Eric.

Yep. Wed, Sat and Sun all year 'round and they add Fri form, like, April to Dec or so. Eric

of the 3, I'm going with the VCOG. personally, I like that you have the option of true 1x sighting or you can crank up the magnification as needed. Unless this gun is strictly for doing entries and room clearing, I feel you need to have a wider range of distances that it's good for. Even with your rifle set up for cqb you should be equipped to engage out to 200 yds, with the 1-6x glass. for the 50 yds and closer work,I like a holo/rds, especially if you are dealing with moving targets. Can you swing both? If so, Trijiconhas a rmr reflex sight that mounts on top of the VCOG. This would be the most flexible set up. For that matter, you can buy a 45 degree adapter to mount a reflex sight. Once in place, just turn your rifle a little to the left and aim/shoot. While he 45 deg mount puts you closer to the bore centerline, the drawback is that brass ejects closer to your face. Eric

"Wrong" is pretty strong. In my opinion, it's not so cut & dried with some of the stuff you mentioned. I agree that someone with better eyesight, better visual skills, etc are genetic and are a physical advantage. What I'm not so sure about is how much of a gap there is or how big of an advantage it is? Are the results a huge gap or maybe a smaller one? Maybe someone with a background in that field can chime in? One thing I absolutely know, if one man is 6'6" and another is 5'5", the taller guy has a huge advantage in dunking a basketball. The shorter guy can train til he has holes in his sneakers but he will have a near impossible time coming close to the tall guy's abilities (Spud webb, excluded). Eric

I would agree with most of what you are saying, but I'm not sure the Jamaican high jumper is the best example, for the 10,000hr rule. With high jumping, natural physical attributes are such a huge factor. If a guy is born "physically superior", then all the practice in teh world will not allow you to beat him. IMO, a better test for the 10k hr rule would be a skill that takes a lot less physical ability. I think shooting guns would be a good basis for the experiment, for example. Eric

Here's thought- to be admitted into the Scout-Sniper program, you have to have time in under an MOS 03 (infantry) and you have to already be a qualified expert marksman. *Before you enter the program* Eric

I do agree that the 10000hr rule might have some holes. Even still, its not completely without merit either. One of the underlying suggestions is that with dedicated practice (to be redundant: practice&coaching&instruction&competition), anyone can reach a high level of proficiency. That doesn't mean they can play like the top of the field, but they won't be mediocre, by a long shot. For that matter, if anyone plays Pool on this forum, I'd be willing to challenge anyone, if you would like to see what 9000 hours of dedicated practice and play time can produce. I know this comes across as arrogant but really,its just confidence in knowing where my abilities are, on the totum pole. If anyone feels like reading something interesting, google "the dan plan". Its about a guy that took up golf 5 years ago, at 30 yrs old. Dan is running uis own 10k hr experiment. Eric

Yes, there are a lot of variables. Talent, instruction and coaching, mainly. I do play in a Pool league, once a week. It gives me a little bit of somewhat competitive practice. I don't play as much as I used to, at my peak. I also will play a local, weekly cash tourney and regional "open" tourney, once in a while. Long story, short- I still practice a good amount and compete a little. With Pool, it takes a top level amateur to beat me. I've practiced and competed for many years contijuously. I'm not one of these guys that "payed their way thru college with Pool winnings". Honestly, I would swim thru a pond of shit to gamble with those guys. The reason I put the question out there on the 10,000 hr thing is that since 2008, I've been trying it out as a personal experiment. Including my Pool hours before 2008, I would say I have around 9000 hrs of dedicated practice, instruction and actual competition, all combined. By the time I log in 10,000 hrs, I might be around a low "open" level player, which would be considered a top amateur or"semi pro". I don't consider myself extraordinarily talented and have only had a moderate amount of coaching and instruction. I am, however, dedicated when it comes to practice . So, while the 10,000hr thing may or may not hold water, in my Pool experiment, it seems to be holding true. BTW, how "good" were you at Pool? Would ya like to gamble a lil? Eric

Jealous? Check out my view. Don't hate...

Yeah, ok, Vlad.

Yeah, ok, Vlad. Eric

Exactly. In other words, after 10,000 hours, everyone will be very good but there will still be different levels of "good". No one will be just mediocre. Eric

You see? Its hard to take a guy like you seriously when you say stupid shit like "does the 10000 hours include packing gear, doing mag dumps, oiling your gun..." I wonder if you are that dumb or just being a dick. I didn't think this needed clarification but, the 10,000hour theory is based on dedicated practice for the skill you are trying to achieve. If you put the time towards slow fire precision, then you should be very good at it, eventually. Same goes for runnin and gunnin. I would say that everything that goes along with the act of performing the overall skill gets improvement. Eric

Just to address a couple of points- I believe the 10,000 hours addressess the actual performing of the skill. My guess is that including packing of gear and maintenance in your totals is just silly. Good training cannot be denied. Learning windage or bullet drop compensation, for example, can cut the learning curve. But, even with all the knowledge in the world, if that knowledge cannot be executed well, how effective is it? Eric

Agreed. I don't want to over simplify the 10,000 hour rule. Training, talent and proper practice can possibly cut the learning curve. Part of what is interesting about the 10,000 hour thing is that in theory, even without proper training and practicing "the wrong way", the theory says that you will still become highly proficient, despite all that. Not to sound too perjorative, but I'm not sure I want to get into a rifle shooting contest against "hillbillies" or eskimos. Eric

Though the 10,000 hour rule doesn't address that specifically, but I would tend to agree. To reach 10,000 hours, you would have to have a constant and consistent routine. If not, shooting 5 hours, twice a month(10 hours total) for example, would take you 1000 months or 83 years. Eric

I have two hobbies- shooting precision rifle and shooting Pool. Actually, the two have lots in common, such as; preshot routine, alignment, sighting picture, etc. With precision rifle, I believe I would be a C class shooter. Typically, I shoot around 1 MOA, consistently. I'm do not include the few days that the sun, moon and winds line up and I shoot a ridiculously tight group, then post it for the Interwebs to see, lol. I've been involved with shooting rifles and shooting Pool the same amount of years, but not the same amount of total hours. With rifles, I feel lucky if I get to the range once or twice a month and spend a few hours, shooting 200-300 shots. Also, I regularly dry fire at home, to get some fundamentals practice. With Pool, I have a table at home, practice 6 days a week and put in far more hours a month than shooting rifles. I'm considered an "A player" and shoot Pool far better than I shoot rifles, relatively speaking. So, that brings me to the topic. There is a something called the "10,000 hour rule" by a professor named Anders Ericsson and highlighted in Malcolm Gladwell's book "Outliers". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outliers_%28book%29 Basically, the rule states that to be great or an expert at a task, you would need to put in 10,000 hours into it. There's more to it, but that is the gist. I have no where near 10,000 hours of actual shooting. At the rate I've been at, I may not hit that number until I'm old enough taht I can't see the target anymore. I'm curious if any other shooters feel that the 10,000 hour rule applies to shooting guns? Eric

Im going this Sunday afternoon. Eric

For target ammo, I've had pretty good luck with Frredom Munitions in my Beretta 92FS and Glock 19. No FTE or FTF. I bought 1000 rounds last year and 1000 last month. Shot 100 rounds of the latest batch, yesterday. No problems. Maybe I'm lucky? So far, so good. Eric

PD2K, We've already clarified that, earlier. Eric

Krdshrk, if you go back to my post, i mentioned "legal area i.e. the woods". Eric

Listen, you are not qualified to interpret the law (neither am I). One interesting point is that a Temporary Transfer involves very little, if any formal process. the only stipulations are that it has to occur in a legal area i.e.the woods, etc. there are no forms to fill out, there are no third-party witnesses and there is no registration. so, in practice, it could be something as informal as a gun owner pulling a spare gun out of his bag and handing it to you to use for up to 8hours. Ponder that. Eric

OMG, lolol. You love to play semantics, huh? Temporary Transfer=borrow Permanent Transfer=sale You most certainly can borrow a gun, provided that you only do it in the way it is spellednout in the NJSA. Like I said before, neither one of us are experts on this matter (although only one of us is focusing on one semantic to try to show he was right). With respect to the OP, he doesn't need the arm chair quarterbacks, he needs good legal advice. *Period* Eric

Ok, I see what I'm dealing with. You never admit when you are wrong about something, do you? Are you the type that keeps focusing on minutaie until you appear to sound like you are right again? The original reference I made was about borrowing guns. While I was not completely correct, because, as I stated, I am not a legal expert, I was correct in that ANYONE can borrow a gun (they have to follow the legal stipulations). YOU attempt to correct me by saying "There is no borrowing of firearms in NJ except for hunting by Juveniles." This has to be the most uninformed and incorrect post in this whole thread. You can borrow a gun. Also, the NJSA makes note about being over 18 and makes NO reference to juveniles or "hunting by juveinles". I provided you with the NJSA. At this point, there is no need to debate the Statute. I've already acknowledged that I am no legal expert. MAybe you should step off too, since you've already made uninformed, non-expert statements. Eric

I did read it. The only part you are correct in, is that you cannot borrow the guns without the owner present. The part where you are incorrect is where you said "There is no borrowing of firearms in NJ except for hunting by Juveniles." This is about as wrong of a statement as there can be. Your other statement is also misleading: "Temporary transfers can occur at a gun range as long as the owner is present. They can occur at gun shop and for minors while hunting. That's it." That most certainly is NOT it. Borrowing can occur in my basement, your living room or in the middle of the friggin woods. There is no stipulation that it can ONLY occur at gun shops or ranges. Temporary transfer and "borrow" are synonymous. Once again, THIS is why I strongly suggested that the OP consult with a lawyer. I'm no legal expert...but neither are you. Eric

And... This is why he shouldn't be taking legal advice from a forum: 2c:58-3.1 (please read all of the subsections too). Eric