I recommended a 22LR for self defense/conceal carry today

[Mister X]

Untrained people with absolutely no training or range time successfully defend themselves with firearms all the time. Even children. Usually just producing a weapon does indeed end the conflict or firing off shots does. If not, the gun itself does most of the physical work and the distances involved in civilian self-defense are extremely short, so a high level of marksmanship skill is not necessary. I just don't think it takes much(or perhaps any) range time to likely be able to defend oneself with a suitable firearm in many possible defense scenarios, so much of what is prioritized by many shooters is irrelevant IMO. It's just not that difficult to shoot someone that is two to three feet away.

Does anybody have any stats on incidents of people who were armed during their assault, but unable to get to their weapon? Civilian shootings are relatively rare, but violent crime isn't and most people don't carry a gun. The problem(s) that needs addressing are the most likely potential points of failure in defending oneself and choosing a weapon that is inherently more efficient in that contex. Thise things are often completely overlooked by many shooters, and it's not lack of marksmanship since longer range civilian shoot-out are astronomically rare, but an inability to see the situation soon enough to avoid or escape the situation or get the gun out. Beyond that, protecting against the initial assault, effectively using the gun due to contact, movement, instability, or an inability to retain the gun. And yes, I think caliber matters in instances where the (determined) attacker(s) is not deterred by the defender simply having or firing their weapon or even being shot.

These are not advanced skills when conducted in the proper context, but can be taught immediately. I used to hold corporate self-defense and sexual assault prevention courses for executives when I lived in the city. These were relatively short-lived classes, so no time was wasted and functional skills were taught from the get-go. I don't see basic avoidance tactics and ECQ gun skills being any different or more difficult to learn.

 

[Ziggy2525]

...
These are not advanced skills when conducted in the proper context, but can be taught immediately. I used to hold corporate self-defense and sexual assault prevention courses for executives when I lived in the city. These were relatively short-lived classes, so no time was wasted and functional skills were taught from the get-go. I don't see basic avoidance tactics and ECQ gun skills being any different or more difficult to learn.

You keep saying that you have this special knowledge, based on your 30 years as a DT instructor, of a few simple skills that can be taught immediately with no time wasted that can save peoples lives. What are they?

Why not either start a new thread about it (like some here have requested) or just post them right here. Think how many lives you could potentially save with a single post.

 

[buzzkillbob]

It's easy to be a tough guy on the interwebs. Heck, a true lion doesn't need to tell you he's a lion! There's something to be said for quiet professionals... :-|

 

[BB57]

The NRA tells us that every year there are approximately 2 million
incidents where people use guns for self defense. In 96% of these
incidents shots are not necessary because of the intimidation value
of the gun.

When shots are necessary, about two thirds of the remaining 4%
stop voluntarily. Maybe they were not even hit. Maybe they were
hit but it did not cause a deadly wound. Whatever the cause, they
don't want to get shot at again, so they run, or stop and surrender.

The remaining approximately 1.36% is our main concern. Up to this
point the lowly .22 can, and does, fill the bill. But when the S.H.T.F.
we need to stop the attack.

It's all about assessing your risk, right? There's something like 225 million adults in the US. Using your numbers from the NRA, that would mean there's a .01% (1x10e-4) chance in any year of being in a circumstance that a .22 might not work. That doen't factor in any skew that occurs due to people's bad lifestyles choices (people that buy illegal drugs, etc.) or the crime rate where people live. I don't carry a .22, but even a .22 improves your odds a lot.

These posts pretty well nail it and it's why both armed citizens and police officers get away with carrying and even shooting firearms that they in no way shoot effectively in a real world shoot.

If you already shoot an Airweight .38 badly, carrying a .22 LR that you shoot better isn't much if any of a handicap.

And that's the irony I see in the arguments in this thread. Shot badly, no handgun cartridge is significantly more effective than any other, but most of the time you just need a handgun that is "good enough". It goes like this:

1) carry a concealed handgun, and you may start displaying better situational awareness and/or appear less afraid in the face of an approaching threat and your odds of avoiding a life threatening situation increase, even though the gun is never even drawn.

2) Draw a gun in the face of an imminent threat and a competent petty street criminal will do what he or she is trained to do - turn and run to avoid getting shot - and your odds of getting killed or injured again decrease because a gun is present, even if you never fire it.

3) If you shoot it and miss, a fair percentage of assailants will turn and run because they are facing an armed victim who is actively shooting at them, even if they are shooting badly.

4) If you do have to shoot and hit your assailant - anywhere - the statistics are pretty clear that about half the time the assailant will stop the assault once he or she has been shot, in order to avoid being shot again.

5) However, in that other half of self defense shoot, you're going to need to keep shooting until the assailant is down.

6) If he or she is also armed with a hand gun you'll need to shoot effectively while receiving fire, which will produce a great deal of stress and your shooting will need to be second nature as there will be no mental bandwidth available to focus on any thing you have not completely mastered.

6 1/2) This should include the ability to move away from the attacker and toward cover.

7) If the assailant is armed with a knife or blunt object, then you again need to know how to move to get off the X, how to create space to employ a handgun, and how to retain and shoot a handgun from a close in retention position.

----

In 1 through 4 above, it doesn't matter what you carry. Anything is better than nothing.

In 5 and 6 above, if you learn to shoot the way I described above, you are covered. Here, what you shoot matters but what matters more is that you start with a handgun that fits you well and doesn't cause you to develop a flinch or other bad habit. You can always move to a more effective cartridge later once you've mastered the basics.

In 6 1/2 and 7 it matters a great deal what you carry as you need to be able to shoot it well and you need a cartridge with good terminal performance. However 6 1/6 and 7 also require another skill set that blends the use of a handgun with movement, and with other self defense techniques.

You'll note I never discussed focusing on a tactical reload, as a reload is almost never required in an armed citizen self defense shoot. That said, it's not a big deal to add it to your training. Make every reload, including administrative reloads, a tactical reload. If you practice once a day you'll get 365 repetitions per year. Practice 3 times each day an you'd have over a 1000 reps a year, and you'll start to get good at it under stress.

If you carry a revolver learn how to reload it quickly using a speed loader and the FBI, Universal or Stress Fire methods. There are pros and cons to each.

The FBI reload is fastest, but it was designed for revolvers with full length ejector rods shooting .38 Special, it has reliability issues with short ejector rod revolvers (barrels less than 3 inches, and with the longer and often sticky .357 Magnum cases.

The Stress Fire reload is a bit slower, but it works with DA revolver with a swing out crane, and with sticky .357 Magnum cases.

The Universal reload is a bit of a hybrid. It's slightly slower but much more reliable than the FBI reload. It's also slightly faster and slightly less reliable than the Stress Fire reload.

All of these methods use the strong hand to manipulate the speed loader, and it should be carried on the strong hand side.

 

[Mister X]

You keep saying that you have this special knowledge, based on your 30 years as a DT instructor, of a few simple skills that can be taught immediately with no time wasted that can save peoples lives. What are they?

Why not either start a new thread about it (like some here have requested) or just post them right here. Think how many lives you could potentially save with a single post.

I'm not sure what you're wanting, am I supposed to write a book on here? There are too many variables to give overly simple solutions although people do it all the time. Trying to learn to fight by the numbers simply doesn't work. It's like asking me for an easy solution and fail-safe moves to win a street-fight. It's not as simple and as straight-forward as target shooting, but it's not necessarily as complex as many make it out to be as being some super-advanced set of skills.

I've already gave the outline of what I would address. I hold no special knowledge that you can't find through many sources. Most of my self-defense understanding and knowledge comes from my martial art background, not defensive tactics. The DT came later and was simply a branch-off from my martial arts background. Armed ECQ training is very similar to training unarmed skills and pretty much any instructor well-versed in it will have an extensive H2H/Combatives/Martial Art foundation. It's very different from pure shooting, but shooters want to approach the issue like they do pure shooting problems, when effective solutions are better achieved by addressing it as a Combatives problem, which is what it truly is.

The self-defense/sexual assault prevention courses I mentioned usually took place in three hour blocks over three days, but some applicable skills were learned over the first hour. Longer term training is obviously much better, but few will commit to it and you never know when an assault could happen, so learning some effective skills as soon as possible makes sense and how I recommend approaching the issue.

 

[Kanewpadle]

I'm not sure what you're wanting, am I supposed to write a book on here? There are too many variables to give overly simple solutions although people do it all the time. Trying to learn to fight by the numbers simply doesn't work. It's like asking me for an easy solution and fail-safe moves to win a street-fight. It's not as simple and as straight-forward as target shooting, but it's not necessarily as complex as many make it out to be as being some super-advanced set of skills.

I've already gave the outline of what I would address. I hold no special knowledge that you can't find through many sources. Most of my self-defense understanding and knowledge comes from my martial art background, not defensive tactics. The DT came later and was simply a branch-off from my martial arts background. Armed ECQ training is very similar to training unarmed skills and pretty much any instructor well-versed in it will have an extensive H2H/Combatives/Martial Art foundation. It's very different from pure shooting, but shooters want to approach the issue like they do pure shooting problems, when effective solutions are better achieved by addressing it as a Combatives problem, which is what it truly is.

The self-defense/sexual assault prevention courses I mentioned usually took place in three hour blocks over three days, but some applicable skills were learned over the first hour. Longer term training is obviously much better, but few will commit to it and you never know when an assault could happen, so learning some effective skills as soon as possible makes sense and how I recommend approaching the issue.

I think he's asking what certifications do you hold? That's assuming that a piece of paper means anything.

 

[eb07]

I think he's asking what certifications do you hold? That's assuming that a piece of paper means anything.

I already asked and was ignored. That means a lot.

 

[Mister X]

Certifications are generally for shooting instructors, which I'm not. I've already previously discussed my background on numerous occasions.

 

[Muss Muggins]

How much? Send me a quote for 11 participants, two hours . . .

I'm not sure what you're wanting, am I supposed to write a book on here? There are too many variables to give overly simple solutions although people do it all the time. Trying to learn to fight by the numbers simply doesn't work. It's like asking me for an easy solution and fail-safe moves to win a street-fight. It's not as simple and as straight-forward as target shooting, but it's not necessarily as complex as many make it out to be as being some super-advanced set of skills.

I've already gave the outline of what I would address. I hold no special knowledge that you can't find through many sources. Most of my self-defense understanding and knowledge comes from my martial art background, not defensive tactics. The DT came later and was simply a branch-off from my martial arts background. Armed ECQ training is very similar to training unarmed skills and pretty much any instructor well-versed in it will have an extensive H2H/Combatives/Martial Art foundation. It's very different from pure shooting, but shooters want to approach the issue like they do pure shooting problems, when effective solutions are better achieved by addressing it as a Combatives problem, which is what it truly is.

The self-defense/sexual assault prevention courses I mentioned usually took place in three hour blocks over three days, but some applicable skills were learned over the first hour. Longer term training is obviously much better, but few will commit to it and you never know when an assault could happen, so learning some effective skills as soon as possible makes sense and how I recommend approaching the issue.

 

[Ziggy2525]

...
These are not advanced skills when conducted in the proper context, but can be taught immediately. I used to hold corporate self-defense and sexual assault prevention courses for executives when I lived in the city. These were relatively short-lived classes, so no time was wasted and functional skills were taught from the get-go. I don't see basic avoidance tactics and ECQ gun skills being any different or more difficult to learn.

I'm not sure what you're wanting, am I supposed to write a book on here? There are too many variables to give overly simple solutions although people do it all the time.
...

The self-defense/sexual assault prevention courses I mentioned usually took place in three hour blocks over three days, but some applicable skills were learned over the first hour. Longer term training is obviously much better, but few will commit to it and you never know when an assault could happen, so learning some effective skills as soon as possible makes sense and how I recommend approaching the issue.

Why would it take a book? You taught these basic skills over a few hours.

I'm not interested in your certifications like @Kanewpadle suggested. I could care less about your resume. You've been pretty vocal with your critique that pistol people just don't get it. Cool. You're right, they're all wrong. What's your solution that you're able to teach to non-athletic business women in 9 hours that's better than the OP teaching his wife's friend to protect herself with a .22 as a starting point?

 

[Kanewpadle]

Certifications are generally for shooting instructors, which I'm not. I've already previously discussed my background on numerous occasions.

No sir. It wasn't discussed. It was stated.

 

[Mister X]

How much? Send me a quote for 11 participants, two hours . . .

Those were in the mid-90's in Chicago. I honestly have no clue what I was paid.

 

[Muss Muggins]

Those were in the mid-90's in Chicago. I honestly have no clue what I was paid.

I'm interested in now. We'll pay hotel and air for two-three hours training, 11 participants, mostly female. Of course, we'll need to see a CV and references first. Totally not kidding. How much?

 

[Mister X]

Why would it take a book? You taught these basic skills over a few hours.

I'm not interested in your certifications like @Kanewpadle suggested. I could care less about your resume. You've been pretty vocal with your critique that pistol people just don't get it. Cool. You're right, they're all wrong. What's your solution that you're able to teach to non-athletic business women in 9 hours that's better than the OP teaching his wife's friend to protect herself with a .22 as a starting point?

There is a reason why most folks generally recommend getting such training in person rather than through books and video. You can ask me how to defend against a punch, but unless you can give me specific details about the type, angle, positioning and distance between the participants as well as some basic physical characteristics of those involved, it's hard to give a detailed answer. There are general principles and concepts, but if you're looking for specific detailed solutions, you have to define the specific problem in detail.

In terms of this topic I would recommend learning to recognize pre-attack indicators, go over avoidance strategies(including physical movement) and stress situational awareness from the start.

In terms of physical fighting skills...
-Basic unarmed defensive skills to survive the initial assault.
-How to access the weapon while physically engaged.
-Retention shooting positions.
-Basic weapon retention
-Incorporate some movement into dry-fire practice.

All these things can be done pretty much anywhere and should be introduced as soon as possible. In terms of actual range shooting methods, I would include retention, one handed firing from natural postures and incorporated some limited movement at very close-range from the get-go. Outside of ECQ scenarios, there simply isn't much to learn IMO. And I would highly recommend she get a enclosed hammer snub in .38 special and explain the reasoning behind it and demonstrate how the inherent advantages it offers fits in with what I'm teaching her.

 

[Muss Muggins]

Those were in the mid-90's in Chicago. I honestly have no clue what I was paid.

The last time you taught a class was 25 years ago?

 

[Muss Muggins]

I have discussed this with my boss. We will pay airfare and hotel for a 2-3 hour class. Eleven participants, maybe a couple more. Give me available dates, a CV, and references . . .

There is a reason why most folks generally recommend getting such training in person rather than through books and video. You can ask me how to defend against a punch, but unless you can give me specific details about the type, angle, positioning and distance between the participants as well as some basic physical characteristics of those involved, it's hard to give a detailed answer. There are general principles and concepts, but if you're looking for specific detailed solutions, you have to define the specific problem in detail.

In terms of this topic I would recommend learning to recognize pre-attack indicators, go over avoidance strategies(including physical movement) and stress situational awareness from the start.

In terms of physical fighting skills...
-Basic unarmed defensive skills to survive the initial assault.
-How to access the weapon while physically engaged.
-Retention shooting positions.
-Basic weapon retention
-Incorporate some movement into dry-fire practice.

All these things can be done pretty much anywhere and should be introduced as soon as possible. In terms of actual range shooting methods, I would include retention, one handed firing from natural postures and incorporated some limited movement at very close-range from the get-go. Outside of ECQ scenarios, there simply isn't much to learn IMO. And I would highly recommend she get a enclosed hammer snub in .38 special and explain the reasoning behind it and demonstrate how the inherent advantages it offers fits in with what I'm teaching her.

 

[Mister X]

The last time you taught a class was 25 years ago?

I was referencing the corporate self-defense and sexual assault courses. I was only involved with those when I lived in the City.

 

[Muss Muggins]

I was referencing the corporate self-defense and sexual assault courses. I was only involved with those when I lived in the City.

Lots of deflection going on. All of my offers still stand. Send me a CV . . .

 

[Mister X]

Lots of deflection going on. All of my offers still stand. Send me a CV . . .

Not at all, I'm just not interested. I don't need the money and I only travel to help out long established friends and colleagues. Plus I don't think you're actually sincere.

http://smith-wessonforum.com/139555350-post108.html

 

[Muss Muggins]

A: That link isn't a CV.

B:

Plus I don't think you're actually sincere.

Same here. I don't think you're anything but an internet commando, and nothing you do from here forward, short of sending me a CV, will convince me otherwise.

This interaction convinced me. You are all hat and no cattle.

Not at all, I'm just not interested. I don't need the money and I only travel to help out long established friends and colleagues. Plus I don't think you're actually sincere.

http://smith-wessonforum.com/139555350-post108.html

 

[Mister X]

A: That link isn't a CV.

B:

Same here. I don't think you're anything but an internet commando, and nothing you do from here forward, short of sending me a CV, will convince me otherwise.

This interaction convinced me. You are all hat and no cattle.

It has always been quite obvious you and many others here think that. I don't really care, otherwise I wouldn't choose to remain anonymous. There is absolutely nothing to be gained by sending you a CV. You would think if I was going to make up things, I would pick things a lot more sexy and exciting, but whatever. This is a forum, I use it for entertainment and folks are free to believe whatever they wish.

 

[Muss Muggins]

Duly noted . . .

It has always been quite obvious you and many others here think that. I don't really care, otherwise I wouldn't choose to remain anonymous. There is absolutely nothing to be gained by sending you a CV. You would think if I was going to make up things, I would pick things a lot more sexy and exciting, but whatever. This is a forum, I use it for entertainment and folks are free to believe whatever they wish.

 

[kwh]

Enjoy learning on the SR22. Next, try the Walther PK380.

 

[Kanewpadle]

Now back to regular scheduled programming.

Most of us are in agreement that 22 lr is not the ideal caliber for self defense. Depending on the velocity and bullet design some 22 lr does not penetrate very well.

Knowing this, the right bullet and choice of gun are important. Short barrels with the wrong bullet won't be as effective. Of course shot placement is extremely important when using a small caliber. I think a four inch barrel and a quality high speed copper hollow point would be best. Since most guns with four inch barrels hold ten or more rounds, hopefully one of those ten will be placed where it needs to be.

 

[Hapworth]

The pile-on's ugly and off-topic; particularly the public baiting under false pretenses.

Agree or disagree with aspects of Mister X's assertions, his essential points about armed self-defense generally being closer to combatives with an added firearm component rather than a range session practicing bullseye is fundamentally correct.

Argue the points -- not the individual -- if you're sincerely here for the discussion, and save the ad hominems for elsewhere.

 

[keith44spl]

A: That link isn't a CV.

B:

Same here. I don't think you're anything but an internet commando, and nothing you do from here forward, short of sending me a CV, will convince me otherwise.

This interaction convinced me. You are all hat and no cattle.

Has it yet to be established wither or not that Mr X knows what curriculum vitae means???


Jest askin'

.

 

[Kanewpadle]

The pile-on's ugly and off-topic; particularly the public baiting under false pretenses.

Agree or disagree with aspects of Mister X's assertions, his essential points about armed self-defense generally being closer to combatives with an added firearm component rather than a range session practicing bullseye is fundamentally correct.

Argue the points -- not the individual -- if you're sincerely here for the discussion, and save the ad hominems for elsewhere.

Hap, your missing the point.

 

[Hapworth]

Hap, your missing the point.

Well, I was going back to delete my post since I saw after I submitted it you were already putting things back on track...then this.

So -- apart from the irony that you made an assertion without explaining it, the same complaint made about M-X -- help me see the point.

 

[eb07]

The pile-on's ugly and off-topic; particularly the public baiting under false pretenses.

Agree or disagree with aspects of Mister X's assertions, his essential points about armed self-defense generally being closer to combatives with an added firearm component rather than a range session practicing bullseye is fundamentally correct.

Argue the points -- not the individual -- if you're sincerely here for the discussion, and save the ad hominems for elsewhere.

I told him repeatedly this wasn't a thread for it. This is for a brand spanking new shooter and a former firearm shunner.

I asked him to create a new thread. He just likes to cause problems. I realize that now. I also realize he is not for real and is just regurgitating others info from online sources. Anyone can do that and be anything they want online.

 

[Hapworth]

I told him repeatedly this wasn't a thread for it. This is for a brand spanking new shooter and a former firearm shunner.

I asked him to create a new thread. He just likes to cause problems. I realize that now. I also realize he is not for real and is just regurgitating others info from online sources. Anyone can do that and be anything they want online.

I get that. And I have no dog in the fight. I think you steered the new shooter well; and I think both your and Mister X's positions have their place, and by-and-large can be complementary under most circumstances.

Anyhow, dead nuts reliability and being able to run the gun always topped caliber for me.