What some clueful instructors carry as their defensive firearm

Some in the gun community are like women~~they shave their heads because every tactikewl instructor shaves their head. It is like celebrities, some people act, or wear clothes a certain way because that is the way the big shots do it. I call it lemming syndrome.
I shave my head because I'm mostly bald and refuse to pay$15.00 plus trip for a haircut when nature's done most of the work.

Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk
 
I shave my head because I'm mostly bald and refuse to pay$15.00 plus trip for a haircut when nature's done most of the work.

Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk

Not everyone in the operator/gun community shaves their head because they are going bald. It is called a fad, no offense to those who have a legitimate need to shave their head.

There are those who follow, and do as the crowd tells them. Then their are those who find their own way.
 
Last edited:
The military version of SMU from the DOD Dictionary of Military Terms is...
"A generic term to represent an organization composed of operations and support personnel that is task-organized to perform highly classified activities. Also
called SMU."

http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/new_pubs/dictionary.pdf

Don't feel bad Ziggy...within the context of this thread perhaps it would be better if SMU meant "some members understand".

To hope for more might be overly optimistic.
 
When I see "SMU". here's what i think of. For you young whippersnappers, that is Doak Walker, one of the greats of the golden era of Southwest Conference football.
 

Attachments

  • idoak walkerndex.jpg
    idoak walkerndex.jpg
    9.3 KB · Views: 18
If the majority of reputable instructors as well as those who routinely put themselves in harms way all choose the same basic gun to count on if life is on the line, I don't think it's very wise to nonchalantly dismiss that fact. Even if it is different from my choice, I want to know precisely why they chose what they did and not try to explain it away by twisting the narrative to fit my preferences. The reasons could be irrelevant from my perspective or actually not be applicable to my particular circumstances or I could be wrong and lack understanding and insight.

John Correia/Active Self-protection posted this awhile back... John P Correia - I've watched about 5,000 gunfights at... | Facebook

It both confirms and contradicts different parts of my opinions in terms of what is likely to occur in a civilian gunfight. I'm actually pretty impressed with John's overall analysis and ability to see the big picture and discern and convey the basic learning points in the numerous videos he's narrated, so his opinion is always worth serious consideration as far as I'm concerned.

All guns are not equally viable choices just as all martial arts are not equally effective. If you wanted to be a successful MMA fighter, some systems have proven to be more effective than others in that context. Someone can dismiss the results and choose to enter the cage with no training other than in some flowery Kung-Fu style, but any rational and knowledgable person would advise against it. The same principal applies to selecting firearms.
 
I think maybe...

I have never understood what makes Glocks so polarizing. To me they are just an option amidst many good choices.

I think maybe the fact that to people that aren't knowledgeable about guns hear 'Glock' and to them it means 'gun' because they've heard about them so much. They don't think, "I'm going to buy a gun. What type should I get" but, "I'm going to go buy a Glock."

Glock also did a super marketing job by offering LEOs heavy discounts, similar to what Apple Computer did by giving computers to school. Both happened a long time ago, but that momentum is still there.
 
Last edited:
Don't like Glocks . Don't like Da Sigs . Don't Like Berettas . For sure don't like Highpoints . Does not bother me that others do but they ain't my cup of tea so I don't own any of them . I love 1911 style autos and Browning HP's but only carry my 70 Series Colt of the two . I carry most my double action revolvers and even on occasion carry a single action just cause I like to . I carry what I like not what anybody else says I should . I shoot better with guns I like to shoot so that is what I carry . Today its a 32-1 loaded with 125 grain RNFP lead and 2.8 grains of TiteGroup . At 15 yds all shots stay in a tea cup and are only 1/2" high . Don't need 15 of them to ruin your day cause 5 is more than plenty .

Eddie
 
Last edited:
I think the word...

I have a safe full of guns from full size to subcompact. All of them are criticized by other gun owners as either unreliable, inaccurate, not enough capacity, ineffective caliber, wrong grip angle, poor trigger, poor sights, unsafe... on and on and on... even had a renowned holster maker tell me some of my guns had unsafe paradigms and were so dangerous he refused to make holsters for them. Hell, I didn't even know my guns were equipped with paradigms.

For reasons that remain unexplained like a paranormal phenomenon... my handguns are reliable, I shoot them to my satisfaction and have experienced no accidental, negligent or otherwise unintentional discharge with any of them. And get this... I'm not even an instructor.

I think the word 'design' would be better there in place of 'paradigms'. But never pass up an opportunity to use a big word, even if you have to squeeze it's usage a bit in order to fit in.

PS If someone told me my guns had unsafe paradigms, I'd like them to tell me what exactly was unsafe.
 
Last edited:
If the majority of reputable instructors as well as those who routinely put themselves in harms way all choose the same basic gun to count on if life is on the line, I don't think it's very wise to nonchalantly dismiss that fact. Even if it is different from my choice, I want to know precisely why they chose what they did and not try to explain it away by twisting the narrative to fit my preferences. The reasons could be irrelevant from my perspective or actually not be applicable to my particular circumstances or I could be wrong and lack understanding and insight.

John Correia/Active Self-protection posted this awhile back... John P Correia - I've watched about 5,000 gunfights at... | Facebook

It both confirms and contradicts different parts of my opinions in terms of what is likely to occur in a civilian gunfight. I'm actually pretty impressed with John's overall analysis and ability to see the big picture and discern and convey the basic learning points in the numerous videos he's narrated, so his opinion is always worth serious consideration as far as I'm concerned.

All guns are not equally viable choices just as all martial arts are not equally effective. If you wanted to be a successful MMA fighter, some systems have proven to be more effective than others in that context. Someone can dismiss the results and choose to enter the cage with no training other than in some flowery Kung-Fu style, but any rational and knowledgable person would advise against it. The same principal applies to selecting firearms.

Points 3 and 4...... he who gets the first good hit wins and follow up shots are necessary.................... so shoot what you like and can get good and fast hit with!!!

Back in the day...... the Deputy Director of my security Dept. ( 30 man) and I generally shot the best qualifiers...... a 95% for either of us was a bad day........ we'd often shoot head to head (just the two of us)...me almost exclusively with my slicked up DAO 3" 65 (w/ 38s) he would shoot both his issue 4" model 10 and would also shoot his Model 39........ I'd get the first shot off 90% of the time.

The 90% kept me humble....... cus 10% of the time he would have had the first good hit ...... well you know the rest of that story!!!
 
If the majority of reputable instructors as well as those who routinely put themselves in harms way all choose the same basic gun to count on if life is on the line, I don't think it's very wise to nonchalantly dismiss that fact. Even if it is different from my choice, I want to know precisely why they chose what they did and not try to explain it away by twisting the narrative to fit my preferences. The reasons could be irrelevant from my perspective or actually not be applicable to my particular circumstances or I could be wrong and lack understanding and insight.

John Correia/Active Self-protection posted this awhile back... John P Correia - I've watched about 5,000 gunfights at... | Facebook

It both confirms and contradicts different parts of my opinions in terms of what is likely to occur in a civilian gunfight. I'm actually pretty impressed with John's overall analysis and ability to see the big picture and discern and convey the basic learning points in the numerous videos he's narrated, so his opinion is always worth serious consideration as far as I'm concerned.

All guns are not equally viable choices just as all martial arts are not equally effective. If you wanted to be a successful MMA fighter, some systems have proven to be more effective than others in that context. Someone can dismiss the results and choose to enter the cage with no training other than in some flowery Kung-Fu style, but any rational and knowledgable person would advise against it. The same principal applies to selecting firearms.

Very well stated. I asked John if he had asked them WHY they chose their CCW. He replied that it was a very good question. Apparently, he did not, but hopefully he will when the opportunity next presents itself.
He did explain HIS reason for the choice of H&K, and it was a sound one.
 
Last edited:
If the majority of reputable instructors as well as those who routinely put themselves in harms way all choose the same basic gun to count on if life is on the line, I don't think it's very wise to nonchalantly dismiss that fact.
I completely agree with this statement. However, neither does this mean that the gun they choose is right for me or anyone else for that matter. It does present a good starting point.

If you truly have no idea what gun to start with, starting with something these guys use is as good as any other idea. Then the individual must go to the range and really find out if if works for them.

I've said it before, the most important aspect of a carry gun, outside of functional reliability, is that the owner be able to use it effectively. Cost, size, color or "reputable instructor" opinions are all a distant second.
 
I wouldn't judge a person's ability to defend themselves, or their ability to teach others how to defend themselves, by their appearance.

Several years ago I studied jiujitsu. The instructor was similar in build to the guy in the video, maybe even a little bigger. Put a red suit and a white beard on him and he could've passed for Santa. I still remember my first day in class. He picked me to demonstrate a technique he was teaching. He told me to throw a punch at his face. I threw a punch at his face. Before I knew what happened I was on the ground twisted up like a pretzel.

My first instructor in the "Gentle Art" was rather round and balding, not the least bit intimidating, either.

I had the "honor" of being an uke for a semester-long class at a Junior College. That mean't he not only demonstrated everything on me, everyone else got to practice and test on me. He was so fast, he made it a point to tell me before every full-speed demo what the technique was so I knew which way to move. The slightest hesitation to move the right way with a joint lock mean't a sprain or worse. Throws were almost as bad.

Watch Rob Leatham some time if you think big guys can't move fast.
 
The first qualification I did with my current agency, the officer next to me complained loudly that there was no way I could have (1) drawn faster than he did, (2) shoot faster than he did, (3) finish faster than he did, and (4) shoot a higher score than he did. After all, HE was shooting the mighty Glock 22, and "that old man" was shooting an old-fashioned Smith & Wesson revolver (for the record, a Model 686-6). Therefore, "that old man" had to be cheating.

Our rangemaster asked him how long he'd been shooting. "Five years!"

Then he asked me. "Since I was five." (I was considerably older than ten.)

I still carry a revolver(s) and will retire next year. So far, none of the regular officers are beating my qualification scores. Of course, some of them don't take advantage of free range time and training opportunities. Those that do are getting closer.

Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk
 
Couldn't help but notice he did kinda sorta take a shot at the XDS.

Don't think he's an XD fan. He compares XD's to a McRib here...

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PShoOEUjlGg"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PShoOEUjlGg[/ame]
 
Last edited:
Some in the gun community are like women~~they shave their heads because every tactikewl instructor shaves their head. It is like celebrities, some people act, or wear clothes a certain way because that is the way the big shots do it. I call it lemming syndrome.

Really? You’re comparing guys who shave their heads to people who worship celebrities?
 

Latest posts

Back
Top