I'm trying to envision a situation where as a chl holder you are taken totally by surprise, have one second to pull back your garment, draw and fire 3:10 to yuma style. I'm also trying to picture the pile of bodies stacked up like cord wood of those who carried their 1911 that day instead of their Glock and could not get it to fire. It has all been good for a chuckle, that is for sure.
I Do Not Rotate My Carry Guns
- Thread starter Trunk Monkey
- Start date
- Status
The Lone Haranguer
Member
Whatever floats your boat.
You know your own abilities better than anyone. There isn't really a good argument for "rotating" guns with different operating systems and control placements.Posted by chaosrob:
And speed is likely to be very necessary for a successful defense. One second? A little tight. Try a second and a half.
I do not know how the phrase "3:10 to yuma style" applies, but a chl holder outside of his or her domicile who is not taken by surprise should have addressed the threat in a manner that did not involve a firearm.
And speed is likely to be very necessary for a successful defense. One second? A little tight. Try a second and a half.
"Muscle memory" is a REAL and deeply researched subject. Due to this we have culled our collection of any pistols that have a magazine release other than a right side "button" release. Had previously owned Walthers and H&K's, (absolutely well made firearms) but the position of the magazine release was the clincher. We are now back to Glocks and 1911 platforms for carry. Have a few revolvers in the safes, but they are not generally our carry choice.
I thought a lot of this lately and come down to the main point and that is to have a gun. So ultra light and compact are my needs, Colt XSP 380, Colt 38 agent and S&W 61 22LR. I switch depending on how well they conceal. I can hide the revolver well in the winter months and its the most powerful, but less so in the summer months.
wally
Member
People biased against external safeties don't seem to realize that once you are used to having them you wipe them off on the presentation even if they aren't there. The only thing that would really mess you up are the safeties that rotate the "wrong" way -- like on the Beretta Neos or the slide mounted ones like on the Makarov. I would never carry any of these for this reason.
While I see the virtue of a single gun carried the same way all the time, but if an alternate gun and/or mode of carry means you can hide it and thus have a gun that day it sure beats the alternative of no gun.
Anyone who believes that they are competent enough to drive different vehicle platforms and react properly in a wide range of sudden emergencies should be competent enough to use different firearm platforms under emergency conditions, assuming similar familiarity with each firearm platform.
Posted by WYO:
First, it is not at all a matter of what one might believe. It is a matter of how one will react.
Second, all automobiles have steering wheels in the same location, throttle pedals in the same locations, horn buttons in the same locations, and brake pedals in the same locations. That was not true five and half a score years ago, but it is now, and for good reason.
Where people encounter trouble is when they have to turn on the wipers very quickly, or squirt the windshield. When Alan Mulally took over the helm at Fords several years ago, he noted unnecessary differences in those controls and had the differences eliminated.
Differences in safeties, significant differences in trigger pull, and other differences can cause problems, even if one is very familiar with all of one's firearms. The problems will not manifest themselves at the range, but they can in training, and in serious circumstances in which no delays and no hiccups are permissible,
Huh?
First, it is not at all a matter of what one might believe. It is a matter of how one will react.
Second, all automobiles have steering wheels in the same location, throttle pedals in the same locations, horn buttons in the same locations, and brake pedals in the same locations. That was not true five and half a score years ago, but it is now, and for good reason.
Where people encounter trouble is when they have to turn on the wipers very quickly, or squirt the windshield. When Alan Mulally took over the helm at Fords several years ago, he noted unnecessary differences in those controls and had the differences eliminated.
Differences in safeties, significant differences in trigger pull, and other differences can cause problems, even if one is very familiar with all of one's firearms. The problems will not manifest themselves at the range, but they can in training, and in serious circumstances in which no delays and no hiccups are permissible,
Folks who have deliberately walked into harm's way on a regular basis know a couple of things about human behavior under that level of stress.
One, everybody is a Hollywood action movie star if you ask them before the first curtain goes up. That script often gets rewritten after the first gun comes out.
Two, a lot of folks who choose to carry guns for whatever reason lose control of their bowels and/or urinate all over themselves when the balloon goes up. A lot.
Any conversation or theory that doesn't account for what we know to be true is not even ready for the classroom, let alone real life!
One, everybody is a Hollywood action movie star if you ask them before the first curtain goes up. That script often gets rewritten after the first gun comes out.
Two, a lot of folks who choose to carry guns for whatever reason lose control of their bowels and/or urinate all over themselves when the balloon goes up. A lot.
Any conversation or theory that doesn't account for what we know to be true is not even ready for the classroom, let alone real life!
While I never heard that, but I can believe it. It's not something you'd read about In the news. I am surprised that Mothers Demand Action Against Illegal Mayors haven't brought that up. Perhaps too tough on their sensibilities.
I have friends I shoot with weekly and some of them talk about rotating carry guns. The instructor who we all took lessons from always emphasizes losing motor control under stress. I guess they didn't believe him.
People who have yet to enjoy the sensation of a lethal confrontation have no idea.
CJ, your instructor is right to emphasize the loss of motor control, but that's only part of the problem. There are a variety of mental malfunctions that occur as well. For some reason a lot of instructors don't seem to want to get into that area, possibly because it is not something that can be prepared for very well, possibly because many students tend to get very easily antagonized when it is suggested that they are less than perfect.
Neither fun houses, paintball contests, nor any of the other training methods in use can duplicate the effect of a lethal threat on the brain. I've been through some elaborate and expensive training (on the gov's nickel!), and I always knew, knew, I was going home in one piece when it was over. It's not the same.
I was training a guy recently who showed up to the range with a very classy 1911. Nice gun! He could shoot it fairly accurately, but he was in no way prepared to be using a single action auto in a self defense setting. Three other instructors tried to help him understand that that pistol was a dangerously bad choice for him at this stage of his development, and it was like talking to a stubborn 9-year-old. He wanted to carry "an expert's gun," and he hadn't begun to imagine what was probably going to happen if the time came when he had to use it.
I tried!
That certainly is true. But, one limitation of Internet forums is that most people do not know the true knowledge, training, experience and skill level of people making assertions on a thread, so one is left to take a person’s thoughts expressed as words as an indication of what they are capable of doing. I used the term “believe” because I do not know what people actually can do. Maybe it was a bad choice of words. Maybe I should have said anyone who is competent enough to handle different vehicle platforms under emergency conditions is competent enough to handle different firearms platforms.
That analysis is only true at a very superficial level. A Crown Vic, an AWD Subaru sedan, and a big 4x4 pickup are all different in terms of dimensions, weight and handling characteristics. (The pickup can be further divided into being driven 2WD versus 4WD, and with a load or without a load.) They also have different suspensions and may have different traction control. Although the controls and basic principles may be consistent across all platforms, the amount of steering and breaking input needed to make the vehicles respond a certain way, the gap through which each may travel, and alternative courses of action will vary greatly even if they all are going the same speed when the sudden problem appears on the road. Try driving a winding mountain road with all those vehicles while trying to maintain the exact same speed, steering, throttling and braking and see how that works out. Then throw in a deer crossing the road, a patch of snow and ice, or a lane obstruction. The solutions may be very different. I think it is a valid analogy. Most people think nothing of driving different vehicles on a regular basis.
To use another car analogy, everyone's mileage may vary!
Old Dog
Member
A previous poster claimed
I once knew one guy in the military with an anxiety disorder who suffer urinary incontinence when he had time to think about what might happen ... If this incontinence phenomena peculiar to those who choose to carry guns is so widespread, it's been covered up pretty well. 'Course, what do I know (with only a couple years over twenty years total active duty and another fourteen years in various law enforcement jobs)?
Back on topic, as one poster previously noted, those experienced 1911 shooters unconsciously swipe down even a non-existent thumb safety, so to decree that everyone who might occasionally carry a different pistol platform is always going to cause problems is hyperbole. As for the guy who
I now carry a striker-fired polymer pistol on duty and have been known to pack a 1911 (usually a LW or Combat Commander) off duty, so I guess I do "rotate" carry pistols. Having not engaged in any off-duty lethal threat encounters (although Macy's on Black Friday was fairly dangerous), I'll let everyone know if I ever encounter any problems should "the balloon go up" (whilst trying to maintain a tight pucker factor on the sphincters).
Exaggeration. I disagree.
I once knew one guy in the military with an anxiety disorder who suffer urinary incontinence when he had time to think about what might happen ... If this incontinence phenomena peculiar to those who choose to carry guns is so widespread, it's been covered up pretty well. 'Course, what do I know (with only a couple years over twenty years total active duty and another fourteen years in various law enforcement jobs)?
Back on topic, as one poster previously noted, those experienced 1911 shooters unconsciously swipe down even a non-existent thumb safety, so to decree that everyone who might occasionally carry a different pistol platform is always going to cause problems is hyperbole. As for the guy who
, I'm not sure why, if that's the only gun he was training with that your instructors maintained
For years, many of us in the military were only beginners with regard to pistolcraft (it was not emphasized much until the 90's, nor was there regular training for most beyond routine fam-fire quals) yet it was the only pistol we ever carried.
I now carry a striker-fired polymer pistol on duty and have been known to pack a 1911 (usually a LW or Combat Commander) off duty, so I guess I do "rotate" carry pistols. Having not engaged in any off-duty lethal threat encounters (although Macy's on Black Friday was fairly dangerous), I'll let everyone know if I ever encounter any problems should "the balloon go up" (whilst trying to maintain a tight pucker factor on the sphincters).
Old Dog, without trying to be a hole or anything, I have a few thoughts.
I have no idea what you know, but I am thinking it must be pretty quiet in your neck of the woods. If we were in a room, I could fill that room with credible witnesses to the aftermath of many of those events. That's after the gunfight, okay?!?!
The thumb safety is not the biggest problem for most civilians carrying SA semis for self defense. Everybody knows that, don't they?
I just can't figure out what you're trying to say there, so I can't respond. I would point out that you were not there, to my knowledge, so I'm not sure what you have on your mind there.
The man in the military is not nearly the same as the civilian carrying a gun for self defense. Even with that in mind, the military, as well as most law enforcement agencies, abandoned the 1911 and most similar type weapons long ago, except for specialists who demonstrated the ability to use them safely and effectively. Joe Lunchbox gets issued a DA/SA auto, right? The guys who pass a rigorous testing procedure and get to train all the time carry the "expert gun."
No offense intended, Dog, but it's been 30 years for the military, and most law enforcement agencies ditched SA handguns for the rank and file even before that.
I have no idea what you know, but I am thinking it must be pretty quiet in your neck of the woods. If we were in a room, I could fill that room with credible witnesses to the aftermath of many of those events. That's after the gunfight, okay?!?!
The thumb safety is not the biggest problem for most civilians carrying SA semis for self defense. Everybody knows that, don't they?
I just can't figure out what you're trying to say there, so I can't respond. I would point out that you were not there, to my knowledge, so I'm not sure what you have on your mind there.
The man in the military is not nearly the same as the civilian carrying a gun for self defense. Even with that in mind, the military, as well as most law enforcement agencies, abandoned the 1911 and most similar type weapons long ago, except for specialists who demonstrated the ability to use them safely and effectively. Joe Lunchbox gets issued a DA/SA auto, right? The guys who pass a rigorous testing procedure and get to train all the time carry the "expert gun."
No offense intended, Dog, but it's been 30 years for the military, and most law enforcement agencies ditched SA handguns for the rank and file even before that.
larry_minn
Member
I will agree its best to stick to ONE platform... I do try to stay with same operation. I have changed from revolver, to 1911, DA semi auto, Glock type action. (I will admit I have carried 1911 twice in last yr, and a single action .45lc revolver once)
So now its Glock 26, 27, 19, 21.... or S&W sigma .380 if I don't carry a gun.
All have similar operation.(except mag release but since I don't have spare mag what does it matter?)
So now its Glock 26, 27, 19, 21.... or S&W sigma .380 if I don't carry a gun.
All have similar operation.(except mag release but since I don't have spare mag what does it matter?)
Old Dog
Member
Mr Khromo said
Quiet up here? Not so much these days, what with the scourge of meth, armed home invaders and violent sex offenders, but probably not as busy as it is for some down in that wild west town of San Diego ...
A room? Well, if we were on a football field, I could fill it with guys I've worked with who've never seen widespread loss of bowel and bladder control post gun-fight. A lot of babbling, tremor, shock and relief perhaps, but not so much in the way of soiled skivvies.
The labeling of the 1911 by some "instructors" and other "experts" as The Expert's Gun seems to be a fairly recent phenomena. My point was there, Khromo, that plenty of folks for a long time started as beginners with the 1911 and become fairly proficient. I have to chuckle a bit when I see a lot of instructors try to set up brand-new shooters with Glocks which, by golly, are every bit as dangerous in the hands of an untrained shooter as a 1911.
Sigh. I would love to be able to come here and pontificate like new member Khromo, who clearly has far more experience seeing guys having to change their Jockey shorts after gunbattles, and I actually do agree with a couple things he stated, such as
But going back to a previous statement by the same poster
So, in summary, I agree that keeping it simple and not arbitrarily rotating one's carry piece du jour simply to show off one's fabulous collection is not the best of ideas, at least if one is not training extensively with each platform, and even then, as pointed out, brainfarts and unforeseen physical effects can occur. However, I won't agree with the notion of the 1911 as "The Expert's Gun" as any handgun one might choose will come with its own pitfalls, no matter the level of training.
Well, I know what I know.
Quiet up here? Not so much these days, what with the scourge of meth, armed home invaders and violent sex offenders, but probably not as busy as it is for some down in that wild west town of San Diego ...
A room? Well, if we were on a football field, I could fill it with guys I've worked with who've never seen widespread loss of bowel and bladder control post gun-fight. A lot of babbling, tremor, shock and relief perhaps, but not so much in the way of soiled skivvies.
The labeling of the 1911 by some "instructors" and other "experts" as The Expert's Gun seems to be a fairly recent phenomena. My point was there, Khromo, that plenty of folks for a long time started as beginners with the 1911 and become fairly proficient. I have to chuckle a bit when I see a lot of instructors try to set up brand-new shooters with Glocks which, by golly, are every bit as dangerous in the hands of an untrained shooter as a 1911.
Gosh, is that a rule now?
No offense taken. Golly, has it really been that long? Oh wait ... I was still on active duty then ... subsequently segueing into law enforcement ... where my first issue piece was a Glock (which we all know isn't a single action).
Sigh. I would love to be able to come here and pontificate like new member Khromo, who clearly has far more experience seeing guys having to change their Jockey shorts after gunbattles, and I actually do agree with a couple things he stated, such as
But going back to a previous statement by the same poster
I'm not sure if "enjoy" was the term he really wanted to use, because, although I did once make the acquaintance of a group of guys who did seem to enjoy going outside and doing stuff, I'd submit that most people who go through a deadly force confrontation do not enjoy the experience and would strongly prefer not to have to do that ever again ... That said, yeah, if you've never been downrange with incoming, you do have no idea how you're going to react the first time.
So, in summary, I agree that keeping it simple and not arbitrarily rotating one's carry piece du jour simply to show off one's fabulous collection is not the best of ideas, at least if one is not training extensively with each platform, and even then, as pointed out, brainfarts and unforeseen physical effects can occur. However, I won't agree with the notion of the 1911 as "The Expert's Gun" as any handgun one might choose will come with its own pitfalls, no matter the level of training.
I asked my shooting instructor about loss of bowel and bladder control and he said, yes, it happens, but no one wants to admit it. I suggested he should teach that so people will not be surprised. Everyone needs to understand how unprepared you are if it's your first time. In CA there was case law where the judge said that it was not unreasonable to assume that a person that needs to defend himself could draw his empty semi-auto, pull a mag and seat it, and then rack the slide in enough time! Talk about pulling it out of your butt.
He didn't say how often, but he did say it's not something you have control over. I would think that with military people who have been in war, their systems don't react that way. Just a guess; I have not been in the military.
As far as a football field filled with people that have been in a gun fight? A football field is 45,000 sq. ft. That would hold maybe 10,000 people. A large bit of hyperbole, wasn't it?
He didn't say how often, but he did say it's not something you have control over. I would think that with military people who have been in war, their systems don't react that way. Just a guess; I have not been in the military.
As far as a football field filled with people that have been in a gun fight? A football field is 45,000 sq. ft. That would hold maybe 10,000 people. A large bit of hyperbole, wasn't it?
Posted by WYO:
Let's examine the meaning of the term "handle". At the range, I can "handle" a Browning HP, a Radom P35, a Luger, Beretta Model 1934, and a Colt Automatic (aka Model of 1911). And a Woodsman, for that matter.
When one is ambushed--and that's the best description of a self defense encounter in the out of doors--one must react very, very quickly, without a hiccup. The reaction must be automatic.
I had myself convinced that three different firearms with frame-mounted safeties that operated similarly would give me the consistency needed for that automatic response. But in a training season, I flubbed it--once. That's all it would take.
Two of them are gone; one stays home.
Do you have retention holsters? They should be identical.
Your comments about the handling, etc. of different autos are well taken; I had thought of the same things myself. But what one is more likely to encounter is a problem with the obstruction of vision when slush comes up non the windshield at a very bad time, and the washer/wiper controls on that someone's three vehicles vary. I have said for years that those controls should present an industry standard operating interface.
The car analogy only goes so far. Until one has tried it in some really good training, one should not rely on what one thinks one is competent to do with one's pistol in the gravest extreme.
That would of course be a lot closer to being accurate, but I'm not sure there is any basis for that assertion.
Let's examine the meaning of the term "handle". At the range, I can "handle" a Browning HP, a Radom P35, a Luger, Beretta Model 1934, and a Colt Automatic (aka Model of 1911). And a Woodsman, for that matter.
When one is ambushed--and that's the best description of a self defense encounter in the out of doors--one must react very, very quickly, without a hiccup. The reaction must be automatic.
I had myself convinced that three different firearms with frame-mounted safeties that operated similarly would give me the consistency needed for that automatic response. But in a training season, I flubbed it--once. That's all it would take.
Two of them are gone; one stays home.
Do you have retention holsters? They should be identical.
Your comments about the handling, etc. of different autos are well taken; I had thought of the same things myself. But what one is more likely to encounter is a problem with the obstruction of vision when slush comes up non the windshield at a very bad time, and the washer/wiper controls on that someone's three vehicles vary. I have said for years that those controls should present an industry standard operating interface.
The car analogy only goes so far. Until one has tried it in some really good training, one should not rely on what one thinks one is competent to do with one's pistol in the gravest extreme.
I stay with pistols that have no controls to operate in a defensive situation other than the trigger.
When I open carry (or OWB carry but still concealed under a coat, etc) now it is only using one of two handguns/holsters that are the same model by the same company with the same retention devices, even though I have other OWB holsters.
The car analogy is apt in that, as was pointed out, pedals and wheels are in the same place, etc. Sure, different cars handle differently...just like a Glock 27 and a Glock 34 and an M&P Shield (with no safety) and a DAO revolver handle differently. But the basic operation that you need to use when you need to use them RIGHT NOW...all the same.
Of course a person is better off in their vehicle when they have some time behind the wheel and of course a person is better off with their pistol when they have some time behind it.
But having a Glock one day, a SAA revolver the next, and then a 1911 the third is kind of like having an automatic transmission one day, a traditional manual transmission with clutch pedal the next, and a right hand drive manual transmission car straight from the UK the third.
When I open carry (or OWB carry but still concealed under a coat, etc) now it is only using one of two handguns/holsters that are the same model by the same company with the same retention devices, even though I have other OWB holsters.
The car analogy is apt in that, as was pointed out, pedals and wheels are in the same place, etc. Sure, different cars handle differently...just like a Glock 27 and a Glock 34 and an M&P Shield (with no safety) and a DAO revolver handle differently. But the basic operation that you need to use when you need to use them RIGHT NOW...all the same.
Of course a person is better off in their vehicle when they have some time behind the wheel and of course a person is better off with their pistol when they have some time behind it.
But having a Glock one day, a SAA revolver the next, and then a 1911 the third is kind of like having an automatic transmission one day, a traditional manual transmission with clutch pedal the next, and a right hand drive manual transmission car straight from the UK the third.
JohnBiltz
Member
Drive in a country where they drive on the left side of the road and see how many times you turn your windshield wipers on when you want to signal a turn or how it feels when the stick is on the other side.
olafhardtB
Member
- Joined
- May 8, 2011
- Messages
- 393
rotates schmotate
I love J frames. I almost always shoot them double action. Yes indeed rolling cans with a kit gun 22 is applicable to blasting with a kit gun 357. I carry a gun to shoot things that need to be shot. It is usually a 38 snubby. All that has to rotate is the cylinder.
I love J frames. I almost always shoot them double action. Yes indeed rolling cans with a kit gun 22 is applicable to blasting with a kit gun 357. I carry a gun to shoot things that need to be shot. It is usually a 38 snubby. All that has to rotate is the cylinder.
Unless you draw under concealment and do not display, you are not able to draw until you are justified in shooting. Yes you will have your hand on the gun. You will be ready to draw. However, from that position you need to be able to draw and hit your target in a smooth motion.
- Status
