New gun, new trigger, or keep fighting the good fight?

[spinmove_]

Generally sound advice, but while I might be out of the circle of danger, someone else I care deeply about might be in that circle of danger. Considering that any use of force is a low probability event, given all the effort I have put into shooting at 25 yards and further, I do not like the idea of hardware limiting my useful range envelope and risk that my low probability event did not fall into the 3-7 yard expected engagement distance.

So much this as well as LSP552's comment. I'm fully aware that 25 yards isn't necessarily "imminent threat range" for A LOT of scenarios, but that doesn't mean that there aren't scenarios where it wouldn't be perfectly justified. This is why I stated earlier that this particular topic isn't relevant to this discussion because it's an entirely different rabbit hole.

We can't predict when and where and what situation will present itself if/when we do get into a lethal force defense situation. If we could, I personally wouldn't show up and just stay at home. Given that I don't have a crystal ball and can't predict the future I choose to prepare myself as best as possible so that if such a situation did present itself I would be better equipped to handle it.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[KP]

A qualification is in order with respect to my comments in shooting at 25 yards and "being in imminent danger of serious injury." In no way am I stating that you cannot take that long shot. I do favor practicing long distance pistol shooting, as I see it close groupings at long distance increases greater accuracy at those 3-7 yards - creates shooting confidence during exigent circumstances. Moreover, there are possibilities of being confronted with a situation where one is forced to fire at a long distance in order to protect themselves or family members. However, my state, a jurisdiction with serious gun control laws, not only greatly limits those situations where a person can employ the use of deadly force on another but also will prosecute a shooter who shoots a BG when that civilian is no longer in danger i.e., the dangerous situation is over and the BG is running away. In short if the shooting is not justified, the shooter will be "the criminal defendant" in a separate criminal trial. What may be justifiable shooting at 3-7 yards may not be justifiable at 20-25 yards. BTW, Spinmove_ I neglected to say you shot well

[GJM]

A qualification is in order with respect to my comments in shooting at 25 yards and "being in imminent danger of serious injury." In no way am I stating that you cannot take that long shot. I do favor practicing long distance pistol shooting, as I see it close groupings at long distance increases greater accuracy at those 3-7 yards - creates shooting confidence during exigent circumstances. Moreover, there are possibilities of being confronted with a situation where one is forced to fire at a long distance in order to protect themselves or family members. However, my state, a jurisdiction with serious gun control laws, not only greatly limits those situations where a person can employ the use of deadly force on another but also will prosecute a shooter who shoots a BG when that civilian is no longer in danger i.e., the dangerous situation is over and the BG is running away. In short if the shooting is not justified, the shooter will be "the criminal defendant" in a separate criminal trial. What may be justifiable shooting at 3-7 yards may not be justifiable at 20-25 yards. BTW, Spinmove_ I neglected to say you shot well

Albany and South, I am pretty sure you would be prosecuted even if you took out two ISIS shooters with AK's and explosive vests. Most of out west, you wouldn't need to buy drinks for the rest of your life.

[P.E. Kelley]

I am not a tactician, just a shooting enthusiast and competition oriented shooter.

Over the past few years I have shot 26 different handguns (most all of the brand new) without benefit of a single round of live fire before shooting them
at Speed Steel shooting matches. That expreience has taught me that...what gun, trigger, sights etc. matters very little. What matters is how well you can
apply the fundamentals on demand. Even with the very heavy DA of the KelTec P11 and Webley MarkIV I have generally managed to break into the top 3.

So pick a gun and practice. 25 feet or 25 yards the ability to hit rests squarely on the shooter.

[JHC]

Any bias against 25 yard precision is pretty wrong headed. Both from the standpoint of the effective range of a BG's firearm (it's more than 25 yards) and from the obvious standpoint of how great precision translates into hitting tight targets at closer ranges.

Folks can settle for whatever they want to settle for but there is no valid argument against high levels of precision.

[KP]

Albany and South, I am pretty sure you would be prosecuted even if you took out two ISIS shooters with AK's and explosive vests. Most of out west, you wouldn't need to buy drinks for the rest of your life.

[BWT]

This is one of the best threads I've read in recent memory.

I'd agree about sentiments regarding distance. Distance to me puts a magnifying glass on the execution of fundamentals. Habits that wouldn't be as readily apparent or nuanced become more obvious at distance.

Also as P. E. Kelley and, to me, GJM's posts point out. I think good and frequent practice help minimize the nuances of the gun and help performance in general.

Now only if I did those things...

God Bless,

Brandon

[GJM]

I am not a tactician, just a shooting enthusiast and competition oriented shooter.

Over the past few years I have shot 26 different handguns (most all of the brand new) without benefit of a single round of live fire before shooting them
at Speed Steel shooting matches. That expreience has taught me that...what gun, trigger, sights etc. matters very little. What matters is how well you can
apply the fundamentals on demand. Even with the very heavy DA of the KelTec P11 and Webley MarkIV I have generally managed to break into the top 3.

So pick a gun and practice. 25 feet or 25 yards the ability to hit rests squarely on the shooter.

I agree, but with a caveat. That caveat is that great shooters like Patrick and TGO, can shoot anything. Less developed shooters often do not shoot everything as well as specific pistols that match up with their skills better.

[HCM]

A lot of good advice has already been dropped in this thread, but I will add this:

I find it very hard to take multiple different pistols to the range on the same day, shoot them all back to back, and shoot a Glock to my normal level because it has such a different trigger and ergonomic feel. Glocks tend to be easier to shoot and maintain proficiency with if you shoot them exclusively.

I've found this to be true if both Glocks and HK LEM. Both demand monogamy and regular maintenance to shoot at a high level.

[HCM]

And being able to hit at distance means increased ability to make a partial/obscured shot up close.

LSP552 is spot on. You have to train "all the ranges." Legally there are no range limits. The particular facts of the situation will determine what is objectively reasonable and thus legal.

In practical terms, your fight is gonna be what it's gonna be and your opponent gets a vote. Tanaka Ken said it best in The Yakuza: