'The' Gun Thread (Page 41)

DanielG - 2013-04-30 8:16 AM I'm Eastern Cherokee and I approve of this message http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/pro-gun-native-american-billboar... Pro-Gun Native American Billboard Draws Criticism

I was reading about some of the hoopla on that sign this morning.  What's interesting is that people are missing the point.  One lady being interviewed was saying she didn't see the correlation to taking guns away and the government placing people on reservations.  Um, hello it's not about putting people on reservations.  It's about the half million plus Native Americans that were slaughtered prior to creating the reservations.

tuwood - 2013-04-30 10:54 AM

DanielG - 2013-04-30 8:16 AM I'm Eastern Cherokee and I approve of this message http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/pro-gun-native-american-billboar... Pro-Gun Native American Billboard Draws Criticism

I was reading about some of the hoopla on that sign this morning.  What's interesting is that people are missing the point.  One lady being interviewed was saying she didn't see the correlation to taking guns away and the government placing people on reservations.  Um, hello it's not about putting people on reservations.  It's about the half million plus Native Americans that were slaughtered prior to creating the reservations.

But but but they were "enemy combatants".  They didn't have any human rights.

Never mind the whole it was us white people who were coming in and taking their land and everything

Taken at face value, I do not have a problem with what was discussed. I only have a problem with adding law upon law when many are not even enforced... at a time when it is important to just "do something"... and all those something would not have stopped Columbine, West Virginia, Aurora, or Sandy Hook... the very events that everyone is demanding we stop.

The mentioned legislation would not change my life one bit (or my 2A rights), but it would also not change mass shootings one bit either... so I do not get what the point is.

Question on teaching a young or a new marksman:

If they're right handed but left eye dominant, then I have them shoot shotgun, rifle, archery left handed.

What about pistol or revolver?

(and yes, I said marksman. that includes you ladies as well) 

I'm no Chicken Little, but I do not think it is entirely impossible for another civil war. I can't really fathom where the lines would be drawn, but I can easily fathom a rift between conservative and liberal growing so deep that it is possible. Made possible by a growing American decline as a super power, and the economic pressures that would be added by a growing government and fewer resources.

The only thing that remains unknown is that when that time comes for those to "wake up", I'm not sure what their numbers would be. That will determine if they are just some sort of rebel minority and shrugged of as a small group of extremisms, or if they indeed had some serious numbers to effect a rebellion. I do not really see that happening in my life time, but if I live long enough, I think I will have an answer as to where we are headed.

Yes, pistol left handed. That is generally what I hear. I have heard that from some left eye/right hand people that finally switched after all their life and improved their shooting.

I'm left/left so not much problem for me... except everything is on the wrong side.

I'm left eye dominant and right handed as well.  A handgun is not the same big issue that a rifle is....you just have to get used to moving the gun a bit further to the left.......he should be shooting with both eyes open anyway so he'll automatically want to find the spot in front of his face where the left eye takes over.

I takes a bit of practice, like anything, but I won alot of shooting competitions as a young man being cross eye dominant.  Not a big deal to overcome.

That's what I've been thinking.

He's completely comfortable with shotgun, rifle, and archery shooting left handed. (He just moved up from .410 to a 20 gauge this weekend.  The .410 was his squirrel gun.  Now that he can handle the 20 gauge I'll take him out to the trap clinic our club has each week)

He hasn't shot much revolver yet, a .22,  and no pistol other than some airsoft.  He wants to naturally grip them right handed.

My youngest guy also seems to be left eye dominant. (I've done one of the the eye dominance test with him a number of times but haven't been 100% sure) He's too young in my opinion to be on a shotgun, but he's shooting a .22 rifle. Every time out so far, I had him on it right handed and he seems uncomfortable.  Had him just hold it left handed on a bench at home and he seems much more comfortable.  I could also see at the archery range a couple weeks ago that he was using his left eye to aim his right handed recurve.

I'm no expert by any means. So if it's best in any way for both of them to shoot everything left handed, that's what I'll have them do.  

How has understaffing, underfunding, and blocking of an appointment to head the ATF for the last 7 years contributed to the "lack of enforcement of existing laws"?

None. We have laws, and if a law enforcement agency says they do not have the resources to enforce them, and a legislature does not have the will to fund it.... then it has no business enacting more laws.

My only problem is at some point I went right handed for everything else. So I fight, and play sports right handed. I do not care for isosceles, and like to stagger my feet, but it does throw me off now wanting to stand right handed, but shoot a pistol left. Rifle and bow are just rifle and bow. Like you said... I just have to practice.

Grip is VERY important in pistol shooting....arguably the most important.  If he wants to naturally grip right handed I would let him......much easier to get over the left eye dominance thing than to try to get muscle memory for a left handed grip if you are doing everything else in life with a right handed grip.

Good question.  I'm left eye dominant and right handed, but I shoot everything right handed with my right eye.  I easily qualified as Expert Marksman with both Pistol and Rifle back in my Navy days and have no issues to this day making very small groups with anything I shoot. 

Now, could I be a little better from a pure competition standpoint?  I'm not sure, but I guess my point is you can train either way and become very proficient but I have no clue what the "best" or "proper" way is.

That's kind of my thought too.  I'd even go one step further to say that trigger control is even more important than grip.  Trigger control gets the first shot on target and grip is for the follow up shots.  Both very important though. 

Nothing like getting a facefull of black powder.

(Most flintlock rifles are ONLY right handed, for good reason.  The primer in the pad blow out sideways.  If you stand in a line with other guys, you get flaming powder sprayed on the left side of your face from your neighbor if they put a little too much in the pan, and your a good 2' away.  I don't want to know how it feels next to your cheek lol.  But, on the other hand, all MBR flintlocks don't even have sights.)

For a kid, grip is the base...it just is.  After you learn to shoot then trigger control overtakes grip...in fact, we drill by pulling the trigger WITHOUT any grip at all....just use pressure on the trigger to hold the gun in the crook of your hand and pull backward....no grip needed.   It's the best trigger control drill I know.

Exactly, my wife is right handed and left eye dominant.  She grips right handed.  We recently took a firearms course and she out shot 39 of us, and she doesn't shoot that often.

Are you in favor of giving the ATF the resources it needs to enforce the existing laws and allowing a director to be confirmed?

The ATF, needs a director. I do not know who that should be.

Laws either need to be enforced, or removed from the books. If we do not have the resources to enforce them, then either get them, or get rid of the law.

If we do not enforce the current laws, but want them in place for special cases, then I can't see how enacting more laws, are going to do anything. If the laws are not going to solve the problem they are enacted for, then they are bad laws and should not be enacted.

It's not complicated.

I'm in favor of the Federal Government doing a LOT better job of prioritizing it's responsibilities and allocating the funding for their priorities.

Our Federal Govt. doesn't have a problem with revenue and the ability to do the things it is required to, it has a problem of taking on things it has NO business being involved in.