Followthrough discussion

[zushwa]

I'm not sure what you're reading that is "contradictory and convoluted," but if you can back off on the rhetoric and continue to discuss the issue professionally, I'm happy to.

You keep saying that you do it the exact same way every time, but you also stated above that you know you're not really doing it the exact same way. You realize you're doing something different in terms of follow-through when engaging a second target than you do when you're staying on one target. So in other words, you do something different when you're done with a target. Res ipsa loquitur.

Again, trying to mesh "tactics" of shooting non-reactive static targets with reactive dynamic targets just doesn't work. Your paper target is going to stand there no matter how many times you shoot it. So when do you stop shooting at it? When you choose to. If someone feels that prepping for another shot after he's made the conscious decision to stop shooting is more realistic training than stopping when you've decided to stop, no harm no foul. But suggesting that stopping when I know I'm done and I've made the conscious decision to stop shooting is somehow bad or un-tacticool? Sorry, no.

Good post. Thanks for the response. I don't recall saying I did anything different except drive the gun to the next target. Maybe I'm the one not being clear. My bad.

I hope some others have taken something from this discussion. I know I have.

It seems there might be some animosity growing so I'm going to gracefully bow out of the conversation so that others can learn from you. I hope to read what others have to say on the subject.

[Keith E.]

Spirited yet civil discussion with contradictory ideas, nice.

Thanks, Keith

P.S. .....and quite novel in some areas/forums.