So Sunday I get to sit there at our table and not wander, lest I might find something, like a Trapdoor Springfield in very good condition, which tempts me greatly to part with money I shouldn’t be spending on guns right now. Of course, said Springfield was on the table next to us, and it called to me the whole time. I resisted, however.

But there’s a few things that struck me about the crowd compared to even a few years ago. Generally speaking, guns shows were mostly a sausage fest, and the women you did see tended to be bored girlfriends who were dragged there by their boyfriend. What’s surprising is that not only are there more women at the shows, but they often have kids in tow. Gun shows seem to have developed into family affairs where mom and dad bring the kids along. Bitter talked a good bit to someone who was a 4dH mom, and who was interested in the dinner (since the grants fund 4H programs). The other demographic that seems to have grown quite a bit at the shows are middle class blacks. Sure, you still have your stereotypical fat middle-aged white guys, but the demographics are getting younger, more diverse, and trending toward families. Needless to say this is not good news for our opponents.

Shooting Olympian to Address GOP Convention

Provided that a hurricane doesn’t interrupt the GOP convention, they have invited shooting Olympic record holder Kim Rhode to speak at the event. In fact, I’m very impressed by the fact that the GOP does not shy away from mentioning her shooting records in her biography. There’s no sugarcoating it, they are straight up talking about Rhode’s accomplishments as a serious competitive shooter. It’s a context that doesn’t threaten people, but makes clear that shooting is an American pastime.

Kim Rhode, the co-host of the Outdoor Channelâ€™s Step Outside program, is the only American Olympian to win five medals in an individual event in five consecutive Olympic Games. Sheâ€™s the most successful female shooter at the Olympics, the only triple Olympic Champion and the only woman to have won two gold medals for Double Trap. Most recently, she brought home gold in skeet shooting at the 2012 Summer Games in London, equaling the world record of 99 out of 100 clays. When double trap was eliminated from the Olympic Games, she set a new world record in skeet at the 2007 world cup competitions, going on to win the silver at the 2008 Summer Olympics in womenâ€™s skeet.

Also, of the 11 Olympians attending, she’s one of three selected to speak.