Instructors limiting gear/equipment choices??

[Dead Duck]

"Walk on road. Walk left side, safe. Walk right side, safe. Walk middle, sooner or later, get squish just like grape."
Mr. Kesuke Miyagi - 1984

.

 

[MCgrease08]

The bottom line for me is this: if I attend a training class I run my Glock 19 and robust carry gear. I train to learn the fundamentals and good techniques.

Those fundamentals can be applied to situations where I may or may not be carrying a smaller gun. Situations like a work environment where having one's gun exposed would likely be grounds for termination.

We all have to make trade-offs in life. Would I ever show up at one of Coach's classes and insist he make me a skilled gun fighter with only an LCP? Of course not.

But having a gun is better than no gun, especially when the most likely threat is a disgruntled employee targeting a specific person or people who most likely aren't me.

 

[dudley0]

I spent yesterday morning at the range with a guy. He is on the fence about getting a 9mm. Currently he has a little Taurus .380, one mag and a floppy holster.

I took an M&Pc 1.0 in 9mm specifically for him to try out. He complained about it weighing more at first. After I got him calmed down a bit he came to realize that he could hit better with the larger gun, even though it shoots a bigger bullet. I had a .38 snub with me as well but decided that putting too much into the mix this early would not be helpful.

Ended up loaning him the empty gun with two holsters. He is going to carry it around his place to get used to having something on him. He is also going to start dry firing as much as he can. Hopefully we can go back out next week and see an improvement on at least holding the thing.

As soon as I can find an intro class local enough that he will go to it I told him I would take it with him. The ego/embarrassment thing is there for him.

The little .380 has a decent trigger. Sights were basically non-existent. Accuracy potential was decent enough I guess, with me at least. Felt recoil was well above the M&Pc, enough so that it wasn't pleasant to shoot. Getting ready to leave and he wanted to try the little thing again.

Gun goes down. He asks for help. Feed problem. Bullet looked fine. Loaded a couple rounds in the mag and it would feed. Last round and no go. Tested it a few times. Figure it was a mag problem. Then I explained that with only one mag he was down a round with a little gun that was not fun to shoot.

Maybe a light bulb showed above his head... it was bright outside and I couldn't tell.

 

[Coach]

Say I break into a house to steal some stuff to support my drug habit. I was wrong and the lady of the house was home. She has her trusty home defense gun in hand. She dumps all 10 rounds from the .22 in my direction and hits me center of mass with most or all of them. She has just changed our relationship drastically. After throwing her around the kitchen for the next five minutes I end it with a sharp instrument. I stumble down the street and bleed out fifteen minutes later. Sound like having the gun was better?

So many people claim they can only handle a .22 and that something is better than nothing when it comes to having a gun. I disagree.

 

[jkdbjj]

If my elderly mother could put 10 .22 slugs center mass in a burglar, but can't shoot a 9mm because of her severe arthritis...I like her odds of winning that fight over the hand-to-hand combat she gets to have with a doper that outweighs her by 200 pounds...if she doesn't have the .22.

There is no magic bullet and there is no magic caliber. If all you can handle is a knife, handle it well. If all you can shoot is a .22 revolver, train with it and best of luck.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Say I break into a house to steal some stuff to support my drug habit. I was wrong and the lady of the house was home. She has her trusty home defense gun in hand. She dumps all 10 rounds from the .22 in my direction and hits me center of mass with most or all of them. She has just changed our relationship drastically. After throwing her around the kitchen for the next five minutes I end it with a sharp instrument. I stumble down the street and bleed out fifteen minutes later. Sound like having the gun was better?

So many people claim they can only handle a .22 and that something is better than nothing when it comes to having a gun. I disagree.

We can invent scenarios and anecdotes both ways, but I've seen a lot more win then lose when they fought back in a home invasion. Surprise has mattered more than weapon. Ambush with a golf club has better success rate than confronting with a shotgun but losing surprise.

Tactics first, hardware second.

 

[croy]

I want to add something to what Clint said. Males in general fear looking like a fool in front of other males. I'm not going to lie it kept me from classes for awhile. I got over it. Yes there were times I looked like a fool, but so did everyone else. But I'm better for it and I practice what I wasnt very good at and I'm better for it.

I would never make fun of someone who isn't very good at something. We were all there once. They're spending the money and time to make themselves better.

 

[riverman67]

I want to add something to what Clint said. Males in general fear looking like a fool in front of other males. I'm not going to lie it kept me from classes for awhile. I got over it. Yes there were times I looked like a fool, but so did everyone else. But I'm better for it and I practice what I wasnt very good at and I'm better for it.

I would never make fun of someone who isn't very good at something. We were all there once. They're spending the money and time to make themselves better.

I understand that this sentiment is out there.
I don't understand it.
It's a rare person that tries a new skill and does it perfectly the first time.
I have never had anyone in a training environment, of any kind , attempt to make me feel embarrassed because of a poor performance.
Everyone is there to get better at x and are mostly worried about how they perform the skill in question.
This is not meant as an attack on you personally and good on you for getting past it.
I'm hearing it a lot from Co workers that ask me about where to get training and never follow up

I am enjoying this thread
My excuse is time
But I try

 

[rhino]

I want to add something to what Clint said. Males in general fear looking like a fool in front of other males. I'm not going to lie it kept me from classes for awhile. I got over it. Yes there were times I looked like a fool, but so did everyone else. But I'm better for it and I practice what I wasnt very good at and I'm better for it.

I would never make fun of someone who isn't very good at something. We were all there once. They're spending the money and time to make themselves better.

I understand that this sentiment is out there.
I don't understand it.
It's a rare person that tries a new skill and does it perfectly the first time.
I have never had anyone in a training environment, of any kind , attempt to make me feel embarrassed because of a poor performance.
Everyone is there to get better at x and are mostly worried about how they perform the skill in question.
This is not meant as an attack on you personally and good on you for getting past it.
I'm hearing it a lot from Co workers that ask me about where to get training and never follow up

I am enjoying this thread
My excuse is time
But I try

If I had any concern at all about "looking like a fool," I would never leave the house, either physically or electronically. This is closely related to people who won't try or continue to do thing that they aren't good at doing. It severely limits their life unnecessarily. It's been quoted many times, but if I only did things I was good at doing, I'd be limited to watching television and running my mouth.

The ego thing is really odd in terms of refusing to attend training classes. I suspect those who are afraid to look like a fool are unaware of what really happens in the classes. The other students, regardless of ability level, are focused on their own performance. I've never witnessed anyone purposely try to embarrass someone else in the hundreds of hours I've trained, both as a student and as a teacher. That does not count good natured ribbing among friends, of course. I suppose it's more related to self-image and self-worth than it is about genuine concerns over someone else's reactions. The fear is that someone else will see what the person sees in themselves, and they don't want that. It's almost an absurd concept to people with a strong and positive self-image and awareness, but then we don't think those kind of thoughts on a regular basis.

 

[thunderchicken]

Say I break into a house to steal some stuff to support my drug habit. I was wrong and the lady of the house was home. She has her trusty home defense gun in hand. She dumps all 10 rounds from the .22 in my direction and hits me center of mass with most or all of them. She has just changed our relationship drastically. After throwing her around the kitchen for the next five minutes I end it with a sharp instrument. I stumble down the street and bleed out fifteen minutes later. Sound like having the gun was better?

So many people claim they can only handle a .22 and that something is better than nothing when it comes to having a gun. I disagree.

A couple thoughts come to mind..
First yes I would like the womans chances of survival with only a .22 than surviving with just her hands. In your scenario the attacker after being shot 10 times went hands on with the woman. The effects of those 10 rnds are very possible to have shortened the duration and severity of the attack. And, even without knowing the outcome in your example, it's a win that the attacker bled out.
Second, I recall having a firearms instructor (mcsd or ipd) run through a story that involved a drug addict that was hopped up on something (can't recall what) and was able to continue fighting after being shot like 17 times from a 9mm. Two thoughts on that are 1- 9mm ammunition has advanced since I heard that story in 2001 and 2- there is no round that is guaranteed to end the conflict with only a round or two.
I also recall a story within the last 10yrs in Indy, where a guy tries breaking into a house in the middle of the night. The resident gets the jump and yells to go away I have a gun. But, the schnook still tries to get the door open. At some point the resident in fear of an imminent attack shoots (2 rounds IF I recall) through the door with a Bersa .380 at least one round hit the would be attacker and he was found by police in the front yard. I don't remember if the guy survived or not.
Regardless of the weapon available, survival chances are increased when coupled with training.

 

[Jackson]

How would I carry a second full size? I know you carry two on your belt when you carry, but I've fought way more people than I've shot and retention of two belt guns could be problematic.

Craig Douglas' ECQC proved to me I'm not terribly smart in this arena and I'll just listen to Craig, who is smart in this arena.

I think retention issues are a valid consideration when determining how many weapons to carry and where to carry them.

 

[Dead Duck]

I think retention issues are a valid consideration when determining how many weapons to carry and where to carry them.

Why?

 

[Jackson]

Why?

I only have enough mental bandwidth to focus on two things at a time while fighting. One of those things is always the position and relative safety of my private parts. The other cycles through things like position, movement, defense, offense, protecting my gun, etc.

With 50% allocated to my special parts, I just can't keep up with too many other extra things at once.

 

[Vigilant]

I only have enough mental bandwidth to focus on two things at a time while fighting. One of those things is always the position and relative safety of my private parts. The other cycles through things like position, movement, defense, offense, protecting my gun, etc.

With 50% allocated to my special parts, I just can't keep up with too many other extra things at once.

Never met you, but are they really worth 50%? I mean you could insure them if they are that important, and if they did get compromised, the big ass check would make up for some of it.

 

[chezuki]

The effects of those 10 rnds are very possible to have shortened the duration and severity of the attack.

Or perhaps they are what invoked the attack altogether. If you’re gonna poke the bear, poke it hard enough to count.

 

[2A_Tom]

Why?

Guy obviously doesn't like mag changes.

 

[Coach]

We can invent scenarios and anecdotes both ways, but I've seen a lot more win then lose when they fought back in a home invasion. Surprise has mattered more than weapon. Ambush with a golf club has better success rate than confronting with a shotgun but losing surprise.

Tactics first, hardware second.

My tactic is to put the rounds on target with good hardware. No settling for one or the other. I can have both.

 

[2A_Tom]

Well then, why in the world do you carry a puny 9 when you could carry a manly .45.

 

[MCgrease08]

My tactic is to put the rounds on target with good hardware. No settling for one or the other. I can have both.

Fair enough. Are you able to carry the same hardware 24/7?

Personally, I am not.

ETA: Well, that's not 100% true. I could likely carry a similarly sized gun in a higher caliber if I were willing to invest a bit in different hardware. (As I've mentioned up thread.)

I admit not doing so is my own conscious decision.

Did I just Denny myself?

 

[Hop]

Everyone seems to agree that the 9mm rounds improved over the years. Has that technology trickled down the caliber chain? Wouldn't the smaller calibers have also improved? Does that mean the 380 is now the 9mm of yesteryear?