If you’re including all non-experienced shooters

Even if you include only gun owners that think they’re experienced, it’s still easy-ish to be better than average with focused practice. There are a lot of people that think going to the range once every six months and shooting 100 rounds of slow fire makes them good. Meanwhile, the people that are actually good do dryfire drills daily, and shoot thousands of rounds each month.

I’m solidly low-middle when it comes to shooting competitions like local PCSL, local USPSA, Brutality, Gun Run, etc. That probably puts me in the top 5% of gun owners though. (And I absolutely suck at long range shooting; I’ve done a little, but I don’t know my holds, because I’ve had very limited ability to shoot past 100y. I really struggle past 300y without a spotter, and past 500y it’s basically pure luck for me to hit a full-sized steel IPSC target.)

Absolutely. There are certain things that will make it easier–like having very good proprioception/kinesthesia, or perfect vision–but with enough focused time and practice, almost anyone can become a highly proficient shooter. Some people will definitely have an easier time than others, and some abilities in other areas will help more than others. And yes, you absolutely need to practice or else you’ll start losing your ability.

But.

As far as needing to be introduced to shooting early, absolutely not. There are a number of people that have moved to the US in their middle age from other countries (Korea, in particular) with no experience with firearms, taken up shooting, and have become USPSA masters and grand masters, because they understand how to practice.

Depending on what you want to learn, my first suggestion would be to look up NRA classes. Yes, yes, I know, but trust me, the NRA classes are very good for foundational work. You want to start with safety and get very, very familiar with that before moving on, because carelessness with a firearm can kill. From there, you can do something like Project Appleseed to get proficient with rifle marksmanship, or you can take classes with Ben Stoeger and Joel Park for pistol.

Hunting specifically is going to require far, far more than shooting ability; you’re going to need naturalist skills, like being able to see trail sign, land navigation, getting a feel for movement without spooking animals, and so on. For hunting, most of your time will be spent in observation and waiting, with only a single shot at the end of it all. Spending a lot of time outdoors, in the woods or fields, paying attention to animal behavior is your ‘practice’ for hunting.

Aside from all of this, something to consider is that the average shooter is… Pretty bad. Most people that own firearms don’t put in any significant amount of time training. The police are no exception; most cops are not terribly proficient with their weapon, because they only have to qualify annually, and qualification is slow fire at a target 10y away, not a practical shooting course.

There’s absolutely nothing wrong with the NRA rifle courses; the instructional courses are where the NRA really shines. The NRA as a 501©(4) is great. It’s the NRA-ILA that’s a steaming pile of shit.

The Socialist IRA is… Very dependent on the chapter. Some are fantastic, amazing groups. Some are very cliquish, and you’re going to need to know your theory cold and never, ever voice any contrary opinions in order to get membership. (E.g., if I say that I think that come degree of professional policing is necessary, both because not all criminals are a product of material circumstances, and because ‘community policing’ can be the autobahn to vigilantism and night riders, that would get me thrown out of some chapters.)

There’s also the Liberal Gun Club, which has some pretty decent people in it, but they’re as scattered as the SocialistIRA is.

Operation Blazing Sword lists instructors that are willing to work with LGBTQ+ people; I’m on there for one of the states.

Appleseed events are a great way of learning the basics of rifle shooting over 2 days. Some of the history they teach as fact is highly suspect–it’s more the American myth than American history—but they nominally keep contemporary politics out of it.

I opt for bitcoin because it has more utility value for me.

My bank makes it an enormous pain in my ass to buy things from overseas vendors; they won’t process any payments that are going outside of the US border. The rationale is ‘fraud’, even when you’re dealing with well-known and trusted vendors. Even when I try calling my banks and telling them to pre-authorize the charges, they won’t go through. The only way I can get around that within the established financial system is by using a 3rd party payment service; those 3rd party services make their money by lopping off a percentage of that purchase. E.g., if I’m buying something for $1000 from China (and we’re going to ignore tariffs, duties, taxes, and shipping costs for the moment), then I may have to pay $1040 for it, because of the fees that are taken out. On the other hand, if I’m buying from a trusted vendor, and I use bitcoin, I can just send it to them. Bitcoin doesn’t care where it’s going, and–assuming you don’t care about speed of confirmations–transaction fees can be quite a bit lower than using any other payment system. (And, BTW, transaction fees are built into all payment processing systems; it’s just not apparent to individuals on the purchasing end. That means that if something costs .001btc, then I have to send, say, .0010001btc to the vendor, but then the)

Speculation doesn’t play a role in it for me.

I have no direct use for gold; I can’t plate connectors.

Yes.

But many people–and I’m not saying you do this–but many people get gold, silver, and diamonds confused, and think that their intrinsic value is linked to their perceived value. does that make sense?

…Except that gold, like the dollar, and like bitcoin, has the value it does because people believe it does. Sure, gold’s a great semiconductor. But if that was all we used it for, the price of gold would be a tine fraction of what it is. Diamonds are great as abrasives and in certain cutting applications, but that’s all synthetic now. Natural diamonds only have high value because of artificial scarcity and advertising.

I named a black cat Svartur. I also had a cat named Potet. (“Black” and “Potato” respectively.)

I had a cat that my partner nicknamed pants. He answered to it.