August 17, 2004

• I think "we" need a marker for "Americans only" threads.
• This is China's sport. They've got it locked down.
• MetaFilter: Americans Only hmm. MetaFilter: Americans Only Metafilter: We Like Markers
• Looks at awful pdf thing, becomes unreasonable.
• Make that Metafilter Monkeyfilter...
• American athlete aims at Mfpb, shoots, misses.
• They should paint niggers on the targets, then we might have a chance.
• I'm sorry, I hate Americans tonight.
• Can I undo
• I was kind of meaning “we” in the sense that I am an American and can't really say "they" and separate my self from it. Eliminating the personal pronoun would have been awkward. Too much unity on the board, that’s a first for me.
• ActuallySettle: You are an American. You need help.
• Again with the anti-American stuff. I'm so ashamed we have not yet achieved perfect racial harmony, like every other country on Earth. If only we could be more like Australia, where Aborgines are worshipped as kings. Or France, where a neo-nazi runs for national office and gets not even a single vote.
• Um, whoa and fuck. Admin, please hope us. Somehow this got REAL ugly, real quick.
• Please note my "becomes unreasonable" comment upthread. If I download some piece of shit pdf thing that gives me 0 results when I search for "Diamond" (and if you don't know why I searched for that you know zip about shooting), it makes me cranky. I'm also a pretty good shot with a rifle.
• Fascinating, a shittily insular link hich manages to decline into particularly ugly nationalism in only 12 posts. Who is it that says MoFi is more cuddly?
• So, what I'm getting here is that America (is that North or South) is bad, Australia is great, and China breeds good shooter-people. Is that a good summary, or shall I just flush the thread down the crapper? /said with love Personally, I made a rule for myself never, ever to touch a gun. Of course, this means I'm probably unreasonably nervous in the presence of guns, much like someone who hears about how nasty those rabid kittens are, and stays a great distance from said kittens, will never feel safe approaching a rabid kitten, even if it's been declawed, had its teeth surgically removed, and been blindfolded from birth. And I think it was reasonable for Testy Cod to write 'we', as he says, given his post. So why, then, has NZ never won gold in the sheep shagging field hockey? On preview: I say MoFi is cuddly. Now hush. /cuddles
• Bugger. Monkeybashi got here before I could give drkimmy the slap upside the head he so desperately needs. I find this thread concides spookily with Miguels suicide-by-metatalk over here.
• Full moon?
• I told you all the olympics were bad -- see what happens? Bad, Olympics, bad! Go sit in the corner.
• MonkeyFilter: where Aborgines are worshipped as kings
• If I can (nervously) address the Cod's original question, could it have something to do with different military cultures? The American army, I believe, has always been less inclined than most to teach marksmanship and more inclined, instead, to provide a gun that shoots so many bullets it's bound to hit something. This is, I suspect, part of the wider US preference for technological solutions, and for things to be made easy wherever they can. Why change gear when your car can be an automatic? This sort of thing isn't, as it may sometimes seem to the rest of us, Americans being stupid and lazy (nor is it, as it may seem to Americans, the rest of us being too backward or poor to get proper gadgets) - it's a subtle but pervasive difference of attitude. So maybe part of the explanation is that Americans, latterly at least, tend to regard marksmanship as a relatively sterile accomplishment. Why spend years learning to shoot a gnat's eyelashes off when you can buy a bazooka round the corner right now? *Puts on tin helmet and waits to be mown down from all sides*
• I like Americans. In fact, I like people from all countries of the world. In other news, I'd like to teach the world to sing, except the_bone would do it better.
• Whoa! cranks up to puckerfactor 10, backs away slowly
• "I know my own nation best. That's why I despise it the most. And I know and love my own people, too, the swine. I'm a patriot. A dangerous man." (Edward Abbey) If I can't hate my own people, who the hell CAN I hate? I think Plegmund is correct about the gun thing, oh, lovely rational on-topic Plegmund. Americans are stuck in the first evolutionary stage of hunting -- kill the most you can as fast as you can -- hence the preference for shotguns and assault weapons.
• Why doesn't the U.S. have an Olympic handball team? The kids in McCarren Park are way good. Interesting analysis of the quality/quantity marksmanship/bullets thing. The U.S. in not particularly competitive in archery, either. BTW, I think a little ugliness in the posting can be productive, if it's honest.
• And killing Canadians, spackle, don't forget killing Canadians. *pours oil on troubled waters, strikes match*
• Wrong handball, little nemo.
• I'm also a pretty good shot with a rifle. *coughs up 'protection money', laughs nervously* Lovely day guv!
• Polychrome: We'll be waiting for you with sharpened hockey sticks ;-)
• Okay, a bit of stating the obvious, but: I don't think assault weapons or the US Army have much to do with it. Though they use related tools, they're different skills and, I believe, generally pursued by different people for different reasons. The question might be why recreational/sportsman shooting isn't a very popular recreation in the US. Suburban sprawl? You essentially have to do this in the middle of nowhere, I'd imagine, for safety and noise concerns. Gun ownership/use is just too much of a hot-button issue? Outcompeted as a hobby by hunting? As a stab in the dark, my best guess is that in areas in the US where this might become popular, people tend to hunt instead. And as for organized, well-funded gun clubs that might foster Olympic-caliber (no pun intended) marksmen... well... the hot-button issue may come into play then. There are rural clubs where people target-shoot - some of my relatives were fans of that in the early eighties - but I can imagine a more large-scale or modern place raising a hue and cry among the populace. Interesting, though.
• *throws weight around* *demands to know why everybody doesn't speak English* *farts* *remembers he's from the Ozarks, removes shoes* *wonders what all the fuss is about that limey Shakespeare* *eats too many cheesburgers* *fulfills cliches, passes out*
• When I was a kid, my summer camp had a rifle range for the older kids. They started us out first with bb guns shooting at targets in the basement of the chapel. (Yes, really.) I was, as a little kid, such a profoundly bad shot, that my fame preceded me from the bb range to the rifle range, and when my age group graduated to rifles, they saw me coming and said "oh, ummm, ambrosia, ummmm, wouldn't you rather make candles instead?" Back in the seventies, that summer camp was up in the mountains in Colorado, and by now, it's probably considered suburban Denver, what with all the crazy sprawl. I can't imagine they are turning out many marksmen these days.
• MonkeyFilter: We'd Like to Teach the World to Sing. MonkeyFilter: A Pretty Good Shot With a Rifle MonkeyFilter: Particularly Ugly Nationalism in Just 12 Posts. MonkeyFilter: We're cuddly. Now hush.
• Oh, and I should mention I love the Biathalon and the Modern Pentathalon, both of which involve shooting.
• [Editorial Note: I would much prefer to learn from y'all about the gun cultures of your own countries instead of being told that this topic is Americans Only and "shittily insular."] There are two outdoor rifle ranges smack dab in the middle of Memphis, Tennessee, which has a metro population of about a million people. In rural areas here, people just go to the nearest gravel pit or bridge for target shooting. Ah, the matchless thrill of canoeing down a peaceful river and hearing wild gunfire up ahead... Here's an article on hunting trends in Mississippi which I think is a fairly accurate picture of the whole southeast U.S. While assault rifles are not legal for hunting, they are sold every day at gun shows with no background checks or waiting periods. And if you're willing to settle for semi-automatic pistols, you can buy an endless supply online.
• Just a thought, but perhaps the reason America doesn't have a particularly competitive shooting team is because guns are widely available in a multitude of forms. In countries with stricter gun control, people with an interest in shooting might be forced to engage that interest through the only venue available - competitive sport shooting. In America, anyone who wants to fire a gun can pick up any old gun anytime, and many of them are a lot more interesting than those target rifles.
• No, any gun enthusiast values precision and difficulty of target. Witness the large number of deer hunters in the US, for instance -- a deer is one damn difficult moving target to hit. And I think that's part of it -- there are a lot of target shooters here, but probably a lot more hunters. I'd argue that most gun enthusiasts here live in rural areas and small towns, where they're more likely to be brought up to hunt. Hunters like target shooting, but targets have a more utilitarian value to your average hunter, for instance sighting in your weapon or teaching someone to shoot.
• "a deer is one damn difficult moving target to hit" Ummm not in Texas where people essentially set up a can-opener (feeder) and wait for the cat (deer) to come for dinner.
• Dear Wolof, Yes the PDF is big and ugly, it also happens to be the only thing that google finds on the subject -in fact if you can find the PDF I linked to through google, you'd be one up on me. When I want to bring a little covered topic to people's attention, I sometimes have to do it with crappy links. As for searching for "Diamond" in it, Michael Diamond is in it twice. Once for a Gold in 1996 and once for a gold in 2000, both for trap shooting. I don't follow trap and have no idea who he is. Dear Biffa, Shhhh
• My uninformed observation is that target shooting is not a "big-ticket" Olympic event like athletics, aquatics, boxing, gymnastics, etc., so it is not as applealing to amateur US athletes (and their parents/teachers/coaches) who can reap extraordinary rewards from sponsorship and achieve fame from participating and winning in higher profile events. You're not going to see a crack marksman on a Wheaties box any time soon.
• Jerry, what are 'athletics' in relation to the rest of the Olympic sports? Track & field events? (genuinely asking here) Why are they called that (which implies other things aren't as athletic)? I realise I could go do some looking myself to find out, but if you happen to know...
• Perhaps it's because a lot of people don't even realize that shooting is an Olympic sport. My sister is a pretty good skeet shooter and she didn't even know it was an Olympic event. Her brother-in-law just placed 7th in the nation in a skeet shooting event and he didn't realize it was in the Olympics either. I knew about it (thanks to video games) but I probably still wouldn't know that BB Guns were an Olympic event if it hadn't been the first medal awarded.
• The American army, I believe, has always been less inclined than most to teach marksmanship and more inclined, instead, to provide a gun that shoots so many bullets it's bound to hit something. Not to defend... well yes, actually, I'm going to defend the American army here. There is nothing about what you suggest that is actually true. Your example of giving soldiers automatic weapons was true of the Russian army in WWII, where they literally didn't train their soldiers to shoot, but gave them a submachine gun and hoped for the best (because they had more manpower than anything else, including time and training). The American infantry has always been based on the rifle, and not automatic weapons. Even today, in Iraq, the basic weapon is a rifle that shoots one bullet at a time (or a 3-rd burst). Shooting a lot of bullets is a really good way to not hit anything, and the Army knows this. Special weapons are used in special situations. The only soldiers that get automatic weapons are the ones doing close quarters combat, in urban settings. Special Forces, Rangers, etc. The basic infantry unit will always be a squad of rifleman, who can shoot straight. I was actually reading an article somewhere about how in Afghanistan their (the Taliban) basic infantry unit went from a grenadier (with RPG) and two riflemen, to two RPG's and one rifleman in support, and how this was exceptionally effective against US forces. The question was, why isn't our army using similar tactics. IANAS(oldier) But anyway, I don't think any of this is why the US can't field a good shooting team.
• But yeah, no one here knows about the shooting sports. When I was travelling a few years ago with the ex, she wore a Salt Lake cap, and this guy asked her if she was an olympian. We decided to have some fun and told him she was a biathelete because that's pretty much the only sport we could get away with.
• Maybe it's time for some new real life events. Replace trap shooting with hunting. Candidates have 2 hours to bag as many (local animal or bird) as possible. Combine fishing and hunting into one event. Lose the canoe time trials, and replace it with "paddle the canoe across the lake, complete a 2 km portage, paddle some more, and set up a tent" race. (No comment on the kayak competition). With the new hunting/fishing competition this would be the new triathalon! / I neither hunt nor condone it, and haven't fished since Ontario brought in license requirements. But I would like to see some of these Olympic "canoeists" race across a portage that has only enough space for two teams at once.
• Yes, ilyadeux, athletics encompasses all track and field events, just as aquatics is swimming, diving, synchro, etc.
• Shooters from the U.S. aren't subsidized by the government. They use their own money for ammo (very expensive) and train on their own time, often while pulling down full-time jobs. That's the answer to the orginal question, just in case anyone's still interested.
• One cliche: two words. Olympic paintball.
• Thank you I Feel. That would explain it.
• Wurwilf, I think, pretty much nails it. It seems to me to be fairly trivial for any yahoo in the States to obtain a firearm, so simply being interested in rifles or pistols doesn't impose any kind of structure. In New Zealand, by way of comparison, a firearms license is quite hard to get, can be revoked for pretty much any reason (domestic disputes, assault convictions, divorces, mental health problems, flunking character references, or just living with someone considered unsuitable). And that's just for shotguns and rifles. Weapons have to be stored in approved safes, ditto ammuntion. For a handgun, you have to join an approved club for 6 months, get signoff from the club members that you're not a nutter, and then there's a probation period where you're still not allowed a handgun in the house, it has to be stored at the club. This all means that shooting as a hobby tends to funnel people into structured, organised groups, clubs, and the like. Hunters and farmers may roam the countryside with rifles, but people don't simply tote firearms except on well-defined occasions, all of which tends to greater skill. I imagine in nations with similar policies/mindsets around firearms ownership the same is true. However, we don't have any kind of compulsory millitary training, which would doubtless mean a whole bunch of potential sharp shoorters never handle a weapon.
• The American infantry has always been based on the rifle, and not automatic weapons. Well, up to a point. The good old M-16 is a 'rifle', but it's well capable of fully automatic fire. I may be guilty of perpetuating stereotypes, but my view derives from accounts like this. That doesn't sound like a culture that seeks to put just one bullet in exactly the right place. That was Vietnam, of course, and the American Army has changed a lot since then; but the general drift still seems to be against taking out each member of the Taleban with a beautifully placed sniper shot, and towards razing the entire mountain. And why not? If I were a soldier on the ground, that's exactly the way I'd want it. Of course us Brits (if I can rant on even longer) have a different problem - it's so hard now for a law-abiding citizen to lay a finger on a firearm of any kind even for bona fide sporting purposes that it's difficult to attain even basic competence with the things.
• And that's just the way I like it, Plegmund.
• Here here. We're rubbish at shooting, and we only sent one boxer to the Olympics. To my eyes, that's a success...
• Witness the large number of deer hunters in the US, for instance -- a deer is one damn difficult moving target to hit. So let's have deer-shootin' as an Olympic sport -- the hell with this namby-pamby "target" stuff!
• What rodgerd said. Plus the guys who may have an interest in competitive shooting in the USA are going to be doing it with larger and/or more durable weapons. My impression is that an Olympic class rifle isn't good for much but target shooting and is pretty delicate. Yes the skills transfer but to be in the top three in the world you need to practice with the legal weapon.
• a deer is one damn difficult moving target to hit. MCT- do you know any hunters? Knowing how to aim and shoot with accuracy is certainly a skill, but there's not much challenge to shooting a deer. Any kid who can handle a rifle could do it.
• In the 1900 Olympics they used live pigeons for the target shooting. How about we go back to that?
• i hate people.
• From a tree blind, in the woods, through the trees, as smart and sensitive as they are? Yeah, I know quite a few deer hunters -- you can't throw a rock without hitting one here. Never done it personally (my dad was steadfastly opposed to trophy hunting, and raised us likewise), but I've known quite a few in my life, and every one of them would scoff at the idea that a deer is an easy animal to hunt.
• American Matthew Emmons fired at the wrong target in the men's 50m rifle three-position target event to gift the gold medal to China's Jia Zhanbo.
• every one of them would scoff at the idea that a deer is an easy animal to hunt. I guess the deer are more frisky where you live. Around here, they wander through the yard and snack on my flowers. They're more of a pest, like raccoons or rats. I run into them all the time while hiking, and can often get within 30 feet of the critters before they're spooked. Hunting them wouldn't be much of a challenge.
• True that. Where I come from there's heavy deer hunting (in season, of course), so they're extremely skittish of humans, thank God. They've even gotten fairly decent at spotting tree blinds, I hear. However, they can be trusting. A FedEx employee who used to deliver at my old employer's raised a deer she rescued until it got to be too big to handle. She had some great Thanksgiving shots of the li'l guy in the kitchen trying to steal food. Then she gave him to some guy who has a deer farm, where he now makes a good living as a stud.