Hi, I’m Steve, and I am a Fudd.
This is a term that is fairly new to me, having only learned of its existence and its meaning in the last year or so. A “Fudd” is someone in the gun world that is looked upon as old school, dated, out of touch, prehistoric in their attitudes and as such is at least quasi- irrelevant.
It is a common use term by the youngish generation now qualified to own and carry a handgun, which to be totally honest I just looked up and found it was Gen “Z”. Proof positive of my Fuddishness, already established.
Having a long memory, I remember when my generation had the same divergent attitudes to the old masters. In my 20s, I was interested in learning as much as I could and read everything that I can lay my hands upon. I once remarked after reading “Cooper’s Corner” on the back page of “Guns and Ammo”, that they were little more than the ramblings of an out of touch old man. In today’s language, the Colonel was a Fudd.
The fact is that I was on top of my physical game, as most young men are, I was also able to see the attractiveness of a new theory, eager to add my voice and name to the wave of modern thought. I was sure of myself, was proud that I knew what I was talking about and defended my position with passion. In short, I held a position that the world was only right if they agreed with me, and I think this was then and is now the hallmark of the young men – this new shooting generation, as well.
Fruit of my poison tree, likely. So, if I get the pushback now, and for that which I have already gotten, I have it coming, really. One always gets what one deserves.
The debate in the 80’s was that the old school guys were wheel gunners, or1911 guys, and we, the new brand of upstarts had our heads turned by that sleek European influence, both in guns and in cartridges. It was an Uber 9, and it was made in Europe: Sig, Beretta, or Glock. The old guys looked at these guns, and named them “crunchintickers”, in the case of the DA/ SA’s, and had no idea how to figure out the plastic gun that is the Glock.
The oceans of water that have passed under the bridge since then, one should consider the position of the 9mm, so opined as the ultimate by my late boomer generation. It was in, then out, then in again, then way WAY out- and now it is viewed as the ultimate. The Glock Uber 9 especially- is the starting point for the Z generation.
So, good start. We have common ground, thanks to the ebbs and flows of the business, Z has circled back to where I started. I carry a Glock, on occasion, so we are good, right? Well, maybe, maybe not.
Glocks are good, but not my favorite. My four guns all shoot a touch high, which aggravates me, a bit more than a little. I refuse to mess with mine, and add anything aftermarket stuff, figuring that Glock knows how to build guns, and Steve may not nearly as well. So, I put my trust in the guys that had made millions of guns, and Steve has made none, so mine remained untouched except for the most basic of modifications.
I don’t like the sights on a Glock, but won’t consider putting an electronic dot on one, either. I have exactly one pistol so equipped, a Sig 365XL that had previously shot to the right. My motivation in doing so is that if a fellow is teaching dots, he ought to be able to run one to teach one- and that worked out. At this writing, my intention is to never carry one for defensive purposes, only academic ones.
Major Fudd alert. If it makes a fellow hit better, which it does, isn’t it a necessity? No, no it is not. If a fellow shoots as well, or even nearly as well with irons that he does a dot, isn’t it a crutch for a man who can walk without one? In all humility, I can hit well, so it’s an unnecessary addition, so why live with the risk of failure? I am not willing.
This attitude makes me resistant to any modifications or additions that are not necessary or beyond the stock issue. I prefer a stock AR, iron sights, carrying handle, for the reasons mentioned above. My reasoning is that the AR was ultimately designed to be light, as an operator carries this rifle more than he fights with it, so light, as little weight as possible is its most pleasing virtue.
If I was going to put four pounds of accessories on a six-pound rifle, that makes a ten-pound rifle. I am beyond uninterested in carrying a ten-pound rifle. If I do, it will be a .308.
So, these are all signs of fuddyness, as designed by the Z gen. Other signs:
- I do not limit myself to striker fired pistols. DA/ SA’s, single stacks, single actions, revolvers, whatever- they all work, and are all adequate for the task at hand. The tool is much less important than the operator behind it.
- I can hit with it, I can fight with it. Guns are only interesting to me if they shoot to the sights.
- I do not limit myself to 9mm. I run 38s, 357Sig, 40s, 10s, and 45 ACPs. My favorite gun to carry is a 1911, 45 ACP Lt/Wt Commander length.
- I do not worship at the altar of capacity. A good shooting gun is better than an average shooting gun that holds a boatload of cartridges.
- I do not believe that the 9mm “stops” as well as more potent carry cartridges (faster, or larger caliber bullets). It is not “just as good with bullet improvements.”
- I refuse to point a loaded pistol at my genitals. Appendix carry for me? No thank you.
- No optics for me on defensive guns.
- No lights for me on defensive guns.
I think most of the division is centered around theory, versus real world practical experience. In my 20s, high capacity grabbed my attention, the Army’s endorsement of the Beretta found one shortly in my hands, and it remains there, a very good tool despite its shortcomings. Experience proved some assertions, dismissed others, forcing relooks.
It seems sage to respect the opinion of a fellow that has spent 30 years with his issued Beretta, and 39 years behind one, that he may know a thing or two about this platform. This informed Beretta opinion has more gravity, likely, than a fellow that has shot one fifteen times and with that small bit of experience has decided that this firearm is too big, too cumbersome, too difficult to operate, etc., at least theoretically. The difference between experience of 39 years and 15 rounds should speak volumes.
Maybe the fellow that is apprehensive in respect to red dots, has had one fail on him at a very inopportune time. Maybe? Maybe so.
My experience with handguns of different action types is over 40 years behind a DA revolver, 39 years with DA/ SA’s, 33 years behind Glocks, and 26 years behind a 1911. I know their strengths and weaknesses and can operate around those. It is the archer and not the arrow after all.
I find all these tools still viable, workable, but ultimately it is the shooter and not the tool. My experience behind all of these guns confirms this. So, theory is great, experience is greater, theory confirmed by experience, the best yet. Maybe the young Gen Z’er ought to listen to the old man when he tells you something and try to be polite if it is outside the theory that you have carefully adopted. Do more than that, file it away, and see if one day you notice the same. Fudd’s have value.
When I read Colonel Cooper now, I see the value, and experience. It is illuminating, and sage, when I convert from the cynical and self-interested promoter of my own preferences, and into food for thought to a lifelong student. He instructs me, furthers my experience, and I am able to use his Fuddishness to further my own. Colonel, I apologize, I find that we are on the same page.
I am a Fudd. You may call me General Fudd.