Chicks and Guns
Video of Pretty Pistolera shooting some steel plates. As for advice: sight alignment and trigger squeeze.
Update: Dad calls (what you can’t use comments?) and says:
19 Responses to “Chicks and Guns”
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
July 9th, 2008 at 3:17 pm
slap, rack, bank? Is that like a crime reference or something?
July 9th, 2008 at 3:24 pm
No, it means i can’t type. slap, rack, banG
July 9th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
Good advice from your dad. I noticed the last two but not the first one.
July 9th, 2008 at 3:37 pm
She had 2 or 3 malfs.
Was that a Glock or a 1911?
July 9th, 2008 at 3:42 pm
thought it was a glock but they do put dummy rounds in them to test your 1337 5k1115.
July 9th, 2008 at 8:21 pm
She needs to use over the top slide rack method. (make a pirate hook with all your fingers together, now put the hook on top of the slide where the grippy part is. Squeeze hard, and pull back as hard as you can letting your hand fly off. It is a powerful, effective way to rack the slide.) If there was a actual jam vs dummy rnd, she probably wouldn’t have been able to clear it, especially with her arms fully extended.
July 9th, 2008 at 11:05 pm
Actually, she’s got it right if you’re shooting a certain style. The reverse-Chapman style of locking the support arm elbow offers superior recoil control. I’ve learned that from studying the Fist-Fire system. Lots of really hot shit shooters are using that or something similar.
Chapman/Weaver/locking the right arm looks tacticool on TV, but was real modern in about 1978.
July 10th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
slap, rack, bang.
SLAP the manufacturer of whatever junk part failed, go to the gun shop and get another one off the RACK, and then BANG you’re back on target.
I’m so totally kidding…
July 10th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
slap, rack, bang.
SLAP the manufacturer of whatever junk part failed, go to the gun shop and get another one off the RACK, and then BANG you’re back on target.
I’m so totally kidding…
July 10th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
I’m surprised we’re not seeing more traditionalists get exercised over my disagreement with Unk’s dad. 🙂
July 10th, 2008 at 4:20 pm
Well, given that my dad has actually been in combat while in the army, CIA, DOD, and sheriff’s dept. and always come out on top, I’m gonna lean toward his advice myself 😉
July 11th, 2008 at 8:46 am
Ah yes appeal to authority. 🙂 Well I suppose DR Middlebrooks would simply say “how many shooting titles has he won, and can he outshoot me or my students?” FIST Fire works, period. There are ways things have always been done, and then there are improvements on those methods ;).
July 11th, 2008 at 8:49 am
Which of course is not to disparage his or anyone else’s ability; but there ARE reasons for using the reverse Chapman type stance, and lots of very competitive shooters are having lots of success with it. I’m sure you can make arguments for both methods.
July 11th, 2008 at 8:49 am
And my dad would probably ask how many actual firefights he has won.
July 11th, 2008 at 9:35 am
I was not criticizing I was just offering my opinion. I think the word traditionalist may refer to us ” Ol Farts ” and I guess I am. I was a Range Master in my former job and I also attended many courses at Thunder Ranch at that time located in Texas. I would suggest that people use whatever they are successful with. People tend to react in a real situation the way they were trained. There was one case were a FBI agent was found dead with brass in his hands, So we trained our people to be prepared for anything, leave the brass on the ground and always check your 6. front sight front sight. I have seen many of the” hot shooters”do great at ranges and paper targets. Have them to drop from a chopper to the roof of a 5 story building and engage targets that shoot back ( lasers ) and you are using live ammo, you will see a big difference. I guess what I am trying to say is get the basics, like don’t lean into the weapon in order to anticipate the recoil, perform immediate action drills, failure drills ( 2 to the body 1 to the head ) so if the situation does arrive you will be ready and then you can go home to your family and when you meet with your friends over a beer then you can discuss one method over another. One thing I have experienced is a loud thumping noise in my head, I realized later it was my heart and guess what it didn’t happen at a range.
July 11th, 2008 at 9:55 am
A few; DR was in law enforcement for quite a while and has told some hair raising stories. But I think you’re missing my point about the appeal to authority argument. I dig what your dad is saying, but what I’m saying is the basic mechanics of effective shooting don’t change based on what the target is. Of course actual combat is different than a range day, that’s practically an a priori statement. But DR’s system is built around techniques that will be effective in life or death situations; if your muscle memory is built around effective recoil control and accurate, fast shooting, that’ll serve you well when the targets are real and shooting back.
I’m simply pointing out that over the last couple decades, people who train and refine tactics for the people who do actually drop from choppers to the roof of 5 story buildings and engage live targets have studied the mechanics of how to effectively control recoil and be accurate, and there’s an argument that old Weaver strong arm side elbow lock has been improved upon.
Seeing as the list of law enforcement and military orgs that use DR’s stuff is pretty long, I’d say we can probably call the appeal to authority thing kind of a moot point.
July 11th, 2008 at 9:58 am
Holy Jesus. Can we never have a discussion without someone bring up logical fallacies! Don’t make me break out the fallacy fallacy fallacy.
July 11th, 2008 at 10:08 am
And I’m not appealing to authority. Just stating whose advice I personally would choose to follow.
July 11th, 2008 at 10:11 am
There’s gotta be a fallacy in there somewhere ;).
Putting the phallus in fallacy since 1975