For Tom (no peeking)
 

Harry Krause wrote:
Black Dog wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:

I didn't say shooting stuff wasn't fun. I NEVER said shooting stuff
isn't fun. I own guns. Handguns, in fact. At the shooting range
there are man targets that I love. To take them down with the 22
requires a good head-shot and I can do it 5 out of 5 times. The 9mm
I can't hit the broad side of a barn with.



Are you consistently missing with the 9 mm? Are your sights off? Is
your stance off? Are you not using a good two-handed grip?


Yeah, consistantly. Haven't quite figured out what I'm doing wrong.
The hubby can do a nice tight cluster on the bullseye with the beast,
my shots usually hit the ground way short of the target. I know the
sights are good, I know how to stand and hold a gun. Like I said, I'm
a dead-eye with 22. The Browie is quite a bit lighter than the 22 so
I thought it would be easier to hold steady, but not so.

I think I may be pulling up my hands at the last second because I hate
the recoil so much. The first time I shot with it my right hand ached
for two weeks afterward. A psychological block of some sort.
Fortunately, I'm not a cop or a soldier so it doesn't much matter.



I've found the opposite to be true, that is, within reason, the heavier
handgun is easier to control. Within reason. Some of them are damned
heavy no matter the caliber.

Yes, well, experience has showed me the same, although it is
counter-intuitive.

The 22 has a bit of longer barrel too, which probably makes quite a bit
of difference.

I can't feel the "recoil" on the .22 I shoot at all. Zero. Zip. There's
nothing there I can perceive.

Exactly. And that's the one I am whizzers at.

The 9mm I shoot kicks a bit, but it's
easily managed with a good two-hand stance.

Mine kicks like an angry mule. Course that's just MHO. Hubby thinks
I'm a wimp.

You might want to visit an
indoor range with a couple of boxes of 9mm ammo and get one of the guys
who usually hang out at those places to give you a look-see.

You might be surprised. Even in my little red-necky part of the north
country those guys are curiously absent. This is Canada, eh.

Although, if I were truely ambitious, I could get my daughter or
son-in-law or any of their co-workers to help me out. They are both
RCMP. The daughter even has her crossed pistols pin, which is
apparently one step up from the crossed rifles the son-in-law has.

From what
you say, it reads as if you are pulling your shots. A bit of instruction
and practice will rid you of that. I'm guessing that you are pulling the
handgun down when you are pulling the trigger and then pushing the
handgun up as soon as you fire.

Yup. I think you're probably right. But like I said, it doesn't
matter. I daresay, neither my life, nor anyone elses would be saved by
my being a good shot with 9mm. The bears, OTOH, are having a picnic to
celebrate my lack of ambition.


How far away are the targets you're shooting?

25 yards. See my response to JoeSpareBedroom.

For Tom (no peeking)
 

"Black Dog" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Black Dog" wrote in message
...

Harry Krause wrote:

I didn't say shooting stuff wasn't fun. I NEVER said shooting stuff
isn't fun. I own guns. Handguns, in fact. At the shooting range there
are man targets that I love. To take them down with the 22 requires a
good head-shot and I can do it 5 out of 5 times. The 9mm I can't hit
the broad side of a barn with.



Are you consistently missing with the 9 mm? Are your sights off? Is your
stance off? Are you not using a good two-handed grip?


Yeah, consistantly. Haven't quite figured out what I'm doing wrong. The
hubby can do a nice tight cluster on the bullseye with the beast, my
shots usually hit the ground way short of the target. I know the sights
are good, I know how to stand and hold a gun. Like I said, I'm a dead-eye
with 22. The Browie is quite a bit lighter than the 22 so I thought it
would be easier to hold steady, but not so.

I think I may be pulling up my hands at the last second because I hate
the recoil so much. The first time I shot with it my right hand ached
for two weeks afterward. A psychological block of some sort.
Fortunately, I'm not a cop or a soldier so it doesn't much matter.


Questions & comments:

1) With the 9mm, what distance are the targets at?

25 yards. I can't even pretend to get near the 50 yard ones. Hell, I
can't even see the 50 yard ones.

I've got a Kahr .40 cal with 4" barrel. Patterns are tight at 50 feet. 75
feet's pushing it for your typical handgun, unless you've had all sorts of
gunsmithing done to it and you're very selective with your ammo. You should
be able to at least hit an 8.5x11 inch piece of paper, though.



Yes. Flinching in anticipation is exactly what I think I am doing. But I
have no ambition to become Annie Oakley. The big bang the 22 makes is an
excellent bear-deterent even though I couldn't take the ******* down with
it if I tried.

That "noise deters bears" thing is a crap shoot. Sometimes it just scares
them and makes them crazier, if they've already targeted you. In that case,
it's good to have a gun with a totally smooth barrel. No front sight, in
other words. That way, when the bear shoves it up your ass, it hurts less.

For Tom (no peeking)
 

JohnH wrote:

A few hours spent dry firing at objects on the TV can be a big help also,
in many more ways than one!

That does sound like a good plan. Too bad election time is over (up here).

For Tom (no peeking)
 

On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 19:34:07 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Black Dog" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Black Dog" wrote in message
...

Harry Krause wrote:

I didn't say shooting stuff wasn't fun. I NEVER said shooting stuff
isn't fun. I own guns. Handguns, in fact. At the shooting range there
are man targets that I love. To take them down with the 22 requires a
good head-shot and I can do it 5 out of 5 times. The 9mm I can't hit
the broad side of a barn with.



Are you consistently missing with the 9 mm? Are your sights off? Is your
stance off? Are you not using a good two-handed grip?


Yeah, consistantly. Haven't quite figured out what I'm doing wrong. The
hubby can do a nice tight cluster on the bullseye with the beast, my
shots usually hit the ground way short of the target. I know the sights
are good, I know how to stand and hold a gun. Like I said, I'm a dead-eye
with 22. The Browie is quite a bit lighter than the 22 so I thought it
would be easier to hold steady, but not so.

I think I may be pulling up my hands at the last second because I hate
the recoil so much. The first time I shot with it my right hand ached
for two weeks afterward. A psychological block of some sort.
Fortunately, I'm not a cop or a soldier so it doesn't much matter.


Questions & comments:

1) With the 9mm, what distance are the targets at?

25 yards. I can't even pretend to get near the 50 yard ones. Hell, I
can't even see the 50 yard ones.

I've got a Kahr .40 cal with 4" barrel. Patterns are tight at 50 feet. 75
feet's pushing it for your typical handgun, unless you've had all sorts of
gunsmithing done to it and you're very selective with your ammo. You should
be able to at least hit an 8.5x11 inch piece of paper, though.



Yes. Flinching in anticipation is exactly what I think I am doing. But I
have no ambition to become Annie Oakley. The big bang the 22 makes is an
excellent bear-deterent even though I couldn't take the ******* down with
it if I tried.

That "noise deters bears" thing is a crap shoot. Sometimes it just scares
them and makes them crazier, if they've already targeted you. In that case,
it's good to have a gun with a totally smooth barrel. No front sight, in
other words. That way, when the bear shoves it up your ass, it hurts less.

ROFL!

For Tom (no peeking)
 

Black Dog wrote:
JohnH wrote:


A few hours spent dry firing at objects on the TV can be a big help also,
in many more ways than one!


That does sound like a good plan. Too bad election time is over (up here).


Not for us. We elect a new provincial government today.
Tough choice for me. Former co-worker is running for the Liberals, but
I usually favour the New Democrats. The New Dems are promising to bring
in Govt run auto insurance to release us from the claws of the big
international gougers.

For Tom (no peeking)
 

"Don White" wrote in message
...
Black Dog wrote:
JohnH wrote:


A few hours spent dry firing at objects on the TV can be a big help
also,
in many more ways than one!


That does sound like a good plan. Too bad election time is over (up
here).


Not for us. We elect a new provincial government today.
Tough choice for me. Former co-worker is running for the Liberals, but I
usually favour the New Democrats. The New Dems are promising to bring in
Govt run auto insurance to release us from the claws of the big
international gougers.


I have a friend who sells car insurance. He has an interesting idea. He
think that instead of everyone paying absurd prices for a risk pool largely
consisting of awful drivers, the insurers should administer road tests,
refuse to insure the worst drivers, and (here's the good part) share the
test results with all other insurers. I like it.

For Tom (no peeking)
 

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Don White" wrote in message
...

Black Dog wrote:

JohnH wrote:


A few hours spent dry firing at objects on the TV can be a big help
also,
in many more ways than one!


That does sound like a good plan. Too bad election time is over (up
here).


Not for us. We elect a new provincial government today.
Tough choice for me. Former co-worker is running for the Liberals, but I
usually favour the New Democrats. The New Dems are promising to bring in
Govt run auto insurance to release us from the claws of the big
international gougers.



I have a friend who sells car insurance. He has an interesting idea. He
think that instead of everyone paying absurd prices for a risk pool largely
consisting of awful drivers, the insurers should administer road tests,
refuse to insure the worst drivers, and (here's the good part) share the
test results with all other insurers. I like it.


Only bad thing about that 'cherry picking'.
You would end up with a lot of yahoos running around without insurance.

For Tom (no peeking)
 

"Don White" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Don White" wrote in message
...

Black Dog wrote:

JohnH wrote:


A few hours spent dry firing at objects on the TV can be a big help
also,
in many more ways than one!


That does sound like a good plan. Too bad election time is over (up
here).


Not for us. We elect a new provincial government today.
Tough choice for me. Former co-worker is running for the Liberals, but I
usually favour the New Democrats. The New Dems are promising to bring in
Govt run auto insurance to release us from the claws of the big
international gougers.



I have a friend who sells car insurance. He has an interesting idea. He
think that instead of everyone paying absurd prices for a risk pool
largely consisting of awful drivers, the insurers should administer road
tests, refuse to insure the worst drivers, and (here's the good part)
share the test results with all other insurers. I like it.
Only bad thing about that 'cherry picking'.
You would end up with a lot of yahoos running around without insurance.

We already have that. More of them might be a good thing. It might increase
the odds of the cops being able to arrest them. Now, there's no penalty for
stupid driving.

For Tom (no peeking)
 

Don White wrote:
Black Dog wrote:

JohnH wrote:


A few hours spent dry firing at objects on the TV can be a big help
also,
in many more ways than one!



That does sound like a good plan. Too bad election time is over (up
here).



Not for us. We elect a new provincial government today.
Tough choice for me. Former co-worker is running for the Liberals, but
I usually favour the New Democrats. The New Dems are promising to bring
in Govt run auto insurance to release us from the claws of the big
international gougers.

The New Dems will promise ANYTHING to get elected (like any other
party). They will not deliver. Garanteed. They promised us govt auto
insurance too, cheaper, better. What they did instead was slap
provincial sales tax on it. So we are a still beholdin to the gougers,
but now we pay 8% sales tax on top. I used to vote NDP. That was
before, what we call here in Ontario, "The Rae Years". Now I know better.

And when the NDP say, "tax the rich", guess what - if you live in
anything better than a cardboard box in the middle of a swamp - you ARE
rich. Nova Scotians did the right thing electing a PC minority.

And now Bob turned coat completely and is running to lead the libs. I
know the only person in Ontario who will vote for him (my boss - a Tory
at heart, loves Rae)