Moderator: carlson1
Check your figures. I think that's a 95% deviation.WildBill wrote:At a 95% confidence level.marksiwel wrote:But only 1/3rd of the time!The Annoyed Man wrote:And 75% of statistics are wrong.gigag04 wrote:I'd say that's a good number since well over 25% of the general public is obnoxious.
But these figures are only true, when they are not false...OldSchool wrote:Check your figures. I think that's a 95% deviation.WildBill wrote:At a 95% confidence level.marksiwel wrote:But only 1/3rd of the time!The Annoyed Man wrote:And 75% of statistics are wrong.gigag04 wrote:I'd say that's a good number since well over 25% of the general public is obnoxious.
I wasn't trying to be a wise guy, by the way. (Ok, maybe just a littlemikeintexas wrote: I guess my trips there have been more pleasant than you described.
) Seriously, be careful. They let folks get away with some really unsafe stuff.
Because they are...?Why does it seem like 1 in 4 gun ranges are full of jerks?
Its like I say, I love Texas, I could have moved to any other place in the US, I choose Texas, but I dislike Half the population of Texas. No based on race or politics or anything silly like thatOldgringo wrote:Because they are...?Why does it seem like 1 in 4 gun ranges are full of jerks?
One of my favorite bumper stickers of yesteryear was spotted in south Florida in the late 80's: "If you {heart NY} try 95 North".marksiwel wrote:Its like I say, I love Texas, I could have moved to any other place in the US, I choose Texas, but I dislike Half the population of Texas. No based on race or politics or anything silly like thatOldgringo wrote:Because they are...?Why does it seem like 1 in 4 gun ranges are full of jerks?
Statistics are like bikini swimsuits. What they reveal is interesting but what they conceal is critical.marksiwel wrote:
The Annoyed Man wrote:
gigag04 wrote:
I'd say that's a good number since well over 25% of the general public is obnoxious.
And 75% of statistics are wrong.
But only 1/3rd of the time!At a 95% confidence level.
I am lucky enough to be able to use DFW range at times they are generally less crowded. At those times I don't see any unsafe gun handling. I do know however that most, if not all ranges, get more than a few people who really need to have a basic gun safety course. And range officers can't see everything!Blinking Dog wrote:I wasn't trying to be a wise guy, by the way. (Ok, maybe just a littlemikeintexas wrote: I guess my trips there have been more pleasant than you described.
Truer words have never been spoken...G.C.Montgomery wrote:... our industry tends to attract people with pretty serious maturity issues ...
Age and Maturity do not always go hand in hand. I've seen my share of Young Fools and Old Fools in my short time in the shooting world. The first time I got muzzled swept was by an old guy.pbwalker wrote:Truer words have never been spoken...G.C.Montgomery wrote:... our industry tends to attract people with pretty serious maturity issues ...
One trip to the Bullet Hole in San Antonio will prove this statement. Full of wannabe 'gangstas' and kids thinking they are 'hard' with with their Jimenez "duece duece"...
I need to find me some 50+ year old gents to shoot with...
That's not maturity or lack of. That's inexperience or lack of situational awareness. Chances are great that if you (in my case, a younger guy) took the time to explain and show them, they'd appreciate it. Try that with Eminem in the bay next to you...marksiwel wrote:Age and Maturity do not always go hand in hand. I've seen my share of Young Fools and Old Fools in my short time in the shooting world. The first time I got muzzled swept was by an old guy.pbwalker wrote:Truer words have never been spoken...G.C.Montgomery wrote:... our industry tends to attract people with pretty serious maturity issues ...
One trip to the Bullet Hole in San Antonio will prove this statement. Full of wannabe 'gangstas' and kids thinking they are 'hard' with with their Jimenez "duece duece"...
I need to find me some 50+ year old gents to shoot with...
