As an Ex-cop I can tell you that police force is a reactionary force. It could take 10-15 minutes or more to get to a scene and by then the situation is long gone.
Yep. One of the best phrasings of that goes like this: When seconds matter, the police can arrive in minutes!

electric-rascal on April 11, 2008 at 4:49 AM

Yep. I lived in some of the worst areas of Detroit, without a car for years. Running outside for help puts you against unknown assailants with no guarantees anyone will aid you. I would have gone in too, and locked the door to limit the number of threats.

A rabbit can only run so far, and there may be no place to run to.

Sometimes police never came, or they came after a few hours. I had a 911 operator hang up on me.

I once repeat called 911 to tell then to hurry because people were hammering my window and I didnt want to shoot them to be told I have a right to shoot them if they come in. Well yah I knew that but I lived in a slum. First, my door would be smashed and the landlord would fix it after all my property was stolen. There would be blood and guts all over and the landlord would hit me with repairs. I couldnt afford to move and the victim’s friends might come and kill me for revenge.

Probably at the bus stop where I was a sitting duck. I carried an open knife in my pocket at the bus stop

I have had to barricade a door from being kicked in, hold a shotgun on a guy trying to come in a window. He didn’t care. He was high. The police never showed on that one. I and often went room to room armed, kicking doors open, checking closets and hideouts after intrusion attempts so I could sleep nights. I slept with the shotgun next to me in bed under the blankets

I stopped calling 911 for attempted breakins because I needed credibility for serious threats.

Police do not offer protection for chicken stuff in Detroit. One neighbor surprised burglars in the house. Even though police did search the premises, the neighbor walked in on the runner in a closet later that night.

A runner goes in and runs through the house grabbing stuff he piles outside for the others. He could have come out and cut their throats. One on one he chickened and jumped out a window.

I don’t miss those days but it taught me that ultimately it is sometimes better to face danger

You are the first line of defense when it comes to your freedom. You decide if it is a Maginot Line or Patton’s Thrid Army, to pick historical opposites in effectiveness.

Not picking on you, as much as the media would like to portray that such a place exists, there is no such thing as a crime free zone. Crime can occur anywhere at any time … even in a “safe, gated residence”. Only “law abiding” citizens respect locks and gates.

Mrs Redneck won’t allow herself to become a statistic. She sleeps with a Ruger 357 next to her bed and carries a S&W 638 (described in a previous post) on her person when she leaves the house.

AZ_Redneck on April 10, 2008 at 6:31 PM

I’m not taking it as picking. I appreciate what I take as genuine concern from all who have warned me. The sticking point though is my husband.

Were I married to a man who believed in gun ownership things would likely be different. But I’m married to my political opposite. After eight years I’ve brought him around on a few things (in high school he considered himself an atheist), but I respect him and didn’t marry him with the intention of changing him.

His opinion might change one day (we do still talk about these things on a regular basis), but until then I won’t disrespect him by purchasing a gun.

As an Ex-cop I can tell you that police force is a reactionary force. It could take 10-15 minutes or more to get to a scene and by then the situation is long gone.

Yep. One of the best phrasings of that goes like this: When seconds matter, the police can arrive in minutes!

I love the flabbergasted, confused look on the faces of the news anchors. You can just tell they’re trying to figure out how to label her a lunatic and just can’t quite get there.

Yea, the intro guy claimed she was armed with a concealed carry permit – it sure looked like an S&W pistol to me!

Without practice, the revolver is likely the best option.

you have to be comfortable and confident in its use.

Exactly.

People should be able to defend themselves. Revolver or Semi Auto? Which one can you defend yourself with?

It depends on the situation and what one is comfortable with.

Breaking down my front door? I’d go with a .12 guage.

Beating my windshied in with a tire iron when I’m blocked in with no place to go? There’ll be a Glock .45 brought into the discussion.

Someone telling me to hand over my wallet while jabbing a knife in my face? Meet Mr. .38, .357 mag, .22 mag or .327 mag. that I have here where my wallet’s supposed to be.

If things are ugly enough to draw, you should shoot. Maybe you will see the threat back off as you draw in a half a second after you start, but if not, you are committed to shoot. You have to. This is why practice is so important, so that you can be aware of what is going on rather than worrying about deploying your weapon. That awareness can keep you from firing on an innocent, or hesitating to take down a real threat.

This is where Glocks (for example) get close to the revolver in ease of deployment, and practice, practice and some more practice makes the difference.

Without practice, the revolver is likely the best option. I have liked the 1911 for a long time, but it is not easy to use without a lot of practice.

Whatever anyone picks, you have to be comfortable and confident in its use. This is the best antidote to mistakes of any kind, and proper use if you need it.

There are no gun “accidents”. Somewhere in the chain of an “accidental discharge” is human negligence of some sort. The best antidote is practice and the basic four rules, always following them.

“You gotta ask yourself, do I feel lucky?”…

This is such a hard issue in some ways. At the same time, some parts of it, to me, appear quite simple. I just don’t know what lies ahead or with certainty how to prepare for it.

Hope for the best, plan for the worst. That is one solution. There are many others, and to each his own.

And God bless you all with peace through all your days.

I don’t hope to hear from Brat that her .38 +P’s worked fine. I don’t wish such a time on anyone, but I would rather hear the +P’s performed than read an obit.

This is where the “21-foot rule” came from. When someone is closer than 21 feet, you can hit them fatally with most handguns and they will still have enough time to close the distance and harm you before they die.

Harry Schell on April 10, 2008 at 7:55 PM

Not quite. The “21 foot rule” is there because at less than 21 feet there typically isn’t enough time to draw, aim and fire at an assailant.

Hollowpoint on April 10, 2008 at 8:06 PM

The 21′ rule is in place because, according to my concealed handgun instructor, it’s the distance someone can come at you within 3 steps and 3 seconds while brandishing a knife, gun, club, fist, ets.

21′ = 7 yards. Very close.

And all you folks packing those semi autos here’s something to consider. After every round fired there’s a lot of activity that goes on – sear goes back, round gets ejected, sere goes forward, new round gets placed in a chamber – all after a round has been fired. That’s assuming something hasn’t gone wrong with the magazine release. With a revolver everything occurs up to the point of firing a round and is all inclusive with no separate “body” for the gun – the magazine in the case of a semi auto.

Less moving parts, less worries, and all inclusive.

Don’t get me wrong. A semi auto has its place … a Glock .45 in the center console of a vehicle.

But for personal defense? Concealability Reliability? Just point and pull the trigger?

A revolver is the way to go.

Statistically, gunfights occur by the rule of 3s when it comes to personal defense. It ain’t like the old west or a drive by.

Gunfire occurs within 3 seconds … where talking stuck in a parking spot with someone beating your windshield in with a tire iron ….

With 3 shots fired …

And within 3 FEET of the parties involved … in other words, at arm’s length.

For point and bang, revolvers are the way to go.

on second thought …never mind!

Both? which one is primary?

Harry Schell on April 10, 2008 at 11:10 PM
The (very sad, IMO) lesson is that the human body can take incredible punishment and keep going.

.
That is why I carry a .45 ACP and a .44 Special with hollow points. It will stop the bad guy. You do not want to be in a situation to have to use the weapons, but if there is no other choice you want to stop the bad guys.

+Avoid if possible a situation where you have to use deadly force.
Harry Schell on April 10, 2008 at 11:10 PM

I can’t speak for AX, but this is my main issue with this woman. She put herself in possible danger… with the police on the way…what was she thinking? In my view, this is a nobrainer!!

The after-action study of an FBI/drug runner engagement in FL is instructive. One of the BG’s was mortally wounded early on. He managed to climb out of his car and use a shotgun to down two agents. Similarly, one agent was hit multiple times and managed to empty, reload, empty his revolver (.38 Special) and work a pump shotgun one-handed. IIRC, that agent fired the mortal round and his use of the shotgun knocked the bad guy down hard enough that he went out of the fight.

The (very sad, IMO) lesson is that the human body can take incredible punishment and keep going. That works on both sides of the equation, for the good guys and the bad guys. But it does tell anybody in a defensive situation not to expect a single round to stop things.

I have not seen the data so I cannot vouch for it, but IMO with even 5-7 seconds available, someone on a mission could cover 21 feet and have time to do bad things. In the instructors’ view, 30 feet was a better, safer, margin.

Reckoning with “our” lack of LEO experience and mindset, I have to say I would take great care of how close someone gets before I open up on them.

One thing I pray for is never to fire on an innocent, or fire wildly and hit one. The second is to not miss in firing on a legitimate threat.

Details omitted, I have seen film of people taking multiple hits of 9mm and 5.56mm. Read Blackhawk Down. The movies and their one-shot stops are not realistic. This is one reason to arm yourself with handgun, if you make that choice, that you find comfortable. If the time comes, you should launch 2-3 rounds if you think it is time to shoot.

Amendment X, I have to agree with you that one can question whether this lady should have stepped into the breach as she did. Various forums discuss this issue, and I don’t think there is a tight formula for every case. I can see why you would have failed this woman in a course, and it is a very good point.

What do you do when things turn to poo? Attack, retreat, stand your ground? IMO there are too many variables for me to proscribe a formula. In my mind, there may be some overriding goals, submitted for consideration:

+Be skilled enough that you never hurt an innocent, by mistaking them for a threat or by incompetent use of a weapon.
+Be skilled enough to never miss a legitimate threat.
+Avoid if possible a situation where you have to use deadly force.
+If you cannot avoid using deadly force to protect yourself or others, use everything you have, down to your teeth and fingernails, and win if possible. Evil is evil. Those in the community of the law-abiding have to stand as tall as possible in resistance if confronted. If you want to understand what “muddling along” and pretending it isn’t your problem produces, look at the UK. It is hard for me to critcize because the law-abiding have been betrayed by their government. That said, the only real chance the UK has of not having the highest violent crime rates per capita of any “developed” (har!) country rests with its citizens finally refusing to reelect their masters…and demanding “change” (har, again).
+Recognize that whatever legal or political savants try to sell you, you have an inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. You may not always be happy or get what you want, but nobody should take those rights from you, and if they try, you have the option to let them do it or resist. This concept is unique in the world, not endorsed by the UN or even some of our own political class, but I digress.
+Don’t ever threaten my children or family. It is a bad choice. Anyone who will give up their kids to evil without a fight…I just don’t know what to say. But there was a conversation with my ex-wife about whether she would use a weapon to save a kid or me from harm. The answer was “no, I couldn’t stand the burden of taking a life”. It is just a question of whose life she was willing to expend. I understand she was willing to toss mine, but not our kids.

I raise this issue as it is a choice you may have to make: who gets hurt or dies? It might be easier for me, but not for others and that is understandable. That quandry, that it exists, is our humanity and celebration of life.

I would prefer never to have to make the choice, and I actively take care to avoid such circumstances. I want no trouble, but I won’t accept much, either. It is a mystery to me that some expect I should accept getting mugged because I lack an effective means to defend myself lawfully.

I am 57, asthmatic, doing a desk job. Four young guys could easily stomp me into the cement, unless I was armed, and maybe even then. I have no chance unarmed, a chance armed, but in Los Angeles CA you don’t get carry permits unless you have a lot more money than I do. All you have to do to see this is to look at a sort of carry permits by zip code. Beverly Hills is in there, but Compton, where the murder rate is off the charts? Nope. So everyone in Compton is a criminal? Ah, my momma raised some stupid children, true, but they are my brother and sister (and this is true, details omitted).

My points are that I do not believe this reverence and very honorable humanity should be used as a pretext to tolerate evil.

I also believe the political class on the left is totally out of touch with reality on this issue, by omission or comission. The numbers of 20+ years of the impact of “shall issue” laws on crime of all stripes are out there and clear. Studies issued by the Joyce Foundation and the Brady Bunch have descended into fabrications over time. Sometimes I am confused what some people use for brains these days…

I don’t like conspiracy theories, but when the objective numbers and history show a path to be wrong…and someone is dedicated to it, I have to wonder.

What do you all think? (okay, I lived in Dallas 14 years)

Oh my- Amendment X, aka “The Thread Killer”.
Just one more moniker I need to bear.

Amendment X on April 10, 2008 at 10:42 PM

I do believe you can handle it!