Range report seeking the perfect edc

Keep on practicing with what you actually carry. For it is written: When TSHTF, you will get one opportunity. And you will hit a target far better with the handgun you carry every day...and actually practice with...than the one that sits in the safe.

I was not happy knowing that 30-50% of the time I was shooting an innocent bystander.
Click to expand...
While I am happy to see that you take responsibility for each round fired, in this case, you are making an entirely invalid assumption.
 
Ack.
That's what I've been saying.
Don't leave any of them in the safe.
Practice with them all, until it doesn't matter which one you have in your hands.
Even the other guy's.
 
Last edited:
In a real event, the defender is doing a LOT during the draw. Here's an example, using a high % situation-- low light, threat is a pair of men who reveal themselves as a threat within 5 feet. During the draw, the defender is...

- locating the firearm
- clearing cover garments
- locking into master grip
- moving to create space, backward or sideways
- yelling to draw attention and to try to 'freeze' the BGs briefly to create time
- presenting into a retention position
- observing BG reactions to defensive movement and introduction of lethal force response. IE, identifying "shoot/no shoot"
- prioritizing targets
- mapping an exit
- identifying what is behind the targets
- trying not to trip while moving

90% of what is described here is intuitive.. and the time necessary to complete is fleeting. You can assign the same level of independent decision to eating cereal


Having been through it, I get badly agitated when I see people reference Nutnfancy style, multiple pistol, multiple method, multiple location carry rotations. What it speaks to is obvious: complete disconnect from the single most crucial aspect of private citizen DGUs.

Your idea of practical carry may not work all that well with people who carry fighting weapons in many different arenas ( sea, mountains, aircraft, ATV, horseback, ) or where the working spaces and logistics are not always the same. Nutnfancy may be long winded but his methods and evaluations are spot on for those he is addressing and maybe not so much for urban carriers doing light everyday tasks.


the faster you are able to deploy it, the less likely you are to have to shoot.

I think the mindset that "if I get my pistol out quickly, I might not have to use it" is a counter anything I have ever learned about fighting. It is possible that a person not need to shoot but this mindset escapes me.
 
Last edited:
Speaking only for myself, enough effort is when I'm satisfied that I can have complete confidence with the gun in my hand and not care what it is - without a thought.
Click to expand...
Let's take a step back because I see where the disconnect is.

How do you define being proficient with a gun? What gives you complete confidence with a gun? I would define it as being able to do, at the least, all of the following:

  • The ability to rapidly draw from my normal carry position (including dealing with concealment garments) and fire multiple shots rapidly and accurately at multiple targets and reasonable self-defense ranges while moving and making use of cover. That includes constructively dealing with any safeties on the gun--manual levers/buttons/grip safeties, etc.
  • The ability to shoot with either hand and from retention positions.
  • The ability to clear any type of malfunction rapidly and effectively while keeping eyes on the target.
  • The ability to reload rapidly while keeping eyes on the target.
  • The ability to safe and reholster the gun while keeping eyes on the target/surroundings.

Achieving that level of unconscious competency with a pistol is not a simple task, it's not something that can be done quickly, nor is it a level of competency that is lasting. If you stop practicing or don't practice enough, those skills will degrade. I don't know many people who have the resources (time, money, etc.) to truly achieve and maintain this level of skill with a single platform, let alone with many platforms.
Not getting good with various types can be a handicap.
And I'd druther not be handicapped.
Click to expand...
You're focusing on only one aspect of this topic, and it's on the aspect that is the least likely for you to encounter.

Not being fully proficient with your carry platform is a handicap. Moreover, since the odds are tremendously in favor your being required to use your carry platform as opposed to a scavenged gun, that's a handicap that is actually likely to have an impact on any of your future deadly force encounters.

Not being fully proficient with all platforms is a handicap, but the reality of deadly force encounters is heavily in favor of this not actually being a factor since the vast majority of deadly force encounters are not resolved by the defender using a scavenged gun.

The reality is, that unless you have an unusual level of dedication, and an unusual amount of time and money to spend practicing, you will not be able to achieve unconscious competence with all the possible platforms you might encounter. So you will have a handicap--by dividing your practice resources, you'll handicap yourself by not achieving the level of competence you could have with your primary carry gun. And that's a handicap that could really matter.
 
Johnska is spot on.

Fireforged,

In the moment, with tunnel vision, auditory exclusion, threat fixation, and everything else happening, many of those things are not intuitive.

As for drawing fast potentially preventing the need to shoot... Yes. I have lived through it. If you identify a threat and deploy a deterrent fast enough, you may persuade the threat to change their thinking. In my case, the BG revealed a holstered firearm, and moved to produce it deliberately. I was not deliberate, and had my firearm in hand before he cleared his holster.

A man I know was watching a movie alone in his living room on Halloween 2012. Someone kicked his front door in, and G turned, drew, and targeted the invader (without standing up, btw!). The invader was a couple steps from the couch, saw the 1911, turned right around, and ran away.

In either case, the time it would take to process the question, "where is my gun?!" could have been the difference in being assaulted or not. By knowing what and where we carry without having to think about it, each of us avoided having to fire.
 
^ precisely why I carry 24/7 on my person. On the couch right now watching TV and...

u6yzyheh.jpg
 
Last edited:
You said that you couldn't find evidence of the use of alternate weapons in a real situation.
Here's the story of the infamous 1986 FBI Miami shootout with at least three instances of lost guns, the use of backup, multiple and the other guy's weapons.
All in a single and well documented incident.
Judge for yourself the merits of being capable with more than just the one you carry.
(And hope the bad guy isn't).
http://www.thegunzone.com/11april86.html
 
g.willikers said:
You said that you couldn't find evidence of the use of alternate weapons in a real situation.
Here's the story of the infamous 1986 FBI Miami shootout with at least three instances of lost guns, the use of backup, multiple and the other guy's weapons.
All in a single and well documented incident.
Judge for yourself the merits of being capable with more than just the one you carry.
(And hope the bad guy isn't).
http://www.thegunzone.com/11april86.html
Click to expand...

My lord -.-

Okay, remember when I said the whole thing about driving different cars? It can be done without taking a formula one course training on it. It's simple and basic to operate another vehicle. It's the same song and dance.


Same with handguns. Same darn thing. We're gun enthusiast. Your gun most likely has the same function of another gun. In that rare rabbit out of the hat scenario, you'll more than likely be able to use that outside weapon. It'll be mediocre, and not as well as the weapon you've trained extensively with. But bullets will be flying out of that barrel nonetheless. Keeping you in the fight.

Unless by your logic once again, you stop time and say "Be right back. Let me run a magazine through this at the range."
 
Last edited:
My lord -.-

Okay, remember when I said the whole thing about driving different cars? It can be don't without taking a formula one course training on it. It simple and basic to operate another vehicle. It's the same song and dance.


Same with handguns. Same darn thing. We're gun enthusiast. Your gun most likely has the same function of another gun. In that rare rabbit out of the hat scenario, you'll more than likely be able to use that outside weapon. It'll be mediocre, and not as well as the weapon you've trained extensively with. But bullets will be flying out of that barrel nonetheless. Keeping you in the fight.

Unless by your logic once again, you stop time and say "Be right back. Let me run a magazine through this at the range."
Click to expand...

I tend to agree with Constantine's point and will add that there are only so many ways to fight with arms, its not all that deep. Should you be reasonably proficient with your selected platform? sure.. Should you have a good understanding of the methodology of fighting tactics and a fighting mindset.. sure. Do you have to be as good with all manner of weapons and arms in order to be formidable? No, I think that is over-intellectualizing the process. I believe that there is a fighting science, I will not dispute that but when people begin to describe 2 men fighting in an alley like a Military campaign, I consider it equally over thought.
 
Last edited:
Fireforged,

In the moment, with tunnel vision, auditory exclusion, threat fixation, and everything else happening, many of those things are not intuitive.
Click to expand...

Sure they are, any trained/practiced response can be intuitive during a crisis... Its is why we train. Tunnel vision auditory exclusion, threat fixation yadda yadda are not harbingers of doom.. They are part of a prewired survival mode that effects everyone differently and to different degrees. A person can certainly benefit from the fact that it is part of our hard wiring system and benefit even further if they understand it and manage it so that they can work through the crisis. Anyone who has ever faired well to avoid what seemed to be a imminent car crash has experienced the same thing. If you ask them how many times the applied the brake, gas or how many times the turned the wheel left or right, they will say ["I don't know, I just did it"]. If a person has trained and has become proficient in the use or operation of any device, machine, tool, vehicle.. They will likely default to their particular level of experience during a crisis without much thought. Scientific terms, Military sounding acronyms, color codes, decision trees and force ladders are all well and good but at some point a hyper focus on such things (outside the classroom) may turn what should be a millisecond consideration into the realm of overthinking.

As for drawing fast potentially preventing the need to shoot... Yes. I have lived through it. If you identify a threat and deploy a deterrent fast enough, you may persuade the threat to change their thinking.
Click to expand...

Sure, but where I disagree is what is on a defenders mind when they make the decision to pull their weapon in a life threatening crisis. There will always be those situation where a person does not have to use force or should not but in the moment (in the mind) of the defender there is resolute intent and passive intent. One could argue all day about the pros and cons of each mindset as it relates to fighting but I politely disagree with the passive aspect of pulling a weapon.

In either case, the time it would take to process the question, "where is my gun?!" could have been the difference in being assaulted or not. By knowing what and where we carry without having to think about it, each of us avoided having to fire.
Click to expand...

A person is going to process "where is my gun" no matter what.. its a nano-second decision process that begins after the brain receives a specific stimulus. Your buddy didn't present his weapon by accident, he decided to do it and part of that was deciding where his gun was. The time it take to complete the act (after you decide to do it) can certainly be a factor but the nano-second it took to process "where is my gun" is not really in the same universe and probably not actually measurable.
 
Last edited:
Here's the story of the infamous 1986 FBI Miami shootout with at least three instances of lost guns, the use of backup, multiple and the other guy's weapons.
All in a single and well documented incident.
Click to expand...
The story is about a law enforcement shootout with two armed men. It doesn't provide much insight as far as typical civilian self-defense shootings go, but it does bring up a good point. If I were an LEO, I would do my best to be as proficient as possible with my partner's weapon(s) and would make sure that I at least had the basic ability to operate all the issue weapons for the department.

For an LEO, the likelihood of using a partner's weapon, or another officer's weapon is tremendously higher than that of a citizen using a scavenged gun.
 
It is apparent that there are some permanent disconnects in this discussion. Rather than spend the time required to crystallize each point, I think it is more time effective to bow out of this one.

Be well.
 
Yeah, we've probably beat this one to death.
For those who would like to gain more experience with guns not normally used or owned, there's ways to do it without mortgaging the house or filling up the safe.
Many ranges have gun rentals available, for a fraction of the price of buying anything,
Or
The next time you go to the range, offer to swap with whoever is there.
It would be a rare enthusiast who wouldn't jump at the chance to share.
Either one is a way to learn the operations of more types of guns, so at least they wouldn't be a mystery should you find one in your hands.
 
A little off topic. I returned to the range today. I was not able to shoot the tree I had shot before due to maintenance I assume. I instead shot dots. I took my 26,19,17. I shot all three and wasn't really surprised with the results. I then swapped the warren tactical from my 19 to my 26 with intentions of carrying my 26. What I found did surprise me. I found I shot the 19 far more accurate with the trijicon sights. I realize that accuracy isn't everything but its alot. If nothing else I have great confidence in my accuracy with the 19. I already felt confident in my draw time to first shot with it and follow up shots are on point. I think for a while I'm gonna focus on my 19. I will maintain proficiency with other guns but 90% of my shooting will be my 19.
 
Either one is a way to learn the operations of more types of guns, so at least they wouldn't be a mystery should you find one in your hands.
Click to expand...
Being generally familiar with the controls and operation of various types of firearms is commendable. That would be a worthy goal--one that most people could reasonably be expected to achieve.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top