Comment by bugsMarathon88 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by bugsMarathon88 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Why is every opinion qualified as "ex-military" always tend to be hyperbolic, technically incorrect and full of appeals to authority rather than actual factual information?

> There is no real-world situation where you are really just that much better at drawing and firing accurately that you will out-draw an adversary who drew on you first

There is, and it is called training. Get a timer, hit the range, and get your shots on target from concealment in under a second - while getting off the "x" - this is a standard I have trained many people to meet first-hand. And it doesn't take a specialist to get this level of training, either; it takes a few years, several thousands rounds of ammunition, and periodic maintenance, just like any craft.

> In a real world firefight you're either close enough where martial arts is relevant or you're not. If martial arts are relevant, then the guns are irrelevant.

Disparity of force - another well known concept you ought to familiarize yourself, especially as it is one of the most critical elements of legal defense in a shooting.

> Responsible citizens carry their guns in such a way that prioritizes the safety of those around them before their own personal safety.

Smart people legally carry a firearm to defend themselves and their family only from unexpected deadly threats. They would never intervene, get involved with, or otherwise "rescue" anyone else with lethal force. The "sheepdog" mentality you've put on display is honestly offensive and gives a bad name to firearms owners.

> it is called training

Even if I take you at your word for the sake of argument, what percentage, do you think, roughly, of gun owners are going to take "a few years, several thousand rounds of ammunition, and periodic maintenance" to get to that level? Because guns without manual safeties are sold to people regardless of such skill level, and no such demonstration of skill is required for licensing in order to purchase such a manual-safety-less weapon. Especially in legal environments where the Second Amendment is used to justify weapons purchases without or with minimal licensing or other restrictions, it is all the more incumbent for people to understand what their real limitations are, for their own safety.

> Disparity of force

Perhaps, instead of "a few years" at the range, you might want to take a couple of self-defense classes? In the range where martial arts matter, skill is a far greater determinant than sheer physical size. I'll grant you that martial arts is not a universal strategy (e.g. people in wheelchairs), but I would also argue that, of the people for whom martial arts is not a strategy, in a significant plurality if not a majority of cases where such incompatibility is due to frailty, such frailty will also usually preclude the kind of "few years, several thousand rounds of ammo, and periodic maintenance", not to mention reaction speed, that it would take to actually succeed in a drawing contest.

> They would never intervene, get involved with, or otherwise "rescue" anyone else with lethal force.

Many, many Good Samaritans out there would disagree with this offensive take that shows more how society has disintegrated than anything else in this thread. The audience should note that I, someone who does carry, am apparently a "sheepdog" because I decide to employ a manual safety, am aware of my limitations, and encourage others to be honest with themselves instead of thinking that they're big people just because they went out and bought a firearm.

For what it's worth I'm also "ex-military" and the person you are replying to is in fact wrong. For many, a "manual safety" is a preference but for others confident in their training it's not necessary or desirable. I also own a P320 (but will be purchasing a Glock soon) and stopped shooting in shortly after these stories came out. Unfortunate, because all things considered I really did like that pistol. Anyway, depending on branch of service, deployment experience, time in service etc a lot of veterans' experience with handguns is minimal, amounting to firing enough rounds on the qual range once a year. No idea about OP's experience, but these things do tend to correlate if you get my meaning.

Well said.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com