Discussion in 'Civil Rights & Privacy' started by Caradoc, Jul 20, 2012.
Seems to me you have made a pretty good argument for disallowing CCPs.
That is a viable option, but investigators carry and wind up in shooting situations as well. I think another point to be made is that simulated stressors are a good way to help condition someone to react a certain way in certain situations, but not everyone reacts properly under actual situations. We have all heard of soldiers/LEOs/regular citizens freezing up when faced with live fire situations - we have also heard stories to the contrary, where previously non-aggressive or fearful individuals (that is a gross over generalization btw) became Rambo when faced with a live fire situation. Some folks that freeze their first time or couple of times, learn and overcome that reaction after time, and some don't. I think that using training such as Monica indicated is a helpful tool, it can help many to learn how to overcome increased stress levels, but most people do not know what they will actually do in a live fire situation until faced with it.
No I think more training is needed for CHL purposes, which is what I have done and my scores both on paper and scenarios have improved. Anyone who says they know how they would react in a kill or be killed situation yet never has been in that position is full of .
BTW my definition in dropping accuracy is from everything in the X with the occasional 10 ring that enlarges to the 7 ring, which is still a hit, scores points and would stop an attacker.
In my first club IDPA rules match club I was using a Kimber 1911 and ammunition that would have made major power factor (+P or very fast, hard hitting rounds with lots of recoil and fireball out the barrel). The targets were 4" wide steel plates and 1/2 size silohetttes instead of the normal 6" plates and full size silhouettes. I still shoot in that division I have changed my ammo selection to a or reloads to a lower power factor.
agreed. I saw one cop the entire 10 days I was in Sydney last month, which is a large city of about 4 million, and I saw ONE cop the whole time, and he was apparently an administrative type, no firearm and he could barely walk due to some advanced disability such as palsy or parkinson's. If they cannot be trusted with a live weapon, there are plenty of other things for them to do. All of the those people injured in the NY incident were very badly served by their current process. I think policemen in some cities get an allotment of a few rounds per month for practice, which is not enough.
btw, for the folks that want to get rid of firearms (firearms being a proxy for our right to self defense), take a look at what happens in England TODAY: burglars can invade your house, tie up your family, but if you defend yourself even with a baseball bat, the burglar gets no jail and you'll get one to 5 years.
I've run into a few on the transit systems, mostly in central Sydney where they're checking for fare skippers and trying to keep the rowdy youths under control.
They're very pleasant though -- spotting the middle aged toursts & opening the gates so we don't have to get our passes out. "You do have your tickets, I presume."
It's attitude & culture. In Norway when the transit cops do their "kontrol" check they walk through the bus or tram grinning from ear to ear. Most cops in Norway aren't even armed.
And in Melbourne, dead tired after the long MR & on the train south to Jonestown on a mostly empty train, I was very nicely reprimanded for having my feet on the bench across from me and not having validated my day pass.
England abandoned its constitutional underpinnings in the late 19th century in favor of parliamentary supremacy. Our founding fathers debated whether Bill of Rights was even necessary because we already had those inalienable rights. Unfortunately in England they turned out to be not so inalienable after all.
Separate names with a comma.