"Carry" vs. "Combat" Handguns

[NH Shooter]

Note to mods: not sure if this is the most suitable forum for this topic so please move if needed.

As a civilian I (wrongly or rightly) make a distinction between a handgun intended for comfortable, easily-concealable everyday carry (in my case, a 9mm PPS in a Comp-Tac IWB holster) and a “more capable” handgun I would prefer to be wearing if the S truly HTF and a long gun was not available. A G17C with an APL and Heine night sights in a JM Custom OWB holster constitutes what I would consider a “combat handgun” (along with a double mag carrier on the weak side) that at least on a square range, substantially extends the distance of fast, accurate fire over the Walther but at the obvious expense of weight, comfort and ease-of-concealment.

Tinfoil hats and doomsday scenarios aside, if I suspected I had a greater-than-normal chance of running into serious chaos outside the home (and for the purpose of this discussion, ignoring common sense that it would be better to stay home under such circumstances) and overtly carrying a long gun was not an option, the higher capacity, faster-shooting Glock is what I would want to be packing.

So, the intended topic for discussion: do you have one rig that you wear all the time that is optimized to strike a balance between comfortable/concealable carry and maximum effectiveness/capability, OR do you carry a smaller, more comfortable/concealable (but still reasonably capable) gun regularly but have a larger/higher capacity/more-capable handgun set up to CC for certain situations? Is such a distinction even relevant to civilian CC?

TIA for sharing your thoughts.

[BJJ]

I believe the Glock 19 is considered the ideal mix of capability and ease of carrying. A couple of G17 mags for reloads and you are quite well armed.

I carry my issued G22 for CCW. For my circumstances, there is never a reason to go smaller than a G19. Obviously, personal circumstances vary greatly.

If you want a display of shooting prowess with the G19, check out some video of USPSA GM Mike Hughes training and competing with his.

[DocGKR]

Since 2000, I've carried a 5" 1911, a full size M&P, or a G19/17 for CCW--all of which were easy to carry in a variety of situations and clothing styles, yet offered an effective, reliable, and easy to shoot handgun in case things went sideways.


"I believe the Glock 19 is considered the ideal mix of capability and ease of carrying. A couple of G17 mags for reloads and you are quite well armed."

The above is likely one of the best available compromises and one that I currently use.

[GardoneVT]

Note to mods: not sure if this is the most suitable forum for this topic so please move if needed.

As a civilian I (wrongly or rightly) make a distinction between a handgun intended for comfortable, easily-concealable everyday carry (in my case, a 9mm PPS in a Comp-Tac IWB holster) and a “more capable” handgun I would prefer to be wearing if the S truly HTF and a long gun was not available. A G17C with an APL and Heine night sights in a JM Custom OWB holster constitutes what I would consider a “combat handgun” (along with a double mag carrier on the weak side) that at least on a square range, substantially extends the distance of fast, accurate fire over the Walther but at the obvious expense of weight, comfort and ease-of-concealment.

Tinfoil hats and doomsday scenarios aside, if I suspected I had a greater-than-normal chance of running into serious chaos outside the home (and for the purpose of this discussion, ignoring common sense that it would be better to stay home under such circumstances) and overtly carrying a long gun was not an option, the higher capacity, faster-shooting Glock is what I would want to be packing.

So, the intended topic for discussion: do you have one rig that you wear all the time that is optimized to strike a balance between comfortable/concealable carry and maximum effectiveness/capability, OR do you carry a smaller, more comfortable/concealable (but still reasonably capable) gun regularly but have a larger/higher capacity/more-capable handgun set up to CC for certain situations? Is such a distinction even relevant to civilian CC?

TIA for sharing your thoughts.
There is no standard answer to this question, because there is no standard body type. Im built skinny enough to pull off hiding a full size Beretta without printing, and that is a pistol most people cnsider decided un-concealable. Yet, I knew a chick who couldnt hide a P22 without it printing badly.

As to the 'SHTF' scenario,it depends on your circumstances. If youre defending your business and/or residence from looters, put down the pistol and get a long gun. If the problem involves a Katrina style natural disaster, listen to the authorities and evacuate.If the natural disaster is unforseen, concealing the weapon becomes even more important-not less. Few relief or evacuation vehicles will permit an openly armed man to board, and the thugs will have guns too-except theyll have strengh in numbers.Ive yet to see the youtube tactical video explaining how someone with a pistol can escape four hoods with long guns.

[LSP552]

So, the intended topic for discussion: do you have one rig that you wear all the time that is optimized to strike a balance between comfortable/concealable carry and maximum effectiveness/capability, OR do you carry a smaller, more comfortable/concealable (but still reasonably capable) gun regularly but have a larger/higher capacity/more-capable handgun set up to CC for certain situations? Is such a distinction even relevant to civilian CC?



I use different handguns for different circumstances/environments/dress. As much as possible, I keep operating systems the same. I'm generally carrying a G17 in a Comp-Tac CTAC or a Glock 19. In truth, I find for most forms of dress, I can hide the 17/CTAC combo under the same conditions I can hide the 19. I really like the CTAC because it allows you to adjust the height and cant for the individual. Occasionally, I carry a G26 when traveling to places that limit magazine capacity.

I keep a G34 with WML on the nightstand, but don't carry it. I no longer have the need to carry a pistol with WML.

I also use J-frames for pockets and ankles when I need to. The new G42 is on the verge of filling most of my J-frame roles, except for outside jacket pocket carry.

Realistic threat assessment should be part of everything you do. What's in my short's pocket on my back patio while smoking a cigar and drinking whisky is different than what I carry walking around New Orleans.

[Haraise]

So, the intended topic for discussion: do you have one rig that you wear all the time that is optimized to strike a balance between comfortable/concealable carry and maximum effectiveness/capability, OR do you carry a smaller, more comfortable/concealable (but still reasonably capable) gun regularly but have a larger/higher capacity/more-capable handgun set up to CC for certain situations? Is such a distinction even relevant to civilian CC?

TIA for sharing your thoughts.

I'd think what you're describing, is for most people, a carry gun and a 'nightstand' gun. Not so much combat.

I personally find width of grip is the issue with concealment, so Glocks (other than the 42) are out for me, regardless of size. Width of frame/slide means a lot too. You're on the right track, but I think people generally plan around home defense more than going to war.

[Mr_White]

So, the intended topic for discussion: do you have one rig that you wear all the time that is optimized to strike a balance between comfortable/concealable carry and maximum effectiveness/capability

That's how I prefer to do it. It's far from the only reasonable choice, but that's my preference for myself.

[NH Shooter]

I'd think what you're describing, is for most people, a carry gun and a 'nightstand' gun.

Yes, nightstand duty/HD is actually the primary role of my G17/APL. My goal is to see how practical it might be for CC.

With the recent purchase of the JM Custom holster, I have worn it a few times on short excursions and with a sweatshirt or light jacket it conceals just fine. I certainly feel better equipped vs. the PPS, if not quite as comfortable sitting in the driver's seat or doing cartwheels in the CVS parking lot.

[David S.]

One could make the argument that the whole point of a handgun, regardless of size, is to strike a balance between concealment and effectiveness.

I prefer the full-size gun, but for NPE or when I have to get dressed up, I carry a sub-compact. That's all I own and all that goes into my EDC decision.

I'm sure a female or someone who prefers a more fitted look would require a more complex system. That's not my reality. Personally, I take advantage of the fact that ill fitting clothes are the norm these days anyway and dress to fit in.

[Alpha Sierra]

I give this about as much thought as JollyGreen.

I've always carried FS handguns (SB K frame, M&P, G17) except when dressing up as they tend to print when wearing a sport coat. This year I let go of the G17 in favor of a P-07 (same size as a G19).

Besides the fact that it takes far less effort for me to be good with a CZ than with a Glock, the shift to slightly smaller pistol makes the need for a J frame even smaller. The P-07 (and others of its size) offer about 95% of the capability of their full size counterparts while being much easier to conceal under dressier clothes and being much more comfortable when seated in a car for long drives.

As for the difference between carry and nightstand guns, I don't follow. Whatever I happen to be carrying that day goes into the nightstand when I go to sleep. That could be a J frame, a P-07, a 75, or a 357 Magnum K frame. Not something I spend too much time debating or contemplating.

[DocGKR]

If I carry a G19, my "nightstand" gun is a G19 with an X300U. When I carry an M&P, my my "nightstand" gun is an M&P with an X300U.

[KevinB]

Same with the Doc -- my Carry gun is my duty gun, is my nightstand gun -- I have more M&P's - but I don't rotate them in, unless needed.

[DocGKR]

Most folks would be WAY better off is they just stick with one firearm type and learn to master it; get two or three identical pistols--one for training, one for carry, one as a spare or "nightstand" gun, then spend the rest of your available time, energy, and fiscal resources on training.

[Mr_White]

Most folks would be WAY better off is they just stick with one firearm type and learn to master it; get two or three identical pistols--one for training, one for carry, one as a spare or "nightstand" gun, then spend the rest of your available time, energy, and fiscal resources on training.

I agree. There is a lot to be said for the fine level of attunement one can get if all available time and effort goes into one platform.

[okie john]

I've always carried FS handguns (SB K frame, M&P, G17) except when dressing up as they tend to print when wearing a sport coat.

This was my thinking for years. I had a 1911 for daily use and a J-frame as a dress-up gun. Then I discovered really good Kydex holsters, and that radical notion you can cut a G17 grip to take G19 mags. I haven't carried anything else since then.

That works for me because of my body type, wardrobe, and profession. YMMV.


Okie John

[KevinB]

I get my suit and sport coats cut a tad larger to allow for guns...

[GJM]

I think AIWB is the game changer. With conventional 3 o'clock carry, it might be necessary to go down from a 34 or 17 to a 19 or 26 size gun, or make significant dress around decisions. With AIWB, your full size game/HD pistol can also be your carry people.

The exception being, I don't think AIWB works well for a smaller woman wearing trim clothes. My wife goes from her regular G26 to a G42 or J frame behind the hip in fitted clothing, where cover garments are not an option.

[LSP552]

I think AIWB is the game changer. With conventional 3 o'clock carry, it might be necessary to go down from a 34 or 17 to a 19 or 26 size gun, or make significant dress around decisions. With AIWB, your full size game/HD pistol can also be your carry people.

The exception being, I don't think AIWB works well for a smaller woman wearing trim clothes. My wife goes from her regular G26 to a G42 or J frame behind the hip in fitted clothing, where cover garments are not an option.

AIWB doesn't work well for me with dress clothes either. My suits and jackets get fit while wearing IWB SS. So much depends on what you wear, which sometimes isn't a free choice. AIWB works well in a casual setting and at one point was about the only way I carried. Since my dress varies a lot now, I default to IWB strong side. That's why I really like the CTAC because you can adjust the cant to help hide full size guns.

[GJM]

AIWB doesn't work well for me with dress clothes either. My suits and jackets get fit while wearing IWB SS. So much depends on what you wear, which sometimes isn't a free choice. AIWB works well in a casual setting and at one point was about the only way I carried. Since my dress varies a lot now, I default to IWB strong side. That's why I really like the CTAC because you can adjust the cant to help hide full size guns.

Suits and jackets? Where I work and play, almost nobody wears a suit or jacket unless they are from out of town or getting married. With a sport coat, a thin wool sweater vest works great with AIWB.

[Clay]

I carry a Glock 19 most of the time, which I would consider to be a duty/combat handgun. I do carry a S&W 442 and a Ruger LCP often, basically in NPE's or places where I feel like I don't need a gun, i.e. lounging around the house in shorts, etc.

Everyone has different requirements. Lots of things go into picking a carry gun, or should. Work and social environments, financial situation, clothing preference - they all play a part. I agree with DocGKR that most everyone would be better off with one full size or compact platform like the Glock 17/19, but most folks aren't going to go that route, either because they aren't willing (they like to mess with different guns), or their situation won't allow it.

[Beat Trash]

Most folks would be WAY better off is they just stick with one firearm type and learn to master it; get two or three identical pistols--one for training, one for carry, one as a spare or "nightstand" gun, then spend the rest of your available time, energy, and fiscal resources on training.


You have made this statement in one wording or another, several times over the last few years. It is one of the most profound things you have written that I have read on the internet.

A gun the size of the Glock 19 can fulfill most of my pistol carry needs. I just wish more manufactures would offer a model in this size range.

[ST911]

My G17 is my house, competition, duty, CCW, and always gun. I switched to the G17 from the G19 in 2014 to show that it could be done.

On the G19... If it's an option, it's usually the answer.

[EVP]

Most folks would be WAY better off is they just stick with one firearm type and learn to master it; get two or three identical pistols--one for training, one for carry, one as a spare or "nightstand" gun, then spend the rest of your available time, energy, and fiscal resources on training.


Like BeatTrash said, I also agree and have decided to follow Docs advice.

Believe me I have been wanting to get a CZ p07, Beretta, VP9, 9mm 1911. Especially after hearing reports about how shootable some of these are. I realized that for me(who wants to focus on a defensive gun) I am better off sticking with a gen 4 g19 and focus on improving my skill then hopping around to different platforms. There are plenty of people who can shoot Glocks really really well. I don't think Glocks will hold me back in the shootability department given consistent practice on a consistent platform.

With that being said, I think a g19 can cover anything you need it to. I carry mine with a fitted suit jacket or sport coat in a tuckable AIWB when the need arises.

[GJM]

If your interest is solely acquiring a tool and the skills to defend yourself, 99% of folks would be best off if they got even two Glock 19 pistols, an OWB and IWB holster, a mag pouch, and a truck load of 9mm ammo. Of course, many people enjoy shooting generally, including long guns and a variety of handgun types, and enjoy firearms. For those people, a world with just 2 or 3 Glock pistols is the firearms equivalent of purgatory*.

* a place or state of suffering inhabited by the souls of ……..

[LittleLebowski]

If your interest is solely acquiring a tool and the skills to defend yourself, 99% of folks would be best off if they got even two Glock 19 pistols, an OWB and IWB holster, a mag pouch, and a truck load of 9mm ammo. Of course, many people enjoy shooting generally, including long guns and a variety of handgun types, and enjoy firearms. For those people, a world with just 2 or 3 Glock pistols is the firearms equivalent of purgatory*.

* a place or state of suffering inhabited by the souls of ……..

One problem I see a lot, is folks that can shoot long guns fairly well because....long guns are easy to shoot (I mean carbines, not actual precision long range rifles). I've seen many, many guys who can run a carbine......not do well at all with a handgun. Seen a few this weekend at the three day EAG course I'm attending.

ETA: learn how to shoot a pistol first when starting out. It will help in other shooting disciplines.

[Sigfan26]

Carry gun is either an rmr g17 or g19 in a Dale Fricke Seraphim(appendix) or (if carrying with a light mounted) in a Raven Phantom (3 o'clock owb). As a general rule, I carry my combat handgun.

[mizer67]

I carry a G19; shoot G17s mainly. I much prefer the full sized grip, but IWB SS, they print too easily.

Haven't figured out how to not print badly in AIWB.

Tried a G26 for a while, but found very little a G26 could to that a G19 couldn't and the 19 is more shootable.

[LHS]

Most folks would be WAY better off is they just stick with one firearm type and learn to master it; get two or three identical pistols--one for training, one for carry, one as a spare or "nightstand" gun, then spend the rest of your available time, energy, and fiscal resources on training.

That's why I've resisted the latest and greatest pistols over the years. I have a lot of time and money invested in the 92 platform, and whatever incremental gains I might get from going to a P30 would be less than spending that money on ammo to practice with my 92s.

[koj11]

I think AIWB is the game changer. With conventional 3 o'clock carry, it might be necessary to go down from a 34 or 17 to a 19 or 26 size gun, or make significant dress around decisions. With AIWB, your full size game/HD pistol can also be your carry people.

This. I carried an M&P Shield strong side for quite some time, but wanted to be carrying a larger and higher capacity weapon that I could shoot better. I switched to AIWB and it was a revelation. Now it's my P229 every day.

[23JAZ]

Purgatory*.

* a place or state of suffering inhabited by the souls of ……..
Gun Control Advacates.

[NH Shooter]

For those people, a world with just 2 or 3 Glock pistols is the firearms equivalent of purgatory*.

I have to agree. I think the "one platform" approach makes a ton of sense for those who have not spent a lot of time shooting handguns, and own them only for defensive purposes. But for those of us who have decades of experience shooting a variety of handguns for different purposes, having only Glocks at this point would get old in a hurry for me.

FWIW, I do not find it much of a transition going from one striker-fired pistol to another. Though the shape and size are different, I can transition from the G17 to the PPS (and visa versa) with little difficulty. The largest "reset" for me is the magazine release, and I have come to like the ambi trigger guard release on the PPS.

A few years ago Rob Pincus was in town to conduct a class for the club I belong to, a convenient opportunity that I couldn't resist. Just for grins and giggles, I used a factory-tuned 5906 (gasp!) that I have owned since 1989 for the class, but that I hadn't shot in over 20 years. With everyone else using some kind of polymer frame pistol or 1911 for the event, Mr. Pincus at one point made a comment about my gun selection but within a few strings of fire, I was back in the saddle with it. It still feels like a brick to me, but with the factory tuning and Novak sights, I had forgotten how well it shoots.

If I had to do it all with one pistol, it would certainly be the G17. But so far I have not found any significant difficulty switching between it and the PPS.

[wsr]

I carry the same day-in day-out HK45c with a elephant foot mag AIWB and two spare mags a 357 LCR in left back pocket all under a normal size t-shirt or polo, I see no need to go small on your carry gun unless you are in a serious NPE

[Alpha Sierra]

I strongly disagree with Gary Roberts about having just one type of handgun.

What he says may be true for some lowest common denominator type, but it is not true for me and I bet it isn't true for most here.

Most handguns are not all that freaking different and once one is competent on the fundamentals it takes very little to be good with several different types.

I laugh at the often repeated concept here that transitioning from striker pistols to DA/SA or the other way around is such a traumatic, difficult experience. Maybe if you suck, that is true. If you don't suck the transition is pretty easy.

[Malamute]

If your interest is solely acquiring a tool and the skills to defend yourself, 99% of folks would be best off if they got even two Glock 19 pistols, an OWB and IWB holster, a mag pouch, and a truck load of 9mm ammo. Of course, many people enjoy shooting generally, including long guns and a variety of handgun types, and enjoy firearms. For those people, a world with just 2 or 3 Glock pistols is the firearms equivalent of purgatory*.

* a place or state of suffering inhabited by the souls of ……..

Very much agree.

Besides general utility of larger cal revolvers to me living out of town, I am pretty sure I never would have shot nearly the number of rounds if only or predominately from Glocks or 1911's.

I understand the rational of getting as good as one can with what they use, but the use isn't always the same with different people.

[YVK]

I just went for a couple of months carrying one handgun and competing with another. Both DA/SA, but even then trigger properties are different. That meant running each dry fire session double the time, combined live fire practices, etc.
That got old fairly quick.

There's no doubt in my mind one can be good or very good moving around different handguns. I think there are multiple benefits in trying different. However, if one wants to be the best he/she can be, then one gun's the answer, regardless of a baseline level.

[EVP]

I dont want to speak for Doc, but I don't take what he said as you should not have more then one type of handgun. I think the point is that you should focus your practice with the same gun you are using for defensive purposes and learn to master it.

[Tamara]

I have to agree. I think the "one platform" approach makes a ton of sense for those who have not spent a lot of time shooting handguns, and own them only for defensive purposes. But for those of us who have decades of experience shooting a variety of handguns for different purposes, having only Glocks at this point would get old in a hurry for me.

One could have decades of experience shooting and own so many guns that they couldn't tell you to the nearest ten how many they have, not even on a bet... and still CCW just the one gun and do most of their shooting with it.

I enjoy playing with different guns at the range, but I have to admit I don't get the whole "If this is Tuesday, I must be carrying the Luger" thing.

[BWT]

I strongly disagree with Gary Roberts about having just one type of handgun.

What he says may be true for some lowest common denominator type, but it is not true for me and I bet it isn't true for most here.

Most handguns are not all that freaking different and once one is competent on the fundamentals it takes very little to be good with several different types.

I laugh at the often repeated concept here that transitioning from striker pistols to DA/SA or the other way around is such a traumatic, difficult experience. Maybe if you suck, that is true. If you don't suck the transition is pretty easy.

I think what Doc is referring to people who can't afford a slight lapse in accuracy/performance because they're using a firearm with different controls. Such as a Glock to P30. Different magazine release location and a DA/SA trigger or a 1911 with thumb safety and crisp light trigger versus a revolver.

The best shooters I've seen usually shoot the same platform regularly. YMMV.

Doc's a SME and a professional, I don't think he can well afford a lapse in memory or muscle memory. That's the idea here, what you carry, train, and compete with should be the same. Atleast if you want to see real gains under pressure and improvements with times and accuracy.

What they're proposing isn't exactly that hard to understand. Even Todd didn't end up turning in his best performances with guns until he was 10,000-25,000+ rounds down range with a gun, regardless of make/model.

ETA: I own about a half dozen handguns and some I do own for enjoyment/nostalgia. I'm not saying you can't/shouldn't own multiples, simply that real improvements won't come (ETA: different wording) shooting a different handgun every time you're on the range.

[Beat Trash]

One could have decades of experience shooting and own so many guns that they couldn't tell you to the nearest ten how many they have, not even on a bet... and still CCW just the one gun and do most of their shooting with it.

I enjoy playing with different guns at the range, but I have to admit I don't get the whole "If this is Tuesday, I must be carrying the Luger" thing.


Well said...

[SAWBONES]

I strongly disagree with Gary Roberts about having just one type of handgun.

What he says may be true for some lowest common denominator type, but it is not true for me and I bet it isn't true for most here.


I'd agree that there may well be more than one sidearm platform one can responsibly carry and rely upon for CCW, after long experience and practice.

Still, I find fault with the "hobby" mentality of CCW, which involves carrying a different "favorite gun toy" every day, as is too often seen expressed on various gun-related internet bulletin board posts.

We all enjoy the various features of different guns, of course, but it's probably best to have only a select few altogether-reliable sidearms (for me it's just three-four) that you can reliably have with you and operate to best effect under stress, on demand, irrespective of weather-climate or clothing worn, and stick with carrying one of those at all or nearly all times.

I'm not thinking of the very hottest weather, when nothing but swim trunks and a S&W 340PD in the pocket is viable, but day-to-day CCW.

Sidearm shooting competence, that is, adequate accuracy and precision, fast enough, at need, on demand, is a great thing to have.

I don't know that the carrying of just a single pistol is an absolute prerequisite for this, but IMNSHO it's certainly good not to spread your capabilities too thin while falsely imagining that you'll do everything "just fine" when the SHTF, whether you're carrying a Walther PPS or a S&W model 10.

[DocGKR]

AS: Since 1985, at various times I have been issued, qualified with, or authorized to carry the Beretta 92F/M9, Sig P226/228/P220, various S&W 3rd gen pistols (9 mm, .40 S&W and .45 Auto), Glock 9 mm's, S&W M&P's, multiple 1911’s, as well as several S&W revolvers including J, K, L , and N-frames. I also have a fair degree of experience with Browning Hi-Powers, Glock 22/23 & 21, and various HK pistols. I have been certified as an armorer on several of these systems.

I guess I am "some lowest common denominator type" who "sucks" since when I dilute my practice efforts among multiple handgun types, my shooting skills suffer based on objective scores and times. Interestingly, nearly every top level shooter I've spoken with has stated the same thing--that is why they generally concentrate on one handgun type for each competitive season. But hey, what do us suckfest lowest common denominator shooters know. After all, the documented 6.60 sec El Prez I shot with a G19 was pathetically slow compared to the 4.61 sec run Bob Vogel shot on the same course (although he did have a couple of C-zone hits and mine were all A's...).

http://i1292.photobucket.com/albums/b580/DocGKR2/th_GKRElPrez_zps59fdcbdd.jpg (http://i1292.photobucket.com/albums/b580/DocGKR2/GKRElPrez_zps59fdcbdd.mp4)
http://i1292.photobucket.com/albums/b580/DocGKR2/th_VogelElPrezsmall_zpsa343e1fd.jpg (http://i1292.photobucket.com/albums/b580/DocGKR2/VogelElPrezsmall_zpsa343e1fd.mp4)

In the past 2 years or so, due to increased teaching responsibilities, an uptick in patient volume, and some injuries, I have taken a severe hit to my pistol practice schedule--getting to shoot less than 25% of what I did in 2012. What little practice time I've been able to squeeze in needed to be devoted to my primary carry pistol in order to maintain any semblance of my prior skill level--again based purely on objective scores and times. Trying to transition between different pistols types causes measurable decrements in my shooting performance unless I am able to devote a significant amount of practice time to each type--probably because I "suck" and am a "lowest common denominator" shooter.

I sure wish I was a pro like you who could effortlessly transition between whatever handgun I want to carry that day; unfortunately, as a lowest common denominator shooter who sucks, but still carries a handgun on a daily basis, I'll just have to continue devoting my meager practice time to just one type of pistol in hope of not sucking so much. Thanks for your advice.

[GJM]

I think this is something that varies by individual. Bill Rogers can shoot his 125 point school test with a Glock, M&P, Beretta 92 and P226 on successive days and shoot something north of 120/125 with each system. I have watched Ronnie Dodd at Rogers, and other instructors there, seemlessly switch from platform to platform. There is a local CO GM who has bounced from Production to Limited to Single Stack, and regardless of what he shoots, he is amazing. I have shot a DOW back to back with a Glock and several pistols, like the P226 and Beretta, and noticed no measurable difference in my performance. The caveat being I have a pretty good base with all of those, and if I picked up something I hadn't shot before or shot in the last few years, I couldn't do that.

Other folks are constantly fiddling, letting that dilute their effort, and never developing proficiency with any platform.

Still others, who have proficiency believe they are unable to switch systems, and it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. Gary, I would bet you one of those PF dollars, that if you grabbed a M&P and did a few dry fire presentations, you would shoot as well (or better) as you can now with your Glock 19 across any measurable course of fire. The reason for this is because you don't just know how to shoot a Glock 19, you know how to shoot.

Nobody, who doesn't want to, should be forced to shoot multiple platforms. By the same token, that doesn't mean only one system is the answer for everyone. I do not think there is any one right answer here, but if you are performance tracking, the numbers won't lie about what is right for you.

[1986s4]

I used to carry a full size pistol because I wanted something I could shoot well.... And that's what I had anyway. But now I prefer a compromise pistol, something that's large enough to shoot well yet a little easier to carry. I often shoot the carry pistol in IDPA just to work out bugs and familiarization.

[Mr_White]

I strongly disagree with Gary Roberts about having just one type of handgun.

What he says may be true for some lowest common denominator type, but it is not true for me and I bet it isn't true for most here.

Most handguns are not all that freaking different and once one is competent on the fundamentals it takes very little to be good with several different types.

I laugh at the often repeated concept here that transitioning from striker pistols to DA/SA or the other way around is such a traumatic, difficult experience. Maybe if you suck, that is true. If you don't suck the transition is pretty easy.

I think it takes a lot of time and effort on any given platform to be able to shoot at or very near a person's maximum ability.

The pseudo-generalist argument that one should be able to pick up any platform and shoot them equally well, or nearly so, usually only applies in one of a few ways: someone who is really good, someone who is really mediocre, and a nonspecific weasel word argument.

A high level shooter who spent months or years shooting one platform, then months or years shooting another, and so on, until there are a number of platforms that person is highly developed with. GJM is a good example right here on p-f.

Mediocre shooters sometimes think they should be able to shoot equally well with a number of platforms – that's usually when they have never developed a very high level of skill with any of them.

Sometimes the argument is couched in weasel words like 'be able to shoot any gun well.' Shooting any gun 'well' or 'competently' or 'good' – sure, I can buy that, but those aren't specific levels of performance, they are just generic terms that mean whatever we want. Objectively shooting any gun at or very near the top of one's performance range though? Nope, unless that performance range is already pretty mediocre, or the person is a really high level shooter, that person is probably just not measuring their performance enough to notice the difference.

[GardoneVT]

I think it takes a lot of time and effort on any given platform to be able to shoot at or very near a person's maximum ability.

The pseudo-generalist argument that one should be able to pick up any platform and shoot them equally well, or nearly so, usually only applies in one of a few ways: someone who is really good, someone who is really mediocre, and a nonspecific weasel word argument.

A high level shooter who spent months or years shooting one platform, then months or years shooting another, and so on, until there are a number of platforms that person is highly developed with. GJM is a good example right here on p-f.

Mediocre shooters sometimes think they should be able to shoot equally well with a number of platforms – that's usually when they have never developed a very high level of skill with any of them.

Sometimes the argument is couched in weasel words like 'be able to shoot any gun well.' Shooting any gun 'well' or 'competently' or 'good' – sure, I can buy that, but those aren't specific levels of performance, they are just generic terms that mean whatever we want. Objectively shooting any gun at or very near the top of one's performance range though? Nope, unless that performance range is already pretty mediocre, or the person is a really high level shooter, that person is probably just not measuring their performance enough to notice the difference.

Ill avoid generalizing by using economic terms to impart the point.

Jerry Michulek is an example of a shooter who can run probably any pistol ever made better then most folks. That is because most folks cannot match his training resources. In economics, we use a chart called a Production Possibilities Curve to show what is possible given Resourse X and Variable Y. In terms of shooting we can use training cost for Y value and time for X.

In the case of shooting, Mr Michulek's graphical curve is way larger then mine. I cannot achieve his level of skill given my limited resources and limited time. Thats not a personal opinion either-it is mathematically impossible for me to exceed his balance of training and time . If I attempted to do so, I would be dismissed from my job and have no income to pay for the ammo.That means beating his range time is impossible.Ammo? Since he's sponsored by S&W & pays zero while GardoneVT is sponsored by whatever Wells Fargo says is in his bank account, thats a crapshoot too.

So, I have two options. I can try to increase my time and resource balance to match his via seeking a professional sponsor for my ammo and range costs, thus increasing my resources. Option two-which is the practical one most mere mortals face-I accept my lower resource capability, and maximize my limited time and ammunition allocation .That means shooting ONE model for an extended period of time.Otherwise, by changing handguns frequently, I am further diluting my limited resources and reducing my achievable performance .

This is why the phrase 'standardize to one gun type' doesnt apply to everyone. We all have different economic possibility curves with regard to shooting,and some shooters have a high enough resource level to where they can elevate their capabilities without sacrificing diversity. Most shooters, myself included, so not.

[rob_s]

I think the last two posts hit the nail on the head.

There's something else to take into account, which is that some people like accumulating crap and some people go out of their way to avoid it. I'm of the latter group. I get no particular joy or pleasure from owning or using various objects for the same task. I want the object that best fits my needs:budget ratio and I move on. I am willing to test out new objects that may appear to reduce the cost or enhance the performance (although not, typically, both) or as new factors come into play that change either one (such as an injury changing the "needs", or a sudden windfall changing the "budget"). Whereas some people seem to have a pathological desire to accumulate stuff, I'm quite the opposite and have a pathological desire to purge redundancy.

ultimately nobody is going to change their mind on this. The guy that thinks he can shoot the FAST equally well with any gun that he has in his safe, or picks up on the street, is unlikely to be disavowed of that idea. There may, however, be other limitations or performance reductions when engaged in other activities with a variety of different tools. The guy that has run several drills with a variety of handguns and seen performance degradation on one or more of those drills isn't likely to change his mind. There may, however, be a level of "good enough" or some of those drills where the same performance isn't achieved with different tools my not really be applicable.

You're never going to account for those variables. Which is why most people should probably avoid absolute statements like "standardizing is the only thing that makes sense for everyone" or "only crappy shooters have to standardize".

[LittleLebowski]

Jerry Michulek is an example of a shooter who can run probably any pistol ever made better then most folks. That is because most folks cannot match his training resources.

I think he's also a one in a million shooter.

[jetfire]

I think he's also a one in a million shooter.

It's also worth noting that guys like Dave, Jerry, or Bob have reached a level of skill through literally a lifetime of dedicated practice. Just because now they can transition seamlessly from gun to gun doesn't mean that's a skill that's accessible to average joes. Additionally, when Dave was prepping for the Standard division at World Shoot this year, he spent literally two years shooting nothing but his limited/standard gun so he could be ready for this match. That's dedicated single gun practice, because he wanted to be tippy tops when it came time for performance.

[Cookie Monster]

I run all Glocks, it is just how it ended up and I don't see changing having got the investment in.

There is a place for knowing how to run all guns. But I've been at a bunch of training classes were guys are looking for skill in different platforms.

I used to dry practice with a much heavier trigger pull than my carry gun, Standard connector vs a NY2. My trigger prep on NY2 will fire a minus or standard connector. Keeping the same platform with the same trigger pull is my standard now as I thinking the monkey brain will be taking over during a high stress situation.

People can roll how they want to roll, but as a whole people are better off keeping it simple.

Cookie Monster

[mizer67]

Wow, this thread went south fast in the last page.

I'm one of those shooters than notices a performance degredation switching between guns. Measureable performance differences on the clock or even when shooting low probability shots at longer distance.

There are also muscle memory issues as others have mentioned, like the H&K mag release vs. Glock.

I've put many thousands of rounds through a Glock in the last 4 years and if I lay off shooting one for a couple of months, it'll take a little while to get back to the limit of my performance when I left off. Some guns (for me) are easier to shoot well and the experience is less perishable, so there isn't as long a re-traning period but it's still there.

As I become a better shooter in general, the differences in performance aren't as great, but they still exist.

I doubt most people would be able to tell the difference without a shot timer and/or strict accuracy standards (quantifiable measures). Just shooting slow fire at hoser distances at generous targets won't show you enough. Also, if you don't practice regularly, you likely wouldn't notice either. So, you've reduced the shooting populous to a very small group of people that both practice regularly and can quantify thier performance. I'd hazzard a guess there's ~1% of the shooting population that fall into that group. 99% of the people at the ranges I frequent set up at no greater than 30 ft. (usually less) and shoot slowly at huge targets, barely hitting those a fraction of the time.

[psalms144.1]

I'll try to go back to the OP's question WRT a "carry" gun and a "combat" gun. While I agree that risk assessment and mitigation are the best tools in the toolbox of any armed person (LEO, military or private citizen), the truth is, kitten happens. And kitten happens when you least expect or want it to. If we could predict when/where our Gun Fight was going to happen, we either wouldn't be there, or we'd be there in full kit, with belt-fed automatic weapon support, and a squad (or at least a fireteam) worth of hand-picked team mates.

I can't get into specifics, but I recently had the opportunity to talk at length with a number of guys who were involved in an Active Shooter response. I know all of them fair-to-middlin' well, and three of the five of them are, literally, guys I'd hand-pick from my agency to be with me if I thought I was going to my gun fight. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM was SIGNIFICANTLY kittened up, equipment wise, when the "go" light went off and they had to dance with the one that brung them. Two of them, because they were going to the range that day, had their "backup" guns on them with no spare magazines - they're "primary" pistols and all their magazines being left behind in their range bags either at the office, or in the car on-scene when they went to work. I could go on and on and on - and these are good, switched on, tactically minded guys.

The moral of the story is this. If you think your threat assessment skills are so good that you can "get by" with a carry gun only, you shouldn't need a gun at all, being able to avoid trouble in advance. If you need a gun, you need a REAL GUN, and, to some extent, capacity matters. Even more so, SHOOTABILITY matters. I know I can shoot a 298 or 300 with my PM9 when I work at it, but, if I need to shoot an El Prez, or a Bill Drill, that's NOT the pistol I want to use.

Now, I know there are compromises that we all make. Now that I live up North, it's a LOT easier to conceal a G19 and G26 with spare magazines on a daily basis, even in the summer. I know that there are lots of private citizens for whom the decision is a deep concealment gun or nothing, based on employment policies and what-not, but that's not what I'm addressing. What gets my goat is the idea that you can "get away" with just carrying a "little" gun, because you're going somewhere "safe." NOWHERE is safe. Not your Church, not your office, not the movie theater. When the monster(s) come through the door, I guarantee you will not, afterwards, say: "Gee, I wish I had a smaller pistol with less ammunition during that fight..."

As always, this is one man's opinion, and worth precisely what you paid for it.

Regards,

Kevin

[LSP972]

Jerry Miculek is an example of a shooter who can run probably any pistol ever made better then most folks. That is because most folks cannot match his training resources.

Perhaps. But the flaw in that theory is that Jerry was pretty close to as good as he is now back when I was shooting with him 35+ years ago… and his "training resources" at that time, according to Donnie, was impromptu targets at a garbage dump, and what ammo they could scratch out or "borrow".

Yet, Jerry managed to clean our clocks regularly with that 6" M-27. IOW, not to put too fine a point on it, I seriously doubt you (or most of the rest of us here) could get as good as he is regardless of how large our graphical curves, resources, or time might be.

.

[LSP972]

...the idea that you can "get away" with just carrying a "little" gun, because you're going somewhere "safe." NOWHERE is safe. Not your Church, not your office, not the movie theater. When the monster(s) come through the door, I guarantee you will not, afterwards, say: "Gee, I wish I had a smaller pistol with less ammunition during that fight..."



And that about covers it, I think. Beautifully stated, Kevin.

Thought processes like that used to get my goat, too…. along with having to endure the inevitable Rambo comments, et. al., ad nauseum. Retirement is a wonderful thing, along with the knowledge that all the years you spent trying to give some of your people a clue weren't entirely wasted… in that some of them paid attention, and a few actually used those skills and knowledge to survive their fight/fights.

The rest… well, they don't know what they don't know, they don't CARE, so they can eat cake as far as I'm concerned. God bless 'em.

.

[Hambo]

Getting back to NH Shooter's question, I carry my 92F even in the hot Florida summer. When it's not inside my waistband it's on my desk or the bedside table. My easy to carry but not too confidence inspiring .380 rides in my cargo pocket primarily so I can reach a gun while in the car.

[LittleLebowski]

Perhaps. But the flaw in that theory is that Jerry was pretty close to as good as he is now back when I was shooting with him 35+ years ago… and his "training resources" at that time, according to Donnie, was impromptu targets at a garbage dump, and what ammo they could scratch out or "borrow".

Yet, Jerry managed to clean our clocks regularly with that 6" M-27. IOW, not to put too fine a point on it, I seriously doubt you (or most of the rest of us here) could get as good as he is regardless of how large our graphical curves, resources, or time might be.

.

Pretty much what I thought, appreciate you sharing that.

[DocGKR]

Got to agree with OAK and several others above.

Quantity of shooting has a quality all of its own. When I've had the opportunity to shoot several times a week and fire off 25,000+ rounds in a year, I could do pretty well with any handgun I shot. Shooting in the 10-15,000 per year range range, I did best with my primary pistol, but still shot adequately with similar ones (ie. Glock and M&P). On years where it becomes hard to get close to even 5000 rounds fired, I struggle to maintain acceptable skill with just my primary pistol--forget doing anywhere near peak performance with other handguns. Keep in mind that most LE officers and military personnel rarely are able to get anything close to 5000 rounds of agency sponsored pistol training in a year and that would be the bare minimum to maintain skill with even one handgun system...

[Tamara]

Perhaps. But the flaw in that theory is that Jerry was pretty close to as good as he is now back when I was shooting with him 35+ years ago… and his "training resources" at that time, according to Donnie, was impromptu targets at a garbage dump, and what ammo they could scratch out or "borrow".

Yet, Jerry managed to clean our clocks regularly with that 6" M-27. IOW, not to put too fine a point on it, I seriously doubt you (or most of the rest of us here) could get as good as he is regardless of how large our graphical curves, resources, or time might be.

Yeah, I hate reading on the internet "Well, if I got all the practice ammo Jerry got..." ...then you'd still be you and he'd still be him.
There are probably people out there who've taken a lot more practice swings than Derek Jeter, too.

[Kyle Reese]

NOWHERE is safe. Not your Church, not your office, not the movie theater. When the monster(s) come through the door, I guarantee you will not, afterwards, say: "Gee, I wish I had a smaller pistol with less ammunition during that fight..."

As always, this is one man's opinion, and worth precisely what you paid for it.

Regards,

Kevin

Well stated, Kevin.

[ST911]

What gets my goat is the idea that you can "get away" with just carrying a "little" gun, because you're going somewhere "safe." NOWHERE is safe. Not your Church, not your office, not the movie theater. When the monster(s) come through the door, I guarantee you will not, afterwards, say: "Gee, I wish I had a smaller pistol with less ammunition during that fight..."

And yet legions of plain-clothes detectives and SROs will arm up with subcompact convenience guns. May fate spare them the consequence of their folly.


As always, this is one man's opinion, and worth precisely what you paid for it.

Good stuff.

[John Hearne]

Paul Howe made it a point to distinguish between too much caliber and not enough gun and I agree it is an important distinction. Very few people shoot a Glock 27 well but a lot more seem to be able to shoot a 26 or 22 acceptably.

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk

[HeadHunter]

A Carry gun can be concealed on one's person and can be fired with one hand. A Combat gun has a stock, a long barrel, fires a powerful cartridge, and takes two hands to shoot. Assuming that the former, no matter what its size, is in any way equivalent to the latter is foolishness.

[Haraise]

A Carry gun can be concealed on one's person and can be fired with one hand. A Combat gun has a stock, a long barrel, fires a powerful cartridge, and takes two hands to shoot. Assuming that the former, no matter what its size, is in any way equivalent to the latter is foolishness.

2683

Plenty of people have combat handguns. In the US they're the M9, M11 and M45. :rolleyes:

[Chuck Whitlock]

2683

Plenty of people have combat handguns. In the US they're the M9, M11 and M45. :rolleyes:

Perhaps you do not realize who you are talking to.

Let me help you with that:

http://ballisticradio.com/2013/06/30/ballistic-radio-episode-17-june-30-2013/

http://ballisticradio.com/2014/04/21/podcast-season-2-ballistic-radio-episode-58-april-20th-2014/

[user277221]

2683

Plenty of people have combat handguns. In the US they're the M9, M11 and M45. :rolleyes:

HeadHunter is the real deal dude... ease up and listen.

[Haraise]

HeadHunter is the real deal dude... ease up and listen.

It's not meant as an insult to say someone is missing the point. Happens all the time. To come in a handgun thread and say 'rifles are better' is not topical or relevant. I'm not sure who here needs to be informed of long gun superiority?

ETA: My take is that the 'combat handgun' is one that you either leave at the base, or if forced to take, make it as light as possible with as many rounds as possible (Glock 17) so it's less of a distraction. HeadHunter is right in that there's either 'your combat rifle' or 'you're fucked' when you're left with just a handgun.

[Kyle Reese]

We are back on topic now.

[JAD]

I try to carry as much gun as I can.

For me, that's a lightweight commander strong side most of the time, a CCO in t shirt weather. I am, for the third and hopeful last time, about to sell my J frame, because I don't find myself in circumstances where I can carry a gun at all and can't carry the CCO.

The CCO is, for me, an acceptable mix of the attributes I think are good in a fighting handgun.

I fool with other platforms sometimes, out of interest; when I do, I try to focus on them for a while, and I usually switch to them for carry.

[NH Shooter]

Lots of catching up from my last post, all good stuff.

Over the years, I've tried a number of "small" guns for easier CC with summer clothing, including a J-frame and a Colt Mustang .380 (which IMO was really a POS). Neither of those were satisfactory for me as I was unable to shoot either even remotely as well as a larger handgun.

My first Glock was a 23. Call me a girly, but for some reason the .40 didn't seem to recoil any less than a .45 and I still did not feel I shot it well enough.

The 23 went in favor of a 17C, which has been the sweet spot for me. I even ran it through a PPC course and though points were dropped vs. my S&W Model 14 shooting wadcutters, I was pleasantly surprised at how well I was able to do with it at the longer 25 and 50 yard distances (with Heinie SlantPro sights (http://www.heinie.com/shop/3155l-heinie-glock-slantpro-ledge-sight-set-black/)) using 124 grain FMJ ammo. When shooting IDPA I have a non-ported barrel to keep it game legal.

Because I have small hands, the Walther Police Pistol Slim fits my girly mitts very well. What has amazed me about it is how well I can shoot it and based on all the reading I have done, I am far from alone in that assessment. The PPS is the first easy-to-CC handgun that I have owned that I can shoot well, giving up little-to-nothing to the G17 in the critical 3 to 5 yard range of the typical self defense encounter. I also believe that from a retention standpoint, the PPS has a very considerable edge.

In a typical up-close-and-over-fast self defense scenario, I do not feel disadvantaged in any way with the PPS. But if it was a more prolonged situation beyond the typical 3 to 5 yard SD engagement, I know the G17 would gain me some major advantage over the PPS. Thus back to my original question but with a bit of rephrasing: do you carry an easy-to-conceal handgun that you feel 100% confident with to defend yourself, but also have a larger/more capable/higher capacity handgun that is also set up for CC for when you can effectively conceal it, OR do you strictly carry one handgun regardless of the season or any other (real or perceived) circumstances?

Thanks again to all for your continued indulgence.

[psalms144.1]

NH Shooter - a quibble, but, I believe, a valid one. "in the critical 3 to 5 yard range of the typical self defense encounter." A friend used to like to repeat the quote, I think from Mark Twaine, that there are "lies, damned lies, and statistics." I think the "typical self defense encounter" description (3 rounds, 3 yards, 3 seconds) is the MOST misused and misunderstood thing since "9mm is for sissies" was posited.

I'm not a mathematician (dropped calculus in 12th grade to take drivers ed - which REALLY set me up for my current gig as an economic crimes specialist!), but I do know that "averages" mean basically NOTHING. Since MOST SD "uses" of firearms involve one party scatting for all they're worth at the display of the other party's firearm, the number of rounds fired in actual shootings gets VERY skewed (average 9 "zeros" and one "ten" and you get an AVERAGE of one round per encounter - which is GROSSLY false in describing ANY of them).

Besides that, your chances of having to draw your weapon are infinitesimally small. So, MAYBE, the BG you have to draw down on is either (a) one of a pack, (b) a dedicated, motivated attacker who won't stop aggressing until you "switch him off" or literally shoot him to bits, (c) doped out of his gourd on bath salts and thinks you're beef jerky, or (d) a kittened up combination of any/all of the above. Tell me again why you want to have a 6 or 7 shot 9mm for that?

Yes, you SHOOT the PPS well. How do you RELOAD it? How do you shoot it one handed, maybe weak hand only? If you're performing at tip-top of your game, and you're running 50% hits on the two-way rifle range, how many HITS are in the PPS? Enough to stop more than one attacker? Enough to stop someone stoned out of their mind?

And, let's just imagine YOUR gun fight isn't "average." What if you're at work/church/shopping when your nightmare shows up with an AK and starts killing people 10, 15, 25 yards away. PPS still going to do it for you?

This is where this argument goes off the tracks. You either prepare and equip for the WORST case scenario, or you roll your dice on the law of averages.

For me, I don't trust averages, I don't expect ANYTHING to be easy. If I'm in that TINY fraction of a percent of private citizens who use their weapon for self defense, I've already blown the AVERAGE out of the water.

Again, YMMV, and you gotta do what's right for you. For me, it's the G19 or a similar sized "compact" semi-auto that allows me to perform to the best of my abilities on the worst day of my life.

Regards,

Kevin

[NH Shooter]

NH Shooter - a quibble, but, I believe, a valid one. "in the critical 3 to 5 yard range of the typical self defense encounter." A friend used to like to repeat the quote, I think from Mark Twaine, that there are "lies, damned lies, and statistics." I think the "typical self defense encounter" description (3 rounds, 3 yards, 3 seconds) is the MOST misused and misunderstood thing since "9mm is for sissies" was posited.



Tom Givens student stats;

90% were 3 to 5 yards. Three out of 64 occurred at or beyond 15 yards. Two occurred at contact distance. All the rest between 3 and 7 yards.

Number of rounds fired ranged from 2 to 3 in a shooting (one individual firing) to nearly always fully emptying the magazine in gunfights (multiple individuals shooting)- Again, this mirrors what we see. Our average number of shots is about four although we have had shootings involving 8, 11, and 12 rounds fired by one individual.

See post #287 - http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?13633-Will-competition-get-LEO-s-or-Armed-Civilians-killed/page29

I'm comfortable being well prepared for the most likely. If a band of ISIS terrorists show up with AKs blazing, I'll be running away with everyone else.

[GardoneVT]

Lots of catching up from my last post, all good stuff.

Over the years, I've tried a number of "small" guns for easier CC with summer clothing, including a J-frame and a Colt Mustang .380 (which IMO was really a POS). Neither of those were satisfactory for me as I was unable to shoot either even remotely as well as a larger handgun.

My first Glock was a 23. Call me a girly, but for some reason the .40 didn't seem to recoil any less than a .45 and I still did not feel I shot it well enough.

The 23 went in favor of a 17C, which has been the sweet spot for me. I even ran it through a PPC course and though points were dropped vs. my S&W Model 14 shooting wadcutters, I was pleasantly surprised at how well I was able to do with it at the longer 25 and 50 yard distances (with Heinie SlantPro sights (http://www.heinie.com/shop/3155l-heinie-glock-slantpro-ledge-sight-set-black/)) using 124 grain FMJ ammo. When shooting IDPA I have a non-ported barrel to keep it game legal.

Because I have small hands, the Walther Police Pistol Slim fits my girly mitts very well. What has amazed me about it is how well I can shoot it and based on all the reading I have done, I am far from alone in that assessment. The PPS is the first easy-to-CC handgun that I have owned that I can shoot well, giving up little-to-nothing to the G17 in the critical 3 to 5 yard range of the typical self defense encounter. I also believe that from a retention standpoint, the PPS has a very considerable edge.

In a typical up-close-and-over-fast self defense scenario, I do not feel disadvantaged in any way with the PPS. But if it was a more prolonged situation beyond the typical 3 to 5 yard SD engagement, I know the G17 would gain me some major advantage over the PPS. Thus back to my original question but with a bit of rephrasing: do you carry an easy-to-conceal handgun that you feel 100% confident with to defend yourself, but also have a larger/more capable/higher capacity handgun that is also set up for CC for when you can effectively conceal it, OR do you strictly carry one handgun regardless of the season or any other (real or perceived) circumstances?

Thanks again to all for your continued indulgence.

One, people are not very observant. This is why I have carried a large frame handgun since starting CCW , and have yet to be made. Most folks are too busy snapchatting to notice the bulge at your 4 o'clock position.

Two;Anton Chirgurh is out there. His character may be a work of fiction, but the existence of such people in society is not. Do you want the only tool standing between a trained, cold blooded predator and the attendant demise of your family and yourself to be a seven shot pocket filler?

Three;statistics when it comes to firearms are nearly worthless when it comes to individual protection. Stats say most people will never need to reach for their guns more then once in a lifetime. Ive had to do it twice:there are folks both in and out of uniform who've passed that figure long ago.

Four:ill drag out the 'without rule of law ' card, because it has direct relevance to your question. If "calamity X " happens, youre unlikely to be at home when it does. The LA Riots, the earthquakes of the region, etc all happened while people went about their ordinary business. You can see where this is going; in the event of regional instability where your home is either destroyed or unreachable, your defensive collection will begin and end with the piece on your person. You wont be in envious shape with a typical full size pistol during a riot or other calamatous event , yet youll be exponentially better off then if you had a 'pocket friendly' , ballistically inferior pocket gun to stand between you and the criminal element when the police are unavailable.

Hope that gives you some guidance on the matter.

[Salamander]

After first getting my CCW I went through a trial phase to learn what worked for me and what didn’t. Pretty quickly I sold some of those earlier guns and kept others to use at the range just for fun, but don't carry them.

A full size gun is just a bit of a stretch for my professional office time, possible to conceal but requiring some care. With a compact I can pretty much forget about it and not worry. Considering the kinds of meetings I need to attend and the kinds of people who are at them, that's important to me.

I've come to prefer simple, and for carry have standardized on the P2000 platform... two in 9mm LEM, and one in .357 Sig/.40 S&W for backwoods use. One of the 9mm guns gets 90-95% of the use. I'd be almost as happy with a G19, given a little more training time with that platform.

[Grizzly21]

I'm guillty of carrying different platforms from time to time but have come to realize the advantages of carrying a pistol with the same type of operating system all the time so I'm sticking with the Glock 17/19 off duty and my issued M&P at work. I'm issued a M&P 45 at work and carry a Glock 26 for backup. When off duty I always have my 642 on me regardless of attire. I normally carry my Glock 17 however I just ordered a new holster for my Glock 19 and will start carrying it once the holster arrives. I also carry the Glock 26 off duty in an ankle holster when my attire and activities permit me to do so. Changes in issued gun may be coming in the furture and with that being said I will acquire a duplicate of the new platform if I dont already have one to carry off duty. We don't plan on getting into a shootout when we leave home but we want to be as prepared as practically possible.

[ReverendMeat]

When I started carrying, it was a J-frame. Couple years later now, I've been alternating metal frame TDA pistols, the smallest of which is a SIG P239 (which is almost the same size as a Glock 19). It helps that I don't have to carry in a "NPE" work environment though.

[rob_s]

Tom Givens student stats;

90% were 3 to 5 yards. Three out of 64 occurred at or beyond 15 yards. Two occurred at contact distance. All the rest between 3 and 7 yards.

Number of rounds fired ranged from 2 to 3 in a shooting (one individual firing) to nearly always fully emptying the magazine in gunfights (multiple individuals shooting)- Again, this mirrors what we see. Our average number of shots is about four although we have had shootings involving 8, 11, and 12 rounds fired by one individual.

See post #287 - http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?13633-Will-competition-get-LEO-s-or-Armed-Civilians-killed/page29

I'm comfortable being well prepared for the most likely. If a band of ISIS terrorists show up with AKs blazing, I'll be running away with everyone else.

I find it interesting that people will use this data to support one thing, but ignore the larger data (the extreme rarity of finding oneself in such a situation).

[Hambo]

I'm comfortable being well prepared for the most likely.

It's just my observation, but you tend to ask questions for which you already believe you have the answer.

Your G17 would work in those statistically likely situations AND would make you feel more comfortable in an outlier situation. Somebody here has a signature line that says "it's not the odds, it's the stakes." I place a high value on my continued existence, and that's why I carry enough guns and ammo for the worst case, not the best.

[John Hearne]

I find it interesting that people will use this data to support one thing, but ignore the larger data (the extreme rarity of finding oneself in such a situation).

It's not the odds, it's the stakes.

[TCinVA]

I find it interesting that people will use this data to support one thing, but ignore the larger data (the extreme rarity of finding oneself in such a situation).

Tom himself has said on a number of occasions that every robbery, aggravated assault, rape, and murder is an opportunity for the justified use of lethal force. In 2011 that stuff happened to just under 2 million people. The overwhelming majority of the victims were unarmed.

The need to defend oneself from violent attack isn't quite the statistical rarity many people think.

I also tend to take issue with the idea of "SHTF" because it seems to me that if somebody is threatening you with sufficient harm that you have the need to kill them to preserve your existence, the S has definitely HTF in your world.

When someone targets you as the victim of a violent crime you are experiencing a disruption of social order...and the stats tell us that you are largely on your own. You have to deal with the violent actor by yourself and if injured in the attack you will have to deal with the injury on your own at least for several minutes. A major arterial bleed in the extremities will kill faster than even the most impressive average response time by EMS.

In Aurora EMS didn't get to where they could do some good for almost 30 minutes...and it's beyond question that some people are dead as a direct result of that.

[Hambo]

It's not the odds, it's the stakes.

Credit to John Hearne in my post above.

[Beat Trash]

I'm guillty of carrying different platforms from time to time but have come to realize the advantages of carrying a pistol with the same type of operating system all the time so I'm sticking with the Glock 17/19 off duty and my issued M&P at work. I'm issued a M&P 45 at work and carry a Glock 26 for backup. When off duty I always have my 642 on me regardless of attire. I normally carry my Glock 17 however I just ordered a new holster for my Glock 19 and will start carrying it once the holster arrives. I also carry the Glock 26 off duty in an ankle holster when my attire and activities permit me to do so. Changes in issued gun may be coming in the furture and with that being said I will acquire a duplicate of the new platform if I dont already have one to carry off duty. We don't plan on getting into a shootout when we leave home but we want to be as prepared as practically possible.


I highly agree with the parts in bold. I also commend your off-duty choices. (Let me know how the new transition goes for you guys)

As previously stated, If I could predict ahead of time when and where I would get into a critical incident, I'd stay home that day.

Any time you have someone legitimacy trying to kill you, and you are forced to use deadly force to survive, I think that could qualify as your own personal "combat". With this in mind, why would you consider anything that would limit your ability? There are too many guns out there such as a Glock 19 that provide an adequate blend of performance and ease of concealment/carry.

To assume that your incident will occur within 3-5 feet, with just one assailant, and you can even predict how many of your rounds will make contact, and how quickly the assailant will sub come to said rounds is astounding. I might ask you to pick out my next Mega Millions lotto numbers for me.

A few years ago, my agency did a 5 year study of all shots fired by officers, at human and animals. Similar to the one NYPD produces. Our numbers were close to NYPD's. If I remember correctly, the total number of rounds fired was 8, the average distance was 11.2 yards (not feet). Not all incidents where civilians are confronted with an armed individual involve a "Lone Gunman". In today's world, they tend to travel with friends, and those friends tend to be armed also.

A while ago, Dr Roberts had a topic going on why he felt the Glock 19 was the new J-Frame. It was a very enlightened read. I agreed with Gary's assessment then and I still do.

[KeeFus]

I'm guillty of carrying different platforms from time to time but have come to realize the advantages of carrying a pistol with the same type of operating system all the time so I'm sticking with the Glock 17/19 off duty and my issued M&P at work. I'm issued a M&P 45 at work and carry a Glock 26 for backup. When off duty I always have my 642 on me regardless of attire. I normally carry my Glock 17 however I just ordered a new holster for my Glock 19 and will start carrying it once the holster arrives. I also carry the Glock 26 off duty in an ankle holster when my attire and activities permit me to do so. Changes in issued gun may be coming in the furture and with that being said I will acquire a duplicate of the new platform if I dont already have one to carry off duty. We don't plan on getting into a shootout when we leave home but we want to be as prepared as practically possible.

Grizzly and I have shared this conversation many times and I totally agree with it. I too am hopeful of a shift to a G17 as we have both chewed the Chiefs ear about it. Hopefully it will pay off. And if it does I don't need to go buying...but I will be selling!

[Chuck Haggard]

I think it helps that guns like the G19 are in the same size and weight envelope as the Detective Special. One gets 95%+ or so of the performance of a full sized service pistol with the CCW "baggage" of what most people have considered over the decades to be a good small carry gun

[Chuck Whitlock]

Thus back to my original question but with a bit of rephrasing: do you carry an easy-to-conceal handgun that you feel 100% confident with to defend yourself, but also have a larger/more capable/higher capacity handgun that is also set up for CC for when you can effectively conceal it, OR do you strictly carry one handgun regardless of the season or any other (real or perceived) circumstances?

Thanks again to all for your continued indulgence.

To answer the question directly:

I became a sworn peace officer early in 1997, and religiously carried concealed on my own time since raising my right hand. Began with a BHP in .40. Switched to a Glock 23 in '99, and carry the same thing with a 9mm barrel today.

Now, bear in mind that my day job is a uniformed cop, and I can dress like a slob on my own time with little repercussion. I find it easy to conceal under a sport coat. On the occasions that my mode of dress does not allow me to carry that at 3:30-4:00 IWB, then I have used and still use a smaller gun, usually a Kahr of some flavor. Think tucked in shirt without a jacket or fleece vest or whatever.

So, I guess my answer is that I turn your question around: I carry the larger/more capable gun 99% of the time, and a smaller gun either as a BUG, or as a primary only when I can't conceal the larger one.

[Chuck Haggard]

I have always carried service sized handguns unless circumstances dictate that I go to something smaller.

[DocGKR]

http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?716-The-quot-new-quot-J-frame

[Wondering Beard]

Thus back to my original question but with a bit of rephrasing: do you carry an easy-to-conceal handgun that you feel 100% confident with to defend yourself, but also have a larger/more capable/higher capacity handgun that is also set up for CC for when you can effectively conceal it, OR do you strictly carry one handgun regardless of the season or any other (real or perceived) circumstances?

Thanks again to all for your continued indulgence.

Yes.

Glock 19

[NH Shooter]

It's just my observation, but you tend to ask questions for which you already believe you have the answer.



Yes, and what better sounding board than here to test one's beliefs/assumptions?

All good replies by people whose experience-based opinions are generally sage advice. By asking questions and perhaps challenging those opinions in an non-confrontational, objective manner I get a better understanding of a particular POV. Sometimes, there's even discovery in attempting to explain something in a different way, which makes such exchanges a win-win situation. My posts may be based on my current beliefs, but they are always intended to spur objective conversation for the advancement of our collective wisdom.

Thanks again to all for sharing your experience and POV!

[Tamara]

I have always carried service sized handguns unless circumstances dictate that I go to something smaller.

This. I have small handguns mostly to carry in the outside pockets of winter clothes.

[NH Shooter]

I thought I'd post this for reference purposes, especially for those who do not own a PPS.

I get a feeling that when I state "small handgun" that a Freedom Arms belt-buckle .22 is what might be popping into mind. Obviously for the purpose of this discussion, some definition of a "more easily CC handgun" would be useful.

As you can see in the photo below, the PPS is not tiny compared to a full size service pistol. While it may not be much smaller in profile, its single-stack design allows its much-thinner frame to sit flat to the body (in a good concealment holster) thus greatly reducing bulges and printing in the cover garments. Where a light, normal fit (not baggy) summer polo easily covers the PPS in a Comp-Tac IWB holster, the width of the G17 makes it much more difficult - and not as comfortable.

Also as an FYI, the PPS is pictured below with an eight round magazine, so a total of nine of my favorite +P carry loads are on tap - along with what I'm carrying in a spare mag.

Based on owning and carrying this pistol for four years and having used it several times in local IDPA matches, I can say without reservation that for a personal defense handgun, the PPS is no slouch: It's accurate, conceals well, carries as many rounds as a 1911, does not give much for an assailant to grab hold of in a retention struggle, and is easy to shoot well. Also as a point of reference, I'm 5'7" and have small hands.

I hope this post adds some clarity to the discussion, and my thanks again to all who have participated in it.


http://www.canonshooter.com/photos2/g17pps-1.jpg

[warpedcamshaft]

My thoughts (and then I'm done):

1: Shot timers and bulls don't lie... Practice/Train and learn your capabilities and limitations with your carry firearm(s).

2: No one who shoots/carries much claims a J-Frame is equal to a Glock 19 in firepower or shoot-ability. Don't get lazy about what you carry, but even if at times it's a smaller firearm based on your circumstances... carry as much as legally possible.

3: I found this quote disturbing, as I can think of a few situations where someone wasn't carrying a "REAL GUN", but would have otherwise been raped or murdered:

[QUOTE=psalms144.1;262935
The moral of the story is this. If you think your threat assessment skills are so good that you can "get by" with a carry gun only, you shouldn't need a gun at all, being able to avoid trouble in advance. If you need a gun, you need a REAL GUN, and, to some extent, capacity matters. Even more so, SHOOTABILITY matters.
Kevin[/QUOTE]

5: I'm really tired of the word "platform" ;)

6: If you drive much, your seat belt and air bags are more likely to save your life than a firearm... When was the last time you inspected your seatbelts?

http://www.imminet.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/10-step-system-inspection.pdf

Alright... I'm bowing out.

[rob_s]

every robbery, aggravated assault, rape, and murder is an opportunity for the justified use of lethal force.

The bold word is telling.

[TCinVA]

The bold word is telling.

No it isn't. It's simply a statement of the reality that those situations are all situations where the use of lethal force would be perfectly justified, but the victims typically do not have ready access to a reasonable implement of self defense to protect themselves from attack. Tom has stated before on this forum that the ratio of his students who have drawn a weapon preemptively to stop an attack in its tracks far outnumbers the number of his students who have had to pull the trigger.

[Chuck Haggard]

No it isn't. It's simply a statement of the reality that those situations are all situations where the use of lethal force would be perfectly justified, but the victims typically do not have ready access to a reasonable implement of self defense to protect themselves from attack. Tom has stated before on this forum that the ratio of his students who have drawn a weapon preemptively to stop an attack in its tracks far outnumbers the number of his students who have had to pull the trigger.

Off the top of my head I can think of seven times that I avoided a robbery due to having a gun on me. In none of those incidents were shots fired.

Yes, I'm a cop, no, I was not working during those times.

[psalms144.1]

I thought I'd post this for reference purposes, especially for those who do not own a PPS.

I get a feeling that when I state "small handgun" that a Freedom Arms belt-buckle .22 is what might be popping into mind. Obviously for the purpose of this discussion, some definition of a "more easily CC handgun" would be useful.

As you can see in the photo below, the PPS is not tiny compared to a full size service pistol. While it may not be much smaller in profile, its single-stack design allows its much-thinner frame to sit flat to the body (in a good concealment holster) thus greatly reducing bulges and printing in the cover garments. Where a light, normal fit (not baggy) summer polo easily covers the PPS in a Comp-Tac IWB holster, the width of the G17 makes it much more difficult - and not as comfortable.

Also as an FYI, the PPS is pictured below with an eight round magazine, so a total of nine of my favorite +P carry loads are on tap - along with what I'm carrying in a spare mag.

Based on owning and carrying this pistol for four years and having used it several times in local IDPA matches, I can say without reservation that for a personal defense handgun, the PPS is no slouch: It's accurate, conceals well, carries as many rounds as a 1911, does not give much for an assailant to grab hold of in a retention struggle, and is easy to shoot well. Also as a point of reference, I'm 5'7" and have small hands.

I hope this post adds some clarity to the discussion, and my thanks again to all who have participated in it.


http://www.canonshooter.com/photos2/g17pps-1.jpgNH - to me, that photo is the most convincing evidence of all, but in the opposite direction of your post. Overlay that PPS on top of a G19, and see how small the dimensional differences (less thickness) really are - with the G19 offering nearly double the capacity. WRT effectiveness and comfort of concealment, OAK carries a G34 every day, for kitten's sake - it's not THAT hard to conceal a modern double stack semi-auto.

Looking at the dimesions, with the 8-round magazine in place, the PPS is 5.3" in overall height, about a 1/4" "taller" than a G19 with standard (15-round) magazine, and we all know that the length of the grip is one of the biggest factors at play in "concealability." Heck, with that 8-round magazine, the OAH of the PPS is the same as your G17! OAL of the PPS is an inch shorter than the G19, but that inch is immaterial, especially in an IWB holster. I will grant you that the width of the PPS makes is "more comfortable" for IWB carry (same with my PM9), but that doesn't make it hard even for a "less slim" fellow like me to carry a G19 IWB. I carry my G19 all day, every day, including through the summers when covering garment is an untucked underarmour "loose" t-shirt or a tank top of some kind.

But, frankly, if you're happy with what you have, God speed. I'm not going to change you or anyone else's mind, because my experiences, frame of reference, and level of acceptable risk are different from yours and anybody else's.

Best of luck and stay safe.

[psalms144.1]

3: I found this quote disturbing, as I can think of a few situations where someone wasn't carrying a "REAL GUN", but would have otherwise been raped or murdered:
Warped - I hope that you and anyone else did not take from my statement that I think people should be UNarmed if they can't carry a "Real Gun." In context, my discussion was based on the thought process that we can get away with less for COMFORT and CONVENIENCE sake. If dress codes/regulations/laws prohibit the carry of a more capable pistol, OF COURSE I would want someone to have a Beretta 21 in their pocket rather than a sharp stick or harsh language...

And, thanks for the link on safety gear inspection, have to take the car in to the shop tomorrow, I'll make sure to have them check all the gadgets while it's there.

Regards,

Kevin

[Hambo]

I thought I'd post this for reference purposes, especially for those who do not own a PPS.

I get a feeling that when I state "small handgun" that a Freedom Arms belt-buckle .22 is what might be popping into mind. Obviously for the purpose of this discussion, some definition of a "more easily CC handgun" would be useful.

As you can see in the photo below, the PPS is not tiny compared to a full size service pistol. While it may not be much smaller in profile, its single-stack design allows its much-thinner frame to sit flat to the body (in a good concealment holster) thus greatly reducing bulges and printing in the cover garments. Where a light, normal fit (not baggy) summer polo easily covers the PPS in a Comp-Tac IWB holster, the width of the G17 makes it much more difficult - and not as comfortable.

Also as an FYI, the PPS is pictured below with an eight round magazine, so a total of nine of my favorite +P carry loads are on tap - along with what I'm carrying in a spare mag.

Based on owning and carrying this pistol for four years and having used it several times in local IDPA matches, I can say without reservation that for a personal defense handgun, the PPS is no slouch: It's accurate, conceals well, carries as many rounds as a 1911, does not give much for an assailant to grab hold of in a retention struggle, and is easy to shoot well. Also as a point of reference, I'm 5'7" and have small hands.

I hope this post adds some clarity to the discussion, and my thanks again to all who have participated in it.


http://www.canonshooter.com/photos2/g17pps-1.jpg

Add me to the list that thinks you're making a case to carry the Glock, not the Walther. My reloads from concealment aren't glacial, but they aren't blinding either, so reloading in the middle of a fight is not something I long to do. For that reason I'll always take more bullets and work around the gun.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

My minor contribution is that I've ditched IWB for OWB. I find it much more comfortable nowadays. Even in TX heat, I can wear a big floppy light weight shirt that cover a G26 or G19 (this one being my preferred). However, I shoot the G26 almost as well as the 19. IF, I end up with not being able to wear a cover garment - then either my 642 or 432 goes in my pants pocket.

As far as the modal gun fight, my view is that some folks tend to think that the average incident is what will always happen. 3 shots at 3 feet is a physical constant like the speed of light. I think of it as statistical decision question. There is a distribution of critical incident intensity and one has to term where on this risk probability continuum you will make your cut off. It's like the dreaded .05 vs. .01 level. Where in the extremes you decide to make the cut? Being overgunned doesn't have the negatives of being undergunned in a minor incident (mugger be gone) vs compared to being undergunned in some horror like Mumbai. Since a Glock and an extra mag is not really disruptive with a little thought about dress - that's my decision cut off.

In my life, two might have been critical incidents (solved by avoidance and a lie) would have involved 4 bad persons. J frame - might have deterred them - but it would be nice to have more than 5 rounds.

[Haraise]

NH - to me, that photo is the most convincing evidence of all, but in the opposite direction of your post. Overlay that PPS on top of a G19, and see how small the dimensional differences (less thickness) really are - with the G19 offering nearly double the capacity. WRT effectiveness and comfort of concealment, OAK carries a G34 every day, for kitten's sake - it's not THAT hard to conceal a modern double stack semi-auto.

Looking at the dimesions, with the 8-round magazine in place, the PPS is 5.3" in overall height, about a 1/4" "taller" than a G19 with standard (15-round) magazine, and we all know that the length of the grip is one of the biggest factors at play in "concealability." Heck, with that 8-round magazine, the OAH of the PPS is the same as your G17! OAL of the PPS is an inch shorter than the G19, but that inch is immaterial, especially in an IWB holster. I will grant you that the width of the PPS makes is "more comfortable" for IWB carry (same with my PM9), but that doesn't make it hard even for a "less slim" fellow like me to carry a G19 IWB. I carry my G19 all day, every day, including through the summers when covering garment is an untucked underarmour "loose" t-shirt or a tank top of some kind.

But, frankly, if you're happy with what you have, God speed. I'm not going to change you or anyone else's mind, because my experiences, frame of reference, and level of acceptable risk are different from yours and anybody else's.

Best of luck and stay safe.


Add me to the list that thinks you're making a case to carry the Glock, not the Walther. My reloads from concealment aren't glacial, but they aren't blinding either, so reloading in the middle of a fight is not something I long to do. For that reason I'll always take more bullets and work around the gun.

He says that thickness is the big issue, regardless of what they look like from the side... and he gets responses about how close they look from the side so they should be similar.

There's almost nothing more important than a thin grip to conceal well, regardless of what a profile picture shows.

[Tamara]

There's almost nothing more important than a thin grip to conceal well...

Tell us more about how to conceal guns!

;)

[MGW]

"So, the intended topic for discussion: do you have one rig that you wear all the time that is optimized to strike a balance between comfortable/concealable carry and maximum effectiveness/capability, OR do you carry a smaller, more comfortable/concealable (but still reasonably capable) gun regularly but have a larger/higher capacity/more-capable handgun set up to CC for certain situations? Is such a distinction even relevant to civilian CC?"

The short answer is yes. I carry a 19 when I can. When I can't I carry a Shield, 442, or lately a a Glock 42 at other times when I can't carry a 19.

I take a lot of things into consideration when I decide what I'm going to carry at that moment. Location, what I'm going to be doing, what I'll be wearing, the laws for where I'll be, the social norms for where I'll be, and who will be with me are just a few of the things I think about.

I'm in a highly visible and unarmed profession. Anything I do outside of work can have an impact my career. I'm also in the Army national guard and have deployed in the past. Most people that know me professionally also know that I own firearms and know how to use firearms. That would not give me a free pass if I screwed up and was discovered to be armed in the wrong place at the wrong time in THEIR eyes.

I admit that it is fairly easy to carry a 19 concealed. It is also pretty easy to accidentally get caught carry a firearm of any size. I think it was Head Hunter that wrote on another forum "people are generally clueless and unaware, until they're not." Or something similar to that. I want to be able to protect myself and people I care about at all times but that also includes being able to put food on the table.

We all balance risk every day in everything that we do. We all have different comfort levels of risk and live our lives to reflect that. Being "comfortably" armed is a very individual thing and a decision that must be made individually.

[Cecil Burch]

Add me to the list that thinks you're making a case to carry the Glock, not the Walther. My reloads from concealment aren't glacial, but they aren't blinding either, so reloading in the middle of a fight is not something I long to do. For that reason I'll always take more bullets and work around the gun.

As someone who will either carry a PPS or a full size M&P, and who is not built small, I can assure you that there is a significant difference in carrying the two guns. I have the same holster for both (a Keeper AIWB) and it takes about an hour of wearing each to know when one works better than the other for concealment.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

As I said before, if you carry OWB, the width is a trivial factor. I grant you that if you want to wear a tuckable, or t- over the gun IWB - width is a comfort factor but I've decided that I can carry outside the belt with easy as I don't use such cover methods. Don't appeal to me and seem a complication on the draw. I happily wore a G19 yesterday and went to a med clinic, nice stores, nice restaurant and neighborhood stroll with my wife yesterday and was quite comfy. The IWBs are in the box of holsters and assorted gun gadget crappola.

If you carry an extra mag is that IWB? If not, why the gun?

[DocGKR]

"There's almost nothing more important than a thin grip to conceal well, regardless of what a profile picture shows."

For my body shape and clothing styles, I find a shorter grip is the most important asset to more effective concealment--more so than grip thickness. The G26 & M&P9c conceal well, but are not as "shootable" as larger pistols; likewise, the G17 & M&P9 shoot great, but the grips are a bit too long for easy "concealability". While I prefer shooting my M&P9 and find carrying my M&P9c a bit easier, when looked at in aggregate the G19 is the optimum compromise for daily carry at this point in my life, as it offers the best balance of "concealability" vs. "shootability" in a single package.

[Mitch]

My mag carrier doesn't hang that low, but I've carried a Beretta 92 iwb. Owb would not have been an option, the bottom of the holster would have been well below my shirt.

[Tamara]

We all balance risk every day in everything that we do. We all have different comfort levels of risk and live our lives to reflect that. Being "comfortably" armed is a very individual thing and a decision that must be made individually.

It's interesting that I just finished up giving a phone interview on this very topic, and one of the things I mentioned was that mid-20s me, who dressed in a far more body-conscious style than mid-40s me, tended to carry on the belt at work, but then throw the SIG P-228 in my purse after I left the shop. My interviewer and I then commiserated about how the world of CCW was very different in the early/mid-'90s than it is now. Fewer good IWB holster choices, fewer small service caliber autos... (The G26/27 didn't yet exist, and neither did Kahr.) I think if I was mid-20s me now, I could have found a way to carry a PPS/Shield/Nano-sized gun and still dressed in a way that made me happy and comfortable with the level of concealment.

As it is now, I can dress like a hobo with a pullover in winter or an un-tucked and un-buttoned overshirt in the summer and carry a real pistol. Maybe I'm getting "made" every day, but I don't know because nobody has ever indicated, by word or deed, that they were aware of the pistol.

But my dress code and living situation is my own, which is what makes it hard to give advice to others on how to tote.

[Mr_White]

But my dress code and living situation is my own, which is what makes it hard to give advice to others on how to tote.

Well said, and I think that's the crux of the perpetual disagreement on this issue.


As it is now, I can dress like a hobo

I prefer the term 'slovenly golfer', myself.

[Biddy]

I have strong feelings on the subject, and am squarely in the "carry the most capable tool that you can commit to carrying on a daily basis" camp. I carry a Glock 19 each and every day, without fail, no exceptions.

BUT...

Regardless of which side of the fence we're on, I think we can all acknowledge that each of us has a tipping point in terms of what we can or can not conceal. As with Doc, I can't quite conceal a 17 in a way that still allows optimal access and draw speed or comfort (haven't yet found a good AIWB solution), but a 19 is just enough smaller that I can easily conceal one under a tshirt and shorts. As close as a PPQ and 19 are in size, I've found that I can't quite hide a PPQ.

Acknowledging that, it may be possible that the specifics of the OP's dress and such may make the small difference in size envelope between the PPS and 19 a big deal.


I tend to be a bit cynical, though. I've seen Gabe make a 17L or 34 (I forget which) completely disappear, and I have a buddy who is about 5'7" and 150 who easily conceals an M&P 9 full size, so I tend to meet claims of inability to carry smaller service pistols with doubt that they've actually experimented with quality belts or holsters.


If you don't carry it every day, it's not every day carry.

[Mr_White]

I've seen Gabe make a 17L or 34 (I forget which) completely disappear

34...lol

[NH Shooter]

As I said before, if you carry OWB, the width is a trivial factor.

Agreed, and that is why I went OWB for the G17 (see my avatar). The G17 in the JM Custom OWB holster is very comfy, but does not conceal under a polo shirt or other light clothing as well as the PPS in the Comp-Tac IWB (though it's fine under a sweatshirt or fleece vest). I've also tried my G17 sans WML in a Galco TR226 IWB holster, which I found did not conceal as well as the PPS rig and was not as comfortable as the JM Custom OWB.

Through this discussion, I'm realizing that if I only had one choice for CC (and without the benefit of owning a G19 for comparison), the PPS would be it.

[Fire-Medic]

Agreed, and that is why I went OWB for the G17 (see my avatar). The G17 in the JM Custom OWB holster is very comfy, but does not conceal under a polo shirt or other light clothing as well as the PPS in the Comp-Tac IWB (though it's fine under a sweatshirt or fleece vest). I've also tried my G17 sans WML in a Galco TR226 IWB holster, which I found did not conceal as well as the PPS rig and was not as comfortable as the JM Custom OWB.

Through this discussion, I'm realizing that if I only had one choice for CC (and without the benefit of owning a G19 for comparison), the PPS would be it.

Sounds like it's time to look at a G19 ;)

[Glenn E. Meyer]

That's why I don't carry under a polo or other shirt. I have lt. weight flopping shirts over the gun and my t-shirt or polo shirt. Cooler weather - a fleece vest works fine. As far as the shirt being too short - there are longer shirts you can buy. I look for that.

I agree a bit about grips. The 26 is easier to conceal. For my ability range, I don't see that much a difference. I do like and think I shoot my 4th Gen Glock 17 better. I love that gun. I was very few points down with it this weekend. But it does start to get pokey-out to carry.

But whatever you shoot well and conceal is better than a multi-cultural dance festival and folks waving candles in the air after you are gone.

I do find my North American Arms Mini in 22S easy to conceal. I bought it because it was cute.

[NH Shooter]

Sounds like it's time to look at a G19 ;)

Tempting....

[Biddy]

34...lol

Been awhile haha

Still using the AIWB with the foam wedge thing?

-RBid/Biddy


If you don't carry it every day, it's not every day carry.

[Mr_White]

Been awhile haha

Still using the AIWB with the foam wedge thing?

-RBid/Biddy


If you don't carry it every day, it's not every day carry.

Yep, no change here.

[Beat Trash]

For my body shape and clothing styles, I find a shorter grip is the most important asset to more effective concealment--more so than grip thickness. The G26 & M&P9c conceal well, but are not as "shootable" as larger pistols; likewise, the G17 & M&P9 shoot great, but the grips are a bit too long for easy "concealability". While I prefer shooting my M&P9 and find carrying my M&P9c a bit easier, when looked at in aggregate the G19 is the optimum compromise for daily carry at this point in my life, as it offers the best balance of "concealability" vs. "shootability" in a single package.

Very well said Doc. I have thought this for a while, but you expressed it better than I have been able to.

I shoot my M&P 9 rather well. My M&P9c is very comfortable to carry and I shoot it fairly well. But it's grip is too short for me, especially with the large back strap I require on my M&P pistols. My Glock 19 is a great compromise of shoot ability and concealability.

[Haraise]

Tell us more about how to conceal guns!

;)

Under a North Face jacket three sizes too big! ;D

[Tamara]

Under a North Face jacket three sizes too big! ;D

That sounds hot and uncomfortable, but I'd imagine you can carry a no-kiddin' gun that way.

[Terence]

Tom himself has said on a number of occasions that every robbery, aggravated assault, rape, and murder is an opportunity for the justified use of lethal force. In 2011 that stuff happened to just under 2 million people. The overwhelming majority of the victims were unarmed.



If that 2 million figure comes from the FBI UCR Report, its probably wrong. The truth is -- as far as I can determine -- unknowable, but due to the flaws in the way that data is compiled, that 2 million number is probably significantly higher. I would be happy to expand upon the flaws in UCR either here or in another thread if anyone cares.

[VT1032]

Me personally, I used to be a G19 all day every day type. I got sick of lugging it around and went to a Kahr CM9 for a little while but was never really comfortable with it and couldn't master the trigger. I've since made the switch to a G26 and I don't see myself going back to either. The G19 is the new bedside gun with a TLR1 and the Kahr was sold. Shooting them side by side, I actually shoot the G26 with gap floorplates more accurately then the G19 for some reason although I can run the G19 a bit faster. A G26 with 11 in the gun and a 17rnd spare is no slouch and it's much easier for me to conceal especially under T shirts and other light garments.

[breakingtime91]

Me personally, I used to be a G19 all day every day type. I got sick of lugging it around and went to a Kahr CM9 for a little while but was never really comfortable with it and couldn't master the trigger. I've since made the switch to a G26 and I don't see myself going back to either. The G19 is the new bedside gun with a TLR1 and the Kahr was sold. Shooting them side by side, I actually shoot the G26 with gap floorplates more accurately then the G19 for some reason although I can run the G19 a bit faster. A G26 with 11 in the gun and a 17rnd spare is no slouch and it's much easier for me to conceal especially under T shirts and other light garments.

this is why I hardly never grab my MP FS and always put the MP 9c in my JM holster. With the pinky extension and stippling I have added the compact is close to being as easy for me to master as the fullsize. With that stated I know its a compromise but I feel like 29 rounds on my person plus the ease of carry makes it a educated compromise at this point.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I tried the Kahr PM9 but mine never ran. I didn't want to send it back as I didn't trust it. I traded it for a G26 as a compliment to my G19 and carry both.

I took an Insights course with the 26 and it was fine.

[Guinnessman]

Well said, and I think that's the crux of the perpetual disagreement on this issue.



I prefer the term 'slovenly golfer', myself.

If I wear an oversized Steelers/Penguins/Pirates shirt not only is concealment not a problem, but I look no different than any one else from the 'Burgh. If any of you visit here you will understand. ;)

[TCinVA]

If that 2 million figure comes from the FBI UCR Report, its probably wrong. The truth is -- as far as I can determine -- unknowable, but due to the flaws in the way that data is compiled, that 2 million number is probably significantly higher. I would be happy to expand upon the flaws in UCR either here or in another thread if anyone cares.

It does indeed come from the FBI UCR. I'm certain it underestimates the number of violent crimes or attempted violent crimes that occur.

[GardoneVT]

It does indeed come from the FBI UCR. I'm certain it underestimates the number of violent crimes or attempted violent crimes that occur.

Behold, the monster that is sampling bias.

Domestics further compound the problem, as people tend to not report family members who go full kittenhead.

[Terence]

Behold, the monster that is sampling bias.

Domestics further compound the problem, as people tend to not report family members who go full kittenhead.

Sure. Rapes are also typically under-reported.

Also reporting anything at all is voluntary, so sometimes a police department will just not send in the report or some aspect of a report. The city of Atlanta did just that to burnish their credentials for the Olympic Games bid.

Back on Topic: I went with the G19, and even though I had carried a 1911 exclusively for years/ I didn't have much trouble adjusting. Also, my reloads are faster since the Glock magazines taper, and the mag well is wider.

[Kranq]

I'm 6'3, 225 lbs. I can conceal my Sig P220, .45 ACP pretty easily with an iwb holster, and I often do. The majority of the time, I choose to carry my G26 with a spare G19 mag and my Benchmade AFCK in urban settings. I'm confident that I can extract myself from 99% of the misfortunes I may encounter with 26 rounds of 9mm, 124 grain Speer Gold dot. In rural areas, it varies from more spare ammo if hiking with my wife, to a long gun and a pistol if hunting.

It is really dependent on your comfort level. What are you comfortable concealing, -vs- what do you believe to be the threat and an appropriate load out. Carrying a G26 gives me roughly the same comfort level as any handgun.

[Chuck Haggard]

I just don't ever want to face a shot like this while carrying nothing but an LCP;

2698


This is where rob might show up and tell me that I am statistically unlikely to face such a problem. Since I was also statistically unlikely to attend two active-shooter incidents in my career I will note again that it sometimes ain't the odds.

IMHO, if I am ready for a worst case scenario then I am well prepared for a lesser scenario.

[BLR]

I just don't ever want to face a shot like this while carrying nothing but an LCP;

2698


This is where rob might show up and tell me that I am statistically unlikely to face such a problem. Since I was also statistically unlikely to attend two active-shooter incidents in my career I will note again that it sometimes ain't the odds.

IMHO, if I am ready for a worst case scenario then I am well prepared for a lesser scenario.

Granted that's a picture, and it's tough to get depth from it..........BUT -

I'd hate to have to gamble on "combat accuracy" at that point in time. I'd trade 15 bbs for 8 if those 8 would nearly touch each other a that range. But that's just me. YMMV.

[GJM]

I'd trade 15 bbs for 8 if those 8 would nearly touch each other a that range. But that's just me. YMMV.

I would take whichever I was most comfortable with.

For you, that is probably 8 out of a CQB-E, and for Chuck 17+1 out of a G17.

[Chuck Haggard]

Either way, having a round launched from a handgun that would be both capable of making such a shot, and able to get through things like loaded magazine pouches, might be important.

[John Hearne]

Since I was also statistically unlikely to attend two active-shooter incidents in my career I will note again that it sometimes ain't the odds.

Knowledge that one is a statistical exception is rarely of comfort when trying to solve a serious problem.

[BLR]

Either way, having a round launched from a handgun that would be both capable of making such a shot, and able to get through things like loaded magazine pouches, might be important.

Yup.

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/1911%20Pics/20141025_172437_zpsyvcyddup.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/1911%20Pics/20141025_172437_zpsyvcyddup.jpg.html)

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/1911%20Pics/20141025_172408_zps00bejzpt.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/1911%20Pics/20141025_172408_zps00bejzpt.jpg.html)

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/1911%20Pics/20141025_172313_zpsdozvqumj.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/1911%20Pics/20141025_172313_zpsdozvqumj.jpg.html)

Some might be surprised at how nicely a Barnes 120g bullet at 1550FPS will penetrate a mag w/ ammo in it.

10mm is a neat round, and does it's best in a 1911 in my not so humble opinion. And in the right gun, can do head shots at 50yrds all day long. YMMV.

[Beat Trash]

This is where rob might show up and tell me that I am statistically unlikely to face such a problem. Since I was also statistically unlikely to attend two active-shooter incidents in my career I will note again that it sometimes ain't the odds.

IMHO, if I am ready for a worst case scenario then I am well prepared for a lesser scenario.

Very Well Said . . .

[warpedcamshaft]

I know I said I was done... but I'm going to rant again... I'm sorry.

It irritates me how frequently people debate extremely unlikely things like fighting off multiple terrorist armed with long guns while being only equipped with a handgun... and some of these same individuals don't bother to think about/carry something like pepper spray/gel to potentially diffuse a far more likely scenario (think drunk a-hole or guy off of his meds) and avoid the legal/moral/mental struggles of shooting someone after an altercation has escalated.

I've seen 2 situations where someone could have probably been shot legally... but instead, these individuals were pepper sprayed. One was a normally kind individual who did not take his medication for several days... and the other was drunk person who got dumped. (Both are still alive, and are not bad people... just had a short bad episode.) These situations were resolved by CIVILIANS... not by police officers. Both the sprayer and the sprayee woke up in their own beds the next morning.

These situations could have ended up very violent, but having a non-lethal option changed the situation. I've seen this happen twice... and I'm a social recluse who doesn't stay out past 10:30. Yet, I've never seen a rifle armed terrorist... or tried to take him on with a Glock 19.

I should probably change my sig line to: "seat-belts and pepper spray."

[GardoneVT]

I know I said I was done... but I'm going to rant again... I'm sorry.

It irritates me how frequently people debate extremely unlikely things like fighting off multiple terrorist armed with long guns while being only equipped with a handgun... and some of these same individuals don't bother to think about/carry something like pepper spray/gel to potentially diffuse a far more likely scenario (think drunk a-hole or guy off of his meds) and avoid the legal/moral/mental struggles of shooting someone after an altercation has escalated.

I've seen 2 situations where someone could have probably been shot legally... but instead, these individuals were pepper sprayed. One was a normally kind individual who did not take his medication for several days... and the other was drunk person who got dumped. (Both are still alive, and are not bad people... just had a short bad episode.) These situations were resolved by CIVILIANS... not by police officers. Both the sprayer and the sprayee woke up in their own beds the next morning.

These situations could have ended up very violent, but having a non-lethal option changed the situation. I've seen this happen twice... and I'm a social recluse who doesn't stay out past 10:30. Yet, I've never seen a rifle armed terrorist... or tried to take him on with a Glock 19.

I should probably change my sig line to: "seat-belts and pepper spray."

With the selfish direction certain local, state, and Federal governments are going these days, your chances of meeting a no-kitten bad guy are going up by the week it seems. You might ask what I mean by the word 'selfish', and the answer is this; certain types of bad guys like ,say, international terrorists and racial hate crime perpetrators with dark skin are politically risky to pursue and arrest. Ya know, looks like racism to the liberal media. Dont want to upset the ethnic voters and all.

So, it may indeed fall to our shoulders as members of the public to do what the authorities are politically denied from doing;and pepper spray will NOT be a proper antidote. Not against an ISIS sympathizer with an axe and a grudge.

[Hambo]

I know I said I was done... but I'm going to rant again... I'm sorry.

It irritates me how frequently people debate extremely unlikely things like fighting off multiple terrorist armed with long guns while being only equipped with a handgun... and some of these same individuals don't bother to think about/carry something like pepper spray/gel to potentially diffuse a far more likely scenario (think drunk a-hole or guy off of his meds) and avoid the legal/moral/mental struggles of shooting someone after an altercation has escalated.

I've seen 2 situations where someone could have probably been shot legally... but instead, these individuals were pepper sprayed. One was a normally kind individual who did not take his medication for several days... and the other was drunk person who got dumped. (Both are still alive, and are not bad people... just had a short bad episode.) These situations were resolved by CIVILIANS... not by police officers. Both the sprayer and the sprayee woke up in their own beds the next morning.

These situations could have ended up very violent, but having a non-lethal option changed the situation. I've seen this happen twice... and I'm a social recluse who doesn't stay out past 10:30. Yet, I've never seen a rifle armed terrorist... or tried to take him on with a Glock 19.

I should probably change my sig line to: "seat-belts and pepper spray."

FWIW I carry pepper spray and if that does the job I'm fine with that. Tom Givens keeps excellent stats, and last I saw >90% of his student's shootings were in the 3-7 yard range, and that's where he focuses his training. That means that <2 yards (think Southnarc ECQC) and >15 (per Givens actual data) are outliers. I'm not thinking of ISIS terrorists per se in my handgun choices, I'm thinking of the outliers. I can shoot an LCP well at three yards, but not so much at 15. More than 90% of the time, a J frame has enough rounds for a fight, but I don't expect to bad guys to set up the best case scenario for the weapon I'm carrying. I choose my handgun based on the worst cast scenario, which to me is multiple assailants outside the normal envelope.

[1slow]

I know I said I was done... but I'm going to rant again... I'm sorry.

It irritates me how frequently people debate extremely unlikely things like fighting off multiple terrorist armed with long guns while being only equipped with a handgun... and some of these same individuals don't bother to think about/carry something like pepper spray/gel to potentially diffuse a far more likely scenario (think drunk a-hole or guy off of his meds) and avoid the legal/moral/mental struggles of shooting someone after an altercation has escalated.

I've seen 2 situations where someone could have probably been shot legally... but instead, these individuals were pepper sprayed. One was a normally kind individual who did not take his medication for several days... and the other was drunk person who got dumped. (Both are still alive, and are not bad people... just had a short bad episode.) These situations were resolved by CIVILIANS... not by police officers. Both the sprayer and the sprayee woke up in their own beds the next morning.

These situations could have ended up very violent, but having a non-lethal option changed the situation. I've seen this happen twice... and I'm a social recluse who doesn't stay out past 10:30. Yet, I've never seen a rifle armed terrorist... or tried to take him on with a Glock 19.

I should probably change my sig line to: "seat-belts and pepper spray."

I like John Hearne's sig line , It's not the odds, it's the stakes.
If you have thought through the problem and prepared for what it will take to solve it you are much better off than if you put it out of mind as being unlikely.
As Bill Rogers has said "we will figure it out when we get there is likely to get you killed."
ECQC strikes me as more likely to be needed than 50+ yard pistol shots or fighting multiple rifle armed turds, BUT in the event I do not get a vote and have to deal with whatever presents.

[Mr_White]

It irritates me how frequently people debate extremely unlikely things like fighting off multiple terrorist armed with long guns while being only equipped with a handgun... and some of these same individuals don't bother to think about/carry something like pepper spray/gel to potentially diffuse a far more likely scenario (think drunk a-hole or guy off of his meds) and avoid the legal/moral/mental struggles of shooting someone after an altercation has escalated.

You don't need to be talking about pepper spray – you are far more likely to need awareness, avoidance strategies, diet, exercise, social adroitness, and financial health.

Time to shut down the forum. This focus on pistols and what can be done with them is just out of whack.

;)

[Haraise]

You don't need to be talking about pepper spray – you are far more likely to need awareness, avoidance strategies, diet, exercise, social adroitness, and financial health.

Time to shut down the forum. This focus on pistols and what can be done with them is just out of whack.

;)

Wow, TPI forum is weirdly orange colored today...

*cough*Bruce Wayne*cough*

[Jay Cunningham]

This thread is starting to swerve into oncoming traffic.

Let's tighten it up or drive a stake in it - either way is fine with me.

[Up1911Fan]

Back on topic, believe in carrying a handful of gun. I do use my Shield in a tuckable holster for NPE use, but daily carry is a G17 chopped to take 19 mags. Ordering a CZ P-07 this week because it's still a good size gun but in the compact category should be plenty concealable.

[Mr_White]

New thread started in the Romper Room, because I would like to continue this tangent of discussion with my own rant, but I would not like to get this thread closed for everyone else.

http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?13864-Irritation-When-People-Discuss

And back on topic for me: I think there's a wide range of pretty reasonable choices that people might make in deciding on the gear they want to carry around.

[Chuck Haggard]

In this pic I was wearing a G19 IWB, a couple of mags, and a 638 in my pocket, along with a Sure Fire E2e with LED upgrade, key chain type OC, and a ZT folder. I am very comfortably dressed while on vacation in the Caribbean. I wasn't worried too much about that area, but I'm not a stay on the resort and be drunk type of guy, I'm a rent a jeep and see what's out there kind of person, since the crime rate in some of the areas around where we were is well known, and tourists are always targets, I didn't think my EDC was crazy.

2702

[LSP972]

I'm at Universal Studios/Orlando as we speak. Yesterday, as the wife and I were leaving the park, we had to dodge a BIG gaggle of obvious admin types stampeding our way. All were wearing nerd neck badges (you know, the kind that identifies you, your affiliate/firm,etc.; the stuff that makes it easy for us to ID a corpse when said dumb-ass wanders off the reservation and encounters local fauna)... HUGE nerd neck badges, with "IACP" in inch-high letters.

Though not commissioned, my bride has been around LSP and cops as long as I have; she is now one of three civilian managers at our Criminal Records Bureau and has no illusions remaining. As this herd of police administrators, strap-hangers, wives and/or friendgirls streamed past us, she muttered- more to herself than anything- "I wonder how many- if any- of those clowns are armed right now???"

I suppressed a laugh... love that gal.

I'm sure some of you are wondering why I bothered to post all of that. It was for Chuck, and the other cops here... They know why.

[LSP972]

And it was the photo of Chuck that made me think of this. Replace the tennis runners with Sperry Top-Siders, the 638 with a 360PD, the E2E with an E1B, and the ZT with an old Black-T'ed Endura, and that's me today.... low threat environment, but old habits die hard.

No doubt some of you are thinking I'm a bit... "over-equipped"... to deal with all the European and South American tourists here (the only US types I spoke with today were park employees). Perhaps.

And perhaps, if things go sideways, the park security guys will save me with their pepper spray and walkie talkies.

.

[Hambo]

I'm at Universal Studios/Orlando as we speak. Yesterday, as the wife and I were leaving the park, we had to dodge a BIG gaggle of obvious admin types stampeding our way. All were wearing nerd neck badges (you know, the kind that identifies you, your affiliate/firm,etc.; the stuff that makes it easy for us to ID a corpse when said dumb-ass wanders off the reservation and encounters local fauna)... HUGE nerd neck badges, with "IACP" in inch-high letters.

Though not commissioned, my bride has been around LSP and cops as long as I have; she is now one of three civilian managers at our Criminal Records Bureau and has no illusions remaining. As this herd of police administrators, strap-hangers, wives and/or friendgirls streamed past us, she muttered- more to herself than anything- "I wonder how many- if any- of those clowns are armed right now???"

I suppressed a laugh... love that gal.

I'm sure some of you are wondering why I bothered to post all of that. It was for Chuck, and the other cops here... They know why.

Normally they're clever enough not to bunch up like that.

[Fire-Medic]

And it was the photo of Chuck that made me think of this. Replace the tennis runners with Sperry Top-Siders, the 638 with a 360PD, the E2E with an E1B, and the ZT with an old Black-T'ed Endura, and that's me today.... low threat environment, but old habits die hard.

No doubt some of you are thinking I'm a bit... "over-equipped"... to deal with all the European and South American tourists here (the only US types I spoke with today were park employees). Perhaps.

And perhaps, if things go sideways, the park security guys will save me with their pepper spray and walkie talkies.

.

I thought carrying in the parks was illegal? I'm assuming different for LEO? I had a guy make a huge scene last year at Disney's Animal Kingdom because of my benched folder. He kept walking around saying "I saved us from that one". When he asked me to see my knife I thought he was being genuine (stupid me) I took it out and opened it and that's where the fun began. Anyways long story short they made me put it in a locker out front by the exit and padded me down prior to entering.

[Alpha Sierra]

I thought carrying in the parks was illegal?
According to FL law, it isn't illegal to carry on posted private property unless they ask you to leave and you refuse.

[Fire-Medic]

According to FL law, it isn't illegal to carry on posted private property unless they ask you to leave and you refuse.

I guess I have some reading to do. So they took a knife from me (almost) talked my way into storing it in a locker, but CCW is allowed? I was under the impression that in places where the masses gather for entertainment, such as a concert, them park, etc, CCW was not allowed.......

[LSP972]

Concealed is concealed.

.

[Hambo]

I guess I have some reading to do. So they took a knife from me (almost) talked my way into storing it in a locker, but CCW is allowed? I was under the impression that in places where the masses gather for entertainment, such as a concert, them park, etc, CCW was not allowed.......

Read the statutes. Theme parks are not on the no-go list and signs do not have the force of law they do in other states. They can ask you to leave and if you fail to do so you can be charged with trespass.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0790/Sections/0790.06.html

[Fire-Medic]

Read the statutes. Theme parks are not on the no-go list and signs do not have the force of law they do in other states. They can ask you to leave and if you fail to do so you can be charged with trespass.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0790/Sections/0790.06.html

Thanks for the link, much appreciated.

[Alpha Sierra]

I guess I have some reading to do. So they took a knife from me (almost) talked my way into storing it in a locker, but CCW is allowed? I was under the impression that in places where the masses gather for entertainment, such as a concert, them park, etc, CCW was not allowed.......

Yes, you need to study Florida Statutes section 790. Nothing that you mention above is correct regarding where one is prohibited from carrying a concealed weapon in Florida.

The situation you describe at the amusement park is covered under FS 810.08

[Alpha Sierra]

signs do not have the force of law they do in other states.

I would disagree with that. FS 810.08 starts with "(1) Whoever, without being authorized, licensed, or invited, willfully enters or remains in any structure or conveyance...." (underline added)

If there is a sign that says firearms are prohibited, it would stand to reason that you've been told that you are not authorized to enter the premises with a firearm. Just ignoring the sign means you are in violation of 810.08 (1). And since you are in posession of a firearm when you do so, the felony provision of 810.08 (2) (c) applies.

I am not a lawyer, though.

[Fire-Medic]

Yes, you need to study Florida Statutes section 790. Nothing that you mention above is correct regarding where one is prohibited from carrying a concealed weapon in Florida.

The situation you describe at the amusement park is covered under FS 810.08

Thank you I appreciate the education.

[NH Shooter]

I think there's a wide range of pretty reasonable choices that people might make in deciding on the gear they want to carry around.

Agreed (I'm still following the thread).

[Hambo]

I would disagree with that. FS 810.08 starts with "(1) Whoever, without being authorized, licensed, or invited, willfully enters or remains in any structure or conveyance...." (underline added)

If there is a sign that says firearms are prohibited, it would stand to reason that you've been told that you are not authorized to enter the premises with a firearm. Just ignoring the sign means you are in violation of 810.08 (1). And since you are in posession of a firearm when you do so, the felony provision of 810.08 (2) (c) applies.

I am not a lawyer, though.

I'm not either, but I've read what FL firearms attorneys have to say. The point I made is that Florida is unlike Texas. "No firearms" signs in Texas mean that the statute, not the owner, prohibits you from carrying a firearm on the premises. That is not the case in Florida, however you correctly cite the trespass statute, which says in full:

"Trespass in structure or conveyance.—
(1) Whoever, without being authorized, licensed, or invited, willfully enters or remains in any structure or conveyance, or, having been authorized, licensed, or invited, is warned by the owner or lessee of the premises, or by a person authorized by the owner or lessee, to depart and refuses to do so, commits the offense of trespass in a structure or conveyance."

What the attorneys say is that you have the legal right to enter any business, and that signs saying "no guns" do not affect that right. However, if you get made and the owner tells you to leave, and then you fail to leave, 810.08 kicks in. According to attorneys, hospitals with or without signage are a problem even though they're not on the prohibited list.

If you want to discuss this further the admin could chop this off and put it in an appropriate subforum.

[Fire-Medic]

I'm not either, but I've read what FL firearms attorneys have to say. The point I made is that Florida is unlike Texas. "No firearms" signs in Texas mean that the statute, not the owner, prohibits you from carrying a firearm on the premises. That is not the case in Florida, however you correctly cite the trespass statute, which says in full:

"Trespass in structure or conveyance.—
(1) Whoever, without being authorized, licensed, or invited, willfully enters or remains in any structure or conveyance, or, having been authorized, licensed, or invited, is warned by the owner or lessee of the premises, or by a person authorized by the owner or lessee, to depart and refuses to do so, commits the offense of trespass in a structure or conveyance."

What the attorneys say is that you have the legal right to enter any business, and that signs saying "no guns" do not affect that right. However, if you get made and the owner tells you to leave, and then you fail to leave, 810.08 kicks in. According to attorneys, hospitals with or without signage are a problem even though they're not on the prohibited list.

If you want to discuss this further the admin could chop this off and put it in an appropriate subforum.

If that was done I would follow the thread through its entirety as this interest me.

[Palmguy]

I'm not either, but I've read what FL firearms attorneys have to say. The point I made is that Florida is unlike Texas. "No firearms" signs in Texas mean that the statute, not the owner, prohibits you from carrying a firearm on the premises. That is not the case in Florida, however you correctly cite the trespass statute, which says in full:

"Trespass in structure or conveyance.—
(1) Whoever, without being authorized, licensed, or invited, willfully enters or remains in any structure or conveyance, or, having been authorized, licensed, or invited, is warned by the owner or lessee of the premises, or by a person authorized by the owner or lessee, to depart and refuses to do so, commits the offense of trespass in a structure or conveyance."

What the attorneys say is that you have the legal right to enter any business, and that signs saying "no guns" do not affect that right. However, if you get made and the owner tells you to leave, and then you fail to leave, 810.08 kicks in. According to attorneys, hospitals with or without signage are a problem even though they're not on the prohibited list.

If you want to discuss this further the admin could chop this off and put it in an appropriate subforum.

This is what I've always understood to be correct and, if I'm not mistaken, is pretty much what Gutmacher has to say on the issue (it's been awhile since I've looked, though).

With respect to Disney, I've been there quite a bit this year, and do not recall seeing any signs at any of the four parks. It's been years since I've been to Universal, but same thing there.

[Fire-Medic]

Has something changed since this happened:

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2008-07-03/news/disneyguns03_1_walt-disney-disney-world-florida-gun-law

[LSP972]

Not being a Floridian, native or otherwise, all I can say is this...

I have been to both parks several times over the years, with the kids. I will NOT step foot on Disney property ever again, because they are truly dicks about anything "security related". If their security types were actually able to handle a REAL emergency (I.e., an armed asshole/assholes), then I could see the point. But Disney security types are no different from any other unarmed "security"; with the exception of their attitudes.

I personally have never had an issue at either park (Disney or Universal); concealed is concealed. But I have witnessed several incidents, involving citizens who tried to be honest or just slipped up. Those Disney goons are quite confused... They think they are the real po-lice.

Anyway, an interesting discussion but a moot one, for me. HR 218 gives me no special exemption, so I take my chances like everybody else when I'm out of state. If I get made, I'll leave when told to. The trick is to be professional and not get made.

.

[LSP972]

BTW… while normal activities don't involve them, they did set up metal detectors for an all-night 'special event' last night.

FYI…

.

[Palmguy]

BTW… while normal activities don't involve them, they did set up metal detectors for an all-night 'special event' last night.

FYI…

.

Are you talking about the Halloween thing at Universal?

[Palmguy]

Has something changed since this happened:

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2008-07-03/news/disneyguns03_1_walt-disney-disney-world-florida-gun-law

Not really, however the Disney policy with respect to the law being discussed in that article affects Disney employees, not guests.

[LSP972]

Are you talking about the Halloween thing at Universal?

Yes.

.

[Fire-Medic]

Not really, however the Disney policy with respect to the law being discussed in that article affects Disney employees, not guests.

Yes I am aware of that 100%, but if they don't allow an employee to have a gun in his/her car in the parking lot why would they allow a civilian to carry one inside one of their parks?

[Mr_White]

Yes I am aware of that 100%, but if they don't allow an employee to have a gun in his/her car in the parking lot why would they allow a civilian to carry one inside one of their parks?

"Allow" is a tricky word.

I'm sure they would say they don't allow it.

Whether they mean it is really the question.

Many entities don't really mean it and just put up signs, search off-body bags, etc. That doesn't cause their stated policy to become reality.

Pat-downs done well plus magnetometers tells me they mean it. Otherwise, I don't think they really do. Kind of cynical, but that's how I see it. To me, the true policy is defined by the actual, physical measures used to keep weapons out.

[Alpha Sierra]

Yes I am aware of that 100%, but if they don't allow an employee to have a gun in his/her car in the parking lot why would they allow a civilian to carry one inside one of their parks?

How does Disney get to violate FL law?

[Fire-Medic]

How does Disney get to violate FL law?

That is basically what my question is?

[deputyG23]

My old issue Gen 3 G22 is my primary off duty carry instead of my current issue G23. Despite the longer grips, the longer slide carried IWB is just more comfortable. The G23 carried in the same holster in the same place gouges my butt cheek sometimes. Not to mention that I shoot the 22 slighty better...

[Steve m]

Work gun= glock 19 with factory night sights
carry gun= personnel glock 19 with t-cap front and black rear.

I try to carry what I use at work if at all possible.

"game guns"- glock 17 with dawson charger sights , and 10-8 fiber optic.

[ffhounddog]

How does Disney get to violate FL law?

Its Disney. No other answer needed.

[tremiles]

Its Disney. No other answer needed.

Fireworks

[rob_s]

What law are they violating?

Please post a link to the statute.

[JDM]

What law are they violating?

Please post a link to the statute.

http://archive.flsenate.gov/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0790/Sections/0790.251.html

Although it appears this doesn't apply to Disney because of the fireworks thing. That's a shame.

[CSW]

Most folks would be WAY better off is they just stick with one firearm type and learn to master it; get two or three identical pistols--one for training, one for carry, one as a spare or "nightstand" gun, then spend the rest of your available time, energy, and fiscal resources on training.


I agree. There is a lot to be said for the fine level of attunement one can get if all available time and effort goes into one platform.

Agree with both of these statements. Muscle memory and range time with the same platform[s] will assist an individual in 'mastering' his or her firearm.

That being said, I carry the 19 daily in a Winthrop leather IWB, with a 23 as the HD gun, with a TRL3.
I do have a 26 on the way, a victim of the great 2015 sell-off, to fund the G43. The 26 will allow a smaller platform with the same controls. Working at a semi NPE requires huge discretion, which the smaller 26 will hopefully fit the bill.

[s0nspark]

Most folks would be WAY better off is they just stick with one firearm type and learn to master it; get two or three identical pistols--one for training, one for carry, one as a spare or "nightstand" gun, then spend the rest of your available time, energy, and fiscal resources on training.

I am transitioning to this approach now. I've had workalike guns of various sizes filling the different roles and, while that worked ok up to a point, I reached a plateau that I felt required a change. I am now using the same pistol for carry and nightstand duty with a second for practice. I'm going to funnel gun money into ammo and see how it goes.