Shooting from the Pocket

[rhoggman]

I posed this question in another thread, but I really wanted it to be its own topic. I have wondered about this many times not, and I believe it is a valid question.

Who would shoot a gun inside there pocket? Only people that watch movies too much, I would suspect.

I have wondered about this as well. People make this argument often when praising the benefits of a revolver and it makes sense that it would operationaly be more adventageous to shoot a revolver covered by fabric, than a semi-auto in the same situation, but who the hell would shoot from inside a pocket anyways?

Then again it is really kind of hard to surmise about what type of situation you could end up in. The possibilities are endless to the credit of the "pocket shooters".

Needless to say... the ability to shoot from the pocket or lack there of has never influenced my reasoning behind a firearm purchase. Unless you plan to carry in a large jacket pocket this is pretty worthless. Personally, I like to keep my handguns closer to my body. I would never throw a firearm in a jacket pocket where it could flap around. To each there own....

Would there be any safety issues involved in fabric covering the muzzle? I would like to see a Myth Busters episode on this.

 

[RacingJake]

Aiming might be alittle harder plus a flaming pocket might be nice on a cold day

Let us know how it works out

 

[twoclones]

who the hell would shoot from inside a pocket anyways?

Perhaps someone who had their hand on the gun and was pinned in a corner, fearing for their life, but unable to draw?

 

[walker944]

I agree with twoclones. It would be pretty stupid and potentially life limiting not to, at that point. Don't think I would ever practice it at the range, but in a life or death situation...hell yes!!

 

[Hawk]

I fired up a dedicated "shoot from pocket" thread in the revolver forum a while back and the general consensus was that it was a strained thread and disappeared off the bottom of the page in short order.

SM had a plausible "lady at bus stop" scenario but I got the impression one derived comfort more that actually shot from that position.

I saw a Clint Smith revolver course description where it was suggested one bring on old coat. It was unclear if Clint was going to use it as "pocket shooting training" or a "prime example of a bad example" debunk exercise. I suppose I could just email him and ask but haven't done so as yet.

In the Clint Smith gimme DVD which accompanyied my x25 he made specific note that revolvers had to be held away from one's body more than a semi at one point in the draw due to the inadvisabilty of lighting yourself up from the barrel / cylinder gap.

I wound up concluding that there was much more talk about the "technique" than actual use, that gap flash was generally forgotten and that it did not constitute a real "advantage" of a revolver over of semi. It makes for some interesting intertubz grist for revolver "love" and "versus" threads but that's about it. It fits right in with "still works pushed into somebody's gut" as an indication that one's tactics have already suffered from such a profound failure that one's choice of firearms is largely moot.

 

[Duke of Doubt]

I've practiced it at the range using a Goodwill topcoat.

Heck, I've done just about everything at the range you can do in an old topcoat.

First thing I noticed was, you obviously can't see the muzzle so you tend to push the gun forward in the pocket to "see" it. This printing is worse than drawing the gun, as it telegraphs your intention without actually putting the gun sights and/or muzzle in your field of vision, and is done slowly and deliberately, thus wasting more time while the other guy draws, aims and shoots.

In an emergency I might try a pocket shot, but the printing of the barrel while you instinctively try to "see" it and point it shows the gun to your assailant, and loses you time that he'll spend to draw, aim and shoot.

 

[CoRoMo]

...pinned in a corner, fearing for their life, but unable to draw?

That scenario throws caution to the wind.
I'd fire it from inside there and draw it out and continue.

 

[CWL]

Never tried it since I'm not a 'wheelie' man.

I do plan on getting a S&W 642 this year with the shrouded hammer. It will aid in fast draws, but seems like it would suit emergency pocket firing as well.

I will have to remember the barrel/cylinder gas issue.

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

In a magazine article a few years ago, there was an article on shooting revolvers from a coat pocket. IIRC it did not really address the practical utility. What surprised me the most was that each shot left three holes in the pocket - one (obviously) from the bullet exiting, but also two more, a large rip/tear on either side from the cylinder gap blast.

In no case was the author able to set anything on fire, even with tissue paper inside the pocket surrounding the revolver. And, as you might imagine, it didn't take long to blow even the trench coat/pocket to shreds.

 

[yeti]

It's not something I would want to do, and I will likely never even practice doing it, but it's not bad to have it in your mind that it is an option. If things have gone so bad that this seems like a good idea, it probably is. Kind of like the passengers rushing the cockpit on Flight 93, normally not a good thing to do, but if it is all you have left, it is a brilliant idea.

Even a bad plan is better than no plan.

 

[rhoggman]

I guess I never really realized that the cylinder gap issue could be that harmful.

That is good info to know..... It blew two extra holes in a coat pocket.

I have never held a revolver super close to my face. I have always shot one held in my hand with my arm extended, and I'm always in the habit of standing to the rear of others who are shooting.

I'll make sure to keep this in mind when shooting my 44 Mag as well. Now I know fore sure there are a few things it needs to be far awat from when it goes off.

 

[Eightball]

Then again it is really kind of hard to surmise about what type of situation you could end up in.

This is it, right there.

Just because you don't plan/think a situation is even in the realm of likely possibilities doesn't mean it couldn't happen. While I can't think of a real situation where I'd LIKE to be firing it from inside a pocket......I'm sure I'll recognize the situation if it happens.

 

[Hawk]

Just because you don't plan/think a situation is even in the realm of likely possibilities doesn't mean it couldn't happen. While I can't think of a real situation where I'd LIKE to be firing it from inside a pocket......I'm sure I'll recognize the situation if it happens.

I'd go along with that.

However, when the "pocket shot" is postulated it's generally not accompanied by the assertion that a semi-auto won't fire from a pocket - it's generally assumed that a semi-auto won't do it repeatedly from inside a pocket.

The semi-auto goes back-and-forth, the revolver goes round-and-round and neither are things easily accomplished given the trash generally found in my pockets.

They'll each likely get off one shot, the revolver would seem to have a better chance of getting off the 2nd and subsequent shots if left where it is. Personally, it'd seem as likely as anything else that one would simply draw after the first "it's under duress so it's from my pocket" shot.

So, in order for "pocket-ability" to be a realistic "advantage" we have to start with a near implausible scenario and further torture it by insisting that it remain in the pocket while the cylinder is emptied all while not getting a liner wrapped around the axle tieing it up. Or scorching the family jewels sufficient to offer distraction.

Or, IMHO, not a good criteria on which to base one's choice of weapon type. A revolver's behavior in one's pocket being as described may be plausible but it's not really an advantage in the world we live in. Similarly, a revolver is round about the middle. The property of being round about the middle is neither an advantage nor a disadvantage, it simply is what it is - no points gained or lost.

There's an unfortunate tendency in the threads where "pocket shots" are invoked to take note of a characteristic (such as being round) and claim it as an advantage when it is simply a characteristic without advantage or disadvantage.

 

[Doc_Jude]

Some instructors (such as Michael deBenthencourt) teach pocket shooting by inserting the gun and hand into a pocket-like cloth sack, since he teaches that knowing what the heat in a pocket will feel like is the most important aspect of the shooting. The ranges that one would be shooting at that would require pocket firing are almost guaranteed to be within 10'. If you can't hit a human torso w/in 10' with a few hrs worth of practice, you have more to worry about than the utility of pocket firing.

http://www.snubtraining.com/pdfs/snubby.pdf
http://www.snubtraining.com/pdfs/WhyRevolversBeatAutos.pdf
http://snubtraining.com/pdfs/womenGuns0208.pdf


I read an article recently about detectives and undercover cops moving back to 3” snubs (3” for velocity and reloading ease, mostly concerning S&Ws). The intimidation & shock value of the muzzle blast from a 3” .357 and the ease of firing from within a jacket pocket were both important points for them and their mission parameters.
Imagine a hobo walking down the street with his both hands in his coat pockets (read UNDERCOVER COP) getting ambushed. No one would be the wiser… until he pushes both of his 686Ps through the slits in the front of his pockets and opens up point-blank on somebody. Pulling the tiggers alternately VERY QUICKLY is a terrible force to be faced with, and at typical engagement ranges can be trained to develop tremendous accuracy.

 

[Hawk]

This may be a "cart and horse" sort of thing.

Which is to say, if one has already committed oneself to the round gun it would certainly make sense to learn as much as possible and to maximize its quirks wherever possible. This would apply to the revolver being one's sole carry weapon or sharing time with a semi-auto.

But one wouldn't take any of these quirks as reason to commit oneself to the platform in the first place. At least not exclusively.

First platform then quirk training.
Not
"Gee that's a cute quirk, I'll choose the platform thereby".

This would not seem to be totally at odds with what Mr. de Bethencourt notes on SnubTraining's home page.

The snub will never replace the semi-auto pistol but it is a commonly carried substitute for the semi-auto pistol.

If you occasionally carry a snub as either a back-up weapon or as a regularly carried primary weapon let me invite you to register for one of our snub training programs.

If you never need the skills we can share with you, you will still enjoy a day on the range and will certainly discover a variety of uncommon self-defense snub skills by day's end. ...

Makes good solid sense to me.

It's the "revolver is a better choice 'cuz you can shoot from a pocket / buried in somebody's gut ... " tap dance that so often occurs in the revolver forum that simply doesn't make a lick of sense to me.

 

[Doc_Jude]

Actually, considering the actual odds of getting in a "shoot-out", and considering the average range they occur at, and considering the average number of assailants... the 5-6rnd snub revolver will do the job just fine. All the experts say: you run out of time before you run out of ammo. Something simple, easy to carry and manipulate during adrenal rush, something with more than sufficient caliber will put the "time" aspect of a life or death confrontation more in your favor.

 

[jaysouth]

I walked a beat in a "distressed" neighborhood. My issue piece was a Smith M-10 revolver. Backup was 6 extra rounds in belt loops. All this under a blouse or reefer in cold weather.

I Never did feel unarmed or under gunned. Two shootings that I attended up close were decisively ended with .38 Spl lead round nose slugs. Not saying a hot 9mm or modern .45 JHP wouldn't be better, but we did very well with what we had.

At the ranges at which social situations occur, a J frame revolver works just fine. I have lots of shiny 1911s that I fondle and admire, but my carry piece is a 37 with bobbed hammer or 642. I got the 642 because it would shoot from inside a pocket without an exposed hammer getting tangled in clothing.

If you do practice shooting from inside a pocket, have a friend standing by with a hose or fire extinguisher. Ask me how I know.

 

[MCgunner]

My question is, who the hell wears a coat? This might be an issue up in yankee land, but not here. Heck, I haven't worn a coat in two weeks! Oh, if I get on the motorcycle for very far and a front has blown through, I'll wear my riding jacket. On the few cold days we get, I wear one outside, but will take it off indoors. We had some cool weather in January, about 3 weeks worth. It was 80 degrees here today and very low humidity thanks to a pacific "cold" front.

Anyway, it's not cold enough down here to count on wearing a coat of any kind. Firing out of my pants pocket does not sound like something I wanna try.

 

[rondog]

I carry a Model 49 shrouded hammer 5-shot .38 snubbie all the time, but it's in my jeans pocket in a DeSantis Nemesis holster, not in a jacket or coat pocket. I couldn't fire it from my jeans pocket while in the Nemesis holster if I wanted to, the holster completely covers the trigger guard. It would be quicker to just draw it first.

 

[Jim K]

I was once in a very bad area and didn't want to show a gun, but I kept my hand on my Centennial in the pocket of my jacket. Would I have fired through the pocket if attacked suddenly? Yep. I can buy a new jacket, buying a new me is harder.

If you wear an overcoat, wear the kind with pocket slits; that way you can keep a hand on the gun but keep it hidden. To fire, just flip the coat aside.

Jim

 

[Delaware_Dan]

I would like to see someone try it with a Crown Royal bag. Put the bag right over the hand, it would give the shooter a pretty good idea of what would happen.(if anyone does this please film it) On that note I would shoot through my pocket if need be.

 

[Hawk]

The Crown Royal bag sounds like a fun experiment and it's making me curious about something else.

Once the pocket gets big enough, doesn't a mid-sized semi-auto start running just fine again? If so, we could have some fun speculation about pocket shots in general without invoking the "versus" demon that seems to haunt revolver/autoloader threads.

When I first heard of snub-nosed "pocket shots" I admittedly suffered a failure of imagination thinking the thing was in one's relatively tight jeans pocket making it equally likely one would take out one's own femoral artery as much as anybody else's and would preclude the (repeated) use of any autoloader. "Not so", I was advised, "we're talking coat pockets and being able to cover someone surreptitiously."

That makes for a pocket rather larger than a Texan can readily imagine based on his (my) own wardrobe. I'm reminded of a day last summer when one individual wearing a London Fog sort of trenchcoat came into a chicken wing place named for the sound owls make - he attracted a great deal of attention and was interviewed extensively before being allowed in, but I digress. Pockets of that nature would probably work for semis or revolvers.

Hmmmm. I can see me trying the STI in a liquor bag if the staff at the range wouldn't dog pile me at the sight of the experiment.

 

[JImbothefiveth]

as anything else that one would simply draw after the first "it's under duress so it's from my pocket" shot.

If I fired it once in the pocket and then drew it, I wouldn't want my firearm to be jammed. But I don't think that alone is a significant enough aspect to base choice of firearm on.