[M&P15T]

You are half right, but just a tad dramatic about this.

I agree it is not the best to learn on, but it doesn't have to be sold. I bet in 2 lessons, I could get her shooting it ok.

The first lesson I would start her on my S&W 63 .22lr and Ruger GP100. Working on grip, stance, aim, and surprise break with dryfire. Then shots in single action in the 63, and single and double action, with 148gr wadcutters .38 special in the GP100. Both of those sitting at a bench, blank sheet of paper 10 feet away Then move to standing up with those 2 guns. Switch to a bullseye target at out to 7 yards if all goes well.

The next lesson, test recoil in 9mm, moving from my Beretta 92, to Glock 26. Then her Rossi with 148gr wadcutters. See where it goes from there. Probably go back and forth with my 63, working on various things as needed, such as an empty chamber and surprise break.

So, to teach her how to shoot her Rossi .38 snubby, you would use the following;

S&W63 .22
Ruger GP100
Beretta 92
GLOCK 26

You would try to teach someone to shoot a specific firearm by having them train with 4 others, 3 of which have severely different ergonomics and fire control types.

I would suggest you re-think you're teaching style.

 

[ithaca_deerslayer]

So, to teach her how to shoot her Rossi .38 snubby, you would use the following;

S&W63 .22
Ruger GP100
Beretta 92
GLOCK 26

Sorry, but that is an antiquated idea on training. You're trying to teach someone to shoot a specific firearm by having them train with 4 others, 3 of which have severely different ergonomics and fire control types.

I would suggest you re-think you're teaching style.

Interesting post. The goal would be to teach someone to shoot. I often have women come to me with a small carry gun their husband bought for them. But they never really learned to shoot, and are having trouble with it.

So first, teach them to shoot according to NRA basic pistol methods (or have them take the course if they want). Then, use the variety of guns I own to transition them to smaller carry guns with increasing recoil. I would like to own a medium .38 for this transition, but I don't. Thus the use of a couple 9mm for that bridge. And the people seem to like knowing they can shoot a semi-auto as well as a revolver.

Here is your chance to help the OP and me by giving us good details of a better training approach and gun selection advice for his soon to be wife. I know you prefer semi-autos, so I'm not sure if you will be able to offer any revolver help, but please do try to offer some help

 

[M&P15T]

Interesting post. The goal would be to teach someone to shoot. I often have women come to me with a small carry gun their husband bought for them. But they never really learned to shoot, and are having trouble with it.

So first, teach them to shoot according to NRA basic pistol methods (or have them take the course if they want). Then, use the variety of guns I own to transition them to smaller carry guns with increasing recoil. I would like to own a medium .38 for this transition, but I don't. Thus the use of a couple 9mm for that bridge. And the people seem to like knowing they can shoot a semi-auto as well as a revolver.

Here is your chance to help the OP and me by giving us good details of a better training approach and gun selection advice for his soon to be wife. I know you prefer semi-autos, so I'm not sure if you will be able to offer any revolver help, but please do try to offer some help

It has nothing to do with platform selection. Revolver, autos, whatever one likes. The basic concepts behind learning to shoot should be the same.

When working with a brand new shooter, especially a female adult that has never handled a firearm before, it is most important to understand the emotional side of things. Sounds misogynistic, but it's true. The basic idea is that, if they aren't having fun, aren't getting on target quickly, they will grow frustrated and tire of the endeavor very quickly. Conversely, if they have some good success, right off the bat, their interest will be peaked, and they will be more apt to stick with shooting as not just training for SD/HD, but as a hobby.

The main emphasis (and I have taught a few new female shooters, and gotten them on target @ 7 yards, taking out the black, very quickly) is on trigger technique and muscle memory patterns. By far, the most important part, is trigger technique. A trainer can teach stance, grip, sight alignment, and other techniques, but if a new shooter doen't first start with (and master w/dry-fire) trigger technique, their rounds will never be accurate, and the rest will all be for naught.

Your idea of using a S&W63 is good, because it's a j-frame in .22 (please correct me if I'm wrong), and almost identical to a Rossi .38 So it will have almost identical ergonomics, trigger and sights, but with less recoil. That is a good idea once you get to the range with a new shooter, but the ground-work for said new shooter has to start without shells, without live-fire.

With new shooters, I have always started with quite a bit of dry firing, at home, in a quiet and relaxed atmosphere. This gives a new shooter the chance to learn in a very concentrated manner, without the distractions of loud, concussive fire going off all around them. This gives them the chance to focus on, feel and learn, the mechanical break and re-set of the particular trigger they will use in the future.

Atmosphere is extremely important. The normal atmosphere at a gun range is loud, concussive, intimidating, and sometimes downright scary for new shooters. We experienced shooters don't even notice it, it's just part of the scenery. But for new shooters it can be an over-whelming experience, so it's best to teach the basics in a quiet, relaxed environment. Starting with lots and lots of dry-fire, where trigger control techniques, along with proper grip, can be learned. I acutally have found that sitting on the couch, dry firing and focusing on nothing but trigger technique and grip, is an awesome way to start. Then, once that is comming along nicely, stance can be taught. Oddly enough, sight picture I have almost never even discussed, unless the person in question is obviously struggeling with it at the range. Sight picture is a pretty natural thing to figure out. I do, however, discuss the need for vision focus on the front sight.

Another idea is to try to avoid turning learning to shoot into a classroom session. I have found that teaching is best done (given the opportunity, like when living with said new shooter) whenever the perspective new shooter expresses interest. With the OP, he lives with his wife, so the at-home dry fire and such could be tried whenever she shows an interest. No need to force or cajole, just work with her whenever she shows interest.

I also would highly reccomend taking a new shooter to an outdoor range first, instead of an indoor range. The sounds and concussive effects are much lower outside. It's also wise to get to the range when you know it will be empty, like a Tuesday morning or something like that. With no other people shooting around them, the new shooter will have a quiet, relaxed atmosphere to try live-fire for the first time. If the ground-work has been done properly, I can almost guarantee that a new shooter will find themselves taking out the black at 7 yards right off the bat. Recoil, noise and muzzle blast should be the only new things to be experienced. The basics of trigger technique, grip and stance should already be understood and practiced.....and recoil, noise and muzzle blast are enough to try and handle for new shooters, much less trying to pile-on learning all of the proper shooting techniques at the same time.

Getting into GLOCKs, Berrettas and larger revolvers will not help the OP's wife learn to shoot her Rossi .38. It will actually be detrimental, and move her backwards. Keeping with one platform, one trigger type, one set of ergonomics and muscle memory patterns, is paramount to a new student gaining confidence quickly, and enjoying a lifetime of shooting.

If you haven't noticed, I view basic pistol courses like ones that the NRA put on in classroom/shooting range environments, to be next to useless. It's usually nothing but a bunch of over-weight, middle aged wannabes enjoying the one time in their lives when women are pretty much forced to shut up and listen to them, and do exactly as they say. It's a very poor learning environment, and completely ignorant of how women learn the best, which is on their time, at their speed, when they want to. It also represents piling on waaaaay too much information at once, combined with experiencing a new and intimidating set of sensory perceptions, in a foreign and alien environment. It's waaaay too much at once for most people.

 

[jbotstein1]

I have found that wikipedia is a great source for information on the many different calibers. It shows velocity and force of impact for many different bullet weights. It also shows dimensions, gives you a history of the round, and a bunch of other stuff.

 

[ithaca_deerslayer]

It has nothing to do with platform selection. Revolver, autos, whatever one likes. The basic concepts behind learning to shoot should be the same.

When working with a brand new shooter, especially a female adult that has never handled a firearm before, it is most important to understand the emotional side of things. Sounds misogynistic, but it's true. The basic idea is that, if they aren't having fun, aren't getting on target quickly, they will grow frustrated and tire of the endeavor very quickly. Conversely, if they have some good success, right off the bat, their interest will be peaked, and they will be more apt to stick with shooting as not just training for SD/HD, but as a hobby.

The main emphasis (and I have taught a few new female shooters, and gotten them on target @ 7 yards, taking out the black, very quickly) is on trigger technique and muscle memory patterns. By far, the most important part, is trigger technique. A trainer can teach stance, grip, sight alignment, and other techniques, but if a new shooter doen't first start with (and master w/dry-fire) trigger technique, their rounds will never be accurate, and the rest will all be for naught.

Your idea of using a S&W63 is good, because it's a j-frame in .22 (please correct me if I'm wrong), and almost identical to a Rossi .38 So it will have almost identical ergonomics, trigger and sights, but with less recoil. That is a good idea once you get to the range with a new shooter, but the ground-work for said new shooter has to start without shells, without live-fire.

With new shooters, I have always started with quite a bit of dry firing, at home, in a quiet and relaxed atmosphere. This gives a new shooter the chance to learn in a very concentrated manner, without the distractions of loud, concussive fire going off all around them. This gives them the chance to focus on, feel and learn, the mechanical break and re-set of the particular trigger they will use in the future.

Atmosphere is extremely important. The normal atmosphere at a gun range is loud, concussive, intimidating, and sometimes downright scary for new shooters. We experienced shooters don't even notice it, it's just part of the scenery. But for new shooters it can be an over-whelming experience, so it's best to teach the basics in a quiet, relaxed environment. Starting with lots and lots of dry-fire, where trigger control techniques, along with proper grip, can be learned. I acutally have found that sitting on the couch, dry firing and focusing on nothing but trigger technique and grip, is an awesome way to start. Then, once that is comming along nicely, stance can be taught. Oddly enough, sight picture I have almost never even discussed, unless the person in question is obviously struggeling with it at the range. Sight picture is a pretty natural thing to figure out.

Another idea is to try to avoid turning learning to shoot into a classroom session. I have found that teaching is best done (given the opportunity, like when living with said new shooter) whenever the perspective new shooter expresses interest. With the OP, he lives with his wife, so the at-home dry fire and such could be tried whenever she shows an interest. No need to force or cajole, just work with her whenever she shows interest.

I also would highly reccomend taking a new shooter to an outdoor range first, instead of an indoor range. The sounds and concussive effects are much lower outside. It's also wise to get to the range when you know it will be empty, like a Tuesday morning or something like that. With no other people shooting around them, the new shooter will have a quiet, relaxed atmosphere to try live-fire for the first time. If the ground-work has been done properly, I can almost guarantee that a new shooter will find themselves taking out the black at 7 yards right off the bat. Recoil, noise and muzzle blast should be the only new things to be experienced. The basics of trigger technique, grip and stance should already be understood and practiced.....and recoil, noise and muzzle blast are enough to try and handle for new shooters, much less trying to pile-on learning all of the proper shooting techniques at the same time.

Getting into GLOCKs, Berrettas and larger revolvers will not help the OP's wife learn to shoot her Rossi .38. It will actually be detrimental, and move her backwards. Keeping with one platform, one trigger type, one set of ergonomics and muscle memory patterns, is paramount to a new student gaining confidence quickly, and enjoying a lifetime of shooting.

If you haven't noticed, I view basic pistol courses like ones that the NRA put on in classroom/shooting range environments, to be next to useless. It's usually nothing but a bunch of over-weight, middle aged wannabes enjoying the one time in their lives when women are pretty much forced to shut up and listen to them, and do exactly as they say. It's a very poor learning environment, and completely ignorant of how women learn the best, which is on their time, at their speed, when they want to. It also represents piling on waaaaay too much information at once, combined with experiencing a new and intimidating set of sensory perceptions, in a foreign and alien environment. It's waaaay too much at once for most people.

Good post and I agree with most of what you said. And I would also suggest most of what you said to a new shooter.

However, I believe there needs to be a bridge to get from the recoil of a .22 to the recoil of a small carry gun. We can disagree here, that is fine. In my experience, it is best to go gradual, over a 1/2 hour from the 22 they leaned the basics on, to a large 38 or 9, to a medium 38 or 9, to a smaller 9 then to whatever carry gun they have. I don't own a medium 38, but have on occasion borrowed one from other instructors. The transition is done in a very reassuring way. See, this gun doesn't feel too different than that gun, does it. Good job. Now try this one, see not too different from that last one. Good job. And soon we are at the carry gun that they had brought with them and were afraid of. But now they know how to shoot it and have learned to deal with recoil, and don't find it so troublesome afterall.

If I was a better teacher, perhaps I could go straight from a 22 to their small carry gun. But instead, I find that both me and them need a bridge of some transition guns to get there. it was typically their husband that introduced them directly to their carry gun, and that didn't go over so well, so that is why they have come to me.

As for the NRA basic pistol course and NRA instructors, it is at least a program of instruction and safety thought out and written down. There are probably thousands of different NRA instructors. Some probably good. Some probably affiliated with other instruction, such as law enforcement or military training. Some are teachers in other areas, such as grade school or college. Some may indeed be fat. Some may be on power trips. There is a wide variety of people involved. But at least they are trying to help new shooters who are starting from scratch. Probably most of the time doing a better job than the typical wannabe teaching person (with the same wide variety of personal traits, faults, and fatness as the NRA instructors) who hasn't gone through any training process with any organization

But this discussion is good, because it gives the OP an idea of some issues to start looking at in trying to help his soon to be wife

 

[M&P15T]

Good post and I agree with most of what you said. And I would also suggest most of what you said to a new shooter.

However, I believe there needs to be a bridge to get from the recoil of a .22 to the recoil of a small carry gun. We can disagree here, that is fine. In my experience, it is best to go gradual, over a 1/2 hour from the 22 they leaned the basics on, to a large 38 or 9, to a medium 38 or 9, to a smaller 9 then to whatever carry gun they have. I don't own a medium 38, but have on occasion borrowed one from other instructors. The transition is done in a very reassuring way. See, this gun doesn't feel too different than that gun, does it. Good job. Now try this one, see not too different from that last one. Good job. And soon we are at the carry gun that they had brought with them and were afraid of. But now they know how to shoot it and have learned to deal with recoil, and don't find it so troublesome afterall.

If I was a better teacher, perhaps I could go straight from a 22 to their small carry gun. But instead, I find that both me and them need a bridge of some transition guns to get there. it was typically their husband that introduced them directly to their carry gun, and that didn't go over so well, so that is why they have come to me.

As for the NRA basic pistol course and NRA instructors, it is at least a program of instruction and safety thought out and written down. There are probably thousands of different NRA instructors. Some probably good. Some probably affiliated with other instruction, such as law enforcement or military training. Some are teachers in other areas, such as grade school or college. Some may indeed be fat. Some may be on power trips. There is a wide variety of people involved. But at least they are trying to help new shooters who are starting from scratch. Probably most of the time doing a better job than the typical wannabe teaching person (with the same wide variety of personal traits, faults, and fatness as the NRA instructors) who hasn't gone through any training process with any organization

But this discussion is good, because it gives the OP an idea of some issues to start at in trying to help his soon to be wife

Ya know, I've never done a transition thing from a light to service caliber cartridge. But then, I've always used G19s to start new shooters, and they are very soft and easy shooting pistols. With a snubby, going from a .22 version to a .38 sounds like a good idea, as long as they are identical in every way except for caliber. It is really important that the trigger, ergos and such are the same.

Seriously, you should try what I described.....it works really, really well. Trigger technique and consistent ergos above all else. If you're going to step calibers, make it happen with the same platform. Don't mess with developing memory muscle patterns and the learning of a trigger type. That can happen later, after they have become proficient shooters.

As far as the NRA thing, I understand that trainers for the NRA cross a wide path personality and teaching ability wise. My concern is that some of them (too many of them) do more harm than good, especially when working with women. But then, I am a self-taught person, so maybe I shouldn't comment.

 

[fnfalman]

I agree with many ideas that Ithaca_deerslayer and M&P15T said about making training fun and less intimidating. The old school teaching technique of "grunting it through" is long gone. These people aren't trained to be soldiers. Shooting must be "fun" for them first and the self-defense aspects can be worked in later.

Also, there are two different mind sets here that the two of you are disagreeing on:

1. Train this lady to shoot the .38 snubby that her husband had bought her. If this is the case, then use a wheelgun in .22LR that is similar in size and operation is a good thing.

2. Training this lady to shoot. Period. In this case, introducing her to a variety of guns is better. This way she can make up her own mind as to which firearm she would prefer.

I am of the #2 line of thought. That may not be what the hubby wanted, but I wanted a prospective gun owner to be a thinking gun owner and not just a parrot. I'd show her how to shoot, then I'll introduce her to various guns of differing designs and calibers. THEN she can decide what's best for her.

Now, if she doesn't care enough and just wanted to learn with what her husband got her, then I'd go with #1 and give her lots and lots of bang time with the .22LR snubnose. Let's face it, mastering the DA pull isn't easy. You can spend oodles of money shooting .38 Special and give her sore hands (even the lightest .38 load is much more powerful than the hottest .22LR round), or you can just let her practice with the .22 long enough to reasonably put rounds on target with DA shooting and then transition over to the larger caliber. I don't know about you guys, but 500-rounds of the cheapest .38 Special still ain't cheap.

 

[AA#5]

So I bought my soon to be wife a Rossi revolver the other day and was under the false impression that is was a .357 the saleswoman selling me the weapon didn't offer up any objection. I did feel duked, but all in all it is an accurate weapon. Is it a weapon I can be comfortable with my lady carying as her CCW? It only holds 5 rounds and it is only a .38 which does bother me. What should i do, trust it or should i sell it and get something more depenable like a .380 or a .9?

No, you should get something more dependable than a Rossi.

 

[M&P15T]

I agree with many ideas that Ithaca_deerslayer and M&P15T said about making training fun and less intimidating. The old school teaching technique of "grunting it through" is long gone. These people aren't trained to be soldiers. Shooting must be "fun" for them first and the self-defense aspects can be worked in later.

Also, there are two different mind sets here that the two of you are disagreeing on:

1. Train this lady to shoot the .38 snubby that her husband had bought her. If this is the case, then use a wheelgun in .22LR that is similar in size and operation is a good thing.

2. Training this lady to shoot. Period. In this case, introducing her to a variety of guns is better. This way she can make up her own mind as to which firearm she would prefer.

I am of the #2 line of thought. That may not be what the hubby wanted, but I wanted a prospective gun owner to be a thinking gun owner and not just a parrot. I'd show her how to shoot, then I'll introduce her to various guns of differing designs and calibers. THEN she can decide what's best for her.

Now, if she doesn't care enough and just wanted to learn with what her husband got her, then I'd go with #1 and give her lots and lots of bang time with the .22LR snubnose. Let's face it, mastering the DA pull isn't easy. You can spend oodles of money shooting .38 Special and give her sore hands (even the lightest .38 load is much more powerful than the hottest .22LR round), or you can just let her practice with the .22 long enough to reasonably put rounds on target with DA shooting and then transition over to the larger caliber. I don't know about you guys, but 500-rounds of the cheapest .38 Special still ain't cheap.

Yeah, this is why I like GLOCKs, or other striker fired, medium/small framed pistols for starting new shooters.

Oh well, no point in discussing it now.

 

[fnfalman]

Yeah, this is why I like GLOCKs, or other striker fired, medium/small framed pistols for starting new shooters.

Oh well, no point in discussing it now.

So, instead of a heavy DA pull, you'd have a decent SA pull, but then the novice will have to do with snappy recoil and limpwrist issues in addition to learning the fundamentals?

Not to mention, the cheapest 9mm ammo is still around $10/box of 50. $10 will get you about 300-rds of .22LR.

 

[4 glocks]

My GF bought a S&W 442 before I met her. She had never shot it or any other gun except a .22 rifle when she was young.

She learned very fast without any issues. I will say she is a natural shot. She has shot 12 gage auto and pump, .357 and 9mm with out issue.

When she got her CCP she did not carry her gun. When we would go out I would say carry one of my guns LCP and 5 shot .38 after carrying my guns for a while she started carrying her gun all the time.

I had a Rossi years ago and it was a good gun for the money.

Just take her shooting you may be supprised.

 

[ithaca_deerslayer]

My GF bought a S&W 442 before I met her. She had never shot it or any other gun except a .22 rifle when she was young.

She learned very fast without any issues. I will say she is a natural shot. She has shot 12 gage auto and pump, .357 and 9mm with out issue.

When she got her CCP she did not carry her gun. When we would go out I would say carry one of my guns LCP and 5 shot .38 after carrying my guns for a while she started carrying her gun all the time.

I had a Rossi years ago and it was a good gun for the money.

Just take her shooting you may be supprised.

Just to clarify, did she have experience shooting .357 and 9mm before she got the 442?

 

[M&P15T]

So, instead of a heavy DA pull, you'd have a decent SA pull, but then the novice will have to do with snappy recoil and limpwrist issues in addition to learning the fundamentals?

Not to mention, the cheapest 9mm ammo is still around $10/box of 50. $10 will get you about 300-rds of .22LR.

Snappy recoil? On a G19? Serioulsy? Never been a problem, ever, not even with a 70+ year old first time female shooter. Never seen any malfunctions either, not due to "limp wristing", handling a pistol for the first time, nothing.

I'm not arguing against .22 for economic reasons, I'm all for .22 caliber versions of what-ever pistol the new shooter will eventually use. The idea is picking a platform/ergonomics/trigger and sticking with it until the new shooter develops into a decently seasoned one. Heading for a G19? Get a .22 conversion kit. Rossi .38? S&W .22 version of a j-frame.

 

[Restless28]

My wife carries Sabre Red instead of a gun because she still isn't co
comfortable with a handgun. She may never be, but at least she has the Sabre.

I now find myself comfortable with a 642 in an Uncle Mikes 3 in my pocket and a small canister of Sabre Red.

The best advice is to avoid as many situations as possible that dictate a gun. Situational awareness is cheap.

 

[4 glocks]

Just to clarify, did she have experience shooting .357 and 9mm before she got the 442?

No she did not. She had only shot a 22 rifle when she was young. She got the 442 just before I met her, and did not want to shot it by herself. Our first date was shooting her 442 and some of my guns .357 and 9mm Glock.

She took to shooting very fast and had no issues shooting anything. It may not be the same for all woman.

 

[fnfalman]

Snappy recoil? On a G19? Serioulsy? Never been a problem, ever, not even with a 70+ year old first time female shooter. Never seen any malfunctions either, not due to "limp wristing", handling a pistol for the first time, nothing.

Yes, snappy recoil. Maybe not with every female, but surely enough to make these guns to be non-universal. Not to mention the girth of the grip.

I'm not arguing against .22 for economic reasons, I'm all for .22 caliber versions of what-ever pistol the new shooter will eventually use. The idea is picking a platform/ergonomics/trigger and sticking with it until the new shooter develops into a decently seasoned one. Heading for a G19? Get a .22 conversion kit. Rossi .38? S&W .22 version of a j-frame.

I agree, but the guns don't have to be exactly the same. Besides, how do you know which gun the individual will end up using? You expect the individual to make an informed decision right off the bat and buy a gun then go get trained? that's not logical.

 

[fnfalman]

She took to shooting very fast and had no issues shooting anything. It may not be the same for all woman.

It's not the same for every man either. A good trainer would adopt to the students' idiosyncracies.

 

[M&P15T]

Yes, snappy recoil. Maybe not with every female, but surely enough to make these guns to be non-universal. Not to mention the girth of the grip.



I agree, but the guns don't have to be exactly the same. Besides, how do you know which gun the individual will end up using? You expect the individual to make an informed decision right off the bat and buy a gun then go get trained? that's not logical.

You're not following the conversation, and I'm not going to repeat it for you.

And I have no idea of what to say if you think a G19 has snappy recoil, or has a "girthy" grip. How many have you owned or shot?

 

[fnfalman]

And I have no idea of what to say if you think a G19 has snappy recoil, or has a "girthy" grip. How many have you owned or shot?

It's a double stack mag pistol. Ergo, the girth of the grip may not agree with people with small hands and short fingers.

And now you claim that the snappy recoil of the G19 is a non-issue. Guess what, I've seen it as an issue. You claim that the grip size of the G19 isn't an issue. Guess what? I've seen it as an issue.

As far as a G19 goes, you got me there. I have neither owned or shot one. But I do have a G17 since 1988. Does that count?

 

[fnfalman]

You would try to teach someone to shoot a specific firearm by having them train with 4 others, 3 of which have severely different ergonomics and fire control types.

I've always used G19s to start new shooters, and they are very soft and easy shooting pistols. With a snubby, going from a .22 version to a .38 sounds like a good idea, as long as they are identical in every way except for caliber. It is really important that the trigger, ergos and such are the same.

Sounds like double-speak to me.

One moment you advocate using similar guns to the one the shooter ended up with. The next moment you advocate the use of Glocks to train shooters. How do you know that they will end up with Glocks?