Skip to content

Fear of Failure and Simple Self-Defense Instruction

October 16, 2018

Are we brave enough to learn about ourselves?

My usual trip to the shooting range is to stand at a bench and shoot at a stationary paper target a few yards away. I don’t think we learn very much from doing that. If you walked down the firing line and asked most of us, we’d say we are practicing for self-defense. I don’t believe it. I think we stand in a line and shoot at paper precisely so we won’t feel embarrassed by our performance. Our self-image is so sensitive that we can’t suffer disappointment. In addition, we don’t know what we don’t know, so we tend to overestimate our skills and underestimate what we could learn.

Children fail all the time, but it seems we’ve lost that skill as adults. I went shooting with a friend, and the experience drove home that particular lesson.

Let’s call my friend R. The first thing R and I did was walk toward the targets we’d set up at the end of the range. R has carried his handgun for years. The targets were as ordinary as I could make them. They were blank pieces of light colored office paper stapled onto larger pieces of brown cardboard.

As we were walking, I asked R to shoot at the targets whenever he wanted to. I said, “Those targets on the left are your family. That target on the right is a bad guy who is pointing a gun at them. Walk forward until you can shoot the bad guy.”

R did, and he missed. My friend reminded me of these obvious lessons.

-The real world doesn’t come with a flashing sign that tells us when to draw our pistol and shoot. You knew that, but we seldom exercise the decision to fire our gun. I think knowing when to shoot is an important skill.
-The real world doesn’t have range markers on the ground that tell us how far away the target is. You have to judge distances for yourself, and you also have to judge how you’re feeling that minute. Knowing when you can hit a target..and when you can’t..is pretty important, don’t you think?
-Perhaps the biggest takeaway was that we won’t have 20 minutes to practice before we have to protect the people we love. Yeah. It sounds obvious when I say it that way, but we remember our best shots at the range rather than our first shots. I have that bias too.

We remember our best shots at the range rather than our first shots.

R moved closer and shot again. This time he hit his target. When it was my turn, I walked up closer than R did before I fired on the piece of paper and got my hit. With each step I traded the risk that my family might be hurt while I gained confidence that I could hit my target.
You could make a good case for shooting early or late, and both sides have good arguments.

My concern isn’t that you are a great shot or a poor shot, but that you should learn what you can do.
Does that make sense to you?

My friend, R, and I kept learning. We walked forward until our feet were at the edge of the berm and there were no targets in front of us at all. The only thing we had to do was draw our handguns out of the holsters, present the guns at full extension, and fire. In contrast to the first exercise, this time we could ignore the sights and the targets.

Let me share the lessons learned without giving you the details.
-Learn how quickly you can move and still perform flawlessly. That “answer” is particular to you.
-Slow and perfect practice leads to perfect performance.
-You need someone to watch you as you speed up or you will introduce errors into your technique.
-Don’t make excuses and try to ignore your mistakes. Let your mistakes talk to you so you learn from them.
-You are not really ready for self-defense until you can quickly and reliably present your firearm in an operating condition. If you can’t do that after repeated practice, then maybe you’re carrying the wrong gun even though you’ve carried it for years.
-Don’t make excuses if your firearm malfunctions.

In this exercise, the observer is a better judge than the performer. Not only does an instructor he see things that I miss, but he doesn’t make excuses for me. Yes, I’m as human as the next person.

If this sounds stressful to you, then consider we were standing still and facing a mountain of dirt that wasn’t shooting back.

We went on to shoot other easy targets. We put one target a few yards in front of the other one. All we had to do was lean to the side to shoot around the near target to hit the distant one. We were not moving more than a half step.

Merely leaning to the side takes practice compared to standing upright at the firing line the way we are probably used to shooting. The exercise sounds simple, but we both became better as we practiced. The secondary lesson we learned as we shot was to use cover rather than stand in the open and be a target. I’m sure you’ve heard that before, but when was the last time you practiced it?

My friend was satisfied with what he learned. I appreciate his bravery because he was eager to find out what he could do and find out what he needed to practice. In my mind, that sets him miles ahead of many gun owners. Have you noticed that about us?

Most gun owners don’t practice. Most gun owners don’t have their carry permit. I think it is great to see anyone who wants to keep learning.

Please notice that we never used a timer or a scoring target to add to the pressure of performance. We could take all the time we thought we needed, or we could move closer to the target to get hits. The only expectations on our performance were the ones we brought with us. Unless you compete on a regular basis, that small amount of performance pressure is probably enough for a first lesson. Let’s walk before we run.

Judging by what I see at the range and at competition, most of us would rather not know how well we shoot. We want to keep our fantasy self-image unblemished.

Don’t we owe it to ourselves to find out how well we perform? Don’t we owe it to our family?

Learning how well we shoot isn’t hard to do. Step away from the square shooting range and go find out. That is what instructors are for.

I’ll share a little secret with you if you promise not to tell; self-defense teachers like to be inventive with their instruction. Individual instruction or a small group-class lets them do that.

Go live a little..and learn a lot.The original article is here.
~_~_

I gave you 1000 words. Please leave a comment and share this article with a friend. RM

Advertisements

My Gun Control Unicorn is Named Chet

October 15, 2018

The fantasy of gun-control is easy. The sales pitch is a politician’s dream. “No one will get shot ever again if we make guns illegal.” That promise sounds great if you don’t know very much. Who wouldn’t want to have world peace and a pet unicorn when all you have to do is mail in two box tops, vote in November, and wait four to six weeks for delivery. Sounds awesome, doesn’t it. What do you need to know to detect the lies inside the gun-control sales pitch?

 

Now hold onto your seats boys and girls, but criminals don’t obey our laws. Criminals break the law every day. That includes the 23 thousand firearms regulations we already have in the books. I can tell by the look on some of your faces that you’re shocked, but believe me this is true.

You see, criminals can’t go down to the local gun store and pass a background check to buy a gun, so they don’t. Criminals don’t stand around for a ten day waiting period either. Criminals get their guns the same way they get their drugs and the other things they sell. They buy guns and drugs from other criminals in the hundred-billion-dollar-a-year black market. Moving a few pounds of steel is easy when you’re already moving tons of drugs and millions of illegal immigrants. Chet the pet gun-control unicorn isn’t looking so good once you know a few facts and how to put those facts together.

Maybe you want hard evidence rather than logic. Would you consider looking at Mexico, Brazil and Venezuela where they have strict gun-control laws and yet these countries are many times more violent than the US. In contrast, we know of one group of US citizens who behave like the extraordinary peaceful and disarmed citizens of Japan. That group is gun owners in the US who have their concealed carry permits. The fact that lawful gun owners are among the most law abiding people in the world is unicorn poison.

Are those statistics too dated for you? We have more evidence right here in the ol’ US of A, and we see it every day. Thousands of honest US citizens use a gun to defend themselves every day.

You didn’t know that? You don’t see lot of that news for two prominent reasons. The first is that crime and armed defense are both relatively rare. We’re talking about a few thousand events out of a third of a billion people. The second reason is that armed citizens have the same effect that armed police have on criminals. Just like when he sees a cop, the idiot who broke into your house wants to run away when he sees that you’re armed. A few percent of the time the criminal needs to get a louder message.

The honest man on the street might not know about armed citizens, but criminals do. That is why criminals behave so differently here in the USA. They look for burglaries when the homeowner is away. Contrast that with how criminals act in disarmed countries. There the criminals want their victims to be at home.

Which seems safer to you, when criminals avoid you or when criminals hunt you in your home? I’m sorry, but the paper horn on the pet unicorn just fell off.

Some criminals try to take our things. Other criminals like the process of robbing us, and they often graduate to sexual assaults. Hundreds of sexual assaults are stopped every day by armed victims. I think that is a good thing, but gun-control advocates say we’d be safer if we disarm young women so they can’t defend themselves. That does not make sense to me, and Chet the pet unicorn is looking ratty.

When you look closely, gun-control doesn’t make sense. Gun-control doesn’t work, and gun prohibition would leave us in greater danger.

I think Chet the gun-control unicorn was really a funny looking dog with a cheap die-job wearing a paper cone rubber banded onto its forehead. That won’t stop some people from believing in gun-control. Heck, some people believe in unicorns and think the world is flat.

In the case of gun-prohibition they are sacrificing our safety for their fantasy. Don’t be one of them, and don’t help them come November.

How do Pro-Gun Democrats Vote?

October 11, 2018

I met a few people who call themselves “Pro-Gun Democrats”. I’m not sure what that means anymore than I understand the meaning of a Progressive Socialist Republican. Pro-gun Democrats might like guns. They might own guns. They might shoot guns, yet I don’t see how they can be for gun owners and ownership when their party is for gun control and confiscation. How do pro-gun Democrats vote?

Values have a context and a hierarchy. Some things are more important than others. Maybe you have to vote for Democrats to fund abortions..but you also like to go shooting. Maybe you were a Democrat, but now you’re a political independent who looks at every candidate and weighs every issue. The Democrat Party might not be the organization you remember.

Rahm Emanuel pushed the Clinton led Democrat party to adopt its anti-gun political position. That decision earned the Democrat party hundreds of millions of dollars from anti-gun billionaires. The official party position is, “If I had 51 votes, then Mister and Misses America, turn them all in.” I wish that were not the party line but it is today.

Lots of voters don’t like the Democrat anti-rights position against guns and gun owners. Democrat politicians know gun control is unpopular. Democrat politicians pose with shotguns and say they are pro-gun. They also take money from anti-gun advocates and then advocate for gun confiscation. They even say so when you read the fine print buried on their campaign websites. As one Democrat candidate was recorded whispering, “I can be for gun confiscation, but I can’t say that during the election.” Some Democrats brag about a pro-gun rating from the NRA even when the NRA says they have a bad rating. These Democrats want to look pro-rights even when they are against the rights of honest citizens to keep and bear arms.

So what does it mean to be a pro-gun Democrat? I understand that you could give money to the few Democrats who actually voted to end gun control and to end gun free zones. I hope you support the few Democrats who actually voted for Constitutional Carry in their states. I like that you support Democrats who are against gun control. So is the NRA. But then I run into a problem.

Pro-gun Democrats don’t have many options. They vote for a Democrat politician who wants to confiscate guns slowly rather than the one who wants to do it quickly. When can they actually vote for a pro-gun candidate?

In the last 20 years, putting the Democrat Party in political control has consistently led to greater restrictions on our rights to keep and bear arms. What do pro-gun Democrats do with the rest of the Democrat candidates who support gun control and confiscation? As a pro-gun Democrat, do you vote Republican and support Republican candidates in those races?

Do you vote for the candidate who is the most pro-gun, or are you a Democrat who happens to own a gun? Please leave your answer below, because I’d love to know.
~_~_

The original article is here. I gave you 500 words. Please leave a comment.

Are you a lover or a killer, or both?

October 10, 2018

They are only words, but I’d never put them together that way.

Are you a killer?

If you asked most of us, we’d say we couldn’t hurt anyone.

“Oh, I would never do that.”

..but then we look a little deeper.

We say we couldn’t hurt anyone, but is that true? I have to ask because you also say you love your family. You say you love your children. Do you love them enough to defend them, or is your love only soft words and sweet feelings?

Oh, you meant that kind of love. Well, now that I think about it…

Yeah, that kind of love. Do you love your family enough to stop someone who is hurting them? If you’ll protect the people you love, then you love enough to kill.

What? I love enough to kill. Wow.

Yeah. It’s shocking.

Now don’t get me wrong. I don’t want to hurt anyone, and neither do you. But do you see what I mean? Unless you teach the use of lethal force, then you probably don’t ask yourself if you’d kill to protect your family. You only use enough force to defend the innocent, but that realization makes a huge difference in our behavior. Don’t believe me, then answer for yourself.

What would I do to protect the people I love?

Well, what are your options?

I… I couldn’t kill someone attacking my children.

Is that a feeling, or is that a moral decision you reached after careful consideration? You are the expert about what you can and should do, not me.

It isn’t an easy question. Love means you’ll do uncomfortable things. Ask any parent who cleaned a diaper or corrected a child.

You already guard your children’s health in all kinds of ways. You protect them from danger and teach them how to avoid dangerous situations as they grow. You do it every day.

You also guard their character. You teach them not to lie, and to avoid liars. Thank you.

You protect your loved ones from discomfort. You also protect them from physical harm. You probably look in on your kids as you go to bed, and you lock the doors to your house before you turn in for the night. You are a guardian.

You already do a lot, so let me say thank you. Thank you for all the ways you protect the people you love.

Because I study self-defense, I research when, where, and how people are attacked. Will your family ever be threatened? I don’t know. I do know that it happens to thousands of people just like us every day. Are you depending on luck or are you prepared? Now that I don’t know, but you do.

Because I’ve studied it, I know that you have a right to defend yourself. You have a duty to protect the innocent people who depend on you. What will you do?

Here is something else I learned. You won’t be able to protect the people you love unless you think about it ahead of time. You need a plan when there is no time to think. Everybody does. That is why I’m asking you to think about these uncomfortable questions now, rather than later.

Do your loved ones deserve protection from harm? Who will be their shield until help arrives? What tools and training are required to stop likely threats?

The answers are out there, but you have to ask the questions first.
~_~_

I gave you something to think about and 600 words. Please leave your answers in the comment section.
Rob Morse, author at Self-Defense Gun Stories
The original article is here.

Same Old Fascists in New Antifa Clothes- these kinder-gentler fascists..are still thugs

October 7, 2018
tags:

The evidence is frequent and widespread. Socialists call for violence. The Socialist news media spins these threats to make them sound reasonable. The Socialist media then ignores the violence committed by Socialist rather than report it honestly. The Socialist news media wants to call it a kinder and gentler fascism, but it isn’t. Here are a few examples and the deeper purpose behind them.

A comedian displayed a bloody decapitated caricature of President Trump and excused it as edgy entertainment. I would be excoriated for incitement to racial violence if I did that to President Obama or any other Democrat political figure, living or dead.

A Socialist critically wounded Republican Congressman Steve Scalise and five others in Alexandria Virginia. We would hear about it for years if a political conservative shot at Democrats..but the media has a double standard for political violence.

Peaceful citizens were beaten and bloodied when Antifa attacked a prayer rally. The attacker received probation. In contrast, the Obama Administration incarcerated an innocent film maker for years because it was politically convenient.

Socialist commentators on a national “news” show said Republican voters were violent racist bigots. There were no consequences for that slander. The contributor continues to appear on Socialist media. Ask yourself this; would we be allowed back on the news if you or I said that Democrats were racist bigots?

Socialist celebrities asked who will murder prominent Republican officials. Socialist Professors said to castrate and kill all white males.

There are no repercussions, and it gets worse. This is more than a war of words. Rand Paul was hospitalized after being attacked at home.

Trump spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders was refused service at a restaurant in Virginia. The news media would have called it Right-Wing-Racism if anyone refused service to a member of the Obama administration.

Senator Ted Cruz and his wife were chased from a restaurant by an organized mob in Washington DC. How would the media would react if right wing mobs chased Democrat politicians and their families from a public place?

Court of Appeals Judge Brett Kavanaugh was accused of being a serial gang rapist without contemporaneous evidence. Equally shocking was the sight of socialist politicians and advocacy groups advocating for the standard of guilty until proven innocent. That frightens me and it should frighten you.

A Democrat congressmen called for more of the same, and asked who was going to eliminate President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence.

These protests are funded by Socialist billionaires. Their media strategy is both simple and corrupt. The Socialist media will portray Antifa as righteous and powerful when Antifa thugs beat up on the “right wing”. Antifa will be portrayed as innocent lambs if their victims push back. Without double standards, the Socialist media wouldn’t have any standards at all.

This is part of a larger strategy for the upcoming elections. The political goal is to drive an energetic core of Socialists to the polls. The unintended consequence is the ongoing alienation of independent voters and marginally attached Socialists.

See it for what it is.

https://www.mrctv.org/blog/georgetown-professor-calls-castrate-white-mens-corpses-and-feed-them-swine
https://legalinsurrection.com/2018/10/julie-swetnicks-rape-train-claims-against-kavanaugh-crash-and-burn-in-nbc-interview/
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/gov-jerry-brown-%E2%80%98something%E2%80%99s-got-to-happen-to%E2%80%99-trump-people-must-%E2%80%98get-rid-of-him%E2%80%99/ar-BBNzeRD?ocid=sf
https://www.lifenews.com/2018/10/05/cnn-desperately-tries-to-smear-kavanaugh-saying-the-word-rape-191-times/

~_~_

I gave you 500 words. Please share and comment. RM

A Friend Turned Ten Years Old- Ammoland Shooting Sports News

October 5, 2018

I began writing Slow Facts in 2013. Ammoland Shooting Sports News had already been publishing for 5 years. This month marks Ammoland’s 10 year anniversary.

I didn’t start writing for them until 2015. Since then, they have kindly reposted over 380 of my articles. To give you a sense of scale, I’ve published about 1500 posts here at Slow Facts, while Ammoland has almost 70 thousand. My articles there make up less than half a percent of their content.

I’m glad to call some of the writers at Ammoland my friends, in particular David Codrea, Jeff Knox, and Dean Weingarten. I’ve met about a dozen of their listed authors over the years, though some of them have moved on and don’t post much of their work with Ammoland any longer. The editors have been generous with me.

None of that matters without you. I don’t have a count of how many views Ammoland has accumulated, but you’ve left almost 200 thousand comments. Thank you.

I wish continued success for the owners, editors, and writers at Ammoland. I hope I’ve contributed in some small way.

 

Same Old Problems with the New Democrats

October 3, 2018

The classical Democrat from the early 20th century supported individual independence. That changed in a number of important steps. Today we hear Progressive-Socialist-Communist Democrats steal the rhetoric of the 1920s as they promote the communism of 1917. That is a contradiction, and you can’t have it both ways. Citizens were better off with the old Democrats who were classical liberals.

Classical Liberalism- I disapprove of what you say,
but will defend to the death your right to say it.

Progressivism- I disapprove of what you say, and I will publicly shame you,
lobby to have you censored and demand you be fired from your job!

We’ve always had the problem of big-government colluding with big-industry. In the 1870s, the railroad shouldn’t be able to control the farmer. In the 1910s, the county road commissioner shouldn’t be able to extort bribes from the rural manufacturer who needed a road to his small factory. In the 1920s, the mine owner shouldn’t own the mine-town and its labor force. The common theme is that we want a number of employers who compete for local labor and who also compete against each other. That made sense back in the 1700s and it makes sense today. Back in the 1700s, Americans didn’t much care for government-granted monopolies, and we don’t much care for them today either.

In some ways, we have the same problems, except the Democrats, now rebranded as Progressive-Socialists-Communist Democrats, switched to the other side. Today, Google and your ISP shouldn’t own every online-click you ever made. The single mom should be able to arm herself and protect her family rather than have to beg her local bureaucrats for police protection from the drug gangs working her street.

From our perspective today, we can see the transition of the Democrats as they switched into the new labor coalition. The movement that was once filled with trade unions of the 1920s is now filled with the public employee unions of the 1970s. Today, the Socialists control state employees, who are then expected to politically support the state Socialist party. Sadly, any other activity of state government is incidental to the big-state Socialist politicians. That explains why schools and roads are so bad despite the high taxes in Progressive-Socialist-Communist Democrat controlled cities and states.

Look at Democrats politicians today. Rather than oppose the local mine owner, the democrats now want to control our local Internet Service Provider, the big tech firms, the public school employees, and the local bank. The Socialists want to choose winners and losers.

The chief attribute of these firms isn’t the likely size of their entrepreneurial success, but the size of the political kickbacks and political control they guarantee. Money talks now as it did before. Big failures and big political donations are far more politically profitable than small commercial successes.

Some things never change. We need a reformation away from big-state politics with their big-government “solutions”. That was true in the 1700’s and it’s true today. Big-government collusion with big-business oppressed the Americans of the 1700s and they do today as well.

The more I learn, the more I want the politicians out of my life. Don’t you?
~_~_

I gave you 500 words for free. Please leave a comment and share. RM

%d bloggers like this: