"My 5 Shot Snubby is Good Enough"

[BehindBlueI's]

Is this a trick? The answer is in your question, HITTING.

Goes back to not sucking solves a lot of issues. You don't suck. You telling me that in that scenario you couldn't hit a fist sized target with a j-frame? I mean, I know I can and I'm not that good. With a modicum of training the vast majority of students were hitting 50y torsos at Sand Burr after the snub nose class. Not as fast as with a larger gun, of course, and again if you can carry a larger gun do it. But that's not the same as just constantly ******** on an option that works for a lot of people a lot of the time who just can't carry a duty pistol.

One of the biggest proponents of the full size or dead in the streets proponents who used to post here spent his work day unarmed. Go figure. The j-frame a similar has it's place as much as a rifle has it's place and hardware isn't the biggest concern.

Serious question, say you have 100 chips to assign to a hypothetical fighter before sending him off to face the scenario in question. How many chips would you assign to:

1) Basic gun handling: The ability to safely draw, present the firearm, fire the firearm upon command but not before, and safely put the firearm away.

2) Basic managing unknown contacts skills.

3) Decision making under stress skills.

4) Pure marksmanship skills, however you choose to define that.

5) Handgun selection.

6) Ammunition selection.

7) Unarmed skills.

8) CIT/Managing the mentally ill skills.

So, again, I ask @Route 45 or you or whoever would like to answer, what varies in the outcome of this event with revolver vs Glock? What is different in the outcome if our deputy shoots 7 less times or 12 more times?

 

[Route 45]

So, again, I ask @Route 45 or you or whoever would like to answer, what varies in the outcome of this event with revolver vs Glock? What is different in the outcome if our deputy shoots 7 less times or 12 more times?

We’d have to know exactly which shot finally ended the threat. If it was number 6, guess what…

The point of me posting the video was not that exact scenario. The point was to show that handgun rounds suck, and less of them suck even more. More rounds, easier to shoot platforms, better sights, etc are never negatives.

Like I said earlier, you do you. Hopefully your equipment won’t “suck” as much as your ego.

 

[Mij]

“Never needed it” and “Never felt like I needed it” are never relevant criteria when selecting a defensive weapon for what might happen in the future. Sounds like you would have been just as well off with a rabbit’s foot or four leaf clover. Why do you carry a gun at all?

No need to justify buying what I feel is a superior weapon, especially to randos on the internet. They certainly won’t be with me if I ever have to use it.

Welllll, since you felt the NEED to quote and respond to my post, please let me retort. Your FEELINGS aside, anybody that needs the www or a u tube video to justify there opinion and cannot make a cognizant argument with (there own) words and or experience doesn’t merit my time debating with. And unless you can produce your CIB or a badge, maybe both, you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about. Most fellows live ordinary lives and do not post bravado about my gun is better than your gun because blah, blah, blah. Sorry I posted, hope I didn’t ruin your day.

Oh, to answer your question, I carry a gun (5 shot smith mostly) for self defense and unfortunately or not, I do know what I’m talking about.

 

[bobzilla]

We’d have to know exactly which shot finally ended the threat. If it was number 6, guess what…

The point of me posting the video was not that exact scenario. The point was to show that handgun rounds suck, and less of them suck even more. More rounds, easier to shoot platforms, better sights, etc are never negatives.

Like I said earlier, you do you. Hopefully your equipment won’t “suck” as much as your ego.

So how any times have you used your sidearm in defense? I'm not sure it's BBI's ego that is the issue.

 

[Mij]

So how any times have you used your sidearm in defense? I'm not sure it's BBI's ego that is the issue.

Thought I’d post that again because I can’t make two or three likes in one post.

 

[bobzilla]

Thought I’d post that again because I can’t make two or three likes in one post.

I just find it funny that we have actual experience and a career investigating this topic and all of that is just "ego". Besides, BBI and I are death tube riders, its like we're brothers.

 

[Combat Engineer]

I used to carry a 61/2 inch barreled S&W 629 44 magnum before I put a scope on it.While I'll admit it wasn't a human psychopath I shot a charging Angus bull in the head with a 240 grain jhp handload.I know data says different blah,blah...what that bullet did was extremely ugly.I do know a bulls skull is a hell of a lot tougher than ours.Yea a pistol isn't a rifle but I still love the 44 magnum.My EDC nowadays is a ten mm 1911 it holds 16.Testing handloads in this beast now.My ego aside I'll bet you I could have shot that guy in the head and wouldn't have wasted that much ammo.

 

[Route 45]

Welllll, since you felt the NEED to quote and respond to my post, please let me retort. Your FEELINGS aside, anybody that needs the www or a u tube video to justify there opinion and cannot make a cognizant argument with (there own) words and or experience doesn’t merit my time debating with. And unless you can produce your CIB or a badge, maybe both, you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about. Most fellows live ordinary lives and do not post bravado about my gun is better than your gun because blah, blah, blah. Sorry I posted, hope I didn’t ruin your day.

Oh, to answer your question, I carry a gun (5 shot smith mostly) for self defense and unfortunately or not, I do know what I’m talking about.

I don’t feel the need to post my resume, but suffice it to say that there is more than one person on this forum with LE experience and the use of a firearm in defensive situations under their belt.

“I only need 5 rounds because I don’t suck” is the some of the biggest load of ******** bravado that I’ve seen with regards to handgun selection for defensive purposes.

If you choose your ego and your 1800’s era equipment over sound planning with modern equipment, so be it. But don’t say that it’s MY ego that is the problem when I am the one advocating that armed citizens give themselves every advantage possible, rather than relying on how good you think you are against cardboard and steel plates on a one-way range.

By the way, go ahead and start sending out emails to all of the reputable trainers who use videos as part of their training, letting them know how dumb they are.

If butthurt was gasoline, I could drive to Thunder Ranch on this thread. All because of the notion that more ammo is better, which doesn’t take a badge to figure out.

BTW, if you think a badge equates to firearm skill, I’ve got some news for ya…

 

[Lpherr]

Maybe, but under stress you'll find few people shoot at an assessment pace. My personal opinion is this is human nature* combined with reinforcement from games and social media where split times are uber important. Running the gun like a sewing machine is more common than bang bang assess bang again if needed. Modern "shoot them to the ground" training is well intentioned but also contributes to this.

If you go through historical LE data you'll find near universal agreement that total shots fired goes up when departments transition to semi-autos from revolvers. You'll see some theories that it's because the old guys could shoot better (they couldn't) or revolvers are inherently more accurate (they aren't) or some "stopping power" BS. I think the most reasonable answer by far is that the total *time* spent shooting hasn't changed much but the ability to fire more rounds in that same time changed. Shorter and lighter triggers combined with rabbit heart rates = super quick mag dumps with no time to work through the OODA loop again and see if what you are doing is working.


*there's a strong theory that survival instincts hamper your ability to change tactics because primitive parts of your brain think "this hasn't gotten us killed yet, so it's working" vs "we aren't winning fast enough, we need to adapt tactics". We are inherently more concerned with risk than we are reward due to the stakes as our lizard brain defines them.

I agree, sitting in a comfortable chair, drinking a favorite beverage, and typing on a keyboard, most can state what they would do, but in reality it's not likely what will happen. The perfect example being the Texas situation.


I'm sure, not exactly the the same, but it could be compared to drivers hitting the brakes on an icy road, and when the vehicle doesn't stop, they push the brake harder as if it will make it stop. Due to stress, and inexperience, the response doesn't change because they expect the brakes to stop them.

 

[Combat Engineer]

I've never had the distinction of being in law enforcement.I however was deployed a few times.

 

[DadSmith]

So what's the difference between hitting the heart with a j-frame or a Glock 17? Hitting it more times?

In your video, what changes in the outcome if he puts 12 more round in his chest in the same time frame?
7 less?


Firing one handed, likely unsighted, while walking backwards vs someone slowly advancing on him with some sort of stick? I mean, it's certainly not ideal. Would you train someone to react that way? While I understand it's not an option for everyone, do you think that someone with a modicum of physical ability and hand to hand training could have jumped on sport coat guy early on and not needed to go to gun? Do you think that most departments today would say since he's not actively harming anyone, sit off, wait for backup, then approach? Maybe he's somewhere that he's the entire shift, I don't know, but do you think his response was the best and that Glock vs Revolver was what made the difference in outcome? If so, how?

Do you think someone who was not a uniformed police officer would have been able to just avoid the conflict to begin with? That the mental state of someone who's pretty obviously committing suicide by cop may react differently to a uniform with a gun pointed at them then someone simply fleeing the area?

I have a question would it have been legal to go to the head after seeing no stop with chest shots?
Is that inadvisable in the conditions the deputy was in?

 

[Route 45]

I have a question would it have been legal to go to the head after seeing no stop with chest shots?
Is that inadvisable in the conditions the deputy was in?

If deadly force is justified, then deadly force is justified.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I have a question would it have been legal to go to the head after seeing no stop with chest shots?
Is that inadvisable in the conditions the deputy was in?

Criminally, no difference what so ever. Civil side, some may try to make an argument over it (why didn't you shoot him in the leg?) but it's a very minimal concern and certainly not worth sweating in the moment. Unless you hired a complete bozo of a lawyer they should be able to explain it for you.

 

[cedartop]

Goes back to not sucking solves a lot of issues. You don't suck. You telling me that in that scenario you couldn't hit a fist sized target with a j-frame? I mean, I know I can and I'm not that good. With a modicum of training the vast majority of students were hitting 50y torsos at Sand Burr after the snub nose class. Not as fast as with a larger gun, of course, and again if you can carry a larger gun do it. But that's not the same as just constantly ******** on an option that works for a lot of people a lot of the time who just can't carry a duty pistol.

In that scenario most should be good to go. I was speaking in more general terms. We both went to that class and probably have both worked on those skills subsequently. Most don't. I have worked a case where two people emptied their guns at each other in a bedroom the size of most bathrooms. One missed with every shot and one only scored a couple of hits. I am sure you have seen something similar but it was my first eye opener on how bad people can actually function under stress with a gun. My point was a 17 would be much easier to make good hits with than a snubbie. Heck, for most people a 365 will be easier to get good hits with than a snubbie.

One of the biggest proponents of the full size or dead in the streets proponents who used to post here spent his work day unarmed. Go figure. The j-frame a similar has it's place as much as a rifle has it's place and hardware isn't the biggest concern.

I laugh about that more than you can know. I constantly see people posting they carry giant guns with no problem but when you ask how that goes at work, they say, oh we can't carry at work. Then you don't carry bro. Don't tell me carrying a Staccato XC is no problem and then only do it on weekends. I agree a j frame has its place, just not with most people.

Serious question, say you have 100 chips to assign to a hypothetical fighter before sending him off to face the scenario in question. How many chips would you assign to:

1) Basic gun handling: The ability to safely draw, present the firearm, fire the firearm upon command but not before, and safely put the firearm away. 50

2) Basic managing unknown contacts skills. 10

3) Decision making under stress skills.20

4) Pure marksmanship skills, however you choose to define that. 5

5) Handgun selection. 5

6) Ammunition selection. 1

7) Unarmed skills. 1

8) CIT/Managing the mentally ill skills. 5

Good stuff there. I gave my answers based on what I saw in the scenario in question. They may vary given more generalized context.

So, again, I ask @Route 45 or you or whoever would like to answer, what varies in the outcome of this event with revolver vs Glock? What is different in the outcome if our deputy shoots 7 less times or 12 more times?

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I agree, sitting in a comfortable chair, drinking a favorite beverage, and typing on a keyboard, most can state what they would do, but in reality it's not likely what will happen. The perfect example being the Texas situation.


I'm sure, not exactly the the same, but it could be compared to drivers hitting the brakes on an icy road, and when the vehicle doesn't stop, they push the brake harder as if it will make it stop. Due to stress, and inexperience, the response doesn't change because they expect the brakes to stop them.

I suppose I have the advantage of knowing what I have done in similar situations. I'm certainly not the only one typing in this thread, and the OP is included in this, who's made use of force decisions under threat up to and including pulling the trigger to drop someone.

For *me* this is not a gun problem to begin with. I know exactly what I'd do because I'm bigger, younger, stronger, almost certainly more trained and practiced at violence, and have done it before. I would have no issue knocking him on his ass with a surprise takedown as he's slowly advancing and then controlling him on the ground. Due to policy I can't choke him out, but I can still ground and pound as necessary. 20 years from now me may have a very different way to have to deal with it, but that's ok, but let's not overlook that the hardware in the guy's hand isn't what's making the day here.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

In that scenario most should be good to go. I was speaking in more general terms. We both went to that class and probably have both worked on those skills subsequently. Most don't.

Which goes back to don't suck and how that matters more than hardware.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I just find it funny that we have actual experience and a career investigating this topic and all of that is just "ego". Besides, BBI and I are death tube riders, its like we're brothers.

Oh, hell, two things can be true. I can be both correct on the topic and an egotistical a-hole. (Please don't report me for personal attacks against myself )

 

[cedartop]

Which goes back to don't suck and how that matters more than hardware.

You know I don't disagree with that as I push training and practice any chance I get. I just don't think Hardware and software are mutually exclusive. In my own life I have been pretty hard on my hands and they are not large by male standards. Even though I am only 54 and in good shape, they are starting to give me problems. Besides warm up before dry fire, prehab, chiro, I also have found myself being more hardware focused than ever because some guns are just more comfortable to shoot. Especially if you shoot a lot. (which I have to because I have no natural gifts.)

 

[Gingerbeardman]

I read all 3 pages and all I can say is thank goodness BBI showed up cuz the rest of this is about as a helpful as watching commercials.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

“I only need 5 rounds because I don’t suck” is the some of the biggest load of ******** bravado that I’ve seen with regards to handgun selection for defensive purposes.

Probably would be if anybody said that quote. But if you're assigning it to me what I actually said was "Don't suck fixes a lot of issues."

You seem to also gloss over the whole "If you can carry a bigger gun you shoot better and that has more capacity, great, do it. If you can't, you're way better off with an LCR or j-frame than you are hopes and dreams." I'll carry a duty gun on duty. I'll carry one off duty most of the time...but I won't carry one while jogging. So is my LCR good enough for jogging or am I just wasting my time and going to wind up dead in the streets because a suicide by cop incident had more rounds fired than 5?

So why just blow me off with things I didn't say vs addressing the actual things I brought up? Do you really want a 'teachable moment' on the gun forum or just a drive by revolvers suck post? Why not simply accept that duty guns have a place, single stack concealable guns have a place, pocketable revolvers have a place, rifles have a place, etc instead of "1800s technology" sort of nonsense.