dakota1911
New member
The one you have when you need it is the best one.
The Ultimate Carry Gun...
- Thread starter JohnKSa
- Start date
While having "something" is better than nothing, in most cases, its not necessarily, or even close to the best choice. Its simply what you have, and have to make due with.
Just having it is also a misnomer. If you dont have the skills to make it work, on demand and under stress, even the best choice may well let you down, or maybe better put, you let it down. Having it is only one part of the equation.
Just having it is also a misnomer. If you dont have the skills to make it work, on demand and under stress, even the best choice may well let you down, or maybe better put, you let it down. Having it is only one part of the equation.
Depending on where you live & work, the state laws affect your ability to carry. I'm ex USAF Security Police, with a PA license to carry. I work in NJ. Even though the 2 states are next to each other, my PA license is not reciprocal with NJ, and since New Jersey is "may issue" I cannot get an NJ license as an out of state resident since my occupation does not necessitate that I be armed. I have argued unsuccessfully with the NJ State Police that the neighborhoods I have to drive through justify my need to carry a firearm. I would rather commute an hour plus each way, since I don't want to live in a state with such restrictive firearms laws. So if you happen to live and work in a state where you have the right to carry, be grateful for the privilege!
Last edited:
I'd venture to say it's virtually never close to the best choice. One can look at the military to see what they believe the best choice is for saving a soldier's life and it's usually something carried with a sling, not a holster.
One might even say the most important part of the equation. While an unskilled person with a gun has a chance (perhaps a small chance) of prevailing in a situation requiring a firearm, a highly skilled person without a gun isn't going to make any headway at all in a situation requiring a firearm.
Absolutely, but if you have a choice, why continue in a negative direction if its not necessary?
I wasnt referring to having or not having, but what you have, and your ability to use it.
Your chances are diminished if you have the wrong gun, and even more so, if you dont know how to use it. Just having it, especially without skills, is simply trusting to luck and false sense of confidence.
Again, having a gun is important, but having the "right gun", even more so, and being able to use just goes along with that.
I never said the state should mandate anything, thats the individuals duty and responsibility. I would think, or at least hope, that if you carry a gun, you would understand that.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
I suggest people watch their language. You can get banned if you stray into some linguistic outrages.
As far as training - you have the overall statistical analyses which suggest that you don't get significant differences between training and nontraining states.
However, each incident does have its own individual variance and we do see many cases where the untrained carry the day.
But, we do see some extreme critical incidents where the carrier fails from what seems to be a lacking of training. Take the Tacoma and Tyler courthouse incidents. Failure of action that wouldn't occur if someone would have followed what most quality training would suggest.
We also see the NDs clearly from finger on the trigger. Training and practice reduce those.
As far as training - you have the overall statistical analyses which suggest that you don't get significant differences between training and nontraining states.
However, each incident does have its own individual variance and we do see many cases where the untrained carry the day.
But, we do see some extreme critical incidents where the carrier fails from what seems to be a lacking of training. Take the Tacoma and Tyler courthouse incidents. Failure of action that wouldn't occur if someone would have followed what most quality training would suggest.
We also see the NDs clearly from finger on the trigger. Training and practice reduce those.
I agree its what you have on you at the time. Being retired LEO (with Military Police Service) I have seen my share of fun. I carry a fullsize pistol everywhere I go, Glock 31C or a 1911. If I get in a fight I want a fighting gun. All respect to Sgt Lamb, but my experience is on the street and usually alone, a little different than having a team with you.
Doc Holliday 1950
New member
Very simple. Any of my 357's everywhere, all the time, except where prohibited by Federal Law & I try to stay away from those places as much as possible. It's like voting. You have the right to vote but if you don't use that right then you're useless to complain about your plight.
Respectfully,
Doc
Respectfully,
Doc
Limnophile
New member
Sorry. No outrage intended. I was just trying to make the point that having a gun is infinitely more important than having training. An untrained person with a gun stands a fighting chance, while a trained person without a gun is a sitting duck.
One is almost always able to point to an outcome that does not conform with the relationship to the means, but such observations in no way negate the validity of the conclusion about the means relative to each other. About the only time an exceptional outcome cannot be pointed out is when the differences of the two means being compared is so great that statistical analysis is not required to quantify the obvious.
I agree. Training and practice can be and usually is beneficial, but I see no need to require it by legislation.
I would say its just the opposite. The gun is simply the tool. Training is the skill.
Theres no doubt having a gun is important, but you really do need to know at least the basics of what to do with it.
You "may" stand a chance, but you also may well put yourself, and/or others in even greater danger, if youre counting on simply having the gun itself and not being able to use it in a reasonable manner.
Also, Im not sure why a trained person is necessarily a sitting duck, simply because they dont have a gun. I would think that most people who have taken the time to learn to use their gun, also have other skills and options available, should they somehow happen to find themselves "gun-less". At distances youre always told you will be fighting at, you pretty much always have a chance, gun or not. Of course, that is assuming you have some "training".
That position is quite difficult to support.
The problem with the idea that an untrained person with a gun is a sitting duck is that in something like 8 or 9 out of 10 successful self-defense gun uses, the gun isn't even fired and may not even be presented/drawn. The attacker gives up/retreats when it becomes obvious that the defender has a firearm. Guns have a very strong deterrent value which can be exploited even by an untrained person and even using a gun that is considered to be substandard.
The scenarios where a person's training makes the difference between living and dying aren't very common. The scenarios where the details of a defender's firearm choice make a significant difference in the outcome are even less common. Only about 10% of successful defensive gun uses even involve the defender actually firing the gun.
It's far better to have a gun, even a less than ideal gun, even with insufficient training, than it is to be highly trained and own an ideal gun that's not with you when you are faced with a scenario requiring a firearm.
Does that mean I'm advocating crappy guns and no training? Hardly. Training gives a person confidence and that is very important. Training makes it less likely that a defender will hurt himself or innocent people with a firearm. In the rare cases where an attacker is skilled, determined or unconcerned with self-preservation, training can save the day. And, of course, for all the same reasons, having a quality firearm is important too.
In other words, good training is important, having a quality firearm is important, but having a gun on you when you need one is absolutely critical.
Limnophile
New member
Ever hear the saying: “Abe Lincoln may have freed all men, but Sam Colt made them equal”? It was in reference to a tool, not a skill.
How many gun owners who eschew formal training do you think do not bother to read their gun's instruction manual and go out, load it up, and fire a box or more of ammo in familiarizing themselves with their tool?
With only the gun training without access to the gun, you may well put yourself and others in great danger if all you can do is stand there with your finger in your armpit.
Of course the subject was gun training, not martial arts training. The quip about Colt making men equal had nothing to do with training and everything to do with Colt's revolving handgun. A firearm in the hands of a petite woman puts her on more equal footing to a hulking male thug. But, if you move the goalposts far enough you can engineer a winning argument.
As to the point made above about the majority of DGUs not involving the gun being fired, while recently reading the LAPD's Use of Force report for 2010 I noted that for every shooting incident there were four incidents where a firearm was drawn and exhibited but not fired.
swan_derek
New member
gun
I love my LCP!
I love my LCP!
I just want to interject a couple of thoughts into this debate.
I have witnessed "trained" people do some unbelievably dumb things with a gun.
I have also know quite a few folks who handle a weapon like an expert with their only training being a trip to the range with a relative or what they pick up here and there.
Having sat through a class and watching a poorly produced safety video rarely turns out spectacular shooters.
I have witnessed "trained" people do some unbelievably dumb things with a gun.
I have also know quite a few folks who handle a weapon like an expert with their only training being a trip to the range with a relative or what they pick up here and there.
Having sat through a class and watching a poorly produced safety video rarely turns out spectacular shooters.
Ive never said dont have a gun along. My point is, if youre going to carry one, get a "real" one, and have the skills to use it. If you feel the need to carry one in the first place, why would you do otherwise?
You dont have to compromise and carry a "little" gun. A full sized gun is easily carried and a much better choice.
Its a cute saying, and we both know that.
Just having a gun, does not make you an equal, or even a better. Given two people with guns, the one who has no skill or training, is trusting to luck and false confidence.
Id bet a lot of them. Ill bet a lot of them just load the gun, never shoot it, and just put it away, or in their pocket.
You keep going to the "gunless" thing here for some reason, when thats not the issue.
The point of training and practice, is to be proficient with your gun. If you choose not to do that, you do so at your own peril (and that of others around you).
Some of us do see things as a package deal too though. A gun is only one part of it, and its not a magical part, like some want it to be. Then again, this is a gun board, so it carries more weight. If your only skills are gun related, you may want to expand your horizons a little.
Youre the one who keeps pointing in that direction "gunless", hence the comment.
The old lady with a gun, is simply an old lady with a gun, especially if her only skill with it, is having it. She may be in a better place having it, but shes still in a very bad place if shes up against a determined thug.
Thats great and all, but it sounds like your whole theory here, is using the gun as a threat/bluff, with nothing to back it up should the other party not be intimidated by you. Is that right?
So have I.
You have that too, but generally, thats not to common a thing, especially if you add a little reality to things.
My sons fiance never shot a handgun prior to meeting him. On her first couple of trips out, she was attentive, and did very well, and showed she was a "natural", and she is. She does great when she can focus on what shes doing, she doesnt do very well, when you put pressure on her, and just tell her to quickly shoot the targets without thought. She hasnt got to drawing and shooting with a live gun yet, but she is practicing. Her shooting is getting better the more she comes out though.
That is exactly my point about just having a gun being only part of it. Just having it is an important start, but if you dont continue to work towards better things, youre really only deceiving yourself.
To look at it in a different perspective, its really no different than the person who takes a generic karate class at a local Dojo, and then thinks they are good to go against a street fighter.
Ive been through a couple of this type class too, and the shooting portion at the end, was pretty scary in both cases. But then again, they all "did" have a gun.
the only problem I have with "The Ultimate Carry Gun" is that its not always lawful or practical to carry religiously; work policies, legal gun free zones, Reciprocity laws..... until a solution is found the ultimate carry gun does not exist. Or maybe a better way to look at it is its not available to all.Glenn E. Meyer said:
I didn't make the specific comment you're referring to but I have made similar ones on the thread.
For my part, I believe it's a terrible idea to carry a gun purely as a bluff. I think it's a terrible idea to buy a low quality gun for self-defense. I believe it's a bad idea to get a gun to rely on for self-defense and assume that no training or practice is required.
HOWEVER, in spite of the fact that all of those things are a bad idea, it is not possible to deny that many people do all of those things and successfully defend their lives. Is it a good idea? NO! But it does often work.
It's important to understand that it's possible to acknowledge that a particular strategy is often effective without advocating it or agreeing that it's a good idea.
That is correct. While that is a valid excuse for not carrying all the time for people who live with such restrictions, many people use it as an excuse to never carry, even when the restrictions would allow them to.
So refreshing to see some of the comments concerning the right of everyday Americans, and as having enough experience in life, to have built enough character to be reasonably intelligent, and diligent, in carrying guns and potentially preserving life, in contrast to the mantra which seems to have become so overwhelming repeated on the forums in recent years of "training", "training", "training", etc., etc., etc. I personally know many an "old-timer" (and some young ones to) with life experience and with a brain between their ears, that I would not want to trifle with, regardless of any amount of formal training they may or may not have received.
Bill DeShivs
New member
Most people don't carry all the time because they listened to some "expert" or "instructor" that told them that only big guns work. They think a .25 or a .32 will just bounce off of someone or "just make them mad."
I see it in this thread, too.
If you really want to carry your full sized .40+ caliber gun, that's fine-but stop spouting that small guns are useless. They are far more useful than the gun left at home.
As far as "carry rotations"- here is some good advice from an old guy: your carry guns are not toys to be swapped out whenever you get tired of playing with them. Choose ONE gun that best fits your needs, learn it until you know it like your tongue knows you teeth. Keep it in the same place all the time. (hint- an ankle holster is NOT a good place to carry a gun!) Learn to shoot it.
Carrying different guns as a fashion statement can get you killed if you ever need to use a gun.
I see it in this thread, too.
If you really want to carry your full sized .40+ caliber gun, that's fine-but stop spouting that small guns are useless. They are far more useful than the gun left at home.
As far as "carry rotations"- here is some good advice from an old guy: your carry guns are not toys to be swapped out whenever you get tired of playing with them. Choose ONE gun that best fits your needs, learn it until you know it like your tongue knows you teeth. Keep it in the same place all the time. (hint- an ankle holster is NOT a good place to carry a gun!) Learn to shoot it.
Carrying different guns as a fashion statement can get you killed if you ever need to use a gun.