Yes, Mr. Reeves, You Are

Is it hubris for a guy who never served in the military, worked in law enforcement, or became a firearms instructor to second-guess semi-famous gun gurus? Because I do it.

It’s not hubris. You don’t have to be a genius to know when someone is obviously wrong.

Here’s another interesting thing: you can be a cop (even SWAT) or a Navy SEAL with two tours in miserable Islamic strongholds or an NRA-certified instructor and still be full of opinions that conflict with reality. Also, there is a reason why people don’t get promoted in the military or law enforcement. You don’t want to put much stock in what people who ended their careers near the bottom say, unless they have other credits that prove their expertise in the areas in which they profess to be expert.

I worked as an armorbearer in a big church, and we walked around with firearms under our shirts. It was probably stupid of me to join. Our leaders were two ex-military guys: Army and Air Force. The Army guy said he had been a miltary narc for 4 years, and the Air Force guy helped maintain planes, if I recall correctly, and also did air traffic control.

I was not working under Douglas MacArthur and Curtis LeMay. I was working under two guys I liked a lot, who had never gotten to do heavy thinking or command a lot of people.

Eventually, I noticed they made bad decisions pretty often, and there were important, fundamental concepts they did not seem to understand. I had an epiphany: these guys were enlisted men. They were not officers. They had never been in any danger of becoming officers. They were great guys, but truthfully, their role in the service was to execute orders given by other people. When things got more difficult than that, they were in over their heads.

There are a lot of self-styled gun and tactics experts on the web who never made it past sergeant. How much can they really know, if their superiors didn’t think they had the makings of decision-makers and policy creators?

As for NRA training, maybe I should look it up now.

Here is what the site says:

Candidates must have completed the basic course in the discipline they wish to be certified to teach, e.g. NRA Basics of Pistol Shooting (Instructor Led Only), NRA Basic Rifle Shooting, etc.

Candidates must possess and demonstrate a solid background in firearm safety and shooting skills acquired through previous firearm training and/or previous shooting experience. Instructor candidates must be intimately familiar with each action type in the discipline for which they wish to be certified.

Candidates will be required to demonstrate solid and safe firearm handling skills required to be successful during an instructor training course by completing pre-course questionnaires and qualification exercises administered by the NRA Certified Training Counselor.

Candidates must satisfactorily complete an NRA Instructor Training Course in the discipline they wish to teach (e.g., NRA Basic Pistol Course), and receive the endorsement of the NRA Training Counselor conducting that training.

Okay, so, not to denigrate the program, but I think I could do this in a month. I think the lady who served me today at Sonny’s BBQ could do it. Maybe she has. This is red Florida.

I was going to say “a month or two in my spare time,” but all my time is spare.

I had two instructors I think were fantastic. I took a precision rifle course, and the instructors were former military snipers. They had probably killed dozens of people. I think they really knew what they were talking about, as far as hitting things with bullets, and I’ll bet they were great at the things snipers need to be good at. Not being shot. Picking places to shoot from. Planning escape routes. Fooling the enemy. Whatever. They had gone to war, engaged with people who were trying really hard to kill them, killed them instead, and come home intact. I would listen to anything they had to say about the topics mentioned above.

Beyond that, I would feel free to question their opinions. If they got out of their lanes when giving advice, I would take their backgrounds into consideration when weighing it.

The other day, I saw a Youtube guy telling people how to take a pistol away from an armed assailant. He said he was a former CIA officer. That’s his big credit.

Man. The CIA doesn’t teach most of its people much about self-defense or the martial arts. A lot of them do things like writing book reports.

Lanes are important. Don’t try to disarm a person with a pistol. Sometimes it’s best to comply.

Is it obvious I’m going to express my disappointment with a gun guru today? I guess it should be. Actually, I am disappointed in two.

I wrote about one the other day. James Reeves. Not the country singer.

He works at The Firearm Blog, and he seems to be focused mainly on tricked-out AR-15’s and plastic pistols. I think he shoots a lot of steel in hobby competitions. He’s supposedly a lawyer, but I haven’t seen any evidence that he has a substantial practice, and he has said things about the law that don’t seem very smart to me. His bio says he is an NRA/Louisiana State Police certified concealed weapons instructor.

My guess is that Reeves makes most of his money being a professional gun celebrity.

I took my course from a certified concealed weapons instructor in South Miami. I stood at the counter in his gun shop for 45 minutes, and he told me things like how it was bad to shoot people more than 7 yards away unless they were “big niggers.” Maybe things are different in Louisiana, but I’m not impressed with concealed weapons instructors.

I’m not sure why the cops would be any good at teaching people to carry concealed weapons. They don’t carry them. Am I right? Except for backup guns, they carry everything on their huge belts, right out where you can see it.

I hate to praise Massad Ayoob, who has no idea where his lane ends and everyone else’s begins, but I would listen to him before I would listen to a real cop. Concealed carry is his thing, and even though he worked as a part-time cop doing nearly nothing, he is what I would call a civilian, so he can see things from a civilian’s perspective. Just don’t listen to his legal advice.

I found a Reeves bio that lists some credits. He was named a “Rising Star” and “Top Insurance Lawyer” somewhere.

Oh, boy.

Let me tell you now cheesy lawyer credits work. One day you open your email, and there is spam from America’s Most Amazing and Incredible Trial Lawyers. Guess what? You’ve been nominated to be on the list! You’ll be in their deluxe, bonded-leather-bound directory! Or you can upgrade to top-grain leather! You’ll get a gorgeous faux wood plaque to display in your office!

Just send in $150.

Lawyers who lack mental horsepower use bought titles like this to impress rubes. They join organizations. They give presentations. If you can’t win cases, you have to do what you can to make people think you’re a big deal.

I probably still get these things. I haven’t seen my email in a while. Top Lawyer! Master Litigator! If you think credits like this mean anything, you deserve a lawyer who has paid for the whole set.

“Top Insurance Lawyer” is not something I would put in my bio, if I had one. It’s like “Fastest Plow Mule in Arkansas.”

Insurance companies don’t hire good lawyers. My grandfather got rich in a crack between two hills in Eastern Kentucky, beating insurance lawyers. Consider John Edwards. He’s an idiot, but he got rich beating insurance lawyers. Think of all the tort lawyers on billboards that cost a ton of money to buy. That money came from insurance companies that settled or lost cases.

Settling is losing.

My dad told me this: insurance companies don’t hire the best lawyers, and they don’t hire the worst. Their actuaries think hiring the mediocre pays off best in the end. It averages out. The mediocre are cheaper than the best.

Reeves could still be a great lawyer, though, right? A great lawyer could be on these lists.

Doubtful. Too many things he says seem to me to be things that could not come out of the mouth of a great lawyer. But maybe he’s just not trying hard.

Lawyers who are really good don’t have to pump up their credits. They just win and win and win. My grandfather never had an ad. My dad never had an ad. His firm never had an ad. My dad used to get angry when he saw lawyers’ fat faces grinning oilily from billboards.

Reeves says nutty things about guns. He did a video in which he laughed at people who replace the guide rods in Glocks, even though this is a part which is both essential and known to fail frequently. Then he advised people to take their tiny, concealable guns and bolt a bunch of stuff on them, making them as easy to conceal as refrigerators. Quite honestly, I think he is one of the worst gun celebrities on the web to take advice from. What he says seems nonsensical to me.

He seems to be prominent in the cult of AR bros. If you do competitions on the weekend and paid more than $900 for your BCG, you probably love him.

The other person who disappoints me is Clint Smith. If Colonel Jeff Cooper is like Jesus to gun lovers, Clint Smith must be the Apostle Peter, because he learned at Cooper’s feet and taught under Cooper at Gunsite.

Reeves did a video, and he asked Clint Smith what was the best “urban rifle.” Whatever that means. It sounds like something a white supremacist uses to shoot up a ghetto because he’s fed up with rap.

In the end, the answer provided by the video turned out to be…you’ll never guess…an AR-15. Pimped out to the tune of $3000. That figure was part of the theme of the video. Best “urban rifle”…for $3000.

I have more than one AR-15. People love to say guns are not toys. My AR-15’s are toys. I have one I have not even shot yet. I do not have any plans to go near these guns in self-defense situations. The platform is not nearly as reliable as other platforms, and the caliber is not even close to the best for self-defense.

I would guess I have $1600 in the most expensive AR-15, and it would be more like $1200, except I went nuts and used a White Oak Armory upper. I don’t even know where you would put $3000 in an AR-15 unless you had some kind of nutty optics, or maybe you had the handguard covered with Cerakote Punisher Pokemons to match your neck tattoos.

You could use a $200 trigger, which is a total waste of money unless you want accuracy far exceeding anything you might need for self-defense, at the expense of safety. You could have a $1200 upper, which would serve no purpose at all in a defense rifle.

To Reeves, $3000 is apparently cheap, because he also has a $6,000 video. You can buy almost 4 Ruger Precision Rifles for $6,000. Why on Earth would you blow $6,000 on a gun notorious for getting its owners killed?

When you put all this money into a gun, you make yourself look like someone who really hopes he gets to shoot somebody with it.

What is an “urban rifle”? That’s where Smith comes in.

According to Thunder Ranch’s site, their urban rifle course is about using a rifle to defend yourself at handgun distance.

Either that’s BS, and Thunder Ranch is really teaching people how to mow leftists down at long distances as part of a militia, or somebody doesn’t understand “handgun distance.” You don’t need an AR-15 with a long barrel to defend yourself at handgun distances.

What does handgun distance have to do with “urban”? Don’t Smith’s techniques work on farms?

Here is what I think, as a very good but not top-level pistol shot. To me, “handgun distance” means 50 yards or less. If you get within 50 yards of me, and you scare me, and I have a pistol, I can kill you pretty easily unless you move around a lot or really rattle me. Anything beyond that, to a person on my level, is rifle distance. But to be really clear, I wouldn’t want to defend myself with a pistol at any distance. It’s a weapon of last resort, vastly inferior to any long gun.

A pistol is the Denny’s of guns. No one ever says, “I plan to eat at Denny’s soon.” They drive around, see that everything else is closed, and “end up” at Denny’s, as one comedian put it. When you can’t put your hands on a real gun, you end up with a pistol. Col. Cooper, PBUH, believed this.

I’ll be generous and assume Thunder Ranch’s typical students can hit people with pistols most of the time at 50 yards. This probably isn’t true, but still. If it is true, why teach a pistol-distance course and push an unreliable platform made to shoot up to 600 yards?

AK-47 or variant. Vz58. Tavor. VEPR. Saiga-12. Aren’t any of these more trustworthy and lethal than an AR-15?

If you’re 600 yards away, running is better than all of them. Or just jog in a circle. It’s really hard to hit people that far away.

Let me talk about investing. Something I don’t do much, but I do know one thing: I know what’s most important for an investor. High returns? No. NOT LOSING YOUR CAPITAL. If you don’t have capital, you are all done investing, and you have to get a job.

How does this relate to self-defense shooting? Simple. The big priority to an intelligent person isn’t to have the lightest trigger, the cutest nitrided barrel, the most expensive lower, or the greatest accuracy. The big priority is to NOT GET SHOT.

In a violent engagement, winning is not as important as not losing. That’s why it’s called self-defense, not adversary-offense.

Any rifle or shotgun will hit a burglar very easily within legitimate self-defense distances. A pellet gun will do it. You don’t need a $6,000 Daniel Defense gun with your girlfriend’s picture engraved on it. You want a gun that goes off every time and packs a punch. Period. In other words, not an AR-15. It fails on both scores.

While you’re jacking around with your $6,000 underpowered range toy you bought on credit to impress the other guys, trying to make it chamber or eject a round, a burglar with a stolen .22 revolver and mismatched rounds he found in a drawer will perforate your organs multiple times.

I don’t know if Clint Smith really thinks you should use a $3,000 AR to protect your family. Maybe that’s all James Reeves. But I know he recommends the AR over guns like the AK-47. That’s nuts. I don’t care if Smith taught Jason Bourne everything he knows. I don’t care if he served 50 tours in Vietnam. Don’t care. Don’t care about his SWAT credentials. The AR should be nobody’s first choice.

What are Clint Smith’s credentials? He says he did two tours in Vietnam. This was the war where lots and lots of American soldiers died holding jammed full-auto AR-15’s. Yes, I know they called it an M16, but an M16 is an AR-15.

He was on a SWAT team. Where? Indiana. Where in Indiana? A big city like Indianapolis where a SWAT team might actually do something, or a small town where there were only three team members and they rode around in a minivan? Can’t see it on the web.

He was a Marine. Well, a lot of Marines were shot and killed by barely-trained Viet Cong guerrillas with crusty AK-47’s.

Was he an officer? Was he an enlisted man? Did he work in an armory? Did he see combat in Vietnam, or did he pass out uniforms and boots? Don’t know.

Clint Smith is not shy about tooting his own horn. If he’s out there telling people he’s a two-tour Vietnam veteran and a former SWAT team member, he’s fine with self-promotion. He’s not modest. If he had been a captain or higher in the Marines, wouldn’t he say so?

If he left the service as an enlisted man, how much does he really have on the ball?

I guess a sharp person could stop me here and ask me why I doubt Clint Smith but admire Paul Harrell, who may well have been an enlisted man. Harrell served in the Army and Marines, and he was a firearms instructor. He was a combat veteran, but no one seems to know his rank.

Here’s the difference: Paul Harrell was a genius who stayed in his lane. He had an incredible mind. He was able to do complicated 20-minute monologues from memory with no pauses or stumbles. He always admitted his limitations. He considered every angle. He was nothing short of amazing. He was also an astonishing, dominant competitor with every firearm known to man, and he could even throw an ax accurately. He was Jack Reacher.

Clint Smith is no Paul Harrell.

Most enlisted men are not terribly smart, but sometimes one slips through. We will never see the equal of Paul Harrel again.

What if Smith loves the AR-15 not because it’s a good weapon, but because it reminds him of his days in the field and makes him feel like a Marine again? What if he’s emotionally attached to it? It’s a real possibility.

I would fight a burglar with a sling made from Dylan Mulvaney’s pink jockstrap, with Che Guevara’s face stenciled on it, if I knew it was the best weapon for the job. I picked Glocks for carry even though they’re ugly and depressing to look at because I knew they were reliable. Then I switched calibers. I may switch to something better and get rid of the Glocks. I don’t care about them.

It doesn’t bother me that AK variants have killed a lot of Americans. Using an AK doesn’t make me a communist or a terrorist. Our soldiers have picked up and used them. Using an AR doesn’t make me a patriot, either.

The Israelis still use the AR. Maybe someone will say this. Know why they use it? It’s cheaper than better guns. They prefer the Tavor and the Galil, but Israel has limited funds. If they had the money, I’m sure they’d be all-IMI.

Maybe buying Colts helps keep Big Bro America happy.

All this being said, I’ll bet Clint Smith and Thunder Ranch can teach you great things about how to use your badly-chosen AR-15. They must be among the very best at that, not that it’s rocket science. I guess you could take your training with an AR in order to make them happy, and then you could go home and get a better rifle for actual use.

They probably do a wonderful job, but there are probably people within an hour of my house that would do just as well. This stuff is very, very common knowledge. There are no secrets, and there isn’t that much to it.

The average IQ of military inductees is just below 100, and they learn this stuff just fine in a few weeks.

I should get a new soapbox before this one wears out.

This is my take on James Reeves, TFB, Clint Smith, Gunsite, insurance lawyers, Paul Harrell, the AR-15, other guns that actually work, and enlisted men. It’s worth at least twice what you paid to read it.

And now let’s spend a few minutes with the other Jim Reeves.