Any 1911 fans on the board? [Archive] - Hummer Forums by Elcova

View Full Version : Any 1911 fans on the board?

ssgharkness020147

10-14-2005, 01:30 AM

Well I rolled over the magic 21 a few months back, and the time is fast approaching to pick up a handgun. I have already settled on a 1911 chambered in 45 like they should be. But, I'm pretty torn on brands, I have looked at the Springfields, they make some nice looking guns, but I keep hearing love hate stories about them. I've glanced at the STI's, but have not found that much info on them. I'm not the biggest Kimber fan, they make some nice guns, but I'm going to pass on Kimber this go around. And finally there is the Wilson Combat. That's what I'm leaning twoards, does anyone on the board have a Wilson, or experience with them? I'm almost positive that the Wilson will prevail, but I'm open to other suggestions. Off the bat I'll be taking the gun down to the range alot, I'm thinking about getting into IPSC. I would not mind having something I could have in the truck sometimes as well, but not a specific defense gun. Are there any good 1911 boards out there? Any guidence would be appreciated.

ssgharkness020147

10-14-2005, 01:30 AM

Beastmaster

10-14-2005, 02:43 AM

If money was no object, here's my choices in order (having owned or currently own all of these brands at one time or another):

-Wilson Combat CQB (with or without the light rail...I prefer no light rail. It's finish is great! Smoothest trigger pull too.) This one is so nice I don't like to beat it up much. I prefer cranking on my Gunsite Combat Commander (see below).

-Kimber Tactical II (I know you said no Kimber, but damn! Those pistols are sweet.)

-Kimber Custom Tactical TLE II Stainless (LAPD SWAT's choice of pistol).

-Colt Gunsite Model 70 (I have a Stainless Combat Commander version of this. It's one of three standard carry pistols I tend to use.)

Best web site - m1911.org.

As for IPSC, think more IDPA. I used to be really into IPSC, and got ticked off at the fact that people with specialized raceguns and near impossible scenarios would be the norm.

IDPA is more suited to real life situations using near stock pistols and revolvers.

Oh, and if you do get into IPSC or IDPA....get a reloader. Either a Dillon Precision 550 or Square Deal B. You're better off spending money on the 550.

Oh...my other two primary carry pistols? Glock 30 and Glock 21. Can you tell that I like .45acp? http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I wish my wife would standardize on it as well...but no, she had to be different. She went Glock 23.

-Steve

Toadies

10-14-2005, 04:34 PM

Glock is a goddamn turd gun..****in tuperware...I would never own a Glock http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Sig > *

BlueTJCO

10-14-2005, 06:59 PM

SIG SAUER>>>>>>>> http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Mr. I - Man

10-14-2005, 07:07 PM

H&k

Toadies

10-14-2005, 08:52 PM

HK, Kahr, Glock is all tupperware plastic crap..

Here let me show you a real gun.. not wannbe starwars crap..

http://remtek.com/arms/sig/model/220/220.gif

Mr. I - Man

10-14-2005, 10:21 PM

Heavy, outdated. Works well as a paper weight or if you run out of rounds you can throw it at your enemy.

Toadies

10-14-2005, 11:00 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mr. I - Man:
Heavy, outdated. Works well as a paper weight or if you run out of rounds you can throw it at your enemy. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah I would much rather have to worry about a potential Kaboom in a tupperware gun than exceptional service from an outdated Sig or Kimber or Wilson..

http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Mr. I - Man

10-14-2005, 11:21 PM

To each his own, I have never have a problem with this fine piece of German engineering. Had hot loads pop off in the chamber, bad reload ( split casing) & still cycled through all 15 rounds.

Bondage

10-14-2005, 11:22 PM

You gotta understand this - guns are like off road machines - the Jeepers hate the Hummers, the Glockenspeils hate the 1911ers, etc., etc., etc. It's all bullshiite. Stick with the best brands, (Glock, HK, Kimber, Springfield, Beretta, Sig, etc) and SHOOT 'em all. A lot. Then stick with the one that feels most comfortable to you and that you shoot the best. Be sparing with the modifications (again, like an off road machine) and it will be a reliable machine. I have an original COLT Combat Government in .45acp that has had the piss shot out of it. Untold thousands of rounds (yeah, get a Dillon reloading press) and it is as reliable and accurate and awesome as it was on day one. If pressed for a particular weapon as a recommendation, I'd have to side with the Wilson CQB as previously mentioned. Then do NO mods and just shoot it, and shoot it, and shoot it, and shoot it........

http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
Sean

Toadies

10-15-2005, 01:34 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mr. I - Man:
To each his own, I have never have a problem with this fine piece of German engineering. Had hot loads pop off in the chamber, bad reload ( split casing) & still cycled through all 15 rounds. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

ANYONE using reloads in a tupperware gun is a dumbass asking to have his hand blown off. If you want to reload stick to a big boy gun like the Sig, Kimber, Wilsons, Springfield Armory, etc.....

Glockies are best with factory ammo.. Even Gaston says so...

GeorgeSSSS

10-15-2005, 01:36 AM

Hmmm. I never liked Glocks until my friend's son who is a SEAL officer chose one in 45 ACP for his service weapon. I still don't like them, but he changed my thinking about how capable a weapon it is.

I shot a friend's Colt 45 Gold Cup series 70(?) about 15 years ago. The combination of slow burning powder and smooth trigger action allowed me to put seven shots on the forehead of a lifesize silouette target at 25 yards. I could never do that now with my old-guy eyes. But that was my experience with a model 1911.

As far as my favorite sidearm? S&W Model 29, 44 mag. Lots O' noise, lots O' kick, and lots O' fun. Damn accurate too.

Best regards,

George SSSS

Toadies

10-15-2005, 01:45 AM

http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/glock-kb-faq.html

Mr. I - Man

10-15-2005, 03:48 PM

quote: Glockies are best with factory ammo.. Even Gaston says so...

Hey hillbilly Texan don't you know how to read. I don't have a F*&king Glock I have a H&k USP 40SW. I guess the literacy rate is not to good down there.

Toadies

10-15-2005, 09:23 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mr. I - Man:
quote: Glockies are best with factory ammo.. Even Gaston says so...

Hey hillbilly Texan don't you know how to read. I don't have a F*&king Glock I have a H&k USP 40SW. I guess the literacy rate is not to good down there. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Here's your pile of crap blowing up..

http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/hk-kb.html

ree

10-15-2005, 10:46 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ssgharkness020147
...Are there any good 1911 boards out there? Any guidence would be appreciated. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Carey,
I can't offer any advice on various 1911s. I've only shot a few brands and don't actually own any, but here's another board:

http://www.thefiringline.com (http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/)

it's not 1911 specific, but there's a lot of knowledgable people there.

Just ignore Toadies. He's just looking for attention. There are irrational guy's like this everywhere. Any gun'll go kaboom for a number of reasons. I primarily shoot a polymer SigPro chambered in 357sig. So it's a pretty hot round (40,000psi and up) and I've never had fail to feed or eject problems, let alone a kaboom (not that it couldn't). Funny why a polymer frame would be the cause of a kaboom in the chamber. It's not like the barrel, slide, or receiver is made of plastic. I suppose Toaddie will now poo poo my choice of ammo because it's smaller than .45 inches in diameter or has a bullet weight under 200grains.

Toadies

10-16-2005, 01:11 PM

real guns are made of metal and metal alloys NOT plastic and come in calibres of .40 or better.

The best round bar none is a .45 230 grain hollowpoint in +P

Bondage

10-16-2005, 01:22 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Toadies:
real guns are made of metal and metal alloys NOT plastic and come in calibres of .40 or better.

The best round bar none is a .45 230 grain hollowpoint in +P </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have to respectfully disagree. The best gun - and the best round - is the one you have with you when you need it.
http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
Sean

Klaus

10-16-2005, 02:17 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Toadies:
The best round bar none is a .45 230 grain hollowpoint in +P </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You might want to do more research on the .357 Magnum with 125 grain hollowpoint ammo before you make a blanket statement like this.

Mr. I - Man

10-16-2005, 03:12 PM

.45 230 grain. You better be a good defilade shot for anything over 25 yards, because thats going to have a lot of bullet drop. So your well placed chest shot is going to be a knee cap at range. I take it you never had to use a weapon in a real world situation. And real world does not mean shooting at stray dogs in your trailer park.

Looks like we have weapons troll now boys!

Season is open fire at will!!

Bondage

10-16-2005, 03:59 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mr. I - Man:
.45 230 grain. You better be a good defilade shot for anything over 25 yards, because thats going to have a lot of bullet drop. So your well placed chest shot is going to be a knee cap at range. I take it you never had to use a weapon in a real world situation. And real world does not mean shooting at stray dogs in your trailer park.

Looks like we have weapons troll now boys!

Season is open fire at will!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

While I agree on the bullet drop, I'd have to say though that as far as a self-defense round goes, it's a moot point! http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif In any courtroom in the U.S. today, 25 yards sounds more like murder than self-defense! I love the .45acp +p 230 grain round - especially as offered in the Hydra-Shock or Golden Sabre rounds. I will admit, however, that just about any manufacturer's .357mag in a 125gr JHP is about the ultimate manstopper. There is some issue with overpenetration which is why many police forces went away from it, but if that is not an issue, and one can handle the recoil, it is about the ultimate in real-life one-shot stops on thin-skinned two legged targets.
http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Now, that said, I'd far rather have a .22 in my boot when I need it than a .45 or .357, or .40, or anything else back at home in the nightstand!

Anyone who is a rabid devotee of a particular caliber, firearm (or anything else for that matter) to the exclusion of all else, is not the brightest bulb on the tree. I used to have this idiot tell me all the time that one of my rifles chambered in .223 was worthless, and that ONLY his .308 was effective. I made him an offer - to stand and face each other at 100 yards, let me fire first with my useless 5.56 and then I'd let him fire at me with his 7.62. It was odd. He never took me up on it.
http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
Sean

Toadies

10-16-2005, 04:25 PM

It has been well established by Ayoob, Marshall and others that most tactical engagements occur at 21 feet or less.

I suppose you glockies are gonna start the hi-cap arguement next...

Toadies

10-16-2005, 04:32 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bondage:

In any courtroom in the U.S. today, 25 yards sounds more like murder than self-defense! I love the .45acp +p 230 grain round - especially as offered in the Hydra-Shock or Golden Sabre rounds. I will admit, however, that just about any manufacturer's .357mag in a 125gr JHP is about the ultimate manstopper. Sean </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree on your murder charge over 25 feet. Any DA will take that and your love for weapons and take you to a Grand Jury any day of the week.

The .357 is good at penetrating auto glass but thats it's only advantage.

Klaus

10-16-2005, 07:43 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Toadies:
I suppose you glockies are gonna start the hi-cap arguement next... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's why I like the .357 Magnum. If you need more than 5 or 6 shots, you need more than a handgun anyway.

PARAGON

10-17-2005, 02:17 PM

A tactical engagement doesn't follow any rules written by a damn magazine or a book. The ridiculous back and forth about calibers and the DA and polymer handguns is doling out the ignorance and nothing else.

A 1911 .45 is fine as a backup weapon to tactical officer who is carrying an entry weapon but as an everyday personal protection choice.... it's just a bad choice. 25 feet is easy to encounter for the civilian in any situation. You can't tell the person shooting at you to stop and wait until he is only 25 feet away. You corner someone in your home and they are threatening and it is easy to be 30 feet or more down a hall. To pigeon hole things will get you killed. And yes, having as many rounds available is a plus, because you never know what situation will arise.

If you want to be stupid with your own life, fine. Otherwise, move on and quit giving advice here on crap you know nothing about on something as important as this.

Mr. I - Man

10-17-2005, 02:57 PM

Thanks Paragon! Well put.

Bondage

10-17-2005, 03:17 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PARAGON:
A tactical engagement doesn't follow any rules written by a damn magazine or a book. The ridiculous back and forth about calibers and the DA and polymer handguns is doling out the ignorance and nothing else.

A 1911 .45 is fine as a backup weapon to tactical officer who is carrying an entry weapon but as an everyday personal protection choice.... it's just a bad choice. 25 feet is easy to encounter for the civilian in any situation. You can't tell the person shooting at you to stop and wait until he is only 25 feet away. You corner someone in your home and they are threatening and it is easy to be 30 feet or more down a hall. To pigeon hole things will get you killed. And yes, having as many rounds available is a plus, because you never know what situation will arise.

If you want to be stupid with your own life, fine. Otherwise, move on and quit giving advice here on crap you know nothing about on something as important as this. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was with you through most of the first paragraph, but...ummmm...before critisizing, read more carefully. No one was discussing 25 FEET - it was 25 YARDS (that's 75 feet for those of you who are "yardstick challenged"). http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
You are quite obviously an incredible wheeler! Slapping newbies around with regard to wheeling an H2 is your forte. You keep us all very entertained and informed! But coming late to this thread and misreading what was being discussed while dissing the venerable and proven 1911 .45 shows...well...um...maybe not ignorance, but perhaps you are just tired from your recent awesome trip. Maybe you could explain why the 1911 .45 as an everyday personal protection weapon is a bad choice? I'd be interested in your reasoning much more than your vitriol.
http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
Sean

Mr. I - Man

10-17-2005, 03:24 PM

Actually Paragon and I are former Jarheads. I was in for about 8.5 years with extensive M.O.U.T. and C.Q.B. Training also a Water Survival Instructor and 300 PFT consistantly. So I know just a little.

Bondage

10-17-2005, 03:40 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mr. I - Man:
Actually Paragon and I are former Jarheads. I was in for about 8.5 years with extensive M.O.U.T. and C.Q.B. Training also a Water Survival Instructor and 300 PFT consistantly. So I know just a little. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's great service. I'm sure you understand how little Marine training and warfare experience and weaponry translate to civilian situations though. And SURELY you know the high regard held for the 1911 by the Marines who have actually been in the **** with it. I have exceptional regard for the Glock, the Sig, even the Beretta. But one must equally be worried about a man carrying a .45 1911 if he knows how to use it. I agree with most of what Paragon said - the petty arguments over caliber and capacity are silly. It is time better spent getting familiar with the weapon you choose - regardless of what that is!

Somehow I doubt that you, faced with a man carrying a 1911 are going to laugh at him and tell him that's a "bad choice" to shoot you with! The arguments get silly after a while, huh?
http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
Sean

Mr. I - Man

10-17-2005, 03:52 PM

The Marines who used the 1911 as a service piece were way before my time. I served from 1993 - 2002. I never said it was a bad pistol.I never stated anything but the obvious, The 1911 is a great weapon for its day. It is a little heavy and the bullet drop and capacity in my opinion does not make up for little bit more in stopping power over the 40 S.W. It just does not fit my needs. And thats my personal choice.

Bondage

10-17-2005, 05:08 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mr. I - Man:
The Marines who used the 1911 as a service piece were way before my time. I served from 1993 - 2002. I never said it was a bad pistol.I never stated anything but the obvious, The 1911 is a great weapon for its day. It is a little heavy and the bullet drop and capacity in my opinion does not make up for little bit more in stopping power over the 40 S.W. It just does not fit my needs. And thats my personal choice. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's cool. And the HK line - just about every damn weapon in it - is awesome. As for heavy, well, I guess it's heavier than the HK, but a big bad Marine would have no problem hefting it. http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif (Sorry, years of Army training forces me to make fun of Marines at any and every opportunity). http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif I know you personally did not berate the pistol - that was Paragon, and his vehemence against this fine weapon suprised me. I'd love to hear his reasoning.

Hey, anyway, "Semper Fi" my friend ....now "Follow Me"
http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
Sean

Mr. I - Man

10-17-2005, 05:14 PM

Quote : " Follow Me"????

Were you a Ranger??

Just wondering because when I was a group of us Marines and Navy got to participate in a Ranger school package It was to help with better unit coheasion during J.T.F. missions.

Anyways the instructors were always saying that.

Bondage

10-17-2005, 05:21 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mr. I - Man:
Quote : " Follow Me"????

Were you a Ranger??

Just wondering because when I was a group of us Marines and Navy got to participate in a Ranger school package It was to help with better unit coheasion during J.T.F. missions.

Anyways the instructors were always saying that. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
And meaning it. Rangers go first, you girls follow.
http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif
Sean

Mr. I - Man

10-17-2005, 05:28 PM

Dick http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Bondage

10-17-2005, 06:05 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mr. I - Man:
Dick http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thank you.
http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
Sean

Toadies

10-17-2005, 08:44 PM

Toadies

10-17-2005, 08:46 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PARAGON:

If you want to be stupid with your own life, fine. Otherwise, move on and quit giving advice here on crap you know nothing about on something as important as this. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

RAAARRR!!!!1 I am a goddamn navy bellhop and I know all...

RAAARRRRR!!!!1 http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Bondage

10-17-2005, 10:30 PM

Toadies

10-17-2005, 10:34 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bondage:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Toadies:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PARAGON:

If you want to be stupid with your own life, fine. Otherwise, move on and quit giving advice here on crap you know nothing about on something as important as this. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

RAAARRR!!!!1 I am a goddamn navy bellhop and I know all...

RAAARRRRR!!!!1 http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're an idiot. Kinda funny, but an idiot.
Sssssssssssshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
You're making a fool of yourself.
http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
Sean </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am deaf and I will thank you NOT to make fun of the handicap. http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

DRTYFN

10-17-2005, 10:44 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Toadies:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bondage:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Toadies:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PARAGON:

If you want to be stupid with your own life, fine. Otherwise, move on and quit giving advice here on crap you know nothing about on something as important as this. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

RAAARRR!!!!1 I am a goddamn navy bellhop and I know all...

RAAARRRRR!!!!1 http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're an idiot. Kinda funny, but an idiot.
Sssssssssssshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
You're making a fool of yourself.
http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
Sean </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am deaf and I will thank you NOT to make fun of the handicap. http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_mad.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This Toadies = AE for some dickheadhttp://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

PARAGON

10-17-2005, 11:03 PM

I didn't "knock" the 1911 per se. It's just not a good carry weapon for most applications. It is indeed heavy, is not very concealable, is more cumbersome on the draw, etc. It is about the application.

Advice is being discussed here and one has to take into account that you are talking an averaging of individuals and situations and what would fit most. A 1911 style just simply is not a friendly platform for a carry. I have an original Colt from WWII with the heavy, slopply trigger. But, I personally do not think the platform is the right one for the average person on a PD level.

Bondage, before you try to mouth off in any way, I would suggest you get your ducks in a row. Toadies made some comment about most engagements being made within 21 feet, hence my reference to feet. A handgun is for personal defense, period. You can't go around with an AR15 and a shotgun slung on your shoulders for personal protection. Optimum personal protection is to keep the target as far away as you are accurate and effective with your weapon. Since you can keep a target at much distance with a rifle it is the first choice of arms, second would be the shotgun, then the handgun, knife and lastly hand-to-hand. Since the first option most can have available to them at all times is the handgun, it is best to choose the one handgun that is the most applicable to the most possible situations. The fact that one can accurately engage a target further away and with more ammunition available without reload puts them at an advantage over the target in most situations.

At 5-10 feet the energy of the rounds of most large caliber handguns are sufficient to stop the target, so that is really a moot point as long as you have a handgun that is easily controlled in such an tense situation. You are no longer shooting at a paper target and taking out as many variables that would result in a miss or failed engagement has to be employed. This is why the Glock was developed. It is the easiest pistol to use and has a smooth profile.

H3OwnerDiz

10-17-2005, 11:57 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DRTYFN:
This Toadies = AE for some dickheadhttp://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Walc is in the building. Just a guess...

H3OwnerDiz

10-18-2005, 12:08 AM

Here is my contribution to this thread... HK USP .45 COMPACT is what my hubby carries daily and he can't say enough about how great it is. Here's a link to the torture test (http://www.streetpro.com/usp/torture.html), it can withstand an awful lot!

Bondage

10-18-2005, 12:14 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PARAGON:
I didn't "knock" the 1911 per se. It's just not a good carry weapon for most applications. It is indeed heavy, is not very concealable, is more cumbersome on the draw, etc. It is about the application.

Advice is being discussed here and one has to take into account that you are talking an averaging of individuals and situations and what would fit most. A 1911 style just simply is not a friendly platform for a carry. I have an original Colt from WWII with the heavy, slopply trigger. But, I personally do not think the platform is the right one for the average person on a PD level.

Bondage, before you try to mouth off in any way, I would suggest you get your ducks in a row. Toadies made some comment about most engagements being made within 21 feet, hence my reference to feet. A handgun is for personal defense, period. You can't go around with an AR15 and a shotgun slung on your shoulders for personal protection. Optimum personal protection is to keep the target as far away as you are accurate and effective with your weapon. Since you can keep a target at much distance with a rifle it is the first choice of arms, second would be the shotgun, then the handgun, knife and lastly hand-to-hand. Since the first option most can have available to them at all times is the handgun, it is best to choose the one handgun that is the most applicable to the most possible situations. The fact that one can accurately engage a target further away and with more ammunition available without reload puts them at an advantage over the target in most situations.

At 5-10 feet the energy of the rounds of most large caliber handguns are sufficient to stop the target, so that is really a moot point as long as you have a handgun that is easily controlled in such an tense situation. You are no longer shooting at a paper target and taking out as many variables that would result in a miss or failed engagement has to be employed. This is why the Glock was developed. It is the easiest pistol to use and has a smooth profile. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah, I'd pretty much agree. But I wasn't "trying to mouth off"...I WAS mouthing off. http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif My ducks WERE in a row, but I popped 'em all.

It is a fact that in the VAST majority of "personal defense" situations, you have no choice on distance - it is almost exclusively "up close and personal." If I wanted to reach out and touch someone, I'd opt for an M14 or Rem 700BDL over the Mattel toy anyway. (See...I know how to piss off a Jarhead) http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif I was just trying to point out that your experience (and mine) is combat oriented and not really applicable to civilian self-defense - precisely because we cannot go properly armed with a rifle or shotgun! http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif You are most likely quite efficient with your Glock. But, even with these older eyes, you'd be happy for me to have your back in any realistic self-defense scenario with my 1911. Hell, together, we'd probably even hit something. As for capacity, there is no denying a statitical edge in sheer numbers. HOWEVER...for fun sometime, compare rounds expended to casualties in WWII vs. Vietnam. It is astounding. Hundreds to one vs. MILLIONS to one! No kidding! BTW - we won the former and lost the latter..... http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif I would go so far as to say that choice of weapon is the LEAST important factor in effective self-defense. Attitude, experience, and training make the real difference, huh?

Oh, and BTW, Toadies is a buffoon. http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif You are right about giving advice in a forum that includes the likes of him. You and I sitting down together would probably agree far more than not.

BTW, I like the Glock. Well, I respect it. It just doesn't fit me well and the balance is odd to me - but then the 1911 is such an extension of my hand and arm that ANYTHING else feels odd. Yeah, I've shot it that much.

Welcome back, Paragon.

http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
Sean

Toadies

10-18-2005, 12:18 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DRTYFN:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Toadies:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bondage:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Toadies:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PARAGON:

If you want to be stupid with your own life, fine. Otherwise, move on and quit giving advice here on crap you know nothing about on something as important as this. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

RAAARRR!!!!1 I am a goddamn navy bellhop and I know all...

RAAARRRRR!!!!1 http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're an idiot. Kinda funny, but an idiot.
Sssssssssssshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
You're making a fool of yourself.
http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
Sean </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am deaf and I will thank you NOT to make fun of the handicap. http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_mad.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This Toadies = AE for some dickheadhttp://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Look at the big brain on Brad.. does mommie let you use the big boy chair at home???

Toadies

10-18-2005, 12:23 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PARAGON:
I personally do not think the platform is the right one for the average person on a PD level.

Toadies made some comment about most engagements being made within 21 feet, hence my reference to feet. A handgun is for personal defense, period.

This is why the Glock was developed. It is the easiest pistol to use and has a smooth profile. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Most people can't shoot so sure give em a 9mm pussy gun.

Most tactical engagements are 21 feet or less and LE experience comes a lot closer to real life than your pretend Marine experience. Ayoob has credentials, you have an innerweb rep.

Tupperware guns are for idiot operators that do not want to learn how to use a handgun so DAO is the best for those idiots..

ree

10-18-2005, 12:34 AM

Toadies, what an idiot, you're all over the map on everything except your idiocy:
- Glocks only come in 9mm now, eh?
- Tupperware == DAO, huh?

I think many an experienced/non-idiot operator have explicitly chosen DA/SA and DAO guns specifically because they can take extra steps out of the equation during an up close situation when you're going to be impaired by an adrenaline spike. I primarily shoot a DA/SA for this reason...not because I'm too lazy to learn how to handle my weapon (btw it's tupperware too, just not a Glock, it's a Sig).

Harley

10-18-2005, 12:34 AM

...careful there, toad... Most "Tactical" engagements involve the use of M4 rifles or MP5, in my experience... I wouldn't walk into anything w/ just a handgun intentionally. I carry glocks at work and Kimber Ultra CDP off duty.

DRTYFN

10-18-2005, 12:36 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Toadies:
Look at the big brain on Brad.. does mommie let you use the big boy chair at home??? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is definitely NOT the real Toadies.

PARAGON

10-18-2005, 12:59 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Toadies:
Most people can't shoot so sure give em a 9mm pussy gun. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>We're on the same page, Bond.

Toadshiit, the US Armed Forces converted use from the .45 cal to the 9mm because of the range issue. As I understand things now, all Berettas are being worked out of service and replaced with SIG 229R DAK .40 cals because of the compromise of down-range energy and accuracy.

Storydud, you can't win an argument if the facts were written for you. Certainly you can't talk about guns or wheeling. Give it a rest, storyhut.

Beastmaster

10-18-2005, 01:19 AM

Hmm..the Glock Kaboom! FAQ. Wow.

With the octagonal rifled barrel (on at least the .45's), along with the feed ramp setups on a stock Glock barrel, you should always use SAAMI spec factory ammo with new brass.

With that being said, my Glock 30, my Glock 21, and my wife's Glock 23 all have had many rounds of ammo through it (my 21's had nearly 10k rounds, my 30 about 3000, and my wife's 23 about 2500), with zero issues.

From a liability issue, my recommendation is to always keep ammo in it that a local law enforcement agency uses. All of my .45's use 185gr +P Winchester (which is what the County and State uses in their .45's), and the wife's uses the same Speer Gold Dot that the local police department uses in their Glock 22's and 23's.

As for more ammo the better - there is a reason why Massad Ayoob loves the Beretta 92F with the 20 round extended magazine filled with 115gr +P+....you never know when you need that many rounds, and in an extensive firefight, reloading may not be an option. That's why my wife's Glock 23 (when it's in her side of the nightstand safe) has the Glock 22 magazine in it.

Back to the question at hand, which is M1911 related - Once you pick a pistol, shoot with it over and over and over again. Get snap caps and practice holster draws, trigger pulls, sighting, hand placements. Do clearance drills over, and over and over again. Get it to where it's going to fit in your hand the same way every time, all the time.

I will say one thing. I've carried an M1911 for years. Trained with it, taught others how to use it, and it's unique compared to other pistols. You must be willing to carry in Condition 1 at all times.

Also be aware that there is some minor additional training and mind sets needed to carry in Condtion 1.

A great case in point is Low Ready/High Ready drills (and I'm talking competition shooting, not self defense). Low Ready, thumb safety on, high ready, thumb safety off. Drill that into your head over, and over, and over, combine that with practice draws, over, and over, and over.....

You don't have to worry about that with a Glock....your trigger finger along the frame is your safety mechanism. http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

The other thing would be this....and it's about personal preferences. You might not like the Wilson CQB (although I can't see why not) or any of the other ones. Despite the fact that I love my Wilson, I end up carrying my Gunsite modded stainless Combat Commander much more often (and shoot with it more as well) than I do the Wilson. Why? I can't say. I just do.

And I paid (with mods) far less for the Combat Commander than I did the Wilson, even though both have similar mods and tweaks...some by me, some by professional gunsmiths.

So, be careful about spending a ton on a pistol that you actually might not like.

Toadies

10-18-2005, 02:19 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PARAGON:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Toadies:
Most people can't shoot so sure give em a 9mm pussy gun. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>We're on the same page, Bond.

Toadshiit, the US Armed Forces converted use from the .45 cal to the 9mm because of the range issue. As I understand things now, all Berettas are being worked out of service and replaced with SIG 229R DAK .40 cals because of the compromise of down-range energy and accuracy.

Storydud, you can't win an argument if the facts were written for you. Certainly you can't talk about guns or wheeling. Give it a rest, storyhut. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wrong again wannabe warrior. We "converted" to 9mm more for NATO compliance which is not really an issue anymore since we ARE NATO.

And yes we are going back to .40 or in some cases .357sig to get back to the performance of the venerable .45ACP. Deny it, pretend it's not the truth, I don't care. I will carry it and blow your dumbass away with one round to your three.

Get your facts straight pretend Marine.

Toadies

10-18-2005, 02:21 AM

Petey

10-18-2005, 02:34 AM

most marines being of the limp wristed variety need a weapon with a light kick.. not too stunning and a flat trajectory to stay on target http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Efrain

10-18-2005, 04:18 AM

Okay, so how many trolls are running loose in here? I'm starting to lose count http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

ssgharkness020147

10-18-2005, 04:22 AM

I appreciate all the advise guys. I found a gun shop close by that is a Wilson dealer, I plan to go down there this week and demo a gun or two. So far (despite the STEEP price tag) I really like the Wilson Tactical Elite. All and all that would fit me and what I would like to go in to. I checked out that IDPA league Steve, I appeciate the tip, it looks like a blast and is exactly what I would really like to get in to. Thankfully there is also a gun club 5 minutes away that has IDPA too.

How many of you guys carry a gun in your truck? Here in WI the way the laws sit I can have a gun in the truck if its in a case and unloaded (a loaded clip can be right next to the gun though). With all my trips down to Milwaukee and the bad experiences down there I have come to the conclusion that it would be in my best intrests to have protection of some kind for my trips down there. I dont feel that pepper spray would be effective in most situations, the same goes for a stun gun. A tazer could help sometimes, but not always. Though I wonder with the way the laws sit here if my having some protection would even be worth it, and I do not and will not do anything that it not legally allowed. What do you guys think, is it worth having a gun in the truck if it has to be in a case and cannot be loaded while stored?

Petey

10-18-2005, 10:19 AM

Actually Toadies is right all trolling aside. The 9mm Baretta has selected more for us to be in compliance with NATO for interchangability than the fact that it was a superior round.

Read and be informed.

http://www.sightm1911.com/M1911vsM9.htm

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> In 1985, the United States Armed Forces replaced the M1911 with the Beretta 92 F to the everlasting consternation of 1911 devotees everywhere. There were several reasons for the switch. The U.S. was the only NATO country not using a 9mm as the standard issue sidearm and there was a desire to issue a pistol chambered for the ubiquitous 9mm for logistical reasons. The Beretta will hold 15 rounds in its magazine as compared with 7 rounds of the military issue 1911 magazine and is lighter and easier to field strip than the 1911. The double action/single action Beretta was perceived as being a safer pistol to carry in a state of readiness than the "cocked and locked" 1911. In some quarters, the .45 ACP was viewed as too powerful and difficult to control for those having only nominal training with the weapon.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Toadies

10-18-2005, 01:06 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Beastmaster:
Hmm..the Glock Kaboom! FAQ. Wow.

. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Indeed. Nothing like having your pistol blow up in time of need.

Most LE are forced by departments to carry those ****ty pieces because Mr.Glock sucks major LE cawk. They practically give them to departments compared to Kimbers, HKs, Sigs, etc.

I wouldn't use one for a doorstop.

Bondage

10-18-2005, 03:49 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ssgharkness020147:
I appreciate all the advise guys. I found a gun shop close by that is a Wilson dealer, I plan to go down there this week and demo a gun or two. So far (despite the STEEP price tag) I really like the Wilson Tactical Elite. All and all that would fit me and what I would like to go in to. I checked out that IDPA league Steve, I appeciate the tip, it looks like a blast and is exactly what I would really like to get in to. Thankfully there is also a gun club 5 minutes away that has IDPA too.

How many of you guys carry a gun in your truck? Here in WI the way the laws sit I can have a gun in the truck if its in a case and unloaded (a loaded clip can be right next to the gun though). With all my trips down to Milwaukee and the bad experiences down there I have come to the conclusion that it would be in my best intrests to have protection of some kind for my trips down there. I dont feel that pepper spray would be effective in most situations, the same goes for a stun gun. A tazer could help sometimes, but not always. Though I wonder with the way the laws sit here if my having some protection would even be worth it, and I do not and will not do anything that it not legally allowed. What do you guys think, is it worth having a gun in the truck if it has to be in a case and cannot be loaded while stored? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Enjoy your new weapon. I think you've made an outstanding choice, now practice, practice, practice! http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif You were too kind to call our rambling nonesense "advice." But take what Beastmaster said to heart - he is, IMHO, dead on. Go back and re-read his last post. I agree 110%.

As for carrying the weapon in your car, I understand and sympathize with you're wanting to follow the law. You're a good law abiding citizen. And that is why I urge you to break the law if you feel it is necessary for your personal safety and well being. Living in the People's Republic of Kalifornia, I do it just about on a daily basis and have never had a problem. The weapon is well secreted, and I know how to say "Yessir and Nosir" if I am pulled over for a traffic violation.

Good luck! Enjoy it!

Sean

Beastmaster

10-18-2005, 05:56 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Toadies:
Indeed. Nothing like having your pistol blow up in time of need.

Most LE are forced by departments to carry those ****ty pieces because Mr.Glock sucks major LE cawk. They practically give them to departments compared to Kimbers, HKs, Sigs, etc.

I wouldn't use one for a doorstop. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, these are the primary reasons why Glocks have won out over the years versus any other major manufacturer:

1) Weight. My duty belt (with a Colt Double Eagle, of all things!) had the DE, Surefire, two handcuffs, 4 magazines, stun gun, and ASP. Taking a few ounces off helps the duty officer. (I also had a S&W 945 in a belly band holster off of my body armor). That's a lot of stuff to haul around.

2) Ammo count. The S&W 39 and 59's (made famous by the Illinois State Police when they went to it in 1968) started the trend of high capacity duty carry. Glock's G17 with 16+1 perpetuated that even further. Add the gangbanger FUD (Fear/Uncertainty/Doubt), and you've got something there.

One patrol officer I used to know had a G21 with 4 spare magazines. He used to give me crap (since I only had Wilson 8 rounders x4 spares with me) all the time. He fell into the FUD....hook, line and sinker.

If I really need that much firepower, out came my FN/FAL. Screw the .45, screw the AR-15 or the Ruger Mini-14 or the Remington 870 with slugs- give me .308 with the FAL.

3) Perceived Durability. When I was going through Instructor training, there was a rather hilarious video about how this one southern state Sheriff's office did their Glock "testing". I now wish I kept or made a copy of it. It shows the G17 getting tortured by:
- Multiple Helicopter Drops
- Mud dunk
- Run over by a patrol car
- Thrown onto a brick wall
- and some other stuff I don't remember.

What was hilarious about the video was that the lead tester (who might have been the elected Sheriff too), took the G17 after each torture test, loaded it, shot off all the rounds in the magazine in a really haphazard fashion, then tossed it onto the nearest flat surface (most of the time which was the concrete floor.). He eventually knocked off the front sight.

Well, that video helped sell Glocks. Many departments, stung by the failures of many various shotguns other than the Remington 870, saw this video as the ultimate torture test.

What also helped was that the same G17 that was beaten up by that backwater department made its rounds to other departments....and beaten up even more.

And with realism - how many officers really keep their duty pistols clean? I still clean mine every month if they are unused, and after each use when I take them on the range. But I've been drilled so many times on the aphorism "a clean gun is a happy gun" that all of my firearms are happy. Police departments look at reliability - will the pistol fire when you pull the trigger and if it's abused like most officers abuse their pistols?

4) Armorer's school....or the simplicity of it. Take one punch bought at Sears, and you can fix most stuff (short of sights) with a Glock. Win over the hearts of the poor souls that have to fix the pistols that get abused by the officers that don't take care of them, and you get good reports back up the chain of command.

5) Finally, it comes down to training. When Glock came out of the shadow, many departments still used revolvers. Glock was the first manufacturer who could prove to training departments that the overall basics of firearms training remained the same, and that you needed to just teach the issues/differences of loading/unloading and clearing jams. No external safeties, no other niggling issues, just teach the same basics (which are the same basics no matter which pistol you use, really), and add the esoterics of magazine handling.

This is where Glock won out. This is where Glock continues to win - convincing the departments of the last two items are cost savings. This is how Glock has won 60% of the Police Departments and the FBI. I'm not saying it's right, but with a decent product and excellent marketing - they really did a number on the competition.

Harley

10-18-2005, 06:19 PM

Steve, I agree entirely... I shoot IPSC with a G35 so I don't switch between guns too often (other than a ccw)... ( I personally carry a G22 at work). I've dumped thousands and thousands of rounds through that gun and it did fail once, we think it was d/t a jacked up reloaded round... and the weapon did just what it was supposed to... it dumped the mag (yes it spanked my hand) and expelled the gasses downward. I replaced the extractor that got knocked off, got a new mag and was ready for the next stage... same gun.

Beastmaster

10-18-2005, 06:26 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bondage:

Enjoy your new weapon. I think you've made an outstanding choice, now practice, practice, practice! http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif You were too kind to call our rambling nonesense "advice." But take what Beastmaster said to heart - he is, IMHO, dead on. Go back and re-read his last post. I agree 110%.

Sean </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Drills are the key. It's called muscle memory, and if you do the drills over and over and over - your gross motor skills will react properly and by the numbers under stress every single time. This is the basis for most successful training programs that combining firearms and stress mangement.

I've got a funny story about muscle memory, rather recent, in fact.

My stress relief is practicing a rather esoteric martial art called Krav Maga. We had an out of state instructor come by to demonstrate disarming techiques.

Utilizing ASP Red Training guns, we practiced the movements. Then came the drills using real "training" weapons - firearms with plugged barrels, no magazines, and no firing pins. The pistol in this case was a Beretta 92.

The out of state instructor (who instructs with LAPD SWAT) was the guy I was paired with. Figures. And he was the armed person.

Now - when you're doing pistol takeaways, rule #1 is: The gun will go off! Most takeaways will have you grasp the pistol in the area of the ejector port to cause a jam when the pistol discharges. Well, in my former life's training, when you take away the pistol, you rack the slide twice (done to clear and put the pistol back into battery), come up to target, and assess. (Of course, I won't talk about situations where you back into a semi-auto pistol!)

Well, that's what I did. Everyone started asking me why I did that. Then came the real life versus dojo training discussion.

So - muscle memory done years ago for 3 1/2 years straight still applies and is remembered over 10 years later. It did cause the group to discuss stuff that the instructors really didn't want to cover, but the point is that doing drills over and over again until they are second nature will put you in good stead.

I do have a bad story about the same clearing drill. I was a particpant in an introductory IPSC shoot. The fake sceneario was an interesting one where you grabbed any loaded pistol on the table and started shooting the selected targets. On the table were three revolvers and one Sig P228 semi-auto.

The Sig got a stovepipe jam on the second target. Muscle memory said for me to cycle twice and continue. That's what I did. Floor rules for that day's shoot was to halt after all jams. I got DQ'ed. http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif So there are times where real life drills sometimes conflict with competition rules.

Beastmaster

10-18-2005, 06:39 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Harley:
Steve, I agree entirely... I shoot IPSC with a G35 so I don't switch between guns too often (other than a ccw)... ( I personally carry a G22 at work). I've dumped thousands and thousands of rounds through that gun and it did fail once, we think it was d/t a jacked up reloaded round... and the weapon did just what it was supposed to... it dumped the mag (yes it spanked my hand) and expelled the gasses downward. I replaced the extractor that got knocked off, got a new mag and was ready for the next stage... same gun. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And that's why I've slowed my 1911 carry down a bit...actually quite a bit! Using the same pistol over and over builds that muscle memory and refreshes it. I have to enhance my G30 and G21's handling. Here's why.

My wife carries the G23 for CCW. To standardize (in case of anything adverse that happens), I've been carrying the G30 or G21 a lot more. I really should get another G23 and carry that instead.

Which brings back the side discussion about standardization. Standardization in NATO meant using the same ammo. Police departments should do the same thing - standardize along the same firearm family so that you can interchange parts and ammo. In the off chance of an extended firefight, officers can exchange magazines with little to no issues, or at least use the same ammo by migration to magazines of the type that their weapon can use. That's why Phoenix PD uses (for their patrol officers) G22's and G23's.

But again, training repetitively is the key. I know that when I carry the G30 or G21, my wife doesn't have to change her way of thinking to adapt to use it if she has to. It operates identically to her G23. She can grab ANY one of the Glocks and use it, and she knows how the trigger works, the angle of the grip to her hand, sight alignment, etc.

Again, gross motor skills and the training to make you use it in adverse situations will help you survive. And I need to reinforce it myself by carrying the G30 or G21 more often than I do.

Toadies

10-18-2005, 06:41 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Beastmaster:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Toadies:
Indeed. Nothing like having your pistol blow up in time of need.

Most LE are forced by departments to carry those ****ty pieces because Mr.Glock sucks major LE cawk. They practically give them to departments compared to Kimbers, HKs, Sigs, etc.

I wouldn't use one for a doorstop. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, these are the primary reasons why Glocks have won out over the years versus any other major manufacturer:

1) Weight. My duty belt (with a Colt Double Eagle, of all things!) had the DE, Surefire, two handcuffs, 4 magazines, stun gun, and ASP. Taking a few ounces off helps the duty officer. (I also had a S&W 945 in a belly band holster off of my body armor). That's a lot of stuff to haul around.

2) Ammo count. The S&W 39 and 59's (made famous by the Illinois State Police when they went to it in 1968) started the trend of high capacity duty carry. Glock's G17 with 16+1 perpetuated that even further. Add the gangbanger FUD (Fear/Uncertainty/Doubt), and you've got something there.

One patrol officer I used to know had a G21 with 4 spare magazines. He used to give me crap (since I only had Wilson 8 rounders x4 spares with me) all the time. He fell into the FUD....hook, line and sinker.

If I really need that much firepower, out came my FN/FAL. Screw the .45, screw the AR-15 or the Ruger Mini-14 or the Remington 870 with slugs- give me .308 with the FAL.

3) Perceived Durability. When I was going through Instructor training, there was a rather hilarious video about how this one southern state Sheriff's office did their Glock "testing". I now wish I kept or made a copy of it. It shows the G17 getting tortured by:
- Multiple Helicopter Drops
- Mud dunk
- Run over by a patrol car
- Thrown onto a brick wall
- and some other stuff I don't remember.

What was hilarious about the video was that the lead tester (who might have been the elected Sheriff too), took the G17 after each torture test, loaded it, shot off all the rounds in the magazine in a really haphazard fashion, then tossed it onto the nearest flat surface (most of the time which was the concrete floor.). He eventually knocked off the front sight.

Well, that video helped sell Glocks. Many departments, stung by the failures of many various shotguns other than the Remington 870, saw this video as the ultimate torture test.

What also helped was that the same G17 that was beaten up by that backwater department made its rounds to other departments....and beaten up even more.

And with realism - how many officers really keep their duty pistols clean? I still clean mine every month if they are unused, and after each use when I take them on the range. But I've been drilled so many times on the aphorism "a clean gun is a happy gun" that all of my firearms are happy. Police departments look at reliability - will the pistol fire when you pull the trigger and if it's abused like most officers abuse their pistols?

4) Armorer's school....or the simplicity of it. Take one punch bought at Sears, and you can fix most stuff (short of sights) with a Glock. Win over the hearts of the poor souls that have to fix the pistols that get abused by the officers that don't take care of them, and you get good reports back up the chain of command.

5) Finally, it comes down to training. When Glock came out of the shadow, many departments still used revolvers. Glock was the first manufacturer who could prove to training departments that the overall basics of firearms training remained the same, and that you needed to just teach the issues/differences of loading/unloading and clearing jams. No external safeties, no other niggling issues, just teach the same basics (which are the same basics no matter which pistol you use, really), and add the esoterics of magazine handling.

This is where Glock won out. This is where Glock continues to win - convincing the departments of the last two items are cost savings. This is how Glock has won 60% of the Police Departments and the FBI. I'm not saying it's right, but with a decent product and excellent marketing - they really did a number on the competition. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Lies and Frapications.

Most LEs are not gun enthusiasts and therefore could care less about their carry. Hence giving them a lighter weapon with plenty of "pray and spray" potential. Any ability to use the weapon adequately are backseat to the primary objective that is making sure Barney Fife doesn't blow his foot off just like the monkey DEA agent on that video. But you see the biggest safety hazard for a weapon is a LE type who sucks at self preservation and WILL NOT invest time and effort let alone the fact that a majority of departments are tighter than a 10yr old chinese twat. They will not spend the funds to give their officers the best weapons and training let alone give their officers a fine quality weapon like a Sig, Kimber, Wilson, etc. It is simply easier to pay out the life insurance policy when Joe Law fails at his chosen occupation in life.

LE officers PWND by taxpayers and Gastons tupperware guns.

Bondage

10-18-2005, 07:00 PM

Okay, Beastmaster, I know the vid you are talking about and I've seen it. It is an outstanding testament to the durability of that design and build. HOWEVER........

We don't usually drop our pistols out of choppers. http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif We DO (or at least a friend of mine DID) tuck his Glock between the mattress and box springs of his bed. He came home one day and found that his dog had literally EATEN THE DAMN FRAME!!! http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif It was about the funniest f()ckin' thing I'd ever seen. The dog had popped the mag and chewed it up pretty well, but the frame was basically GONE! You'll not see a photo of this or a video though. He took it in to the gunshop, they contacted Glock, and Glock had the weapon shipped immediately back to them and they replaced the frame - for FREE! That was one pic I don't think they wanted floating around. http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

The moral of the story is this - get a goddam Nylabone for your dog and keep your Glock high and dry when you're not around!

http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif
Sean

ps - Again, I agree 110% - muscle memory, developed through repetition, IS the key. I am right handed and left eye dominant, so I "cross shoot." My shooting stance is therefor a little unique, but when my bicep hits my cheekbone, the sights are ON! http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif It makes shooting a sidearm more like shooting a rifle! A little weird, yeah, but a LOT effective.

Bondage

10-18-2005, 09:54 PM

BTW, I found actual video of Toadie displaying his firearm prowess...
http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/10/10_5_134.gif ('http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb008_ZNxdm86764US')

Sean

Petey

10-18-2005, 11:11 PM

Did we lose PARAGAY??? Guess all those facts scared him off.

http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Beastmaster

10-18-2005, 11:45 PM

No. He's not the type to be scared off. He gathers information and waits patiently. http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Toadies

10-19-2005, 01:08 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Beastmaster:
No. He's not the type to be scared off. He gathers information and waits patiently. http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

He gathers no information.. leastwise not "correct" information.

I know I was shock to find out we adopted the M9 pistol because of it's long range capablities and not so we could interchange ammo stocks with NATO allies... Or due to the fact that Beretta was "fed" the bid amount so they could win. And it was low bid not best bid... And most tactical engagements take place well beyond the established 21 feet.

Wow it was like history had changed itself...

Just shocking.

http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

PARAGON

10-19-2005, 04:00 PM

Actually, I have a hard time typing in response to continued stupid nonsense from storythehut while driving 12 hours and got back home late last night. Go back and learn some history that's actual, from the people involved. Not the BS you like to pretend is facts.

Ronald Reagan was rebuilding our Armed Forces. Standardization was the politically correct excuse. Back in Vietnam, the subject of the range of the Colt was discussed and debated. It was a great tunnel gun but range limited it's ability in many engagements. This was after we assumed use of the M16.

If the US was simply concerned about NATO interoperability, the Colt would have been replaced long before it was. Our guys were taking German Lugers in WWII and using them for their range. The .45's use had debated been ever since and there were many on both sides of the argument.

So, where did I say anything about the choice of Beretta over other makers? Also, where did I say "most tactical engagements take place well beyond the established 21 feet?" You are a dumpster diving tool. And Petey, exactly what "facts" are supposed to have "scared me off."

I don't need to gather information on this one. Toadies, aka Storyfck, already has a Sterling reputation for being a complete dumbass here and on other sites.

PARAGON

10-19-2005, 08:04 PM

Toadies

10-19-2005, 08:07 PM

Toadies

10-19-2005, 08:12 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PARAGON:
Actually, I have a hard time typing in response to continued stupid nonsense from storythehut while driving 12 hours and got back home late last night. Go back and learn some history that's actual, from the people involved. Not the BS you like to pretend is facts.

Ronald Reagan was rebuilding our Armed Forces. Standardization was the politically correct excuse. Back in Vietnam, the subject of the range of the Colt was discussed and debated. It was a great tunnel gun but range limited it's ability in many engagements. This was after we assumed use of the M16.

If the US was simply concerned about NATO interoperability, the Colt would have been replaced long before it was. Our guys were taking German Lugers in WWII and using them for their range. The .45's use had debated been ever since and there were many on both sides of the argument.

So, where did I say anything about the choice of Beretta over other makers? Also, where did I say "most tactical engagements take place well beyond the established 21 feet?" You are a dumpster diving tool. And Petey, exactly what "facts" are supposed to have "scared me off."

I don't need to gather information on this one. Toadies, aka Storyfck, already has a Sterling reputation for being a complete dumbass here and on other sites. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wrong again **** for brains Jarine...

here once again.. read and learn then get back to me..

http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

http://www.sightm1911.com/index.htm

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> In 1985, the United States Armed Forces replaced the M1911 with the Beretta 92 F to the everlasting consternation of 1911 devotees everywhere. There were several reasons for the switch. The U.S. was the only NATO country not using a 9mm as the standard issue sidearm and there was a desire to issue a pistol chambered for the ubiquitous 9mm for logistical reasons. The Beretta will hold 15 rounds in its magazine as compared with 7 rounds of the military issue 1911 magazine and is lighter and easier to field strip than the 1911. The double action/single action Beretta was perceived as being a safer pistol to carry in a state of readiness than the "cocked and locked" 1911. In some quarters, the .45 ACP was viewed as too powerful and difficult to control for those having only nominal training with the weapon. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No one disputes this except you know it all double ought spy man....

http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

PARAGON

10-19-2005, 10:10 PM

Well, I don't think I have the intelligence to break down into terms you can understand why things are not so black and white.

If you want facts about what caliber and what handguns are good for everyday use, consult the FBI. Better yet go peruse their terminal ballistic studies and figure it out for yourself.

Storytoads, you have openly shown your ignorance in yet another subject. I offered up several holes for you to actively argue and you showed your blatent lack of knowledge on this issue and that anything posted by you is very subject.

Do you really think it would be a published fact that We wanted a different round because the .45 lacks the penetration of other rounds? Range is not just about accuracy, it is the terminal ability of the round, and a pistol projectile that does not penetrate will get the shooter killed. This is why I personally do not chamber HydraShoks. If I knew the contact was going to be at 10 feet, a .45 with HydraShoks would be great, but I can't predict the encounter and choose to have the best option for all engagements.

Everybody has their opinions, some are based on experience or knowledge. StoryToad, you have shown that you have neither.

KenP

10-19-2005, 10:29 PM

Paragon, I forgot to tell you I like you carry weapon. http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Bondage

10-19-2005, 10:50 PM

Paragon - I don't think I ever caught your caliber and load (and I'm too lazy to go back and read over Toadstools BS to find it). Do you carry a .40 Short and Wimpy? Sorry - couldn't resist. I actually really like the round. http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif What rounds do you stoke it with for everyday use? Are you familiar with the +P Golden Sabre rounds? I don't know about .40, but they are about tops in the .45. I have half a box of the original Black Talon's laying around here somewhere in .40 - if we ever meet up on the trail, I'll give 'em to you as a reminder of how pathetically PC the USA has become.

Sean

ps - hey Toadstool....
http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/14/14_6_6.gif ('http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb008_ZNxdm86764US')

Toadies

10-19-2005, 11:06 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PARAGON:
BLAH BLAH BLAH BLATHER BLATHER BLATHER </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

the basis of your arguements throughout this thread is the military adopted the M9 due to a perceived lacking in range and accuracy on with the 1911. you are wrong and very stupid to keep blathering your bull**** opining about what does not constitute a valid tactical situation. again, you = wannabe CQB man..

You are the only one who is dazzled with your pretend military experience and tactical expertise. Most LEs and operators would laugh at your dumbass as most likely half this board is not counting your sackriders.

http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

PARAGON

10-19-2005, 11:16 PM

Noticed I purposely did not advocate or push MY choice. I am fairly standardized with the .40SW, though. Although I do own anything from a MarkII to a DE .44mag.

The Remington Golden Sabres are pretty much top dog as far as the average round goes from what I remember. Their wound creation is well beyond most other rounds.

I have Winchester Ranger Partition Golds that I got several boxes of from a buddy and are my CC loads. The Hydra-Shoks rate well in tests but when they loose some kinetic energy their penetration drops off faster or so I was told.

There might be newer and better rounds available today but when when it hits the fan there are many more variables that I am concerned about than a few gelatin tests. http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

PARAGON

10-19-2005, 11:17 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Toadies:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PARAGON:
BLAH BLAH BLAH BLATHER BLATHER BLATHER </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

the basis of your arguements throughout this thread is the military adopted the M9 due to a perceived lacking in range and accuracy on with the 1911. you are wrong and very stupid to keep blathering your bull**** opining about what does not constitute a valid tactical situation. again, you = wannabe CQB man..

You are the only one who is dazzled with your pretend military experience and tactical expertise. Most LEs and operators would laugh at your dumbass as most likely half this board is not counting your sackriders.

http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Ok

Petey

10-20-2005, 12:34 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PARAGON:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Toadies:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PARAGON:
BLAH BLAH BLAH BLATHER BLATHER BLATHER </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

the basis of your arguements throughout this thread is the military adopted the M9 due to a perceived lacking in range and accuracy on with the 1911. you are wrong and very stupid to keep blathering your bull**** opining about what does not constitute a valid tactical situation. again, you = wannabe CQB man..

You are the only one who is dazzled with your pretend military experience and tactical expertise. Most LEs and operators would laugh at your dumbass as most likely half this board is not counting your sackriders.

http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Ok </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Another stunning comeback from PARAQUEER..

PARAQUEER ladies and gentlemen.... http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

PARAGON

10-20-2005, 01:34 AM

Meh

Mr. I - Man

10-20-2005, 02:27 PM

Hey toad sh*t it is very obvious that you don't know dick about the armed forces. USMC S/S does not stand for anything secret agent or service related. It stands for Marine Scout Sniper. One Shot One Kill. OOH RAH

Efrain

10-20-2005, 03:21 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mr. I - Man:
Hey toad sh*t it is very obvious that you don't know dick about the armed forces. USMC S/S does not stand for anything secret agent or service related. It stands for Marine Scout Sniper. One Shot One Kill. OOH RAH </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well said I-man! http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
you go that Camel Toadie? http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Petey

10-20-2005, 05:17 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mr. I - Man:
Hey toad sh*t it is very obvious that you don't know dick about the armed forces. USMC S/S does not stand for anything secret agent or service related. It stands for Marine Scout Sniper. One Shot One Kill. OOH RAH </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

except he wasn't a real marine so that is all bull****..

hoo haw.....

http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Petey

10-23-2005, 01:46 PM

I WIN!!!!1

Humgirl&guy

10-27-2005, 11:25 PM

Here in canada we cannot carry handguns, Just shotguns and beer!

DennisAJC

10-27-2005, 11:31 PM

Where aboots in Canada are you from????

Humgirl&guy

10-27-2005, 11:35 PM

near toronto ontario

Petey

10-27-2005, 11:51 PM

h2co-pilot

10-27-2005, 11:57 PM

Humtranny = Cahootananny http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Humgirl&guy

10-28-2005, 12:00 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Petey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Humgirl&guy:
Here in canada we cannot carry handguns, Just shotguns and beer! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Bull****..

Julian does it all the time on TPBs... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

On TPBs.....what is that!!!

Andy C

10-28-2005, 11:54 AM

Interesting thread - all I want to know is this - all you guys spouting off about distances and trajectorys and dependability and ease of use and guns blowing up in your hands when they are needed most - have any of you actually ever been involved in a CIVILLIAN situation where you actually needed to pull and fire a weapon.

Just out of interest.

I have fired hundreds of rounds through my Ruger P90 and it never blew up on me - what are the chances of this happening on the one occassion that I might possibly need to use it in anger - pretty slim I would imagine.

Any gun is only as effective as the person behind it.

PARAGON

10-28-2005, 12:14 PM

Yeah, I have one of those bricks with a trigger. 'cept mine is a P91. It's a stash gun in the house and not much more as I never really fell in love with shooting it.

Beastmaster

10-28-2005, 09:06 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Andy C H2 hasbeen:
Interesting thread - all I want to know is this - all you guys spouting off about distances and trajectorys and dependability and ease of use and guns blowing up in your hands when they are needed most - have any of you actually ever been involved in a CIVILLIAN situation where you actually needed to pull and fire a weapon.

Just out of interest.

I have fired hundreds of rounds through my Ruger P90 and it never blew up on me - what are the chances of this happening on the one occassion that I might possibly need to use it in anger - pretty slim I would imagine.

Any gun is only as effective as the person behind it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, that's my argument. A brand name pistol (Ruger, Glock, S&W, Colt, Kimber, H&K, Sig, Kahr, Walther, Wilson, etc.) will be one of those that you can trust your life on. I want to know that the pistol (when kept in even somewhat deplorable conditions) will fire a round when I pull the trigger.

As for being in a Civilian situation in which I needed to unholster my sidearm - no. In a past professional situation, yes, I have had to unholster my sidearm or utilize and present a long gun.

I can definitely say (with some level of pride, I might add) that I have NEVER had to fire my sidearm (or any long gun for that matter) in self defense or in the defense of a third party. I sincerely hope I never have to, or be placed into a situation in which I do have to defend myself or defend a third party.

And you bring up a good point - if the person behind the pistol is effective in defusing the situation without pulling the trigger, that shows that it's the person being effective - the pistol is just a tool to help present and project the effectiveness of that person at a short range distance. http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

BTW - I would recommend against utilizing your verbage that you just posted. Firing in anger is not a good thing...nor is it good for a jury to hear either.

Andy C

10-29-2005, 11:09 AM

Good point - "in anger" was just quicker to type than "in self defense or in the defense of a third party". The use of the word anger in front of a judge is going to make you look pretty stupid.

PARAGON

11-10-2005, 10:07 PM

<Table>
<H2><FONT size=5>One-Shot Drops
Surviving the Myth</FONT>
By ANTHONY J.
PINIZZOTTO, Ph.D., HARRY A. KERN, M.Ed., and EDWARD F. DAVIS, M.S.</H2>

<FONT
face="TimesNewRomanPSMT,Times New Roman,Times,serif">O</FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">n a summer evening in the
northeastern part of the United States, a patrol officer received a radio
dispatch at approximately 7 p.m. to respond to an address for a disorderly
subject. The officer arrived at the location and parked his patrol vehicle on
the opposite side of the street, several houses away. Before exiting the
vehicle, the officer paused to observe the scene. He saw a male move from behind
a large tree in front of the address of the alleged disorderly subject. The
officer started to exit his vehicle, but then stopped </FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">when he saw the male, with a
gun in each hand, begin to run toward him. The man fired both weapons at the
officer, who returned two rounds from his service weapon, striking the male in
the center of his chest. However, the man continued to fire. One round struck
the officer in the head, killing him instantly. The male survived the two
gunshot wounds and later was convicted of killing the officer. </FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">This scenario is a collage of
several cases dealing with the use of deadly force, by and against law
enforcement, that </FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">the authors have examined over
the last decade. Studying these cases and interacting with officers attending
the FBI National Academy,</FONT><SUP><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">1</FONT></SUP><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif"> who have experienced similar
incidents in their own agencies, have led them to question if officers have died
because of any of the following factors: </FONT></P>
<UL>
<LI><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">The type of weapon
issued to the officer.</FONT>

<LI><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">The type of
ammunition the department issued for service rounds.</FONT>

<LI><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">The lack or quality
of self-defensive training provided to the officer.</FONT>
<LI>Overconfidence because the officer was wearing a bullet-resistant vest and,
thereby, took unnecessary chances.
<LI>The officer’s own preparation for a violent encounter, such as wearing a
bullet-resistant vest or remaining in excellent physical condition.
<LI>The officer’s choice to notify dispatch of the location during a traffic
stop or other encounter with suspects.
<LI>ny other circumstances presently unknown to the officer’s department.
<P align=left>In the opening scenario, did the officer “hesitate” after firing
the two rounds that struck the offender? Was he instructed to “double tap” and
pause, as many departments once trained?</P>
<P align=left>The authors have learned from their research on law enforcement
safety that there exists a significant hesitancy on the part of many officers to
use deadly force. However, they have not determined the reason for either the
hesitation or why officers stop shooting before they neutralize the threat. One
question they can answer is that handguns used for protection by law enforcement
are capable of immediately eliminating a deadly threat quickly.
However, the fact largely remains that bullet placement, rather than caliber,
causes immediate stop-page of body functions in most instances. 2</P>
<P align=center>With all of this in mind, then, if officers are adequately
armed, what causes them to fall victim to criminals wielding less powerful
weapons? An examination of the myth of the “one-shot drop,” data relative to the
type of weapons offenders have used to attack officers, and effective survival
and firearms training may help law enforcement agencies begin to reverse this
tragic trend.

</P></LI>[/list]

<P align=left>
In many of the classic, albeit simplistic, cowboy movies from
the early days of the American film industry, the stereotypical “good guys” wore
white hats, whereas the “bad guys” donned black ones. After meeting in the
middle of a dirt street in some small town, two shots would ring out. The bad
guy’s bullet always missed, but the one from the hero in the white hat
inevitably found its mark and freed the town of the criminal threat. With one
shot from the good guy’s gun, the bad guy immediately dropped to the ground and
became completely incapacitated.</P>
<P align=left><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">In today’s films and television
programs, Hollywood has varied not only the clothing of the actors but also
their standards and demeanor, both the good guys and the bad guys. It now has
become difficult to distinguish the protagonist from the antagonist.
Unfortunately, however, this increased realism has not always carried over to
the portrayal of gun battles. Many current shooting scenes continue to display
unrealistic reactions and underlying expectations regarding ballistic effects.
For example, one shot from a handgun often lifts the wounded person 2 feet off
the ground and causes immediate incapacitation. </FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">Even knowing that these are
movies and television programs, some in the law enforcement community still
expect one-shot drops in real-life shootings. In fact, few actual instances end
this way. </FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">Realistic and regular law
enforcement training must counterbalance and mentally and emotionally override
the fallacy of the one-shot drop still promoted by some media. Short of
disrupting the brain or severing the upper spinal column, immediate
incapacitation does not occur.</FONT><SUP><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">3</FONT></SUP><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif"> Therefore, the threat remains
to the officer. Yet, implicit in the media presentations of law enforcement
encounters is the belief that with the </FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">“proper handgun” and the
“proper ammunition,” officers will inflict immediate incapacitation if they
shoot offenders anywhere in the torso. Varied and multiple real-life law
enforcement experiences contradict this false and dangerous belief. </FONT></P>
<H3 align=left><FONT
face=TimesNewRoman,Bold,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif>Actual Shootings
</FONT></H3>
<P align=left><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">In the authors’ ongoing study
of violence against law enforcement officers, they have examined several cases
where officers used large-caliber hand guns with limited effect displayed by the
offenders. In one case, the subject attacked the officer with a knife. The
officer shot the individual four times in the chest; then, his weapon
malfunctioned. The offender continued to walk toward the officer. After the
officer cleared his weapon, he fired again and struck the subject in the chest.
</FONT><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">Only then did the
offender drop the knife. This individual was hit five times with 230-grain,
.45-caliber hollow-point ammunition and never fell to the ground. The offender
later stated, “The wounds felt like bee stings.” </FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">In another
case, officers fired six .40-caliber, hollow-point rounds at a subject who
pointed a gun at them. Each of the six rounds hit the individual with no visible
effect. The seventh round severed his spinal cord, and the offender fell to the
ground, dropping his weapon. This entire firefight was captured by several
officers’ in-car video cameras. </FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">In a final case, the subject
shot the victim officer in the chest with a handgun and fled. The officer,
wearing a bullet-resistant vest, returned gunfire. The officer’s partner
observed the incident and also fired at the offender. Subsequent investigation
determined that the individual was hit 13 times and, yet, ran several blocks to
a gang member’s house. He later said, “I was so scared by all those shots; it
sounded like the Fourth of July.” Again, according to the subject, his wounds
“only started to hurt when I woke up in the hospital.” The officers had used
9-millimeter, department-issued ammunition. The surviving officers re ported
that they felt vulnerable. </FONT></P>

<FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">They wondered if they
had done some thing wrong that caused their injury or placed them in the
proximity of physical danger. They also wondered if they would react differently
if faced with a similar situation. </FONT></P>
<H3><FONT face=TimesNewRoman,Bold,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif>Practical
Expectations </FONT></H3>

<FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">Social science discloses that
if people expect to see something, they well may see it. For ex ample, in basic
psychology courses, instructors generally include the perceptual set theory,
which shows students a picture. Although exactly the same picture, it appears to
some as an old woman, whereas others see a young </FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">woman. People often see what
they expect to see. This explains why so many sightings of the Loch Ness
“monster” turn out to be floating logs. </FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">Officers’ expectations of how
they will respond when shot significantly affect their reactions to these
situations. Development of advanced, practical expectations may be</FONT> <FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">influenced best by clarifying
misconceptions and imparting new knowledge during purpose-driven training
concerning the topic. Absent a clear, purposeful understanding of the session’s
training objectives, little influential and practical learning can occur.
Further, lack of purposeful training may prove detrimental to an officer’s
practical </FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">expectations, psychological
preparation, and capabilities when employing complex tasks in response to the
significant stressors of a life-threatening, critical incident. </FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">Humans are largely
differentiated from animals through their miraculous ability to develop skills
and abilities to perform multiple, complex tasks simultaneously through
repetitive practice. By necessity of minimizing risk to themselves and others,
officers effectively learn many firearm-use procedures and tactics through a
progressive building-block process. Herein, initial exposure is given to
learning gross and fine motor skills. Some conscious behaviors develop into
subconscious ones. Officers progressively hone skills to a reasonable level of
mastery, then apply them under shorter time constraints during which they must
incorporate and </FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">maintain mental processes of
assessing their surroundings and changing conditions. Trainers need to remain
cognizant of the role that repetition plays in the mental processes reinforced
during training scenarios and courses of fire. From learners’ perspectives,
ideal firearms and tactics training objectives should embrace an achievable
notion that they will learn “something new” about their personal performances,
skill levels, and capabilities with their equipment each time they receive
training. </FONT></P>
<H3><FONT face=TimesNewRoman,Bold,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif>THE
DATA</FONT> </H3>
<P align=left><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">To better grasp the scope and
gravity of the myth of the one-shot drop, the authors provide an over view of
felonious, line-of-duty law enforcement officer deaths. From 1993 to 2002, 636
officers were feloniously killed in the line of duty.</FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif" size=1>4 </FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">Offenders used handguns,
ranging from .22 to .50 caliber, to kill 443 of the officers.</FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif" size=1>5 </FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">Forty-five of these victims
were slain with their own </FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">weapons. </FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">Fifty-six of the 443 officers
(12.6 percent) were killed by small-caliber weapons that fire lightweight
bullets at low velocity and included .22, .25, and .32 calibers. Undoubtedly, no
officer would consider any of these firearms as a primary weapon of choice, and
no records indicated that agencies issued any of these to their uniformed patrol
officers. </FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">Concerning the 45 officers
killed with their own weapons, 3 were slain with small-caliber rounds from
backup/off-duty weapons they carried, either .22 or .25 caliber. Twenty-five
</FONT><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">officers (56
percent) were killed with their 9-millimeter or .40 caliber service weapons,
common to law enforcement during the time period examined. The remaining 17
officers were slain with other weapons, including .38 caliber, .357 magnum, 10
millimeter, .44 magnum, and .45 caliber. </FONT></P>

<FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">In two previous studies on
violence against law enforcement officers conducted by the authors, offenders
stated their reason for selecting a particular firearm as availability, 41 per
cent in the first study and 68 percent in the second.</FONT><SUP><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">6</FONT></SUP><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif"> These offenders did not care
about bullet weight or velocity. The majority of the offenders in both studies
had been involved in prior shootings before assaulting or killing the officers.
Their major concern was being “fast on the trigger” and delivering the bullet to
its intended target. One stated, “There’s no time to sight up the gun. If you
hesitate, you’re dead.” </FONT></P>

<FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">Because of the time
needed for adjudicating these offenses, the most recent disposition data
available for offenders involved in line-of-duty law enforcement officer
felonious deaths are for the 10 years 1991 to 2000.</FONT><SUP><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">7</FONT></SUP><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif"> Of the 665 persons charged
with killing a law enforcement officer for this time period, only 9 remained
fugitives. The majority (464) of these individuals </FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">were arrested and convicted of
murder. The victim officers justifiably killed only 23 of their attackers. Other
officers responding to the scene killed an additional 78 offenders. Sixty-two of
the perpetrators committed suicide after killing the officer. In their ongoing
research, the authors are examining if any of these incidents could have started
as an officer-assisted suicide or, more commonly, suicide by cop. </FONT></P>
<H4 align=center><FONT face=Helvetica,Bold,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif>Law
Enforcement Officers Feloniously Killed in the Line of Duty with Firearms
1993-2002 </FONT></H4>
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="45%" align=center
summary="This table lists Law Enforcement Officers Feloniously Killed in the Line of Duty with Firearms from 1993 through 2002 "
border=0>
</Table>

PARAGON

11-10-2005, 10:09 PM

<Table><TBODY>

</P>
<H4 align=center><FONT face=Helvetica,Bold,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif>Law
Enforcement Officers Feloniously Killed in the Line of Duty with Firearms
1993-2002 </FONT></H4><TR>
<TH width="28%" height=40><FONT
face=TimesNewRoman,Bold,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif>Size of</FONT><FONT
face=TimesNewRoman,Bold,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif> Ammunition</FONT></TH>
<TH width="22%"><FONT
face=TimesNewRoman,Bold,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif>Total</FONT><FONT
face=TimesNewRoman,Bold,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif> Slain</FONT></TH>
<TH width="29%"><FONT
face=TimesNewRoman,Bold,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif>While Wearing
</FONT><FONT face=TimesNewRoman,Bold,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif>Body
Armor</FONT></TH>
<TH width="21%"><FONT face=TimesNewRoman,Bold,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif>With
Own </FONT><FONT
face=TimesNewRoman,Bold,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif>Weapon</FONT></TH></TR>
<TR>
<TD width="28%"><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">.22
caliber</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="22%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">28</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="29%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">9</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">2</FONT></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD width="28%"><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">.25
caliber</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="22%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">18</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="29%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">11</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">1</FONT></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD width="28%"><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">.32
caliber</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="22%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">9</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="29%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">6</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">0</FONT></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD width="28%"><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">.32-20
caliber</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="22%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">1</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="29%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">0</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">0</FONT></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD width="28%"><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">.357
magnum</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="22%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">30</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="29%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">19</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">5</FONT></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD width="28%"><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">.38
caliber</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="22%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">65</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="29%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">28</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">5</FONT></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD width="28%"><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">.380
caliber</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="22%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">43</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="29%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">24</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">0</FONT></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD width="28%"><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">.40
caliber</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="22%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">34</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="29%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">24</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">11</FONT></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD width="28%"><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">.41
magnum</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="22%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">1</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="29%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">1</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">0</FONT></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD width="28%"><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">.44
magnum</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="22%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">11</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="29%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">7</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">1</FONT></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD width="28%"><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">.45
caliber</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="22%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">36</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="29%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">24</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">5</FONT></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD width="28%"><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">.455
caliber</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="22%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">1</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="29%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">1</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">0</FONT></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD width="28%"><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">.50
caliber</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="22%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">1</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="29%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">1</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">0</FONT></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD width="28%"><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">7.62x25
millimeter</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="22%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">1</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="29%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">1</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">0</FONT></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD width="28%"><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">9
millimeter</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="22%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">136</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="29%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">65</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">14</FONT></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD width="28%"><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">9x18
millimeter</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="22%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">1</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="29%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">1</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">0</FONT></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD width="28%"><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">10
millimeter</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="22%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">2</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="29%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">0</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">1</FONT></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD width="28%"><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">Size not
reported</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="22%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">25</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="29%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">10</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">0</FONT></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD width="28%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">Total</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="22%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">443</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="29%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">232</FONT></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%"><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">45</FONT></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<DIV align=center></DIV>

<FONT face=Helvetica,Italic,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif size=2>Source: U.S.
Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, </FONT><FONT
face=Helvetica,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif size=2>Law Enforcement Officers Killed
and Assaulted, 2002</FONT><FONT
face=Helvetica,Italic,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif size=2> (Washington, DC,
2003).</FONT> </P>
<H4 align=center><FONT
face=Helvetica,Bold,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif>Offenders Justifiably Killed or
Committed Suicide</FONT> <FONT
face=Helvetica,Bold,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif>1991-2000</FONT></H4>
<DIV align=center>
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="52%"
summary="This table lists offenders justifiably killed or committed suicide 1991 - 2000"
border=0>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TH width="17%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face=TimesNewRoman,Bold,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif>Year</FONT></DIV></TH>
<TH width="36%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face=TimesNewRoman,Bold,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif>Justifiably Killed
</FONT><FONT face=TimesNewRoman,Bold,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif>by Victim
Officer</FONT></DIV></TH>
<TH width="26%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face=TimesNewRoman,Bold,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif>Justifiably Killed
</FONT><FONT face=TimesNewRoman,Bold,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif>by Other
Than Victim</FONT></DIV></TH>
<TH width="21%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face=TimesNewRoman,Bold,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif>Committed </FONT><FONT
face=TimesNewRoman,Bold,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif>Suicide</FONT></DIV></TH></TR>
<TR>
<TD align=middle width="17%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">1991</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD width="36%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">2</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD align=right width="26%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">6</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">5</FONT></DIV></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD align=middle width="17%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">1992</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD width="36%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">3</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD align=right width="26%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">6</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">5</FONT></DIV></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD align=middle width="17%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">1993</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD width="36%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">2</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD align=right width="26%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">7</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">6</FONT></DIV></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD align=middle width="17%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">1994</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD width="36%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">4</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD align=right width="26%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">12</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">9</FONT></DIV></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD align=middle width="17%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">1995</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD width="36%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">4</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD align=right width="26%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">5</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">8</FONT></DIV></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD align=middle width="17%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">1996</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD width="36%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">1</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD align=right width="26%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">14</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">3</FONT></DIV></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD align=middle width="17%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">1997</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD width="36%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">2</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD align=right width="26%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">6</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">12</FONT></DIV></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD align=middle width="17%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">1998</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD width="36%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">2</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD align=right width="26%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">11</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">4</FONT></DIV></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD align=middle width="17%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">1999</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD width="36%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">0</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD align=right width="26%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">5</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">5</FONT></DIV></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD align=middle width="17%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">2000</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD width="36%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">3</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD align=right width="26%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">6</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">5</FONT></DIV></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD width="17%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">Total</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD width="36%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">23</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD align=right width="26%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">78</FONT></DIV></TD>
<TD align=right width="21%">
<DIV align=center><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">62</FONT></DIV></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></DIV>

<FONT face=Helvetica,Italic,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif size=2>Source:
Compiled by members of the FBI’s Criminal Justice Information Services Division
with data from U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of
Investigation,</FONT> <FONT face=Helvetica,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif
size=2>Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted, 2002</FONT><FONT
face=Helvetica,Italic,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif size=2> (Washington, DC, 2003).
</FONT></P>
<P align=left> </P>
<H3 align=left><FONT face=TimesNewRoman,Bold,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif>THE
TRAINING </FONT></H3>
<P align=left><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">A firm understanding of what an
officer possibly may expect if shot or severely injured during a violent
confrontation with an adversary remains crucial. This includes heightening an
officer’s aware ness about establishing a survival mind-set and practical
measures to combat reactions </FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">to extreme stress concerning
natural physiological, psychological, and emotional responses that occur in
normal people during abnormal situations. Such training is imperative in
</FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Italic,Times New Roman,Times,serif">conquering</FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif"> survival versus
</FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Italic,Times New Roman,Times,serif">succumbing</FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif"> to an otherwise treatable,
recoverable injury. </FONT></P>
<H3><FONT face=TimesNewRoman,Bold,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif>Survival
Training </FONT></H3>

<FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">Effective survival training
should provide a clear under standing of how authorized weapons and ammunition
likely will perform under varying conditions to 1) strengthen officer confidence
in personal skills with equipment and 2) prepare officers to efficiently and
quickly incapacitate/control a threat against life. First and foremost, officers
should possess a working knowledge about terminal ballistic performance of
bullets when fired through intervening obstacles that they, by necessity, may
have to shoot through and penetrate to incapacitate a violent adversary. Some
common intervening obstacles encountered in law enforcement shootings can
include heavy clothing; building materials, such as wood and drywall; automobile
windshield glass; and sheet metal used in vehicle doors. Such obstacles may
alter terminal projectile performance (i.e., the medium may plug or </FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">close the hollow point of a
bullet, making it perform as a ball round or become deformed and, thus, limit
penetration). </FONT></P>

<FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">Officers also should know about
ammunition performance at different, reasonable distances. Such training
promotes greater understanding of agency policy when applied to different
situations encountered in daily work experiences (i.e., when it is reasonable to
shoot, not shoot, or seek alternate methods of self-preservation). Agencies
using firearm ranges of 25 yards or fewer may consider options of periodically
shooting at reduced-size targets, simulating a longer-distance handgun shot.
</FONT></P>

<FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">Finally, officers should
possess a basic understanding of the human anatomy and related system functions
from a three-dimensional perspective. Training should visually convey the
placement and vulnerabilities of the cardiovascular system (heart, lungs, and
blood-bearing organs) and the central nervous system (brain and upper spinal
column). Knowledge of how these human systems likely will respond to
low-velocity projectiles, such as from most hand guns, and high-velocity ones,
such as from high-powered rifles, will augment officer awareness that reactions
to being shot may not occur immediately. Perhaps more important, this
information can help </FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">prevent officers from forming a
false assumption or preconceived expectation that the adversary </FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Italic,Times New Roman,Times,serif">will be</FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif"> rendered immediately harmless
following a well-placed shot from their firearm. </FONT></P>
<P align=center>oct04lebx21x1.jpg </P>
<H3 align=left><FONT
face=TimesNewRoman,Bold,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif>Firearms Training
</FONT></H3>
<P align=left><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">Well-rounded firearms training
programs should include instruction and courses of fire emphasizing fundamentals
of marksmanship and position shooting. However, from a survival aspect,
additional training points require consideration. Examples include alternate
courses of fire that possess phases unfamiliar to the officer, as well as a
preset number of fired rounds, such as routinely employed in qualification
courses and largely gathered for the purpose of establishing a “standard” of
proficiency if needed in litigation. Alternate </FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">courses of fire (e.g.,
specialized combat courses), by design, should reinforce desirable behaviors and
thought processes. Combat courses should necessitate officers shooting until
they incapacitate the threat (target) or the threat ceases. This can help
</FONT><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Italic,Times New Roman,Times,serif">prevent,
rather than encourage</FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">, psychological reinforcement
and presumption that the threat will desist after firing a given number of
rounds. If lethal force is warranted and appropriate under the circumstances,
the officer </FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Italic,Times New Roman,Times,serif">must shoot until the
threat ceases</FONT><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">.
Use of cardboard or paper targets, although economical, inherently forces
personnel to perceive bullet impacts on a single plane of reference with out
dimension—much different from a human simulation with dimension and placement of
organs/skeletal structure of a body. An occasional mix of training on a
three-dimensional target, such as clothed mannequins, preformed targets, and
other devices limited only by imagination, may better demonstrate and encourage
personnel to exercise critical-thinking skills for delivering optimal shot
placement and effective ness. An example is a shooting scenario requiring
accurate shot placement on a three-dimensional target at an adverse angle
substantially different from the usual 90-degree target </FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">placement in many training
scenarios due to range design, safety, and economy of training resource time.
</FONT></P>

<FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">Economical, three-dimensional
reaction targets made of cardboard to resemble a torso are available. These
targets, suspended by heavy string or cord to one or two inflated balloons
inside the body of the device, can become lifelike by placing old clothing, such
as a shirt or jacket, on the exterior. When one or both of the bal loons are
struck by a bullet, the balloon pops and the target drops from its suspended
position. Such an exercise emphasizes that the officer must aim at a distinct
spot on the torso to achieve incapacitation, rather than merely shooting at the
entire target. </FONT></P>

<FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">New technology incorporated
into training simulators portraying lifelike, real-time scenarios permits course
designers to define the zones of immediate or quick incapacitation similar to
the relative area on a human body. Additionally, designers can denote zones of
incapacitation based on the angle and distance of the adversary from the
officer, as well as scenarios representing body armor worn by the adversary.
</FONT></P>
<H3 align=left><FONT
face=TimesNewRoman,Bold,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif>CONCLUSION </FONT></H3>
<P align=left><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">Just as in the days of the
American Old West when only </FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">the peace officers’ superb
gun-handling abilities stood between them and the violent outlaws of their time,
today’s law enforcement professionals still must rely on their firearm skills to
protect their communities from similar lawlessness. Employing deadly force
against another human being is not an easy choice, nor should it be. </FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">However,
when an individual is intent on causing grave bodily injury, even death, to
officers sworn to uphold this nation’s laws, those officers must react
responsibly and quickly to protect their communities and to avoid the loss of
innocent lives, as well as their own. </FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">The perpetuation of the
one-shot drop by movies and television programs has no place in the real world
of violent criminals bent on their destructive missions. Officers must realize
</FONT><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif">that they have to
continually hone their survival skills, always expect the unexpected, and never
give up; they must protect themselves to protect their communities. </FONT></P>
<H3 align=left><FONT face=TimesNewRoman,Bold,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif
size=2>Endnotes </FONT></H3>
<P align=left><SUP><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif" size=2>1</FONT></SUP><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif" size=2> The FBI hosts four
10-week sessions each year during which law enforcement executives from around
the world come together to attend classes in various criminal justice subjects.
</FONT></P>
<P align=left><SUP><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif" size=2>2</FONT></SUP><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif" size=2> “Physiologically, a
determined adversary can be stopped reliably and immediately only by a shot that
disrupts the brain or upper spinal cord. Failing to hit the center nervous
system, massive bleeding from holes in the heart, or major blood vessels of the
torso causing circulatory collapse is the only 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 to 15 seconds after
the heart has been destroyed.” See U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of
Investigation, Firearms Training Unit, FBI Academy, </FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Italic,Times New Roman,Times,serif" size=2>Handgun Wounding
Factors and Effectiveness</FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif" size=2> (Quantico, VA, July 14,
1989), 8.</FONT> </P>
<P align=left><SUP><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif"
size=2>3</FONT></SUP><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif"
size=2> Ibid. </FONT></P>
<P align=left><SUP><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif" size=2>4</FONT></SUP><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif" size=2> U.S. Department of
Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, </FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Italic,Times New Roman,Times,serif" size=2>Law Enforcement
Officers Killed and Assaulted, 2002 </FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif" size=2>(Washington, DC, 2003).
</FONT></P>
<P align=left><SUP><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif" size=2>5</FONT></SUP><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif" size=2> Members of the FBI’s
Criminal Justice Information Services Division collected and supplied this
information to the authors for this article. </FONT></P>
<P align=left><SUP><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif" size=2>6</FONT></SUP><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif" size=2> U.S. Department of
Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, </FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Italic,Times New Roman,Times,serif" size=2>Killed in the
Line of Duty</FONT><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif"
size=2> (Washington, DC, 1992); and, U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau
of Investigation, National Institute of Justice, </FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Italic,Times New Roman,Times,serif" size=2>In The Line of
Fire: Violence Against Law Enforcement</FONT><FONT
face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif" size=2> (Washington, DC, 1997).
</FONT></P>
<P align=left><SUP><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif"
size=2>7</FONT></SUP><FONT face="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif"
size=2> Supra note 4, 44. </FONT></P></Table>

Petey

11-12-2005, 12:48 AM

OMG PARAFAG can't get enough of this thread.....

RAAARRR@!!!!1

Petey

11-12-2005, 12:48 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Humgirl&guy:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Petey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Humgirl&guy:
Here in canada we cannot carry handguns, Just shotguns and beer! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Bull****..

Julian does it all the time on TPBs... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

On TPBs.....what is that!!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Trailer Park Boys

Petey

11-12-2005, 12:55 AM