The BEST Carry Handgun and Condition.....

[Paul]

I too, carry a full sized handgun (in fact, some might argue my handgun is oversized: it's an M&P 9L) in 9mm.

I shoot the 9mm better than other calibers, because it recoils less. I also have the added benefit of having more rounds at my disposal (a recent change for me, from 1995 until 2009 I carried a 9mm single-stack).

From the time I started shooting until around 1995 I believed - very strongly - that the 9mm was an underpowered caliber. My carry guns were all .45 autos. After another instructor pointed out to me I could shoot the 9mm more accurately than the .40 and .45, I did some serious examination of my dislike for the 9mm and realized it was based mainly on macho ********.

The 9mm has been in service for over 100 years. It's in use by police agencies around the world, and nearly every military force in the world. With modern good-quality ammunition, its stopping power is on par with the .357 magnum. Until something better comes along, I'll stick with the 9mm.

I understand what you're saying Erik, but my statement was mostly directed towards the OP, who indicated that it all comes down to a training issue (as I understood it). So, if the recoil of the 40/45/whatever is the reason for carrying a 9mm... That could arguably be overcome with more training and trigger time.

[DS99]

Dusty,

What is your "go to gun" for carry?

RTK

I personally have carried a Glock 17 for the last six years both professionally and for civilian carry.

If you want to carry a full size Glock because of the potential unknown threat, why limit yourself to a 9mm?

Great Question.

Two primary reasons. First, it was the weapon I was issued for work and therefore HAD to carry for about 8 months of the year overseas for the last six years. I'm big on continuity, so that's what I used at home as well and therefore is the handgun that I own. Second, 9mm ammunition is significantly less costly than .40 or .45 so it's less expensive for me to train with.

I agree that 9mm isn't the optimal round, but it is an adequate round for self-defense when using high grain hollowpoints so at this point I don't see any justification for the expense of buying a new gun and paying a lot more money for training ammunition.

[Erik_Pakieser]

I think this statement by the FBI sums it up:

Failing a hit to the central nervous system, massive bleeding from holes in the heart or major blood vessels of the torso, causing circulatory collapse is the only other way to force incapacitation upon an adversary, and this takes time. For example, there is sufficient oxygen within the brain to support full, voluntary action for 10-15 seconds after the heart has been destroyed.

Source: Patrick, Urey W., Federal Bureau of Investigation, Firearms Training Unit, “Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness” (1989).

Getting hits is more important than the elusive "stopping power."

Just today, John Farnam posted some similar observations:

Federal, WW, Remington, Cor-Bon, Black Hill, et al are all fine companies, do constant research and evaluation, and all produce quality ammunition. However, none perform miracles!

Therefore, (1) Be fully prepared to hit the threat, in vital areas, multiple times.

(2) Adequately test your carry ammunition, in your carry guns. Assure yourself that it feeds and functions normally.

(3) Regardless of what ammunition you're using, or are being compelled by circumstance to use, hit with consistent, surgical precision!

Finally, (4) have reasonable expectations. The ammunition we carry in ourpistols today represents a quantum leap forward from what we used as little as thirty years ago. But, for all our forward progress, it is still sorely limited. Look, with a jaundiced eye, at all the promotional hype.

It's still just a pistol! /John

[farmerj]

who said the most effective hit is to go for a Center chest or head shot.

I personally teach a pelvic shot before a head shot.

[bensdad]

who said the most effective hit is to go for a Center chest or head shot.

I personally teach a pelvic shot before a head shot.

This was debated at length on another forum.
http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t ... elvic+shot
That's just one of several threads on the subject (from other boards as well). Consensus among the BTDT crowd seems to be that pelvis is a third target. COM is first, head second, then go south.

[JoeH]

I prefer a single-action Glock P220 in 40 S&W in condition 4. I aim for the feet and work up.

[1911fan]

A friend who was involved in teaching at risk .gov women employee's basic weapons handling before overseas postings called the current method the zipper method. If you have trouble with recoil, the starting aiming point was the zipper, and to just fire till the sights passed the top of the head. It seemed that they had found that those who had little training had little trouble putting a few hits on the body using this program. it was Draw, as soon as the weapon crossed the crotch, start firing and keep firing, letting recoil and natural inclinations to bring the gun up to eye lever result in hits on the target. He described it as a very natural and intuitive way to teach and shoot and get results.

[whiteox]

I'm not going to war, I'm going to the store. I think my snubbie will fit the bill.

[Pat Cannon]

I'm not going to war, I'm going to the store. I think my snubbie will fit the bill.

You just don't know you're going to war.

I too carry 5 shot snubbie. The reload in my pocket is only in case the cops take a long time to get there. Or on the off chance they let me keep my gun after we're done at the scene.

[bensdad]

Or on the off chance they let me keep my gun after we're done at the scene.

[farmerj]

Unless you have a Glock 40 in .45 ACP, you ain't got nothing worth shooting. Single stack with a 20 round capacity.

[EJSG19]

Unless you have a Glock 40 in .45 ACP, you ain't got nothing worth shooting. Single stack with a 20 round capacity.

I get the joking here, but I'm going to ignore it for now...

But I'd say 3/4 of the people I see with extended magazines (mag extends beyond the grip) either A. can't shoot straight, or B. have gun malfunctions.

The hilarious irony of it all is that they have these big huge magazines and are ready to do battle, but either miss completely, or jam up after one or two rounds.

Priority #1 should be reliability
Priority #2 is having the ability to shoot.
Priority... well... somewhere down the list, should be ammo capacity. (yes, yes, of course top priority is having a gun. Not directed at you farmerj, just saying so somebody doesn't have to chime in with that little correction.)

[DS99]

who said the most effective hit is to go for a Center chest or head shot.

I personally teach a pelvic shot before a head shot.

I'm interested to see any data you have on effectiveness of pelvic shots. The NRA LE program still teaches them for failure to stop and I used to teach them myself. To my knowledge most other training programs have stopped teaching them. I stopped teaching them because I wasn't able to find any data showing that they actually worked as advertised. If there's some case studies or information, I'd really like to see it because it's an easier target to hit than the head.

Dusty

http://www.sealedmindset.com

[DS99]

A friend who was involved in teaching at risk .gov women employee's basic weapons handling before overseas postings called the current method the zipper method. If you have trouble with recoil, the starting aiming point was the zipper, and to just fire till the sights passed the top of the head. It seemed that they had found that those who had little training had little trouble putting a few hits on the body using this program. it was Draw, as soon as the weapon crossed the crotch, start firing and keep firing, letting recoil and natural inclinations to bring the gun up to eye lever result in hits on the target. He described it as a very natural and intuitive way to teach and shoot and get results.

I believe that the "zipper" terminology was actually part of Rex Applegate's program back in the OSS days...but I could be wrong about that.

There is a very valid point here, which is that shooting rounds in the direction of the threat give you a lot better chance of winning the fight than doing nothing does.

That being said, I'll differ with the idea that this sort of spray and pray is a good or useful primary training method in practice. It might get a student to put a few rounds on paper on a range, thus allowing justification of "checking a block" to fill billets and get people out the door on deployments, but that does not translate to operational effectiveness. I can say from personal experience of spending six years protecting these folks in both theatres that most of the people (men and women) in this category refuse to carry a weapon when they get overseas, or if they have to because of an SOP they put it (unloaded) inside a zippered pouch and throw it into the bottom of a backpack. In both cases, it's largely because they are more terrified of the gun than they are of being killed by bad guys and they feel that they can't use it anyway, so why bother.

Dusty

http://www.sealedmindset.com

[farmerj]

what bobs and weaves? Heads.

What do things pivot around? Pelvis.

What should you aim for? COM.

So while you are pumping away TRYING for a head shot, it's likely the larger, less likely to move target of the pelvis will be sustaining more hits.

Where are you likely to have a greater chance of a hit here?


I want the fight taken out of the bad guy. COM and the pelvic girdle will do that. Looking at the relatively low skill level that most individuals will have, those targets give the highest probability due to target size and likely hood of moving around.

Will a CNS hit shut the BG down? Yop. Is it harder to hit with a higher level of skill required? By all means.

What if the BG is wearing body armor? COM of mass is protected. Now what do you do?

ANY Hits count. Misses are just noise in the air.

Put another way...
If I miss your head but hit your pelvis, which is likely to send you seeking medical treatment?

"Zippering" the BG is one alternative.