testtest

Why The Most Important Part of Being Armed is Being Armed

Status
Not open for further replies.
I agree with the "have a gun that you are effective with" versus the "latest and greatest".

It's like when I sold motorcycles for a living, I'd always have customers come and say "my buddy says I should get a...". My answer was always "is your buddy paying for it? No? Then try a few bikes, and get the one YOU like best." Because more often than not, the buddy was over 6' tall, and the shopper would be a hair over 5'5"; buddy is athletic, shopper is...not. Things like that.

And 9 times out of 10, the buddy was waaaay off base.

Carry the gun YOU like. Carry the gun YOU are proficient with. Screw everyone else's opinion about it.
 
I would dissent.

The firearm is just a force multiplier; the real weapon is the mind—the will to use force to defend yourself.

Because if you don’t have that...it doesn’t matter what you’re armed with, or even how much you may be trained. If you don’t have the will to use it, you won’t.
 
Good Morning Annihilator,

While I appreciated the article, it's symbolic of why I do not read gun magazines to include NRA's publications. BTW, I'm a life member of the NRA.

Rule One of Gun Fighting: The only why to survive a gunfight is to avoid gunfights.

Rule Two of Gun Fighting: If rule one isn't an option, don't get shot.

The cute, vapid banality of, "The best gun to have in a gunfight is the one you have with you," is another reason why I do not read gun magazines. A gunfight means a bad guy wants you reduced to evidence of murder and your corpse autopsied the following morning. I have too many trout yet to catch to risk my life to anything smaller than a 9MM.

The objective of a gunfight is survival. A good guy doesn't have to kill a bad guy to survive. A wise good guy wants to escape a gunfight or end it posthaste. Hence, destroying a threat's strong side shoulder would end a gunfight with darn close to absolute certainty. I'm sure that 230 grains of .45 ACP bullet to a bad guy's knee would drop him to the ground more quickly than a sack of potatoes.

Only a fool would trade his life for a bad guy's life.
 
For anyone who has shot in competition or watched one and I don't mean on TV where you only see pros you have seen under stress your everyday competitor even miss the 3 yard target. I know it seems incomprehensible that you can draw and miss that "A" zone only 3 yards in front of you but it happens. Just like even Master shooters in the stress of a match will for a half second forget the safety not matter what the forums say about muscle memory.

So as much as you train and practice and hope that you are never in the situation where you need to shoot in self defense IMO you should always be considering how you will react. HOW YOU WILL SHOOT TO STOP THE THREAT. Mentally preparing yourself for various situations while hoping they do not occur. You want to be ready and not surprised. Then hopefully you will react in a lifesaving way for yourself and loved ones.
 
HansGruber said:
I would dissent.

The firearm is just a force multiplier; the real weapon is the mind—the will to use force to defend yourself.

Because if you don’t have that...it doesn’t matter what you’re armed with, or even how much you may be trained. If you don’t have the will to use it, you won’t.
Click to expand...

To me this is the number 1 rule and the only one that should cause concern for everyone. Each person must honestly answer this question for themselves and pray to never make the decision in life.
 
Good Mourning southtex,

The gist of the article is based upon a false premise. If a good guy is not armed, by definition, it cannot be a gunfight.

I could be armed with an F-15 Strike Eagle. If there's a possibility of my taking rounds and I have an escape path, I'm taking it. Getting shot could permanently screw up my 2021 trout fishing plans.

Gun magazine writers can conjure up cockamamie ideas.

My advice is to turn to professional journals. Gun magazines publish entertainment. Journals publish knowledge that's generally peer reviewed. Law enforcement professional journals will sometimes publish scientific firearms and ballistic knowledge.

My advice to live by Rule One: The only way to survive a gunfight is avoidance.
 
SATRP said:
Good Mourning southtex,

The gist of the article is based upon a false premise. If a good guy is not armed, by definition, it cannot be a gunfight.

I could be armed with an F-15 Strike Eagle. If there's a possibility of my taking rounds and I have an escape path, I'm taking it. Getting shot could permanently screw up my 2021 trout fishing plans.

Gun magazine writers can conjure up cockamamie ideas.

My advice is to turn to professional journals. Gun magazines publish entertainment. Journals publish knowledge that's generally peer reviewed. Law enforcement professional journals will sometimes publish scientific firearms and ballistic knowledge.

My advice to live by Rule One: The only way to survive a gunfight is avoidance.
Click to expand...

Good Afternoon...I am not dismissing what you are saying because avoidance is the goal. I was making the point that if you brandish a weapon (any weapon) and you can not complete the action there is no point in carrying the weapon (my opinion only). I was agreeing with HG's thread on the ability to complete your action. I will always look to get to safety first and foremost but if denied that opportunity I am mentally prepared to forcefully protect my family and myself. Given the opportunity I will skedaddle myself.
 
Hi southtex,

Years ago, I ready a synopsis of research that found that even pacifists will kill if their lives are in danger. Survival in an innate human instinct.

I agree with you. I'd skedaddle, too, rather than risk taking rounds.
 
SATRP said:
Good Morning Annihilator,

While I appreciated the article, it's symbolic of why I do not read gun magazines to include NRA's publications. BTW, I'm a life member of the NRA.

Rule One of Gun Fighting: The only why to survive a gunfight is to avoid gunfights.

Rule Two of Gun Fighting: If rule one isn't an option, don't get shot.

The cute, vapid banality of, "The best gun to have in a gunfight is the one you have with you," is another reason why I do not read gun magazines. A gunfight means a bad guy wants you reduced to evidence of murder and your corpse autopsied the following morning. I have too many trout yet to catch to risk my life to anything smaller than a 9MM.

The objective of a gunfight is survival. A good guy doesn't have to kill a bad guy to survive. A wise good guy wants to escape a gunfight or end it posthaste. Hence, destroying a threat's strong side shoulder would end a gunfight with darn close to absolute certainty. I'm sure that 230 grains of .45 ACP bullet to a bad guy's knee would drop him to the ground more quickly than a sack of potatoes.

Only a fool would trade his life for a bad guy's life.
Click to expand...
Well, I will kindly disagree on a few points here, one, I was taught that if your in a life and death situation and you have to shoot, it’s best NOT TO WOUND the assailant, but to END it there. That is how my CCW class taught us, which before you say I was taught wrong, my instructors were both highly trained sheriff deputies, and class was taught were I worked at, the Sheriff’s dept. And when it comes to caliber choice, shot placement will overcome smaller less powerful cartridges. I rather have any gun, caliber then to have no gun at all.
 
Annihilator said:
Well, I will kindly disagree on a few points here, one, I was taught that if your in a life and death situation and you have to shoot, it’s best NOT TO WOUND the assailant, but to END it there. That is how my CCW class taught us, which before you say I was taught wrong, my instructors were both highly trained sheriff deputies, and class was taught were I worked at, the Sheriff’s dept. And when it comes to caliber choice, shot placement will overcome smaller less powerful cartridges. I rather have any gun, caliber then to have no gun at all.
Click to expand...


I think trying to do anything other than immediately stopping the threat sounds like a good way to get killed.
 
Bassbob said:
I think trying to do anything other than immediately stopping the threat sounds like a good way to get killed.
Click to expand...

Or turn a clean shoot dirty.

What happens when your assailant gives up after a minor wound? Do you keep shooting anyway?

That doesn’t mean, of course, that you shouldn’t shoot for center mass...but things don’t always go perfectly when it gets sideways & kinetic. The psychological stop is a very real thing—your assailant gives up after a hit which isn’t a physiological stop (or even a miss).
 
HansGruber said:
Or turn a clean shoot dirty.

What happens when your assailant gives up after a minor wound? Do you keep shooting anyway?

That doesn’t mean, of course, that you shouldn’t shoot for center mass...but things don’t always go perfectly when it gets sideways & kinetic. The psychological stop is a very real thing—your assailant gives up after a hit which isn’t a physiological stop (or even a miss).
Click to expand...


That would be murder.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top