Concealed Carry Weapons

[The Reaper]

Many people may start this new year considering obtaining a CCW permit or starting to carry a concealed handgun. The following is offered for your consideration.

There are many choices for the armed individual who wants to carry a large framed handgun under winter clothing, or for those who want to carry a peashooter in their bathing suit.

Most people will opt for an intermediate solution which is small enough to carry concealed under most circumstances, yet powerful enough to reliably put down multiple adversaries with properly placed rounds.

We will not deal with the legalities and moral issues of carrying a concealed weapon here. If you have those questions, see an attorney or a priest. www.packing.org is another place to check out your legal options. I would state that everyone thinking about owning a firearm for personal defense take a quiet moment to reflect on whether you would be willing to take another's life to protect yourself or those you are responsible for. If not, do us all a favor and do not carry a firearm for defense. Likewise, if you are the kind of person who is looking for an opportunity to brandish your piece for minor reasons or to shoot a person under anything other than deadly force conditions, do us a favor and and do not carry a firearm.

When I carry a concealed weapon, I also find it handy to carry a good flashlight, at least one spare mag, a can of OC, a knife, a cellular phone, and a set of flexcuffs. Not every situation requires lethal force. Everything that you shoot at needs to be positively identified before you press the trigger. You may have to restrain someone and not be able to hold a weapon on them until they are taken into custody. Know the laws in your area. Get to know the cops in your area. Be a good guy/gal.

Do not get your CCW mags out of the "Grab Bag" bin or from a dumpster behind the pawn shop. Buy new factory mags or better quality, test them before you use them with your carry rig, keep oil off the rounds, shoot up the carry ammo every six months or less, and if you get a mag related malfunction that cannot be remedied by a spring or follower change, smash it with a hammer or at least mark it and rotate it to training use only.

To carry concealed requires a decent holster. Please do not embarrass the rest of us and try to get by with a $3.00 nylon bargain basement "one size fits all" special. This will result in you flashing your piece, dropping your weapon at inopportune moments, and drawing a holstered weapon with the holster still attached. Don't try to use a holster meant for another weapon unless it really fits. Serious people carry serious gear. Don't put your $700 pistol in the cheapest holster you can find if you expect to carry concealed past the end of your driveway. Sticking the weapon in your belt for carry is dangerous, stupid, and makes you look like a rank amateur.

If you are betting your life on being able to stop an opponent with your handgun, you need the best ammunition that you can find. You may not be able to get LeMas, but the only reason to carry Wolf in a duty gun is if that is all you can find, or that is what you are issued. In either case, you need to be seeking alternatives. Never forget that the two loudest sounds in the world are a click that should have been a bang, and a bang that should have been a click.

Maintain your weapon. Rust, dirt, crud from last year's live fire, and pocket lint are not sexy. Clean your weapon regularly, and lube it according to the book. Function fire or function check after disasssembly. Select a safe carry condition appropriate for your threat and carry method, and use it all of the time.

Finally, serious professionals are well-trained. They got that way by quality practice and by seeking training from qualified professionals. Do not be ashamed to get good training before you start packing, or to seek additional training, no matter how good you are. I attended several classes last year. Training is an opportunity to learn things, good and bad, and to add tools to your kitbag. If your five day, $1000 course winds up teaching you one additional technique, on the day you have to draw your weapon and you need that tool, it will have been well worth it.

Your training should include instructions on when you can draw your weapon and engage an opponent. This is not television, you cannot whip out your piece and shoot at people without a very sound reason. You will be held accountable for every round you fire. You will not shoot another human being and stroll off to the applause of the cops like the good guys do on television. You may wind up in court defending your actions at great expense while your freedom is in peril, even if your actions were fully justified. You will probably be sued in civil court regardless of the criminal outcome. Know the applicable laws, know when you can/may/must act, and what to do if you do have to shoot another person. Keep a defense attorney's number in the cell phone, remember that you have the right to an attorney before answering any questions, and almost certainly should take advantage of that right, even if you think you were fully justified. Lawyering up is not a crime, regardless of what they tell you.

LEOs now have the option of nationwide concealed carry. IMHO, backup guns should if at all possible be the same caliber as the primary piece, and preferably take the same mags as well. I would hate to be in a serious gunfight and have a .45 duty gun go down in the first mag, and be left with a .38 revolver as my only backup. I would also not want to be stripping .40 rounds out of duty mags to try and transfer them to an empty bakckup gun mag while under fire.

I also prefer that backups function the same as the primary, so that you are not trying to disengage a safety only to find out that it is a decocker. I am not a fan of the "Gun of the Week Club". Find a handgun that works for you and stick with it. I have used a variety of pistols, but have stuck with 1911s as carry pistols since 1977. When I carried a Government Model primary, I carried a Lightweight Officer's Model as a backup. When a Para P-14 was my primary, I carried an alloy Para P-12 as a backup. For those with large frame Glock primaries, I would recommend a Glock sub-compact in the same caliber as backup.

I have personally attempted to concealed carry everything from a .22LR NAA Mini-Revolver to a Para-Ordnance .45 ACP at various times. Most people today with CCWs who are serious will opt for a concealed weapon in .38 Special, 9mm, .40 S&W, or .45 ACP. There are those who will use a .25, .32, .380, .357, 10mm, .44, .45 Colt, or another unusual caliber. If it works reliably for you, you can hit what you need to, and you are comfortable carrying it (literally and figuratively), that is your call. If I am in very lightweight summer clothing, I will occasionally opt for a Kel-Tec .380. If so, I will keep a Para or other larger weapon as close at hand as possible. Regardless of the caliber, remember what Jeff Cooper said about a pistol being what you carry when you are not expecting to be in a gunfight and Clint Smith's adage that a handgun is what you use to fight your way back to where you left your real gun.

Many people have asked me for recommendations on concealed carry weapons. I have taken the liberty of grabbing several of the most common intermediate size types here and taken a few pictures. The four pistols shown are available in .40 S&W, three are available in 9mm, three come in .357 SIG, two come in .45 GAP or .45 ACP versions, and the revolver comes in .38 Special or in a slightly larger frame, .357 Magnum. Three are available with accessory rails for lights. I intended to take pics of the Glock 23, the SIG 229, the HK P2000, and the alloy Para P-12. These seemed to me to be very similar in size and capacity. I added the S&W 642 for a scale comparison and for those diehard wheelgun fans. Only after I had taken the pics did I realize that I had grabbed the wrong box and gotten a Glock 19 by mistake. Have no fears, it is the same external dimensions as the Glock 23 which I will provide data for.

(Continued)

[The Reaper]

The Glock is probably the most common, largely because it works, but IMHO primarily because it is the cheapest. It has a polymer frame, and comes in a larger and a smaller version, all of which can use the larger mags. The SIG is also a common weapon favored by the Feds. It is more expensive than the Glock, and has an aluminum alloy frame. It has a larger version. I have recently acquired the HK and I really like it thus far. When it has night sights and 500 rounds through it, I may put it on my belt. It is more expensive than any of the other pistols here out of the box, and has a polymer frame. There is also a smaller version, and both of the P2000s take the HK USP Compact mags. The aluminum alloy framed Para is representative of the compact 1911s. This one has been my carry piece for about 12 years and it shows. It ran fine out of the box, I added a custom trigger, night sights, steel mag release button, S&A mainspring housing, custom grips, beavertail grip safety and extended thumb safety for cosmetic, comfort, and functional reasons. With the mods, it is the most expensive pistol here. It has about 5,000 rounds through it and I cannot remember the last malfunction it had. The majority of 1911 reliability issues are from bad gunsmithing (which includes most home gunsmithing), unnecessary modifications, and pursuit of accuracy at the expense of reliability. There are larger and smaller versions, all can use the larger mags. The revolver is an S&W 642. I consider it to be of very limited utility with only five rounds, but as long as you have five or less bad people to deal with and are perfect, or very lucky, it can get the job done. It is about in the middle of this group in terms of price. There are other models with the same caliber and the same or larger capacity, but unless you like humping around moon clips, you load it with individual rounds. Berettas are fairly common as duty guns, like the M-9, but are too large to conceal handily and have had some durability/reliability issues. If you want to carry one, that is your business. The S&Ws autos are small enough, but the company politics and reliability issues have soured me on them. If I left your favorite pistol off, send it to me with carry gear and 1000 rounds of ammo and I will consider adding it to the list.

These pistols pictured above all have virtually identical size in terms of height, width, and length.

The Glock 23 holds 12+1 rounds of .40 S&W. It weighs 21 ounces empty.
The SIG P229 holds 12+1 rounds of .40 S&W. It weighs 28 ounces empty.
The HK P2000 holds 12+1 rounds of .40 S&W. It weighs 22 ounces empty.
The Para P-12 holds 12+1 rounds of .45 ACP. It weighs about 26 ounces empty.
The S&W 642 holds 5 rounds of .38 Special. It weighs 15 ounces empty.

Carry pistols should be reliable, have decent combat accuracy, demonstrate decent ergonomics, and be readily concealable in good leather.

Anyone with additional recommendations of options to add, please post the same info as above (preferably along with pics) and explain why you think it is a good concealed carry option.

Hopefully, this information will be of value to you.

TR

[Huey14]

Great post, TR! I enoyed reading it and learned a bit, too (which is always nice ).

[STR8SHTR]

Very well said TR! Thanks for posting this.

BTW, how do you like the P229R that you have in the pictures?

[Surgicalcric]

Thank you Sir for taking the time to post this. It is very informative.

Time to start shopping.

Crip

Thanks for taking the time to write this. Very informative.

[Sten]

Thank you very much for this information.

I have a few follow up question on training. Aside from Google, what is the best way of vetting a good civilian trainer/coach? What is your opinion of the IDPA as a civilian training tool?

Again, thank you.

TJ

[frostfire]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

We will not deal with the legalities and moral issues of carrying a concealed weapon here......

.....Not every situation requires lethal force. ... Know the laws in your area.

Please remove if redundant/in wrong thread. RL has brought up one of these before.

Lethal Force from gutterfighting:

Ability, Opportunity, Manifest Jeopardy, and Preclusion, are the cornerstones of any legally justifiable act of self-defense, especially using a weapon. In "Fundamentals of Defensive Shooting" by John Farnam, there is the best explanation of these concepts that I have found to date;

There are four elements to legitimate self defense, and they must all be present simultaneously in order for there to be a situation where deadly self-defensive actions are warranted. They are:

1. Ability

2. Opportunity

3. Manifest intent (imminent jeopardy)

4. Preclusion

An "ability" is simply an injurious capacity. It usually manifests itself in the form of a weapon of some sort, but not always. Serious injury can be inflicted by many individuals using no weapon at all. The person you applied deadly force against must have been "able" to kill you or inflict serious bodily harm. Threats alone do not suffice, unless he had the ability in hand to carry them out. If you were attacked by a person much larger than yourself, or by someone using martial arts techniques, or several individuals at the same time, you may reasonably conclude that he/they had the ability to seriously injure or kill you, even though they may have been technically "unarmed." Disparity in size, age, strength, sex, and the level of aggressiveness of the involved parties are all important matters when considering the element of "ability."

When considering the element of "opportunity," we must have a situation where this attacker, in addition to having an "ability," was also in a position to bring the destructive powers of his ability to bear effectively upon you. The question is, were you within the effective range of his weapon(s)? For example, a knife or bludgeon is harmless in the hands of someone standing twenty meters away from you, yet either can be deadly if the person is standing within arm's reach, or is several meters away but closing fast. A firearm, on the other hand, is considered deadly at any range.

You are in "imminent jeopardy" when the attacker unmistakably indicates, by words and/or actions, that it is his intention to kill or seriously injure you, and further, that he intends to do so at once. Your are not permitted to use deadly force to defend yourself against nebulous threats. The danger must be mortal and imminent. It must appear that the circumstances were sufficient to occasion the legitimate fears of a reasonable person, and that you acted under the influence of those fears, not in a spirit of nengeance or criminal assault. When a person has reasonable grounds for believing, and does in fact actually believe, that the danger of his being killed or seriously injured is imminent, he is permitted by law to act in self-defense based on those appearances even, if necessary, to the extent of using lethal force. This is true even if it turns out that the appearances were misleading and the person was thus honestly mistaken as to the real extent of the danger. It is for the jury to decide whether appearances of danger were sufficient so as to justify the defensive actions that were taken.

No one is expected to wait until they have absolute and incontrovertible knowledge that a threat is real. However, there must be an overt act coupled with that threat. The point is, it does no matter if your attacker's "weapon" later proves to be a toy, or non-functional, or unloaded. So long as, under the circumstances, you had good reason to believe (reasonable belief) that the weapon was real and functional and that he intended to use it to harm you forthwith, your defensive actions will likely be considered reasonable and appropriate. Remember, you will be judged only with regard to what you knew and reasonably believed to be true at the time. You will not be judged based upon facts and circumstances of which you had no cognizance.

"Intent" is, after all, a mental process. We therefore cannot perceive intent directly. We can only infer it from the person's actions and/or words. Accordingly, it is an error to say, "He was going to kill me." How do you know? Are you a prophet, or mind-reader?

The fact is that you don't know what was going through his mind. The correct way to phrase it is: "It looked as if he was going to kill me." That way, you correctly identify your motivating factor as his actions, which you can see, not his thoughts, which you cannot see.

Intent is not strictly necessary for imminent jeopardy to be present. You can, for example, be placed in lethal danger by an individual acting with extreme carelessness but who may have no specific intention of harming you.

"Preclusion" simply means that the other options were precluded. In other words, you used deadly force only as a last, desperate resort. The jury must be persuaded that, under the circumstances, you had no logical or reasonable alternative but to use deadly force to defend yourself. Generally, the more self-restraint you use, the more "reasonable" your actions will look. In fact, "self-restraint" is a key word, particularly if you used a firearm. It is desirable for the jury to see your actions as judicious, restrained, reasonable, and retrogressive. They should believe you made every reasonable effort to abate the situation, even including the use of non-lethal force, before finally resorting to the use of deadly force. Conversely, they should see your attacker's actions as precipitous, unwarranted, barbarous, and unconscionable.

Some states require preclusion as a component of legitimate self-defense. Some more liberally-inclined state legislatures have even based "mandatory retreat laws." In general, the require a person to retreat from an attack, rather than use deadly force to repel it, even when the person attacked otherwise has a right to be where he is. Generally, mandatory retreat laws apply to every situation,except when the victim is in his own home.

The outcome of criminal and civil court proceeding alike is often determined not so much by how a particular law is written, as it is by "courtroom poker." The winner is usually the one who can cause a jury to be sympathetic to his side, and preclusion is often the magic ingredient.

The decision to use deadly force always hinges upon a balance of two opposing imperatives: risk exposure and restraint.

Exposure to risk is, of course, inherent to all human activity. Risk cannot be entirely purged from any endeavor, but is must be identified, controlled, and minimized. Everyone is expected to expose themselves to some risk during the course of their daily activities. It is an understood condition of life. However, no one is expected or required to expose themselves to unreasonable or suicidal risk.

In any situation, as a person's risk exposure increases, he is permitted by law to take reasonable measure to reduce it, restraining himself from using deadly force until such a time as risk exposure has escalated, or is about to escalate, to unacceptable levels. At that point, deadly force may be employed if it is the only reasonable avenue through which the risk can be reduced.

[UberAlles]

Guess I wasn't paying attention last time I was on this forum, just saw this and read it today. Great information, thanks.