The Waffle House shooting and guns
[See UPDATE below.]
The shooting at the Waffle House that killed four has sparked the usual discussion about firearm control. I read a number of articles about it, and the comments sections were rife with people on the left crowing about the fact that the hero of the incident (who denies being a hero, but is) managed to disarm the shooter even though the former didn’t have a gun himself.
I have several responses to that.
The only reason that James Shaw (the hero) managed to succeed was that the shooter was reloading and Shaw saw his opportunity. It was that, or die. Fortunately, Shaw was stronger than the perp. But if Shaw had been armed as well, it’s possible that fewer people would have died, because he wouldn’t have had to wait for a propitious moment.
Of course, it’s also possible that if Shaw had been armed, more people would have been hurt rather than fewer. But I’ll go with the defender with a gun over the defender without one, when faced with an armed perp.
In fact, if the Waffle House had not been a gun-free zone (it apparently is, as best I can tell) this shooting might not have happened there, because shooters realize that gun-free zones present a golden opportunity for them.
In addition, the shooter got away and remains at large. If Shaw or any other person in that Waffle House had had a firearm, that part of the story might be different, and the shooter might either be dead, wounded, or in custody. As it was, he was able to get away.
The shooter’s history points to mental illness in this particular case. His guns were confiscated because of previous suspicious incidents, but:
“There’s certainly evidence that there’s some sort of mental health issues involved,” Tazewell County Sheriff Robert Huston said. But he said deputies returned the guns to Reinking’s father on the promise that he would “keep the weapons secure and out of the possession of Travis.”
Reinking’s father “has now acknowledged giving them back” to his son, Nashville Police spokesman Don Aaron said.
Human beings are the loophole, and there’s no way to fix that.
UPDATE 7 PM: Police have taken the shooter (“alleged shooter,” but I think there’s little doubt about this one) into custody. They found him (from a citizen’s tip) in the woods behind an apartment complex. He was armed with “a silver Kimber semi-automatic weapon with .45 caliber ammunition, flashlight and holster.” He had a long history of delusional ideation and behavior, and I think this guy is going to go the way of the the Aurora shooter.
It seems that there is a pattern of recent shootings that involve people who have been tagged by the mental health system and yet obtain weapons, even if (in this case, for example) the police have disarmed them because of their suspicious and unstable behavior. The law did its job, but the mental health system did not, and if the reports about the shooter’s father giving him back his weapons are accurate, the father did not do his.
The father returned the guns to his son?
Seems like that would make him an accessory to murder charge.
The sins of the sons to be visited upon the fathers?
The shooter is reported to have walked into the Waffle House naked except for a jacket.
I’d think that that was a big clue to “mental health issues.”
As for the AR-15, as I have commented before, it is not the weapon, it is the person that uses the weapon who is at fault.
Thus, our attention and any solutions must be directed at the shooter, and not at the weapon he used.
That being said, it would seem to me that the shooter’s father, by reportedly giving his confiscated weapons back to his son, has opened himself up to all sorts of criminal and civil liability.
Finally, on the issue of what might have happened had someone in the “gun free” Waffle House had a gun to defend himself and others, I note the reports out in the last day or two that a couple of years ago the CDC conducted an Obama ordered $10 million dollar study on gun violence.
Among it’s conclusions was that there were somewhere between an estimated 500,000 to 3,000,000 instances each year of people using handguns in self defense situations, most of which did not result in any deaths–BUT THE CDC NEVER RELEASED THE STUDY.
Gee, I wonder what that was?
I guess it won’t matter to the anti-gun people, but this would be another case of existing gun laws working except for the responsible people not being responsible.
The person that uses the weapon is at fault but the optic is not good and very difficult to win independents over when you have psychos shooting people in a mass number everyday. You are right, you are not wrong but when you have crazies mass shooting people in the news everyday throwing the 2nd amendment around in debates just isn’t enough to win you more supports to prevent an eradication of the 2nd amendment. If pro-gun people wants to keep their guns, they need to come up with some real solutions to take guns away from psychos, doing nothing and hiding behind the 2nd amendment means the left will eventually win, just like same sex marriage and abortion.
Clearly all we need is common sense gun control legislation to address and prevent these type of situations. At least that’s what the usual suspects are saying, again.
Put me down as a ‘yes’ on prosecuting the father as an accessory to murder.
The fundamental problem with the gun control controversy is that one side posits facts while the other makes an emotional argument for gun control; that is they make a quasi-religious argument based upon belief (and feelings) rather than fact.
Most arguments for gun control proceed from the basis that the primary purpose of a gun of any sort is to kill, but this is wrong. In fact, the primary purpose of a gun is to shoot, just as the primary purpose of a knife is to cut.
Pro gun control advocates reject that parallel by noting that, e.g., the fundamental purpose of a knife is to cut, as a tool, even though it can be used to kill. A gun, on the other hand, can only kill.
They reject the fact that we have staple guns, nail guns, glue guns. My mother even had a cookie gun which expressed cookie dough, but no, those parallels are dismissed because while the purpose of a knife is to cut, the purpose of a gun must be to kill.
Until one can disabuse the pro-gun activists of that faulty premise on which they base their argument, no real discussion is possible. They, however, can never accept the faultiness of their premise because if they do, then their entire argument implodes.
Present all the equations and facts you want, cite Tycho Brahe, Copernicus, Kepler or Galilleo ad nauseam; it doesn’t matter. They still believe that it is the sun which moves around the earth.
Adam Lanza’s mother, although actively seeking serious mental health help for her seriously mentally ill son, KEPT GUNS IN THE HOUSE. Kip Kinkel’s father, concerned because his son was depressed, got him a pistol to make the kid feel better.
This guy was, as Neo points out, disarmed by the proper authorities–an anomaly–but even that didn’t work.
” If pro-gun people wants to keep their guns, they need to come up with some real solutions to take guns away from psychos, . . . [Dave @ 2:41]
I absolutely disagree. The facts refute this statement. Gun deaths, and gun homicides, are such a statistically small percentage of the deaths in this country that mass-shootings are actually quite uncommon.
They don’t seem uncommon because the media sensationalizes each and every on of them. It’s like trying to draw a parallel between deaths in airplane crashes and deaths in car crashes. You usually only hear about car deaths on the local news, if you hear about them at all (and then, it’s usually only a single report), but even a small plane crash makes national news and coverage oftentimes continues for several days because of its sensational nature. Plane crashes, like multiple gun deaths, draw national eyes, car crashes rarely do.
Finally, we used to take “psychos” away from guns by institutionalizing them. Over the last half-century, the left has pushed Progressive policies to mainstream these very same people. Now the argument is “remove the guns!”
Funny how that worked out!
I visited a gun store the other day. As an ex-hippie poet, it didn’t come natural to me. I took a quick look around, then fled.
It may take a while but I’ll get over it. I’m thinking about a S&W 686+ with 4″ barrel. Then training.
I am interested in self-defense of course, but I also want to be a problem for the gun grabbers.
People aren’t just afraid of guns, which are a tool, they seem to actually be afraid of tools in general.
An ax? A hammer? Eek!
An acquaintance literally had a panic attack about the idea of using power tools. Another gets panic attacks over the idea of driving, she’s convinced she might lose control and drive into oncoming traffic. And it was unnerving to drive over a bridge with someone having a panic attack about bridges.
But when people are even scared of cooking
equipment like the Instant Pot? C’mon, it’s getting silly.
James Shaw Jr. is a hero in every sense of the word, he knew his life was on the line and he charged towards the man with the gun. He said if he was going down the gunman would have to work for it and then after the fact Shaw was modest about his actions. This is what men are supposed to do in dangerous situations and I hope to learn more about him.
As for the mentally ill man with the gun who we should not name, he deserves no fame or recognition, we find out he has been known to be a menace and his firearms were taken from him and given to his father who at some point returned them. That was not a good thing nor was the fact Mr. No Name stole a BMW last Tuesday that was tracked to his apartment complex after a high speed chase, that is the car he was driving when he was arrested.
People with mental problems who want to make a splash have learned to use ARs if possible just to stir things up more and receive a higher recognition in the media. The anti-gun people seems to relish this factor since they can scream scary black gun and focus on trying to abolish scary black guns. Because Trump & NRA.
Our rights become their sacred cause and I am thinking that each additional gun sold and sales in March were higher than ever, will be another vote against the Democrats this fall. Remember, every time a new gun, scary or not, is sold it is sold to a non-felon who is in good standing with the government and usually a citizen who can vote.
It is possible that the election this fall might be as big of a surprise with conservative victories as the election two years ago. The polls might be missing conservative gun owners who don’t talk to strangers.
Huxley, I have owned the S&W 686 with 4″ barrel and it can be used with .357 or .38 special rounds. It is a fine simple to use gun and you might try to find a gun range that will let you rent one and arrange for a trainer to help you learn to shoot. The trainer, he or she can then help you determine if this is the right gun or if perhaps there is a better fit for your needs.
We do live in interesting times and once more, thank you James Shaw Jr., job well done.
A gun is a tool, a rock is a tool, they don’t work themselves, Someone has to work, to use them for some purpose.
You can hunt game with a gun, you can kill a human being with a gun. You can use a rock to hunt game with, you can use a rock to kill someone with.
You can fashion the right type of rock into a very sharp instrument, even a knife or an arrowhead that you can then use to either hunt game or kill your fellow man.
How about Baseball or Cricket bats? Chopsticks? Same thing.
It all depends on intent, on motive.
“Human beings are the loophole, and there’s no way to fix that.”
Perhaps not ‘fix’ but people can be controlled. The Soviet Union, China, N. Korea, Cuba and Venezuela demonstrate that controlling people is indeed possible. It just takes a disarmed public and fanatical ruthlessness.
”If pro-gun people wants to keep their guns, they need to come up with some real solutions to take guns away from psychos, . . .” Dave
Just as there is no way to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, there is no way to keep guns out of the hands of psychos.
As for keeping our guns, unlike Europe, in America there is a fundamental problem with confiscating arms and one that goes beyond the 2nd amendment.
The philosophical premise behind the Bill of Rights is the Declaration’s premise that mankind possesses “inalienable rights” granted to us by our creator and therefore beyond the power of government, the mob or the majority to rescind.
Nothing would precipitate nationwide rebellion and another civil war faster than an attempt by the majority to repeal the 2nd amendment… for without it, all our other rights are unenforceable against the tyranny of the majority.
Liberty dies absent the 2nd.
On another thread we discussed how the apparently well-meaning “de-institutionalization” movement of the 1960s-1970s has resulted in the problem we face today, of increasing numbers of mentally ill street people wandering around on and occupying our streets.
As part of that same movement laws were “liberalized,” making it lot harder to involuntarily commit someone, as well as causing a massive decline in the number of beds and treatment centers that are available for the mentally ill.
Practically every time one of these shootings happens, you hear how the “authorities”–at all levels–have missed so many “red flags.”
Well, if it were easier to involuntarily commit someone who is obviously mentally ill–if that possibility were uppermost in the minds of those in authority–if we had a lot more beds for psychiatric patients, then, the authorities might be much more willing to get people off the streets, out of the community, and to commit people who are “dangerous to themselves and others.”
Negligence, recklessness, and perhaps even malice …
I am an absolutist on natural rights, but I agree that the father is liable either criminally or civilly. Criminally, there may be a challenge; but I do not imagine that there would be much if any difficulty in finding a title under tort law which would apply.
And morally he deserves to spend a few years in hell, at a minimum.
These goddamned mental cases should not be running effen loose anyway. If institutional life is seen as too cruel, then liberate them to some island where they can enjoy each others company, or allow them to remain and shackle them to their advocates so they cannot run wild. Just keep them AWAY …
Frankly, and for all I care, they may be provided paradisaical lives on the Big Rock Candy Mountain Soros-Gates asylum: and while away their hours reclining on heaps of jewels, breathing scented breezes, surrounded by legions of servile volunteer enablers and case pleaders in order to be bathed in bodily pleasure day and night.
They just need to be out of Dodge … where they are effen up the public spaces because they are are preposterously afforded the civil rights of the mentally competent: even when they are provably, manifestly, and demonstrably not.
It is no fault of a rabid dog that it is rabid, and no fault of a violent schizophrenic (so far as science can determine) that he is schizophrenic and violent. But no sane man exposes his neck to one, or orders his existence around accommodating the same.
A society that lets these maniacs run wild, is just as crazy and self-destructive in aggregate, as they are individually.
“deputies returned the guns to Reinking’s father on the promise that he would “keep the weapons secure and out of the possession of Travis.” ”
I am sure the promise was not in writing. The deputies were under the illusion they were dealing with a rationally normal father. But the acorn does not fall far from the tree: multigenerational child abuse is proof enough.
The young are eminently programmable. I once encountered a schizophrenic mother, wife of a PhD, whose 6 year-old son was just as nutty as she. Dad did not want to break up the family, so she was allowed to raise nutty kids while he did neurophysiology research. Ironic.
SOB father in this case should be charged as accessory to 1st degree murder.
The dirty little secret is that there is no way to keep guns from every potential killer. Total confiscation would disarm law abiding folk; but, does anyone believe that the criminal element would participate? Then there is the unintended consequence–always a factor in any governmental action–of making the guns that avoid confiscation even more valuable to the criminal element.
It seems that most locales have reasonable laws to control guns. These laws are both circumvented, or not properly enforced. So, more laws would solve the problem? If the authorities are serious, the father of this shooter will be prosecuted. I predict with some certainty that he will be sued.
Ironically, as we consider this tragedy, we observe the one of greater magnitude in Toronto. I just read an article touting how Canada’s gun control laws are so much more effective than those of the U.S. Bottom line; killers kill.
Dave says, “Psychos shooting people in a mass number everyday.” Not true.
Susanamantha:
we will get there eventually with the rate this type of shooting is rising, at least it feels like it
Funny. Since moves are being discussed, there’s a scene in “The Quiller Memorandum” movie wherein George Segal says to Senta Berger, that … “If you don’t carry a gun you are less likely to get yourself killed”
I thought that could be chalked up to Harold Pinter as the screen writer, but apparently the same disdain for firearms was expressed by author Elleston Trevor in the novel of the same name [for American readers] for approximately the same reasons. Though I have read that in other passages Trevor, resorted to the more usual leftist psycho-sexual compensation critique.
How possessing a firearm is more likely to get you killed when one is confronted by 3 knife and bludgeon wielding thugs, I will leave to the explanatory powers of spy novel authors.
“What a stupid I am!”.
Done neo.
Hopefully not the first sign of approaching senility…
Geoffrey Britain:
Well, since I removed the redundant comment and your request to remove it, your comment at 6:06 won’t make sense now 🙂 .
If pro-gun people wants to keep their guns, they need to come up with some real solutions to take guns away from psychos… Dave, @ 2:41
The laws in place in Florida to deny guns to adolescents who were arrested didn’t work because Broward County Schools didn’t want to have their misbehaving students arrested. BTW, Broward County voted 66% for Hillary, so it’s fair to say that it wasn’t “pro-gun” people who crafted that Broward County Schools policy.
What is YOUR “real solution” to that?
Gringo:
See my update to this post.
IMO, the 2nd can not be repealed. 3/4 of the states is a en impossble barrier breach. It would require using the full force of the military to seize weapons from the law abiding which means DC has gone entirely rogue and CW2 goes hot.. It is in blue states where strict laws, backed by the courts, make it is possible to restrict legal ownership to such a degree that it is expense and basically meaningless. Then the crime rates in those states go through the roof. Popcorn time.
A thinking person who does not own a gun should realize they have a degree of safety because potential home invaders do not know which homes are gun free. It is rare I think, to see a home with a sign on the door that says “THE MEMBERS OF THIS HOME ARE DEFENSELESS”.
huxley,
Don’t be deterred, especially by the overly opinionated, vaguely hostile gun shop salesman. Visit several. Do find one with an indoor shooting range and rental guns.
Consider a 9mm semi-auto and if you really want a revolver, they now come in 9mm Luger, which is a new thing. The ammo is so much cheaper and a good self-defense choice.
If you are starting with a general aversion, consider a .22LR pistol as a first pistol. They are very pleasant to shoot, and while not recommended for home defense, they’re better than no gun.
Also, get a real gun safe!
10 dead after van hits pedestrians in Toronto, driver in custody: Police
https://www.truthdig.com/articles/9-dead-16-injured-in-toronto-van-attack/
It’s about time we had some common-sense truck control!
It’s about time we had some common-sense truck control!
Preach it , brother! 🙂
Dave, it is actually YOUR and your ilk’s task as to how to deal with what you gratuitously call “psychos”. Do your best to remember, or, if you can’t, research the history of granting civil rights to hallucinating delusional schizophrenics, doing away with involuntary psychiatric hospitalizations, etc.
In my city there are no hospital psych units. None. One did have a locked psych unit, but it was done away with 20 years ago.
Now we have multiple ‘rehab’ facilities for alcohol and/or drug abusers. Greater profits.
These psych units were not just for psychotics, but also for the near-suicidal. We now have, of course, a (Leftist) movement for euthanasia, and as a corollary, suicide is now a ‘right’.
I am pro gun, but you also have to understand how having mass shootings with ar15 in the news being a weekly event now can affect people’s psyche and public opinion. People will eventually choose safety over liberty, just like how we handed the government powers to surveillance everyone of us due to our fear of terrorism. The liberal corporate world are squeezing gun manufacturers out of the system already, the fact is if no-one take actions to bring mass shootings under control 2nd amendment will be repealed. You can’t seriously except Democrats to take action to enforce the gun laws to stop mass shootings, they want more mass shootings so they can use the tragedies to ban guns, only people having any incentives to stop mass shootings are conservatives. If we don’t do it, more mass shootings will happen and eventually people in the middle will join the left to surrender liberty in exchange for safety.
OldTexan & TommyJay: Thanks for the sensible advice.
I’m mostly dealing with mental blocks. But I managed to go from a Chomskyite leftist to whatever conservative/classical liberal blend I am now, so I’ll probably manage to buy a handgun when the time is right.
I like the S&W 686 revolver because by all accounts it’s basic, effective and elegant. I’ve rented a Beretta 92 twice but it seemed like too much gun and complexity for me as a newbie.
Dave: Liberals are coming for the Second Amendment no matter what conservatives do or how many shootings there are.
Pragmatically 2A can’t be repealed. It’s the balance of the Supreme Court which will make the difference.
Another known nutcase strikes. But it would be wrong to do anything about people with mental illness. Just because fairness and stuff.
Appears the homicidal driver in Toronto may also be a case of mental derangement.
The beat goes on. No matter, disarm all the law abiding citizens. That’ll stop the killing. Aaaarrrrggghhhh!
huxley,
The 38 SPL is a good round with a variety of commercial cartridges available from milder practice rounds to +P (high pressure) jacketed hollow points for self defense. If you choose to go with a revolver I highly recommend S&W for the smoothest out of the box trigger pull.
But for a first firearm I recommend a 22LR rifle. A Ruger 1022 is an excellent choice. Very mild recoil, good accuracy, and 10 22LRs rapidly delivered to the center mass is not something to sneeze at. Whatever you decide, just do it.
How many more casualties do you need before America is stripped of guns?
As I mentioned to you before, GB, if 100 doesn’t work, how about 1000?
If 1000 doesn’t work, how about 10,000?
If 10,000 isn’t enough to make you stop clinging to your guns, American patriots, how about 100,000?
How about 1 to 3 million, how about losing a few cities, would that be enough to bring Americans to humility so that the Deep State can initiate the next phase after Disarmament?
Think far, farther than human imagination usually limits itself to. Think long, longer than 3 month budgets. This is the Deep State. This is long term strategic war planning and logistics. They will never give up. The Leftist alliance will never give up. The Islamic Jihad will never give up.
Face the truth of the enemies of America, for if people do not, they will come to regret it. Your “HATE” is insufficient to win a war based on grand strategy. It is not enough.
Whatever you decide, just do it.
parker: That’s pretty much where I am now. I’m a quirky fellow. I can’t see myself with a .22 or a shotgun or an AR-15. Or a Glock or Beretta.
The S&W somehow satisfies my engineer sweet tooth. Everyone says it’s a more than decent handgun, so that’s probably where I’ll start. But maybe not where I’ll stop.
That’s how I do things. I first bought a TRS-80 computer in 1980 but it wasn’t quite right. I sold it and bought an Apple II and that changed my life.
huxley,
The first step is to learn marksmanship, thus a 22LR rifle. Gain skills/confidence first. It is like any other skill, get grounded in the basics.
parker: So you’re saying I can’t learn to shoot with a 686? Or I can’t learn to shoot the way you think I should?
Most of my life I’ve followed my instincts, often in spite of my betters’ advice. My instincts don’t always pan out, but I’ve done pretty well.
I play chess and I comment on chess.com. Lots of people have lots of advice on how new players should learn. The classic advice is to learn the endgame first, but I don’t know anyone who did that. Nonetheless, most of my friends made it to expert and master ratings.
I tell players to study and play what makes them want to continue to study and play.
Huxley,
I commend you for being willing to go into the gun store itself. Cultural or sub-cultural programming is a powerful, powerful thing to overcome.
Some good advice has been given here already. I’d only add this:
Go target shooting first, with someone safe. You may turn out to not really like shooting in and of itself, and if you are going to be a gun owner, you need to practice. And if you have fun, practice is easier.
There is nothing wrong with not liking guns and shooting. Its better to be honest with yourself about it, if that’s the way it turns out.
Also, if you ever get the chance to shoot a lever action Winchester 30/30, do it! The most fun I’ve ever had target shooting (and I’ve shot a lot of things; from pistols to SMGs).
Ymar,
“How many more casualties do you need before America is stripped of guns?”
In and of itself, liberty does not have an expiration date. Repeal the 2nd and liberty is on life support.
In 1866, American’s had sacrificed what today would be 6 MILLION to preserving governance “of the people, by the people and for the people”…
There’s a specific number for you. However, the prospect of escalating mass murders with guns into the thousands, much less the millions is false, something like 95+% of mass murders with guns takes place in “gun-free” zones.
So the answer is; “An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.” Robert A. Heinlein
It’s illuminating to consider that Western society’s mores fully developed during a long period when the prospect of a duel was a legal way of restricting personal insults and guaranteeing polite discourse.
In that society, David Hogg would not be declaring the NRA to be a terrorist organization. Leftists would not be routinely declaring republicans and conservatives to be ‘fascist Nazis’.
And, psychologically disturbed wanna be mass murderers would be quickly put down for the rabid dogs that they are…
Huxley – I think a 686 S&W is a quality revolver and it was used in the past by a lot of police and Highway Patrol troopers. It is an easy gun to learn to shoot so plan to run some .38 special through the gun and you will be fine.
You don’t have to be a super tactical run and gun guy to use a pistol effectively for home and personal defense. Just shoot enough to be comfortable and then try to improve each time you go to the range.
He’s saying that if it is your general purpose to learn to shoot, then a good introduction to firearms is the one that has been used for generations now with cub scouts and farm boys and almost everyone else who learned to shoot by plinking at tin cans: a .22 rifle. The .22 rifle is itself inexpensive (can be bought used for $100 bucks), has no distracting recoil, is easy to handle and aim, and used to be very inexpensive to shoot, as the rounds were so cheap.
If your immediate purpose is concealed carry, then by all means buy a pistol first.
Pragmatically 2A can’t be repealed. It’s the balance of the Supreme Court which will make the difference.
Yes and another reason we dodged a bullet (sorry) in November 2016.
Involuntary mental health treatment is the field I have worked in for four decades. New Hampshire has less than 200 involuntary psych beds total. Before deinstitutionalization, we had 3000.
All the people who are complaining that the psychos should be locked up and the mental health system should do its job…Do you want to increase the mental health budget in your state by a factor of 10? 15? Do you want the laws to go back to how easy it was to put someone away in those days?
Shouting at the clouds about mental health isn’t actually very helpful. Solutions are certainly not cheap, nor are they simple, nor are they without other consequences. What is it that you expect your government to actually do?
As for arguing against gun-control PR, I have found it better to point out that the solutions are generally useless, rather than focusing on 2A rights. (Even though you’re right!) Even very “commonsensical” laws agreed on by gun groups, such as forbidding people ever convicted of a gun crime from owning a firearm haven’t moved the dial on reducing crime. They don’t work. None of it works.
What does work is a whole different discussion, but just for openers, it’s not “root causes” either.
In and of itself, liberty does not have an expiration date. Repeal the 2nd and liberty is on life support.
They don’t need to repeal it, just have people give up their arms or confiscate them as they did in new Orleans during Katrina.
By hook or crook, the evil of the Leftist alliance is all encompassing. They will never give up. Even if the mightiest and most courageous of America’s Hero Kings kills EVERY SINGLE LEFTIST ON THE FACE of the Earth, Evil will still rule this world.
The .22 rifle is itself inexpensive (can be bought used for $100 bucks), has no distracting recoil, is easy to handle and aim, and used to be very inexpensive to shoot, as the rounds were so cheap.
Two fundamental problems with marksmanship learning is that men tend to adjust for recoil before even firing. This affects accuracy at optimal and beyond optimal ranges.
The other issue is that the trigger finger pull tends to affect the other muscles in the hand, for guns with higher trigger tension. That is less of an issue, since each gun can adjust its own trigger tension. It’s just in the trigger assembly. This is why the Marine corps train people to pull the trigger with a wooden gun that has a coin ontop of it. It is to train your hand so that you can use the index finger without jerking any other muscle.
For people who play FPS games… we already got that down pat ; O
Recoil normally doesn’t affect the accuracy of the first round out of the barrel. What it does is to cause a physiological response in marksmen (focus on men) who use their superior physical arm strength to control recoil as they are pulling on the trigger. This allows them to bring the ironsight back on target faster, but it is a very very bad habit for long range accuracy.
So by giving boy scouts a lower caliber and recoil weapon, it is easier to convince them to just let the recoil happen via a relaxed (Eastern martial arts like tai chi talk about relaxation a lot) posture.
This is why some instructors say that the recoil should be a “surprise” to the user. It means you are so relaxed, that when the .50 caliber recoil hits you, you didn’t mentally expect it to. If you did mentally expect it to, that means you subconsciously tightened some part of your body to face the recoil.
Women won’t have the physical strength necessary, usually, to handle the recoil on certain calibers like the Desert Eagle .50 caliber. Thus in order to handle the recoil, they must practice superior stance and posture and orientation of their bones.
Even long practiced shooters with AR 15, have reported that they still use the back muscles to handle the recoil. Which creates back aches for them later on in life.
This is something that just “becomes a habit”, but for a warrior, it is a habit that can be self destructive later on.
In order to obtain the advanced technique of moving out of cover, shooting, moving towards cover, shooting, moving under cover to reload, a person cannot be reliant on the bad habit of handling recoil with their arm and back muscles. They have to divert the recoil force along the spine into their legs at least. This is internal martial arts now, not external strength based speed training.
Rifle stocks make it much easier to handle recoil and bringing target under the sights once again, because the stock transfers the force to the shoulder. Making it easier to transfer it to the spine, or the bad habit of using the back muscles instead. A handgun requires the use of the arm ligaments and fascia and bones to automatically transfer the force into the shoulder. This is a high level technique that people often don’t know about. It will sink directly a .50 caliber recoil straight into their legs without damaging the arm, shoulder, or back.
These days, people don’t need to use live rounds to practice shooting skills. We have something called “dry firing drills” now.
Due to ammo costs, people have adapted. The US MCorps training that utilizes wooden guns with coins on top of them, is an example of a dry firing drill. But even elites and top echelon skill users can make good use out of dry firing each day. Saves ammo costs, and maintains their skill levels. It also increases their skill levels, but obviously not as much as shooting thousands of rounds each day as some Special Forces do.
While we are contemplating banning guns, we should consider banning vans, trucks, and other high-mass, high-torque projectiles.
Then there is this: CDC’s results, then, imply that guns were used defensively by victims about 3.6 times as often as they were used offensively by criminals
Banning guns or vans, trucks, etc, would be equivalent to banning sex, because hundreds of thousands of our offspring (“fetuses”), and millions globally, will be catastrophically Planned (e.g. selective-child, one-child), or recycled (e.g. clinical cannibalism), or selectively culled (e.g. Down Syndrome offspring, short men and women, transgender/homosexuals/transvestites, etc.). Surely, a progressive slope.
Ymar,
“They don’t need to repeal it, just have people give up their arms or confiscate them as they did in new Orleans during Katrina.”
Nationwide? “Give up their arms or confiscate them”? Right.
“By hook or crook, the evil of the Leftist alliance is all encompassing. They will never give up.”
“If you kill enough of them, they stop fighting” Gen Curtis LeMay
“Even if the mightiest and most courageous of America’s Hero Kings kills EVERY SINGLE LEFTIST ON THE FACE of the Earth, Evil will still rule this world.”
Evil does not rule the world for if it did, civilization could never have arisen.
Greece could never have created democracy, Rome never created a republic, the Enlightenment arisen nor the Founders defeated the British and created America.
Evil is at war with Good and when pushed against the wall, Good makes war upon evil. It’s a struggle between the two. Adam and Eve ate of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of GOOD and EVIL.
Yes, unless and until mankind’s reconnection with the divine occurs we will always have evil with us. But we will also have good. When good is willing to pay the price, evil loses. Given the nature of evil, which is ultimately self-defeating… Evil’s triumph cannot be permanent as it always results in good eventually paying the price to defeat evil.
Assistant Village Idiot:
Increasing the budget somewhat, and thus making it possible for a modest increase in involuntary hospitalizations, is not the same as going back to square one. People might support the former but not the latter.
Also, in the case of this shooter, I wonder whether the father owned the guns or whether the shooter did. If the shooter did, I don’t think they should have been given back to the family. If the father did, it’s a different story.
LOL. I’ve seen that at the range. Guy could not hit a desert plate sized bull at 50 yards … He was sitting at the pistol area (there was no one else there) and using a bag rest on the bench. He flinched so bad you could see it 30 feet away. And he was only using a .308. The gun was a fancy stocked, jeweled bolt, big bell objective scoped deal, which I thought must have been a $4k 7mm mag at first.
On the other hand, there should be no follow up flinching with a .22 as there is no recoil that even a 10 year old would notice.
The fact that you ignore recoil when shooting doesn’t mean that you won’t feel it later of course. Even a 30-30 with a phenolic butt-plate will do a number on you if you stupidly imagine that you can casually let loose 40 to 50 rounds while dressed in a summer tee shirt … as you might with a .22.
Hard muscled as I was at the time, I still had bruising down to my ribcage. Nearly passed out when I saw it at bedtime. Ha.
DNW, your bruise story reminds me that full plate mailed knights often had tournament armors that were 25-50% heavier and or larger. Even though normal plate has excellent agility and range of movement (people can do rolls with it), the tournament armor always seemed to have certain restrictions on mobility.
I didn’t realize why this was so until I saw what people put under the plate armor. Massive layers of cloth, padded armor, and other things that would absorb the impact from the wooden lances and maces on battlefields. It does no good to have plate deflect cutting force, if the blunt force still projects into the body cavity and crushes organs and bones.
A tournament armor wasn’t focused on having heavier plate, but on having additional layers of cloth armor underneath to absorb the impact. That’s why the jousters had mobility issues. It was like wearing several layers of winter coats and clothing. The pelvis and arm pit mobility goes way down. Even raising a knee to pelvis level would be difficult given the massive layers of cloth on the stomach. Mounting horses must have been a nightmare without a step stool or squire launching the foot up.
Maybe next gen powered exo skeleton armor using Sapphire superconductors derived from quantum locking, will be able to have cushioned recoil absorbers for all those .50 caliber machine guns mounted to the side. That way humans can fire “off hand” full auto, without the bruising.
. There are numerous studies on guns, violence and criminality. Here are some of the major studies that you should read to become knowledgeable on the subject.
Drs James Wright and Peter Rossi, “Under the Gun, Crime and Violence in America” (1983) A study for the National Institute of Justice.
Professor Gary Kleck, “Point Blank, Guns and Violence in America” (1991).
Dr. Charles Wellford; et al, “Firearms and Violence: a Critical review” (2004) A study for the National Academy of Sciences.
All the studies reach the same conclusion. There is no evidence that demonstrates the availability of guns has any measurable effect on rates of homicide, suicide, robbery, assault, rape or burglary.
Evil is at war with Good and when pushed against the wall, Good makes war upon evil. It’s a struggle between the two.
A struggle you participate in without reading the history of this conflict.
By that I refer to 1st Enoch and various other texts.
If it was merely a struggle and conflict between two human factions, with equal technology, it would be one thing. Do you think your chances are good against a more numerical superior foe as well as one that has superior qualitative technologies?
How can a world that doesn’t even know how this struggle started (no, it wasn’t the Garden of Eden), know how this struggle will ultimately end.
I did a baseline read on you, back when we were talking about this subject concerning Freedom and Lucifer. I noticed you got emotionally upset about something, because usually you don’t bring the short snark to future threads in replying to me. You either ignore it, or you come up with a more reasoned argument, like the one you wrote here.
I traced it back to my original comment that said that the orthodox dogma that Lucifer was a creation of the Godhead being incorrect. Everything afterwards, we either agreed about or merely had different perspectives.
The reason why the nations of the Earth are allowed to create democracies is because this world is ruled by the Watchers, Lucifer being of an equal or equivalent rank to the Watchers, the Sons of God. The ancients refer to the Tower of Babel, another story point that was distorted as time went on.
The patron god of the USA is not Jesus or YHVH, but a Watcher or a goddess, called by the Romans Liberty.
Evil rules the Earth because this has been authorized by the Godhead and the Divine Counsel. It is a test, of both the divine and the mortal. As such, you do not understand the rules of this little war, so how do you know you have won or lost.
Humans know when they have lost a war because their military and country has collapsed, such as Germany and Japan. But how would you know that you have lost the war when you don’t know which god or goddess rules over the territory of the USA or the other nations?
Humans have free will. That is why there are child molestors, Demoncrats, traitors, and anybody or anything else under the sun. You all are free to do as you wish, and whole nations and governments can punish and kill you for it, they cannot prevent it.
The Watchers and bene ha elohim that were set to rule over the goyim, the nations of the world, are also free. The Most High long ago divorced and disowned the human race, except for a portion allotted to YHVH.
Evil princes, the powers of darkness, rule over human nations because this is part of the divine law. They were given that authority. If you seek to contest it, you would either have to replace their Seat, as the Prince of a nation, a Son of God, or you would be going against the authority of the Divine Laws themselves: the Most High.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+32&version=ESV
Remember the days of old;
consider the years of many generations;
ask your father, and he will show you,
your elders, and they will tell you.
8 When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance,
when he divided mankind,
he fixed the borders[a] of the peoples
according to the number of the sons of God.[b]
9 But the Lord’s portion is his people,
Jacob his allotted heritage.
The masoretes, human scribes, corrupted the Hebrew Torah text and changed Sons of God, bene ha elohim, to Sons of Israel. Other translations had Sons of Adam perhaps.
The various forces of darkness and spiritual powers were referenced by Paul. Daniel recorded them as well, when the scripture read that Michael and another upper divine entity fought and contested against the Prince of Persia for a few days. Some human prince contested against an entity powerful enough to wipe out a human army in one day, for a few days? What kind of “human prince is that”.
People have heard about how one Son of God, Jesus of Nazareth in his mortal incarnation had powers over the earth and the heavens. That is only one of the Sons of the Most High, there are others.
Whether I am right or wrong, whether people here agree with me or not, matters not. I am here to pass on the message. So that none may say later on that nobody had warned them.
Don’t worry, the world isn’t going to end in some EMP storm or hurricane or tornado just yet. That wasn’t part of the msg.
Evil does not rule the world for if it did, civilization could never have arisen.
The World Died in the Divine Flood because the Watchers gave humanity “civilization”, breaking the non interference clause associated with free will.
You have lost and forgotten and not been given the knowledge of how this evil vs good conflict started, GB.
When firing a rifle, a solid stock to shoulder contact is very important–it allows you better aim and minimizes recoil. This was probably taught to every rifleman at least before the development of the buffer spring assembly on the M-16. My favorite rifle when I was a teenager was a British Enfileld SMLE converted into a deer rifle (I resented that last part) with excellent sights. Once you learned the bolt mechanism you could fire quickly and efficiently–it was, after all–a WWII battle rifle used very effectively by the British Army.
As for recoil, my first time firing a shotgun taught me the importance of stock to shoulder contact. They don’t call it “shotgun bite” fer nuttin….
If you want to learn basic rifle shooting IMO a bolt-action rifle is your best teacher. It’s relatively simple to learn how to use the rifle and shoot it, but doing it well requires concentration and discipline until it becomes natural. It’s a good starter for anyone interested in learning firearms, and rifles are easier to master than pistols….
Of course at some point people will throw up their hands and give up when they learn the firearm must be maintained–disassembled, cleaned and reassembled. Human nature never changes, and humans are basically lazy apes….:)
The mental health issue provides some civil liberties problems.
Who decides when somebody needs to be involuntarily confined and his head messed with? What protections are there?
Mental health issues are manifested in behavior. Behavior is on a continuum from mildly eccentric to violent and uncontrollable. Where on the continuum does the individual’s right to freedom end? Who decides? Is it like Child Abductive Services where an anonymous report is all that’s necessary despite there being no evidence when a gauleiter shows up at the home?
You don’t have to be a super tactical run and gun guy to use a pistol effectively for home and personal defense. Just shoot enough to be comfortable and then try to improve each time you go to the range.
OldTexan: Thanks. That’s all I want at this point. Maybe I’ll develop greater ambitions later. But I get my back up when people tell me how I’m “spozed” to do things.
I’m old enough to remember the time-honored progression from a pocket knife to a BB gun to a .22 to a real gun or rifle. I get it. I had friends who did it that way. I’m sure there’s value there. But I was literally raised by beatniks so that wasn’t my path.
Also, I’ve studied learning and I know that a lot of the conventional wisdom is BS. When I was in high school, there was a big deal about football players soldiering on without hydration. Dangerous nonsense now.
I’m 66. If I’m gonna do guns, I’m gonna do them the way I’ve done everything else — in a way I find makes sense.
And screw anyone who wants to lecture me without really serious data on their side.
There alpear to be efforts to pathologize conservative thinking in psychological research. So that sounds like a potential problem.
Mental health issues are manifested in behavior. Behavior is on a continuum from mildly eccentric to violent and uncontrollable. Where on the continuum does the individual’s right to freedom end? Who decides?
The State will decide everyone here has transgressed against US nationalism, and after declaring all of you right wing extremist terrorists and traitors, they will put you ALL under Control once and for all. Then everyone is happy ; )
Treason cannot be punished as treason when the traitors succeed. The right wingers have not succeeded yet against the Deep State.
Is it like Child Abductive Services where an anonymous report is all that’s necessary despite there being no evidence when a gauleiter shows up at the home?
CPS grabs children and sells them to pedo rings. Far as Iknow, Americans look perfectly fine with that. It has always been For the Children: even in the days of Bhaal.
But I get my back up when people tell me how I’m “spozed” to do things.
It’s a drug flash back. Adults don’t have that kind of emotional instability except for special circumstances of trauma, drug use and mind control.
I’m 66. If I’m gonna do guns, I’m gonna do them the way I’ve done everything else – in a way I find makes sense.
And screw anyone who wants to lecture me without really serious data on their side.
Emotionally, that is still 6-16 due to the usage of anything that can create a permanent memory. It triggers based upon the same principles that NLP and MK Ultra conditioning triggers responses.
For example, that’s a far stronger response than I had when people told me that my nickname for Trum was me insulting Trum or that I didn’t know how to spell his last name.
There’s no cure for traumas inflicted or voluntarily experienced during the early formation years, which is 8-18, from the medical profession. The only cure I’ve ever seen work is the Holy Ghost inhabiting a damaged body and reconstructing it back to a pre-traumatized state.
Trum and I use the mirror technique as a defense, and as a counter offense. Contrary to what it appears, the emotions presented are a reflection of the received emotions others are using to attack. The core is kept stabilized to safeguard it from the emotional attacks of others, as the mirror reflects the light. Trum is still thinking and planning, even as it looks like he is reacting like an angry bear.
This is similar to but fundamentally different from trauma based triggers, such as PTSD. In those circumstances, a single trigger is present, and the scale of the reaction is not based upon the scale of the stimulus. The heart is also not kept defended, as the person feels threatened and the body’s instincts call out for a full defense committing everything. A mirror does not do anything active, it just sits there passively.
Jordan P could probably talk it out better, given his number of hours of experience on the damage to the human soul.
The gun control supporters in the media may be shooting themselves in the foot by publicizing mass shootings.
If you believe that there’s a danger of your house catching fire, that won’t make you less inclined to buy a fire extinguisher; it will make you more likely to buy one.
Similarly, if you believe that you’re in danger from gun-wielding lunatics, then their guns are a threat to you. It’s rational to disarm them, because their guns are like the hypothetical fire,..
… But not to disarm yourself, because YOUR gun is a fire extinguisher.
I was going to let it go, let Huxley buy what he wants and shoot what he wants but Ymar Sakar I am calling you on this one. When you talk about shooting a Desert Eagle .50 cal pistol. This statement is one of the strangest I have seen when talking to a new shooter:
“Women won’t have the physical strength necessary, usually, to handle the recoil on certain calibers like the Desert Eagle .50 caliber. Thus in order to handle the recoil, they must practice superior stance and posture and orientation of their bones.”
You talking to a new shooter about a Desert Eagle .50, like telling a brand new driver how to handle a race car. I have never seen a Desert Eagle .50 being fired and I do a lot of shooting, weekly and I am an NRA range safety officer. I have shoot .44 mag but I don’t enjoy it and I am happy with my .45 Colt Defender for a carry gun. The Desert Eagle is a neat monster of a 4.5 pound pistol, costs around $1.5K and it is expensive to feed. If you have one and you enjoy shooting it, that’s great but it makes no sense at all to bring it up for discussion with a new shooter. Now this:
“Even long practiced shooters with AR 15, have reported that they still use the back muscles to handle the recoil. Which creates back aches for them later on in life.”
Number two, my family shoots a lot, son and son-in-law compete in three gun in several states and your description of the recoil of the AR 15 is unusual since my 7 year old grandson, under close supervision of his dad, shoots on well off the bench out to 100 yards without flinching. Recoil is a factor and that is why I went from my 12 ga. over/under to 20 and 28 as I passed 60 years in age 13 years ago, I don’t need the pounding but I still enjoy shooting my centerfire bolt actions up to 30-06 with a little extra shoulder padding.
Last thing is my friend Jeanne Almond at Elm Fork Range in Dallas is an excellent instructor for women leaning how to use a pistol for self defense and her recommendation is always, without fail a .38 Special revolver as a first and perhaps only gun.
It annoys me when a new shooter decides on a choice for a first gun and a so called ‘EXPERT’ tells him or her that they are wrong and floods the conversation with a whole lot of overkill information. We need more new shooters, shooting any safe gun they want to shoot in any type of safe manner. As an NRA range safety officer part of our training is teach safety and keep out own opinions and knowledge out of the mix unless asked and then keep it to a minimum.
Most of my time instructing has been with new comers to shotguns and some rifle. The last thing a new shooter needs is to feel put down and talked down to. With safety first, we build confidence in new shooters with patience and praise.
Huxley – Your first choice you shared with us is excellent, the S&W 686 is a great revolver that will give years and years of reliable, trouble free shooting with simple maintenance. That is all.
If you have one and you enjoy shooting it, that’s great but it makes no sense at all to bring it up for discussion with a new shooter.
You’re misunderstanding something. The recoil of a Desert Eagle was used as an example of how shooters, men vs women, attempt to compensate for recoil using their muscles. This was part of my point, not part of your point. You are perhaps confusing what other people were talking about with what I was talking about.
This thread was not about discussing things with a “new shooter”. Try to keep that in mind.
Number two, my family shoots a lot, son and son-in-law compete in three gun in several states and your description of the recoil of the AR 15 is unusual since my 7 year old grandson, under close supervision of his dad, shoots on well off the bench out to 100 yards without flinching.
Unless your son and son in law are elderly people in their 50s or 60s, I am not sure what your point has to do with my topic. My topic was addressing how people who use their back muscles to handle recoil countering, developes back pains later on in life as they grow older. Maybe 20-40 year olds get it too, but that wasn’t necessarily needed to make the statement.
I never described the recoil of an AR 15. The recoil of an AR 15 was observed and the effects described to me. The effects being back pain and damage to the muscles. Of course there were some special circumstances during the shooting, but it was merely wind conditions. The context that you read my comments in, was not the context I wrote the comments in. The shooting competition was also a tournament style, with certain timings. The effect on people shooting the breeze at leisure and someone under competition stress will of course also be different or unusual in consequence.
Most of my time instructing has been with new comers to shotguns and some rifle.The last thing a new shooter needs is to feel put down and talked down to.
Again, this just proves what I pointed out to you. Your context is not my context. Since I’m not talking to a new shooter about marksmanship, there is no way I can talk up or down to them about it. You’re firing off center over there with an inaccurate zeroing for your style.
but Ymar Sakar I am calling you on this one.
You can call me out if you wish, but you should be accurate first. And if talking down to new shooters is bad, does that make it okay to start talking down to other people… maybe I am the new shooter.
Old Texan–read a lot more about guns than shot them, but what I’ve gotten from all that I’ve read is that, if your gun’s in good repair, no matter what handgun you are shooting–large and powerful or small and less powerful, automatic or revolver–shot placement is the key.
Unless you are shooting an absolute piece of crap, or a gun very unsuited for your stature, strength, and experience, if you can’t put the shots where you want them, no matter how great looking and tricked out the gun is, it’s not the gun’s fault, it’s yours.
With safety first, we build confidence in new shooters with patience and praise.
On a personal note, I advise more people in lethal force H2H than NRA related activities.
We stay away from social praise, as it may hinder a person from developing the intent needed for many movements.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKqmDZUUX4M
A sample of the type of training I underwent after 2001.
Frontsight’s mental awareness code (apparently used after 2001 for terrorist attacks) was useful for all kinds of stuff.
Not every instructor has the same teaching style. Not every instructor is also teaching people every moment.
A gun to me is just a tool, like a life saving raft. Don’t need it if you can swim: it is merely convenient as tools save energy and makes your actions more efficient.
One of the huge differences I noticed is that in martial arts, martial sports, competitions, and in social group training, people offer their praise or comraderie.
I suspect a reason why people freeze a lot in certain stress situations is that they aren’t used to the silence and the screaming. Their mentality isn’t at escalated asocial violence mode. Their mentality is still in “let’s talk this out”.
There’s a saying, people will act as they train (except at 50% effectiveness). So if they train in a situation where they are given social praise for good technique, they won’t have that emotional support on the battlefield.
Usually it’s going to be them all alone in their own little world, facing hordes of foes. Or hordes of school shooters ala American Battlefield 2018+.
The training I prefer is the training normally classified by Frontsight as Red and Black. Orange and yellow is something that can be dry run trained as a civilian or normal person in life. Red and black is far more rare. Learning how to shift the mental intent into red and black and doing it in a controlled fashion, just walking into a room, is very useful for adjusting to the stress.
Social praise doesn’t do anything for me in those situations, normally because I don’t hear people using audio any more. I rely on physical feedback to check if my skills are effective or not, not verbal feedback.
The asocial training is done by not talking. Not socializing. Just movements and targets. Targets need to be serviced, then continue to terminate all targets within range until the battlefield is clear. Or one can secure an escape exfiltration route.
Year Sakar thanks for reminding of the futility of an internet argument. Have fun doing things your way.
My way is to look at the truth first, before arguing a subjective way.
You should try it, OldTexan, before firing off center again. Although recently I think you did it again on some other thread later.
Since you aren’t going to read what I wrote and pay attention, there’s no reason for you to argue against it.
This text is worth everyone’s attention. Where can I find out
more?