Paradigm Shift in CCW Guns?

[.455_Hunter]

Over the years, it seems to me that a lot of “expert” wisdom for CCW guns has been to make them DA-only, with proponents stating that single action fire was unnecessary, dangerous and a legal liability. These folks have strongly stated that the S&W 642, Guardian, Kahrs or other long trigger pull weapons as the best option for CCW, since law abiding citizens can only legally shoot an assailant at close range, with sights often being an extraneous accessory.

In light of recent events (Trolley Square Mall, Von Maur Dept Store, and New Life Church), I propose that the prepared CCW holder MUST factor in possibility of having to engage a attacker FAR outside the traditional defensive distance of a few feet or yards. This would be especially true when patronizing a "shooting gallery" target zone such as mall or other large confined gathering area, not so true when walking your dog on a bike trail after dark.

It seems to me that having the capability to place accurate fire from a weapon (revolver or auto) in single action mode should not be overlooked. For example, I would select the S&W 638 over the 642, giving me a single action option while preserving the snag free draw of the hammerless design. Range time would also include shots at 50 or 75 yards, just in case.

Please comment.

The wife and I are still shaken-up about the shooting in Arvada across the street from my son’s daycare this morning.

Thanks,

Hunter

 

[ashtxsniper]

Thats why I routinely shoot out to and beyond 100 yards with my handguns that are capable of it.

 

[skinewmexico]

Shooting at someone 50-75 yards away opens a whole new can of worms. No one is consistently on target at those distances. Under stress. Sometimes there are crazies in the world, and nothing you can do will stop them.

 

[AZ Husker]

Gotta remember...those "experts" writing for the gun rags are well compensated by the manufacturers for their positive reviews. Stick with what you're comfortable and proficient with. As long as it's a legal gun, manufactured by a licensed reputable company, it doesn't matter what you use, assuming you're legal to carry.

 

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

Shooting a handgun accurately at 50+ yards is entirely possible, even under stress. Obviously it helps to practice at that distance and to use a handgun that's suited to the task.

Also, I would argue that there are circumstances where shooting at an attacker even if you're likely to miss is preferable to not shooting at all. A mass murderer on a rampage is one of those circumstances. Your stray bullet might strike an innocent bystander if it misses, but that's unlikely. The threat posed by the murderer continuing to shoot bystanders far outweighs the risk posed by your own stray bullet.

 

[ReadyontheRight]

Shooting at someone 50-75 yards away opens a whole new can of worms. No one is consistently on target at those distances. Under stress. Sometimes there are crazies in the world, and nothing you can do will stop them.

From every thing I have seen about this loser, I think someone shooting back at the recent Omaha idiot would have caused him to stop shooting, shrink into the fetal position and cry.

There is NO reason a handgun should not be exercised and used out to 50+ yards.

 

[Kind of Blued]

I just got REALLY into researching holsters and handguns for a CCW today. In light of recent events, I feel as though I'm essentially OBLIGATED to carry for a number of reasons, the main one being that I have the knowledge and willingness to potentially save innocent lives, including my own, by carrying.

In regard to your point(s), I completely agree. While I'm sure the chance of me being mugged by someone is much greater, the thing that made me truly commit to being able to legally carry is the off chance that I could save my life as well as possibly dozens of others in one of these pre-meditated mass shootings in a public place. It does as much as possible in turning "wrong place at the wrong time" to "right place at the right time".

It is for this reason (the nature of these public shootings) that I am paying as much or more attention to sight radius in my consideration for a CCW as I am of weight, price, and a dozen or so other factors. Shooting longer ranges in public places indisputably brings up many questions. You and I know that we are held 100% accountable for every bullet that exits the muzzle, but the likelihood of needing to shoot at longer ranges is becoming more of a reality in my mind, if not in real life.

This is my first post by the way, hello to all.

 

[Shawnee]

I think our politicians and their activist dictators will shun loosening up on ccw for private citizens who might actually do some good and instead, they will create more ineffective bureaucracy by claiming the answer to "mall security" is to create more government jobs manning mall "check stations" similar to those at airports. That wouldn't help situations like Arvada (also know someone close to there) or the New Life Church but politicians aren't really about helping us too often anyway.

 

[Steve C]

It looks as if it was an off duty police officer who engaged the shooter and stopped the shooting.

Ken Hammond, an off-duty officer from Ogden, north of Salt Lake City, jumped up from his seat at a restaurant after hearing gunfire and cornered the gunman, exchanging fire with him until other officers arrived, Burbank said.

"There is no question that his quick actions saved the lives of numerous other people," the police chief said.
CBS News

I'd be a little hesitant to draw and begin firing at someone across the mall unless you saw them shooting and even then its questionable that you could determine who is the assailant, who is an off duty or under cover police officer. If they bad guy is shooting at YOU and you definitely ID him then that's one thing but to identify a shooter in a crowded mall with hundreds of people running and ducking for cover, well ... there's a good chance that more than the bad guy including yourself could be shot as the exact situation is rarely apparent in the confusion. The picture they showed of the gun man firing had him behind a column or corner of some type, not roaming down the aisle in the middle of the mall.

 

[Vermonter]

The picture they showed of the gun man firing had him behind a column or corner of some type, not roaming down the aisle in the middle of the mall.

The cover was only good for 100 degrees or so? That leaves 260 degrees for someone with a CCW to take him out.

First Aid and Gun Safety with optional target shooting should be a requirement for High School graduation.

 

[1911 guy]

You've got a family, right?

I don't mean to be harsh, but you carry to protect yourself and your family. Everybody else is on their own.

I've actually shot at folks with a handgun at long range. 50 plus yards. Those front sights look damn big, people move a lot when they get shot at (whooda thunk it?) and your adrenalin and pulse will be wildly out of control. Add in running to cover/concealment, shooting from weird unsupported positions behind same and lots of heretofore uninvolved people getting in the way. Yeah, you'd think they'd all run AWAY, right? Some folks are stupid.

Now you're 50 yards out trading dirty looks and lead with some crazy, all the while cutting off an escape route for others because now there's TWO guys shooting in the Mega-Mart.

Get your family out of the area. Your CCW is for shooting down threats to that end, not leaving them in the middle of a two way shooting gallery. Shoot down Mr Gunman if he's an obstacle to your families safety. Get the Hell out of Dodge and don't spare the horses.

I carry to protect my family, not Joe Publics. He should have got his own gun. I don't get paid to shoot people anymore, so it's gonna be on my terms and those are very narrow.

 

[ZeSpectre]

Judgment calls on the scene aside, I regularly practice out to 75ft (25 yards) which is the limit of the indoor range I use. It's amazing just how tight your 15 ft patterns get when you've been doing a lot of 75ft practice.

 

[Pilot]

.455,

I'm on the Front Range also. Boy, two shootings near us. One in Arvada and one in the Springs. *** is going on?

 

[Vern Humphrey]

DA-only was popular with police administrators -- cops routinely hold suspects at gunpoint, and DA-only reduces accidental shootings under those circumstances. Remember, the issue isn't officer safety, or even the safety of the citizenry -- it's legal liability.

When someone is shooting at you, or at other innocent people, and you have a shot, take it. Apply all the normal rules of safe gun handling, including being sure of your backstop -- but if you can take the shot under those conditions, do it.

Remember, the bad guy's next shot may be the one that kills you.

 

[redneckrepairs]

I normaly carry dao ( a Kahr p9 ) and it is plenty accurate at 50 yards . With that being said , i am honestly looking at going back to a sa either a full size 1911 or a p7 just because they make the shots at range easyer than the da of the kahr . I hit fine " out there " with the kahr , but it takes more time to get consistant hits .

 

[Lanyard]

What is the distance?

.455,
I think you have brought up a great point, what are the distances of engagement for a CCW citizen? I know quite a few people use the FBI Uniform Crime Report (UCR) but I think that is a very poor data set for the civilian to use. What is the time between draw and discharge of the side arm? Is there movement between threat identification and shooting? Has any CCW been ID'd and then assaulted? Does anyone know of a good study for this info? I've looked but not found anything.
Lanyard

p.s. I used to live on the other side of that Church compound.

 

[TimboKhan]

CCW people are not cops, and are not expected to act as guardians of the realm. I carry to protect me, and although I would like to think that if I could stop a crime against others, I am certainly not going to be taking potshots at 100 yards with my revolver. CCW does not mean that you run to the sound of gunfire, you know...

 

[pax]

If you can't do the job in double action, you should not carry a double action only firearm.

That said, I'd suggest reading this article from one of the finest revolversmiths in the country (and a dang fine shot), Grant Cunningham: http://www.grantcunningham.com/blog_files/the_case_for_dao.html

pax

 

[Creature]

I regulary carry a S&W Model 36 (w/ 1.85" barrel). While I dont expect to engage a target out beyond 7 yards, in this past year I have begun to practice out to 25-30 yards with it. And that little snubby is easily capable of getting on target at that range.

I specifically built this into my routine on the chance of a mall-shooting scenario in which the opportunity presented itself to cleanly engage the shooter beyond my 7 yard "bubble".

 

[ravencon]

Also, I would argue that there are circumstances where shooting at an attacker even if you're likely to miss is preferable to not shooting at all. A mass murderer on a rampage is one of those circumstances. Your stray bullet might strike an innocent bystander if it misses, but that's unlikely. The threat posed by the murderer continuing to shoot bystanders far outweighs the risk posed by your own stray bullet.

I think this reflects a dangerously irresponsible attitude. Assume for a moment that you are civilian CCW and you take a long shot at a goblin and you miss and kill or wound an innocent bystander. The likely outcome is that whatever you own in this world will become the property of the innocent person you shot or their estate. Worst case scenario is that in addition to losing all your assets is that you will end up a convicted felon and do prison time or at least lose your right to own firearms.

Obviously any decision to shoot/not shoot will have to be decided based on the totality of the circumstances. But a civilian CCW had better seriously consider the ramifications of their actions.

 

[Cosmoline]

Unless you can routinely hit a squirrel at the distance in question with your CCW sidearm, you should not consider trying to hit a person who's shooting back. How many can hit a living, moving squirrel at long range? 25 yards is the max practical range for most people. 50 is really crazy for an ordinary CCW. You'd need a hunting handgun to engage a moving, shooting target at that distance.

 

[meef]

There's been so much chest thumping going on here recently from those who could make the long shot under extreme duress, and would do this or do that to take out the bad guy that it boggles the mind.

It sounds like an infinity of monkeys on an infinity of bongo drums.

geez....

 

[Autolycus]

Originally posted by Timbokhan: CCW people are not cops, and are not expected to act as guardians of the realm. I carry to protect me, and although I would like to think that if I could stop a crime against others, I am certainly not going to be taking potshots at 100 yards with my revolver. CCW does not mean that you run to the sound of gunfire, you know...

+1

It may sound selfish but I am looking out for myself, my family, and a few select friends. Everyone else is pretty much SOL. It is cold but I am not a cop and it is not my job to protect other people. It is the states, according to the state. In reality it is up to the individual.

 

[TimboKhan]

It is a little selfish, but it's the truth. If I could stop a crime I would, but I am not going to go dashing into the face of danger if I don't have to. Life isn't a Diehard movie, you know. As far as people who plan on taking long shots, let me tell you this: I have taken shots at human targets with a rifle in a war-time situation at ranges under 200 yards, and that was hard enough to do. If you can hit with a pistol at extreme range under extreme stress, god bless you. I can't, and so I won't.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

One of the things I see here is the liberal idea that "you have to be protected from yourself." You shouldn't have the single action option on your carry piece because "you might be tempted to do something dangerous."

If you're that flaky, you shouldn't carry at all.