Have you ever had your training curtailed and limited by range rules? Does it frustrate you when that happens? What can you do to get around overbearing restrictions? Let’s take a look at the topic and see what we can come up with.
Why Train Realistically?
Those of us who want to train at least somewhat realistically for self-defense realize that some rapid fire will be involved. Why?
- Because bad guys often require multiple hits to make them cease trying to harm us. Not multiple slow hits, but multiple fast hits.
- Bad guys also have the irritating habit of operating together. Something about superior numbers making victory for them more likely. So, to learn how to engage multiple targets rapidly, we need to shoot accurately and rapidly.
Indoor Ranges
Indoor ranges are probably the very worst for those attempting to train realistically. Many will not allow shooters to draw from a holster and engage targets with rapid fire. Even engaging multiple targets is usually not in the cards at an indoor range. Almost none of them allow a shooter to shoot on the move, much less engage multiple targets while doing so.
So what’s an indoor range good for? Well, they’re nice if you want to stand in a stationary position and bang away at a stationary target. In short, you’re not going to get any real defensive training doing that. The sad thing is that many such facilities will run “training” classes that claim to teach the participants “self-defense” while monotonously banging away at those static targets. Unfortunately, though, you can’t learn to shoot under stress in these scenarios.
Is shooting static targets worthless? No. There’s some value because you’re actively firing the weapon and becoming more familiar with the weapon and how it feels to fire it. However, this is far from optimal.
Outdoor Manned Ranges
I’ve belonged to ranges with such overbearing “safety” rules that I quit my membership. What sort of rules? Here’s one: shooters shall not have more than three rounds of ammunition in any gun at any time. Are you kidding me? You mean I can’t even fill the magazine of my .30-30 lever action? Nope! The management said it was for “safety”, but no one could tell me why three rounds made the gun safe while having six rounds in the tubular magazine was too dangerous.
And semi-autos? Forget it! They practically had an aneurysm if you came onto the range with a semi-auto rifle or pistol. Signs abounded everywhere: “NO RAPID FIRE!”
I’m quite certain they’d have been far more comfortable with something along the lines of a flintlock rifle. Without a doubt, there was a profound prejudice against semi-automatic firearms at these ranges. Most of the members were hunters who saw no other need for having a firearm or going to the range other than getting ready for hunting season.
When I’d show up and place several military-type semi-autos on the shooting table, they’d look at me as though I had lobsters crawling out of my ears. “What good are those? What do you use those for?” they’d ask me.
I’d give them a blank look and reply, “I shoot bullets with them.” Inwardly, I’d smile as they attempted to process that information. I could tell they were picturing the movie Commando in their mind, where Arnold mowed down crowds of 437 bad guys using belt-fed weaponry, bullets flying to and fro.
This was not an environment where I would be able to load up a 30-round magazine and move downrange while engaging multiple targets with my AR-15 or AK-47.
Why So Much Safety?
Understand, I’m all for safety; no one wants to get hurt or killed on a range trip. But is it possible to be excessively obsessed with safety?
There are several explanations why rapid fire isn’t allowed at certain ranges. Some of those reasons are justified, others are hogwash.
I’ll start with the outdoor range where I shoot. On the ranges above the line of sight for targets, there are sheets of steel mounted on telephone poles. Those sheets of steel are there to stop bullets that would miss the tall mounds of dirt that serve to absorb bullets fired at the targets. The steel sheets are high enough that there is no reason that any bullet should ever contact that steel. And yet, that steel is riddled with holes. People are launching bullets skyward, and that’s not a good thing at all. I’d venture a guess that most of those holes came from someone’s incompetence during rapid fire.
Now, if you ask the vast majority of gun owners, they’re going to tell you that they are consummate experts with guns. Unfortunately, many will overstate their level of training and experience. It’s an ego thing, and the gun community is rife with it. They’re not necessarily trying to mislead us; more accurately, they’ve probably misled themselves.
Because of this, we have to be cautious in certain situations when people are handling guns. If I ask a person or group how experienced they are, I can’t help but wonder if they are being accurate in their description of their skills. How do you really know?
Most military people will at least know the basics of safety, but even some of them aren’t very checked out in the handling of firearms. Beware of the guy who was a Delta SEAL Ranger and who served as a door gunner on the space shuttle (they’re out there, I’ve met them). I even met a fellow who was in Marine “Forest Recon.” I asked him if he didn’t mean, “Force Recon,” but he said no, that “Forest Recon” was an even more specialized branch of the Recon Marines. Now, I was never a Marine, but I have worked with members of Marine Recon, and I know enough to realize when someone is utterly full of the BS. So yeah, we run into all kinds out there.
Those of us who are competent suffer because of the incompetence of others.
On the flip side, even though some shooters are competent, administrators, range personnel, and instructors sometimes take on an arrogant stance toward everyone else who isn’t among their esteemed ranks. I’ve seen several over the years who had the attitude that they were the most highly trained individuals on the planet and that everyone else was inferior to the point of being bumbling fools. Their condescending attitude and policies toward everyone else alienated them and created nothing but strife among the ranks.
Some Practical Considerations
I know one range that limits shooters to firing one round not more often than every three seconds. In my mind, that’s pretty restrictive. Simply put, it’s more difficult to control a firearm during rapid fire. Flyers and errant rounds can occur more frequently when people are firing a couple of rounds per second if they are not accustomed to such shooting. It’s easy to pull shots high, low, or to the sides when shooting as fast as we can.
What’s The Answer?
Should ranges simply relax all the rules and let shooters have their way? What about competent shooters who need or want to build their defensive shooting skills?
I’m afraid I don’t have the perfect answer. Some shooters aren’t competent enough to enjoy the spoils of rapid fire, especially inside a building. How do we sort them out? Perhaps have them complete a training class to verify their competency?
I can tell you what I do. I belong to an outdoor range that does not have these restrictions. I’m free to shoot on the move, engage in rapid-fire, and practice other essential skills for defense. With the outdoor range, though, come challenges. When there’s a couple of feet of snow from a fresh snowstorm, there is no going to the range because it’s not accessible. During the winter time when it’s 15 degrees and a 30-mile-per-hour breeze is blowing, the elements are challenging. I just have to suck it up.
Do some research and see what sort of ranges are available to you. It’s possible that some are not very restrictive. Perhaps for the cold months when there’s inclement weather, it’s best to frequent an indoor range and just live with the restrictions.
We’d love to hear what readers think on the subject.
