Jump to content

Joelk

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    375

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

  • Feedback

    0%

Posts posted by Joelk

  1. Posted

    As for showing off or having a nice AR-15? So what? It's called mainstreaming, and it means that firearms are moving from the taboo and stigma that they have and into the realm where they are becoming commonplace and accepted.

    You do realize that firearms are, and have long been, "commonplace and accepted" in the majority of America. It is only in a few liberal states like NJ that they are "taboo and stigma"

  2. Posted

    Again: where is the exclusion in my definition? Are you saying that you three don't like evil black rifles, polymer handguns, etc? You don't like 3-guns? IDPAs?

     

    As for the combat vets and police... who cares if they consider themselves "into" guns or not? You make it sound like it's a bad thing to view a firearm as something beyond a tool. Maybe they're shamed into believing that or having a little fun with the sport from time to time. It doesn't have to be all serious you know. Don't be afraid of a little fun. There is noting wrong with fun, and liking guns, just realize some don't consider firearms fun or interesting any more that you consider a bandage fun or interesting.

     

    My whole point with that description was to capture what is essentially the new generation of shooters. Folks who didn't have a parent/grandparent/relative who hunted and owned firearms and had to get into the hobby all by themselves. This is especially common in an urban state like New Jersey where many hunters and old time shooters have simply died off or moved away.

    I will go point by point from my perspective, with my comments in red:

    Gun Culture 2.0 is the new generation. Kids who grew up playing Counter-Strike, Call of Duty, etc. I didn't grow up playing Counter-Strike, Call of Duty, etc.

    who got into guns for all things fun and tacticool. I didn't get into guns because they were fun and tacticool.

    They love rapid firing, suppressors, Evil Black Rifles, black tubberware pistols, and combat shotguns with mag extensions to the double digits. I don't love rapid firing. I have more experience with suppressors than the vast majority of board members here, and know how loud they really are. I own ARs and Glocks, but not because they are Evil Black Rifles, or tubberware, but because they are reliable and fit my needs. My shotguns have practical and legal mag extensions.

    They love IDPA, 3-guns, and zombie shoots. I do not love competition, but merely view it as a training tool when shot using real world tactics

    They enjoy tactical vests, tac lights, and aggressive stylings of firearms. I do not enjoy tactical vests, in fact I find them impractical. I use lights merely to be able to see in the dark. I like firearms that work, and hate when style takes precedence over function.

     

    As you can see I have little in common with your 2.0 description, which seems to me to be of an ignorant young person obsessed with style and video game culture, who has yet to really learn much about firearms. It is good that they are getting into firearms, but don't think that they are the only non 1.0s out there.

     

    On the other hand we both like Bonesinium's decription.

  3. Posted

    1.0

     

    Stuck in their ways, not accepting to change. Doesn't like when people do things differently than them.

     

    2.0

     

    All others.

     

    You can like bolt guns, wood on your shotgun, slow fire, and not much else, and fall in this 2.0 category as long as you either don't care how others shoot, or understand that others like shooting differently than you and are okay with it.

     

    It is usually pretty clear when you meet these people. You pull out your AR or something and they give you a stare down, or shake their head and sigh, or even try and prevent you from shooting or having a good time. On the other hand you can run into somebody who looks old as dirt, has on think glasses, is doing his own, slow fire with ancient looking rifle, yet when he sees you bring out the AR with an ACOG or something comments on how he needs something like your sight as maybe it would help his old eyes see better, or something in a friendly manner.

    GREAT description!

    • Like 1

  5. Posted

    My description takes into account the motives as well as the move to embrace advances in shooting technology. Gun Culture 1.0s see all that stuff and consider it "tacticool". Whether that's a derogatory term or not is up to you. I don't think it is as it represents a culture shift towards a positive development of our sport.

     

    You're operating under the assumption that 2.0 folks only like tacticool things and nothing else. I never made that assertion and I don't quite understand the hesitation that I included folks like you into that category. You're literally creating divisions where none exist.

     

    As for CCW...

    1. Cops don't count. They're there own type of class with a wholly different set of rules.

    2. Those who view guns as "tools"? What does that mean? Is there a difference viewing a gun as a "tool" or as a "weapon"? Is it wrong to appreciate them for their "style"? What makes this group so special that they are somehow in a different group?

    I am trying not to assume, but go off of your description of 2.0 in the OP:

    Gun Culture 2.0 is the new generation. Kids who grew up playing Counter-Strike, Call of Duty, etc. who got into guns for all things fun and tactical. They love rapid firing, suppressors, Evil Black Rifles, black tubberware pistols, and combat shotguns with mag extensions to the double digits. They love IDPA, 3-guns, and zombie shoots. They enjoy tactical vests, tac lights, and aggressive stylings of firearms.

    That mostly style based description does not fit Wastegate, Shane, several others, and myself, who would like to be on your side.

     

    As far as the tool discussion, I have met quite a few people in training classes, who were excellent shooters, many with combat experience, who were not "into" guns, but just considered them tools that they use to defend themselves. There is noting wrong with appreciating a gun's style, but some people couldn't care less about style, just function.

     

    I am just trying to make you aware that you have many potential allies who would say that they do not fit your 2.0 description.

  6. Posted

    Any training I want to do that isn't going to put others' safety at risk. As for fundamentals, they have their place.

     

    Why? What's wrong with a mag dump every now and then*?

     

    *if done safely

     

    With the *if done safely caveat we agree. Unfortunately I have watched people doing uncontrolled rapid fire put rounds over the berm more than once.

     

    Edited to add: You don't need to get defensive as to what kind of training you are doing. I am a big advocate of firearms training and attend as many classes as I can. I am really looking forward to an upcoming carbine class with Kyle Lamb and taking ECQC with Southnarc again. I just wish we had more good classes in NJ.

  7. Posted

    I don't get why things like rapid fire are frowned-upon. Outside of being a sniper, how is slow-firing on a target a practical form of training? I can see doing it as a warm-up exercise, but transitioning to other forms of practice is very important.

    What kind of training are you talking about? No mater what type of shooting you do you need a firm grasp on the fundamentals.

     

    Anyone who knows me knows I have no aversion to rapid fire. Shoot as rapidly as you want as long as you can hit your target.

    On the other hand, I have nothing but contempt for those who go to the range and dump lead into the berm as fast as they can because they think it looks cool, without any ability to actually hit the target.

  8. Posted

    You contradict yourself sir... lookie here:

     

    You obviously fall into the 2.0 generation. Serious self-defense students go for the best tools for the job, which are coincidentally the same tools used my police/military, and are also exemplified in video games.

     

    So what? Where else are they gonna get exposed to shooting sports? And so what if it's based on image and style? We want these kids in our tent, we want them to spend money on AR-15s, ACRs, SCARs, etc. We also want them to go shoot, and learn the differences between real life and video gaming.

     

    You make mainstreaming sound like a bad thing.

     

    BS! You don't go through all the effort to carry concealed if you didn't love guns. And one can be serious about self-defense and still enjoy the "tacticool" aspects of shooting. The two are hardly exclusive from one another, and I very much doubt that it is actually the case. I'd bet that the average CCWer in the 'free states' owns a few black rifles with tacticool accessories on them.

     

    I know CCWer's who, who like many in the police and military, have no love for firearms, but only view them as a tool.

     

    Not to mention, CCW is a recent invention within our national fabric going back about 20 years (when it really became widespread), and has grown quite considerably along with the Black Rifle Boom.

     

    CCW is also not a recent development. While there have been more laws passed regarding CCW in the last 20 years people have been carrying concealed firearms for self defense since guns small enough to conceal were made.

     

    I don't think it does. I think it encompasses what is essentially the next generation of shooting. We need to accept these gamers with arms open into the sport and learn from them as much as they'd like to learn from us.

     

    With sports like hunting at an all time low, we need to get our support where we can get it.

    I think you are missing my point. My point is that your description of 2.0 contains motives such as coolness, styling, and video game pedigree that you feel cover self defense shooters and ccwers. I, and several other people in this thread, disagree. I am not saying we should not include anyone (regardless of their motivation for owning guns), I am just saying that your description, which is based significantly on motive for ownership, alienates people like myself who would otherwise identify with you.

  9. Posted

    I own, and have used Bladetech, G-code, Comptac (among others). The vast majority of my use is with Glocks.

     

    Within those 3 I like Conptac best by a small margin, then G-code, and lastly Bladetech.

     

    By the way use code SPOOK-3111 for 15% off at Comptac through Sunday.

  10. Posted

    I agree with Bob in the there are too many factions in the shooting community.We all should be one loud, strong, unified group. Until we get there we will be ignored by "our" politicians.

    I agree we should be as inclusive as possible, but how can gun owners "speak with one voice" as Bob said, when some gun owners say that the firearms that other gun owners own/use should be banned, and who vote that way?

     

    I have also had gun owners tell me that they don't think anyone but police officers should be allowed to carry a gun. How can I be unified with that person when my biggest concern is concealed carry?

  11. Posted

    I would even put those people in the 2.0 crowd. Especially those who want Concealed Carry. That is very much a modern Gun thing.

    I disagree as I don't know anyone who is a serious student of self defense who would describe them self like the 2.0 description below.

    Gun Culture 2.0 is the new generation. Kids who grew up playing Counter-Strike, Call of Duty, etc. who got into guns for all things fun and tacticool. They love rapid firing, suppressors, Evil Black Rifles, black tubberware pistols, and combat shotguns with mag extensions to the double digits. They love IDPA, 3-guns, and zombie shoots. They enjoy tactical vests, tac lights, and aggressive stylings of firearms.

    This sounds like a description of a kid who likes guns because of video games. It also sounds like the airsoft kid who finally got old enough to buy real guns. It is all based on image and style, without any though as to real world function and substance.

     

    The concealed carry guy does not love guns because they are "fun and tacticool" but because they can save his or his family's lives.

     

    I own ARs and Glocks, not because they are cool, are black, or are "tubberware", but because of their functionality. I don't care about aggressive firearm styling, just function. I don't "enjoy" tac vests, nor do I "enjoy" tac lights, I just need a light (or NV) to see in the dark. Etc...

     

    I do see and agree with your point, I just think that your description ignores and alienates a lot of people.

    • Like 4

  14. Posted

    We do in fact destroy all recordings. That is part of our contractual agreement with General Dynamics (Simunitions). They feel that is a training tape showing the student making mistakes could end up in the wrong (prosecutor) hands and be used against you in a court of law.

     

    Anthony

    I definitely agree with that position. Good job Anthony.

  15. Posted

    Is it Jemima Mount or not? If it is, you have no business driving up there. It's a geological site and ecologically used as a geodetic control station. Just "driving up a hill" as you put it, has done the damage you see there. What damage you ask? The fact that it never used to be a road right there, for one. You and the dozens of others that "drive or wheel or whatever" up the Mount each year contribute to it's current eroded condition. Listen, I'm not trying to bust your balls and I can only assume you just figured you were driving the fun roads or whatever. Someone took you there once and they didn't know the damage that was being caused either. Truth be told, it's people that do this that will eventually have our freedom to drive in the Pines taken away. Look at what was done to Apple Pie Hill. Now you can't drive up to the tower at all, because of all the j*rkoffs that tore it up and littered.

     

    All that being said, if this is not Jemima Mount, than I appologize for being an *sshole.

    Yes it is Jemima Mt. Please pardon my ignorance but where is it OK to drive, and where is it not? I was under the impression that all of the dirt roads are Ok to drive, and both my GPS and my map show that as Jemima Mt Road. The only road I have ever seen closed is Old Lower forge road right where it crosses the Batsto River (if there is a sign saying closed I don't go there). I am not familiar with Apple Pie Hill. By the way, what is a "geodetic control station"?

     

    As it is inappropriate I will remove the pictures from my original post as well.

     

    Are you coming out to the 10th annual pine barrens clean up on the 23rd? Unfortunately I will be out of town on business, but I have tried to spread the word about the event.

  20. Posted

    Liberal How Joel???? And I realize that you posted it initially after i went and read it, but The other Poster jumped right on the idea that anyone who didnt agree with him MUST be an Obama Voter. back to my Initial question..Explain how this forum is "Liberal"???

    I am not looking to start a political argument here, and I thought we were not supposed to talk politics.

     

    If politics are OK I will do a poll thread on who voted for Obama here and on the other site and we can see what the results say.

  24. Posted

    Something for further consideration. There is a small risk associated with the overhand/powerstroke method particulerly for .40 shooters. there is the remote possibility of setting off a round while your hand is over the chamber. This happened to Todd Jarrett when he sent a .40 through his hand.

    That is what can happen when the shooter is ejecting a live round and tries catch it in his support hand. If it bounces back into the chamber and the ejector hits the primer when the slide goes forward bad things can happen. The easy way to avoid that is to not try to catch the live round but let it fly.

     

    Also if the gun is canted toward the ejetion port it makes sure a live round, or what happens much more often, an empty case in a failure to eject malfunction, doesn't fall back into the chamber.

  25. Posted

    It has been over 10 years since I ran a shock buff as I only ran one in my IPSC pistol. But I do know those that use them in all their 1911's. I never had one chew uo on me to the point of shredding in the pistol but I changed it out regularly. I was running VERY hot 45 loads back then as I was one of the Dinosuars running a .45 still and the power factor was higher then so I was running around 1200fps :D. Anyway, the shockbuff would allow everything to function normally except slingshotting. I don't recall if I ever tried to muscle a slingshot to tell the truth. Did a quick search and found this link with more info.

    http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=196845

    Thanks for the info. I am still curious because it seems to me if you can lock the slide back then there is enough travel to release it with the overhand method. If anyone has a commander length 1911 with a buff would you please vigorously try the overhand method and let me know if it works.

     

    I find all of this interesting as in training I regularly participate in malfunction drills involving setting up and fixing malfunctions on other people's guns, and I am yet (in 100s of different guns) to encounter any where the overhand method does not work.

     

    I believe he was being tongue in cheek/sarcastic :)

    I know Tosser was joking, but as in most good jokes a little kernel of truth makes it funnier :icon_e_wink:

×
×
  • Create New...