At the upper end of demonstrated practiced expertise there are examples like Bill Jordan's court performance in defense of someone who had drawn and shot a subject before they had even had a chance to clear leather. In Jordan's demo he had a court subject (think it was a deputy) hold a cocked revolver, finger on the trigger, with instructions to "shoot" when he was perceived as drawing his own handgun. Those who are familiar with the account know the rest; Jordan drew and "fired" so fast that the demo assistant just stood there with his mouth open. He didn't even pull the trigger, let alone beat Jordan to the shot.
CCW & Speed of Deployment
- Thread starter Unique 5.7
- Start date
Double Naught Spy
New member
Yes, there are some fast people out there, but they are not the norm.
I have read about the Jordon court demonstration. I am not convinced he didn't have something arranged with the deputy or that the deputy didn't have some problem in pulling the trigger. Decent human response to a stimulus is about 0.20 seconds. We ran a whole class through with a timer, gun out, finger on trigger, firing the gun when they heard the time beep. Most times were 0.20-0.24 with a couple below 0.20 and a couple above 0.24. The class had 20 people.
So, I see no way in which the deputy could not have fired before Jordon was able to draw his gun.
Here is one version of the story from http://www.wyomingtalesandtrails.com/rocksprings2.html
Assuming the information presented is correct, Jordan messed up his numbers in stating that the normal human reponse of 0.50 seconds. If he did actually manage to draw in 0.27 seconds, it was because he was NOT carrying concealed. Also, he was doing a demonstration on speed to show just how fast another officer could draw, Cantrell. Not replicated was the fact that Cantrell was sitting in the passenger seat of a car when he did his supposedly miraculously fast draw. Oh, and Cantrell was not carrying concealed either.
In trial practice, lawyers frequently save the best witness for last and will ocassionly make a "show." Juries remember best that which they heard first and that which they heard last. Thus, the media frenzy continued. Spence called as his last witness, a former border patrolman, National Rifle Association shootist, and author of the book No Second Place Winner, Bill Jordan. Spence received permission for a court room demonstration. A gun was loaded with blanks and a young deputy was told to point the gun at Jordan and if Jordan made any move towards his gun to pull the trigger. All of a sudden a shot was fired in the courtroom. The deputy stood there chagrinned, the deputy's weapon still unfired. Jordan testified that the normal human reaction time is 1/2 second, but he, Jordan, had trained himself to draw and fire in 0.27 seconds, less than half the time for someone else merely to recognize that an opponent is going for his gun.
I have read about the Jordon court demonstration. I am not convinced he didn't have something arranged with the deputy or that the deputy didn't have some problem in pulling the trigger. Decent human response to a stimulus is about 0.20 seconds. We ran a whole class through with a timer, gun out, finger on trigger, firing the gun when they heard the time beep. Most times were 0.20-0.24 with a couple below 0.20 and a couple above 0.24. The class had 20 people.
So, I see no way in which the deputy could not have fired before Jordon was able to draw his gun.
Here is one version of the story from http://www.wyomingtalesandtrails.com/rocksprings2.html
Assuming the information presented is correct, Jordan messed up his numbers in stating that the normal human reponse of 0.50 seconds. If he did actually manage to draw in 0.27 seconds, it was because he was NOT carrying concealed. Also, he was doing a demonstration on speed to show just how fast another officer could draw, Cantrell. Not replicated was the fact that Cantrell was sitting in the passenger seat of a car when he did his supposedly miraculously fast draw. Oh, and Cantrell was not carrying concealed either.
In trial practice, lawyers frequently save the best witness for last and will ocassionly make a "show." Juries remember best that which they heard first and that which they heard last. Thus, the media frenzy continued. Spence called as his last witness, a former border patrolman, National Rifle Association shootist, and author of the book No Second Place Winner, Bill Jordan. Spence received permission for a court room demonstration. A gun was loaded with blanks and a young deputy was told to point the gun at Jordan and if Jordan made any move towards his gun to pull the trigger. All of a sudden a shot was fired in the courtroom. The deputy stood there chagrinned, the deputy's weapon still unfired. Jordan testified that the normal human reaction time is 1/2 second, but he, Jordan, had trained himself to draw and fire in 0.27 seconds, less than half the time for someone else merely to recognize that an opponent is going for his gun.
Unique 5.7
New member
I think many people here missed the "all else being equal" criteria. That includes the concealment method, the shooter's skill, etc. A little background: We're all tennis players & shooters and are very familar with swingweight and how too much in a racquet can result in many missed shots, esp. volleys. I really don't see how (all else being equal) a gun weighing over twice the weight of another gun could be deployed more rapidly and get off the first shot. Anybody arguing differently is unfamilar with basic physics. The real question to me is if the smaller gun can get off a 2nd or 3rd shot before the heavier gun gets off its first shot.
All else is never equal.
That's why some win, and others lose. It's the human factor.
Your original query/statement left out so many of the "variables" (What else is equal?) as to render it almost meaningless. It's the other posters adding details that have given the thread life.
What are the "equal" conditions? What do you mean by deployment? Both guns in hand, at the low ready, fingers on the trigger? Both guns concealed in the same concealment method? Are you trying to say the deployment is slower, or the actual shooting is slower? If deployment method is "equal", are you trying to say that a smaller, lighter gun will deploy and shoot faster than a bigger, heavier gun, based on the laws of physics?
Just WHAT are you saying?
CB3
That's why some win, and others lose. It's the human factor.
Your original query/statement left out so many of the "variables" (What else is equal?) as to render it almost meaningless. It's the other posters adding details that have given the thread life.
What are the "equal" conditions? What do you mean by deployment? Both guns in hand, at the low ready, fingers on the trigger? Both guns concealed in the same concealment method? Are you trying to say the deployment is slower, or the actual shooting is slower? If deployment method is "equal", are you trying to say that a smaller, lighter gun will deploy and shoot faster than a bigger, heavier gun, based on the laws of physics?
Just WHAT are you saying?
CB3
Vanguard.45
New member
A matter of ounces.
Unique5.7 wrote:
"I really don't see how (all else being equal) a gun weighing over twice the weight of another gun could be deployed more rapidly and get off the first shot."
First of all, you're talking about a matter of 20 ounces, give or take. Maybe for some people, that's an issue, but not to those of us training our bodies to bicep curl 100 pounds or bench press 300 pounds.
Second of all, the essence of fighting on the street is to NOT have things equal. If you're wanting to do a science experiment about draw speeds, keep it in the laboratory. On the streets, cheating is the rule.
Third, there are three Types of Speed relevant to a gunfight: Perceptual Speed, Mental Speed, and Physical Speed. This is why little old men can whip the young men's a$$es in martial arts classes. It's not because they're physically faster, but rather because they are able to perceive problems and decide what actions to take faster and more appropriately.
Me? I carry a 1911, and while I may not be able to "whip it out" as fast as a guy with a .32, you can probably bet it's going to already be in my hands before the trouble really gets-a-brewing. Twenty-one years of martial arts taught me a little bit about what the Japanese call "heiho" (strategy). Gunfights and fistfights are both still fights.
Vanguard.45
Unique5.7 wrote:
"I really don't see how (all else being equal) a gun weighing over twice the weight of another gun could be deployed more rapidly and get off the first shot."
First of all, you're talking about a matter of 20 ounces, give or take. Maybe for some people, that's an issue, but not to those of us training our bodies to bicep curl 100 pounds or bench press 300 pounds.
Second of all, the essence of fighting on the street is to NOT have things equal. If you're wanting to do a science experiment about draw speeds, keep it in the laboratory. On the streets, cheating is the rule.
Third, there are three Types of Speed relevant to a gunfight: Perceptual Speed, Mental Speed, and Physical Speed. This is why little old men can whip the young men's a$$es in martial arts classes. It's not because they're physically faster, but rather because they are able to perceive problems and decide what actions to take faster and more appropriately.
Me? I carry a 1911, and while I may not be able to "whip it out" as fast as a guy with a .32, you can probably bet it's going to already be in my hands before the trouble really gets-a-brewing. Twenty-one years of martial arts taught me a little bit about what the Japanese call "heiho" (strategy). Gunfights and fistfights are both still fights.
Vanguard.45
Unique 5.7
New member
Some of your questions are answered in my original post. Since I am referring to CCW, then you know that your "Both guns in hand..." question is irrelevant, since it does not fit the criteria. Leaving out so many variables is totally intentional so as to uncloud the issue and make the respective guns the only significant variable. Your questions make me think you are not familar with this methodology. I suggest you read about the scientific method and your questions will be answered about what "all else being equal" means. This is to make the difference in the guns the meaningful variable. What do I mean by deployment? The firing of the first shot is completion of the deployment, that seems quite clear, no? What am I trying to say? How about this: I see a lot of talk here about which gun, caliber, and load "should" be used without much heed to how quickly the first round(s) may be fired. I sometimes wonder if, all else being equal, (skill of shooter, reaction time, awareness, concealment method, etc.) if some Beretta 92FS shooter using Cor Bon 115's @ 1350 fps (me) is going to find himself stitched up with 2 or 3 .22LR shots from somebody with a Beretta Bobcat or .32ACP Tomcat.
My post was not carefully read, all this talk about bets and holsters misses the point. Dwight, nice post, but you are one of several who introduced a new variable, that is not the point at all. One person using the open hands at his sides start and the other with a gun in his pocket now makes a variable more important than the guns, not what the question was about. But, I'll agree, the guy with the pea shooter in his hands hsa an advantage over the guy with the .45 in his pocket. See what I mean?
My post was not carefully read, all this talk about bets and holsters misses the point. Dwight, nice post, but you are one of several who introduced a new variable, that is not the point at all. One person using the open hands at his sides start and the other with a gun in his pocket now makes a variable more important than the guns, not what the question was about. But, I'll agree, the guy with the pea shooter in his hands hsa an advantage over the guy with the .45 in his pocket. See what I mean?
I believe that a TRAINED shooter can draw from concealment and get several shots on target in under 3 seconds.
I have been shooting with my Bro. in Law several times. He's FBI, and his training regimen is specifically designed to speed the draw from concealment and get rapid on-target shots. I have watched him draw from concealment and put 3 shots on target in under 2 seconds. Sounds close to full-auto. BAM-BAM-BAM. This is with a Glock .40. I don't see how he can come down from recoil and get his sight picture so accurate, but he says its all training. Apparently, you can train your grip and wrist to the level of recoil, so the muzzle flip comes back to the sight picture, with fairly good accuracy. He doesn't try for one-hole group. Palm-sized at 10 yards is good enough.
He really changed the way I train. I could print smaller groups than him--slow-fire, offhand, because that's how I trained. Not very practical for those situations in which you need a handgun for defensive purposes.
Now I train for rapid follow-ups (where ranges allow--mostly "informal" ranges), and I train in "draw from concealment." Most ranges won't allow that, so I do that training in my garage with Speer's plastic training bullets. Primer-only power, but the POI is close enough to regular ammo that the training effect holds. I have seen my draw-to-first-shot-on-target times fall significantly with training.
And if you have ever seen Jerry Miculek's (sp?) video of his world-record performance with a revolver, you will never doubt that a repeater can be shot a quick as a full-auto.
I have been shooting with my Bro. in Law several times. He's FBI, and his training regimen is specifically designed to speed the draw from concealment and get rapid on-target shots. I have watched him draw from concealment and put 3 shots on target in under 2 seconds. Sounds close to full-auto. BAM-BAM-BAM. This is with a Glock .40. I don't see how he can come down from recoil and get his sight picture so accurate, but he says its all training. Apparently, you can train your grip and wrist to the level of recoil, so the muzzle flip comes back to the sight picture, with fairly good accuracy. He doesn't try for one-hole group. Palm-sized at 10 yards is good enough.
He really changed the way I train. I could print smaller groups than him--slow-fire, offhand, because that's how I trained. Not very practical for those situations in which you need a handgun for defensive purposes.
Now I train for rapid follow-ups (where ranges allow--mostly "informal" ranges), and I train in "draw from concealment." Most ranges won't allow that, so I do that training in my garage with Speer's plastic training bullets. Primer-only power, but the POI is close enough to regular ammo that the training effect holds. I have seen my draw-to-first-shot-on-target times fall significantly with training.
And if you have ever seen Jerry Miculek's (sp?) video of his world-record performance with a revolver, you will never doubt that a repeater can be shot a quick as a full-auto.
Quote From 5.7: "I sometimes wonder if, all else being equal, (skill of shooter, reaction time, awareness, concealment method, etc.) if some Beretta 92FS shooter using Cor Bon 115's @ 1350 fps (me) is going to find himself stitched up with 2 or 3 .22LR shots from somebody with a Beretta Bobcat or .32ACP Tomcat.
You came asking a question, but want to argue with those who give you an answer that you don't like.
Yes, the .45, or .40 or the 9mm will likely be faster. Have you ever timed your draw from concealment (all things being equal) - same vest or jacket and same stlye of CCW holster (let's say Comp-Tac Kydex for a common example) with a small framed "mouse gun.?" I have. And I can get a grip MUCH faster on my "full size" Glock 19 or Glock 23. And faster grip is key to faster deployment.
I would suggest getting a timer and renting/borrowing a few handguns - and then go practice. I'm not fast, and I'm no expert (IDPA SS in SSP). At 7 yards it's not hard (with practice) to get two COM hits and one head shot (on IDPA target) in 2.5 seconds from concealment (using IDPA legal holster) with 9mm Glock 19. My times with .40 Glock are ~0.2 seconds slower.
I've done enough of this to know that if I were to go to a SIGNIFICANTLY larger pistol (not larger caliber - larger PISTOL), or to a SIGNIFICANTLY smaller pistol, those times (even with practice) will suffer. There's an ergonomic "point of diminishing returns" (for ME).
Getting back to your original question/scenario: Your friends say that THEY can deploy the .32ACP and get multiple hits quicker than THEY can get one hit with a .45ACP. This may certainly be the case - but their ability, or inability to perform, doesn't represent the norm. Maybe THEY have simply praticed more with their mouse guns.
YMMV
You came asking a question, but want to argue with those who give you an answer that you don't like.
Yes, the .45, or .40 or the 9mm will likely be faster. Have you ever timed your draw from concealment (all things being equal) - same vest or jacket and same stlye of CCW holster (let's say Comp-Tac Kydex for a common example) with a small framed "mouse gun.?" I have. And I can get a grip MUCH faster on my "full size" Glock 19 or Glock 23. And faster grip is key to faster deployment.
I would suggest getting a timer and renting/borrowing a few handguns - and then go practice. I'm not fast, and I'm no expert (IDPA SS in SSP). At 7 yards it's not hard (with practice) to get two COM hits and one head shot (on IDPA target) in 2.5 seconds from concealment (using IDPA legal holster) with 9mm Glock 19. My times with .40 Glock are ~0.2 seconds slower.
I've done enough of this to know that if I were to go to a SIGNIFICANTLY larger pistol (not larger caliber - larger PISTOL), or to a SIGNIFICANTLY smaller pistol, those times (even with practice) will suffer. There's an ergonomic "point of diminishing returns" (for ME).
Getting back to your original question/scenario: Your friends say that THEY can deploy the .32ACP and get multiple hits quicker than THEY can get one hit with a .45ACP. This may certainly be the case - but their ability, or inability to perform, doesn't represent the norm. Maybe THEY have simply praticed more with their mouse guns.
YMMV
riverkeeper
New member
What dawg23 said ...
that's why my 40 oz 44 mag AND the 15 oz 38spl mouse guns have after market grips that perfectly fit my hand, come to hand, naturally point, come to target and fire by themselves.
that's why my 40 oz 44 mag AND the 15 oz 38spl mouse guns have after market grips that perfectly fit my hand, come to hand, naturally point, come to target and fire by themselves.
Wow, lots of thread drift. I know Ed Cantrell, I had his kid in a class (I are a skool teacher). Gerry Spence grew up and lived about 20 miles form my home, I have visited with him too. FWIW, Cantrell shot Rosa in a car and the only account we have is Ed's story. The driver just heard a boom and ducked. As for Jordan's court room antics, yes he is fast but, well never mind. Sooner or later common sense might prevail.
Comparing apples to oranges makes for interestng Internet chatter, but speed of deployment is pretty easy to measure. It's a simple matter to strap on your pistola, get a timer, and go see what your reaction time happens to be as well as your draw time.
As for which is faster to draw and shoot, a 1911 or a Tom Cat, well I own both. I am much faster with the 1911 because of the size of the pistol. More positve grip, better trigger, superior ergonomics, better pointing characteristics and so on.
Let's try this. I have a digital movie camera. I'll strap on my trusty old 1911 and go film a couple of draws. Have your mouse gun buddy do the same. We can watch the films and compare the timers and see how it all shakes out.
Comparing apples to oranges makes for interestng Internet chatter, but speed of deployment is pretty easy to measure. It's a simple matter to strap on your pistola, get a timer, and go see what your reaction time happens to be as well as your draw time.
As for which is faster to draw and shoot, a 1911 or a Tom Cat, well I own both. I am much faster with the 1911 because of the size of the pistol. More positve grip, better trigger, superior ergonomics, better pointing characteristics and so on.
Let's try this. I have a digital movie camera. I'll strap on my trusty old 1911 and go film a couple of draws. Have your mouse gun buddy do the same. We can watch the films and compare the timers and see how it all shakes out.
FrankDrebin
Moderator
What kind of full auto can Jerry shoot as fast as?
Unique 5.7
New member
Dawg23 - Some of the discussion wasn't relevant to the topic, so I am not arguing, but dismissing those irrelevencies (bets?. You make a good point, perhaps people should practice more with their mouse guns so they can draw them more quickly than heavy guns. I think you may be right about ergonomics and avoiding extremes. It seems that the mouse guns would also give one many more options in concealment, which could aid of speed of deployment even more.
MX5 gets the idea and lists some criteria that could make "all else" not equal and favour the heavier gun in his particular case.
MX5 gets the idea and lists some criteria that could make "all else" not equal and favour the heavier gun in his particular case.
Vanguard.45
New member
Unique5.7 wrote. . .
"Are we looking too much at one stop performance statistics and not paying enough attention to first hits and multiple hits?"
A Response:
From the context of this question, it would seem that you are wanting to know how relevant the issue of "quick-draw and the weight of one's gun" is to self-defense. I would say that the weight of one's gun or the nano-seconds difference in draw times is no more relevant to a real gunfight than the effectiveness of the caliber one is employing.
Again, to put the "all else being equal" stamp on a self-defense scenario is like saying "What if Muhammad Ali fought Muhammad Ali and each wore different sized gloves- who would win?" The reason no one seems to worry too much about the single aspect of "quick draw and the weight of one's gun" is because the "all else being equal" gunfight is never going to happen. I realize that you seem to believe that no one here trying to respond to your question is being realistic.
The reality is that those of us interested in surviving a gunfight do work on our speed of draw along with sight picture, sight alignment, use of cover, movement while engaging targets, trigger control, handgun retention techniques, handgun disarms, and the deadly art of the NINJA!!!! Okay, maybe not that last one, but you get the idea.
It is an interesting idea you bring up, but as I said in my last post on this topic, speed comes in many flavors, and the .45 in your hand is worth 10 mouseguns in the holster.
Vanguard.45
Gunfighter and Astronaut (Okay, maybe not that last one)
"Are we looking too much at one stop performance statistics and not paying enough attention to first hits and multiple hits?"
A Response:
From the context of this question, it would seem that you are wanting to know how relevant the issue of "quick-draw and the weight of one's gun" is to self-defense. I would say that the weight of one's gun or the nano-seconds difference in draw times is no more relevant to a real gunfight than the effectiveness of the caliber one is employing.
Again, to put the "all else being equal" stamp on a self-defense scenario is like saying "What if Muhammad Ali fought Muhammad Ali and each wore different sized gloves- who would win?" The reason no one seems to worry too much about the single aspect of "quick draw and the weight of one's gun" is because the "all else being equal" gunfight is never going to happen. I realize that you seem to believe that no one here trying to respond to your question is being realistic.
The reality is that those of us interested in surviving a gunfight do work on our speed of draw along with sight picture, sight alignment, use of cover, movement while engaging targets, trigger control, handgun retention techniques, handgun disarms, and the deadly art of the NINJA!!!! Okay, maybe not that last one, but you get the idea.
It is an interesting idea you bring up, but as I said in my last post on this topic, speed comes in many flavors, and the .45 in your hand is worth 10 mouseguns in the holster.
Vanguard.45
Gunfighter and Astronaut (Okay, maybe not that last one)
Plenty of thread drift, but some of it is pretty interesting. The film of Jerry setting the record is really making the rounds on the Internet shooting forums. I wonder why it took so long? Smith and Wesson's write up is on their Website here.
Jerry fired 8 shots in one second from the first shot to the last shot. That's seven splits averaging .14 seconds. That's just absolutley incredible with a revolver. Wouldn't that be 428 rounds per minute? What's the cyclic rate of something like an UZI or an HK MP5?
Jerry fired 8 shots in one second from the first shot to the last shot. That's seven splits averaging .14 seconds. That's just absolutley incredible with a revolver. Wouldn't that be 428 rounds per minute? What's the cyclic rate of something like an UZI or an HK MP5?
In the movie Collateral, Tom Cruise shoots some thugs in an alley VERY fast. He draws from concealment and places two shots in the first BG and one in the second BG for a total of three shots fired. He might have fired more, but this is what I remember. I don’t know if it was under one second, but it was fast enough. I understand it is a movie, but if you watch the “making of” section on the DVD you will see him training at a range practicing this very same move. I believe the guy training him is a former British SAS operator who also did the firearms training for the movie Heat. If you have seen Heat, you know it has great weapons handling. I think anything is possible, so three shots under one second from concealment... why not?
PressCheck
Moderator
I'd take that bet in a heartbeat, using a Glock 21, and a Kydex holster. My fastest time .78. My average time 1.2sec. I am not a "gamer".
It's called the limits of human function. Then again just because world class shooters aren't performing at that level doesn't mean some Hollywood actor can't pull it off with ease.
Presscheck has posted some very realistic times for a very accomplished shooter. He doesn't state what yardage his 1.2 second par time draw is performed at, but that's about the time an IPSC Master will take to an 8 inch plate (with excellent sight picture) at 10 yards in practice. In a match the time will obviously vary depending on the difficulty level of the shot. Presscheck's personal best draw is on par with on demand draws done at spitting distance by world class pistoleros using a stock gun out of a kydex holster when doing speed demonstrations to students.
It's pretty obvious the majority of the guys posting on this Website aren't competition shooters and I suspect most of them don't have timers. Unfortunately, Internet lore has warped reality for a lot of folks. If you get a chance to work with a timer, start with the pistol in your hand at low ready (forget the draw) and at the beep shoot two rounds into a target then a third round into another target. Check your time. See if you can beat Tom.
I posted a brief film in another thread just to see what guys thought about the shooting in relation to elapsed time. I posted the frill because I am the shooter and I know the draw time, split, and transition. It's three shots on some Steel Challenge plates at 7 yards with a 1911 and an Uncle Mike's holster. Here's the link. To do that drill in one second I would need to be at least 30% faster. Kind of puts things into perspective.
PressCheck
Moderator
Five yards. Again, I'm not a "gamer", but I shoot 12-1,300 rounds a month.
CAPTAIN MIKE
New member
There is NO Substitute...
There is no substitute for good, old-fashioned Muscle Memory developed through Good Training, Good Habits and LOTS of practice. Whether dry-firing or live-firing on the range, practice and more practice will help you develop the skills.
I concur with those that say drawing from concealed carry is the best way to practice. I do that on a regular basis and I encourage others to do the same thing.
The likelihood of using the skill is one factor. The 'muscle memory' of a thousand repetitions is another. Draw from concealed carry as you would as a CCW permit holder. Practice in combat-realistic ranges. Don't stand still.
Practice drawing, issuing a verbal command and shooting as you move laterally or away from the threat. Practice as you would "do" not as it might look in front of some silly mirror.
And - just for realism - though I normally recommend eye & ear protection, just once in a very blue moon, try shooting your daily carry gun at your IDPA type target on the outdoor range without ear protection sometime so that the loud BOOM is something you've experienced, at least once. I don't recommend it very often because of the damage you can do to your hearing, but hey, how many of us walk around in daily carry with our eye & ear protection on while carrying our CCW firearm????
There is no substitute for good, old-fashioned Muscle Memory developed through Good Training, Good Habits and LOTS of practice. Whether dry-firing or live-firing on the range, practice and more practice will help you develop the skills.
I concur with those that say drawing from concealed carry is the best way to practice. I do that on a regular basis and I encourage others to do the same thing.
The likelihood of using the skill is one factor. The 'muscle memory' of a thousand repetitions is another. Draw from concealed carry as you would as a CCW permit holder. Practice in combat-realistic ranges. Don't stand still.
Practice drawing, issuing a verbal command and shooting as you move laterally or away from the threat. Practice as you would "do" not as it might look in front of some silly mirror.
And - just for realism - though I normally recommend eye & ear protection, just once in a very blue moon, try shooting your daily carry gun at your IDPA type target on the outdoor range without ear protection sometime so that the loud BOOM is something you've experienced, at least once. I don't recommend it very often because of the damage you can do to your hearing, but hey, how many of us walk around in daily carry with our eye & ear protection on while carrying our CCW firearm????
Quote: Unique 5.7 said: "It seems that the mouse guns would also give one many more options in concealment, which could aid of speed of deployment even more."
Concealment options? Yes.
Aid speed of deployment? Not likely.
Quit listening to your friends. Quit listening to us. Quit speculating. Go borrow a timer, practice, and draw (no pun intended) your own conclusions.
Concealment options? Yes.
Aid speed of deployment? Not likely.
Quit listening to your friends. Quit listening to us. Quit speculating. Go borrow a timer, practice, and draw (no pun intended) your own conclusions.