Normally, I am firmly in the libertarian camp of “live and let live” when it comes to how someone wants to spend their money. However, a graphic that I stumbled across on social media, provided a rather interesting perspective that I thought should be shared.
Specifically, it showed the cost of a custom built Glock 19 (a project I happen to be knee-deep into), adding in all the various tacticool goodies and their relative cost of ammunition that one gives up to acquire the total tacti-cool weapon. The trade-off? Just over 9,523 rounds of ammunition.
I’m not quite re-thinking the formal position, but it does shed some light on the opportunity cost of pursuing the best (or cool) equipment if one does not have the basic shooting skills down pat – a set of skills that 9,500+ rounds would have easily beaten into an individual assuming they have a good coach or are willing to do some self-diagnostics.
Divorcing myself from the implications, it is also a funny graphic, as I have often ran across those who look really good shooting versus knowing how to shoot. At the local 3-gun match last month, a fellow competitor was asking why I didn’t use a formal competition belt rig (I use a duty belt and mount gear directly to it) only for me to smoke him on time in the match (don’t worry, I got my comeuppance in the form a DQ last weekend).
What say our dear readers? Go straight for the toys or stick it out at stock weapons and shoot? Or, is there a balance between the two?