AFSis asked me a question in email last night. She was going to add this into the H&I Fires post, but I thought it should stand alone.

Here's her question:

John,

I tried to pose a question on H&I tonight, but my signon wouldn't work. I'm going to bed and will be offline until tomorrow night.

Here's my question:
Why do people learn to use guns? What is the appeal of target practice if you're not practicing to actually shoot something other than the target? My contention is that guns were invented as lethal weapons (after all, I can't mow my lawn or build a house with a gun), so there is no other reason to learn how to shoot a gun other than to learn how to kill. You learn how to shoot to either kill an animal or a person (or at the very least defend yourself against someone seeking to cause you or your family harm). Targets don't look like torso's by accident... there's a reason for that, and there's a reason you try to cluster your shots at the head or heart.

Post it if you want, or simply reply... but it is an honest question from someone who does not understand the desire to shoot just for the hell of shooting.

This is really a very good question, as it really sits at the core of all those people who see the murders, and can't for the life of them see why *anyone* would want to own a gun, so why not just make 'em illegal? Leave aside the logical fallacy inherent in that mindset - it's real. And since these people vote, we should give them an answer. Well, there are many answers. Some of which they won't like, some they won't understand, but one of the reasons I opened up shop here at the Castle was to show people that you could be *koff* "relatively" normal and have a basement full of bangsticks. I have made a few conversions - at least in opening some people, like my sister... to the idea that just having a lot of guns doesn't mean you're a menace to society. I think she was really uncomfortable the night they spent in the house when I was stationed in Oklahoma, and she, her husband, and her two sons and niece had to walk down the Hall of Arms (racks of many ugly rifles) to get to the place of ablution performance.

So here's my answer, in brief.

I have *always* had a fascination with firearms. I got my first gun, a M1873 Springfield Trapdoor, when I was 15, as part of a family distribution of guns from the old family hardware store. All the males in the family got one. I still have it, natch. The first one I bought myself, was a Commission 88 Mauser, which I bought at Woolco, in 1975, the day I turned 18 and could buy one. It was $35 or something like that, one of the ones imported from Turkey. I still have it, too. While location (Germany) or finances have slowed me down now and again, I've not looked back.

I don't hunt for sport. I've only killed anything when needful, usually during survival training and since I'm happy with beef, pork, and chicken, I've never felt the need to hunt deer, etc. I actually frown on trophy hunting. That just strikes me as killing for decor, which, well, just isn't my style. I know it's more complex than that - if you trophy hunt, please feel free to explain it in the comments.

I'm into the variety of weapons I own because I'm into the history of it all, military and technological. These artifacts were there. As participants, so to speak, at events we only read about. Especially since I would rather collect the used ones, vice the pristine ones. The collection of arms and ordnance was useful as tools when teaching military history - many students really connect to the subject when you give them something tangible from the era. I'm fascinated by the history of the technology. With items from the collection, I can explain from simple tube lit off by a hot coal to machine guns how the technology changed - and I can use the artifacts to discuss how technology drove tactics and was shaped and driven by the demands of the battlefield.

I love to shoot them. Just for the sport of fitting myself to the tool (and adjusting the adjustable parts of the tool to me) for the purpose of hitting that elusive "x" in the center of the target. The combination of accounting for all the variables - the ammunition, the sights, the shooter, the micro-weather between the muzzle and the target. Heck, between the receiver and the target if you have an exposed, especially an exposed thin barrel - if the conditions are right, a breeze blowing on your barrel from left to right will cause your barrel to pull ever so slightly to the left, as differential cooling causes your barrel to warp slightly - hence thermal jackets on tank guns.

The differences in lock action - between the really smooth action of an Enfield, to the varying degrees of smoothness in Mauser-style actions depending on who made them and how well cared for they are. From all of that I gather an appreciation of why soldiers liked and disliked particular weapons.

AFSis' question may stem from my posting of the targets I posted on Sunday. I maintain two sets of skills. When I'm shooting long range, I generally shoot at traditional circular targets, looking first to get my grouping down, then adjusting so that the group moves to the center of the target, if not already there. I do the same short range, as well, and I will also shoot at animal silhouettes and "spinners" - targets that when you hit them, they spin, giving you feedback that you hit them. That's all about form for accuracy - and the challenges inherent in it.

The second set of skills is combat shooting. I was a soldier, after all, and there was a chance back when the Army was offering early retirements that I would join the FBI. In the end, the Army said I couldn't retire early and that went away (but not before I'd spent the money on the degree...). And combat shooting is all about being fast and accurate *enough*. I could do that kind of shooting at non human-form targets, true enough - and many public ranges specifically prohibit shooting at human silhouette targets, requiring the use of traditional circular-style targets.

That particular day, I was teaching SWWBO how to shoot combat, because she wants to get a concealed carry permit. If you're going to teach people to shoot in self-defense, well, it's counter-training to teach them to shoot at something other than what they're going to shoot at, should they be applying the skill.

At the Castle, thus far, we've only shot spinners and conventional targets. I don't even have any human silhouette targets on hand. Once SWWBO gets serious about getting a permit, I'll get some, so that she can practice appropriately - but for Castle shoots, it's all about circles, unless it's a specific combat shooting event. You can always bring your own targets.

So, to recap - I'm into the guns and the shooting for the history, the technology, and the test - can I hit what I aim at, and with anything you hand me (which is also a soldierly combat skill, in truth). I don't hunt, and am not particularly interested in hunting, though I'm prepared to take down coyotes that won't go away from the chickens and guineas. But I like just grabbing a rifle off the rack, stepping out on the deck or under it, and shooting at the spinners I've got set across the creek. Oddly enough, it's relaxing.

The fact that the skills can be used for other purposes, well, true enough, but *intent* matters.

So, why do *you* shoot?