Do you really think there is that much advantage to carrying a full sized pistol?

[wildcatter109]

I'm a big boy so concealed care is easy fer me, and yes, I believe my full size 1911 commander sized pistol is my best option. even in shorts a T-shirt, and sandals I can easily carry it unnoticed, with 8 shots in a self defense situation I am well aware if I don't have the situation under control by the second or third shot,,,,,, I would be considered the casualty as well as victim. With good Law Enforcement ammo such as the Ranger T or Hydroshok I feel I have the finest CCW possible, by a huge margin when it is in the 8 shot V-BOB Valor.

I also agree if you can't comfortably carry a full size 1911, whatever you can carry 100% of the time comfortably is a better option, BUT, you are settling for works best for you. No High capacity or revolver from an SP-101 to a Springfield XD carry as comfortable as a thinner flatter 1911 inside a waste band pressing against you all day, regardless of build. I also know that if you need more than 2 or 3 shots against a threat you can legally engage with, you are not talking self defense, this will matter in a court of law, by then most treats have had to much time to take control of the situation.

Lastly under the definition of legal self defense, I want the best large caliber possible I can carry comfortably, every waking hour even in my house, with the largest round I can efficiently shoot with accuracy and speed, for me it is a 45 acp.

 

[WrongHanded]

Yes, yes it is. I shoot a Glock 26 better than a G17. I've got 35,000 rounds through G26s. When I take lessons its what I am shooting. Quite simply my hand knows a G26 better than any other gun. I will also say this at close range I shoot a G42 better than a G26. I don't know why but that little thing just shoots and I can dump a magazine and the sights never leave the target.

Full size guns are simply too big for most people to carry and conceal. There is a reason they are called service or duty guns and smaller guns are considered concealed carry guns. Its because its true.

Good job. You practice with what you carry, and now it's what you're best with. I seriously doubt most who regularly carry a sub-compact can say the same.

 

[bangbang01]

I'm a big boy so concealed care is easy fer me, and yes, I believe my full size 1911 commander sized pistol is my best option. even in shorts a T-shirt, and sandals I can easily carry it unnoticed, with 8 shots in a self defense situation I am well aware if I don't have the situation under control by the second or third shot,,,,,, I would be considered the casualty as well as victim. With good Law Enforcement ammo such as the Ranger T or Hydroshok I feel I have the finest CCW possible, by a huge margin when it is in the 8 shot V-BOB Valor.

I also agree if you can't comfortably carry a full size 1911, whatever you can carry 100% of the time comfortably is a better option, BUT, you are settling for works best for you. No High capacity or revolver from an SP-101 to a Springfield XD carry as comfortable as a thinner flatter 1911 inside a waste band pressing against you all day, regardless of build. I also know that if you need more than 2 or 3 shots against a threat you can legally engage with, you are not talking self defense, this will matter in a court of law, by then most treats have had to much time to take control of the situation.

Lastly under the definition of legal self defense, I want the best large caliber possible I can carry comfortably, every waking hour even in my house, with the largest round I can efficiently shoot with accuracy and speed, for me it is a 45 acp.

A lot of people will say that with modern expanding ammo you don't really get anything more out of a 45 than other service calibers, but i actually think it's the opposite. I've shot dead animals with ball ammo and I can't tell the difference between a 45 and my little 32acp, but with good HP ammo the 45 makes a pretty impressive hole compared toeven good 9mm hp ammo. I can't imagine a couple 3/4 inch holes in someones chest not causing a pretty fast incapacitation.

 

[bangbang01]

Good job. You practice with what you carry, and now it's what you're best with. I seriously doubt most who regularly carry a sub-compact can say the same.

Subcompact yes, but i can think of several compacts that shoot as good if not better than their full size counterparts for some people. One that really comes to mind is the CZ-p01 which is generally considered more acurate in general than a full size 75. Granted, where talking almost 30 years improvement in technology, but I can attest that the p01 with its 3.75" barrel is far more acurate for most people than a plane jane 75b.

 

[wildcatter109]

A lot of people will say that with modern expanding ammo you don't really get anything more out of a 45 than other service calibers, but i actually think it's the opposite. I've shot dead animals with ball ammo and I can't tell the difference between a 45 and my little 32acp, but with good HP ammo the 45 makes a pretty impressive hole compared toeven good 9mm hp ammo. I can't imagine a couple 3/4 inch holes in someones chest not causing a pretty fast incapacitation.

Yes, and for self defense I would never limit my life's value the way are military is required to by the Geneva Convention rules. Mine will be carrying a single stack of the finest Law Enforcement ammo available, and always in 230 grain, at current that is Ranger T 230's

 

[Klint Beastwood]

Hogue covention of 1899. Geneva convention is rights of a prisoner and a series of treaties.
The only thing convential fighting forces are limited to is more proficient training.

 

[Trunk Monkey]

but I can attest that the p01 with its 3.75" barrel is far more acurate for most people than a plane jane 75b.

Have you run most people through a qualification range to verify that statement?

 

[Trunk Monkey]

in a self defense situation I am well aware if I don't have the situation under control by the second or third shot,,,,,, I would be considered the casualty as well as victim.

Have you been in a lot of self-defense situations?

I mean what data are you basing this assertion on?

I also know that if you need more than 2 or 3 shots against a threat you can legally engage with, you are not talking self defense, this will matter in a court of law, by then most treats have had to much time to take control of the situation.

Lastly under the definition of legal self defense, I want the best large caliber possible I can carry comfortably, every waking hour even in my house, with the largest round I can efficiently shoot with accuracy and speed, for me it is a 45 acp.

Again I have to ask what's your level of qualification to make this claim?

Do you have a lot of experience litigating self-defense cases?

What university did you get your law degree from?

 

[Kleanbore]

in a self defense situation I am well aware if I don't have the situation under control by the second or third shot,,,,,, I would be considered the casualty as well as victim.

Where in the world did you get that idea?

I also know that if you need more than 2 or 3 shots against a threat you can legally engage with, you are not talking self defense, this will matter in a court of law...,

And that one?

 

[nettlle]

I carry a full sized gun. I carry full sized simply because in my experience I can trust them and shoot them better. I have tried smaller compact guns and have yet to find any that I trust for reliability and as accurate as my full sized. Not saying there aren't any smaller or compact guns out there but I haven't had one work out for me yet.

Would I switch from a full sized to a smaller, lighter, and just as accurate gun? I sure will if I find one. The smaller guns tend to be a little less costly also.

 

[bangbang01]

Have you run most people through a qualification range to verify that statement?

It's a more accurate pistol for most people. This doesn't just apply to people I personally know. That's one of the main reasons the Czech National police made the switch.

Here is an interesting link where you can read all about it as well as tons of other interesting facts

https://www.google.com

 

[Ironicaintit]

Sometimes I carry 6+1 of 380acp in a 238. Not often, but it does happen. I shoot it pretty well, and it carries so, so nice. Ya forget it's there.

My usual carry is 13+1 of 9mm Luger in a BHP. I carry this whenever possible, because I shoot it well, and having twice the ammo, and of a more potent cartridge, I feel is exteremely advantageous. It doesn't conceal as easily or as comfortably, but....meh. It's not so bad that the discomfort can't be dismissed.

 

[Trunk Monkey]

It's a more accurate pistol for most people.

Again, what hard data do you have to support that statement? Have "most people" been tested with both guns side by side?

Have "most people" been able to achieve an objectively higher score on a qualification range with one gun over the other?

Here is an interesting link where you can read all about it as well as tons of other interesting facts

https://www.google.com

I'm not the one who made the claim. It's not MY responsibility to provide supporting data to back up YOUR claim.

 

[wildcatter109]

Have you been in a lot of self-defense situations?

I mean what data are you basing this assertion on?
Most of my experience and knowledge, comes from working with a local LEO, holding three certificates for SD training, and qualifies 4 or 5 local and county and state LE agencies.


Again I have to ask what's your level of qualification to make this claim?
been there!

Do you have a lot of experience litigating self-defense cases?
no but do have 63 years experience working hunting and shooting with LEO's, and as I said, there first hand experiences and their teachings!

What university did you get your law degree from?

This is the BS most want to hear, what a book says, and what they read or hear from others that agree with them,,, like I said, mine comes first hand from those that deal with it every day, and teach, qualify, and save those that read books with closed ears!

The ammo choice is just one the FBI, State, local, and special agency's from LE, to the Military test and agree on. Any Law Enforcement ammo from big 4 is as good as you can buy today, and most will tell you skip the +p for self defense, the standard velocity is less recoil and easier to control, regardless your experience level. On other words if you are deadly with +P, you'll be even faster and better with standard.

 

[Trunk Monkey]

like I said, mine comes first hand from those that deal with it every day,

Is it FIRST hand or is it "from those who deal with it every day"? Which, by definition would be SECOND hand.

And how does any of that answer my question regarding your legal qualifications to tell us what is or isn't self-defense?

The ammo choice is just one the FBI, State, local, and special agency's from LE, to the Military test and agree on. Any Law Enforcement ammo from big 4 is as good as you can buy today, and most will tell you skip the +p for self defense, the standard velocity is less recoil and easier to control, regardless your experience level. On other words if you are deadly with +P, you'll be even faster and better with standard.

Again what's your level of qualification to make these statements? And when did I ever make any comment about ammunition?

 

[Trunk Monkey]

Ultimately yes there are quantifiable objective advantages to carrying a large gun over a small gun.

Longer Barrel higher velocity rounds.

Heavier gun reduced recoil.

Easier to get a full firing grip on.

Are the advantages enough to tip the decision to the full size gun? That's your call you live or die with your decision. In MY case they're not. I carry Glock 19 and I'm happy with it.

 

[wildcatter109]

Where in the world did you get that idea?
And that one?

Anyone who is in a self defense situation, means, your life must be in eminent danger. This does not mean threatened, you legally have to be engaged with a deadly weapon to even draw and threaten force with your firearm. That is taught by every CCW instructor I know, and two of them are LEO's, and one is certified instructor and runs qualifications the federal law requires for LEO's.

They all teach, the first shot is the most important, and with one or more threats, if you can't take them out, or at least one of them by the 3 rd shot, history shows most have lost their life trying. There are exceptions to everything, I don't rely on exceptions when my life is in danger, if I did I would just rely on someone else to take care of my threats in imminent situation of death for me!

I would be interested in hearing where you got your information thinking otherwise?

 

[Trunk Monkey]

Anyone who is in a self defense situation, means, your life must be in eminent danger. This does not mean threatened, you legally have to be engaged with a deadly weapon to even draw and threaten force with your firearm. That is taught by every CCW instructor I know, and two of them are LEO's, and one is certified instructor and runs qualifications the federal law requires for LEO's.

Care to cite the relevant statutes?

history shows most have lost their life trying.

What history please? Can you provide links?

I would be interested in hearing where you got your information thinking otherwise?

I think he got it in law school but you go right ahead and tell us how it's done

 

[Kevinq6]

I conceal carry in anticipation of killing my enemies in a gunfight and I prefer a full-sized pistol.

A full-size pistol:

1. Has more capacity if you confront three men committing robbery, a gang, or an active shooter

2. Has a larger grip, sight radius and slide, making it easier to fire accurately

3. Has more velocity … not as important as 1 and 2 above but it is nice.


If someone with a gun or knife were trying to kill me within 3-10 feet I would prefer a full-sized handgun to a subcompact with a 3in barrel, and I would prefer a more powerful round that would crush bones better to a smaller round as long as I could shoot it well.


If you like pocket carry or you find the larger handgun impractical, then obviously a subcompact is the right option for you.

 

[Trunk Monkey]

I conceal carry in anticipation of killing my enemies in a gun fight.

Wow, just Wow

 

[bangbang01]

Again, what hard data do you have to support that statement? Have "most people" been tested with both guns side by side?

Have "most people" been able to achieve an objectively higher score on a qualification range with one gun over the other?



I'm not the one who made the claim. It's not MY responsibility to provide supporting data to back up YOUR claim.

Well this is the thing, I'm not trying to debate you. I go on gun forums to learn or educate others, not to debate or argue. When someone makes a statement such as the one I have made, I generally pull up my big kid pants and research it to see if there is any validity to it in the form of empirical evidence. You sound like you're probably capable of that. I would probably start at CZ's website. Then I would look at various comparisons of data sets between the two pistols in question including the large sample obtained by the Czech national police agency as I previously pointed out. If I was still curious, I would crunch the numbers myself. Remember that central tendency theory is king with stuff like this. Never use the mean, and always go with the medium or mode. If that doesn't work for you, I would just go with the whole standard deviation thing. people on gun forums LOVE standard deviation. Even if you have no idea what any of this means, you should at least try to garner a basic concept of decision science/statistic as it will make you sound like a total boss when arguing just to argue on the Interwebs..........Godspead my friend.......Godspead!

 

[Old Dog]

Anyone who is in a self defense situation, means, your life must be in eminent danger. This does not mean threatened, you legally have to be engaged with a deadly weapon to even draw and threaten force with your firearm.

Well, that part would be wrong. Plenty of case law out there noting that "disparity of force" is a valid legal defense. Look it up.

As well, your life does not have to be in imminent danger. Case law also recognizes the use of lethal force to protect others from serious bodily harm or death.

 

[bangbang01]

This is the BS most want to hear, what a book says, and what they read or hear from others that agree with them,,, like I said, mine comes first hand from those that deal with it every day, and teach, qualify, and save those that read books with closed ears!

The ammo choice is just one the FBI, State, local, and special agency's from LE, to the Military test and agree on. Any Law Enforcement ammo from big 4 is as good as you can buy today, and most will tell you skip the +p for self defense, the standard velocity is less recoil and easier to control, regardless your experience level. On other words if you are deadly with +P, you'll be even faster and better with standard.

While I like some of the hard cast +p woods ammo meant for protection against animals, there just seems to be gobs of evidence out there that high quality name brand defense ammo like Winchester, Federal, Speer, Hornady.... etc are far more consistent performers brands like double tap or Buffalo Bore in regards expanding ammo. I do like some of Underwood's +p 9mm ammo, but they're literally using bullets designed by name brand manufactures. I have some of their +p gold dots and the recoil is no more than standard pressure 147 grain in a steel framed gun. I would never use it something like my Kel-tec pf9 for the very reasons you stated. +p in 40 or 45 is silly IMO. They already have the power and weight needed to open up nice and big.

 

[Old Dog]

How were you concealing your P229 so it wasn't obvious to the dentist and hygenist?

Un-tucked flannel shirt over a tee shirt, Kramer Belt Scabbard (OWB in horsehide) at 3 o'clock with a Kramer single mag pouch on the off-side.

 

[Kevinq6]

Well, that part would be wrong. Plenty of case law out there noting that "disparity of force" is a valid legal defense. Look it up.

As well, your life does not have to be in imminent danger. Case law also recognizes the use of lethal force to protect others from serious bodily harm or death.

Yeah, some states are worse than others but what you say is true.

For example, in TX you can shoot someone for the following:
1. 'theft or criminal mischief at night'
2. In defense of your own or others' lives if there is an immediate threat
3. If you are home and they break in (you can blow their head off the second they step inside)
4. There is also disparity of force (ie: if you are a 150lb woman being chased by a 250lb man you don't have to perform an extensive analysis on how bad he might rape you etc.)
5. To immediately retrieve items that were stolen by an armed robber
6. Rape (You don't have to give a warning)
7. Kidnapping (someone tries to drag you or someone else out of your car)

The list isn't exhaustive, just an example.