Teaching those who have no experience with firearms and dealing with a pushy husband.

[Vaquero]

I'll do y'all a favor and stifle my urge to go on a rant...

Burn it down Ben!

 

[benenglish]

I have learned that women are natural shooters.

Barring the need for brute physical strength, women can do anything men can do. That used to be really, really obvious in the smallbore and airgun shooting sports where the strength to withstand recoil was not an issue. Men and women competed in International matches against each other and nobody gave that a second thought.

Your statement that "Women are natural shooters" is broad and over-simplified but, in my experience, it's absolutely true.

That's why I find the current brouhaha over biological men kicking ass in women's sports occasionally amusing. I remember back when the International Shooters Union separated the men and the women. They had previously shot all their events without regard to gender but the women were beating the men so often it was embarrassing.

PS - Yes, there was more to it. The politics of Olympic sports are always convoluted and complex. But y'all get the idea.

 

[Sam7sf]

It's amazing how little instruction it takes to make a complete novice into a competent shooter who can be safe and stay on target.

In many cases so long as you score well, shooting stance is open to discussion. I showed her the standard two hand stance but showed her how to use a modified weaver stance if certain challenges arise. For certain medical issues or other problems this stance tends to get them on target in a short amount of time.

I then showed her the basics of shotgun that any commission from dps would ask for. Here’s how you shoulder buckshot and here’s how you hold your shells for fast reload. She started with bird shot while learning proper foot and shoulder stance but jumped to buckshot immediately after with confidence once she understood proper stance will protect her.

 

[Glenn B]

tl;dr - Teaching should be done by disinterested third parties. Others, especially family members, really should be kept well away.

On that I must respectfully disagree, that is exactly why the state of teaching in this country is so screwed up - because parents for decades did not take enough interest in teaching their children when they could. It applies to not only education in schools but to everything and that includes firearms training if the parent is able to to do so. Sure, if a parent cannot do it or is not comfortable, sending the child for firearms lessons is wonderful and then they must let the trainers do it but teaching ones own child how to shoot is an excellent thing to do. I taught my daughter (who lost interest when she discovered boys althogh her new job will require her to be armed) and my son how to shoot. My son still shoots today and is a bit of an avid collector. Many folks we have met consider him to be a very good at it. He was most definitely not taught about firearms by disinterested third parties but was taught by an extremely interested parent with all the bias and loving care that comes with being family. When parents can teach their children and do it well, it is of greater significance to the child than when they are taught by anyone else. Disinterested teachers are just that - disinterested in your children.

 

[Sam7sf]

That kind of hate comes from the same people who will tell you that you should never take a class from someone who doesn't have LEO or military experience.

My job has me working with lots of former police and military. There are some I trust with my life. One a former dfw cop and one a former Nevada stater.

Most everyone else gets surprised at my situational awareness skills being none military.

 

[leVieux]

The importance of that cannot be over-stressed.

Cooper on Handguns has a section on choosing a defensive firearm. The first step was to ask "Do you shoot regularly for fun?" If the answer is yes, the instructor should simply reply "Fine. Use that."

That doesn't work in every case; obviously a skeet shooter can't conceal their shotgun on their belt. But for home defense, two center-mass shots from a shotgun that the shooter knows intimately are far more likely to end a threat than six misses with a .44 magnum.

Once someone is shooting regularly for fun for some time, they'll know enough to make a valid choice for a defensive firearm. Maybe not the best choice but at least a workable one.

<>

Having escaped from an armed kidnapper in very late 1980, not too long after a Friend/Colleague, Dr. Wm ‘’Pat’’ Fitzpatrick, was kidnapped & murdered in Houston; I vowed to never be unarmed again, no matter the law.

I was encouraged in this by two different career HPD Officer/Friends. As I was very familiar with Walther PPK’s from War relics, I bought a PPKS .380 & an IWB/‘’SOB‘’ concealment holster.

Neither the .45 Gold Cup, the 4’’ Python had helped because they were left at home. Too big to conceal, especially before Texas had CHL’s.

Lesson is this, and I feel it primary: For any defensive weapon to be of any use, it must be present when needed.

Forget targets, calibers, mag cap’s, etc. IF it is not present, it is useless, PERIOD !

So, I advise all to pick a gun which is easy & comfortable to CC !

leVieux

<>

 

[benenglish]

It applies to not only education in schools but to everything and that includes firearms training if the parent is able to to do so.

When parents can teach their children and do it well, it is of greater significance to the child than when they are taught by anyone else.

You are absolutely correct. The operative phrases in your statements are "if the parent is able to do so" and "When parents can teach their children and do it well..."

Most parents aren't able. Some are able to compartmentalize themselves into instructor mode and do a fantastic job. Children will cherish those memories like they probably already cherish their parents.

Most people can't compartmentalize that well. When the kid makes a mistake, words like "You always mess up stuff like this" or "You weren't listening. I already told you. You never listen." Most parents treat their kids during instruction as if they were their kids, letting years of emotional baggage pollute what should be a simple, straightforward lesson plan.

During a lesson, successful parents or teachers treat the kids as pupils, not offspring. That's a whole different baseline of expected behaviors.

You've got brains and patience enough to do the job right. You know other people who do. Same here. Congrats to us both.

But we both also know plenty of fathers who absolutely sucked at teaching their teenage daughter to drive with situations exploding into hurt feelings and outright anger that colors their entire relationship, even after the lesson is over. Teaching to shoot is analogous.

There are certain situations where a disinterested third party is needed/mandatory to provide effective instruction.

We may disagree on how often that is but I get the distinct feeling we're more in agreement than in conflict on this issue.

 

[General Zod]

tl;dr - Teaching should be done by disinterested third parties. Others, especially family members, really should be kept well away.

Gotta disagree here .I taught my sons to shoot (and will be teaching my daughter as soon as she shows interest in learning) and even taught my wife, who has minimal interest in firearms but discovered that true to what you said elsewhere, is a natural shooter. No problems with any of them. I also taught a girlfriend back in college who had never picked up a firearm in her life, but had been assigned to teach rifle shooting at the Boy Scout camp she volunteered at and found herself with two weeks to learn enough to teach kids safe shooting. She wound up being told she was one of the best shooting instructors in years.

With my boys, quite a few members here have seen the result of my instruction - they can outshoot me any day (but don't any of you tell them I said that).

A lot of it just depends on how well the learners are willing to take instruction from the instructor, and how self-aware the instructor is about where the line between teaching and lecturing lies.

(and I see you've already effectively replied to my point before I uploaded my reply...)

 

[red442joe]

First rule of teaching someone to drive?
No yelling.
Second rule?
No yelling.
It works for guns too.

Joe

 

[rotor]

I taught my wife and children and grandchildren how to safely shoot. As a child I didn't have that opportunity but I did learn at Cub Scout camp. I wish that my parents would have taught me. Now in my "golden" days those I taught are all better shots than I am. My only critique of the op was the use of ear plugs from his shop, most of them I find to be inadequate and I use ear muffs for all new shooters. The loud noise of a gun shot can really frighten a new shooter and I want maximum ear protection for them. Otherwise you did great and I applaud you. Skills we learn from our parents are wonderful unless your parents have no gun skills (mine had none).

 

[benenglish]

So, I advise all to pick a gun which is easy & comfortable to CC !

I view the journey from novice to competent concealed carrier as something that takes a while. There's really not much difference in our viewpoint other than the time frame. With that in mind, I will say that I have acted exactly as you described your actions in some situations. I've taught more than one woman who had never touched a gun before but had a violent ex-boyfriend who took a restraining order as a mild suggestion. In those cases, the student was highly motivated and the need to move to an effective concealed carry gun was acute. It can be done.

I just prefer to take a little time and help the student learn to like shooting, a lesson that sticks better than just "Here's the basics in case your ex kicks in your door tonight." Sometimes we don't have the luxury of time.

 

[benenglish]

My only critique of the op was the use of ear plugs from his shop, most of them I find to be inadequate and I use ear muffs for all new shooters.

Personally, I use both simultaneously. I'd like to see students do the same.

In my case, I'm closing the barn door after the horse gets out, unfortunately.

 

[FireInTheWire]

Your statement that "Women are natural shooters" is broad and over-simplified but, in my experience, it's absolutely true.

Curious... what is your hypothesis of why that is?

 

[benenglish]

Gotta disagree here

I agree with your disagreement...in the context of TGT. We're all into guns. Among us, there will be a substantially higher proportion of people who can successfully teach their own children how to shoot. That's fantastic. I love that both my parents were that way.

But I stand by my statement as a general principle for most people. Most people don't know enough about a subject to teach it. Knowing enough to teach is a huge ask and requires years of dedication from the potential teacher. For those who put in the work, it's rewarding and wonderful.

For those who try to teach without the right mindset or skill set, well, a curse on them. They churn out students who know nothing or what they know is at least insufficient if not outright wrong. Generally, those students understand that something went wrong and, as a result, don't really care to be taught anything.

There are valid reasons why disinterested third parties should do most teaching. Not all. I'll grant you that. But most.

 

[rotor]

Personally, I use both simultaneously. I'd like to see students do the same.

In my case, I'm closing the barn door after the horse gets out, unfortunately.

Me too. $5k hearing aids.

 

[baboon]

My wife was no stranger to guns when I met her. I think by our third date I opened the safe for her & she didn't freak out , so I knew she was a keeper.

 

[benenglish]

Curious... what is your hypothesis of why that is?

The "Why?" of it is more complex than I'm willing to go into for both reasons of time and because I don't know the absolute answer. I know I've observed it more than once.

Research has been done on stability when standing and women seem to do better, on average. In my context, as (usually) a pistol shooter, that means a more stable base from which to shoot. On average, the center of gravity of women's bodies is literally lower than those of men. That's the only real-world physical reason that comes to mind at the moment. Keep in mind that I specified that women succeed in competition like Olympic air pistol where there's not as much a need for physical strength to deal with recoil. That's important.

In practical terms, women don't typically adopt a male attitude that they're the spiritual successors to John Wayne and they already know what they're doing. Sometimes women pull the helpless female act but that's easy to get past. Once past it, female students are often much more attentive because they're now in a world they haven't previously thought of as their birthright. They know they need to listen if they're going to succeed. As simple as that last sentence sounds, my experience is that women do a better job of it than men when it comes to firearms instruction.

I suppose there's more to this and I'll ponder it. Good question. Thanks.

 

[FireInTheWire]

The "Why?" of it is more complex than I'm willing to go into for both reasons of time and because I don't know the absolute answer. I know I've observed it more than once.

Research has been done on stability when standing and women seem to do better, on average. In my context, as (usually) a pistol shooter, that means a more stable base from which to shoot. On average, the center of gravity of women's bodies is literally lower than those of men. That's the only real-world physical reason that comes to mind at the moment. Keep in mind that I specified that women succeed in competition like Olympic air pistol where there's not as much a need for physical strength to deal with recoil. That's important.

In practical terms, women don't typically adopt a male attitude that they're the spiritual successors to John Wayne and they already know what they're doing. Sometimes women pull the helpless female act but that's easy to get past. Once past it, female students are often much more attentive because they're now in a world they haven't previously thought of as their birthright. They know they need to listen if they're going to succeed. As simple as that last sentence sounds, my experience is that women do a better job of it than men when it comes to firearms instruction.

I suppose there's more to this and I'll ponder it. Good question. Thanks.

Thanks, Ben

 

[RoadRunner]

All handgun shooters, experienced shooters as well as newbies, should watch this video.

 

[Axxe55]

TOO MANY HUSBANDS AND BOYFRIENDS THINK THEY SHOULD HELP CHOOSE A FIREARM FOR THEIR SO!