The Fighting Shotgun is one of the most common yet most misunderstood weapons available to the public. I asked J.D. McGuire, who makes his living building fighting shotguns for folks, to share with us some of the things he has found over the years.
************************************************************
The Tactical Shotgun for Home Defense
“Keep it Basic”
By J.D. McGuire, Owner of AI&P Tactical
Web site: www.aiptactical.com
This short write up is going to be very basic and many of the knowledgeable gun guys and gals are going to be bored to death reading this, however, there is a current trend in the gun world of people wanting a Tactical Type shotgun for home defense use. This is for them as many are also new to firearms.
You may have seen the term “HD” when reading about shotguns. That simply stands for “Home Defense” and any firearm can be used for this. However, there is one that is best for most people and that is the shotgun. These are also referred to as “Tactical Shotguns”
The Tactical shotgun is nothing more then a shotgun with some features that makes it easier to use in certain situations. These weapons are very much like the shotguns that have been used for sports shooting for many years, but with a few design differences. They are what many of you would know as Police or Riot Type shotguns. They have shorter barrels, a larger round capacity then a sporting weapon and other features not common on the type of shotgun you would hunt with or use on the skeet range. They are called Tactical Shotguns simply because they are designed to be used in a Tactical type scenario by Police, Military or Security Officers. In a worse case scenario, they are designed to be used by you or me to defend our loved ones or ourselves.
Design of the Tactical shotgun should start with the action of the weapon. Most common and reliable is the Pump action. With this weapon, you manually pull the forend of the weapon to the rear after each shot and the action ejects the spent shell and loads another shell into the chamber so you can fire again. The semi-auto loading shotguns perform this action for you each time you pull the trigger. The weapon operates by using gases from the shell being fired to force a piston to the rear initiating the same action that you performed manually on the pump action and an action spring forces the bolt back forward loading a new round into the chamber so you can fire again. Some models of semi-auto shotguns operate with other actions by using the force of the fired shell to initiate the action instead of using gases.
With that out of the way, remember this. I do not recommend any semi-auto shotgun for Home Defense, Duty or in any situation where your life is on the line. These weapons are not reliable enough for me to trust. There are too many issues that can cause a semi-auto to miss feed, jam or to malfunction in other ways. They are fun to shot, great to hunt with but a pump shotgun should be your choice for Home Defense. It comes down to the operational design of the weapon and I will not get into all that, however, if you are reading this and trusting what I am saying then trust this part most of all.
The most common pump shotguns used for home defense are 12ga shotguns. I believe the smaller 20ga to be a more affective HD shotgun but the buying public does share this opinion so there are more 12 ga shotguns on the market in the tactical design. If this is a weapon for a senior, a person small in stature or a person very new to firearms then I recommend you look that the 20 ga Tactical Models. A great example of this weapon is on my web site www.aiptactical.com . Put your cursor on the links for the 20ga Tactical. The weapon that you are seeing there is a Remington 870 20 ga. Tactical with the SpecOps recoil reducing stock a synthetic stock that is shorter then a standard stock. It cost about the same as the 12 ga models. You do not need the exact one on my web site as that weapon has custom upgrades up with Police parts and is parkerized. If you have the budget for it then fine but the same stock model from Remington will fit your need.
The most common barrel length on a Tactical Shotgun is 18” or in the case of the Remington models, an 18.5” barrel. Barrel length is important as you will be moving through your home with this weapon and the short barrels are more “Doorway” and “Hallway” friendly. They are also faster to swing to a target close to you. The legal length for any shotgun barrel is 18”. Shorter then that requires a special stamp from the BTAF, a $200 Federal license fee and a lot of paper work.
Choke is the restriction at the end of a shotgun barrel that tightens the shot just prior to it leaving the barrel. This is done to give you tighter patterns of shot at longer ranges. The most common choke on these weapons is called Cylinder Bore or Cly Bore for short. This is pretty much no choke. Next is Improved Cylinder Bore or I/C and is a little more restriction. Next is Modified or Mod. Which is a little more restriction then I/C. I recommend the Cyl Bore or I/C choke for most HD weapons. Choke really does not matter at the close distances you are going to using this weapon in an emergency. If you have out buildings or property around your home and may to go outside, the I/C gives you a few more feet of assurance that your pattern will be affective on a threat. I have the modified barrel on both my HD’s since I have out building on my property but I/C would serve as well.
Sights. Here is where may people go wrong when selecting an HD shotgun. The best sight for you HD shotgun is a simple bead sight. It is the fastest sight to use and the most effective at close ranges. There are high visibility and tritium bead sights that enhance the effectiveness of this type of sight and these are fine with me. The trend is to go for “Tacti-cool” or as I call it “Tacti-fool” sights like Ghost ring sights or Optical sights. These sights can get you killed in a close quarters fight. Do not even think about them on a dedicated HD shotgun. In the type of situation you are going to use this weapon there is no time to find a threat in a small peep sight like the rear ghost ring sight. Optics are also a problem as they have to be turned on, they have batteries that can go dead and there is simply no need for them on a close quarters weapon.
The type of stock you decide on is very important. Length of pull ( LOP) of the stock is the distance from the trigger to the end of the stock recoil pad that is up against your shoulder. Standard LOP is 14” and works well for people over 5”10” tall. However, here again, shorter is better so I recommend the reduced LOP stock which is 13” LOP. If you are short I even recommend what is called the “Youth Stock” which has a LOP of 12”.
There are also adjustable stocks that adjust with a quick pull of a lever and look like the stocks you see on many AR type rifles. These are a good choice for the home where different people of different heights may be required to learn to use the weapon.
There are two very effective tactical stocks on the market that not only adjust, but they reduce the recoil of the shotgun. The Knoxx SpecOps stock uses a cam spring in the pistol grip and a spring in the stock tube to take up to 80% of the felt recoil. It is very effective and allows anyone to be able to handle the 12ga shotgun. The other is the Mesa Tactical stock. It also adjust but it uses an Endine buffer in the stock tube to take up to 70% of the felt recoil. The buffer works like a shock absorber on your car. The SpecOps sell for around $120-$140 and the Mesa stocks start at $315 so your wallet can often decide the type you decide on. Another recoil reducing option, and less expensive is to upgrade the recoil pad to one that helps reduce felt recoil. The best I know of is the Remington R3 pad made by Limbsaver or any of the Limbsaver pads. There are other great recoil pads on the market also. Upgrading the recoil pad on your shotgun is the best upgrade and shooter can do and your shoulder will thank you.
The capacity of the HD shotgun should be 6+1. This means six rounds in the magazine tube and one in chamber. I recommend this simply because most HD shotguns come with this capacity when they have the 18 or 18.5” barrel. If they have a 20” barrel they will have a three shot extension on them and can hold 7+1. I also recommend that if the weapon is going to be stored loaded that you do not have a round in the chamber. Keep only four to five rounds in the magazine tube so you do not compact the magazine spring over time.
Most of these weapon will come with sling attachments and you may want a sling should you take a shotgun training course. Most of these courses require one, however, take that sling off when you get home. An HD shotgun does not need a sling and that thing can get you killed. It can hang up on other guns in your gun safe or hang up on something in the closet. It will hang up on door knobs, furniture and things that I have not even thought of yet. NO SLING on an HD…..
Weapon lights. This is one accessory that I recommend. You need to see what you are dealing with in these situations and a quality weapons light can save your life and it can stop you from making a mistake and using that weapon on an innocent person. The best on the market is the Surefire dedicated forend lights. These lights are built into a forend that will replace the forend on your shotgun. Surefire is one the best companies in this industry and they warranty these light for a life time. They have the best customer service of all the vendors I deal with.
Other options are to use light brackets and a small weapons light or even some of the LED flashlights. You can see some quality brackets at www.cdmgear and these will hold lights like the Surefire G2L or G3L, other Surefire models or many of the other brands on the market. The Stream Light Poly-Tech is another quality light that will not brake the bank.
A shell holder is not needed on a basic HD but it is a plus if you have property or out-buildings to check. This accessory allows you to have additional shells on the side of the weapon. I have several different type of ammo in my shell holder as I have out-buildings and have to leave to house to check them if I think something is going on. One of the buildings is my custom gun shop and with a 20 minute responce time being average by the police where I live I may have to deal with something in or around that shop. Everyone's situation is different and it is better to have the extra ammo and not need it than to need it and not have it. If you live in a residential area, condo or you are certain this weapon would only be needed indoors, pass on the shell holder as it is very unlikely you are going to have a situation inside your home that requires more rounds then you have in the weapon.
This is very important. Take a shotgun training course from a reputable trainer. No some EX Delta Ninja Special Ops Commando trying to turn students into some kind of Special Operators, but a reputable trainer at a reputable training facility. You will not only learn to use the shotgun but will learn about the laws of you state pertaining to using deadly force in self defense. After the training course get out and shoot your weapon as often as you can. Learning the weapon and becoming proficient with it is what is going to save your life.
It is important that you avoid the Tacti-fool mess that so many people put on these weapons. Keep it basic and there is less to go wrong with it when the time comes to protect your life and the life of you family. My contact information is on the top of each page of my web site, www.aiptactical.com and you can call with any questions any time. I always have time to talk shotguns.
Also, be warned. If you call and are asking for a HD shotgun and then inquire about something like my “Police Elite” model, well, we are going to have a serious debate about what you need and what you want. If you have that kind of money, and want one then fine. Just so you understand the difference. There is a big difference in what you want and what you need. I recommend on my web site that someone on a budget go buy the basic Remington HD Shotgun model 25077. That weapon will serve you well and would fit the needs of 90% of the people that call me and can be found anywhere for around $330. Some one asked me why I would send my customers away like that and I replied “because it is the truth.”
If you get little else from this write up, please get this. Anyone trying to sell you Ghost Ring sights, Optic sights, pictinney rail forends, laser or strobe sights, heat shields or bayonet lugs on an HD shotgun or to put on your HD shotgun is just trying to get as much money from you as they can. On my web site on the "build your weapon" page is a link to a video of a man named “Clint Smith” the founder of Thunder Ranch. In this video he talks about the shotgun for home and self defense use and this man knows what he is talking about. He also tells you to keep it basic. If you will not believe me then please believe him.
So let us review.
1. The HD shotgun should be a pump action shotgun
2. The HD shotgun should be kept basic, no frills and tacti-fool mess.
3. Barrel length should be 18 to 18.5 inches with a bead sight
4. Stock length should fit the shooter but short is better
5 Weapon capacity should be 6+1 or 7+1
6. Weapons lights are optional
7. A shell holder is optional
8. No sling on a an HD shotgun
9 No tacti-fool mess on this weapon
10. You don’t need a high dollar shotgun as long as it is well built from any of the leading manufacturers.
11. Take a shotgun training course from a reputable trainer.
So there is the basic HD shotgun. It is that simple and understanding that gives you the right starting point.
Thursday, January 20, 2011
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
THE MYTHS OF THE ISRAELI METHOD OF CARRY, or why carrying chamber empty isn’t so bad.
We’ve all heard the warnings. If you don’t have a round in the chamber you might as well carry a rock! A gun without a round in the chamber is just a hammer! Anyone who carries a gun with the chamber empty must be afraid of their gun! Not carrying with a round chambered means you must not have any training! Well, my friends, as with so many of the things we hear in the gun world the myth sometimes overpowers the reality.
Let’s start with a clarification. Although often referred to as the Israeli Method or the Israeli Technique, carrying chamber empty (C3) is not restricted to the Israelis, nor did they develop it. It is gotten that label because of the fact that the Israelis popularized it as a method of carry and developed an entire method of presentation around empty-chamber carry. And their reasons for doing so are quite pertinent: a method of carry that allows safe carry with quick response time for (at that time) a largely untrained population with a diverse variety of firearms. I use the term as one that is easily recognizable, even if not technically correct. I prefer referring to it as “Condition 3”, or C3 for short. The history of C3 goes back to the early days of the autoloader, and is still being written today.
When autoloaders first came on the scene the normal and expected method of carry was with the hammer down on an empty chamber. The handgun would be drawn and the chamber loaded only when one was anticipating trouble, and the safety used as a temporary situation until the gun could be returned to its proper mode of carry, with the chamber empty. Lots of folks aren’t aware of it, but the 1911 was originally designed without any safety, as Browning felt it was irrelevant.
The most important development in C3 history to me was the adoption of that method of carry by the members of the Shanghai Police under W.E. Fairbairn. As the result of a number of incidents, Fairbairn (along with Eric Sykes) began to develop a new way to bring Shanghai P.D. officers to a high level of expertise with their handguns given the limited amount of training time and resources available to them. This training included, in part, carrying the gun with an empty chamber and then chambering a round as part of the draw stroke. This proved to be quite successful and when World War II broke out Fairbairn and Sykes were tasked with training commando units in close combat, including pistol use. They chose the chamber-empty target-focused method that had worked so well for them at Shanghai P.D., and for many of the same reasons. C3 allowed a person to safely carry and adequately use a firearm with a very limited amount of training. Fairbairn also wrote several books which also served to popularize the chamber empty carry method.
Chamber empty carry was the dominant method of carry for military, police, and civilians for most of the 20th Century. Toward the end of the century the rise of double-action autoloaders and the influence of Jeff Cooper’s Modern Technique made significant inroads, although chamber empty is still the dominant method of carry worldwide.
So, with a history of successful use behind it why does C3 create such a storm of controversy? Critics argue it is too slow, that it can’t be used under many circumstances, and the myths flow like water. Let’s look at some facts.
1. SPEED. The most common argument is that racking the slide during the draw is just too slow. The facts are that racking the slide is only one part of a complicated picture, and not a particularly important part from the perspective of speed. Let us assume that racking the slide adds a half second to your total presentation time (which is pretty slow, by the way). And let us assume that you can draw and fire at the 2 second mark. If the attack comes before you can draw and fire (2 seconds) having the chamber loaded or not doesn’t matter, as you don’t have time to draw and fire at all. If the attack comes after a 2.5 second time frame having the chamber loaded or not doesn’t matter, as you have time to chamber a round. Only if the attack happens in that critical time frame after 2 seconds but before 2.5 seconds does the chamber condition matter. Also the speed of presentation can also be affected by such things as type of holster, where the firearm is carried, and so on. Yet we don’t see a big fight over IWB versus OWB, or thumb-break versus open top, or appendix carry versus carry at 4:30, although each of those can impact the speed of presentation just as much or more than chamber empty versus chamber loaded.
2. SAFETY. Another common argument is that you won’t be able to chamber a round under various scenarios. You might only have one hand available to you. You might be fighting off someone with your off-hand and wouldn’t be able to rack the slide. You might be shot in one hand and wouldn’t be able to use both hands to rack the slide. While there is an element of truth to those fears, let’s look at them carefully. First I would suggest that anyone who carries an autoloader should be capable of racking the slide and manipulating the firearm with one hand. If you can’t, perhaps a revolver would be more appropriate. The arguments for needing both hands to draw the gun are the same arguments that would be accurate in case of clearing a malfunction. But more importantly, this is only one side of the safety argument, and a questionable one at that.
To truly look at the safety issue we need to move beyond the “I’m in a gunfight right now” mentality and move more toward the “What is the risk involved in carrying a gun day in and day out?” Let’s face it, for most of us the actual gunfight scene is not going to happen. If it happens it is going to involve a few seconds of our life. Admittedly they are going to be extremely important seconds, but we have to balance that against the thousands of hours we will carry the gun, and the thousands of times we administratively handle the gun. Only then can we do a proper risk assessment.
Whether we like to admit it or not, mistakes happen. And even though we talk a lot about how if people will just follow the 4 safety rules, or if they will just get more training, an honest assessment shows that we don’t follow the safety rules all the time and even the best trained among us make mistakes. Fairbairn recognized this long ago and formalized a response: Keep the chamber empty until you need to use the gun, and then empty the chamber ASAP after you are done. Let’s face it, if there isn’t a round in the chamber the gun cannot discharge.
Chamber empty lends itself to situations where there is a lot of administrative handling. Visualize the person who has to go into the Federal Courthouse several times a day. He has to unload and reload each time. Loading and unloading are the times that are the most prone to negligent discharge. Many shooters have said they want an empty chamber on their house gun because children or others may get hold of it. So they charge the chamber each morning and remove a round from the chamber each night. Perhaps these folks could be better served by maintaining the gun C3.
3. FIREARMS. Lots of folks out there still have, and for whatever reason, still carry/use a firearm that is literally unsafe to carry with the chamber loaded. Noted firearms author Mas Ayoob discussed this in an article for Backwoods Magazine (Feb. 2007) stating, “You don’t want to carry a round in the chamber of any semi-automatic pistol that doesn’t have a firing pin lock. It’s not drop-safe.” Those include most autoloaders made before the 1970s, the first generation Smith & Wesson autoloaders, a number of inexpensive pistols like Jennings, Lorcin and Raven, and so on. Even some modern guns, in certain conditions, can be problematic. Ayoob (Guns Magazine, Feb. 2001) again says, “Condition Three does have its place for carry, however. If I am carrying a gun like a Glock, which does not have a manual safety per se, and do not have access to a holster which covers the trigger guard (as is strongly recommended by the Glock factory), and have to shove the gun into my waistband, I'll make sure the chamber is empty.”
4. PERSONAL ISSUES. Here we get into an area that covers a multitude of issues. Some folks just aren’t comfortable with a round in the chamber. We all know that being comfortable about what you carry is important, so that personal preference and concern can matter. For me personally, I find the safety and long, heavy initial DA pull of some traditional DA/SA guns troublesome. When using firearms like those based on the Walther PP-design I find I actually get an accurate first shot of faster by racking the slide and firing SA than flipping the safety and then fighting through the DA pull. A friend has used a Browning Hi-Power for decades, and has always had trouble with the safety. For him, chamber empty works better.
5. MINIMAL TRAINING. Sadly, many if not most gun owners do not train regularly. In fact, I’d hazard a guess that most gun owners don’t train much at all. And it was for those people that the Israeli Method was designed. Going back to Fairbairn, the chamber empty carry was designed to allow those with minimal training to safely carry a firearm. That was also the rationale behind the method early on for Israel. We do a lot of carrying and administrative handling of a firearm, not so much actual shooting. So recognizing that failure and working it into the system is a good idea. C3 carry recognizes that the danger to the carrier is as great as or greater from negligent discharge than actual attack by a criminal. By acknowledging this problem of minimal training by many gun owners and carriers we can then examine a carry method that reduces the danger while still allowing an effective response.
To conclude, most people tend to look at problems from their own point of view, without considering that others might have different concerns, different needs, different levels of training, and so on. Failure to recognize this is harmful to open and honest debate, and in some cases becomes blatant elitism. From my position, I tend to suggest chamber loaded carry as the normal and standard default position, just as I tend to suggest a DAO autoloader as the standard default weapon for those who choose to carry an autoloader. But just as a SA auto might be better for some persons or for some situations, chamber empty might be better for some persons in some situations. There are advantages and disadvantages to each method. The Thinking Gunfighter looks at his own situation and tries to identify what maximizes his advantages and minimizes his disadvantages and makes an informed decision.
Let’s start with a clarification. Although often referred to as the Israeli Method or the Israeli Technique, carrying chamber empty (C3) is not restricted to the Israelis, nor did they develop it. It is gotten that label because of the fact that the Israelis popularized it as a method of carry and developed an entire method of presentation around empty-chamber carry. And their reasons for doing so are quite pertinent: a method of carry that allows safe carry with quick response time for (at that time) a largely untrained population with a diverse variety of firearms. I use the term as one that is easily recognizable, even if not technically correct. I prefer referring to it as “Condition 3”, or C3 for short. The history of C3 goes back to the early days of the autoloader, and is still being written today.
When autoloaders first came on the scene the normal and expected method of carry was with the hammer down on an empty chamber. The handgun would be drawn and the chamber loaded only when one was anticipating trouble, and the safety used as a temporary situation until the gun could be returned to its proper mode of carry, with the chamber empty. Lots of folks aren’t aware of it, but the 1911 was originally designed without any safety, as Browning felt it was irrelevant.
The most important development in C3 history to me was the adoption of that method of carry by the members of the Shanghai Police under W.E. Fairbairn. As the result of a number of incidents, Fairbairn (along with Eric Sykes) began to develop a new way to bring Shanghai P.D. officers to a high level of expertise with their handguns given the limited amount of training time and resources available to them. This training included, in part, carrying the gun with an empty chamber and then chambering a round as part of the draw stroke. This proved to be quite successful and when World War II broke out Fairbairn and Sykes were tasked with training commando units in close combat, including pistol use. They chose the chamber-empty target-focused method that had worked so well for them at Shanghai P.D., and for many of the same reasons. C3 allowed a person to safely carry and adequately use a firearm with a very limited amount of training. Fairbairn also wrote several books which also served to popularize the chamber empty carry method.
Chamber empty carry was the dominant method of carry for military, police, and civilians for most of the 20th Century. Toward the end of the century the rise of double-action autoloaders and the influence of Jeff Cooper’s Modern Technique made significant inroads, although chamber empty is still the dominant method of carry worldwide.
So, with a history of successful use behind it why does C3 create such a storm of controversy? Critics argue it is too slow, that it can’t be used under many circumstances, and the myths flow like water. Let’s look at some facts.
1. SPEED. The most common argument is that racking the slide during the draw is just too slow. The facts are that racking the slide is only one part of a complicated picture, and not a particularly important part from the perspective of speed. Let us assume that racking the slide adds a half second to your total presentation time (which is pretty slow, by the way). And let us assume that you can draw and fire at the 2 second mark. If the attack comes before you can draw and fire (2 seconds) having the chamber loaded or not doesn’t matter, as you don’t have time to draw and fire at all. If the attack comes after a 2.5 second time frame having the chamber loaded or not doesn’t matter, as you have time to chamber a round. Only if the attack happens in that critical time frame after 2 seconds but before 2.5 seconds does the chamber condition matter. Also the speed of presentation can also be affected by such things as type of holster, where the firearm is carried, and so on. Yet we don’t see a big fight over IWB versus OWB, or thumb-break versus open top, or appendix carry versus carry at 4:30, although each of those can impact the speed of presentation just as much or more than chamber empty versus chamber loaded.
2. SAFETY. Another common argument is that you won’t be able to chamber a round under various scenarios. You might only have one hand available to you. You might be fighting off someone with your off-hand and wouldn’t be able to rack the slide. You might be shot in one hand and wouldn’t be able to use both hands to rack the slide. While there is an element of truth to those fears, let’s look at them carefully. First I would suggest that anyone who carries an autoloader should be capable of racking the slide and manipulating the firearm with one hand. If you can’t, perhaps a revolver would be more appropriate. The arguments for needing both hands to draw the gun are the same arguments that would be accurate in case of clearing a malfunction. But more importantly, this is only one side of the safety argument, and a questionable one at that.
To truly look at the safety issue we need to move beyond the “I’m in a gunfight right now” mentality and move more toward the “What is the risk involved in carrying a gun day in and day out?” Let’s face it, for most of us the actual gunfight scene is not going to happen. If it happens it is going to involve a few seconds of our life. Admittedly they are going to be extremely important seconds, but we have to balance that against the thousands of hours we will carry the gun, and the thousands of times we administratively handle the gun. Only then can we do a proper risk assessment.
Whether we like to admit it or not, mistakes happen. And even though we talk a lot about how if people will just follow the 4 safety rules, or if they will just get more training, an honest assessment shows that we don’t follow the safety rules all the time and even the best trained among us make mistakes. Fairbairn recognized this long ago and formalized a response: Keep the chamber empty until you need to use the gun, and then empty the chamber ASAP after you are done. Let’s face it, if there isn’t a round in the chamber the gun cannot discharge.
Chamber empty lends itself to situations where there is a lot of administrative handling. Visualize the person who has to go into the Federal Courthouse several times a day. He has to unload and reload each time. Loading and unloading are the times that are the most prone to negligent discharge. Many shooters have said they want an empty chamber on their house gun because children or others may get hold of it. So they charge the chamber each morning and remove a round from the chamber each night. Perhaps these folks could be better served by maintaining the gun C3.
3. FIREARMS. Lots of folks out there still have, and for whatever reason, still carry/use a firearm that is literally unsafe to carry with the chamber loaded. Noted firearms author Mas Ayoob discussed this in an article for Backwoods Magazine (Feb. 2007) stating, “You don’t want to carry a round in the chamber of any semi-automatic pistol that doesn’t have a firing pin lock. It’s not drop-safe.” Those include most autoloaders made before the 1970s, the first generation Smith & Wesson autoloaders, a number of inexpensive pistols like Jennings, Lorcin and Raven, and so on. Even some modern guns, in certain conditions, can be problematic. Ayoob (Guns Magazine, Feb. 2001) again says, “Condition Three does have its place for carry, however. If I am carrying a gun like a Glock, which does not have a manual safety per se, and do not have access to a holster which covers the trigger guard (as is strongly recommended by the Glock factory), and have to shove the gun into my waistband, I'll make sure the chamber is empty.”
4. PERSONAL ISSUES. Here we get into an area that covers a multitude of issues. Some folks just aren’t comfortable with a round in the chamber. We all know that being comfortable about what you carry is important, so that personal preference and concern can matter. For me personally, I find the safety and long, heavy initial DA pull of some traditional DA/SA guns troublesome. When using firearms like those based on the Walther PP-design I find I actually get an accurate first shot of faster by racking the slide and firing SA than flipping the safety and then fighting through the DA pull. A friend has used a Browning Hi-Power for decades, and has always had trouble with the safety. For him, chamber empty works better.
5. MINIMAL TRAINING. Sadly, many if not most gun owners do not train regularly. In fact, I’d hazard a guess that most gun owners don’t train much at all. And it was for those people that the Israeli Method was designed. Going back to Fairbairn, the chamber empty carry was designed to allow those with minimal training to safely carry a firearm. That was also the rationale behind the method early on for Israel. We do a lot of carrying and administrative handling of a firearm, not so much actual shooting. So recognizing that failure and working it into the system is a good idea. C3 carry recognizes that the danger to the carrier is as great as or greater from negligent discharge than actual attack by a criminal. By acknowledging this problem of minimal training by many gun owners and carriers we can then examine a carry method that reduces the danger while still allowing an effective response.
To conclude, most people tend to look at problems from their own point of view, without considering that others might have different concerns, different needs, different levels of training, and so on. Failure to recognize this is harmful to open and honest debate, and in some cases becomes blatant elitism. From my position, I tend to suggest chamber loaded carry as the normal and standard default position, just as I tend to suggest a DAO autoloader as the standard default weapon for those who choose to carry an autoloader. But just as a SA auto might be better for some persons or for some situations, chamber empty might be better for some persons in some situations. There are advantages and disadvantages to each method. The Thinking Gunfighter looks at his own situation and tries to identify what maximizes his advantages and minimizes his disadvantages and makes an informed decision.
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
THE MYTH OF THE TACTICAL RELOAD
It's an important skill to be developed at most training programs. It is an essential part of the gun game known as IDPA. Many have said that it is a required technique for the well-trained gunman's toolkit. We say that claims of the need are a myth, and the so-called tactical reload truly fits that old cliché of "a great solution to a non-existent problem.” Let’s start by identifying just what the TR is.
There are various terms used for various reloading techniques. For clarification, we will confine this discussion to autoloading pistols and use the following terms:
SPEED RELOAD (SR): while there is still a round in the chamber and the slide is forward, the magazine is released from the gun and allowed to fall free as a new magazine is placed into the magazine well.
EMERGENCY RELOAD (ER): similar to the speed reload EXCEPT all rounds have been fired and the slide is locked back with an empty chamber.
TACTICAL RELOAD (TR): with rounds still in the magazine and a round in the chamber, the shooter secures a spare magazine with the off hand, brings it to the weapon, releases the magazine in the weapon into the off hand where it is held while the replacement magazine is placed into the magazine well. The partially spent magazine is then secured for later use.
RETENTION RELOAD (RR): with rounds still in the magazine and chamber, the magazine in the firearm is released into the off hand and secured for later use. The off hand then gets a spare magazine and inserts it into the magazine well of the firearm.
Why would we argue against the need for the tactical reload? There are a number of reasons. First and foremost is the fact that outside of the military there has been no verifiable instance of the rounds saved with a tactical reload making a difference in an actual gunfight. I can say that with a fair amount of confidence because several different people in several different venues have been trying for several years to find an example without any luck.
Second, the tactical reload is the reload that is most likely to be messed up. By its very design the TR is complicated and cumbersome in comparison to other reload techniques. It requires manipulation of two magazines at the same time and with the same hand. As can be regularly seen at matches, when a reload is flubbed it is almost always a tactical reload. Under the stress of an actual incident we can only expect the problem to increase, not decrease.
Third, the tactical reload does nothing that cannot be done as well or better with another method of reloading. If your concern is saving the ammo in the used mag the retention reload works better. It is more reliable, as you only have to manipulate one magazine at a time. If your concern is getting a new magazine into the firearm the speed reload or the emergency reload are better. Again, one needs only manipulate one magazine. So if our concern is speed, the SR and the ER provide a faster reload than the TR. If our concern is saving the remaining rounds of ammo, the RR provides greater reliability than the TR.
Fourth, learning the tactical reload is actually anti-tactical. It takes time from our limited training resources to develop a skill that is not needed, and it creates another decision-point for us by increasing the number of options we must pick and choose from. Both of those issues adversely impact our overall fighting ability.
"But wait" some say. "The TR is designed to get you a full magazine into the firearm during a lull in the action." And they are right...but there is a huge problem. How do we know if there is a lull in the action? Literally by definition we cannot know if there is a lull until the lull has already occurred. I've fired a few rounds at the Bad Guy, and I'm securely behind cover. My opponent seems to be down and out, so I start to reload. He suddenly jumps up and charges my position. No lull any more. If I am able to do the TR, I am gambling, as I don't know if my "lull" is actually sufficient until after the TR is completed.
But let's stay with this scene for discussion purposes. We've had our encounter, the Bad Guy is down, and you have some cover and want to top off the gun. The SR is a better choice here because we have no idea if we have a lull or not. Just drop the partially spent magazine. If things are really over or there really is a lull, then you can pick the magazine up after your firearm is fully loaded. If you happen to be in a position where that is problematic, such as wading through the floods after Katrina or in mud up to your ankles, the Retention Reload shines. You have greater control over both magazines at all times, thus reducing the chance of fumbling one or both of them and losing them in the mud or water. Remember, we need to decide what we want to do. If we are reloading because we think there is a further need for our gun, we need to reload as fast as we can, thus the SR or ER. If we want to save our partially expended magazine and there are no time constraints, the RR provides the greatest reliability.
Michael Bane, well known shooter and writer, relates the following comment from a discussion with an Israeli security specialist and top firearms instructor:
"We stopped teaching tactical reloads," he told me, "because the people who tried to do them kept getting killed." That is the basic problem with the Tactical Reload. I won't go so far as to argue that it gets you killed all by itself. But the time and effort spent learning to perform it well is time and effort that is not spent learning something that could make a difference for you. It is a nice trick for the range, but nothing that can't be achieved just as well with a Retention Reload.
The Tactical Reload can be learned, and it can be done. I learned it well and can do it quite quickly. But it still remains a solution searching for a problem. Many things can be done well given enough training, but their actual tactical benefits are few. And that is the crux of The Myth of the Tactical Reload, the idea that it is tactical in any way, shape, or form. It is the only reload that substantially differs from the others. The SR, ER, and RR all rely on a simple task...take one magazine in the off hand and insert that magazine into the magazine well of the firearm. The TR complicates that task in a way that provides no benefit to the shooter.
There are various terms used for various reloading techniques. For clarification, we will confine this discussion to autoloading pistols and use the following terms:
SPEED RELOAD (SR): while there is still a round in the chamber and the slide is forward, the magazine is released from the gun and allowed to fall free as a new magazine is placed into the magazine well.
EMERGENCY RELOAD (ER): similar to the speed reload EXCEPT all rounds have been fired and the slide is locked back with an empty chamber.
TACTICAL RELOAD (TR): with rounds still in the magazine and a round in the chamber, the shooter secures a spare magazine with the off hand, brings it to the weapon, releases the magazine in the weapon into the off hand where it is held while the replacement magazine is placed into the magazine well. The partially spent magazine is then secured for later use.
RETENTION RELOAD (RR): with rounds still in the magazine and chamber, the magazine in the firearm is released into the off hand and secured for later use. The off hand then gets a spare magazine and inserts it into the magazine well of the firearm.
Why would we argue against the need for the tactical reload? There are a number of reasons. First and foremost is the fact that outside of the military there has been no verifiable instance of the rounds saved with a tactical reload making a difference in an actual gunfight. I can say that with a fair amount of confidence because several different people in several different venues have been trying for several years to find an example without any luck.
Second, the tactical reload is the reload that is most likely to be messed up. By its very design the TR is complicated and cumbersome in comparison to other reload techniques. It requires manipulation of two magazines at the same time and with the same hand. As can be regularly seen at matches, when a reload is flubbed it is almost always a tactical reload. Under the stress of an actual incident we can only expect the problem to increase, not decrease.
Third, the tactical reload does nothing that cannot be done as well or better with another method of reloading. If your concern is saving the ammo in the used mag the retention reload works better. It is more reliable, as you only have to manipulate one magazine at a time. If your concern is getting a new magazine into the firearm the speed reload or the emergency reload are better. Again, one needs only manipulate one magazine. So if our concern is speed, the SR and the ER provide a faster reload than the TR. If our concern is saving the remaining rounds of ammo, the RR provides greater reliability than the TR.
Fourth, learning the tactical reload is actually anti-tactical. It takes time from our limited training resources to develop a skill that is not needed, and it creates another decision-point for us by increasing the number of options we must pick and choose from. Both of those issues adversely impact our overall fighting ability.
"But wait" some say. "The TR is designed to get you a full magazine into the firearm during a lull in the action." And they are right...but there is a huge problem. How do we know if there is a lull in the action? Literally by definition we cannot know if there is a lull until the lull has already occurred. I've fired a few rounds at the Bad Guy, and I'm securely behind cover. My opponent seems to be down and out, so I start to reload. He suddenly jumps up and charges my position. No lull any more. If I am able to do the TR, I am gambling, as I don't know if my "lull" is actually sufficient until after the TR is completed.
But let's stay with this scene for discussion purposes. We've had our encounter, the Bad Guy is down, and you have some cover and want to top off the gun. The SR is a better choice here because we have no idea if we have a lull or not. Just drop the partially spent magazine. If things are really over or there really is a lull, then you can pick the magazine up after your firearm is fully loaded. If you happen to be in a position where that is problematic, such as wading through the floods after Katrina or in mud up to your ankles, the Retention Reload shines. You have greater control over both magazines at all times, thus reducing the chance of fumbling one or both of them and losing them in the mud or water. Remember, we need to decide what we want to do. If we are reloading because we think there is a further need for our gun, we need to reload as fast as we can, thus the SR or ER. If we want to save our partially expended magazine and there are no time constraints, the RR provides the greatest reliability.
Michael Bane, well known shooter and writer, relates the following comment from a discussion with an Israeli security specialist and top firearms instructor:
"We stopped teaching tactical reloads," he told me, "because the people who tried to do them kept getting killed." That is the basic problem with the Tactical Reload. I won't go so far as to argue that it gets you killed all by itself. But the time and effort spent learning to perform it well is time and effort that is not spent learning something that could make a difference for you. It is a nice trick for the range, but nothing that can't be achieved just as well with a Retention Reload.
The Tactical Reload can be learned, and it can be done. I learned it well and can do it quite quickly. But it still remains a solution searching for a problem. Many things can be done well given enough training, but their actual tactical benefits are few. And that is the crux of The Myth of the Tactical Reload, the idea that it is tactical in any way, shape, or form. It is the only reload that substantially differs from the others. The SR, ER, and RR all rely on a simple task...take one magazine in the off hand and insert that magazine into the magazine well of the firearm. The TR complicates that task in a way that provides no benefit to the shooter.
Monday, January 18, 2010
THE MYTH OF MURPHY'S LAW: Why "better to have it and not need it" fails the test.
We've all heard it, frequently from the guy who is carrying three guns, 90 rounds of ammo, two tactical folding knives, a cell phone, a couple of flashlights, a can of Mace, an expanding baton, a Kubotan, and so on. "Anything that can go wrong will go wrong." A close companion is "Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it." While technically true I suggest that this is a poor way to plan, and thus becomes a myth that the thinking gunfighter needs to recognize.
Yes, anything that can go wrong will go wrong...given enough time, enough incidents, and so on. The actual problem is not will it go wrong, but how likely is it to go wrong at any particular time or place. The same is true of the concept that it is better to have it and not need it. Technically true, but "what is the actual likelihood of needing it and how much does having it impact your resources" is the better way to look at the issue.
Let's look at the issue from a few different viewpoints. A question I often see is "how much spare ammunition should I carry" or the similar "how many spare magazines should I carry?" At which time we begin hearing horror stories about being attacked by roving gangs of street thugs, or shooting someone and then having their friends come to their defense and having an on-going, running gunfight, or some such. Folks, it is possible, but not too darned likely. You are going to solve the problem with what you have in your gun, or the chances of you solving it at all are almost non-existent. Even in law enforcement, with a much more offensive role, reloads are needed in a very small percentage of gunfights.
Let's say that you have 30 rounds with you. Do you really think that that you are going to be able to accurately and effectively fire 30 rounds at the bad guys? Equally important, if you were attacked by a dozen people, (A)do you really think they would press an attack after you shot the first 3, or 4, or 5, etc. and (B) if they pressed the attack do you really think you would be able to shoot them all before they got you? Let's think about it.
"But wait!" comes the cry. "What about if I have a malfunction and need to clear it? That requires another magazine." First, if you are worried about your weapon malfunctioning, you need to get a different weapon. Yes, I know that guns do malfunction. I see it on the range quite regularly. Why do they malfunction? Bad ammo, cheap aftermarket equipment, modifications designed for the range instead of real life, and so on. A well made, quality firearm that has been properly checked out and is well maintained, using ammunition proven to feed in that gun will not suddenly decide to start malfunctioning on you. Yes, magazines are the weak link in most autoloaders, but not good magazines. If you are going to the range and practicing and checking out your equipment, you will know what works and what doesn't. If a magazine malfunctions don't carry it for serious social purposes. Use that magazine only for the range. And if it continues to cause problems, throw it over the berm and get rid of it!
Second, let's think about this for a moment (Thinking Gunfighters, remember!). A spare magazine only addresses problems that are related to the magazine. If one wants to worry about malfunctions one should look at all malfunctions. After all, isn't that the essence of Murphy's Law? Why worry about and provide a solution to one narrow malfunction problem. Let's solve ALL of our malfunction problems and just carry a spare gun. Realistically, what are the chances that your quality-made, well-maintained firearm will pick this particular time to have a malfunction? Given that, what are the chances that particular malfunction will be the result of a magazine that is defective? If we truly believe in the Murphy concept carrying a spare magazine is rather silly.
OK then, but still isn't it better to have it and not need it than the other way around? Again, sure, but let's think about it. We can't carry around everything, so we need to rationally consider what equipment will be useful to us and what won't. It is always going to be a compromise. Most of us don't carry around a big-game rifle to kill a tiger if it attacks us. Why not? Isn't it better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it? "Wait a minute" you say. "I don't need that rifle because the chances of me getting attacked by a tiger are so small that I don't need to worry about it!" And with that you have effectively done away with the myth of "better to have it and not need it." Having something does cost us. Whether it be money, time, physical effort, convenience, or any of our other resources, there is a cost. We should balance that cost against the need.
The reality is that we all make decisions about what we will need, and we all compromise what we carry based on what we think we will need. Based on perceived need one person might decide a 1911 with 8 rounds meets their needs. Another person might decide that a Glock 17 with a spare mag and 34 rounds meets their needs. But the decision on where to compromise on what to carry should be made based on a reasonable and realistic understanding of what is needed (risk assessment) accompanied by a cost/benefit analysis.
"Remember Murphy's Law" and "better to have it and not need it" are the rationalizations of people who are unable to decide what their needs actually are or people who are unwilling to accept the conflict between the world of fantasy and reality. No matter what the case we will all compromise on what we decide to do for our personal safety and security, even though we might be unwilling to acknowledge that fact. The important thing is if we determine that compromise based on thinking about it, or do we base it on the non-thinking mythology of Murphy's Law?
Yes, anything that can go wrong will go wrong...given enough time, enough incidents, and so on. The actual problem is not will it go wrong, but how likely is it to go wrong at any particular time or place. The same is true of the concept that it is better to have it and not need it. Technically true, but "what is the actual likelihood of needing it and how much does having it impact your resources" is the better way to look at the issue.
Let's look at the issue from a few different viewpoints. A question I often see is "how much spare ammunition should I carry" or the similar "how many spare magazines should I carry?" At which time we begin hearing horror stories about being attacked by roving gangs of street thugs, or shooting someone and then having their friends come to their defense and having an on-going, running gunfight, or some such. Folks, it is possible, but not too darned likely. You are going to solve the problem with what you have in your gun, or the chances of you solving it at all are almost non-existent. Even in law enforcement, with a much more offensive role, reloads are needed in a very small percentage of gunfights.
Let's say that you have 30 rounds with you. Do you really think that that you are going to be able to accurately and effectively fire 30 rounds at the bad guys? Equally important, if you were attacked by a dozen people, (A)do you really think they would press an attack after you shot the first 3, or 4, or 5, etc. and (B) if they pressed the attack do you really think you would be able to shoot them all before they got you? Let's think about it.
"But wait!" comes the cry. "What about if I have a malfunction and need to clear it? That requires another magazine." First, if you are worried about your weapon malfunctioning, you need to get a different weapon. Yes, I know that guns do malfunction. I see it on the range quite regularly. Why do they malfunction? Bad ammo, cheap aftermarket equipment, modifications designed for the range instead of real life, and so on. A well made, quality firearm that has been properly checked out and is well maintained, using ammunition proven to feed in that gun will not suddenly decide to start malfunctioning on you. Yes, magazines are the weak link in most autoloaders, but not good magazines. If you are going to the range and practicing and checking out your equipment, you will know what works and what doesn't. If a magazine malfunctions don't carry it for serious social purposes. Use that magazine only for the range. And if it continues to cause problems, throw it over the berm and get rid of it!
Second, let's think about this for a moment (Thinking Gunfighters, remember!). A spare magazine only addresses problems that are related to the magazine. If one wants to worry about malfunctions one should look at all malfunctions. After all, isn't that the essence of Murphy's Law? Why worry about and provide a solution to one narrow malfunction problem. Let's solve ALL of our malfunction problems and just carry a spare gun. Realistically, what are the chances that your quality-made, well-maintained firearm will pick this particular time to have a malfunction? Given that, what are the chances that particular malfunction will be the result of a magazine that is defective? If we truly believe in the Murphy concept carrying a spare magazine is rather silly.
OK then, but still isn't it better to have it and not need it than the other way around? Again, sure, but let's think about it. We can't carry around everything, so we need to rationally consider what equipment will be useful to us and what won't. It is always going to be a compromise. Most of us don't carry around a big-game rifle to kill a tiger if it attacks us. Why not? Isn't it better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it? "Wait a minute" you say. "I don't need that rifle because the chances of me getting attacked by a tiger are so small that I don't need to worry about it!" And with that you have effectively done away with the myth of "better to have it and not need it." Having something does cost us. Whether it be money, time, physical effort, convenience, or any of our other resources, there is a cost. We should balance that cost against the need.
The reality is that we all make decisions about what we will need, and we all compromise what we carry based on what we think we will need. Based on perceived need one person might decide a 1911 with 8 rounds meets their needs. Another person might decide that a Glock 17 with a spare mag and 34 rounds meets their needs. But the decision on where to compromise on what to carry should be made based on a reasonable and realistic understanding of what is needed (risk assessment) accompanied by a cost/benefit analysis.
"Remember Murphy's Law" and "better to have it and not need it" are the rationalizations of people who are unable to decide what their needs actually are or people who are unwilling to accept the conflict between the world of fantasy and reality. No matter what the case we will all compromise on what we decide to do for our personal safety and security, even though we might be unwilling to acknowledge that fact. The important thing is if we determine that compromise based on thinking about it, or do we base it on the non-thinking mythology of Murphy's Law?
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
THE .38 IS GREAT, PART TWO: Why a Snub Revolver makes good sense for CCW.
Let’s face it, friends, the snubbie revolver is a little dated. It is sort of like wearing bellbottom pants or doing the Hustle. But just as bellbottoms did what they were supposed to do and just like the Hustle was popular at one time, the .38 snub is still doing what it was doing years ago, even though it may not be as popular or as hip and cool as it once was. But that is the key issue, and is why the snub still makes a good choice as a primary carry gun. It was once the premier choice for concealed carry, and nothing has changed to make it a bad choice now.
What were the attributes of the snub that made it so popular? Well, we can start with a package that is very carry friendly. Particularly in the Airweight version, a snub is one of the most comfortable guns to carry for most people, and is versatile enough to be carried in a number of different modes. You can carry it IWB, OWB, you can put it in your pocket, you can strap it to an ankle, and you can even carry it around in a paper sack or a nylon pouch without worrying about it. The snub is still one of the most carry friendly packages going, particularly in a major caliber. The more carry friendly it is, the more likely you are to actually have it with you when you need it.
The caliber is the second reason the snub was so popular. Chambered for the .38 Special in its most common dress, one can step up to the .357 Magnum or the .44 if they wish, or go down to .32 or .22 while still keeping that convenient carry platform. In .38 Special the snub achieves a synergetic effect rarely found in other weapons.
Third, the shooter can easily modify the snub revolver to fit this own particular needs through changing the grip. The revolver design lends itself to user friendly changes to make the grip wider, narrower, thicker, rounder, thinner, longer, shorter, or even with a laser. Most changes to the grip won’t adversely impact the conceal-ability of the gun. Try that with your mini-Glock or similar.
The snub revolver is one of the most versatile handgun options for self defense. Utilitarian in nature it is simple to operate, forgiving of miscues on the part of the shooter, reliable to a fault, it is also the perfect “always” gun. You know, the gun you grab when you are going out to the mail box, or the gun you grab when you are just going to the store for a minute. And that is why the snub makes such good sense for self defense. It is the gun you can always have with you, so why not make it that first choice gun? Sure, it doesn’t hold as many rounds of ammo as some, and it is slower to reload than some, but does that really matter?
I know there are some folks who strap on that full-size 1911 or Glock every day, and they carry it wherever they can, and they practice with it every week, but those are the exceptions. After teaching Concealed Handgun License classes for a couple of decades now I have found that way too many of my students don’t carry a big two-pound gun with them all the time, and they don’t practice regularly. They don’t want to do that. They want to carry a light, comfortable gun with them that is simple and intuitive to use. The revolver fits that bill, and the airweight snub nosed revolver at fifteen ounces fits it best. Other guns may be better overall for fighting, but as I like to point out once one achieves good enough everything beyond that is fairly irrelevant. The snub handles 99.99% of DGU incidents. Are you really that much better armed if your gun handles 99.999% instead?
Few gunfights require rapid reloading (or reloading at all). Few gunfights require precision shooting at long distances. Most gunfights require a gun to be brought into action reasonably quickly at fairly short distances. The .38 snub does that and does it very well. Just as the .38 is perhaps the ultimate compromise caliber, the snub revolver is perhaps the ultimate compromise defensive concealed handgun.
What were the attributes of the snub that made it so popular? Well, we can start with a package that is very carry friendly. Particularly in the Airweight version, a snub is one of the most comfortable guns to carry for most people, and is versatile enough to be carried in a number of different modes. You can carry it IWB, OWB, you can put it in your pocket, you can strap it to an ankle, and you can even carry it around in a paper sack or a nylon pouch without worrying about it. The snub is still one of the most carry friendly packages going, particularly in a major caliber. The more carry friendly it is, the more likely you are to actually have it with you when you need it.
The caliber is the second reason the snub was so popular. Chambered for the .38 Special in its most common dress, one can step up to the .357 Magnum or the .44 if they wish, or go down to .32 or .22 while still keeping that convenient carry platform. In .38 Special the snub achieves a synergetic effect rarely found in other weapons.
Third, the shooter can easily modify the snub revolver to fit this own particular needs through changing the grip. The revolver design lends itself to user friendly changes to make the grip wider, narrower, thicker, rounder, thinner, longer, shorter, or even with a laser. Most changes to the grip won’t adversely impact the conceal-ability of the gun. Try that with your mini-Glock or similar.
The snub revolver is one of the most versatile handgun options for self defense. Utilitarian in nature it is simple to operate, forgiving of miscues on the part of the shooter, reliable to a fault, it is also the perfect “always” gun. You know, the gun you grab when you are going out to the mail box, or the gun you grab when you are just going to the store for a minute. And that is why the snub makes such good sense for self defense. It is the gun you can always have with you, so why not make it that first choice gun? Sure, it doesn’t hold as many rounds of ammo as some, and it is slower to reload than some, but does that really matter?
I know there are some folks who strap on that full-size 1911 or Glock every day, and they carry it wherever they can, and they practice with it every week, but those are the exceptions. After teaching Concealed Handgun License classes for a couple of decades now I have found that way too many of my students don’t carry a big two-pound gun with them all the time, and they don’t practice regularly. They don’t want to do that. They want to carry a light, comfortable gun with them that is simple and intuitive to use. The revolver fits that bill, and the airweight snub nosed revolver at fifteen ounces fits it best. Other guns may be better overall for fighting, but as I like to point out once one achieves good enough everything beyond that is fairly irrelevant. The snub handles 99.99% of DGU incidents. Are you really that much better armed if your gun handles 99.999% instead?
Few gunfights require rapid reloading (or reloading at all). Few gunfights require precision shooting at long distances. Most gunfights require a gun to be brought into action reasonably quickly at fairly short distances. The .38 snub does that and does it very well. Just as the .38 is perhaps the ultimate compromise caliber, the snub revolver is perhaps the ultimate compromise defensive concealed handgun.
Monday, October 5, 2009
INTERNET INSANITY: THE WALL OF SHAME
I debated this segment for a while, but a recent posting finally convinced me that we need to point out some of the absolute nonsense that passses for intelligence on the internet, especially as it relates to guns and gunfighting. Every now and then somebody posts something that is so inane, so ridiculous, it rises above the usual and deserves to be pointed out to others. Think you have run across something that fits? Send me a copy with the source information and let me know if you want your name attached to it as having outed some INTERNET INSANITY!
Monday, September 21, 2009
Why the .38 is Still Great! Advocating the .38 Special, Part 1
This is a two-part series by David Armstrong looking at the .38 Special round and the snub-nose revolver, indicating that they are still perfectly acceptable for self-defense, quite capable of doing what they have done for a century...effectively provide a package that will protect the carrier in hostile situations. The myth is that the revolver is no longer a good choice for self defense, but we make the case that the .38 snub is an excellent CCW choice for many.
It has become fashionable in recent years to bash the .38 as a feeble and ineffective cartridge, particularly in light of all the new advances being made with bullet design in the 9mm, 40 S&W, and .45 ACP calibers. Well, guess what? That advanced bullet design has been going on with the .38 Special also, and far from being washed up, the .38 might just be the ideal round for the typical defensive shooter, especially in a 2" snub gun. Few other cartridges have the versatility the .38 does, and few guns offer the historical defensive fighting effectiveness of the 2" snubbie.
Let's look at the round itself for a moment. In the original 158-grain lead roundnose configuration, the .38 was somewhat well-known for anemic performance. However, when we took that same bullet weight, changed the design to a semi-wadcutter profile, and beefed it up a little, the first early "wonder cartridge" was found. Referred to as the Chicago load or the FBI load, the 158-grain lead semi-wadcutter hollowpoint .38 Special +P quickly became the standard for American police. Using Marshall and Sanow's findings (I realize the controversy but they do provide some basis for comparison) we find this load with a 78% rating from a 4" barrel. Not too shabby when one considers that the same source gives the infamous .45 ACP Black Talon an 81%! Recent modern loads utilizing the newer designer bullets have yielded even higher numbers for the .38. But, let's be honest about it, friends---anything the 4" .38 can do, the .357 Magnum can do better in the same package. Where the .38 has an advantage is in its comfort factor for the shooter. A good load out of a 4" .38 gives the shooter a nice little push to the hand, rather than the abrupt crash that comes from the .357 mag. This ease of shooting takes us to where the .38 is the King of the Hill---the "pocket gun"!
The 2" .38 Spl., as characterized by the quintessential S&W "J" frame, is without a doubt the most common firearm utilized for concealed carry. Some carry it as a secondary gun, others use it as their primary piece, but it seems like almost everybody that carries has a J-frame. The simplicity of the revolver, coupled with increased reliability in some CCW situations, give the nod to the .38 snub. In airweight form it provides 5 or 6 rounds of a recognized fight-stopping cartridge in a package that weighs less than 1 pound. It can be fired from inside the pocket if need be without jamming, something rather doubtful with any of the autoloaders. It also strikes many, if not most, as being more ergonomic for concealed carry than comparable semi-autos, riding easily in a pocket or in an ankle holster as well as traditional belt carry. However, one might ask just how much effectiveness do we give up in exchange for this light, comfortable package? Will the 2" snub be enough to save us in a fight? Well, ask yourself this--"If I had a 1911 model in .45 ACP, loaded with military hardball, would it be enough?" If you answer yes, then it might surprise you to know that further comparison using Marshall and Sanow shows that almost all of the +P modern "designer bullet" .38 loads in a 2" snub equal or exceed the results achieved by .45 ACP hardball!
Is the .38 the best of the fighting cartridges? I don't think so. But fortunately we usually don't need the best in any situation. Being good enough works fine, and the .38 Special is good enough. In a 4" K or L-frame type revolver, it provides a comfortable round that almost all shooters can shoot well. From a 2" gun, it loses some comfort and becomes a bit of an exacting taskmaster, but still controllable by most shooters. It is an inexpensive round, allowing one to practice a lot. It can be found in a weight, style, and charge to suit just about everyone. The .38 has come a long way, and is still perhaps the ultimate in "average"...and that is all that most people will ever need.
It has become fashionable in recent years to bash the .38 as a feeble and ineffective cartridge, particularly in light of all the new advances being made with bullet design in the 9mm, 40 S&W, and .45 ACP calibers. Well, guess what? That advanced bullet design has been going on with the .38 Special also, and far from being washed up, the .38 might just be the ideal round for the typical defensive shooter, especially in a 2" snub gun. Few other cartridges have the versatility the .38 does, and few guns offer the historical defensive fighting effectiveness of the 2" snubbie.
Let's look at the round itself for a moment. In the original 158-grain lead roundnose configuration, the .38 was somewhat well-known for anemic performance. However, when we took that same bullet weight, changed the design to a semi-wadcutter profile, and beefed it up a little, the first early "wonder cartridge" was found. Referred to as the Chicago load or the FBI load, the 158-grain lead semi-wadcutter hollowpoint .38 Special +P quickly became the standard for American police. Using Marshall and Sanow's findings (I realize the controversy but they do provide some basis for comparison) we find this load with a 78% rating from a 4" barrel. Not too shabby when one considers that the same source gives the infamous .45 ACP Black Talon an 81%! Recent modern loads utilizing the newer designer bullets have yielded even higher numbers for the .38. But, let's be honest about it, friends---anything the 4" .38 can do, the .357 Magnum can do better in the same package. Where the .38 has an advantage is in its comfort factor for the shooter. A good load out of a 4" .38 gives the shooter a nice little push to the hand, rather than the abrupt crash that comes from the .357 mag. This ease of shooting takes us to where the .38 is the King of the Hill---the "pocket gun"!
The 2" .38 Spl., as characterized by the quintessential S&W "J" frame, is without a doubt the most common firearm utilized for concealed carry. Some carry it as a secondary gun, others use it as their primary piece, but it seems like almost everybody that carries has a J-frame. The simplicity of the revolver, coupled with increased reliability in some CCW situations, give the nod to the .38 snub. In airweight form it provides 5 or 6 rounds of a recognized fight-stopping cartridge in a package that weighs less than 1 pound. It can be fired from inside the pocket if need be without jamming, something rather doubtful with any of the autoloaders. It also strikes many, if not most, as being more ergonomic for concealed carry than comparable semi-autos, riding easily in a pocket or in an ankle holster as well as traditional belt carry. However, one might ask just how much effectiveness do we give up in exchange for this light, comfortable package? Will the 2" snub be enough to save us in a fight? Well, ask yourself this--"If I had a 1911 model in .45 ACP, loaded with military hardball, would it be enough?" If you answer yes, then it might surprise you to know that further comparison using Marshall and Sanow shows that almost all of the +P modern "designer bullet" .38 loads in a 2" snub equal or exceed the results achieved by .45 ACP hardball!
Is the .38 the best of the fighting cartridges? I don't think so. But fortunately we usually don't need the best in any situation. Being good enough works fine, and the .38 Special is good enough. In a 4" K or L-frame type revolver, it provides a comfortable round that almost all shooters can shoot well. From a 2" gun, it loses some comfort and becomes a bit of an exacting taskmaster, but still controllable by most shooters. It is an inexpensive round, allowing one to practice a lot. It can be found in a weight, style, and charge to suit just about everyone. The .38 has come a long way, and is still perhaps the ultimate in "average"...and that is all that most people will ever need.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)