how common do you think this mind-set is?

When I was stationed in Calif. We had three ranges on base for pistol and shotgun. We had sixty Law Enforcement Agencies using our ranges. The local PD's would not let a pistol on the street unless it had 250 trouble free rounds down range. If if hung up at 249, the clock was reset to zero.
 
I worked at a gun-shop in Hialeah fla for a few years
I remember one guy who brought in a model 19 S&W and a remington 870pump shotgun, both were smeared internally and externally with some black slime.. I asked what this guy used for gun oil... he said CRISCO!
we declined to buy either gun.
 
Ammo is hard to come by and expensive.

Difficult to practice as much as you should.

A retired cop friend says always practice with the defense ammo you carry.

That's nearly impossible. You're lucky to score a 20 round box of quality defense ammo a couple times a year.

Still, some practice is better than none -- and necessary.

One good thing is I have a couple guns that were bought new and kept in a drawer for a few decades unused then finally sold by the purchaser's widow.

Good source of collectables.
 
Last edited:
I was in my LGS about 6 months ago when a guy was buying a .410/.45LC derringer. First thing he did was snap at another customer without a mask that "he was too close", but I digress.
He was trying to open it, couldn't so the sales guy showed him, to which he replied "can you write that down for me?"
He then asked if he could shoot .38 spl with it.
Told "no", he moved on to ask if he could get a shoulder holster for it.
I'm thinking, "for a small 2 barrel derringer?"
He then asked about ammo, was told where he could find some, and went off and came back with a small box of 5 rounds of .410.
Clearly, if he remembers how to open it, he'll load 2 rounds and think he's good to go.
I'm thinking he'll never practice with it, and if he ever has to pull the trigger, he'll miss and scare the hell out of himself in the process.
Thought it would be good for the LGS to have someone (like me) to coach him a bit about what he should do, as well as sell him a gun.

I think I’ve met that guy. Did he have a man bun and wear socks with sandals? If u look at his paperwork he’s 112lbs 30 yrs old and has same address as his parents. But he does have 3 degrees and makes a great mocha latte grande. Yes I know him well
 
I'm shocked he bought a M39 for CCW.
If your argument is that Model 39s haven't been made for decades and parts are a problem, this is true. On the other hand, they were the Illinois state police issued duty weapon from approximately 1967-1980. One of the reasons for issuing the Model 39 was that it was a pistol that could be carried on or off duty (required back then, don't know about recently, as I retired in '93). The thought was that troopers would be carrying the off-duty pistol that they carried on duty.
 
I think I have an apt analogy. A home do-it-yourselfer buys a hammer (often the cheaper the better) and puts in a drawer confident it will drive a nail when needed. A cabinetmaker owns several hammers for different tasks and has driven many nails with each of them, making sure he has the right hammer for the right job.
Which kind of hammer owner are you? Are the others all wrong? HMM...
Froggie
 
This won't provide any solace I'm afraid, but many people legally carry loaded firearms on their person and in their vehicles without ever receiving any familiarization training or firearms training with the gun at all. Many do not know the first thing about the guns they are carrying.

Today, this is not rare....it's the norm. These kinds of folks constitute a very real danger not only to themselves, their families and neighbors, but to those of us around them.

This is not the concealed carry sub forum and I expect the moderators to move the thread.

Here in New Jersey there are many dumb laws. Based on the above, the New Jersey law that you qualify on your carry weapon for both safe handling and accuracy does seem to make sense as it forces all who legally carry be familiar with their carry weapon.

In my qualification class we had to shoot 50 rounds including 10 at 25 yards and 5 rounds one handed with each hand. I had never shot any gun one handed so in addition to practicing 25 yards I practiced one handed at 5 yards BEFORE the qualification test. The qualification instructor requires us to load only 5 rounds in the magazine so we had to safely load the magazines and insert them in and out of the weapon 10 times during the test.
 
Last edited:
Well, I was impressed with the original owner winning department matches with a model 39…

Of course he was competing against other guys in his department, each of whom was competing … with a Model 39…

Actually, a Model 39 is a very comfortable, dare I say, natural pointing weapon, so I can see the guys who really made an effort to shoot them well getting good results. Just sayin’. I know the 39 series appeals to a lot of shooters, including myself.

Froggie
 
I’d dig a little deeper about Grossman before I hung my hat on his posturing. I’ve met him . . .

I'm sure that's a factor too. But I've heard it out of people's own mouths; they're scared of litigation e.g. their brother's neighbor who's a lawyer sez they get people in hot water for using those evil dum dum boolits all the time. OK no one actually said that specific story, but (shocking, I know) there is still a lot of ignorant fear out there.

From reading LTC Grossman's On Killing, I'm also convinced that a large percentage of people who want a gun for defensive purposes want it to go bang and make noise, but taking out a threat is not something they wish to think about or consider. Grossman calls it posturing and firearms are great for that. It doesn't mean the rest of us are bloodthirsty psychopaths, but that we've mentally and psychologically conditioned ourselves for a defense encounter (or, if your profession requires it, an offensive encounter).
 
I’d dig a little deeper about Grossman before I hung my hat on his posturing. I’ve met him . . .

Normally, in debates, one offers a counterpoint, not a demand that the other party do more research to prove their point. What did I state that I should reconsider? Use of a weapon to intimidate without intent to harm or kill is pretty much his definition.

I missed a chance to meet him just last week; several of my friends went to TX to a conference he spoke at. But I'm saving for a trip in a different cardinal direction.
 
This isn’t a debate and my comment was merely a friendly suggestion . . .

Normally, in debates, one offers a counterpoint, not a demand that the other party do more research to prove their point. What did I state that I should reconsider? Use of a weapon to intimidate without intent to harm or kill is pretty much his definition.

I missed a chance to meet him just last week; several of my friends went to TX to a conference he spoke at. But I'm saving for a trip in a different cardinal direction.
 
He probably figures the gun was carried and fired by someone familiar with firearms, therefor it is broken in, functions properly. "Those in the know" know that a NIB handgun needs some "breaking in", get those moving parts used to working with each other, remove any small burrs and rough spots, etc. And one must get the feel of it, practice drawing, etc. Not to mention seeing where it shoots.
 
Last edited:
When we traded in our issued Model 15s for new stainless Model 64s I would not leave the range w/o putting some rounds down range first. Interestingly I was the only one of over 300 sworn officers who insisted on doing this.
 
If you are in a self-defense situation and your pull you weapon only to hear "CLICK," it will be the loudest, and perhaps the last, sound you'll ever hear.

I had a nice Browning HP which I had a well-known gunsmith work on, that I carried when I got it back, before I personally fired it. It would not shoot. Three tries to get a round to go off. The gunsmith wanted me to return it to him and told me he had fired it. I had no reason to doubt him. We decided that changing the firing pin spring would be the place to start. He sent one ASAP and when I installed it, the gun ran like a sewing machine. I learned then to NEVER carry a pistol I haven't personally fired and my preference is about 200 rounds before I view the gun as trustworthy.

Just my .02.
 
Unfortunately lots of people think that way.

That just the mere carrying of a weapon makes them safe. My brother in law and his wife are perfect examples. They asked me for some advice when they got them. Subsequent to that, months ago. I do not think that they have fired any of their guns. This despite me telling them that they have just succeeded in giving themselves a very dangerous false sense of security.
 
That just the mere carrying of a weapon makes them safe. My brother in law and his wife are perfect examples. They asked me for some advice when they got them. Subsequent to that, months ago. I do not think that they have fired any of their guns. This despite me telling them that they have just succeeded in giving themselves a very dangerous false sense of security.
Can you say "talisman"?
 
I bet this mind set is more common than you think .

The population seems to be suffering from two things
1.) A gross lack of common sense .
2.) The Pandemic no one talks about ... " The Screaming Stoopid's "
No cure , no vaccine ... no smart pills ... the WHO ignores the problem ...
Dr. Falseky doesn't even talk about it . I can see it in people's actions and speech every day ... Just like what the OP cites !

You are going to bet your life on someting untried and untested ?
My Dad would say ... " Boy ... don't be acting the fool ! " and my old man had a lot on the ball .
Gary
 
Last edited:
I was amazed and shocked... why would anyone trust a pistol they had yet too fire even once as their concealed carry handgun, to me the idea is incredulous/ absurd!

I see it all the time.

I don't carry anything that I haven't put a thousand rounds through. And I'm not just talking about a B27 at 10 yards ... I make sure I'm regularly shooting a variety of different LEO qualification tests to keep things interesting and more dynamic.

That also lets me weed out the guns that are terrible, or cool but probably not worth carrying. Even after just a hundred rounds, the strengths and weaknesses of a particular gun come to surface ... and that helps me decide whether it's something I'd want to trust my life to.

All of my carry guns are bone-stock. Glock and Wilson know a lot more about building guns than I do ... so I choose to spend my money on training. As is almost always the case, the limiting factor isn't the gun; it's the guy holding it ...

Mike
 
Back
Top