What gun do you carry for your protection?

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

HappyPuppy

Lifer
Apr 5, 2001
16,997
2
71
I carry a .45 Mag stuck in my rear beltband just in case I run into a terrorist at 7-Eleven. You never know when you are going to be accosted by a baddy when you are refilling your 64 oz. Slurpee.

If I even thought someone was contemplating being a perp I would put two slugs through his chest and one through his skull, right between the eyes!

I don't trust anyone and you may be next.
 

Locut0s

Lifer
Nov 28, 2001
22,205
43
91
I carry a .45 Mag stuck in my rear beltband just in case I run into a terrorist at 7-Eleven. You never know when you are going to be accosted by a baddy when you are refilling your 64 oz. Slurpee.

If I even thought someone was contemplating being a perp I would put two slugs through his chest and one through his skull, right between the eyes!

I don't trust anyone and you may be next.

I carry a 64oz slurpee stuck in my rear beltband just in case I run into a terrorist at the gun store. You never know when you are going to be accosted by a baddy when you are reloading your gun.

If I even thought someone was contemplating being a perp I would put two slurpee straws through his chest and one through his skull, right between the eyes!

I don't trust anyone and you may be next.
 

HappyPuppy

Lifer
Apr 5, 2001
16,997
2
71
i carry a 64oz slurpee stuck in my rear beltband just in case i run into a terrorist at the gun store. You never know when you are going to be accosted by a baddy when you are reloading your gun.

If i even thought someone was contemplating being a perp i would put two slurpee straws through his chest and one through his skull, right between the eyes!

I don't trust anyone and you may be next.


rofl!
 

Schadenfroh

Elite Member
Mar 8, 2003
38,416
4
0
Own a couple of rifles, do not carry them with me. I do carry my pocket knife and pepper spray everywhere I go.
 

J-Money

Senior member
Feb 9, 2003
552
0
0
Why don't you all wear helmets and pads as you walk the streets as well?

More likely to take a fall or get hit by a car than need a gun.

There I defeated the "better safe than sorry" comments.

Face it, it's because you all just want to try to be manly.
 

HappyPuppy

Lifer
Apr 5, 2001
16,997
2
71
Why don't you all wear helmets and pads as you walk the streets as well?

More likely to take a fall or get hit by a car than need a gun.

There I defeated the "better safe than sorry" comments.

Face it, it's because you all just want to try to be manly.

Most of the kiddies who post here aren't even out of middle school. They think going on WOW raids makes them real men.
 

shortylickens

No Lifer
Jul 15, 2003
80,287
17,079
136
Any opinions on the kel-tec pf9?

The Ruger LCP is considered superior to most of the Kel-tecs in reliability and quality. The general consensus is you should not risk your life to save a couple bucks.
Of course, the Sig P238 is an even more reliable gun but it costs twice as much. For reference I have both. I carry the LCP because it has no manual safety and it always cocked. The Sig is slightly more accurate but I doubt it would make much difference when my life was on the line. I only noticed it at the range under ideal conditions.
Also the Sig has a manual safety and needs to be cocked to fire (single action only). Thats two things that can go wrong or at least eat up precious seconds I may not have to spare.
 

TheVrolok

Lifer
Dec 11, 2000
24,254
4,090
136
Why don't you all wear helmets and pads as you walk the streets as well?

More likely to take a fall or get hit by a car than need a gun.

There I defeated the "better safe than sorry" comments.

Face it, it's because you all just want to try to be manly.

Well, wearing helmets/pads would be encumbering while carrying on daily life, a properly concealed firearm is not. Risk/reward of wearing pads is possibly avoiding a scrapped knee as opposed to a concealed firearm possibly saving your life (the only time it would actually be used). There, I defeated your fail reply.
 

pontifex

Lifer
Dec 5, 2000
43,804
46
91
I'd be cool with guns if they required an IQ test to buy. Most people that have guns are too stupid to be responsible and spend most of their time drunk. I had a "friend" pull out his shotgun while wasted and we had to wrestle it from him because he decided another "friend" was to much of a slacker/mooch to deserve being alive. Now I don't really care about any of these people, but I was drunk and that seriously killed my buzz.

I also think we need to just open up Texas to gun nuts. Completely legalize all guns, and make duels legal. Just to see what happens. As long as you don't shoot someone in the back it's legal. It'd be a gun utopia and I'm sure it would make some great reality tv(plus we could finally stop getting in the way of evolution).

interesting. I consider myself rather smart, not a genius by any means, but not stupid. i own many guns and drink maybe a few times a year. hell, i've never even been drunk. I don't do drugs either.

concealed (and open) carry has been around for a long time. normal people aren't going around having duels and just shooting people at random.

Sorry, if you look at the stats, millions upon millions or people own guns. compare that to the number of accidents/illegal shootings/illegal uses of guns and it's a very small percentage.

I think you're full of shit, but then again, most gun haters are.
 

PsiStar

Golden Member
Dec 21, 2005
1,184
0
76
I currently do not live where I feel comfortable carrying. I will likely move to more open spaces soon ... so then either a Ruger or a Glock ... can't wait.

Anyone involved in the legal industry especially criminal or family law should carry. As well as anyone responsible for getting large amounts of cash *to* the bank. And not concealed very well.
 

Bignate603

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
13,897
1
0
I've spoken with my father on this a few times and I trust his judgement. He was a captain in the US Army back in the 70's and early 80's running training for urban combat. His opinion is that the vast majority of times a person carrying a handgun for self protection it does more harm than good. This was his reasoning.

1. It gives you a sense of security. Your best defense is to leave when you feel uncomfortable or unsafe. If that gun makes you feel safe and stay in a place or situation that could be dangerous it increases the chances that something will happen.
2. Pulling a gun on someone makes them react differently. Rather than just taking your wallet and running they now feel their life is threatened and it raises the chances that they'll attack you as soon as they see you're armed. For all they know you're still going to shoot them in the back if they try and run away, so they may see attacking you as the only option.
3. Most muggings, robberies and assaults begin with the victim being very close to the attacker. Your chance of getting a concealed gun out, getting it ready to fire, aiming and firing before the guy reacts and grabs you (see #2) isn't as good as you would think, especially if you don't practice it often. As soon as you're struggling with the attacker hand to hand while holding a gun the likelihood that you get shot by your own gun goes up drastically. This is why many cops put their hand on their gun as they approach situations that could be dangerous, it lowers the time to get the gun out. Unless you're walking around all the time with your hand down your pants to hold on to your concealed handgun you're probably not going to get it out in time to react to someone that's close to you.
4. For many attacks you never even see it coming with enough time to do much of anything. There was a guy on the forum a while ago that got attacked from behind at his own house. He could have had an h-bomb in his back pocket, ready to go in a split second and it wouldn't have done him any good. A handgun in that situation would have just been stolen or possibly used against him.

In his opinion its better to carry non-lethal things for self defense. If you pull mace on somebody it can stop them about as effectively, doesn't make them react like you're about to kill them (ie attack you to keep you from shooting them), and even if it is used against you you'll be ok. The most important thing though is to leave or avoid situations where you think you might be threatened or attacked.

For home defense though, he felt that firearms were a better option. You typically have an advantage of knowing your house's layout and its more likely that you will be able to get to your gun and be ready for them. His preference for a weapon inside a house was a sawed off shotgun because it was better in tight spaces and the increased spread from the shorter barrel didn't really matter when you're that close. If you use lighter shot it will chew up any flesh it hits but is less likely to penetrate walls.
 
May 16, 2000
13,522
0
0
I've spoken with my father on this a few times and I trust his judgement. He was a captain in the US Army back in the 70's and early 80's running training for urban combat. His opinion is that the vast majority of times a person carrying a handgun for self protection it does more harm than good. This was his reasoning.

1. It gives you a sense of security. Your best defense is to leave when you feel uncomfortable or unsafe. If that gun makes you feel safe and stay in a place or situation that could be dangerous it increases the chances that something will happen.
2. Pulling a gun on someone makes them react differently. Rather than just taking your wallet and running they now feel their life is threatened and it raises the chances that they'll attack you as soon as they see you're armed. For all they know you're still going to shoot them in the back if they try and run away, so they may see attacking you as the only option.
3. Most muggings, robberies and assaults begin with the victim being very close to the attacker. Your chance of getting a concealed gun out, getting it ready to fire, aiming and firing before the guy reacts and grabs you (see #2) isn't as good as you would think, especially if you don't practice it often. As soon as you're struggling with the attacker hand to hand while holding a gun the likelihood that you get shot by your own gun goes up drastically. This is why many cops put their hand on their gun as they approach situations that could be dangerous, it lowers the time to get the gun out. Unless you're walking around all the time with your hand down your pants to hold on to your concealed handgun you're probably not going to get it out in time to react to someone that's close to you.
4. For many attacks you never even see it coming with enough time to do much of anything. There was a guy on the forum a while ago that got attacked from behind at his own house. He could have had an h-bomb in his back pocket, ready to go in a split second and it wouldn't have done him any good. A handgun in that situation would have just been stolen or possibly used against him.

In his opinion its better to carry non-lethal things for self defense. If you pull mace on somebody it can stop them about as effectively, doesn't make them react like you're about to kill them (ie attack you to keep you from shooting them), and even if it is used against you you'll be ok. The most important thing though is to leave or avoid situations where you think you might be threatened or attacked.

For home defense though, he felt that firearms were a better option. You typically have an advantage of knowing your house's layout and its more likely that you will be able to get to your gun and be ready for them. His preference for a weapon inside a house was a sawed off shotgun because it was better in tight spaces and the increased spread from the shorter barrel didn't really matter when you're that close. If you use lighter shot it will chew up any flesh it hits but is less likely to penetrate walls.

Overall I think those are valid and reasonable points. I think it fails to consider proper awareness, but otherwise not bad. Having considered those factors, however, if someone chooses to carry they should be allowed to, since statistically there's no harm in allowing them to do so.
 

Bartman39

Elite Member | For Sale/Trade
Jul 4, 2000
8,867
51
91
LLama Mini Max 45

llama-minimax-45-chr.gif
 

Bignate603

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
13,897
1
0
Overall I think those are valid and reasonable points. I think it fails to consider proper awareness, but otherwise not bad. Having considered those factors, however, if someone chooses to carry they should be allowed to, since statistically there's no harm in allowing them to do so.

I don't (and he doesn't) believe in making it illegal for people to carry weapons but I feel that in the vast majority of cases it doesn't really do anything to help you and has the potential of harming you.

Also, "proper awareness" is wrapped up in reason #1 I gave. If there's anything that you think is suspicious or threatening you leave. Even if you have to literally run away you're better off running and looking silly than sticking around and getting in a bad situation. The best dangerous confrontation is the one that never occurs.
 

sourceninja

Diamond Member
Mar 8, 2005
8,805
65
91
I've spoken with my father on this a few times and I trust his judgement. He was a captain in the US Army back in the 70's and early 80's running training for urban combat. His opinion is that the vast majority of times a person carrying a handgun for self protection it does more harm than good. This was his reasoning.

1. It gives you a sense of security. Your best defense is to leave when you feel uncomfortable or unsafe. If that gun makes you feel safe and stay in a place or situation that could be dangerous it increases the chances that something will happen.
2. Pulling a gun on someone makes them react differently. Rather than just taking your wallet and running they now feel their life is threatened and it raises the chances that they'll attack you as soon as they see you're armed. For all they know you're still going to shoot them in the back if they try and run away, so they may see attacking you as the only option.
3. Most muggings, robberies and assaults begin with the victim being very close to the attacker. Your chance of getting a concealed gun out, getting it ready to fire, aiming and firing before the guy reacts and grabs you (see #2) isn't as good as you would think, especially if you don't practice it often. As soon as you're struggling with the attacker hand to hand while holding a gun the likelihood that you get shot by your own gun goes up drastically. This is why many cops put their hand on their gun as they approach situations that could be dangerous, it lowers the time to get the gun out. Unless you're walking around all the time with your hand down your pants to hold on to your concealed handgun you're probably not going to get it out in time to react to someone that's close to you.
4. For many attacks you never even see it coming with enough time to do much of anything. There was a guy on the forum a while ago that got attacked from behind at his own house. He could have had an h-bomb in his back pocket, ready to go in a split second and it wouldn't have done him any good. A handgun in that situation would have just been stolen or possibly used against him.

In his opinion its better to carry non-lethal things for self defense. If you pull mace on somebody it can stop them about as effectively, doesn't make them react like you're about to kill them (ie attack you to keep you from shooting them), and even if it is used against you you'll be ok. The most important thing though is to leave or avoid situations where you think you might be threatened or attacked.

For home defense though, he felt that firearms were a better option. You typically have an advantage of knowing your house's layout and its more likely that you will be able to get to your gun and be ready for them. His preference for a weapon inside a house was a sawed off shotgun because it was better in tight spaces and the increased spread from the shorter barrel didn't really matter when you're that close. If you use lighter shot it will chew up any flesh it hits but is less likely to penetrate walls.

1) carrying should make you more aware. People too close to you on your gun side is a big no no. People who carry are usually more aware of danger by nature of training and desire to protect themselves.

2)If you pull your gun without the intent to shoot, you didn't need to pull it. I would never pull a gun to make a bad guy run. If I pull my gun it means I'm shooting it.

3) proper training is always important. Again, if I pull it I think you are going to kill me anyway. So I have nothing to loose. You also make the assumption that trying to mace a thief means he won't use it against you then pound your head in.

4) just because there are instances where nothing can help doesn't mean you shouldn't be ready for instances where it can.
 

Bignate603

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
13,897
1
0
1) carrying should make you more aware. People too close to you on your gun side is a big no no. People who carry are usually more aware of danger by nature of training and desire to protect themselves.

2)If you pull your gun without the intent to shoot, you didn't need to pull it. I would never pull a gun to make a bad guy run. If I pull my gun it means I'm shooting it.

3) proper training is always important. Again, if I pull it I think you are going to kill me anyway. So I have nothing to loose. You also make the assumption that trying to mace a thief means he won't use it against you then pound your head in.

4) just because there are instances where nothing can help doesn't mean you shouldn't be ready for instances where it can.

1) The training to get a concealed carry will not make you more aware of danger in every day life. To think otherwise is laughable. It will make you more aware of gun safety and responsible gun ownership but it won't drastically change your awareness of situations that could be a threat. Again, for the majority of people carrying a weapon makes them feel more secure and may influence their choice to go to or stay in a place or situation that could be a threat because they feel 'protected'. Not everyone is like this but it's human nature to feel safer if you have the means to do harm to others.

2) Yes, and your attacker will also think that you intend to shoot him. My point is that as soon as you pull out your gun the attacker no longer believes he has any option but to physically attack you until you can't hurt him. This can turn a mugging into a murder. Pulling a gun is a direct threat on their lives which is difficult for them to run away from and they will act accordingly.

3) Being maced and then beaten is less permanent than being shot. Again, pulling a gun, especially close up where the attacker has an advantage is likely to turn a situation from bad to worse. If you are free to move you're better off running. If the attacker has a hold on you it's unlikely you'll be able to pull a gun and use it effectively.

4) The vast majority of instances where it can help can easily be done by something without the downsides. A proper non-lethal method (not those cheap little spray cans, gun stores typically have multiple good reliable non-lethal methods) can be just as effective and avoids the issues that I brought up.

I'm not anti-gun and I believe they have their uses but for the average person with a concealed carry I find it far fetched to believe that they bring the kind of security that many people claim. It seems that people vastly over estimate what they'll be able to do in a real confrontation.
 
May 16, 2000
13,522
0
0
I don't (and he doesn't) believe in making it illegal for people to carry weapons but I feel that in the vast majority of cases it doesn't really do anything to help you and has the potential of harming you.

Also, "proper awareness" is wrapped up in reason #1 I gave. If there's anything that you think is suspicious or threatening you leave. Even if you have to literally run away you're better off running and looking silly than sticking around and getting in a bad situation. The best dangerous confrontation is the one that never occurs.

That fiats a surrendering of personal rights and liberty, which not all agree with. If you're aware of a potential situation you can act to mitigate and/or prepare, without necessarily running away or avoiding it. This is partially made possible through the carrying of the tools necessary to adequately meet all challenges.
 

Mr. Lennon

Diamond Member
Jul 2, 2004
3,492
1
81
1) I'm not anti-gun and I believe they have their uses but for the average person with a concealed carry I find it far fetched to believe that they bring the kind of security that many people claim. It seems that people vastly over estimate what they'll be able to do in a real confrontation.

This x1000

The extra sense of security that Bignate talks about is the reason why CCers feel that they will always have the upper hand. Criminals are just as worried about their life as you are about yours. If someone is going to jump you, they are going to do it when you are least prepared.
 

sourceninja

Diamond Member
Mar 8, 2005
8,805
65
91
1) The training to get a concealed carry will not make you more aware of danger in every day life. To think otherwise is laughable. It will make you more aware of gun safety and responsible gun ownership but it won't drastically change your awareness of situations that could be a threat. Again, for the majority of people carrying a weapon makes them feel more secure and may influence their choice to go to or stay in a place or situation that could be a threat because they feel 'protected'. Not everyone is like this but it's human nature to feel safer if you have the means to do harm to others.

I disagree, if you are serious enough to carry a firearm responsibly and get training. You, unlike most people have been coached on what to look for in a dangerous situation and how to identify it. You will also be prepared. Criminals do not like prepared people, they can almost sense them. This makes you a smaller target. Further more, most responsible gun owners do not want to shoot people, thus encouraging them to get out of dangerous situations before they become confrontations. I know that if I get into a fight that I have a gun. That alone has kept me out of fights, because I know that pulling that gun means ending a life. That is not something I want to do (but it is something I'm willing to do). Further more, you advocate carrying non-lethal weapons. This argument can be applied to them as well. You think that carrying mace doesn't give something a feeling of safety? Seems like a arbitrary double standard.

2) Yes, and your attacker will also think that you intend to shoot him. My point is that as soon as you pull out your gun the attacker no longer believes he has any option but to physically attack you until you can't hurt him. This can turn a mugging into a murder. Pulling a gun is a direct threat on their lives which is difficult for them to run away from and they will act accordingly.

I am acting, this act breaks the attacker's OODA loop and gives me the advantage. I'm not going to pull my firearm and go "well well, the tables have turned!" No, I'm going to draw and shoot swiftly like I train to do every week. I don't go to the range and drawn down and threaten my target down range. I draw and shoot. The would be mugger in this situation needs to see that I'm drawing and stop me before I shoot him. Reaction is slower than action, I practice this action constantly. I have the advantage. Further more, I must already feel like my mugger is going to kill/harm me or why would I be pulling my weapon? So that means either I try to fight him hand to hand, or I try to pull a weapon. Deploying mace, drawing a blade, using a firearm, etc all take time. I fail to see how one can be quicker to use with training than the other. My gun is in a holster designed to be quickly accessed and I practice firing from the hip. By contrast my wife's mac is in her purse most of the time requiring a length process. (Her firearm is on her hip). My knife would require me to reach into my pocket, fish it out, orient it, and open it.

3) Being maced and then beaten is less permanent than being shot. Again, pulling a gun, especially close up where the attacker has an advantage is likely to turn a situation from bad to worse. If you are free to move you're better off running. If the attacker has a hold on you it's unlikely you'll be able to pull a gun and use it effectively.

You assume he still won't kill you for attacking him? He already is going to rob you, potentially harm you, but because you didn't try to kill him, but just blind him and cause him horrible pain he will let you off with a beating? I don't buy it. Fighting back at all is a HUGE risk. I train for that risk as all carry holders should. If I was already breaking the law and you tried to stop me with mace, I'd probably leave you dead or crippled for life out of spite (How dare you think you can stop me??)

4) The vast majority of instances where it can help can easily be done by something without the downsides. A proper non-lethal method (not those cheap little spray cans, gun stores typically have multiple good reliable non-lethal methods) can be just as effective and avoids the issues that I brought up.

Again, I fail to see how any of your reasons can't be applied direction to non-lethal weapons. They are just as slow to deploy, have just as much risk of it being used against you without proper training, and still run the risk of retaliation if not successful. Furthermore there are studies that show that people who use weapons to defend themselves from violent crime tend to have better outcomes with no evidence of said weapons being used against them. Studies have also shown that areas where carry is higher have less violent crime and robberies (not including domestic violence). This is probably because criminals know these people are not easy pickings.

I'm not anti-gun and I believe they have their uses but for the average person with a concealed carry I find it far fetched to believe that they bring the kind of security that many people claim. It seems that people vastly over estimate what they'll be able to do in a real confrontation.

I agree people over-estimate themselves. I however see nothing wrong with people carrying firearms as long as they are getting the proper training. This means more than just range time. These are perishable skills and they must be regular practiced and tested in stress situations. I hit the range weekly, I also typically once or twice a month practice keeping my weapon under my control and using it in close quarter situations. I have a background in boxing, judo, bjj and amateur mma (With lots of other MA experience in less practical arts like TKD, krav, aikido, etc) and have taken those skills and applied them with what I have been taught in CCW classes to make sure that I can keep that firearm under control and use it quickly.

While it is hard to keep your weapon in your control in a grappling situation, with proper awareness, distancing, and training (which really isn't all that much) you can be sure to know when to use your weapon, how to use your weapon, and to negate may of the worries you post about. Most police shot with their own weapon are not disarmed while deploying their weapon, but rather have made bad tactical decisions that gave the offender access to their weapon before drawing it. It takes a special kind of person to keep moving forward while bullets are moving at them and a even crazier kind of person to keep moving forward while bullets are ripping though them. I train to make sure that I can draw and fire before my target has enough time to act. Hopefully several 9mm HP rounds will stop him. If not I can fall back on my other training and I have the advantage of knowing he will at least be tired from the blood loss.