Hunting is excellent preparation for the necessary willingness to kill, according to the late, great shooter, Jim Cirillo.
Bump
100 yards, hmm... farthest I’ve ever shot my S&W 5906 is 67 feet... still hit COM at that point though...
Would one be better off with a 5-shot .38 or a 9-shot .22?
----
Send treats to the troops...
Great because you did it!
www.AnySoldier.com
I heartily agree with the call to be prepared. I especially appreciate the suggestion that we be physically prepared as well as mentally prepared. I disagree, however with the contention that a small Glock is too little to be of use. I carry a model 26, 15 round magazine from a model 19 and an extra 10 rounder. After practicing for the past year I can hit damn near anything I point at even while moving. Combined with a nice hollow point round it will certainly make a dent where and when needed. Don’t lump the model 26/27 in with the Keltec type BB guns.
Another important consideration: How to distinguish yourself from the bad guys when the cops finally show up?
Might be important.
Sometimes I take my 357 Colt to the 50 yard part of the range, but I wouldn’t want to bet my life or liberty on being able to do anything other than scare a person at that distance:-)
I seem to recall from the Carlos Hathcock biography that he, and other Marine Snipers could hit a small at 100 yards consistently.
Isn’t it wonderful that we can have a thread like this on a public forum?
I pray we’ll still be able to do this four years from now.
Hmmm, I think I could make a body shot at 100 yds. I don’t miss much at 50 feet though.
This is making me rethink my training a little bit. I kind of like the idea of using a pistol as a quick and dirty sniper rifle. I guess I will go spend some time shooting a pistol at a hundred yds to see if it is feasible for me.
My gut is telling me that I would be better off carrying a rifle in my vehicle, but that would probably be way too slow.
AMERICA IS ARMING ITSELF BECAUSE IT CAN’T COUNT ON THE FECKLESS, SPINELESS SO CALLED “I HAVE YOUR BACK LEADERS “ MOST OF YOU VOTED FOR!
The only good that would come of an American Mumbai - God forbid - would be the end of the Democrat party.
When the massacre was first reported, I read many posts giving India’s relatively disarmed nature (as compared to the United States) as a factor in:
1. Why it occurred.
2. Why the villains were so successful.
Given that, I think it is defeatist to marginalize the benefit of honest, well-trained folks in that situation. There’s a reason why a soft target is chosen. Even if each sentiment about handguns vs. rifles is correct, these guys didn’t pick a high-risk location, didn’t plan to get rounds returned them. If nothing else, it would put them off their plan. At any rate, if I was stuck in a location like that, I’d want to be armed. That’s the bottom line. You can’t always pick your battles, and some will be pretty miserable. The fellows in 1776 thought “it” worth the effort, not that it would be easy. If you can take a rifleman out, his weapon might become yours. If you are unarmed, it won’t be. The problem of how to distinguish yourself from the bad guys remains, but that is not a reason to cower and wait to be killed. Anyway, no one chose to be assaulted there.
Sorry for segueing onto the War of Independence, but if oppression comes, as it has and will again, it is worth the fight even if the odds are long. I’m not saying “let’s be stupid about it”, only that it is worth the fight.
In this area I have access to a M1A (.308) that measures less than 31” long with the folding stock. That along with several 20 rd magazines provides a fair measure of capability. Many of the LEOs in this area have similar armament (semi-auto.308 rifles) in their vehicles.
ROTFLMAO
Urban RAMBO wet dream - there I was, up to my knees in spent brass..... SOF magazine warriors.....
If you are in the middle of a shooting war GTFOTD (urr, get outta DOdge) should be your first choice, and if with family, the only choice.
If you HAVE to shoot to get an exit path, fine.
Sorry, I stay awake and try like the dickins to avoid any situation that would require me to shoot anyone. I even carry a scanner most of the time (IC-Q7A)
I have to consider if the area we will visit even requires a second magazine.
But - I pratice, my family pratices as a family (you know, fun day(s) at the range and all that) and I have no doubt that any adult in the family is ready and able to end a situation with deadly force.
But only if we have been forced into a corner with no other options. Killing someone should be a last choice option.
(OK, flame suit on)
I'm not at all concerned about the stupid Box-O-Truth ammo tests as a measure of effectiveness. Backup mags are loaded with a load from RBCD and again, I pay little attention to folks who doubt this ammo's efficacy, since I got the recommendation from two recently retired special operations senior officers. One of them has saved my life on a couple of occasions, so I'll trust his advice forever. Ccw holsters are always the Super Deluxe Tuckable from Cross Breed. A holster so comfortable in the IWB mode that I have fallen asleep in my DAD'S "Lazy Boy" chair wearing the P226. Same for the P30.
Since 911, I always have figured that I need to carry a serious gun for serious times. I am also convinced and have been since 911 that a Mumbai style attack is headed our way. Maybe multiple such attacks in fat upscale malls all over the nation. When that happens it's durn sure not going to be cops who minimize the initial attack, it's going to be your average everyday SHEEPDOG that answers the call.
This is where the essay falls short. I understand the need for good physical fitness, really I do. That's all well and good for the young guys. But some sheepdogs have been around a LONG time and although highly trained and experienced they may be suffering from the physical realities of age. My father in law is a WWII veteran of the Pacific. Retired USMC 06 (Full Colonel). Holds the Navy Cross, Silver Star and three awards of the DFC while nailing 18 air to air kills in a USMC Corsair. He's 85 and just a little bit shaky. But he can go from doddering to deadly in an eye blink.
I'm just 52. I spent my time on active duty until I hit captain of infantry (branch transferring to armor in the IRR, later). After my time on active duty I worked in law enforcement, since my degree was in Criminal Justice. I've been a competitive shooter and an NRA Instructor for 20 years. But I'm halfway into congestive heart failure and I'm rolling along headed to bariatric surgery before I get to knockin' too loud on Diabetes door. Big "D" might just answer and I don't want that. So am I going to be executing fire and maneuver 3 to 5 second rushes in such a situation? Heck no!
I'm going to make sure my wife and kid (if she's there) are safely out of the danger zone. If I feel I can make a difference, I'll find a good position of cover and a good field of vision, preferably in the path of their movement. By the way, cover is pretty easy to find almost anywhere you are, unless you're in the middle of a football field or in the middle of an empty parking lot. Otherwise it's all around you. Cover & Concealment is always handy.
Concealment is anything that hides you from view. Cover OTOH is any object that will stop or deflect small arms fire. But I'm not superman and I'm not so foolish as to think I can take out a group of Tangos solo. But I can durn sure make certain they move slower and maybe in fewer numbers. Remember, if they're shooting and without ear protection (Jihadi general issue earplugs?) they're not going to be able to hear anything but that ringing in their ears. That's an advantage for the defenders. They won't be very likely to distinguish the shots of defending sheepdogs from their own, nor determine the direction of incoming fire.
As far as their touted "training and unit cohesion" that remains to be seen. I've seen the so called AQ Urban Training vids and they're laughable. The old grandpas in my IDPA club could smoke their butts. It's easy to seem invincible while strolling and slaughtering a huge flock of sheep at random. Now I do know they acted on a plan and stayed to that at least at first: They went to the security office and seized control of the video and commo.
That shows some sophistication and organization and that means at least a mastermind among the wolves and some initial discipline in the execution. But the reports seem to indicate that in the chaos the unit cohesion fragmented and they split up to cover more ground and slaughter more sheep.
The sheepdogs on duty in the form of the Mumbai cops hid and quivered, whining about going up against AK's with old bolt actions. I'll take that action any day. The fact of the matter is those cops were beaten mentally from the opening shots. They should fire the whole group on duty that day.
This is a darn good article.
“Preparing for Mumbai - In America”
We’ve got worse than that.
Mexico’s bloody drug war - The drug violence in Mexico rivals death tolls in Iraq.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2148589/posts
[snip]On Nov. 3, the day before Americans elected Barack Obama president, drug cartel henchmen murdered 58 people in Mexico......By comparison, on average 26 people — Americans and Iraqis combined — died daily in Iraq in 2008. Mexico’s casualty list on Nov. 3 included a man beheaded in Ciudad Juarez whose bloody corpse was suspended along an overpass for hours. No one had the courage to remove the body until dark. The death toll from terrorist attacks in Mumbai two weeks ago approaches the average weekly body count in Mexico’s war. ..... in Juarez, which is just across the Rio Grande...
THE WAR NEXT DOOR
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2151549/posts
First, yes, of course, carry the most potent firearm you are able to. In many circumstances in the real world that will be your littler CCW pieces - deal with it and learn how to employ them in a tactical situation. But I can think of no such situation, at least in terms of Mumbai, that will leave me engaging a terrorist with a pistol at 100 meters. That's not what it's for. It's to get you the heck out of the situation, period. If you're going to play sheep dog, have a long gun handy, because a guy with an AK is going to trump anything you can carry on your belt, and I don't want to hear a bunch of chest-thumping heroics on how somebody can knock the teats off a gnat at 200 meters with his Desert Eagle. The AK is going to win.
I am most decidedly not a sheep dog - I don't care for the flock enough, and if its members choose to be sheep then getting eaten is a known risk and their business. I'll go into combat to protect my fellow citizens only insofar as it serves to get my sorry butt and that of those close to me out of the soup. That means engaging and scooting. For that a CCW piece will work very nicely.
For a civilian, engaging a terrorist at 100 meters is an entirely different tactical scenario. That is not what the civilians in Mumbai faced. It is what the law enforcement authorities faced, and they were barely outgunned and badly outfought. If the shooters are at 100 meters grab your people and get the hell out of Dodge and let the pros do their thing. If you happen to be a pro, have a long gun, some training, and a combat mindset, because this isn't a traffic stop, it's war.
All IMHO, of course.
Buy a helmet Mary. Give it a rest.
His major point is that individuals need to use major caliber weapons to respond to situation like the Mumbai attacks. The police in the Victoria Terminus Station were armed with bolt action rifles capable of taking out the terrorists at long distance. They ran for cover because they had never been trained to engage an armed opponent with superior firepower. The men and women on the platform were unarmed. Had 10 percent of the people on the platform been armed with a .32 or .38 caliber weapon, the attack could have been thwarted with less loss of life.
The people of India are generally speaking an unarmed populace. The victims at the restaurant were set to fail as they were unarmed and in that neighborhood of Mumbai people have had a false sense of security.
The Oberoi and Taj hotels had great front door security but lacked security on the doors entering the Kitchens. This was a major failure on the part of the hotels. At the same time hotel residents did not have an escape plan for them to use as the events unfolded.
No one faced a dozen riflemen as purported by Mr. Suarez. There were two sent to the Victoria Terminus Station, two were at the restaurant, two at the Oberoi and two at the Taj. The final two were at the Jewish Community Center. The two at the restaurant left there and stole an automobile and threw grenades at two location towards central Mumbai. Had a few people been armed at any of the locations things might have turned out differently.
Now let's look at the situation in the U.S. Less than one percent of the people eligible to have a concealed carry permit have one. We need to begin a campaign to increase that number to ten percent.
The model for this position is the nation of Israel. In the late sixties few men carried and terrorists could shoot people down at will. Today when you walk down a street in Jerusalem you will see men routinely carrying weapons openly. Few people are shot by terrorists now as the terrorist knows he will be shot in the process. Today bombs are the tool.
After achieving the ten percent goal, training in marksmanship and how to engage the armed opponent is necessary. I would rather see a dozen men with keltecs and Smith snubbies that one or two with a major caliber.
By the way, Mr. Suarez indicates the .45 caliber weapon has too few cartridges to be effective, I offer the Springfield XD-45 with 14 rounds as an effective tool.
The campaign to move to the 10 percent could be done by members of the Lion, Optimists, Sertoma and other service organization speaking on the value of an armed populace in these tough times.