"Carry Rotation"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Stepping on the "clutch" pedal when you are driving an automatic will result in an unexpected action (especially strong if its a power brake pedal).
Click to expand...
Good analogy.

More often, I think, we see someone stomping on the floor for no reason, and with no ill effects.

BUT: I'm old enough to remember the amazing Citroen DS 21. The power brakes were actuated byvery lightly touching a small, slightly raised circle on the floor. One could learn to operate the thing, with a little practice.

If you drove the DS 21 most of the time and occasionally drove an Impala with conventional American style pewee brakes, you could acclimate your self to the one you were operating after driving only a few hundred yards. but it did require conscience thought.

An instinctive reponse to an emergency situation was something else again.
 
I thought about this thread when I drove to work today. I put my key in my pocket and reached for the starter button. My car doesn't have a starter button, it has a keyed ignition. I drove my wife's car last night. It has a starter button.

I have to admit that my EDC is different from my less frequently used pocket pistol. I have been working under the theory that the different and slightly slower access will alert me to the difference and allow me to handle it, but there are certainly arguments against that idea. It works OK in practice, but as some have said, with someone shooting back it could be different.
 
44 AMP I don't mean to be hostile about the "long established fact" that most credible trainers recommend one weapon system carried in the same way everyday. I also accept that many trainers do not recommend carrying a weapon with an external thumb safety, in spite of long the established history of people using a 1911 for self-defense.

What I do object to (civilly I hope) is the characterization that anyone who carries handguns with different controls or a pistol with a thumb safety is at greater risk of dying as a result. Sweeping the safety off in preparation to fire has become an instinctual response for me. The other handguns I carry are point and shoot DA weapons that serve a specific purpose. My choices illustrates that a person can have some differences in their carry rotation without being imprudent.

All of this is based on my own assessment. I am neither a tenth degree ninja or a novice and my opinion is my own. Your milage may vary.
 
OP's projection of his low manual dexterity on others
Click to expand...
That may or may not be a valid point, but whether it is or isn't, one thing is certain. It is not the Dunning-Kruger effect. The Dunning-Kruger effect is not about incompetent people rating other people as incompetent. They don't rate anyone as incompetent, not themselves or others. It is true that they fail to recognize superior competence in others, but that doesn't mean they rate those persons as incompetent. They continue to rate themselves as being similarly competent to those who really are competent and continue to overestimate their abilities.

In this case, since the OP is, if anything, underestimating his level of competence, Dunning-Kruger doesn't apply. An incompetent person exhibiting the Dunning-Kruger effect wouldn't feel that he needed to restrict himself to a single firearm due to recognition of his limited competence--rather, he would rate himself as being very competent and fail to realize his limitations.
 
44 AMP I don't mean to be hostile about the "long established fact" that most credible trainers recommend one weapon system carried in the same way everyday.
Click to expand...

Ok, hold it. That's not the long established fact I was referring to. (and don't worry, my "skin" is pretty thick)

The fact long known that I was referring to is that, in a stress situation, people will do what they have trained themselves to do (by both training and practice), and that those without training will in most cases, do nothing.

What I do object to (civilly I hope) is the characterization that anyone who carries handguns with different controls or a pistol with a thumb safety is at greater risk of dying as a result.
Click to expand...

I hope I didn't give that impression. I am most certainly NOT in the camp of the people who say things like "shoot SA and DIE!!" (and yes, I have heard that from people who were acting like they were serious..:rolleyes:)

..a person can have some differences in their carry rotation without being imprudent.
Click to expand...

I can agree with this, easily. Although I do wonder is "rotation" the right word for what you guys do? To me, rotation means changing at some set interval, which I do not do. I have a selection, from which I choose what best suits anticipated conditions, I don't carry one gun for X weeks, then switch to another the next month...

The point I would like to make is that there are risks (small, but quantifiable) when you change from one operating system to a different one, if you need to use the gun in "instinctive" mode before the new system's differences become an ingrained response.

If you're practiced with something with a safety that is down for off (like a 1911A1), changing to a gun without a safety won't be an issue if you sweep the "safety" off as you draw. Switching to a safety that uses up for off, could be a real problem, IF you need it instinctively, before your instincts have "reset" for the new model. In other words, it makes a difference what gun you change TO. Likewise, switching from a gun with no safety lever/button to one that has one is also a learning curve, and could be a problem, if things go wrong, before you're fully up to speed on the new system.

What is the right thing to do with gun A could be the wrong thing with gun B. Both are equally good, but if your "instinct" is set in pattern A, carrying B could be a problem. here's an illustration of what I mean..

a friend drops by, want's to borrow a rifle, says he saw a deer up the canyon, and all he has with him is his browning sweet 16 and birdshot. I lend him a rifle, and he talks me into going looking with him, and carrying his shotgun, incase we put up some birds...
No deer, but we did put up a pheasant, right in front of me, slightly startling me, so after the decision to shoot, it was all automatic (instinct). I mounted the gun, punched off the safety and pulled the trigger.

Nothing.

I actually repeated that process twice more as the bird sailed away. I did everything right, but the gun in my hands wasn't the Model 12 I had decades of experience with, it was a Browning, with the safety behind the trigger, not in front of it, where my instinct sent my finger.

I've heard people talk about how they won't have a gun with a safety, because they are worried they will forget to take it off at a critical moment. Personally I never understood that. I can't see how you would forget a safety any more than you would forget to step on the brake to stop your car.

HOWEVER, I have learned that a safety different from what one is used to can be a disadvantage, for a time, and therefore, when you are talking about self defense, its best to avoid any disadvantages that you can avoid.
 
44 AMP my response was to the original idea that carrying different handguns will likely get you killed. I don't think you and I have any differences on this topic. For the way we carry, rotation is not the correct word. I would not consider carrying a pistol with a safety that had to be pushed up to fire. I have too much time with a 1911 style safety and am too old to try to learn another.
 
John
I get it you don't recognize your incompetence because you don't recognize what competence is. So from your veiwpoint you think you're as competent as me.
I however recognize competence and therefore recognized your incompetence so when you say "I'm as competent as you" it means the same as "you're as incompetent as me"
No further discussion is necessary if folks understand Dunning-Kruger they'll understand how it applys.
 
... if folks understand Dunning-Kruger they'll understand how it applys (sic).
Click to expand...
Of course.

Here's an interesting observation. In my last post I made several categorical statements which, if incorrect, should be easily disproved with quotes from the Dunning & Kruger paper.

But rather than taking the simple approach to proving your point, (assuming, of course, that the paper supports it); you instead chose to respond with "hand-waving", denigration and self-promotion.
 
Self deception in confidence of preparedness and abilities has been the Achilles heel of many defense plans.
Click to expand...

DNS, I think lack of understanding is more common than self-deception. While I am in the camp that says a person can carry weapons with different controls, I do agree that what we don't know we don't know, and what we think we know that isn't so, are areas of concern. I think training and practicing to the best of our abilities and resources, and carrying weapons we are comfortable and proficient with is the best answer. There are no guarantees though.
 
I would not consider carrying a pistol with a safety that had to be pushed up to fire.
Click to expand...

To me this is an important part of the equation. Switching from a 1911 to a Glock when you are trained predominantly on a 1911 is no big deal as the Glock is a simpler platform. You are simply going to swipe at a safety that is not there.

Switching to a firearm with a radically different safety placement or direction of function would probably be a much different story.
 
A soldier should probably carry and train with his gear the same way every time. I'm not sure that applies to every concealed carry permit holder's situation.

Some police officers carry Glocks or other full size autos as a primary and carry J frames as bugs. I don't know any officer that walks around off duty open carrying their full size G22 or other auto in a duty holster. One officer I know carries a J frame in an ankle holster as a bug but carries it IWB as a primary when off duty. I'm not about to tell my police officer friends they are wrong for carrying a J frame IWB when off duty.

Is there a benefit for carrying the same firearm in the same holster all the time? Sure. But it's not always practical. It doesn't make sense to change carry guns and holsters as if they are fashion accessories but there are practical reasons someone might change what or how they carry.
 
How does this all apply to back-up guns?

If we assume that doing a carry-rotation with different types of handguns is a very bad idea, then should we also assume that backing up (say) a 1911 with a S&W J-frame is a similarly bad idea?

Also, I assume that many of us would at least consider carrying a different sidearm (and perhaps using a different carrying method) if we were doing a late-Fall hike in the woods vs. driving out to a dinner on a mild evening vs. taking a sunny stroll on the beach on a hot summer day. It may well be that the "optimal gun" to be worn under a jacket in black bear territory is going to be a different type of gun than what one might consider optimal in shorts and a T-shirt.

Is using different platforms in those different environments a bad idea?
 
I guess I don't understand the practicality of having a "rotation" where you switch up the pistol you carry, particularly if it's between functionally different pistols, just to "change things up". Your personal needs should dictate what you carry; for example I don't consider changing from a pocket gun in the summer to a larger pistol in the colder months a "rotation" - rather weather and clothing nessecitate a different system. Ideally these different systems should be similar in function. Your defensive pistol is not a fashion item; changing the system should be driven by a practical reason. Sticking to the same pistol or closely similar pistols also simplifies training and costs of accessories.
 
My friend "Ben" only carries one gun in the same holster. It's a SCCY carried AIWB. He rarely practises and has had no training with it. He doesn't always carry it but he has only one firearm that he carries.

My friend "Dave" carries two firearms when he is at work. A G22 in a retention holster and a snub in an ankle holster. When he isn't working, he carries the snub IWB. He trains and practices regularly and qualifies with both firearms for his work. He has two firearms in his carry "rotation" but has at least one, if not both, of them on his person at all times.

I think my friend "Dave" is better prepared for violence than "Ben" despite the fact that he has a carry rotation and "Ben" does not.
 
I guess everyone has their own way of looking at this subject. As far as myself I have ano extensive carry rotation. Just based on my own experience, a person don't really loose their head when confronted with a deadly situation. My experience is that you actually become more focused, and better prepared for the confrontation. I truly believe that anyone can be competent with any number of different guns.

As long as someone is competent and confident with their (carry rotation), there is no reason not to carry what suits you. My current carry rotation includes a browning high power, a glockenspiel 19, a FN compact HP, a browning bdm, a Remington r51, a model 36 just frame, some light weight hammer less j frame, a model 10 k frame and a know frame 3 inch round button model 13 .357

And I rotate them all the time....
 
My experience is that you actually become more focused, and better prepared for the confrontation.
Click to expand...
What do you mean by "prepared for the confrontation"? It is most likely that the confrontation will be completely unexpected, that it will involve someone at an unpredictable distance and from an unpredictable direction, and that the response will have to be nearly instantaneous.

The civilian is not heading out after someone, or getting ready to draw and shoot at a target, when a self defense situation arises.

I truly believe that anyone can be competent with any number of different guns.
Click to expand...
That is not the issue.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top