"Lena B Katz" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> On Mon, 14 Mar 2005, Doug Kanter wrote:
>
>> "Lena B Katz" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>>>>> Good explanation, but I still think Lena need to justify and explain
>>>>>> her
>>>>>> cockamamie statement:
>>>>>
>>>>> While you're at it, kindly justify your "cockamamie" statement about
>>>>> 2seconds to fire in a combat situation. I think you've rather
>>>>> forgotten
>>>>> about the startle response, and are just citing how much time it takes
>>>>> afterwards. Am I wrong?
>>>>>
>>>>> Lena
>>>>
>>>> By making a blanket statement, yes, you are wrong, especially since YOU
>>>> STATED that 100% of your so-called knowledge comes from third parties
>>>> rather
>>>> than direct experience.
>>>
>>> Sigh. Do I need to quote you saying "someone can fire a gun in two
>>> seconds" before you'll answer my question? Was that timed including a
>>> startle response, or was it timed on a guncourse, where someone shouted
>>> "go"?
>>>
>>> I'm no psych major, but I have personally experienced the startle
>>> response, and I think you have too.
>>>
>>> Lena
>>
>> You have obviously never seen (****FIRST HAND, NOT IN MOVIES*****) what
>> goes
>> on at a close combat training range. That's "close", as in "not far". Not
>> "close" as in "close the door". Part of the training involves having to
>> wait
>> for a target to appear out of nowhere BEFORE you can draw a weapon,
>> acquire
>> the target, and fire.
>
> That still does not involve the startle response. Perhaps you would like
> to go look up what it means? Startle response occurs when something
> unexpected happens (generally a loud noise). If your attention is already
> focused on "shooting a gun", then you're confounding your timing.
>
> lena

The purpose of the training is to raise the gun skills to the point where,
like any other physical activity, it requires no actual conscious effort.
When this is achieved, the startle response remains a separate thing.
Perhaps you have never experienced this.