My Gunfight - "Thinking Outside Your Box"

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't see how an empty chamber can be anything but a handi-cap. I really don't see the benefit. You are simply giving your adversary more time to overpower you.

A loaded gun is completely safe as long a no one pulls the trigger, you can prevent that buy keeping the gun on you and in a good holster.

An unchambered gun is better than no gun, but a chambered one is more useful than an unchambered gun.
 
I don't see how an empty chamber can be anything but a handi-cap. I really don't see the benefit.
The ONLY benefit is calming their needlessly worried minds. There is no real benefit whatsoever--only a psychological one. And even that isn't really a benefit, it's more of a crutch for a problem that needs to be worked through.
 
What-ifs, if plausible, are great things for people with open minds. I love reading "what-ifs" because in each and every one is something that I've missed.

That's why I don't understand why it's taboo to talk about incidents you've had here. They are invaluable, real-life tools. I have changed many things in my training and routine based on other people's self defence stories.
 
The ONLY benefit is calming their needlessly worried minds. There is no real benefit whatsoever--only a psychological one.

It seems to me that if someone is not comfortable carrying a loaded gun, they are not truly comfortable around guns period.
 
My problems is with dreams where I get in a gunfight and my gun doesnt work.

Man for a long time I thought I was just crazy everysingle gunfight dream I have the gun either wont go off or if its a dream that lets me shoot its like im shooting rubber bullets! I could throw them faster than they are shooting out and I carry a glock 19 and my bedside is a 357 mag. So in the dream I always think "crap this 9mm aint doin anything, I need my 357" then I get it and it is a little more effective but not much at all.... still no pen. The same thing happens in every single dream. This is so weird that you all have dreams like this too. I'm a little excited that its not just me!:D
 
In my gun related nightmares I either can't hit the bad guy no matter what or my gun melts in my hand. Maybe it means I'm not truly secure with my shooting ability. ;)
 
I've learned that running dreams have always ended in disaster since I got a Tempur-Pedic mattress, because it's like running in slow motion. I generally stick to hand to hand combat dreams against whatever villain I imagined most recently.
My gunfight is generally one that isn't a fight at all. Like when I'm driving behind a "Compton style" car and coincidentally am behind him for 3 turns and he starts kind of weaving to get a better look at me and my girlfriend... That is the time when the hairs go up on the back of your neck and the only thing that can put them down is thumbing some cold steel. I wouldn't go out looking for trouble and most of the time the gunfight would be a matter of the BG not expecting me to be packing, being terribly dissatisfied to discover otherwise.
 
Great thread. Thanks to everyone that's contributed.

Rusty- thanks for keeping this going with well written, well thought out concerns. I've had them myself. I think I recognize your username from NGTO? If so, good to see ya in here (my userid there is "Magoo"- it was already taken here :().

I'm still waiting on my CWP. I had to do three rounds of fingerprints at 2-3 weeks bewtween notices (stupid workers hands :cuss:). So I still haven't had to make the choices brought forth in this discussion. I have, however, been thinking a lot about it. While I initially shared Rusty's uncomfortable stance, everything points me to carrrying chambered/+1.

My primary carry weapon will be a Kahr PM40. I've, so far, tried 3 holsters with it (granted- not with live ammo at McDonalds). They all protect the heavy double action trigger very well. I've got two poket holsters (cheap Uncle Mike's and a Kahr brand thingy-do (I'll sell it cheap ;)) and a new OWB holster, locally stitched :) that I haven't played with enough to break it in. The imaginable scenarios for those holsters failing to protect from a long, heavy trigger pull (with expected firearms handling/holstering diligence) are so much fewer than "immediate armed response" being needed/appropriate. I'll be carrying with one in the pipe.
 
Someone already brought up the Israeli's. How about Sykes and Fairbairn? Under their oversight, the Shanghai Municipal Police carried condition three. That was a pretty rough place, and they often were confronted by criminals ready to shoot on sight. So then, not every tactical expert dismisses condition three as "worse than no gun"

In the example of the Israelis, we're talking about an Army. Never in the history of the modern world has a sidearm, or a technique for using it, decided the outcome of a war. Additionally, in an Army you have long guns, and friends with long guns, which can provide the time necessary to draw and chamber. I don't know if the Shanghai police department carried long guns (not likely), but police are also an organization. They work with partners, and often respond to a crime that has already occurred or is in progress, giving them time to prepare before arriving on scene or entering the breach. Since the comparisons you're making are organizational, they differ significantly from an individual trying to defend themselves against an unforeseeable threat. I use the term "unforeseeable" because if it could be predicted, it could be easily avoided.

For me personally, I will not carry a pistol without a round chambered military regulations notwithstanding. In both military and civilian life it's the final option, a last line of defense. If I need it, I need it now (or possibly a few seconds ago), and will take any advantage I can get in its employ.
 
OYE says: In my imaginary Gunfights I only rarely prevail.
------------------------------------------------------


I always prevail in my "what if" scenarios. When your life is on the line negative thinking isn't conducive to survival.
 
I know I'm going to get chewed up here...but honestly, I don't care. I'm with Rusty

How many times are we faced with life threatening situations where a gun is actually needed? Not many. Now, how many of those times were you forced to shoot immediately? Far, far less.

I would be willing to bet that 95% of those who are "+1" advocated have never ever been in the situation where they need to draw their weapon, let alone fire it.

Now, this is the part where those 95% of you are going 'YEAH BUT WHAT IF, THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT'

OK, so you're right. That 'What if' scenario might happen in your lifetime, but I doubt it. Exposing friends, family, and yourself to a loaded weapon on a daily basis seems much riskier than planning for a scenario that realistically won't happen to you

Once again, I know most of you are saying, "Yeah but what if".

If that situation arises, and I'm shot because I'm not carrying +1, then I'd rather chalk it up to fate and know that "this is my time to die, it was designed this way" rather than carry +1 for the sake of arguments and planning that 'what if' scenario.




Having a loaded gun in your face will probably never happen unless you're a drug dealer, loan shark, or mobster. Exposing friends/family to danger on a daily basis will happen carrying +1.

I fail to see where carrying +1 is better. Also, not having a gun over carrying unchambered is a bunch of BS too. Like Rusty said, most situations will allow for the time to rack a slide. Feel free to bash me for the 'most' part, cause I know it's coming.

My .02 cents.
 
I know I'm going to get chewed up here...but honestly, I don't care.
Feel free to bash me for the 'most' part, cause I know it's coming.
Maybe the fact that the gun community overwhelmingly disagrees with you should be a clue.

To be quite honest, you sound like an anti.
Exposing friends, family, and yourself to a loaded weapon on a daily basis
Because you know...guns just "go off". Oh, and we'd better all quit carrying revolvers... Or do you advocate having an empty chamber there too?

Having a loaded gun in your face will probably never happen unless you're a drug dealer, loan shark, or mobster.
Go ahead and tell that to the thousands of people who are robbed, car jacked, and assaulted every year through no fault of their own. Just because statistically it's not probable that I will have a loaded gun in my face doesn't mean it isn't possible and that it doesn't happen a LOT to a LOT of people in this country every year.
I would be willing to bet that 95% of those who are "+1" advocated have never ever been in the situation where they need to draw their weapon, let alone fire it.
And that matters why? It doesn't take personal experience to understand the possible utility of an extra round and to estimate the amount of additional time to rack the slide.

If that situation arises, and I'm shot because I'm not carrying +1, then I'd rather chalk it up to fate
Ah yes, "fate" the cornerstone of logical thinking.

Once again, I know most of you are saying, "Yeah but what if".
Nope.
We're saying there are advantages to carrying +1 (speed and capacity), but we also know that +1 is perfectly safe, so there are no real disadvantages. It's not about What Ifs, it's about weighing the cost/benefit and choosing the best course of action.
How many times are we faced with life threatening situations where a gun is actually needed? Not many. Now, how many of those times were you forced to shoot immediately? Far, far less.[citation needed]
It seems rather silly to me to plan for this remote possibility that'll likely never happen by actually carrying a gun...but to fail to plan for the possibility that I may need to shoot quickly. There's a logical break between "Oh yeah, I'll likely never need it, but I'll carry it every day anyway" and "I'll just make the assumption that if I do need it I'll have plenty of time and both hands working."
 
Maybe the fact that the gun community overwhelmingly disagrees with you should be a clue.
I stand for what I believe in. I'm not jumping on a wagon simply because 'the gun community' says I should. Citation, maybe?

To be quite honest, you sound like an anti.
That was intelligent. You sound paranoid. Why judge?

Ah yes, "fate" the cornerstone of logical thinking.
And who said your thinking is?

It's about weighing the cost/benefit and choosing the best course of action.
Isn't that what our friend Rusty was doing? But yet you're nearly ridiculing him for doing so? Refer to engravertom's post on page 2; shouldn't we try to help him in this situation? Why so negative? You can voice an opinion without being nasty or demeaning

It seems rather silly to me to plan for this remote possibility that'll likely never happen by actually carrying a gun...but to fail to plan for the possibility that I may need to shoot quickly. There's a logical break between "Oh yeah, I'll likely never need it, but I'll carry it every day anyway" and "I'll just make the assumption that if I do need it I'll have plenty of time and both hands working."
That's fine. You can think that way. Let others think how they would like. Once again, there's no need for the negative attitude.
 
JoeMal,

In all the contacts a Peace Officer has with the public he serves on a daily basis, he resolves the overwhelming majority without ever touching his firearm.


Based on that observation, should we conclude that officers don't really need their firearm, and furthermore it's a risk even to have it present. Officers are assaulted and killed each year with their own firearm. Based on the FBI's UCR report, on average somewhere around 10% of officers killed with firearms are killed with their own.
 
JoeMal said:
Having a loaded gun in your face will probably never happen unless you're a drug dealer, loan shark, or mobster.

Without thinking too hard, I can easily count about a dozen people I personally know who had guns stuck in their faces. They weren't involved in criminal activities, or the policing profession, either.


That's a rather weak assertion you're making there. As are your others.
 
If you post here, you probably believe in protecting yourself and those around you to the best ability of which you are capable. If you are comfortable and practiced in carrying condition 1, then do so. If you doubt yourself carrying +1, then that paranoia will eat away at you and make your hands tremble, potentially causing you to accidentally do the thing that you feared doing in the first place. Some people keep their guns it in their car, because they rarely walk through troubled lands. Some people carry only when going into troubled lands. Some people believe their own homes are troubled lands, and carry as long as they have pants on, and some with them off. Carrying without one in the pipe is unarguably better than not carrying at all, and if that is all you are comfortable enough with I would stick with it until you can get the heebie-jeebies out of your fingers.
 
It's not about heebie-jeebies...it's a P R E F E R E N C E

That's it.

It may not be what you prefer, you don't have to let it bother you. You don't know me. And from the sounds of it, you don't like me. So be happy that I prefer differently than you. Perhaps some scum will take me from this place we live in and one less idiot will be roaming teh internetz

You're gonna love it, I live in Illinois I can't take a gun outside without the cops getting called lol let alone carry +1. Maybe someday I will be lucky enough to leave this place. So yeah, don't get all bent out of shape. Maybe you can convince me about +1 by the time I move.... :neener: Beat me all you want, it makes me even prouder to be an American
 
Last edited:
I know I'm going to get chewed up here...but honestly, I don't care.
Funny, now it sounds like you care quite a bit.
And from the sounds of it, you don't like me.
Don't take things personally. Odds are we'd mostly all like you just fine if we met you. Don't take disagreement as personal dislike.
 
JoeMal,

Don't take disagreement as personal dislike.
Indeed.

Further, if you've already made up your mind -- at least for now, beyond the reach of further friendly counsel -- it's probably best not to flaunt your decision with a masochistic challenge for the more experienced (and opinionated) sorts to come beat up on you.

a) It's shooting fish in a barrel and you obviously do care or you wouldn't have posted; and,

b) if you seem to be "baiting" or "trolling" to stoke the embers of a pointless argument you could end up on the wrong side of the forum guidelines. Some folks enjoy the attention that even harshly negative controversy brings them. You don't want to develop that reputation.

If you're happy with your choice, that's good. Hopefully someday you will have the opportunity to put some of these things into practice. Until then, keep reading, keep an open mind, and try not to go about with a "kick me" sign on your back. ;)
 
Sam

While I appreciate the comments, I feel I was more defending myself, not 'trolling' or 'baiting'

Once again, my differing opinion is getting me into trouble. I don't think threatening me with 'forum guidelines' is the proper way to address me.

I've done nothing wrong to any of you, but yet all I get is this negative attention and feedback. I just don't understand it.


My friend hates peperoni pizza but you don't see me nagging him about it

How can I not take it personally when I'm being judged, demeaned, and criticized for my beliefs?


I'm unsubscribing from this thread so I won't see responses
 
I'm being judged, demeaned, and criticized for my beliefs?
Here, let me fix that for you:
"My beliefs are being judged, demeaned, and criticized"
I'm unsubscribing from this thread so I won't see responses
Uh huh. You're reading this post and we all know it :D

You seem to want the luxury of stating your opinion without the duty of defending your opinion. Personally, I won't state any opinion that I'm not willing to stand and defend. Instead of making logical arguments supporting your position you go on about how we don't like you and then you run away.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top