Actually, it was a cat, that jumped at the laser dot; So, it was the cat on his face, that tipped him off.
Posted on 02/11/2017 6:38:15 PM PST by MtnClimber
Brazilian store robbery. Good guy has good skills in dropping groceries and acting compliant. When robber turns to cash register the good guy pulls gun, but bad guy hears when he has to rack the slide to chamber a round. The good guy barely wins the shoot out.
(Excerpt) Read more at youtu.be ...
Anyone not sure, search: Blue Press, Chamber empty=Suicide p.62
My primary carry firearm is the Glock 23. It always has a round in the chamber, unless I’m cleaning it. If you carry unchambered, you just have an expensive paperweight.
And the 1970 Newhall CA truckstop incident/massacre where two scumbags just released from prison killed 4 Highway patrolmen armed with revolvers.
Officer Pence had just finished re-loading when one of them came from behind executed him.
There is no empirical evidence from all of the CCW data of the superiority of either a semi-auto pistol or a revolver.
In fact, in the VAST MAJORITY of CCW defense cases, just brandishing the weapon scares off the attacker. It could be a toy or squirt gun in most defenses and the attacker would still be just as disuaded.
In the vast majority of cases where a CCW holder fires shots, there is no empirical evidence that a .50 S&W, .44 Magnum, 10mm, 45 ACP or other big bad boy, etc, is better than a .22LR. This is becaus in the vast majority of CCW shootings, the perps flee the instant they hear shots. They don’t wait around to check the size of the hole in the gun or see if they can distinguish between the shatteringly loud sound of a .22 vs the shatteringly louder sound of a hand cannon like a .44 Mag. All guns sound loud when you are taking fire.
So back to what is REAL.
Carrying a hand-gun is insurance that very few of us will ever need in our lifetimes.
For those who feel better having this not-likely-to-ever-be-used insurance, having anything is better than having nothing. Having a .32 0r .380 mouse gun is just as good as having a hand cannon for most of the CCW encounters you will have, let alone the fact that 98% of us will never have to defend ourselves against a threat of death or serious injury.
For those who want a 16 round hand cannon that could stop a pride of lions, if that is what it takes to feel comfortable as insurance against an event that likely will never take place in your lifetime, then have at it. You have my respect as your premium insurance prepares you for any and all contingencies.
Some people just want catastrophic insurance and carrying a pocket mouse gun works great for that.
Some want a moderate insurance plan and carrying a revolver or 9mm auto of modest capacity works well for that.
Carry a 16 round hand-cannon certainly works well for everything, your platinum insurance.
But please don’t tell everybody else what works for them, when the odds of needing to pull a handgun in defense of life or against serious bodily injury is so low, with such a vast number of people never having to do so, let alone never carrying anyway.
This is also mitigated for most of us Freepers by our sociology-economic class. We tend not to be where the baddies all hang out most of the time. It is usually a marginal time and place that puts us at risk and we can often mitigate that by generally planning around that. Not always of course. And by our situational awareness, which is huge. Dumb people have it a lot worse, so do people with their noses in their iphones checking social media all day.
My peace (not piece) of mind comes from having one in the chamber. Because I have no desire to rest in peace any sooner than I have to. People who don't carry with one in the chamber need to understand they are going to be in a bad way should they ever need to defend themselves. I've had one self defense situation where I pointed my Glock 23 at two thugs attempting a break in on me. They bolted, but if they hadn't, I was ready to engage immediately.
The argument can be made that a revolver is probably adequate but you can't say that it's the better choice.
Actually, it was a cat, that jumped at the laser dot; So, it was the cat on his face, that tipped him off.
Unless you are Chuck Norris. :)
Sure, the chances of it happening are slim—until it happens. And you have satisfied the #1 rule of gun fights.
So you pull out your Ruger LCP .380, fumble racking the slide while his finger is on the trigger, and the bad guy has a .45 ‘hand cannon’.
The police report says you both had guns. The bad guy is gone. You’re dead.
The bright (red) light at the end of the tunnel? :)
And I happen to live in a large city where murder, robbery, gangs, and drugs are all too common. people get shot, knifed, robbed, burglarized, and killed here all the time and you have to always be situation awares. The threat here is "real".
And I would be interested to see the research that your referencing regarding brandishing a weapon (which is actually a crime where I live btw).
The research I am most familiar with is FBI research taken from Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness where it is made perfectly clear that the best choice for a SD handgun will be one that fires a cartridge that penetrates 18" and which creates the largest possible permanent wound cavity without sacrificing penetration.
That ain't a snub nosed revolver.
AFAIC, that's what's real here. What works best. Not what works adequately frequently according to research that remains questionable at this point.
and once again, there's a reason that cops, military personnel, feds, and serious gun fighter types don't carry revolvers anymore. Many reasons actually.
If you want to carry a revolver, go right ahead, but don't try to tell me that it's a better choice than a high quality high cap semi-automatic pistol and expect me to agree.
That is very true.
:)
Thanks.
I admit, I haven’t read the entire thread thoroughly; another thought comes to me on the subject. How many CC folks *know* that they will be willing and able to kill another person? Especially those that have no special training.
While I’ve had some training, I always had a tiny, nagging doubt that I could *really do it*, when the time came.
When the situation presented itself, turns out that I did have the inner strength. That was a relief.
Secondly, I’ve totally rethought my scope for exactly *who* I would go out on a limb for, in a life-or-death. Because of all the stupid, progressive people I come in contact with, I decided, they can fend for themselves.
Me or mine. That’s it. I’d find no satisfaction in saving a Illary voter.
[Sorry Lord. Forgive me. I have sinned.]
Then why did you buy a Glock? You had other opportunities and made the wrong decision.
This is a conversation best shared over a couple of drinks, not over the internet.
I carry a Glock 90% of the time and I always have one in the chamber and I have never shot myself. Admittedly, when I first started carrying a Glock in that way, I was pretty nervous. Now, meh, it’s nothing. You just have to make sure that you have a holster that covers the trigger completely and you don’t put your finger on the trigger until you’re ready to start shooting. There’s a youtube video of a guy dropping a Glock 21 out of an airplane at 500 feet with a primed case in the chamber and it didn’t fire when it hit the ground. it still functioned flawlessly after that drop incidentally.
Always have one in the tube - never take a hammer to a gun fight....
CCW is different from being a cop or soldier. CCW is not supposed to be about being a "serious gunfighter type". CCW is not about clearing buildings or taking the offense against bank robbers.
If a gang rushes you, then the survivors will get your gun with ammo still in it. But the one time I needed to pull a gun, they didn't do the math: "8 - 2 = 6" - because no one wanted to be #1 or #2. On that day, I had a 22 LR. And no one thought a 22 was too small to worry about.
Guns do not PROTECT you. No matter how many bullets you have and how big they are, if you trade shots, you may still die. As the FBI points out, shooting someone in the heart with a 44 magnum will not prevent them from emptying their Glock into you.
The biggest myth about guns and self defense is that guns shield the carrier. People want to believe they will protect them, but all they can do is raise the cost of an attack. If the attacker is willing to pay the price - the Miami shootout, or some terrorists - then no handgun will prevent them from attacking for the next 10-20 seconds. A CNS hit probably will, but those depend more on luck than skill.
When carrying, you don't have the right to pull a gun unless there is significant danger. A gun may persuade an attacker(s) it isn't worth pursuing, and you may get lucky and hit the CNS, but they don't prevent you from being shot. Or stabbed.
If multiple attackers decide to attack in spite of a gun, you won't have time to shoot more than a couple. But very few gangbangers want to rush someone who is able to shoot back.
Bottom line? Lots of people live to old age without ever needing to CCW. It isn't just luck. It includes avoiding places that are dangerous, keeping your eyes open, listening when your gut tells you something is wrong, etc. A lot of us still go "naked" because work takes us places where carrying is illegal and where there are searches.
If I was going somewhere that I believed I needed a Glock 20 with 10mm ammo...I wouldn't go. I sometimes carry a bigger gun - 686 or Beretta 92 - but that happens when my dress allows me to conceal those guns. I've often carried just a Beretta Pico. And I'm often not carrying at all.
I don't tell ANYONE what to carry. I don't give a rat's rear end what you or anyone else carries. Carry a shotgun if you wish. I don't care. But you are not God Almighty and you don't get to tell total strangers what they must do. Nor do you have the right to attack others for sharing what works for them & why.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.