Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns Looking for home defense pistol, Glock???

Due to an increase in home invasions in east central Alabama, I'm looking at getting a home defense pistol. I have a wife and two kids (10,4). I intend to keep it in a quick access safe, by the bed. I'm considering a Glock 9mm with a crimson trace sight. If my wife had to access it, I don't want her trying to access a safety or not be able to shoot it because the safety is on. I also don't want something that will jamm frequently. Consequently, I am considering a Glock 9mm. I am no handgun expert, so how about some feedback from the more experienced handgun shooters. Thanks. rbh

Just kinda hard to beat a Glock.
Laser grips are to the taste of the owner.

I cannot bring myself to recommend a Glock. Yes, they're reliable, but the Glock was made as a compromise weapon from scratch. It has a lousy trigger that's hard to master. Why not just go with an old reliable double action revolver like a S&W Model 10?


With modern designed +p loads out of a four inch barrel, it's hard to beat for home defense. Simplicity itself. And it's a classic, so it will inspire pride in ownership and make you want to go out and shoot it a lot. Get real good with it. Make you deadly.

Or, along similar lines, a nice Colt Police Positive.

Laser sights have their fans and detractors, I'm in the latter group. Even most of the fans would say a set of tritium sights and the proper use of a flashlight are more important, with the laser added as insurance.

In my opinion, the 9mm Glock 19 is the all-round best Glock for self defense.

[bleep] the laser grips.

Get a Glock with the rail underneath, put a decent light on there, and set it on the nightstand. I have a G20 that has the light underneath, and shoot it PLENTY well. The wife shoots it fine, and asks that it stay home when I go out into the woods (the light is a WONDERFUL thing, esp. with 15 rounds on tap).

I prefer a separate flashlight. If I need to ID a target I don't want to have to point the muzzle at it to do so. Heck, it might be my wife coming home drunk from the bar.

You might also check out the Springfield XD line. They point better than the Glocks. Either one would be a good choice.

I�m not the hugest fan of the Glock, but I really can�t fault your line of thinking. To the contrary of my brethren on this forum, I have trained extensively with the Crimson Trace laser grip and have a strong preference for it on a defensive pistol. With the laser grip, you must treat it as an adjunct to your pistol, rather than a replacement for traditional training. Tritium night sights would be first and then the laser grip; if you can afford both you�re in good shape. The thing about the laser grips though is the training, you have to train in their use extensively to really know when to use them and when not to use them.

As for the Glock, the 19 is by far my favorite. Just don�t skimp on training and I would recommend a .22 conversion unit to further augment your training.

Simply arming yourself is not enough, and can actually make the situation worse if you don�t train and educate yourself. Start by picking up a copy of Massad Ayoob�s In The Gravest Extreme: http://www.amazon.com/Gravest-Extre...mp;s=books&qid=1252675053&sr=1-1 It�s a bit dated, but it�s still the best basic education I�ve seen.

I guess I'm the last of the dinosaurs here at the fire.

I'm with TRH about Glocks, at least for novices. I think of them as cocked and unlocked single action autos, an expert's gun. For use by multiple people, including those who do not have a lot of experience with handguns, I prefer something with a more traditional DA trigger and no external mechanical safety. That category includes all modern revolvers and numerous semi-autos, including Sig DAKs, Beretta and Smith DAOs, Kel-Tecs, and probably some others of which I am not aware. I am in a minority on this point, so YMMV.

P.S. As for Laser Sights, I can live without them. I would prefer a rail and a rail light.

I guess not, considering my last post.

Since you have the 4 & 10 y/o around I would be sure to keep it locked away from them(& friends that may come by). Depending on the wife's familiarity you would want a 'grab & go' gun. This points to a D/A revolver & similar semi-auto. The Glock 19 9mm would do the trick. I wouldn't worry to much about laser sights & weapon mounted lights. I'd get some range time for you & the wife, store it safely & you should be ready.

I don't disagree with your progression, but you've been shooting handguns for a long time. Your first nightstand pistol was, like, 1950?

If a guy is going to train a lot of time should be spent up front using the regular sights. A laser is not a 'fix' for basic gun handling skills and will often slow new shooters down without adding any accuracy.



We could argue about that. Most shooters have little or no training, and the need for more would be manifested in numerous failed self defense attempts. Reality is quite the opposite.

Don't overlook the Steyr M9A1. That is what I keep in my bed safe. I installed an under the barrel laser. The Steyr design is from Austria, same as the Glock, at about 2/3 of the price. I like the ergonomics better than my Glock. No bells or whistles, either. Just pull the trigger. My electronic bed safe is from Sportsman Guide for $30. Good luck.

I've got two 10mm Glocks, a 20 and a 29. Both have the conversion barrels to make them .40's (cheaper and more available brass/ammo for practice) as well as a .22 conversion for the 20 for practicing sight picture/trigger.

I have to "sort of" disagree with the revolver guys because of the trigger. The long DA trigger of a revolver is not something everybody can shoot well. This can be more evident with women. I've seen some women/youngsters kinda struggle with a long and heavy DA trigger. I've got a Redhawk revolver and I gotta admit it's a very weird thing to go from my Glocks to the 'Hawk.

Anyway, not knocking revolvers since I've got one and like it but having shot both I would 100 times out of 100 prefer one of my Glocks to a revolver in a SD scenario. (well, other than a charging bear, when I think I'd prefer the .44)

If you, and more importantly your wife, are going to take the time and expense to become proficient with a handgun, great. Skip the 9mm and get a .357, .40, or a .45. Tritiums are a must and I do like CTC laser grips. Be sure she can pull the slide back easily. My wife can't chamber a round in my 10mm Glock or 1911 with a heavy spring without effort and too much thought and fiddling.

If you don't believe you or your wife would become capable handgun shooters, get a shotgun.

I can take a total newbie female and have her hitting center mass of an IPSC target at 7-10 yards with a revolver in less than an hour. I prefer Smith triggers to Ruger triggers, though, for the reason you mentioned.

Never owned one, but have always liked the design. When I worked part time in a local gun shop back in the 1990s, we had one in stock, and I fooled around with it a lot. The most naturally pointing auto pistol that's ever been in my hands. Always intended to pick one up, but just never got around to it.

I've owned several Glocks, and I've owned lots more revolvers. No contest in my book. A good revolver in double action mode wins hands down in every respect.

Yeah, but everyone likes dinosaurs. Hey, if HE wants a Glock, doesn't mean WE have to take Tupperware to a gunfight

Same. But I can actually say the same thing regarding a Kahr P9. The trigger pulls on those feel very much like that on a good double action revolver. Glocks are a different matter, though. Lousy triggers. Like a cheap staple-gun. I suppose, with enough effort and range time, you could eventually master even a lousy staple-gun trigger, but why bother when there are so many guns out there with nice, easy to master, triggers?

The personification of YMMV eh?

For whatever reason, even though some people dislike (and others outright HATE Glock triggers) I've never had much of an issue with mine. A lot of it is I, on the other hand, HATE long trigger pulls. After shooting my Glocks and picking up my Kahr P40 and trying to shoot I find myself thinking "When the hell is this thing going to fire?!!". I settle down after awhile and it's a smooth enough trigger in it's travel but man it seems like a long squeeze. (or, more accurately, longER)

Maybe I've just shot enough Glocks (that .22 conversion is wonderful BTW) to get jaded?

Man, seems everyone is picking on my age as of late; and I�m no where near that old, just a touch over 40.

I think I eluded to that

Depending on who we�re talking about and the circumstance, we both could make a very successful defense of our positions. My position was from the standpoint of someone who has never owned a gun before (I really don�t know if the OP has any experience at all). There are many who, when trouble comes they buy a handgun and leave it at that. Often, they never even fire the thing until something goes bump in the night. Now in some cases, everything works out, but in other cases their lack of familiarity, or lack of mental conditioning can mean that they can find their own weapon turned on them.

And for those who get lucky and everything works out during the shooting; what about the aftermath? How many of those said something stupid to the responding officers? How many of those were sued in a civil court for everything the have and will ever have? No one keeps such statistics. My point was to try to stress the need for education.

Wadcutter at 800 fps,..center of mass,..repeat as necessary.

He was alluding to the fact that your efforts at education eluded them.

OK, I'm being a dick.

I hate the Glock trigger. But it really isn't that hard to get proficient with it. But if you shoot anything else and switch to the Glock, it can take a little shooting to get tuned into it. I don't recommend Glocks to anyone - unless they will agree to get a .22lr conversion for training. That puts the Glock into the realm of practical as starting with a good 38/357 revolver and "downloading" it for practice. I would recommend a used G17 to keep the price down and because it is the easiest Glock to shoot well.

BUT - I don't generally advise Glocks - or any semi-auto - for beginners or those who will not practice enough to be familiar with the pistol and it's operation. One could be just as well off with one of the revolvers mentioned above - and no, it is not any harder to learn a good DA revolver trigger than that of the Glock.

So - if you want a Glock, by all means get one. But make sure it fits the wife too, and make sure you will be able to practice with it (ideally, using the .22 conversion), and do get some education in defense and legal issues.

But the most important thing is to sit down, you and the wife, and really think over and decide....when the bad guy enters the room - should you shoot? Can you shoot? Will you shoot? Any "no" answers might indicate your gun may be more dangerous to you than to the housebreaker.

I know, but you're 85 in shooter years. As for the rest, we disagree on maybe the 1% where you're wrong and I'm right.

If you get a Glock and have the NY-1 trigger installed. It's a bit heavier than the stock model, but the pull is much more like a revolver than the funky factory 'light switch' trigger. If you want the lighter trigger pull, use a 3.5# connector with the NY-1 trigger spring. It will give you the same pull weight as the factory trigger, but with a more uniform pull. Ghost has a nice 3.5 connector that help reduce take up and over-travel.

Revolvers do have a simpler manual of arms, and it's much easier for a beginner to understand loaded/unloaded with a revolver - no checking the chamber. Something like a 640 or other hammerless model is the safest bet.

Practice keeping the finger off the trigger until ready to shoot!

If you see my other thread, I just purchased my first Sig. I carried Glocks the entire time I was a LEO, and love them. They are 100% reliabale and more than combat accurate. With that said, I've never been comfortable recommending them to anyone that won't committ to ALOT of training. The standard trigger is like 5 1/5 lbs, and a SHORT SHORT pull, and the only real safety is your finger. If you are getting an auto, look at weapons with longer trigger pulls and safeties. Sig, Smith, Beretta etc.

RBH:

Glock 17 is a great choice.

The trigger is fine as it comes from the factory. Leave it alone, and you'll be fine, too.

It was designed from the get-go for issue to European soldiers who, for the most part, are young men and women who did not grow up around firearms and mostly likely never held a handgun until they were issued their Glock 17s. Hence, it's not difficult to learn how to use it.

Buy lots of practice ammo.

And if you ever have to use it, get close.

- Tom

The Glock 19 is an excellent choice in a self stuffer and the trigger is easy to get acclimatized to IMHO. The K frame S&W or D frame Colt are also hard to beat and will serve you well.

Terry,

I don't understand it, but I've seen more than a few women have trouble with D-frames. There must be some mystical convergence of hand strength and trigger reach that cause some women problems. I thought I had solved the world's problems when I bought my wife a Diamondback - she couldn't manage the trigger.

Their triggers stack up near the end of the stroke, which causes some people problems. That's why, in fact, when police departments started training cops to shoot double action, instead of single action (target shooting style), they started switching in droves to the Smith & Wesson, the double action of which doesn't stack near the end, but actually lightens near the end. Colt lost a lot of cop contracts after that paradigm shift. The Smith & Wesson double action stroke makes becoming proficient with double action shooting a good bit easier. Personally, however, I've been shooting double action revolvers so long, since 1980, that I can shoot them both almost exactly as well, and that's very well indeed.

I refuse have anything called a quick access safe. Even with kids around. If you need it, you'll need it right now.
I'd buy whatever both of you can shoot well. That's first. Had a girl friend once that put a 5 hardball rds. into the black at 25 yds. with my .45 Colt Gold Cup the first time she ever shot a handgun. Had a wife that couldn't handle anything more than a .22 Kit Gun. So people vary alot.
What I do is take it out of it's safe place at night and stick it near me where it's handy but out of sight. In the morning, the first thing I do is put it away. You might consider that.
I've seen what happens when people use guns to protect themselves and their loved ones. Many times.
It must be readily accessable and you must be able to use it easily. You must be willing to use it. Otherwise, you are creating more problems for yourself and others.
So find something both of you like and make sure it's always where it needs to be for you. E

I agree. Mine is either in my holster inside my waistband, or on my night stand while I sleep.

Yep, Hawk handled that one well. BTW, my daughter carried a Police Positive as a duty weapon for years before they went semi-auto, all depends on the person, Like Hawk, I shoot either one equally.

I like Glocks and think the G19 would be a great choice for what you're after. They're easy to operate, reliable and plenty accurate.

FWIW, before I went with a laser, I'd consider trying a Streamlight TLR-1 light (~$80). They're a pretty good ROI for a self-defense handgun IMO.....

Yes and no...

I am convinced that these grips will get a person killed. I am also convinced that if you wander into my house in the middle of the night that my wife will drill your azz dead center using these things.

They serve a purpose and it takes a person with a strong mind to determine when they should be looking for that red light or when they should be looking for the front dot.

Based on your circumstance I would choose an easily accessible 12 gauge nearby and load it "hot standby". Meaning: Mag full, chamber empty, firing pin dropped. All you have to do is pick it up, rack it, and go to work.

But if you want a pistol...I'd say buy whatever you are comfortable with. Make sure it has night sights, and buy a handheld Surefire. All this talk about triggers is BS. You know or learn how to shoot a handgun or you don't. Doesn't matter the make or model. I've seen so many shooters blame the design of a handgun for their schitty shooting. Put their "great" handgun in their hands and they still shoot like schit.


Travis

Why isn't your first choice of a weapon a good solid shotgun? Even in a 20 gauge pump like a M870 or M500?

The backup weapon would then be the handgun. Which in a 9mm my first choice is indeed a G19, if not a G23 in .40S&W.

Don't overlook a lightweight Remington M870 in 20 gauge! Its actually what I did, followed by the G19 loaded with 124grn +P+ Speer GoldDots.

And on the Sig/Beretta go with a DAO trigger set up rather than the DA/SA. I wouldn't recommend a S&W auto for what you are wanting other than the new(er) M&P line. Very good ergonomics, seem reliable from everything I have read, and if the rare problem should happen to pop up you will likely find S&W's customer service much better than Glock's. Although by going with a 9mm you are lessening the need for it, even with that I have seen a G-26 that was probably short chambered that went back to Smyrna and was never fixed so the marketing claim of perfection isn't a damnable offense in and of itself, but the behavior when the claim fails definitely is.

Priorities - a .50 Browning with the charging handle racked once and mounted to cover the hall is a good man stopper. So is a 12 gauge, but I used to know a little boy who lived in Ontario, OR who is dead now because his 10 year old brother blew most of his head off with a 12 gauge that was kept loaded and easily accessible.

So if it needs to be kept out of the hands of a couple of small children then that priority might override other desirable features of a self defense weapon.

Best advice I've seen so far is to get what you and your wife are comfortable with, not what pleases someone else's personal preference. Don't let yourself be swayed too much by all of the hair splitting here. It's pretty common on all of the 24hcf forums when anyone asks "I have basic needs - what should I get?" to be answered that is absolutely critical to get what the answerer believes is the perfect solution to HIS wants and desires, not yours.

For your wife just make sure it's not too heavy and does not hurt her when she fires it. Women don't have some macho image to live up to, they do not like hard kicking guns. Make sure you can both reach the controls. Make sure it points pretty much where you're looking for both of you.

Main thing is, get something that inspires confidence in both of you. Action type, brand, model, caliber (within reason), and all the other niceties really are secondary to something that lets you put the bullet where it will do the most good. If you and you wife both like the Glock, go for it.

Hey, at least on this thread most of the responses have more or less addressed the question that was asked, rather than the question people felt like answering.

A good idea would be to go to a rental range and just tell them what you want to rent. While you will likely get someone who will show you the basics of how it operates that will also likely drop in some of their own personal prejudices for or against, it will likely be less than if you borrow someone's stuff at the range.

Mine are in favor of semi-auto pistols with the same trigger pull from shot to shot and preferably shorter reset distances on those. While a revolver is less complex to operate in theory, even that goes out the window if you have an ammo failure beyond a simple failure to fire, by some odd chance you have to reload, and there is always the opportunity to short stroke the trigger. In short, you have to practice with a revolver also.

I dunno, but I don't think that's it. I agree with you assessment of Colt triggers, but it seems like women that have trouble are pulling the trigger up into the frame or down into the trigger guard - more of a hand geometry problem then a spring problem.

I can live with that

Yeah I know, Sean is a real subtle...but we love the hell out of him...even if he is a "bleep"-hole

Yeah this is a tough one I've struggled with also. I've found the most female friendly setups for revolvers are the SP101 with a touch of action work, mostly in the form of lighter springs and most Rugers need to be smoothed up in the DA department. The next is a round butt K frame wearing Pachmayr Compac Professional grips, the one's with the open backstrap. And lighter springs are always a help also. If I'm arming my wife with a revolver, it's a 3" HB RB K frame, Wolf springs, Pachmayr Compac Professionals, mill off the front sight and replace with a dovetailed tritium front sight and BOOM baby, we're good to go.

But my wife prefers autos, so it's either a Kahr P9 or an Astra A70 (a great pistol that no one ever noticed)

Kevin, this might be awful sudden, but will you marry me?

Yep - that's what works for my wife. And I kinda like shooting it too. OTOH - she also did well with the Browning Hi-Power.

[quote=JOG

I dunno, but I don't think that's it. I agree with you assessment of Colt triggers, but it seems like women that have trouble are pulling the trigger up into the frame or down into the trigger guard - more of a hand geometry problem then a spring problem. [/quote]

1+ on the hand geometry problem. I have smallish hands and tend to pull the trigger down into the trigger guard with certain handguns. Fit of the grip and ability to reach the controls is critical.

As to all the shotgun reccommendations, I agree.. they are a great home defence weapon. However, I don't want any chance of my kids getting a hold of it while I'm not around. I would rather take the chance of not being able to get to it a few seconds faster than have some neighbor kid visiting, or my own, do something stupid with it. After viewing several options, I think I'll be settling on a Glock 17 with night sights and a crimson trace laser sight in 9mm and a quick access bedside safe.
Since I hand load, and I've heard of some glocks blowing up because the case isn't fully supported...How strongly would you recommend getting a new, more fully case supporting barrel?? Though it seems like the 40 cal's seem more prone to this problem than the 9mm's. What say you, glock handloading experts??

Aftermarket barrels can somewhat compromise reliability. Tighter chambers and other critical dimensions are often "tightened" to get better accuracy at the expense of reliability. If you intend to use it as a practice / training barrel, then there's no real reason not to if it makes you feel better. I don't have a problem developing jacketed 9mm loads for use in the factory generation 2 and generation 3 Glock 19's that I have. The Barsto barrels that I have for them are a bit picky about OAL when using LRN handloads. The aftermarket barrels I have do offer a tad more case support, but not trying to make 2000 fps with a 9mm or 40 has quite a bit to do with blowing up most any pistol. Proper load development gets you function and accuracy without excessive pressures.

If you are going to handload, get the aftermarket barrel. If not, load factory fodder and rock on with the factory tube.

For me, the S&W M&P series points better than either the Glock or XD line. I prefer Kahrs the best, but those are more of a carry gun for me. The bedside gun for me is the M&P, full size in 9mm with a good flashlight. I have a PM9 with tritium sights that is in the drawer as well.

On the other hand, I have a S&W M60 with a 3 inch barrel that my wife shoots well with .38 Spl +P ammo and she prefers it to any of my autoloaders

Getting one handgun to really fit both you and your wife for good control and accurate rapid combat type shooting probably isn't going to be easy.

S&W M&P

That model name has become ambiguous. No one knows if you're recommending a no-frills .38 Special revolver or a wonder nine.

Why not a shotgun?

With a handgun, you can use it effectively with only one hand. This leaves the other free to dial the phone, lock the door, use the flashlight, etc. It is also much harder to wrestle a handgun away from someone than it is a shotgun. And at indoor ranges the pattern of a shotgun is small, making it no more likely to hit.

The one advantage the shotgun has is power. It is going to be far more lethal at indoor ranges than the typical handgun. Birdshot is all you need in confined spaces.

You are assuming the fight will stay indoors. Not always so. Buckshot is a far better choice. E

That's my opinion as well. My shotguns are loaded with Buck.

Yep...

One sits loaded in the safe as I speak.



My wife shoots well with it too.

Not so much with autoloaders.

Birdwatcher

Ummmmmm, after reading through these posts, brings about the sense that GLOCK has a trigger problem, I don't buy that BS at all folks. There are NO safety's to sweep off in order to fire a round and the trigger pull is the same from the get go and easyier than many double action revolvers to pull.

However, if your wanting a house gun with the up most ability to handle the home invader, start with the proper tool in the first place and that is a pump shotgun. Nothing beats a pumpgun loaded up with #6's or #7.5 shot at close range (30ft or less) you sure as hell don't want to be blowing through drywall into a kids bedroom etc with Buck-Shot or rounds from your 9mm or 45 cal pistol etc.

Now as far as GLOCKS not having a great trigger (maybe not for competition!) I think someone is just playing with half a deck of cards. I'll take a non-shooter and have them shooting tight groups at 21ft compared to using a S&W double action revolver.

I have a GLOCK 22 (.40cal) at my nightstand but I reach for that 590 Mossburg 12ga. pumpgun at bedside, first thing, when I suspect a possible problem in house or outside. A SHOTGUN is your best bet for home protection in my humble opinion.

For precision work, the Glock's trigger it terrible. Can it be mastered? Yes. Even a staple-gun-like trigger can be mastered, but since a typical S&W double action K or larger frame revolver has a double action trigger stroke that feels in comparison like it's parts are made of oiled glass, why would anyone wish to handicap themselves with a Glock's staple-gun-like trigger unless their department mandated it? If you think a Glock has a better trigger than a typical K or larger frame S&W double action revolver, you need to consult your psychiatrist about a change in you meds.

Every pistol and revolver has its pluses and minuses. These pluses and minuses can be, in the case of Tonk and TRH, found in the trigger operation. On the plus side of the K,L, and N frame Smiths is their smooth, consistent double action pull. On the plus side for the Glock is its consistent trigger pull. Training on either of the two is the same due to the consistency of both. Training someone on a typical DA/SA pistol is usually a more difficult task due to the first shot being DA and the subsequent SA pull differences. Folks often load up a magazine with 15 or so rounds and that results in practicing the DA/SA transition 1 time per magazine, unless a decocker is used. The Glock trigger can easily be changed to more closely feel like that of a DAO revolver. In that case a 4.5 pound connector and a NY spring gives a much similar feel to a DAO rather than the typical Glock 2 stage. Still not as slick as that of a Smith, but in no way a great hindrance to shooting at typical self defense distances. Different requirements such as self defense, target shooting, etc; lend themselves to different platforms. While they all launch bullets, intracasies of operation leave one with a decision to make on the compromise involved in those differences. That said, I like the DA trigger pull of my Smiths better and from a concealed carry setup I can pretty easily shoot the NQC course of fire cleanly with it, my split times are slower for the revolver and my reload times are slightly slower even using full moon clips. Score wise between a Beretta 92FS, Smith 646, Baer 1911, or Glock 19 I give up little more than the random good day shooting vs bad day shooting between any of them from a concealed carry setup. Split wise, fastest is usually the 1911, then the Glock 19, the 92FS and the 646 are usually too close to call when using the DA/SA of the 92FS. Training and practice easily overcome the perceived shortcomings of the different trigger systems more so than the mechanical device itself. Decisions of the value of the pluses and minuses vary from individual to individual and their intended use.

Glocks are fine, and I have 3 of them....but make sure you get decent training, and practice with them....especially speed reloading and administrative reloading of the mags....they have "fat" grips and if you have smaller hands like I do...it takes a lot of practice to master reloading. I do tend to agree with Hawkeye on the revolvers though....I enjoy all my semis....but I am still a revolver guy at heart!!....just remember.....5 or 6 FOR SURE....with the revolvers.

I know I didn't make that claim. The problem with the Glock trigger is I don't like it. I don't particularly like the grip frame either. I find other guns - revolvers and pistols - easier to shoot well. Guns that shoot with precision and ease are more fun to use, hence I am more inclined to use them often. Glocks, for me...not so much. I can shoot them well, after some "get acquainted" time (every time), but I don't see any reason to bother when I don't have to use a Glock.

Exactly.

Why is it that everyone one talks "hardwear" and hardly a mention of "softwear"? You folks think shooting someone is easy...just mechanics...go buy a gun and defend youself? If you are not physically, mentally and emotionally prepared to defend your life when it happens you are going to get far more than you bargained for...maybe even prison.

How about the laws of Use of Deadly Force...do you know what they are in the area you are living...or do you just think you know. What about laws on safe storage, posession and a lot of other things.

My advise to anyone who has no clue about guns or personal defense is to call the NRA and find out who in your area gives the Basic Pistol Course and Personal Protection in the Home Course. After you have finished those two you'll have a clue what you are getting into...

Bob Makowski

The security-types I talked with during the Katrina fun often used shotguns while clearing buildings, but none of them used birdshot or buckshot. They used slugs for the penetration - they wanted to be able to shoot through chairs, couches, etc. that a bad guy might be using for cover. Out in the open they used AR's.

Eight-tenths of what a person of normal intelligence and prudence needs to know about his weapon in order to defend himself is contained in the owner's manual that came with it. An additional one-tenth can be acquired with some regular, well advised, and self-directed practice. If you want to work at that last one-tenth of preparedness still unaddressed after that, that's what the various hands-on professional training programs are for.

We see way too many cases of 90 year old great-grandma's holding burglars for the police with their deceased husband's rusty Model 10s to deny this reality.

Is hands-on training by a professional a good thing? Absolutely. Does everyone need to sign up for a seven day course at Front Sight in order to be equipped to defend themselves from criminals? Absolutely not.

Hawkeye..having had to re-train the self-trained for the last 20 years I can only say you have no clue what you are talking about.

If I am not mistaken from a previous post you have not even spoken to anyone who has ever been in a gunfight let alone anyone who has ever killed someone. If you think one can get enough to win a real serious personal confrontation from the guns instruction manual you are very wrong...

Bob

The recorded statistics concerning armed citizens in confrontation with violent criminals simply do not support your conclusion.

Does the fact that I have received twenty hours of instruction from an NRA certified instructor in defensive handgun improve my chances? Of course it does, but not by much according to all available relevant statistics.

Does the fact that I've been an avid handgunner for 25 years, who occasionally competes in practical shooting matches, improve my chances? Of course, but again, not by much according to all available relevant stats.

The most important thing by far in an encounter with a violent criminal is that you have a gun and are willing and able to use it. All the rest is icing on the cake.

If you can please email where you have seen these "recorded statistics" I would appreciate it...then I can quit teaching and have more time for my own shooting.

Bob

Bob - we did mention this early on. You must've missed it.

Anyhoo, I agree somewhat with both of you. What is available (I'm thinking of Lott's work) does seem to imply that the odds of survival are improved just by having the gun and making the decision to use it. But statistics are meaningless to individuals in the face of an attack. All statistics have exceptions, and the point of training is to reduce the chance that you will be on the outside of the curve that makes up the statistical point.

Keep training those who will seek it, but don't get too wrapped about those who don't.

Exactly. I am not in the least against training. Some people, however, seem to be obsessed with the notion that only those who have completed two or three seven day courses at Thunder Ranch, or what have you, stand a chance of surviving an encounter with a violent criminal. The facts just do not bear this out. As you say, however, that extra dose of preparation will likely come in handy on the thin edges of the normal curve, so it's certainly money, time, and effort well spent. This lines up with what I said earlier, i.e., that such courses of intensive training address that remaining one-tenth of preparedness for such potential encounters.

I agree that Americans tend to focus on equipment, but let's be frank, in order to protect yourself with a handgun, you must first have a handgun. After that, comes the training. And for that there are two things I recommend, in order of importance:

1 - In the Gravest Extreme: The Role of the Firearm in Personal Protection by Massad F. Ayoob : http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=in+the+gravest+extreme
The book is dated but the principles are still the same.

2 - A .22 Conversion unit for your Glock. Practice is the key to proficiency and this give syou cheap pracitce.

It's my belief that a well-educated man ought to be able to pick up another man's handgun off the ground and - without knowing or caring what it's loaded with - use it with dispatch and effectiveness at close range.

Any of the handguns mentioned in this thread, for example.

- Tom

...well I guess I have it backwards then. In the classes that I have run or helped with 75%+ of the people who purchased a gun before class were given advise from a friend, LEO, gun shop owner/employee...whoever and they quickly found out while better than nothing there was something better out there. So money and time were wasted.

Yesterday was Day II of the NRA Basic Pistol Course our club sponsored. Unlike the NRA that has now dumbed the course down from 10 to now 8 hours, we did two full days 0900-1700 and 0830-1700. There were 20 students ranging in age from 18-80, almost 1/2 were women. In four range sessions covering single action shooting, double action shooting and semi-autos each student fired 200 rounds of .22 ammo. During the Selection Lesson after explaining how to buy a handgun they then got to shoot up to 20 different centerfire handguns that the instructors brought in for them to try...100 more rounds of ammo fired.

In the reviews from past classes, many students rated this as one of the most important sessions right after safe gun handling.

In three weeks will be the Personal Protection in the Home Course. Again we do it in 18 hours not the 8 suggested by the NRA. By the time these people complete these courses they will have a much better idea how to propely select a gun for personal protection, the laws of self-defense, measues to take to prevent an attack in the first place and what to do in case of attack.

I equate purchasng and using a handgun with buying and driving a car. Keeping and using a gun for self-defense is like racing at Indy. Would you as a licensed driver bring a car home to your wife, tell her to read the instruction manual, park it in the garage and tell her that in case of emergency to drive her dying son to the hospital... You gotta know how to start it, maintain it, shift it, fuel it up...she going to remember all that when your son eats some poision and is dying? She just crossed the line from reading the manual to driving at Indy in one split second...and she doesn't even know the "rules of the road" let alone the rules of Indy.

Sorry, but I take this very seriously because in the 30+ years I spent in LE I saw people, including LEOs, killed because of the wrong attitude.

Bob

Back in 1980 I took the twenty hour NRA program, taught to me privately by an NRA certified instructor, a retired deputy sheriff. I guess the first ten hours was the NRA Basic Pistol Course ("pistol" loosely defined, I suppose, since revolvers were covered too). The second ten hours I believe the instructor called "Defensive Handgun." I took one hour per day, five days per week, for four weeks, all private, and all at the town range using only his handguns. It was excellent. That was my foundation I voluntarily put myself through (at $20.00 per hour) before purchasing my first handgun, right after getting my license. After that, I was a regular at the range, drilling all the skills he taught me. Been an avid shooter, and concealed weapon carrier, ever since.

That would have been correct except I belive the original course was called "Personal Protection" not Defensive Handgun. It changed to Personal Protection in the Home in the late 1990s. They now also have Personal Protection Outside the Home as well..16 hour two-three day course.

..so you did it as right as it gets...I guess my question is why would you not advise others to do the same?

Bob

I would advise others to do the same. I simply maintain that 80% of the advantage from having a gun is achieved simply by 1) having it with you ready to bring into action, 2) understanding its basic operation, and 3) being mentally prepared to use it when needed. That doesn't necessarily require a formal twenty hour course. It would help, but the stats on civilian uses of firearms in defense of themselves from violent crime demonstrates that the courses I took (and you teach) are not strictly necessary to enjoy the vast majority of the advantage achievable from having a firearm.

Get the Glock. The 19 is a joy to shoot. It will probably fit her hand just fine--unless her hands are really small.

Go to wall mart and buy some white box winchester 9mm @ $20 per hundred.

Practice at 7 to 10 yards (how long is your house?).

Practice picking up your gun from a table (night stand simulation)--point and shoot.

You want to practice dobule or tripple taps.

If you can tripple tap in an 8" pie plate--you can neutralize most intruders.

When you can tripple tap in a 4" circle your're there.

The conversation always gets lost in egos. Some who advocate the revolver, and have a personal distaste for the Glock tell you, "if you get Glock--buy a 22 conversion kit so you can practise." That's condesending crap. As if you don't need to practise with a revolver.

Practice with ammo that simulates what you plan use for home defense.

As too the lazer. That is your call. I think that a blinding light in the face of an intruder will buy you more advantage to get a shot off than the lazer. It' hard for an intruder to attact with his arms and hands in his face and covering his eyes.

I shoot my Glock better than any of my revolvers. The trigger is not an issue at all. It might have something to do with the disperportionate time I have behind it.

To quote Hawkeye, "I simply maintain that 80% of the advantage from having a gun is achieved simply by 1) having it with you ready to bring into action, 2) understanding its basic operation, and 3) being mentally prepared to use it when needed."

All of his posts could have been reduced to those simple statements (number 3 is probably the hardest--until you've been in that sutuation who can tell how you will react). They apply to what ever weapon you chose.

Then practice in a way that simulates what you may incounter "in your home." Slow fire at the 25 yard line will not be your best bet.

Just my two cent worth.

GB

There is one flaw in your thinking.. Because you did it "right" you have no clue how "clueless" the untrained are. The manual with your gun, if you even get one when it is used, will give you the basic operation (#2) but little to nothing on how to bring the firearm into action quickly (#1) and ABSOLUTELY nothing on on mental preparedness (#3).

Regardless of what you do, motorcycling, shooting, SCUBA diving..until you teach that skill you have no understanding how clueless people taking up a new skill are.

As far as the stats go...there are no accurate stats because in many cases the use of a firearm in personal defense isn't even reported because no shots are fired. And then go talk to the untrained un-mentally prepared people who did shoot or kill someone like I have and you will see what lack of training and mindset costs these people.

This was posted over on one of the other forums..it is from one of my students who took BP, PPITH and did some followup work. Her older sister did so before her as had their father. Do you think the average "untrained" would have survived...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This woman had some problems with a nutzo ex-boyfriend about 10 years ago so her father, who was one of my students, sent her to take a NRA Personal Protection I was CI for. She also did some 1/1 followup and shoots regularly with her dad... It just paid off...



Hi Bob,
I've been meaning to get in touch with you, but things have been a little crazy around here.
Three weeks ago this coming Monday I was attacked at my apartment. The guy came up from behind me, covered my mouth and put a knife to my throat. He pushed me into my apt and knocked me face down on my kitchen floor. He then preceded to wrap my eyes and mouth in duct tape... He then flipped me over and ducked tape my hands in front of me (thank god.) I fought as hard as I could, but I was no match to this [bleep]. He pulled my pants part way down and gave me a good hit in the gut... at this point he GOT OFF OF ME!! I think he got up to close the door, from what I could hear.With out even thinking about it I was able to get to my ankle holster, pulled my 38, and fired!! I didn't know if I hit him till the next day, which unfortunately I didn't, But it scared that bastard away. I got to my feet and with just barely being able to see ( I could get the duct tape off) I made to my neighbor who cut me loose.
I just want to tell you because between the training I received from my dad AND YOU I was able to save myself. After a few days of trying to calm down I thought of you and knew you'd be proud of me. My nerves are still raw, so I'm staying at dads until XXXXX returns from his tour in 39 days.
So thank you Bob!!! I hope you're proud of me.
Happy New Year!!

Love,
XXXXXXXXX


A gun in the pocketbook would have done her little good... She carries 24/7 in and out of the house and has a survivors mindset....do you?

Bob Makowski

_________________________________________________________________

As to the little old lady with the .38...I have seen the same stories but do not remember any where the BG was also armed with a gun... Usually it was a piss-in-his-pants burglar who got caught by granny...

Bob

Excellent post. I think this type of traing is more important than the type of weapon you choose.

GB

Unless part of your training was taping her up, pulling her pants down, and punching her in the gut, I'm not seeing the relevance of training in this event, but maybe that's just me.

You piss off a person with a gun, they're apt to use it. That she did, and good for her.

You make a good point. She was certainly better off with the ankle holster than carrying in the purse, and if she picked that up due to your training, it was certainly your training that saved her. It still doesn't contradict what I said, though, since that situation likely falls in the narrow ends of the normal curve for armed civilian encounters with bad guys. In her specific case, though, your training made a huge difference for her. I have no problem agreeing with you on that.

...you are correct...you are not seeing. This girl was trained and as such she had the knowledge, skills and attitude to adapt to her situation, stay calm, look for the opening and act. She was prepared mentally and equipmant wise...

Bob

I can only take credit for training her how to shoot and how to think offensively. The ankle holster was her idea and I had no clue that is how she had decided to carry. Since the time I trained her I would only run into her at the club once or twice a year practicing with her dad. The last time was maybe 5 months before the attack.

As to this kind of attack being rare..I worked no less that 5 like this over the years especially when I worked in Dallas. You just don't hear about them.

Bob

ps...I didn't change her original letter to me and there is one word left out, she could "not" get the duct tape off her eyes...

Kev..,

I've seen several references to Glock .22 coversion units but have never seen an ad for them. Who makes them?

O

Advantage Arms makes the best one...Ceinder also does but the fixed sights are machined into the slide and are not adjustable.

Bob

Here's what I do see; somebody with something to sell, who's convinced himself that absolutely everyone has to buy it.