5-Shot Snub: Enough Gun?

[TxUplander]

Here's a suggestion: before you try shooting from q garment that you are wearing, remove a pocket and shoot from it while it is not on your person and whare you can see it. Observe the effect of the gases from the barrel-cylinder gap without risking bodily harm.
Someone already provided the video.
Demonstrating that a firearm can be firred from a pocket has already been done. It will not and cannot test a theory that is would be an effective defensive tactic.
How have your weapons and tactics been PROVEN effective? We can talk in circles for eternity and nothing changes.

 

[Kleanbore]

If you cant shoot without being shot

Do you believe that handgun wounds will prevent an assailant from firing? hit: there ia no guarantee. Even if you destroy his heart, his brain will function and enable him to puil the trigger for up to fifteen seconds. Did you know that?

 

[TxUplander]

Is there any part of GEM's post with which you acually fie hurt, or is the debate hurting your feelings?

The point i was trying to make has been proven with video evidence.

 

[Kleanbore]

Perhaps certain people prefer the lighter platform of a scandium / titanium revolver because they simply do not encounter people…ever

Why do they carry at all?

Keep in mind that the likelihood that deadly force will be needed and what force will be needed in the event are not related.

 

[TxUplander]

Do you believe that handgun wounds will prevent an assailant from firing? hit: there ia no guarantee. Even if you destroy his heart, his brain will function and enable him to puil the trigger for up to fifteen seconds. Did you know that?

Are you incoherent? It was brought up that shooting from a pocket wasnt an effective technique because the “assailant” may not be immediately incapacitated and shoot you anyway. HOW DOES THAT FACT CHANGE IF DRAW YOUR SEMI AUTO AND SHOOT HIM?

 

[Kleanbore]

The point i was trying to make has been proven with video evidence.

There is video showing a number of things:

• Some attackers keep coming after having been struck by 12 rounds.
• Some stop at the sight of a gun.
• It is possible to shoot through a jacket pocket.

What point is it that you believe to have been demonstrated?

 

[mavracer]

Where did you get that idea?

There is a lot to be said for that. We chose a 6 shot Kimber K6a.

Because you continuously post that 5 isn't enough for a multitude of reasons but that 6th round is magical.

 

[Kleanbore]

Are you incoherent? It was brought up that shooting from a pocket wasnt an effective technique because the “assailant” may not be immediately incapacitated and shoot you anyway

No. That was not the point, though it is a true fact..

The point is that it is not reasonable to believe that a shot made with very little precision is likely to prove effective in in immediately stopping someone who is already in a position to shoot you at point-blank range.

That's it, period

 

[WisBorn]

I carry a snubby most of the time as well. Just because I like my 442 it doesn’t mean I have to carry it all the time. I do have other guns to carry. I have recently broken in my Glock 48. It has over 500 trouble free rounds through it. I just need the right holster. Even when I carry that there is a very good chance my 442 will also be carried in an ankle holster.

What really gets me is some people think that if you carry a snub nosed revolver, like them or defend them that somehow you must carry it at all times or must be carrying it at all times in their mind,
I own a Mazda Miata. Fun little car. Gets great gas mileage. I also have a Chevy Suburban and a Kawasaki motorcycle. If I go buy a piece of furniture or a bunch of home improvement supplies in my Miata or on my bike it wouldn’t make a whole lot of sense. I would drive my Suburban. Just as if I am going somewhere local in my very low crime neighborhood I am pretty sure I won’t need my Glock 45 and 2 spare mags. I can carry my 442 (Miata). If I head to Pittsburgh or some unknown location for some reason I take a Glock (Suburban).

I love my 442, but I don't fit in a Mazda Miata They are a cute little car

 

[TxUplander]

There is video showing a number of things:

• Some attackers keep coming after having been struck by 12 rounds.
• Some stop at the sight of a gun.
• It is possible to shoot through a jacket pocket.

What point is it that you believe to have been demonstrated?

Why dont you read entire responses instead of cherry picking partial sentences to address? Ive stated my position and its been sufficiently proven now. Not much else i can say about it……and it wouldnt much matter anyway. You will continue to argue “something” (i still dont know what your actual position on the subject is) just for the sake of arguing. Ill go with the element of surprise over thinking im fast enough to draw on someone who has the drop on me EVERY TIME.

 

[TxUplander]

No. That was not the point, though it is a true fact..

The point is that it is not reasonable to believe that a shot made with very little precision is likely to prove effective in in immediately stopping someone who is already in a position to shoot you at point-blank range.

That's it, period

Youve already stated that the very best shot cant be counted on to stop someone immediately. So, you are just talking in circles and saying nothing. I think your lack of objectivity should preclude you from being a “moderator”, but i digress. You can be anything you want on the interweb.

 

[mavracer]

The point is that it is not reasonable to believe that a shot made with very little precision is likely to prove effective in in immediately stopping someone who is already in a position to shoot you at point-blank range.

It's far more reasonable than belief that you could draw a gun from concealment when someone is already in a position to shoot you

So you don't think shooting from a retention position is a skill one should have?

 

[Kleanbore]

Ive stated my position and its been sufficiently proven now

I have not seen anything to prove that a pocket shot at close range can reasonably be counted upon the effect a stop sufficiently timely to stop an assailant from firing.

(i still don't know what your actual position on the subject is)

You're kidding!

 

[Kleanbore]

So you don't think shooting from a retention position is a net positive?

It may well be the thing to do.

I do think that when that becomes necessary, the comply/resist decision is a moot point.

 

[Kleanbore]

Ill go with the element of surprise over thinking im fast enough to draw on someone who has the drop on me EVERY TIME.

Yes, pulling a gun on someone sho has a the drop on one is rarely prudent. I wouldn't want to try it.

At that point, compliance may be well the best strategy

 

[mavracer]

I have not seen anything to prove that a pocket shot at close range can reasonably be counted upon the effect a stop sufficiently timely to stop an assailant from firing.

That's a strawman argument. Who said he has to have a gun?

You're kidding!

I'm quite sure he's not you're position appears untenable.
We should carry more than a 5 shot snub in a pocket because you can draw faster if the guy surprises you up close, but you need to give up anyway.

 

[bearcreek]

Popcorn?
Pretty sure you'll see at least some smoking, smoldering cloth (maybe some melted nylon?)

Shooting from a jacket pocket should be at least as accurate as any other retention positions. And no it won't catch the jacket on fire.

That depends on the gun, the load, and the jacket material. I've seen a jacket catch fire from a comped semi auto fired in the retention position. No reason a revolver wouldn't do the same inside a pocket, given the right circumstances.

330+ post later and we still have resolved nothing!

and that's just in this thread. Doesn't even count the numerous other threads discussing the exact same subject. I wonder if anyone has ever changed their mind due to one of these?

 

[trackskippy]

So you would prefer that an elderly relative not be able to protect themselves if they arent able to get training that satisfies YOUR idea of adequate? What is SCARY to me is people like you who thinks someone needs to EARN their right of protection by your standards!

My idea of basic and adequate is to at least have enough knowledge and experience to be safe with the gun and at least reasonably competent in its use, just for your or their own safety.

But of course, you may think its something totally different.

Who said anything about earning the right? Everyone has the right, but in the same vein, everyone has the responsibility to be competent and proficient with what they chose to use, and responsible for their actions should they choose to use it. I dont want to be collateral damage, and get shot by you because you couldn't bother to do that and accidentally shoot me when you were trying to shoot someone else or fumbling around with a gun in your pocket.

 

[Kleanbore]

That's a strawman argument. Who said he has to have a gun?

The poster discussed saying "please don't shoot me".

Of course, a bladed weapon would pose a real threat.

 

[toivo]

These threads always go south eventually. This one seems to have gone to polar Antarctica. Here's another 2¢:

10 rounds is twice as good as 5 rounds. 15 rounds is three times as good as 5 rounds. 5 rounds is infinitely better than no rounds.

 

[Kleanbore]

and that's just in this thread. Doesn't even count the numerous other thread discussing the exact same subject.

This one's a little different. It has covered capacity, DA trigger pull, pants pocket carry, jacket pocket carry, shooting from a pocket, shooting from a retention position (thanks, Mavracer), compliance vs resistance, and other things.

I wonder if anyone has ever changed their mind due to one of these?

Yes. In one of these threads years ago, JohnKSa posted an analysis that calculated, based on assumed hit rates and on an assumption of the number of hits requried to effect a stop, for various capacities, starting with 5 and working up.

It was eye-opening. Five was awful with one attacker and much worse with two. And I had never really analyzed how much better six can be than five.

I had been carrying a 642 in a pants pocket. I set it aside from primary carry, partly because of John's post and partly because of a training class.

I still believe that pocket carry has its place (in a holster), and I believe that snub revolvers have their place. When my wife wanted a revolver, we bought a Ruger SP-101 and had the hammer bobbed.

When the six-shot Kimber came on the market, I snapped one up immediately. The higher capacity was one reason, but the much better trigger pull was important also.

 

[mavracer]

The poster discussed saying "please don't shoot me".

His original post was that you could shoot from a pocket. He offered up "please don't shoot me as a possible scenario. As usual you've taken it to task that that's the only possibly.
And your position is still untenable saying that pocket carry is a bad idea because of this scenario when you would still at least have the option to shoot. With this scenario carrying on a belt in a holster you have none.

 

[bearcreek]

I must say that I do find it interesting that 2 of my posts in this thread have disappeared. I guess that’s what happens when you aren’t making an approved point.

One thing threads like this sometimes do is galvanize people one way or another. Especially when they become combative. This is The High Road, right?

I've had one of mine disappear as well. It was just a fun post commenting about the zombie horse that keeps getting beaten here.

I had been carrying a 642 in a pants pocket. I set it aside from primary carry, partly because of John's post and partly because of a training class.

Therein lies the key. Way too many folks out there who have very set opinions on the subject based on nothing other than what they read or watched on the internet. Hands on instruction from a professional, experienced trainer is critical, IMO. It's eye opening, and affords a person the ability to come at these decisions from a position of at least some level of practical, rather than purely theoretical, knowledge.

 

[mavracer]

It was eye-opening. Five was awful with one attacker and much worse with two. And I had never really analyzed how much better six can be than five.

One would think as much as you post about the subject you would do that.
6 is awful as well with one attacker and a 30% hit rate you still fail to get 2 hits over 40% with 2 attackers that jumps to over 90%

 

[Old Dog]

WOW! You must be incredibly unlucky to have been involved in so many gun fights! Or perhaps you have watched a few training videos and like to talk about it as “experience”?

Sigh. Twenty years in law enforcement, sixteen years as a certified firearms and use of deadly force instructor, twelve years on a tactical team. Actually, I was quite fortunate as none of these were my gunfights, but I was peripherally involved in the sense that I have responded to incident scenes, reviewed camera footage from dashcams, bodycams, security cameras, interviewed victims, suspects, witnesses, reviewed incident, arrest and investigation reports as well as conducted a few investigations. So perhaps I should have used a disclaimer, such as "cases that I was familiar with." My bad.

Oh, and I've watched a lot of "Cops," "Live PD" and "On Patrol" on TV

For the record, I've been present at training where someone demonstrated shooting from a coat pocket and from inside a purse. As purely a last-ditch self-defense effort, one might get lucky.

Anyway, I'm outta this one (for a while, at least). Gotta remember stuff like the advice in Proverbs 26:17.