Carry choices, such a hard decision

Status
Not open for further replies.
Preciate the replies. I avoid Louisville. I do carry 24/7.


I'd say the gun I shoot the most is the flattop blackhawk. But, I shoot them all equally well and regularly.
 
Bazoo said:
I can hit a 6" plate at 25 yards, I can hit my 2/3 IPSC at 75 yards.
Click to expand...

That's good, so accurate shooting isn't an issue for you. I assume you're carrying for self defense purposes. Can you draw and fire 3 rounds into an 8" target, at say 21', equally fast with all of them? Self defense isn't so much about 25 to 75 yard shooting.
 
Right. Ideally assessing a shooter/handgun combination in the context of self-defense should involve some type of trials involving time, accuracy and testing the ability to use the gun one handed as well as with either hand. If the gun will be carried with extra ammunition, then it probably also makes sense to include an on-the-clock reload or two in the testing.
 
It's different, for everybody. I've never been bothered by people, but I've had to shoot a couple venomous snakes. Then again, spend a lot of time around the farm, so OC'ing a 629 or GP100 is no big deal, most of the time.

As to CC, for me, it was a gradual evolution from smaller full sized pistols to the Makarov knock off I carry now. There's a lot of great hardware out there, and what works for me may not work for you. You just have to try not to overthink it, but figure it out, for yourself.
 
@Bazoo I went back and read your original post. The GP100 will make a good carry choice in both 357 & 44 special. With either cartridge you can carry defense loads for 2 or 4 legged critters.

As @WrongHanded mentioned practice at close range is important. As is drawing and firing from your carry position.

Good luck in finding a GP100 44 special They are nice revolvers. You may want to look for a Charter Arms 44. I don't have one, but many THR members carry them as their CCW choice.
 
There's no way I'm going back to a revolver. It's not uncommon now to be facing three armed attackers. At least one of them is competent. Try some drills with 3 life sized targets. 2-3 rounds on each, any order you want to. 1911 is my minimum recommended capacity.

Reconsider your G22. In actuality, I think the .40 round is a generally better performer overall, than the .45.
 
I no longer have the g22. I stated I only have 4 handguns currently, in a previous comment.

I don't practice self defense much. I do practice some though, but I'm not a training buff like a lot of folks.

I carry as much for the enjoyment of the gun I am wearing as for the purposes of self defense. That's where the hard choice is, I know the 1911 is a better gun for self defense, but I like the other guns better.

I do practice my draw atleast once daily. And draw and getting shots on target from closer distances, with all my guns when shooting. I have practiced more, and at one time could do an el prez drill in under 10 seconds with my 1911. I have practiced half el prez drills and similar with single actions, and I practice reloading for speed with them all. Obviously I can reload the 1911 better. But I don't practice defensive drills much, other than draw and presentation, getting a quick couple shots on target, and a fast reload.
 
"We," the gun commuity, have a bit of a myth of "the one size fits all" or "the best possible" solution to all things firearms.

And Carry is one of those.

And, in reality, there isn't one universal solution. Instead, just as every individual is different, their individual solutions are different. And one is not better nor worse than the others; just different.

Now, "we," as a community, can be bullheaded and stubborn--we will tolerate less-than ideal solutions because "we" are convinced they are "good" (or "better" or "best" or whatever). That's down to the individual, not our community to decide.

Is that "efficient"? Possibly not. As a person could wind up with several appropriate "carry" arms. Which is not necessarily "efficient"--but owning more than one firearm is not necessarily "bad" either.
 
Bazoo said:
I've been carrying for over a decade. I carried a smith 642, glock 22, and now a 1911 in 45 acp. Amoung a few others, including occasional carry of single action Rugers such as my flattop blackhawk in 44 special.

I dont go places that are considered "bad" and I generally stay away from all trouble. My lifestyle is such, that I'm not as likely to be involved in a self defense situation as a more active, more town dwelling person. I generally stay home, I work from home, so my needs are not the same as what others might be.

I am considering, switching from my 1911 to a revolver, such as the gp100. But I have a hard time with that because I perceive the 1911 as better because of capacity and reloadability.

When I switched from a Glock 22, to a 1911, I was somewhat uncomfortable because of the perceived lack of firepower. I primarily switched because I like the 1911 better. And because I am a believer in bigger bore is better.

And that's the reason I'm considering switching again. I like revolvers better. I practice with them more as a result.

I currently have a gp100 in 357 magnum. That is one consideration in the switch, the caliber, 357. I prefer big bore cartridges. But when I am able to acquire one in 44 special, that would be my new love.

Have I lost my mind?
Click to expand...

Has any one of your choices been inadequate during your previous gunfire exchanges?

Honestly, just have a handgun on you that you can use under pressure. For me, that means something light and handy, with a simple manual of arms - for me the little Ruger .380 or Smith Shield in 9mm. Other than that, it is like choosing which wristwatch to wear - it is about personal preference rather than function, since they all mostly do the same thing. Chances are you will never need it, and just having any decent firearm will handle almost any conceivable scenario short of invasion by a squad of Nazi frogmen.

Although I have a hard time picturing a GP100 as a convenient carry gun. Unless you also need to pound framing nails.
 
Zerodefect said:
There's no way I'm going back to a revolver. It's not uncommon now to be facing three armed attackers. At least one of them is competent.
Click to expand...

Do you have some evidence to support this? Three armed attackers is common? Unless you are involved in the narcotics distribution industry, or are employed by personal protection services in Papua New Guinea, I have a hard time believing this.
 
No gunfights here. I stay clear of stuff like drugs and the associates that go with them.

I've read some statistics that, chances are you won't ever need a gun. And then, it's likely just deploying the gun without firing will be sufficient. Then, 1 shot is the most likely to be used. Though now I can't recall where I seen it.
 
roscoe said:
Do you have some evidence to support this? Three armed attackers is common? Unless you are involved in the narcotics distribution industry, or are employed by personal protection services in Papua New Guinea, I have a hard time believing this.
Click to expand...
Have you been watching the news in the past couple of weeks? "Packs" seems to be the thing, armed or not.
 
Kleanbore said:
Why?
Click to expand...

Because it suggests a pattern, based on evidence. Has someone collected data that suggests that three armed attackers has become a more common method of assault? I just don't see evidence of it anywhere. I have only ever seen this idea expressed in gun magazines, who have to hype the latest 12-round compact autoloader lest they lose advertising dollars.
 
Bazoo said:
No gunfights here. I stay clear of stuff like drugs and the associates that go with them.

I've read some statistics that, chances are you won't ever need a gun. And then, it's likely just deploying the gun without firing will be sufficient. Then, 1 shot is the most likely to be used. Though now I can't recall where I seen it.
Click to expand...
When you need a gun, you REALLY need a gun, doesnt matter where you are, or what you might think the circumstances are or might be.

You dont get to choose either, as much as you might think you do. "You" dont make the choice. You do get to choose what you carry.

Not knowing what you might get, wouldnt you at least hedge your bets, and try to carry something that will cover as many bases as possible, and not just one or two narrow scenarios that others tell you to expect?

Statistics are great and all, but they are just some sort of average, based on who knows what and by whom. Im pretty sure we all hope, whatever they are, that we never need to find out. But if youre going to plan, do you hope for the best case, or plan for the worst?

Personally, I dont really care where it is in the curve, if its happening, thats bad enough for me. :)

Luckily too, 99% of most duty and compact-sized handguns are easily carried on a daily basis, so you can easly cover your bases through most of the curve.
 
roscoe said:
I am not shooting a bunch of teenagers stealing handbags from Niemen Marcus.
Click to expand...
What about multiple teenagers attacking you on your way home through a peaceful protest? :)

Multiple attackers "are" the weapon, weapons or not. ;)
 
Bazoo said:
No gunfights here.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but armed and strong-armed robberies, car-jackings, burglaries, and muggings occur everywhere.
Bazoo said:
I've read some statistics that, chances are you won't ever need a gun.
Click to expand...
Ever is a long time. The likelihood is remote, but the longer the period, the higher the chance.
Bazoo said:
And then, it's likely just deploying the gun without firing will be sufficient.
Click to expand...
That does happen.
Bazoo said:
Then, 1 shot is the most likely to be used.
Click to expand...
Defenders are usually trained to fire until the threat is neutralized.
 
trackskippy said:
When you need a gun, you REALLY need a gun, doesnt matter where you are, or what you might think the circumstances are or might be.

You dont get to choose either, as much as you might think you do. "You" dont make the choice. You do get to choose what you carry.

Not knowing what you might get, wouldnt you at least hedge your bets, and try to carry something that will cover as many bases as possible, and not just one or two narrow scenarios that others tell you to expect?

Statistics are great and all, but they are just some sort of average, based on who knows what and by whom. Im pretty sure we all hope, whatever they are, that we never need to find out. But if youre going to plan, do you hope for the best case, or plan for the worst?

Personally, I dont really care where it is in the curve, if its happening, thats bad enough for me. :)

Luckily too, 99% of most duty and compact-sized handguns are easily carried on a daily basis, so you can easly cover your bases through most of the curve.
Click to expand...

I am not saying not to carry a gun. I carry one. But I am saying that we need not to get to absurd about it. It is like airbags and seatbelts in cars - wearing one is fine, but if we were told to wear crash helmets and neck braces for the .00001% possibility of a head-on collision with a dumptruck, most of us would balk.

Carrying a small auto, or a j-frame is like a seatbelt+airbag. Unless you are on the racetrack, you are extremely unlikely to need more. Obviously, lightning can strike, but it is pretty rare (although I have been struck twice).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

F
  • Locked
Need Advice On Bug
Replies
7
Views
466
Alex45ACP
A
A
  • Locked
Need some input on ccw carry choices.
Replies
4
Views
509
Doc
D
mljdeckard
  • Locked
I am down an arm.
2 3
Replies
74
Views
3K
scaatylobo
S
B
  • Locked
Switching from a Glock to a 1911.
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
roo_ster
roo_ster
Bazoo
  • Locked
Carrying a gun you like.
2 3 4 5 6 7
Replies
165
Views
4K
Jeff White
J
Back
Top