I have never seen anything as dangerous as USPSA, IPSC, etc.

[Steven Cline]

<<<<<<<Not a ninja...

Another fat-ish engineer who knows darn well that one gains proficiency and experience with practice and trigger time is the only thing that is going to make you more proficient with a firearm.  However one gains that proficiency, with the understanding that nothing ever happens the way we want it to, is better off than sitting on the couch watching training videos!

What others call a "dynamic critical incident", I call a "cluster f..k"!  It's always better to NOT be there when the SHTF but if you are, it's important to be able to hit what's aiming at you when you need to!

Welcome Steven, enjoy the party!

LOL!

Will you be my new best friend?!?!

That post was awesome.  I salute you, sir.

[Timothy]

LOL!

Will you be my new best friend?!?!

That post was awesome.  I salute you, sir.

I have lots of friends, one more that lives 2000 miles away wouldn't hurt! 

I understand you're a smithy as well!  We always need the opinion of a good mechanic!

Keep your sense of humor, we're a good bunch 'round here!   

[Steven Cline]

I have lots of friends, one more that lives 2000 miles away wouldn't hurt!  

I understand you're a smithy as well!  We always need the opinion of a good mechanic!

Keep your sense of humor, we're a good bunch 'round here!  

Actually, I'm not that Steve Cline.

San Antonio boasts two men named Steve Cline- Mr. Cline of Cline's Trigger Shop is the man you are thinking of.

I'm the local "hot shot" (as the OP would put it), who is a USPSA Master Class shooter in the Single Stack Division.  I've won the Texas Single Stack Shootout two years running, won the SS Division in 2011 at the Texas State Limited match, I've finished in the Top 50 at a USPSA Nationals, and won numerous other smaller matches in the SS Division while whipping many shooters with great capacity firearms.

I do have a BA,was a commissioned officer in the USAR and worked for a Sheriff's Dept. (also? sound familiar as par of my resume, does that?).  Now I do corporate security for the world's largest telecom, and teach some classes locally with an NRA Pistol Cert.  

I don't claim more than that, I won't exaggerated it (much) but I won't minimize it either.

It's nice to make your acquaintance.

[Steven Cline]

The core of this OPs post are some errors.  That the local hot shots were even hot shots is one- I've never seen any shooter in USPSA try the brace the gun when shooting for speed.  After that first time, experienced shooters advise against it.  They never do it again.

At the core of the "debate" is the training scar.  In simple terms, a training scar is the indoctrination of something to the point that one does it without thinking, and the thing is done because it is what one always does in training or practice. It is a negative term; it should have a negative effect.  To really drive home a habit, stress is introduced. Military training engages in this using repetition and stess: "SPORTS!" screams the Drill as you execute your immediate action drill to the M16/M4 not firing. "Get behind cover, reload that gun!  Faster faster! You're partner is getting shot while you fumble with that magazine!" And the Training Cadre is doing the same to you.  You can induce your own stress with competition and create patterns/habits which will likely be auto-engaged.  So one question might be, "is it a scar" or a good practice or even a habit?

The most easily understand example of the training scar was the "policing" of brass on the range after each sub-set of shooting a qual. Officers were found dead with brass in hand or in pockets- they had been so conditioned (though repetition and angry loud direction (stressor) to "pick that brass up off my range!" that they did it in a fire-fight when they should have been focused on killing the f....r.

http://www.nlptimes.com/blog/2009/06/07 ... -practice/

The attempt by some to label the practice of shooting only twice at a target as training scar is understandable, but dubious. It really depends on what the individual is doing as opposed to the simple practice/habit of scoring the best two shots per paper.  In USPSA we score the best two hits per paper, so the assumption is we fire two shots at the paper, no more, no less, and move on.

(Recently I ran a stage were we scored the best three hits per paper... interesting reactions from shooters when we asked them to think a bit more on one course of fire).

If the individual is shooting a shot, seeing the sights when the shot breaks, then doing the same things a second time, and having seen two accurately fired shoots, decides to move on this is less a of a negative scar than can be reasonably argued. This shooter will make up one or more inaccurately fired shots. Thus, no scar of blindly firing two shots and moving on no matter what is being created.  That would be a training scar. And, that is the training scar that is being proposed.  It is is proposed because some don't understand what "we" are doing. 

It is correct that USPSA shooters should not be "programming" ourselves to shoot twice and roll on, we should instead be programming ourselves to make good called shots first and programming ourselves to make up inaccurate shots. This is programming to think. Not to mindlessly do by rote. The former is never a scar, the later would be.

We SHOULD be seeing a sight picture and calling the shots. Are we always? Maybe not. But proper visual patience and called shots are the counter to the perceived "scar." Oddly, all LEOs and Military guys should suffer this same scar- In training and quals both they can't shoot a target to the ground. Instead they shot per a standard format, set number of shots, under a set time limit and are graded... they are gaming.

I know I just stepped on some toes.  Harden the "f" up and keep reading.  You'll see I am right and why without intentionally being a jerk.

LE and Mil are required to shoot the min (and often Max) number of shots per paper. The paper targets don't fall so they don't actually instill a shoot to the ground training or practice. So, I ask the "ninja" how he practices shooting a target to the ground? IN all likelihood.. He doesn't (unless he is creative enough to attach a falling steel behind the target and shoot it until the shots passing through the paper impact the steel enough times to drag it down.  Instead the "ninja" shoots the target repeatedly with no real reinforcement of accuracy and says he's not scarred. Instead, he's substituted the poor practice of shooting a random but large number of shots for the practice of only two shots. In reality our USPSA "practice" is no less dangerous than all the LE and Mil training and practice... ruminate on that. Use it with my permission.  If either the USPSA shooter or LE/Mil bothers to call his shots and makes up any of the shots he calls inaccurate, then no scar is being created. 

As mentioned, steel is another counter to this perceived training scar, shoot the steel to the ground, make it up if the shot was errant or ineffective.

A true training scar might be the rush to unload and show clear. If we want our competitive sport to help support our self-defense maybe we ought not immediately drop the mag and empty the chamber.  But wait, reality says the following: unless the bad-guy calls out IfFinished,Unload And Show Clear... and I do it like an automaton; I'm not worried about a training scar. 

In reality I have shot the targets I wanted to shoot. Saw the shots I wanted to see, made up the shots I wanted to make up, drove steel to the ground, and often scanned the last few targets to hits before I start to unload. Again, do your USC as a deliberate thinking act, not a blind and mindless act.

BTW, we don't shoot 32 (minimum) courses of fire because we stupidly think we'll be engage by 16 bad guys... we do it because it is FUNNNER than shooting 1 target 8 times, or 5 targets 2 or 3 times.   Consider- if I can keep my head in the game through 16 targets, I'm more ready than those you can't to deal with 1 or 2 guys which I might need to engage with a whole bunch or shots for whatever reasons.

The stupid argument that USPSA shooters won't react to visual stimulus to engage bad guys, because we are trained to react to a buzzer; and the often associated USPSA shooters will shoot innocents when ever they hear a buzzer is sad lame BS and intellectual/academic pap. All the observing shooters don't react the buzzer, ready for it or not, do they? 'Nuff said.

[Steven Cline]

My final reaction to the OP is that I've never seen anything more dangerous than the dogmatic, closed minded reaction to USPSA and IDPA than displayed in the post.

It's the reaction and the decision, not the individual I take exception to. 

In the end, I'll tell you what a Marine LTC, sometimes instructor, combat vet of many ops (including the capture of Sadam's sons) said after a practice session and having seen my speed and accuracy.

"If I am every in a firefight, I want Steve on my side."  That's high praise and I accept it graciously.  To return the favor, I know I want him to teach me and my son, tactics, combatives, and aggressive mindset- because I've seen his in action and found it as impressive as he apparently found my shooting skills... and I'm not even the best in the sport.

I've never been of an us v them mentality- simply aggressively defending the sport and bringing education on what we are actually doing.

Cheers.

[Sponsor]

[tombogan03884]

You have completely missed the point of the OP.
There was not one single word of IDPA versus USPSA involved in the entire first page.
I went back and checked.
The only mention of a particular game was Ratcatcher saying he had seen the same thing in his particular sport.
The point the op was making was that if you do that stuff in the real world you can get killed.
That was why he wrote that they were allowing a timer to force them into bad decisions.
Until you posted the whole discussion was centered on the training aid these  may have started as and the "games" that they have become which makes them nearly useless as training for real world situations.

[Steven Cline]

You have completely missed the point of the OP.

No, I didn't.

There was not one single word of IDPA versus USPSA involved in the entire first page.

And no mention of USPSA v IDPA in any of my posts, either.

I went back and checked.

Go back and check all my posts.  I don't hold much hope it will help your reading comprehension.  But, here are the Cliff Notes:  Steven Cline didn't create a single USPSA v. IDPA post.

The only mention of a particular game was Ratcatcher saying he had seen the same thing in his particular sport.

If you say so.

The point the op was making was that if you do that stuff in the real world you can get killed.

And I am saying the OP incorrect assessed what the shooters were doing and why.  He can "waller" in all his tactical glory, I still believe he lacks one of the most critical of tactics- gun skill.

That was why he wrote that they were allowing a timer to force them into bad decisions.

Bad decisions if that was real window with real bad guys or the right decision to solve the shooting equation presented to them.  You and I don't know since we weren't there seeing the stages. 

Hands through windows- bad idea in some situations, absolutely necessary in other situations.
Using cover as rest instead of cover- interesting possibility, though if your resting the gun on cover you're probably getting cover, though in some situations the shooter may feel the stability is offset by the lessened cover.  Great thing about USPSA; shooter solves the problem, not black and white thinking.  Creativity and thinking is rewarded.
Cutting the pie is an IDPA thing, I've seen IDPA cutting the pie- it's not my cutting the pie either.  Well, the OP gets 1 for 3 so far.
Unloading the gun because you have too to satisfy the safety rules (and actually not dictated by the timer, did you catch that little incongruity?).  Not sure that's nuts.


So we can waste out time discussing meaningless hypotheticals.  Or, you can.  I'm actually not interested any more.

Until you posted the whole discussion was centered on the training aid these  may have started as and the "games" that they have become which makes them nearly useless as training for real world situations.

Wrong again.  Tyler Durden asked a wonderful question largely ignored.  Mostly because some people looked a few logical steps ahead and one sees what BBBean wrote in my sig line.

Once again.  You're focused on me, or the wrong things such as what I didn't actually say and are steadfastly what I actually did write.

You can't brow beat me into accepting what you believe is this forums standard mind-think; you don't have anything close to the ability.  I won't let you get away with misstating my position or my statements.  I am unimpressed with your posts.  Why are you still here yammering at me?

Have you anything to contribute?

[tombogan03884]

Your continuing slanders of the original poster show what sort of a person you are.
He was looking for a training aid and found a game.

[Steven Cline]

Your continuing slanders of the original poster show what sort of a person you are.
He was looking for a training aid and found a game.

We can agree on one thing- he went looking for a training aid but he found a game.

We probably won't ever agree that he missed that the game is a wonderful training aid.

[Steven Cline]

Who'd have thunk there were two guys with the same name!   

Anyway, pleased to make your acquaintance as well.   

Indeed.  When I called him the first time I introduced myself as his name sake.  He responded, "So, yer the guy causing me all the problems."  Turned out that all his friends were accusing him competing again and calling him a liar when he denied it.

We've become friends, though he charges me for any smith work I want.   

Now, ask me how many Juan Martinez's are in San Antonio, TX...