Larry Brown is an absolute idiot and has proven it on this thread.
What Stan and I both object to is someone who has the means to become a good shot and doesn't bother.
Looks to me like some impolite folks got up on the wrong side of the bed. I post the results of an actual study on how poorly hunters shoot, and that makes me an idiot. Oh well . . . I also had the occasional "problem student" who lacked the DESIRE to understand, back when I was in the teaching business. True in HS, college, and the Army. But unfortunate.
Matter of fact, I also object to someone who has the means to become a good shot and doesn't bother. Of course if eightbore had bothered to read my posts, he would have observed my point: which is that a lot of people lack the means. As we get older, we tend to think: "Well hell . . . I did it back in the 1960's. Which means anyone and everyone can do it now." Well, there are a lot of hunters, to start with, who lack the desire to become really good shots. Hunting isn't that big a deal to them. They're not that concerned about how well they shoot. Haven't looked recently at the available statistics concerning the target shooting games, but I recall being surprised to learn that close to half the ATA members DO NOT HUNT. Couldn't find similar numbers of NSCA (sporting clays) members who are hunters. But when you consider that the total membership of NSCA is something like 30,000, and when South Dakota alone has about 150,000 pheasant hunters in a typical season, it more or less puts things in perspective. Relatively few really serious target shooters in the ranks of bird hunters.
And things are significantly tougher these days in terms of "means" than it was in the long ago--or even not so long ago--past. You want to shoot a lot; save money by reloading. Except that doesn't save you nearly as much as it used to, with shot now a minimum of $40 a bag, more than that most places; powder and primer prices also way up; not to mention the fact that the gas you need to get you to the range is almost twice what it was just 5 years ago. Excuses, you say? OK . . . or maybe explanations. Are a lot of people in this country doing a whole lot better now than they were 5 or 10 years ago? Don't the economists keep telling us about stagnation in the middle class--which is where most shooters and hunters fall? For me, the nearest skeet range that's open from October to April is over 50 miles away. Unless the weather is godawful bad, or except during hunting season, I'll make that drive at least once a week. But I'm retired, and nobody has yet started tampering with my pretty decent military pension, not to mention Social Security. No kids at home or in college, an understanding wife, and no other really expensive hobbies.
So it takes both desire--which most hunters lack--and it also takes the right situation in terms of money and time available. And when the economy's bad, as it is now, there's less money and time available. A gun dealer friend is backing off on his gun show schedule. Why? Because, at least in this part of the country, very little buying of the kind of guns we talk about on this board. And his inventory is of the modestly priced category. Liquid propane, which many people in the rural Upper Midwest use to heat their homes, doubled or tripled in price this year. I paid $500 more--for just 200 gallons--than I've ever paid before. I pity the people living closer to the edge than I am, and who burn a lot more LP than I do. But it makes a big difference in terms of means when the gas to get you to the range is close to $4/gallon instead of $2, when LP is $5 instead of $1.50, when shot is north of $40 a bag instead of $15 or $20. Something has to give, and what gives in your typical budget is disposable income above things which are necessary--like heating your home and the cost of driving your car.
So let's try looking at people and the economy as they are TODAY, not as they were back when we were learning to shoot . . . and when I was able to send a $50 money order home every month when I was in Basic and AIT, and have enough money saved as a result to pay for my first semester of college. That's not today's world . . . unfortunately.
And while King and I are not related, I value his contributions from north of the border. His politics aren't mine, but I've been married to a Democrat for almost 30 years, and I've been hunting with another one for 40 years.
Finally, as for PA24's evaluation of my mental abilities . . . Anyone who talks about shooting nothing more open than modified and then refers to spreaders ought to maybe check his own thought processes and logic. Or lack thereof.
