personal defense magazine

[Bezoar]

Just looked at the current copy of this magazine, by the personal defense tv people according to the cover. There are a few things that kinda have me confused.

Just about everyone says, if your in your vehicle and someone tries shooting at you or something just as deadly, your supposed to drive away at all cost and avoid confrontation.
Yet a cover article was about, having shotgun based shootouts from your vehicle. Sure would like to have a vehicle where i could carry a shotgun around with me. LEGALLY couldnt carry it loaded in Michigan.

Then the article by Ayoob. That was an interesting one. Basically comes out and says the only gun you should have for self defense is a DAO revovler with bobbes hammer. Says single action possibility will only get you hung for a valid self defense shooting.
Yet in the magazine, they endorse lightweight 1911s with da/sa style triggers for the "good" self defense while riding your bycicle.

Also they had an interesting article on home defense in the countryside. Well a few interesting things came up.
-must have a lever action carbine to take out any armed aggressors who may be lurking in your yard, inside the "fence" shooting they call it.
-Must have a high capacity shotgun to clear the house with.
-must have a bolt action rifle
-must have a 30-06 or other military caliber bolt gun that can shoot surplus armor piercing ammo to deal with people hiding in CARS.
-when there in the car, arent they legally considered to be fleeing the scene, and thus no longer fall into "self defense" shooting?

 

[p2000sk]

So, are you going to pony up the $5.95 (or whatever) next month?
I guess it beats a pack of smokes.

 

[Bezoar]

Why would i waste money on the magazine? Far to much information to end up on the local news as the
"local nutjob goes crazy" segment.

 

[Jeff White]

Yet a cover article was about, having shotgun based shootouts from your vehicle.

Really??? Someone was actually advocating this? Where can I get a copy? Who wrote it?

Surely they don't propose to be taken seriously? This is just unbelievable! You sure it's not a comic book?

Jeff

 

[Old Guy]

My Local Book Store

No need to buy the Magazines, buy a frothy Coffee, read the magazines and return them to the exact spot, not damaged. Barnes and Nobles do not mind.

To buy one of the magazines, and pay money! WOW... Like to look though.

 

[contenderman]

Just ran a web search and couldn't find anything on the magazine. Although I did get a hit on an American Handgunner edition that focused on PD.

Who is the publisher? Is the magazine a monthly, bi-monthly or ???

From the sounds of things it probably isn't something I would subscribe to, but I would like to look an issue over.

 

[Bezoar]

the cover just said by the "people who make personal defense tv"

I know, the shotgun thing really took me buy surprise. proper use of the truck door as a brace for accurate shooting.
The only good thing i got from reading this magazine is this,
if you carry a handgun for defense, always have a cellphone. when you have to use your gun, always use your phone. He who phones first, has the tendency to be considered blameless during the police investigation.
AND do not run from the scene. And never hide you had to shoot, that just makes you guilty.

 

[boalex207]

This magazine is called Guns & Ammo Book Of Personal Defense

It is billed as a presentation of "The Producers of Personal Defense TV". I gather it is a one-time publication run special edition kind of thing.


Apparently, the OP gave this a quick look because he has some of his information wrong.

Primarily, there is no article, cover or otherwise, on "shotgun based shootouts from an automobile". There is ONE PICTURE of a shotgun armed man standing beside a stopped SUV and using the door for concealment. This photo was part of a general information article comparing 12 different shotguns.

The handgun they mention specifically with a bicycle is a Smith & Wesson J frame revolver, not a 1911 platform.

This magazine is basically a lot of repackaged information, and it's heavy on the pro-Ruger content. (Ruger, I guess being a major G & A advertiser.)
It has some decent, unremarkable articles by a few big names (Ayoob, Spaulding, Taylor) and a few other authors that I haven't personally heard of.

I picked it up a few days ago. $ 7.99. I've blown more money on less worthwhile products.

 

[contenderman]

Thanks boalex207 !!!

I think I know the one your talking about. If so ... heck I've read it, but didn't match up my recall of it to the OP description.

Was it worth $8 ... based on new info content, no. Based on single source summary of some reasonable stuff ... maybe.

There remains an un-served (or under served) magazine market in the Personal Defense area. Is there enough "fresh" stuff to support a monthly ... probably not. But, bi-monthly or quarterly might work, Content (IMHO) should focus on:

> Actual case reports

> Legal issues and changes

> Situational tactics

> Equipment

> Ammunition

> Training (classes and home/range drills)

> Readers remarks and questions forum

......

> If you agree with the need, add any other topics that you feel would be worthwhile.

 

[ilbob]

Then the article by Ayoob. That was an interesting one. Basically comes out and says the only gun you should have for self defense is a DAO revovler with bobbes hammer. Says single action possibility will only get you hung for a valid self defense shooting.

I wonder if he carries such a firearm as his primary SD gun? I sort of doubt it.

Yet in the magazine, they endorse lightweight 1911s with da/sa style triggers for the "good" self defense while riding your bycicle.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

Personally, I think the DAO revolver is not a bad choice for someone with limited shooting experience. Way back when, Chicago used to teach its cops to cock their revolvers when they were learning to shoot at the academy. They had all kinds of unintentional shootings and NDs that resulted from this stupid policy.

 

[Loosedhorse]

Then the article by Ayoob. That was an interesting one. Basically comes out and says the only gun you should have for self defense is a DAO revovler with bobbe[d] hammer.

My understanding of Capt. Ayoob's stance is that a DAO revolver (IF you choose to carry a revolver) is better than a standard DA revolver because of legal aftermath concerns.

The standard DA revolver can be cocked. Either the prosecutor OR the civil plaintiff's attorney may argue that you cocked the hammer recklessly, and then it went off accidentally. Juries may easily believe this because (as we all know from Hollywood) "standard" gun handling is that you approach folks with the gun un-cocked, say some clever things to them, and then cock the gun for emphasis. (With semi-autos, it's important to initially approach people with the chamber empty, so you can rack the slide for emphasis later. )

At criminal trial, the theory that you accidentally shot your attacker negates the claim of self-defense: you can't accidentally shoot someone in self-defense.

I'm quite sure that other guns are acceptable for self-defense. You will have the easiest time explaining your choice of arm if it mirrors the choice of local police, but as long as you understand that your choice will come under question and you have a clear explanation of why you chose it, you should prevail (but it may be more difficult).

Guns that have had safety features inactivated and those with very light triggers (usually 4.5 -5 lbs is considered minimum) should never be used. A DA revolver (and cocking before shooting) might be the right answer for someone who cannot pull a DA trigger--but that will need to be documented carefully.

And 1911s can't be cocked recklessly--anyone can explain that they HAVE to be cocked in order to be ready to work.

That's how I see it.

 

[massad ayoob]

One poster asks, speaking of DAO revolvers:

I wonder if he carries such a firearm as his primary SD gun? I sort of doubt it.

Oddly enough, I'm carrying two of them while teaching in Phoenix this week, 4" M/686 .357 tuned by Bob Lloyd and 2" M/442 .38 tuned by Ted Yost.

I would disagree with the characterization of the OP. My article in question was simply an overview of liability issues in self-defense shootings, which included advice not to have a firearm with what could be construed as a "hair trigger."

 

[entropy]

My Local Book Store

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No need to buy the Magazines, buy a frothy Coffee, read the magazines and return them to the exact spot, not damaged. Barnes and Nobles do not mind.

To buy one of the magazines, and pay money! WOW... Like to look though.

Bingo! That's what I do after I punch out at work. And for the record, I didn't buy it.

I did like your article, Mas. But I used the money I saved to buy reloading supplies.

 

[ilbob]

Oddly enough, I'm carrying two of them while teaching in Phoenix this week, 4" M/686 .357 tuned by Bob Lloyd and 2" M/442 .38 tuned by Ted Yost.

I am somewhat surprised. Is this typical for you, or did you switch to this just for the week? Or do you switch back and forth?

 

[ladykilla]

Massod, I read your article as well. Although I agreed with most of it, the part in which you spoke of "to much gun" left a bad taste in my mouth. Who can actually justify that argument. In your article it was a Kimber 10mm loaded with JHP (forgot the specific round) and the jury ruled it was excessive. So, what would be an acceptable caliber and round? Our duty ammo is 9mm 147 gr. Ranger. For being such, I carry variations of the ammo in my own weapons. I also use the Ranger 12ga ammo for my personal shotgun. Do you think that would be an issue?

 

[mljdeckard]

You are reading the magazine objectively, which is good. Yes, everyone has an opinion, and the gun rags are a forum in which they are literally paid to fling opinions at the wall and see what sticks.

Use your brain and some logic to sort out what makes sense and what doesn't. Here's the tip off to what is bull. Anyone who speaks in absolutes. They absolutely KNOW what is correct at all times in all situations. No exceptions. Never been wrong.

As Mr. Ayoob has pointed out, in his characteristically gentlemanly way, the contents of THAT particular column DO NOT reflect his exclusive opinions on what kind of gun you should carry. He has written several books, I recommend you read all of them, to get an overall view of his theory. Start with "In the Gravest Extreme". (If I eventually teach a CCW class, I will make it required reading BEFORE the class.)

I have found there are too many experts, and I have little time. At this time, and for the past couple of years, I have narrowed it down to Mr. Ayoob and Clint Smith, even though they occasionally differ a bit. They have the most reasoned explanations for why they teach what they do. Between the two of them, they have enough course material to keep me busy for a LONG time, and I would very much like to take live courses from both of them. (I would like it even better if I can get my unit to pay for it.)

 

[Pat-inCO]

Send your ten year subscription money to me and I'll take care of it for you.

 

[JImbothefiveth]

Hey Mr. Ayoob, why should the hammer be bobbed?

 

[B.D. Turner]

Most magazines are a total waste of trees. These guys kiss up to manufactures to get them to send stuff for them to test so guess who they promote.

 

[massad ayoob]

Bob:
I use something different every training tour; helps to keep one's hand in with different systems. Was carrying a SIG on the last trip, and a Glock on the one before that.

Jimbo:
Main reason for bobbing the hammer is to reduce snag potential. DAO conversion should revolve around removal of single action cocking notch from hammer, internally. Many prefer to leave the spur intact after a DAO conversion because if they use a safety strap holster, that's where the strap secures.

Ladykilla:
For my two cents, it's only "too much gun" if you can't control it or can't find ammo that doesn't have excessive penetration. I'm personally comfortable with 10mm, .45, or the Magnums. I just warn folks that the "too deadly gun" argument can come up in court, and they should be prepared to convincingly justify their choice, which isn't all that hard.

best,
Mas

 

[Rob Pincus]

I haven't read the article in question, but I have been following this thread.

FWIW, count me as a fan of DAO revolver for convenience and reliability.... I am more likely to be carrying a j-frame 642 for self-defense than anything else over the past few years. All handguns are a compromise.

 

[Rifleman 173]

DAO revolver??? Too much gun??? Sounds like somebody is trying to bring up a solution for a problem that hasn't yet really been defined. Look, if some scumbag attorney brings up some knothead theory about a gun being "too sensitive" or that it was "accidentally fired" then the defendant's attorney had best beat that idea into the ground real quick with objections of all sorts in front of the judge and jury. The defending attorney should point out that facts, not theories, is what one MUST really work with. Otherwise: mistrial.

 

[ladykilla]

Massad, thanks for the reply.

 

[Deanimator]

Just about everyone says, if your in your vehicle and someone tries shooting at you or something just as deadly, your supposed to drive away at all cost and avoid confrontation.

1. If you're SHOOTING AT ME that's the textbook definition of a "confrontation". Shoot at me and there's no going back.

2. They taught me in the Army that NOBODY can outrun a bullet. Nobody can drive faster than one either. There are times when I wish I had a BTR-152, but I don't have one. Therefore, I'm not too optimistic about the ability of my vehicle to stop high velocity projectiles before they hit me. The Army also taught me that the appropriate response to a vehicular near ambush is to drive through those doing the ambushing. If at all feasible, if you try to shoot me when I'm in my car, I'm going to try to run you down. Some people would consider that a good reason not to try to unlawfully shoot people in their cars.

 

[Jeff White]

The Army also taught me that the appropriate response to a vehicular near ambush is to drive through those doing the ambushing.

I don't know who's army you served in, but current doctrine in the US Army for an unblocked ambush is to drive out of the kill zone as quickly as possible. Response to a blocked ambush is to dismount and attack.

If at all feasible, if you try to shoot me when I'm in my car, I'm going to try to run you down.

Good plan..I don't understand why so many people ant to shoot and drive or to stop when they aren't blocked in and shoot.

Jeff