Discussion in 'Handguns: General Discussion' started by Great Scot, Jan 29, 2020.
Sure it is....
tcp 380 pocket carry.
I looked at my collection of pistols and realized with a couple tweaks I can upgrade my grab and go gun without dramatically changing how I carry and dress. My new G&G pebble pusher:
Is that CTC a light or a laser?
I’m a fatboy so I conceal nearly anything well enough. The smallest guns I own that I would carry are a Glock 42, and a Charter Undercover. When I carried I would grab the g42 most days, and back then I had a Taurus 405 that I would sometimes carry, similar in size to the charter, but much heavier. They were my all around carry guns. I see no realistic reason to buy other, smaller guns that would be “deep concealment” guns of marginal defensive ability. Besides, I don’t like changing the manual of arms around too much. If I get used to a couple guns I don’t want to have to figure out another one in an emergency type scenario.
It’s a CT laser. Helps compensate for relatively non-existent sights!
Grab and Go,
Glock 43x walking the dog
Glock 19 MOS walking with the family
AR Pistol in 300blk Walking in the woods
M4 walking in a Non-Permissive Environment
DL-44 walking in space
That little Sig is a nice piece of eye candy!
My exact feelings. I've got my CT380 on the side table beside my water glass at the moment. When I get up to go another room it comes with me and when I go to the mailbox I just slip it in my back pocket behind the money clip. Although i've thought of getting a SD9VE to use as as a straight up house gun for those lazy days when I stay home and loaf.
*When i'm home loafing on a day off i've usually got on either a pair of jeans or cargo shorts so the CT380 is usually on my person anyway. The only reason it isn't right now is because I showered when I got off work and am not wearing anything that can support carrying. If I have to go back out I'll just get dressed.
So the 3 criteria for your definition of a "Grab and Go" gun is that it be:
1) A "Pocket Pistol"
2) Marginal Caliber
3) Easy to shoot
My Rohrbaugh R9 sits in a DeSantis Nemesis holster. The gun in holster goes into my front pocket when I go out, and when I'm done, the gun in holster comes out of my pocket and goes into the nightstand drawer.
It is definitely a pocket pistol, and it is my Grab and Go gun, but it doesn't meet your other 2 criteria.
Barrel: 2.9 in
Length: 5.2 in
Height: 3.7 in
Slide Width: .82 in
Width at thickest part of pistol: .95 in
Weight: 13.5 oz, magazine 1.6 oz
Capacity: 6+1 Rounds
Sig P238. I'm as accurate with it at least with anything else I've owned or tried.
Yep. Here lately, when just working around in the barns or yard, rather than going anywhere, I just slip my P32 in my pocket. It gets in the way a lot less than my "out in the world," guns. (Steel Commander, or Model 10.)
Glock 42 in Desantis holster..grab, onto belt, walk out..takes 5 seconds.
Carry what you are comfortable with and what you can safely shoot and carry.
Have I carried a M27 tweenie barrel in a shoulder holster loaded with Dick Tracy engine block killers? yep
1911 and vairients inside the belt, shoulder holstered and Pouch? yep
but I have also carried .380s, .32s, even .25s and gosha a rooty .22 Short ( thank you Beretta)
At one point while I was living with a Colt Officers ACP my wife had a big event at a swank place in town and she expressed concern about my possible lumpiness or flashing. So an ancient Ortgies .25ACP I had been playing with of late went into pocket.
I was approached by two doctors at the party that knew my wife well enough to know I was a gun nut. A discussion followed and eventually I fessed up to having a .25 ACP on me to these two. Immediately they started with the "use enough gun" and telling me how ineffective the ,25 was.
I ask them if either had worked on a person wounded with a .25 and one said he had and the other was not sure "but either a .22 or a .25"
I asked if either of them knew anyone that would like to take even a chance of being shot with a .25 and it got quiet in that corner for a bit.
One said "But if you had to shoot a .25 would not be much" and the other smiled and nodded.
I then asked what they had to defend them selves with on the way to their cars tonight.
"Why, I am not carrying here!" again the second nodded in agreement.
I saluted them with my drink of soda and told them I at least actually did have a .25 in my pocket and asked who would be in better shape if a pair of thugs did stop one of us and a wife in the parking lot.
Lots of blinking. Fish mouth motions and "Oh...yeah..."
How about instead of ragging on one another for carry choices we encourage folks to be sure they can carry safely in a way that allows rapid and safe presentation with fast multiple shots at three yards or less and get back to hobby stuff?
ANY GUN is better than a sharp stick!
An oft-repeated cliche, and meaningless.
M&P Shield 9 disappears nicely with a Remora holster and appendix carry.
It takes the same amount of time to put on any of my holsters. But in the spirit of the thread, my : getting the mail, pajama party & swimming gun is a g42. I don't have an interest in carrying anything smaller (grip). I tried out a tcp a couple years ago, to say I couldn't shoot it well is an understatement - it was comical.
this. It gets carried about 10% of the time.
My advice to someone who asked would be carry the most gun (caliber) you can shoot safely and well -- and which you will actually carry regularly.
For me, that's generally a compact 9mm on the belt or a .380 in the pocket, or maybe -- occasionally -- a J-frame S&W with .38 +Ps.
Yeah, I can shoot .40s and .45s and .357s, I generally just don't enjoy carrying 'em.
Your life, your money, your gun, your pants ... your choices.
For around the neighborhood or yard, it's a 642-1. For shopping or other errands I'll carry a G27...if i must pass through any war zones (especially where those released prisoners are known to congregate) I'll take a G29 (with G20 mag).
If I have to “grab and go,” a J-Frame has generally been small enough for my pockets. For the rare occasions I wear trousers with insufficient pockets, I can grab a Safepacker, made by The Wilderness dot com. This can carry a serious pistol.
My only pistol that fires .22 LR is a Smith & Wesson Model 17-4 revolving pistol, a K-Frame. I have not owned a functional .25 ACP pistol since the Eighties.
Shooting small autos has generally been uncomfortable. I do have a Seecamp LWS-32 pistol, which is tolerable because the trigger is set quite far forward, so it is more like shooting a medium-sized weapon. I have not, however, tended to use it as a “Grab-and-Go” gun, but, instead, as part of a planned event, and this has been only occasionally.
Horses for courses. Risk management does not ONLY focus upon severity of consequence, but also frequency. Such the concession that carrying something smaller and less accommodating, but which has been statistically proven to be as effective in real world events, is a viable option in a lower risk profile scenario.
My EDC has been an LCP for many years, pretty easy to carry it as a “grab and go” pistol as well - consistency is key.
But as I said, horses for courses. There is no “grab and go” option for me because “grab and go” isn’t descriptive of the risk profile. My “grab and go jog 10 miles down and back the road in nothing but my shoes and board shorts” isn’t the same pistol as my “grab and go into town to a large super-market for milk” option (LCP and G19, respectively). My “grab and go walk the dog” option of late has been OC 3:30 belt carry of my SiCo Matrix. We walk 3-6 miles down and back the tracks nearby as it has less traffic than the highway - and being able to shoot and retain hearing for my son and my dogs as we make a long egress is a key advantage.
This is a well-stated other side of the 'always pack the max' argument.
YMMV, as per usual.
By 'frequency", we assume that you intended to say "likelihood".
Risk management encompasses likelihood, the severity of the potential consequences, and the availability and practicality of possible mitigation strategies.
In cases involving potential consequences that are extremely severe, likelihood pales in comparative importance, and mitigation becomes extremely important.
That's why we say "it's mot the odds, it's the stakes".
Should the risk occur, what would necessary to mitigate the consequences would have nothing at all to do with what the likelihood of occurrence might have been beforehand.
Noe, if we are speaking of a different risk (bear attack, or the need to pursue and apprehend violent criminals), we would consider different mitigation strategies.
I'm not sure what you think that might be.
As a professional in this particular field, you are out of your depth.
Separate names with a comma.