why buy special shtf guns? why not just - Arms Locker
Arms Locker Gun Forum
Go Back   Arms Locker > Gun Forums > Rifles


Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By John in AR
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-09-2016, 07:38 AM   #1
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2014
From: USA

Posts: 3,050
why buy special shtf guns? why not just

use your shtf guns for everything and prove to yourself that they (and you) can handle such needs? if they can't, I suggest that you increase your skill and get more feasible gear.
 
Remove Ads
Old 06-09-2016, 08:57 AM   #2
Registered User
 Garand's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2004
From: Canadian Badlands

Posts: 8,067
Because choosing your firearms that way severely limits the number of other disciplines that you can compete it. You have asked this question at least a dozen times, is your memory getting that bad?
 
Old 06-09-2016, 09:17 AM   #3
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2004
From: Central Arkansas

Posts: 4,005
My 'special shtf' guns are simply my primary guns. Having extra guns in addition to my primary guns is simply like having multiple pair of shoes. I have two pair of shoes that I wear thru the week; rotating them occasionally as they seem to last longer that way. They're perfectly functional, comfortable, and practical, but I still have 'extra' shoes as well. Couple pair of dress shoes, heavier boots for when doing rougher stuff in the woods, etc.

My everyday shoes would be functionally just fine for nearly everything, but I like having options. I don't "need" them, but it doesnít hurt to have them.

I don't "need" air-conditioning or a cd player in my truck (the truck would still serve its purpose without them), but I'm keeping them.
I don't "need" extremely-good MSA Sordin Pro-X hearing protectors (disposable foam plugs would suffice just fine in most cases), but Iím keeping them.
I donít ďneedĒ a tv or a netflix subscription (I may be better-off without them, actually), but Iím keeping them.

Neither extra stuff, nor variations of stuff, inherently detracts from a personís competence with any other stuff. If it did, Jerry Miculek couldn't be world-class with both handguns and long guns; he couldn't be world-class with both autopistols and revolvers; and he couldn't be world-class with both rifles and shotguns. But fact is, heís literally world-class with multiple platforms AND multiple action types, so the argument that using more than one platform causes loss/degradation/absence of skill with any of them, falls apart at the surface. The reason most shooters aren't great with multiple platforms is because they aren't great with any ONE particular platform to begin with. Being great with several 'somethings' inherently requires being great with a single 'something' to begin with, and most shooters don't (and won't) put in enough effort to be particularly good with anything.

Short version:
Are multiple platforms really necessary? Not in most cases.
Are some platforms better at certain things than other platforms? Absolutely.
Are some platforms better at most things than many others? Absolutely.
Does it hurt your skill level to have Ė and to use Ė multiple platforms? No; just ask Jerry Miculek.
Garand likes this.
 
 
Old 06-09-2016, 10:22 AM   #4
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2014
From: USA

Posts: 3,050
sure, if you get paid 100k per year to do nothing but shoot, get your guns and ammo provided free. is that your case? since it's not, why claim that the time spent on other stuff doesn't hurt your performance? it provably does.
 
Old 06-09-2016, 11:02 AM   #5
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2004
From: Central Arkansas

Posts: 4,005
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikto View Post
...why claim that the time spent on other stuff doesn't hurt your performance? it provably does.
By that premise, driving my wife's jeep on the weekend 'provably hurts my performance' driving my pickup truck on weekdays.

I get the point that skill-building time spent with platform X takes away from skill-building time with platform Y, but there's a point of zero return. A person who gets good with one platform easily transfers that skill to another. I spent decades shooting handguns competitively; and the 1911 was by far the autopistol platform I used most in competition. And the fact is, that 1911 ability translates VERY well to the M&P platform; especially once I put better triggers in the M&P's (exactly as I'd done with my 1911's decades earlier). My ability with 1911's helped my initial ability with M&P, and getting better with the M&P certainly doesn't mean I'm getting worse with the 1911. This isn't supposition or theory, it's personally observed, and objectively measured & timed, reality.

If I didn't shoot much, or if I didn't train with measurable (accuracy & time) parameters to measure current performance against past performance, then switching platforms could hurt. And that situation is true for a lot of shooters. Maybe most shooters.

But to assume it's true in a universal application, is itself "provably untrue"; again, see Jerry Miculek or a dozen others. The fact that his guns and ammo don't cost him money has no bearing on his skill. The fact that he shoots a lot and practices intelligently - THAT is what makes the difference. Most people will never be particularly good with ANY platform, simply because they don't shoot a lot, and they don't practice intelligently.

How does your premise apply to you personally? Does using an AR hurt your performance with a handgun? Does practicing with a pocket-9 hurt your performance with a slenced .22 auto? Does using a silenced .22 auto hurt your performance with the AR? The answers to those questions are either 'yes' or 'no'; there is no other possible truthful response.

- If 'yes', then you're saying that you're not as good as you could be with any one of them.
- If 'no', then you yourself are claiming that "the time spent on other stuff doesn't hurt your performance".

Which is it? One or the other has to be true.
 
Old 06-09-2016, 11:03 AM   #6
Registered User
 Garand's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2004
From: Canadian Badlands

Posts: 8,067
Prove that it hurts your performance Melvin!
 
Old 06-09-2016, 03:28 PM   #7
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2004
From: Central Arkansas

Posts: 4,005
Quote:
Originally Posted by John in AR View Post
...How does your premise apply to you personally? Does using an AR hurt your performance with a handgun? Does practicing with a pocket-9 hurt your performance with a slenced .22 auto? Does using a silenced .22 auto hurt your performance with the AR? The answers to those questions are either 'yes' or 'no'; there is no other possible truthful response.

- If 'yes', then you're saying that you're not as good as you could be with any one of them.
- If 'no', then you yourself are claiming that "the time spent on other stuff doesn't hurt your performance".

Which is it? One or the other has to be true.
A half-dozen posts and four new thread starts since I asked this, but still no reply to this question, asked here in your own thread...
 
Reply

  Arms Locker > Gun Forums > Rifles



Search tags for this page

practice 10x

Click on a term to search for related topics.

Thread Tools
Display Modes






Powered by vBulletin 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © 2003 - 2011 Arms Locker. All rights reserved.