Gun misfire in a struggle

[DoubleAdobe]

Fellas, I think, from reading the grand jury testimony that the bad guy was actually gripping the slide and/or maybe the hammer. Having carried a 229 and 226 for many years, I am familiar with how they work. Retention drills etc, taught us that if manipulated out of battery to the rear only slightly, they will not fire. The obvious solution is to not let this happen, but this may not always be possible.
In Officer Wilson's situation he fought through it, had to rack his weapon at least once and prevailed. Training is a wonderful thing, although not perfect.

 

[jimmyj]

To avoid the BG disabling your Revolver or Auto in a close smuggle:
Carry a straight razor or very sharp knife as a B/U

 

[Muss Muggins]

Further down the post you said you're not an instructor. Well, I am an instructor and I can tell you this is poor advice. If you want to see how much pressure it will take to move the barrel/slide back enough to prevent firing, use a wall/pillow/tree/desk anything that is not a person, including yourself!!!

Look, I know what you're trying to do, but it's unnecessary. The situation you describe will never happen to a person who is using a gun for self-defense. Why would you ever jab someone with your gun? If you had it out, why didn't you shoot them? That is why you carry the gun, isn't it? So, forget the subject you're pointing your gun at to do this test, the test itself is unnecessary.

For the record, it will take 12-22lbs of pressure for 99% of the semi-automatic pistols on the market today.

You've never been in a real fight, have you . . .

Here's a scenario driven by the Ferguson incident, with one small detail changed. After Brown has left the patrol car, retreated a little, and turned towards Wilson, he began to charge Wilson. Wilson fired 5 rounds. Let's say that instead of Wilson firing 5 more rounds, which happened, Brown reaches Wilson, which can happen, bear hugs him, and slams him to the ground, with Brown on top. Wilson's pistol is now pressed against Brown's abdomen, with Wilson's elbow mashed into the pavement, and 280 pounds of Brown is on top, choking Wilson . . .

Now, let's say that this is a self defense situation without an officer, just you, pumping gas, who is accosted by a robber. You draw your firearm, but as you bring it to bear with your elbow or wrist at your hip, you are bear hugged, slammed to the ground, and choked, with your muzzle pressed against an abdomen and your elbow mashed into the ground . . . .

Never happen? Actually, seems fairly likely to happen . . .

 

[FloridaFlier]

If memory serves, I believe that I read some years back that John Dillinger once tried to kill a man by shoving his .45ACP into the fellow, but then could not fire because he had put the gun out of battery. He was so frustrated that he swore he'd never trust an auto again. Must have decided to give them another chance though, because I believe he had a small Browning in his pocket when he was killed.

 

[Old cop]

I just tried this using my former service weapon, a Gen II Glock 23, and a soft (I'm old & soft too) living room chair. I don't know how much pressure I applied to the muzzle but it moved back ever so slightly and was out of battery. If I backed off a bit it would fire but I'm guessing in a real fight (I've been in a few during my LEO days) this could be a problem.

BTW I'm never going to press a gun into my body regardless of how "empty" it is. Think ND.

 

[amazingflapjack]

If real close, I guess it would be knees, bows, or coco butt, or a knife. If I was toting an auto loader, using it as a club might be better!

 

[John R]

Any gun/ammo can fail, the odds are in our favor they won't, but it does happen at the worst possible time.

 

[Rastoff]

You've never been in a real fight, have you . . .

Never happen? Actually, seems fairly likely to happen . . .

OK, let's assume that I've never been in a fight. This discussion, at least the part I addressed, is about pressing the gun into the assailant not having the assailant fall on you. Yes, if the guy falls on you, he could land on the muzzle of the gun. Yes, that would press it out of battery. Then what happens? Does the assailant just sit there, impaled on the gun?


In my previous post, there are two salient points:

• First is how unsafe and foolish it is to press the muzzle of any gun against yourself. That is really the most important part. I wasn't attacking Pecos Bill either. We've all done foolish things at one time or another. Sometimes it takes someone else pointing it out to us to be able to see it.
• Second is that the exercise is pointless. We all know that if the barrel is pushed back a small amount the gun won't fire. So, if you do the test, what have you learned? That the gun won't fire if it's out of battery. How does that help? We already know that.

Regardless of what any member thinks of my credentials when it comes to a fight, please, please don't point the muzzle of any gun at yourself at any time. This is a very poor practice and how people get shot.

 

[schgsd]

Before you take me to task about safety READ THE ENTIRE POST. You may find I mention removing the magazine and checking the chamber. Then put the magazine back in the gun and check the chamber again..... blah blah blah

It doesn't matter. What you suggest doing violates rule number 1. I realize your logic, but it still violates rule number 1.

 

[Neumann]

Fellas, I think, from reading the grand jury testimony that the bad guy was actually gripping the slide and/or maybe the hammer. Having carried a 229 and 226 for many years, I am familiar with how they work. Retention drills etc, taught us that if manipulated out of battery to the rear only slightly, they will not fire. The obvious solution is to not let this happen, but this may not always be possible.
In Officer Wilson's situation he fought through it, had to rack his weapon at least once and prevailed. Training is a wonderful thing, although not perfect.

Wilson could not have racked the pistol, nor did he testify to that effect. The capacity is 12+1. He fired twelve rounds, based on empty casings, and had one round left in the chamber.

 

[suckersrus]

....
You're right, no gun can ever be perfectly reliable in every conceivable situation. It just seems to me and a lot of people far more knowledgeable than I am that a concealed-hammer DAO revolver is about as close as it gets.

One thing you have not considered:

I have it on good authority, (a friend named Elmer) that the best and easiest way to "disable" any firearm is to simply place one's finger into the muzzle, causing the firearm to explode, when the trigger is pulled, due to over-pressure.
So, I think you guys are worrying too much about a much more complicated what-if.

 

[DoubleAdobe]

To avoid the BG disabling your Revolver or Auto in a close smuggle:
Carry a straight razor or very sharp knife as a B/U

I certainly understand what you are saying. But in the case of Officer Wilson, he would have had to give up his defensive hand/arm or his weapon to reach for anything else. He does opine about other things on his belt, and off, to include his flashlight on the seat to his right, but couldn't do it without conceding ground. Bad situation, and as you know, why they teach to not make a stand in your vehicle if at all possible. With all due respect, sir.

 

[DoubleAdobe]

Wilson could not have racked the pistol, nor did he testify to that effect. The capacity is 12+1. He fired twelve rounds, based on empty casings, and had one round left in the chamber.

I assure you, I have read his testimony numerous times. He most assuredly did manually cycle the slide while still in his Tahoe. Seek out the testimony, it is in many places on the net.
I know exactly what the capacity is, and when you read the testimony before the GJ in it's entirety, you will understand as well.

 

[Jiman]

I'm not there yet but I did get through the crime scene detective testimony and almost done with the coroners report.

The CSD found all 12 fired brass so I'm assuming the slide didn't cycle or move very much if he manually cycled the slide w/o losing a live round after firing the first time?

 

[DoubleAdobe]

Weapon did not fire because it was out of battery, numerous times. It finally did fire, through his door, window down, glass went all over according to Officer Wilson.
Then, apparently, although the weapon fired, and wounded the BG in the hand, the slide did not cycle the empty brass out. Wilson tried to fire again subsequently, it did not fire, he then did a manual cycling, rightly reverting to his training.
Then things proceeded more or less normally as regards the weapon.
It is all in the testimony, it wanders from time to time but it is there, honestly.
That is why all brass is accounted for, and apparently, no live rounds were cycled out, or we would have heard about them in the testimony.
It makes sense when you follow along with what the officer is telling you, but as I said, the questioner wanders around a little.

 

[Muss Muggins]

I'm curious. Why would you let Mr. Bad Guy get close enough to grab your weapon?

It happens. With regularity. Bravado is a ticket to the undertaker.

 

[Muss Muggins]

OK, let's assume that I've never been in a fight. This discussion, at least the part I addressed, is about pressing the gun into the assailant not having the assailant fall on you. Yes, if the guy falls on you, he could land on the muzzle of the gun. Yes, that would press it out of battery. Then what happens? Does the assailant just sit there, impaled on the gun?


In my previous post, there are two salient points:

• First is how unsafe and foolish it is to press the muzzle of any gun against yourself. That is really the most important part. I wasn't attacking Pecos Bill either. We've all done foolish things at one time or another. Sometimes it takes someone else pointing it out to us to be able to see it.
• Second is that the exercise is pointless. We all know that if the barrel is pushed back a small amount the gun won't fire. So, if you do the test, what have you learned? That the gun won't fire if it's out of battery. How does that help? We already know that.

Regardless of what any member thinks of my credentials when it comes to a fight, please, please don't point the muzzle of any gun at yourself at any time. This is a very poor practice and how people get shot.

I agree with the above, however, that's not what I took issue with, although I thank you for redirecting the message to personal safety. I took from your post the third, and perhaps primary salient point that you tried to make, that in a fight, the muzzle of your weapon will never be pressed directly against your attacker. You may revisit your post, but I saw the word "never." I still call BS. As for the "impaled on the gun" remark, I proposed that your attacker was on top, choking you. He/she would be occupying your personal space, pushing back on the slide, for as long as it took for you to go night night. Real fights are ugly things. Nobody stands toe to toe and slugs it out, or dances around and drops jabs. Fights are hands on, rolling around, grabbing, biting, twisting, punching, struggles for supremacy, generally with no clear winner.

 

[DoubleAdobe]

One thing you have not considered:

I have it on good authority, (a friend named Elmer) that the best and easiest way to "disable" any firearm is to simply place one's finger into the muzzle, causing the firearm to explode, when the trigger is pulled, due to over-pressure.
So, I think you guys are worrying too much about a much more complicated what-if.

You might want to put a winky, smiley face on the end of that.

 

[Rastoff]

I took from your post the third, and perhaps primary salient point that you tried to make, that in a fight, the muzzle of your weapon will never be pressed directly against your attacker. You may revisit your post, but I saw the word "never." I still call BS.

OK, yes, I did use the word "never", but it must be taken in context. Here is the part I believe you are referring to...

The situation you describe will never happen to a person who is using a gun for self-defense. Why would you ever jab someone with your gun? If you had it out, why didn't you shoot them?

By itself it could be taken the way you said. But, when you include this, which I highlighted...

Now press the muzzle of the gun against your body until you can't fire the gun.

...and you see that I'm talking about the defender intentionally pressing his gun against an assailant. I guess it would have been better to say, "...should never press the muzzle against the attacker when using a gun for self-defense, unless you're an idiot."


I completely agree that there are hundreds, if not thousands, of scenarios we could dream up where the muzzle is pressed back and thereby rendering the gun unable to fire while pressure is applied. If that's what you're calling BS on, I concur, it's impossible that it's impossible.

However, and I reiterate, it's foolish to press a muzzle against yourself, regardless of the reasoning. It's also foolish to press the muzzle against an attacker, dynamic situations not withstanding. If you felt it was necessary to get your gun out, why didn't you shoot him?

 

[one eye joe]

One thing you have not considered:

I have it on good authority, (a friend named Elmer) that the best and easiest way to "disable" any firearm is to simply place one's finger into the muzzle, causing the firearm to explode, when the trigger is pulled, due to over-pressure.
So, I think you guys are worrying too much about a much more complicated what-if.

DO YOU RELLY WANT TO HAVE YOUR FINGER IN THE BARREL OF AN EXPLODING FIREARM ? ? ? HOW MANY TIMES HAS ELMER SUCCESSFULLY DONE THIS ? ? ? I WOULD SAY NEVER--UNLESS HE IS EVEN DUMBER THAN HE SOUNDS……..