Carrying Concealed--What and How

[entropy]

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. View attachment 883582 I believe you should never add a safety after you’ve trained years without one.

I believe you should train with a safety lever first, then when that's ingrained, if you want to switch to a gun without one, no harm, no foul. I try to thumb the non-existent safety to OFF all the time on Glocks because of my years with 1911's. Better than NOT trying to thumb the safety to OFFon a 1911 when raising one up to the line of sight.

But then I am from that generation that thinks you should learn to drive a stick first before an automatic.

 

[Hartkopf]

I believe you should train with a safety lever first, then when that's ingrained

But then I am from that generation that thinks you should learn to drive a stick first before an automatic.

I’m also from the stick shift generation but I went the Glock route within 2 months of shooting. I feel like you are in more control of your vehicle and have more responsibility with a stick. With a Glock, ALL of the responsibility lies with your trigger finger (and brain of course). The safety is just an unneeded step in my view. Except for something like pocket carry where kydex is not protecting the trigger.

I have nothing against what other people prefer. I just don’t like extra steps.

 

[JERRY]

muscle memory is key. you will fight like you train, and when your life is truly at risk by a surprise assault you will develop tunnel everything and lose fine motor skills.
while I have various guns, the ones I carry/have for self defense are similar in deployment. because I have non-pistol savvy folks at home, I have guns that are as revolveresk as possible. no safeties to engage or disengage, no special this or that, they are all loaded and ready to go, just point and pull the trigger. Glocks, Seecamps, DAO J frame sized revolvers, all round out the go to's.

if you employ a shotgun, pick one style. the safeties are different locations and that might make a big difference in real life. if you use a Walther PPK, I'd recommend against the use a 1911 also. if you have to look at your firearm for loading, unloading, deploying... you need more training.

this is not an absolute as there will always be those that can transition to different guns without any issue when they are being attacked, and there will always be those that choke and fail to perform on even a basic level with only an audience watching them.

 

[94045]

The NAA guns don't have the preferred caliber and are difficult to use. However, empirically they have saved folks lives usually in close in circumstances. I have a story somewhere where two old geezers in Florida took on a shotgun wielding crook in a restaurant with a 22 Mag Mini and a 22 Mag High Standard derringer. They put rounds in his belly and he fled. Saved a waitress.

They are carried if you appreciate their characteristics.

I've had 3 acquaintances through the years that have had to defend their life with a gun by actually shooting someone.. All were successful. One was a single mom with a 12 ga and 00B, One was a disabled single father with a .single shot .410 with #6 Bird and one was a Ret Command Sgt Major with a .44 Mag with 240 gr hunting rounds. All were successful and were not charged which is the best ending for a bad situation.

 

[Kleanbore]

In the OP, I outlined a structured process that should be useful in selecting a handgun for concealed carry.

One of the factors ("requirements", in system engineering jargon)that I listed pertained to the physical abilities and limitations of the carrier.

Those things vary with the individual.

The comment brings to mind hand strength, hand size, arthritis, recoil sensitivity, and other things, such as upper body strength as it relates to racking a slide.

Not all shortcomings are permanent or chronic. Some years ago, I banged my elbow on a cabinet very hard. I was in a cast, and I had to carry a revolver for a while.

In 2018, I underwent open heart surgery. For some time, I could not rack the slide on my XDS 9 4.0.

When I could carry again, I found a .45 STI Guardian much easier. But it is heavy.

I was recovering well, and then WHAM! Elbow again. That was about two weeks ago, and for some days I could not rack a slide.

The new S&W Shield 9 EZ caught my eye.

I went out to look at one. The slide effort is light; the trigger is great; I like the grip. I prefer the one with the grip safety only.

I would like a slightly longer barrel. I don't think I would fare all that well with it in a two day defensive pistol course.

Fact is, I won't be attending any more of those.

One of my suggestions in the OP--a lesson learned, for me--is to try a gun before buying it.

I did not do that. The reviews and my examination were enough--I think.

A Crossbreed OWB holster is on the way.

The pistol is certainly thin enough to carry inside the waistband, but I don't really find that very comfortable.

Good decision? I hope so.

 

[Kleanbore]

More on the Shield 9 EZ: Some historical trivia:

As I was looking at the thing, I noted some similarity with the Colt Model 1903, and I looked up the dimensions:

It is a little more than 1/8 shorter than the Colt 1903 in .32 ACP.

It is just over 1/2 inch higher.

It is 3/10 inch wider (though it's thinner than a J-Frame revolver).

Obviously I am old.

 

[Smokepole14]

Another vote for the vedder light tuck. The most comfortable kydex holster I’ve ever had. I forget my G43 is there. To me the kydex holster is the safety. It keeps the trigger covered and when u draw there’s no needed step to disengage the safety. Put the gun back into the holster and viola safety is back on.

 

[94045]

More on the Shield 9 EZ: Some historical trivia:

As I was looking at the thing, I noted some similarity with the Colt Model 1903, and I looked up the dimensions:

It is a little more than 1/8 shorter than the Colt 1903 in .32 ACP.

It is just over 1/2 inch higher.

It is 3/10 inch wider (though it's thinner than a J-Frame revolver).

Obviously I am old.

The similarity that struck me when the .380EZ came out was to the .45 Shield. Almost identical size although the .380 is just a little longer (3.675" barrel vs 3.3").
Of course one is striker / two-piece trigger and the other is hammer / grip-safety.

 

[Craig_AR]

Kleanbore,
I appreciate this thread, and as an old system engineer (SE) , I'm good with your starting off with requirements. For the crowd, I'll point out that we SEs try to get folks to narrow down the core requirements (needs) and also identify their "desirements" (wants). [Getting some folks to admit to themselves that some of their supposed requirements are actually desirements is an advanced process for SEs.] Once those are nailed down, then we can work on best solution, moderated by the cost and time limits.
Just over ten years ago, after a few years of range shooting, I decided to start carrying. My first EDC purchase was a J-frame snubby, S&W 642. My stated requirements at the time were revolver for simple operation; easily concealed, pocket or IWB; DA only (no nervous light trigger pulls); shrouded or hidden hammer (to avoid catching in a pocket); and lighter color (642 rather than black 442, so bad guys will see it if I have to present). At the time I gave little thought to the holster, but first got suckered onto one of the "cell phone belt pouch deep hidden" holsters at the gun show. That was a mistake. After extensive recommendations here on THR, went with a Robert Mika pocket holster.
Other mistake, putting off for years any defensive tactical training, concentrating only on range accuracy and groups.
Now, many years later, several speakers at the NRA Expo in Fort Worth convinced me I need to re-evaluate y SD firearm requirements.
Primary new requirement is much higher capacity, preferably double stack. John Correia (Active Self Protection) showed how bad guys are working in groups more in recent years. Years of reading arguments about "best" calibre for SD, led me to move from .38SP to 9mm. Lots of reviews got me to narrow down to a M&P 2.0 9 mm. I am experimenting with two IWB options, a simple single clip from Mika, and a modern hybrid from Tucker.
Which to use and where to put it will eventually be influenced by my first tactical class (correcting my earlier mistake), at the end of February.
Also, Kleanbore, the recent review of the M&P Shield9 EZ in American Rifleman has caused me to put that on my "gonna need it someday" list. All the reasons for the EZ are compelling. I agree with you it is quite interesting.
Thanks, all, for some very good comments in this thread.

 

[Garandimal]

In the OP, I outlined a structured process that should be useful in selecting a handgun for concealed carry.

One of the factors ("requirements", in system engineering jargon)that I listed pertained to the physical abilities and limitations of the carrier.

Those things vary with the individual.

The comment brings to mind hand strength, hand size, arthritis, recoil sensitivity, and other things, such as upper body strength as it relates to racking a slide.

Not all shortcomings are permanent or chronic. Some years ago, I banged my elbow on a cabinet very hard. I was in a cast, and I had to carry a revolver for a while.

In 2018, I underwent open heart surgery. For some time, I could not rack the slide on my XDS 9 4.0.

When I could carry again, I found a .45 STI Guardian much easier. But it is heavy.

I was recovering well, and then WHAM! Elbow again. That was about two weeks ago, and for some days I could not rack a slide.

The new S&W Shield 9 EZ caught my eye.

I went out to look at one. The slide effort is light; the trigger is great; I like the grip. I prefer the one with the grip safety only.

I would like a slightly longer barrel. I don't think I would fare all that well with it in a two day defensive pistol course.

Fact is, I won't be attending any more of those.

One of my suggestions in the OP--a lesson learned, for me--is to try a gun before buying it.

I did not do that. The reviews and my examination were enough--I think.

A Crossbreed OWB holster is on the way.

The pistol is certainly thin enough to carry inside the waistband, but I don't really find that very comfortable.

Good decision? I hope so.

Think this pistol will turn out to be a thoroughbred in the M&P stable.

Iconic Girl&Geezer pistol, like the Glock was for LEOs.

Time will tell, but consider it a very good choice.




GR

 

[94045]

Think this pistol will turn out to be a thoroughbred in the M&P stable.

Iconic Girl&Geezer pistol, like the Glock was for LEOs.

Time will tell, but consider it a very good choice.




GR

Of the newer female shooters at the club it seems 50% have been going .380 .EZ and 25% Glock 42.

It's kind of amusing that those are the two pistols I hear the most, "What were they thinking?' comments on. The 42 should have been a 9mm and who would buy that (.380 EZ) was all I heard.

The 9mm EZ on the other hand is getting a different customer. Generally older shooters transitioning from guns they no longer have the strength to run well or younger woman moving up from the .380 EZ.

I would say the EZ Line is not going anywhere soon.

 

[Kleanbore]

I appreciate this thread, and as an old system engineer (SE) , I'm good with your starting off with requirements. For the crowd, I'll point out that we SEs try to get folks to narrow down the core requirements (needs) and also identify their "desirements" (wants). [Getting some folks to admit to themselves that some of their supposed requirements are actually desirements is an advanced process for SEs.] Once those are nailed down, then we can work on best solution, moderated by the cost and time limits.

Ah! Someone who really understands the process, and did so before I tried to outline it.

Just over ten years ago, after a few years of range shooting, I decided to start carrying. My first EDC purchase was a J-frame snubby, S&W 642. My stated requirements at the time were revolver for simple operation; easily concealed, pocket or IWB; DA only (no nervous light trigger pulls); shrouded or hidden hammer (to avoid catching in a pocket); and lighter color (642 rather than black 442, so bad guys will see it if I have to present).

I, too, started with a 642, but in spite of my professional background, I failed to start with requirements. I just chose it because it would fit into a jeans pocket without snagging.

Now, many years later, several speakers at the NRA Expo in Fort Worth convinced me I need to re-evaluate y SD firearm requirements.
Primary new requirement is much higher capacity,

Yes, our requirements do evolve as we learn and gain experience.

Good post!

 

[Kleanbore]

The 9mm EZ on the other hand is getting a different customer. Generally older shooters transitioning from guns they no longer have the strength to run well or younger woman moving up from the .380 EZ.

It was certainly aimed at a different customer, but we cannot yet draw many conclusions about who is buying it.

Everyone who has handled my EX likes it. The slide racking effort is part of it, but so are the trigger pull and the grip safety. Those would have influenced me without the other.

 

[Trey Veston]

I'm in the middle of transitioning to a new carry gun and I reached the same conclusions in my selection criteria as the OP.

I ended up with a P365 with a safety.

I've had a CCW permit since 1994 and my first gun for that role was a Ruger P90 and then a S&W 686 4". What a couple of tanks! I finally settled on the M&P40c back in 2007, then got caught up in downsizing and then upsizing and now have a G19, an M&P40c with and without a safety, and an XDS 40 that all were in my carry rotation.

Ordered the P365 after some soul-searching and brutal honesty about what gun I would carry all of the time, would have enough capacity to make me comfortable, and what features would allow me to carry it in condition 1 with no concerns.

I've been a in a couple of situations in which a firearm was needed, and a couple of situations in which it saved my bacon. In each incident, I fell back to my combat handgun training in the Navy decades ago. It was my first such exposure to a Hogan's Alley and I carried a 1911.

I learned that my mind does not go blank; it goes on auto pilot and the act of sweeping the side of the slide to disengage a safety is done without me even thinking about it. If no safety is present; no big deal. My brain goes on to the next task of focusing on the threat and letting the booger hook know when to do it's thing.

One time, my brother and I were hunting in the deep woods and we saw a flash of what we thought was an elk. He saw me swing my rifle up and heard the click of the safety go off as I bore down on the movement. It turned out to be a whitetail doe. He mentioned later how impressed he was by how fast and instinctual I was in clicking off the safety. That was with a rifle that I rarely ever shot and certainly never had any meaningful range time with. It led to a long discussion about self-defense and weapons platforms (he's a Detective and SWAT team member). We concluded that some people are just wired differently.

Some may need to carry a firearm without a safety because their brains are unable to process the required information efficiently enough in a self-defense situation. Other's don't have that issue.

 

[MTNSTRYDER]

I have carried a gun for more than 40 years.For most of them it was a Ruger Blackhawk in 45 my life was and is outdoors.I started with a first shot is the only shot idea and Saw no reason to change that for the city and druggys and car jackers.I have updated to a double action 45 but still believe only the first shot counts,but I also carry one or two NAA 22mags somewhere.just in case.
I have never needed my gun and hope I never do But if I do but I will not show a gun unless it’s to put down what needs to be put down and I expect my first shot to do the job.You don’t need the latest wonder 18 shot you just need to practice the first shot over and over again

 

[Kleanbore]

I started with a first shot is the only shot idea ....I have updated to a double action 45 but still believe only the first shot counts ... I expect my first shot to do the job.... you just need to practice the first shot over and over again

I hope you never have to rely upon your expectation.

Should that first shot not happen to strike a critical hidden, moving internal body part that you cannot see to target, you would be in a world of hurt.

That's why police officers and civilians who have really looked into the subject train to shoot several shots very rapidly without taking valuable time to evaluate the effects of the first shot or the second or the....