Carrying Concealed--What and How

Status
Not open for further replies.
TL/DR I have owned just about every kind of handgun, and every kind of action that there is. I got training I don't like manual safeties. I sold them all and bought 9 mm Glocks. /TL/DR.

As far as I'm concerned we are done buying guns. We only have to buy one caliber of handgun ammunition. We only have to stock two kinds of magazines and the standard magazines for all of our guns are currently legal in Colorado. All of our carry guns are functionally identical. None of our carry guns have an external safety.

As far as how. I carried in various ways until I started working as an armed guard then I decide to standardize as much as possible. I carry on my right hip right along the seem of my pants in a Galco CM holster (at work it would be a Safariland).

I came to the exact conclusion you did but I was lucky enough to not be attacked by a meth head. I am pro American products but Glocks are just too good and I shoot them well, and never a problem with safety engagement / disengagement. I like all the same brand of holsters too.
 
While I can agree with much of the OP's well-articulated conclusions on concealed carry, there is one thing with which I cannot totally agree:
From this, I reached the same conclusions as Rob Pincus: ...; it should not require an operation separate from drawing and presenting to disengage a safety; ....
Pincus' bias against handguns with manual safety levers, particularly 1911s and Berettas, is well-known, and he's probably sold a lot of Springfield XDs and Glocks. His idea that the two-piece triggers (inserts in triggers such as Glock's "safe action" and XD's copy that render the trigger blocked unless a finger on the portion of the trigger actually pulls it) are "manual safeties" cracks me up. I have noted in particular that a very large majority of the younger firearms "trainers" and "instructors" widely disparage safety levers on handguns while some even posit that they render the firearm less safe in the event the gun must be used in a lethal force encounter.

Now, I would say that if one is going to carry a gun with a manual safety lever, one should train extensively with it; but it doesn't take too long before the act of taking the gun off-safe, especially with a 1911 type frame-mounted safety, is totally instinctive and occurs with the draw and presentation. I liken this to the difference between driving a car with an automatic transmission or a stick shift. With proper training and experience, one can shift gears effortlessly, without having to think about it, but primarily, quite safely. I 've witness competitive shooters for the past forty years or so operating 1911s quite efficiently.

If one prefers a manual safety lever on a handgun, that's a personal choice, and I cannot agree with those that preach the gospel that a safety is a bad choice.
 
Pincus' bias against handguns with manual safety levers, particularly 1911s and Berettas, is well-known, and he's probably sold a lot of Springfield XDs and Glocks.
No, not on 1911s. Rob's "bias" has to do withe a safety that must be disengaged in an operation that is not pert of drawing, presenting, and firing.

It became mine without his influence when i failed to disengage the safety on a firearm with which I was intimately familiar. The other day we had a post in another thread in which someone recounted a similar experience.

There are tow issues--the small delay, and the risk of failure to disengage.

II's one thing to experience that at the range or in a class, and another to have it happen in a use of force encounter.

liken this to the difference between driving a car with an automatic transmission or a stick shift. With proper training and experience, one can shift gears effortlessly, without having to think about it, but primarily, quite safely.
Human factors engineers have long known that dissimilarities among car controls, including headlamp switches, wiper controls, defrost switches, and other things can lead to operator error and accidents, even when a driver has two dissimilar cars with which he is very familiar

I 've witness competitive shooters for the past forty years or so operating 1911s quite efficiently.
Rob makes n exception for the 1911, for a very obvious reason: When one draws and presents the pistol. one's thumb engages the safety (1) automatically, without even a subconscious effort, and (2) in a positive manner.

The safety is in about the same place on the SR-9c, but (1) it takes a deliberate effort to disengage it, and (2) the thumb pressure may not do so in a positive manner

I like the 1911 design.

In a different pistol I prefer a grip safety, but absent that I'll do without a separate safety.
 
Here’s an example of the worlds best driver making a totally silly mistake due to what had been engrained in his mind for years. 7A527CD5-4929-4142-89BA-359C75E16D04.jpeg I believe you should never add a safety after you’ve trained years without one.
 
Boiling this down some more....

The OP was not about "what kind of gun do you like". It was about examining the requirements for a self defense firearm, and using that analysis to narrow don the list of firearms from which to choose.

In an effort to keep from becoming too "inside baseball" in terms of a structured requirements analysis process, I was just a bit informal, and I skipped some steps.

What I did was establish as requirements some that were really derived, lower tier requirements, without actually having shown how to derive them from true primary requirements.

We should start at the top and work down. We do not start with "I need a Glock", unless we already know that we intend to acquire a gun that operates exactly like the Glock that we already have.

Let's try it from the top, just to illustrate the process.

Perhaps we can agree on the following as primary requirements:
  1. The firearm must be effective for real world self defense.
  2. It must be concealable.
  3. If must be something that one can and will carry all the time.
  4. It must accommodate the physical abilities and limitations of the defender.
That should be about it. Everything else, I think, can be derived from those.

Let's start with the first one and work down from there.

To be reasonably effective for self defense, a firearm for primary carry must ...
  1. ...provide adequate terminal ballistics--penetration, etc. (one might equate that to "the performance of it and its ammunition must at least approximate FBI testing protocols).
  2. It must facilitate fast shooting with combat accuracy--a balance of speed and precision (that will get into recoil, and thus into caliber maxima. size and weight minima, and into rigger pull, grip size, etc).
  3. It must have enough capacity without a tactical reload (that will be subject to judgement).
  4. It must be reliable.
  5. It must be able to be readily brought into action very quickly, without unnecessary delays.
When we think about those, we should be able to eliminate from consideration quite a number of handguns, but it will not lead us to an obvious choice. For that, we have to consider the other primary requirements--and do some shooting.

In the OP, I listed as one of my requirements a rather 9mm semi-auto with a certain desired ammunition capacity. But those were really derived requirements, that stemmed from the first three in the second set above.

The bit about the separate safety derives from the fourth and fifth items.

To illustrate further, the first and fifth items would eliminate Bat Masterson's ten shot Savage .32ACP, which incidentally, I like a lot.

I hope this helps get the idea across.

Now, let's go to the second requirement--concealment.

There is no "one size fits all". what one person may be able to conceal, in his or her attire, will obviously doffer from that of another. It's an an individual thing.

The same thing applies to some extent to what one may want to carry all day.

These requirements will probably eliminate an eight-shot N-Frame revolver from consideration for just about everyone, but after that, it's an individual manner.

To the extent that this indicates a smaller or lighter firearm, we may have to compromise on some of the performance factors.

The last requirement--taking into account the physical capabilities and limitations of the carrier--may be a simple as choosing a pistol that requires less effort to rack the slide, or it may affect the choice of grip. Or it may have to do with recoil tolerance, and require cartridges with less effectiveness.

Now, since we are not defining requirements to submit to a manufacturer, what we have done is shorten the list of acceptable off-the-shelf items. We are not yet at the point of saying "the requirement is for a particular Glock in 9MM".

To get there, or to a SIG or Springfield or Ruger, we have to do some shooting, and if at all possible, try a firearm in a defensive pistol class.

I hope people find this useful.

Full disclosure--when I started carrying concealed a more than a decade ago, my understanding of defensive shooting was insufficient to support the successful conduct of the process described above.

As a result, stores made a number of sales of firearms and holsters that I did not really need.
 
Not to intentionally derail Kleanbore's well-intentioned thread … but Pincus has, in fact, spoken out against manual safety levers, to include the 1911, going back at least twelve or thirteen years. He's a celebrity trainer, one of those who make their money selling videos and getting paid for appearances at gun schools and the remaining few firearms-centric shows on cable/internet/satellite media. Therefore, I'm not willing to lend him any more credence than the guys that actually still work in occupations where they carry firearms, and teach those who do.

Perhaps we can agree on the following as primary requirements:
  1. The firearm must be effective for real world self defense.
  2. It must be concealable.
  3. If must be something that one can and will carry all the time.
  4. It must accommodate the physical abilities and limitations of the defender.
When people say things such as (2) and (3), I get somewhat concerned. First, even full-size handguns can be relatively easily concealed by even smaller or average-sized individuals. Most issues with concealment stem from (a) people worried more about their clothing style than actually concealing a handgun and (2) what's in their heads about whether or not people are going to detect their concealed handgun -- hint: 99% of the folks you're around in public don't notice what gender you are or what color your shirt is.

Some might benefit from watching the actual video from an event that happened up here a couple years ago, when an armed tweaker spent a bit of time in front of a local Wal-Mart in mid-day -- actually holding his pistol, waving it around -- and numerous citizens entering and departing the store didn't pay him any mind, notwithstanding the fact that he'd just fired a couple rounds into a vehicle he was attempting to car-jack.

As far as (3), if one is determined to carry and effective weapon, one will. But the prevailing suggestions typically are that the smaller the better. Regrettably, a substantial portion of folks frequenting internet firearms forums subscribe to this notion.

I guess my sole point to all this would be, with all due respect to the OP, that I'm not gonna be one to suggest that anyone should agree on any "rules" pertaining to carrying firearms as "primary requirements." I have a friend who easily conceals a 4" Model 629 while laughing at me for packing a SIG P-365. I think the concept of concealment can be somewhat subjective. What someone can, and will, carry all the time, is up to the individual -- based on their personal experience, trials and errors.
 
Last edited:
I guess my sole point to all this would be, with all due respect to the OP, that I'm not gonna be one to suggest that anyone should agree on any "rules" pertaining to carrying firearms as "primary requirements." I have a friend who easily conceals a 4" Model 629 while laughing at me for packing a SIG P-365. I think the concept of concealment can be somewhat subjective. What someone can, and will, carry all the time, is up to the individual -- based on their personal experience, trials and errors.

Totally agree.
 
Training

Now this is going to be a little bit off topic but I want to talk about the value of professional training a little bit.

I've worked as a security guard for 12 years. For almost that entire time I have carried a buck knife and a gerber multi-tool on my left side in two upright Bianchi double stack single magazine carriers.

When I first got my concealed handgun permit I carried my spare magazines in a similar magazine carrier BEHIND the multi-tool and the knife.

The very first time I got to take a professional training class I spent the entire day, grabbing my multi-tool every time I reached for a magazine. Even though I knew it was there and even though I made a conscious effort to remember to reach behind for the magazines.

Once that class was over I changed how I carry my magazines.

Now they are the first thing on my belt and I carry them horizontally in an open top carrier. So I know by feel what I'm putting my hand on.

I have not made that mistake since I made that change.

Manual Safety
I have no opinion on Rob Pincus I don't know anything about him. I don't even think I could identify him on sight.

As I mentioned in my previous post I quit carrying a handgun with a manual safety the day I accidentally engaged the safety on my gun during a drill.

I did that three times before I figured out why the gun wasn't firing and I'm positive that if it had been a real fight I would have been seriously injured or killed.

I also can think of a number of times when even on a static range, under no stress, just plinking I failed to disengage the safety on my handgun and had to stop and think about why it wasn't firing.

It's been my experience even in training that when you make a mistake like that things start to cascade and you can end up way behind the curve before you even figure out what the problem is. So no manual safety is a requirement for me.

Multiple Platforms
I don't rotate, I carry a Glock 19, in a Galco Combat Master Holster right around 3:30ish. If it's not that it's a Glock 26 in the same type of holster in the same place.

This might sound like a dumb example but my car is a Mitsubishi Gallant. I used to work for a company that had me drive either a Jeep Wrangler or a Ford Escape and I can't count the times I've been sitting in the Jeep reaching for where the cruise control on the Escape is or sitting in MY car trying to change radio stations by tapping a button on the steering column like I do on the Jeep.

Every time it happened it reminded me why I only carry a Glock 19.
 
....but Pincus has, in fact, spoken out against manual safety levers, to include the 1911,
When I trained undr him, he specifically said that the 1911 safety is a good thing, needed with that design.

He is not a fan of the 1911, but that's another subject.

Rob's opinion aside, I do not like to trust my live to a safety switch that requires a separate and distinct operation to disengage. Tat's based on personal expereince.

He's a celebrity trainer, one of those who make their money selling videos and getting paid for appearances at gun schools and the remaining few firearms-centric shows on cable/internet/satellite media.
Irrelevant.

Therefore, I'm not willing to lend him any more credence than the guys that actually still work in occupations where they carry firearms, and teach those who do.
That doesn't follow.

When people say things such as (2) and (3), I get somewhat concerned.
Why? We are speaking of concealed weapons.

he prevailing suggestions typically are that the smaller [the handgun] the better. Regrettably, a substantial portion of folks frequenting internet firearms forums subscribe to this notion.
Indeed, and that's one of the reasons I started this thread.

guess my sole point to all this would be, with all due respect to the OP, that I'm not gonna be one to suggest that anyone should agree on any "rules" pertaining to carrying firearms as "primary requirements."
Considering all of the requirements is an essential tenet of the requirements analysis process. You apparently do not understand it.

It's basic system engineering.

It does not involve "agreeing to any rules".

I think the concept of concealment can be somewhat subjective. What someone can, and will, carry all the time, is up to the individual -- based on their personal experience, trials and errors.
That should be patently obvious, and no one has said otherwise.

As I mentioned in my previous post I quit carrying a handgun with a manual safety the day I accidentally engaged the safety on my gun during a drill.

I did that three times before I figured out why the gun wasn't firing and I'm positive that if it had been a real fight I would have been seriously injured or killed.
It took me one time.

This might sound like a dumb example but my car is a Mitsubishi Gallant. I used to work for a company that had me drive either a Jeep Wrangler or a Ford Escape and I can't count the times I've been sitting in the Jeep reaching for where the cruise control on the Escape is or sitting in MY car trying to change radio stations by tapping a button on the steering column like I do on the Jeep.
That is a very good textbook example of a failure to consider human factors engineering.

They don't apply it much in car design, escape for (1) pedal location and (2) the P-R-N-D-L order of automatic transmission selector positions, which was standardized after a number of serious incidents.

Some years ago, FOMOCO hired a new CEO from the aircraft industry. One of his early actions was to direct that their car controls be standardized.
 
I have edited Post #31 to complete the analysis of the three primary requirements that I proposed.

I hope that it shows how some of them will likely apply differently to different individuals, and that that may necessitate compromise.

My objective here has not been to suggest that any one firearm is more suitable than another, but to help people apply a a structured process for deciding upon what they need, rather than selecting what they think they like in the gun shop.

It's really pretty basic stuff. Unless someone is trying to act out a second adolescence. most people apply very similar processes when they choose a car or light tuck.
 
Last edited:
This might sound like a dumb example but my car is a Mitsubishi Gallant. I used to work for a company that had me drive either a Jeep Wrangler or a Ford Escape and I can't count the times I've been sitting in the Jeep reaching for where the cruise control on the Escape is or sitting in MY car trying to change radio stations by tapping a button on the steering column like I do on the Jeep

Pretty fair example actually, we recently got a new car with the keyless button deal and how many times turning it off I still reach on the column for the keys that aren't in it is kinda insane.

I mostly shoot and carry SAO guns that have safeties in the exact 1911 place (it's why I don't carry my Hi Power and sold my SR9c and can't abide the CZ 75 safety location) because my hands know what to do every time.

I also shoot a lot of Glocks and still swipe the non existent safety on every presentation, it's amusing.

But to that point, I have a habit of primarily or nearly exclusively shooting the same platform I carry during weekly range sessions and dry fire, figure it's best to keep things consistent.
 
I shot and trained with a safety so much that I still go down with my thumb on every single gun I own. And even my DAO, there goes the thumb down before every shot. Do not try to break this long time habit either. I only shoot DAO now and if I did shoot a Light Striker fired gun, I would HAVE a safety, and would not be a problem in any way. But that is just me. I have no idea of what others do or can do nor do I care.
 
My experience exactly.

The darn thing appeared similar to the 1911, but in reality it was very different.

Too bad. I really liked it.

Yeah, replaced it with a Glock 26, no safety and is fine. But not as nice.

But I just couldn't depend on that safety 100% of my draws, wish Ruger had offered a model without it.

Edit: worth noting that with enough work I'm sure I could have trained my hands, but I was already comfortable with what I have going so I didn't want to change things.
 
One thing I have picked up on from THR is the difference between training and practice. The dilemma that was always on my mind is between the gun I would like to carry but is in a caliber or platform that I can’t run 200 rounds through at the range without serious discomfort. From what I’ve seen here is that training is not necessarily about round count. Also, it is not always necessary to run thousands of rounds through a gun to become proficient with it. Some guns are easier than other to achieve proficiency.
 
Last edited:
My experience exactly.

The darn thing appeared similar to the 1911, but in reality it was very different.

Too bad. I really liked it.

Shot the SR9C so often never had one single problem engaging the safety. Feels perfectly natural. And it is not going anywhere. Too nice a gun. In fact will taking it out to the range today.
 
Shot the SR9C so often never had one single problem engaging the safety.
That had been my experience, until that first time.

I would not want to risk such an occurrence in the stress of a dynamic critical incident. Too much at stake.
 
About safeties - I shoot a 1911 quite a bit and rarely forget the safety from a standard, beep draw. Maybe once in a hundred. I have noticed and others do that people screw up the safety (and the grip safety) in extremis. Meaning starting from a non standard position, using the nondominant hand in an injured shooter drill and drill across your body. That's a point that when things go really bad, your motor memory is specific to the standing beep start. Thus, my carry gun has no impediments to getting it into action. I don't think the manual safety offers any more safety to me than a striker system without a manual safety. My revolver has none and the only difference is trigger pull. Human factors research has demonstrated people ND with DA triggers also - because their finger in on the trigger.

The car analogy:

Now, I would say that if one is going to carry a gun with a manual safety lever, one should train extensively with it; but it doesn't take too long before the act of taking the gun off-safe, especially with a 1911 type frame-mounted safety, is totally instinctive and occurs with the draw and presentation. I liken this to the difference between driving a car with an automatic transmission or a stick shift. With proper training and experience, one can shift gears effortlessly, without having to think about it, but primarily, quite safely. I 've witness competitive shooters for the past forty years or so operating 1911s quite efficiently.

1. I've seen competitive shooters at the top screw up the safety on their 1911s.
2. I drove stick for three cars over 30 or so years. I did it quite wheel. One day, I fell and broke my wrist, ribs and badly sprained my ankle. Instead of waiting for the paramedics, I said I would drive myself to the ER in my stick car. This was even after I passed out when first gotten to my feet by bystanders. So I drove a stick car with one operable hand and foot. Duh, I made it. That being said - my next car was an automatic.

I would carry my 1911 if that was the only option. But it isn't. I've notice that most of the top trainers have moved from 1911s to Glocks (or similar). I recall one mocking the Glocks as he carried a 1911. The only one true gun after the Miami shootout lesson. Guess what he shoots now.
 
That had been my experience, until that first time.

I would not want to risk such an occurrence in the stress of a dynamic critical incident. Too much at stake.

And again we are all different. You are not me and I am not you. That Said, I EDC nothing but DAO now. And I do not ride a reset, never have and never will. I am sure many others do differently, but that is fine by me as well.
 
I'm 5' 7" 155 lbs and 77 years old. I carry a Kimber UCC II in .45 ACP. In the Navy I trained with the 1911 and left the Navy an expert marksman with it. I have no problem with the safety. I, on occasion, carry a Firestar M43 9mm X 19. No problem there either as it's safety is the same as the Kimber. I carry both OWB and/or IWB depending on where I'm going and what I'm wearing that day.
 
While the thread title says “what and how” it seems to be focused solely on WHY. I have no issue with kleanbore’s line of thought thought but it seems inappropriate to label one’s conclusions as ‘rules’ or ‘requirements ‘ when some subjective points are obviously disputable.

If/when I am asked for advice by someone wanting to conceal carry I advise:
1: start carrying whatever you have.
2: train with it.
3: don’t attach you ego to your weapon selection .

Everything else will follow.

I see the bigger issue for most people is whether or not they will actually carry a gun not whether they can find the perfect tool. So you want to cc? Then go ahead and strap that ruger single six on your belt and start using it. Flops too much? Get a better holster. Spend more time reloading than shooting? Get a d/a or semi. Etc. etc. having buddies to shoot with and try their guns is helpful too. If you can keep training and keep an open mind you’ll figure out what works best for you and be armed every step of the way. The biggest hangup is insufficient training to properly vette a platforms strengths/ weaknesses or EVER attaching your ego to your current weapon such that you’re reluctant to change it up and would rather argue about its features (Glock vs 1911, 9mm vs 45 ) than go outside and shoot.
 
While the thread title says “what and how” it seems to be focused solely on WHY.
The reason for concealed carry should be self evident.

What we have been trying to do here is suggest that people step back from what they think they know about guns and shooing and evaluate how to best select what they should carry, and how, to stay safe in the unfortunate event that the tool becomes the determinant.

The best way to do hat--or to choose a light truck, or a sump pump or a kitchen rage--is to start by defining the requirements. That starts at the top, with overarching primary requirements.

I proposed a few that should apply to every civilian concealed carrier. No one has added any, or suggested any changes..

How best to meet those requirements, and what compromises should be made, have to be determined by each individual.

The military used a structured top-down requirements analysis approach in the selection of their new pistol. One of their requirements was interchangeable grips--they are constrained by having to issue one system to everyone. We are not. What we choose can be a function of what is best for each of us.

biggest hangup is insufficient training to properly vette a platforms strengths/ weaknesse...
ABSOLUTELY!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top