TexasCHLforum.com

Excaliber wrote:Intrusions into occupied homes are often dangerous, but they're not always as simple as they seem at first. If it turns out that a citizen shot his daughter's unarmed boyfriend who tried to sneak in to see her through the side door to the garage that she'd left unlocked for him, making the case that the kid presented a deadly threat simply because the house was occupied and the homeowner wasn't aware he had been invited won't pass the smell test.

I agree that we should not shoot the Avon lady or the meter reader. IFF is essential. But when photos of home invaders are readily available, they nearly always look like 10-most-wanted posters. Someone kicking in your door or window, or trying to break into your vehicle, undoubtedly has bad intentions.

It would also be a good idea to educate one's children that perimeter security is sacrosanct. The door that is left open for a surreptitious visit may also admit a prowler.

- Jim

Shooting is hardly as complicated as playing the violin or tennis. You can see that you either hit the point of aim or you didn't, and the causes and solutions to various problems are well-documented.

The Army manual is written so that a relatively raw recruit can learn from it. The cost is effectively zero (though I printed a copy and had it bound).

I think a few formal lessons and consistent practice will keep most shooters at a practical level.

It's a small investment for a skill that can save your life and the lives of your loved ones.

- Jim

I agree that reading can set the mental groundwork for what a coach teaches by example and hands-on instruction.

You don't need a world-class coach to learn basic technique, and that is all that most shooters achieve. I have taught a couple of people who had absolutely no experience to shoot, and they were shooting consistent patterns within one hour.

- Jim

In Gravest Extreme is worth reading, but I have some serious quarrels with it.

Mr. Ayoob advocates the use of deadly force only to prevent murder or serious bodily injury. That policy may be appropriate for certain states; but in light of Texas law and community standards, I think it is dangerous.

If someone is breaking into an occupied residence or vehicle, that criminal is willing to use deadly force against the occupants. He may not have thought it through, but it is implicit in the act. If you allow a criminal past the barrier, the doors and windows of your house or vehicle, his chance of succeeding in a deadly assault, rape, or kidnapping is much greater. The legislature has been very explicit about allowing the use of deadly force to prevent this possibility.

When this book was written (1980), cooperating with armed robbers may have been appropriate. It no longer is. Too many robbers commit violence against cooperating victims. There is a story in today's paper about a robbery where the robbers stole the personal property of all the patrons of a game room in Bacliff, then shot one for no apparent reason: http://www.galvnews.com/story.lasso?ewc ... 67e76f93d7

My other point of disagreement is that Mr. Ayoob recommends carrying "throw-down" money and giving it to potential muggers. This may have been appropriate in the den of thieves that was New York City in the 1970s.

I object to the concept of "street taxes" on principle. I think it encourages aggressive and intimidating behavior. It's like rewarding a dog when it growls at you.

Throw-down money in its own right is useful. It can be a distraction, especially if you "nervously" drop loose bills to that the robber is tempted to bend over and pick them up.

- Jim

ElGato does one-on-one coaching. I think that's the best route. It's real easy for a beginner to develop a flinch or other bad habits.

U.S. Army Pistol Marksmanship Manual: http://www.scribd.com/doc/2869065/U-S-A ... hip-Guide-

U.S. Marine Pistol Marksmanship Manua:
http://www.pointshooting.com/marine.pdf

These books are purely about the mechanics of shooting, not safety, tactics, or anything else.

- Jim