# Concealed Carry and Martial Arts.



## OldGhost (Nov 23, 2015)

I posted another thread a few days ago and a few replies down I brought up that I CC a 45 when ever I can a Sig P227 in bringing that detail up it somewhat derailed the thread. Some of the replies that were posted makes me wonder Is it looked at as taboo to Cary a pistol as a martial artist? Some question were legit questions, some were a little snarky advising just wear a vest or why have a gun since the situation I listed first the gun would not of been much help.

Anyone else CC and incorporate that in to your self defense plan, do you have an EDC pack you keep in your truck, or maybe just a few odds and ends you try to have around? I have a small pack I carry in the truck and with me to work. Honestly it's more to hold my lunch and a few cokes but I tossed in a few things to help in an emergency. Just a flash light, some rope a small stick to make a tunicate, gloves. 

I would think even with martial arts a lot of people would incorporate a firearm into their plan? Maybe I'm way off.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Nov 23, 2015)

I've carried for years. I don't personally think the .45 is a good choice for a carry gun, for reasons I've covered in detail in other threads.
I drive a Corvette, so it wouldn't help me any to leave a pack in the truck...
I do have a backpack that I carry to work, but it's not a "prepper" type thing. It's got my caffeine (I'm not addicted. I can quit any time I want. When you work nights, caffeine is one of the four basic food groups...). My Surface Pro, which sits on the desk and plays a slideshow of vacation photos (better than taking Valium...) and Pandora. And my work gear (stethoscope, shears, multi-tool, etc etc etc).


----------



## Kurai (Nov 23, 2015)

Many of the black belts at the dojo I train at ccw.  it is a part of our curriculum that all black belts have, at minimum, firearm safety training.  I do incorporate it into my self defense plan, with the strong hope of never needing.  Kind of like insurance.  

I have a small pack that I carry my tablet and bluetooth headphones in.  I keep matches, first aid kit, flashlight, small folding knife, paracord, etc.  Doesn't take up a ton of space.  It also has a hidden holster for those rare times off body carry is warranted.  Like a doctor's appointment.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Nov 23, 2015)

In IRT it is looked at in a very positive way and most of the practitioner's studying with me concealed carry.  I personally carry besides my firearm a folding knife and a flashlight.  Cars are fitted with emergency equipment and first aid.  Bug out bags are also available.

If you are serious about personal protection skills then firearms are just one more tool you need to be familiar with and utilize!


----------



## Danny T (Nov 23, 2015)

I carry.
Also carry bladed tools, flashlight, multi-tool, metal pen (tactical type), and a few other choice toys.
I have a day bag with first-aid supplies, hi protein snacks, extra shirt & pants extra ammo, fixed blade, and again some other choice toys.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Nov 24, 2015)

OldGhost said:


> I posted another thread a few days ago and a few replies down I brought up that I CC a 45 when ever I can a Sig P227 in bringing that detail up it somewhat derailed the thread. Some of the replies that were posted makes me wonder Is it looked at as taboo to Cary a pistol as a martial artist? Some question were legit questions, some were a little snarky advising just wear a vest or why have a gun since the situation I listed first the gun would not of been much help.



First, if I did carry a firearm, you would never see me posting anything about it online.  Call it paranoia, but I don't think it's anyone's business whether or not I carry.  I certainly am not a licensed carry holder, mainly because a license to carry is defacto registration and I don't care to be registered.

Second, I see nothing wrong with concealed carry, for a martial artist or for anyone else.  As the old saying goes, _"God made man, Colonel Colt made them equal."_

Third, I believe that carrying firearms changes the dynamics of any self-defense situation.  Now, you must not only defend yourself, you must defend your weapon; by which I mean you must keep it from being taken from you.  If you draw or otherwise brandish it, any self-defense situation has now become a deadly force situation.  If you do that, you must a) be certain that you're legally permitted to do so, or you're going to become a bad man's boyfriend in prison, and b) you must be capable of taking a human life, because you just raised the chances considerably that you'll have to do so.

Fourth, just like martial arts, carrying a weapon is worse than useless if you are not highly skilled and continue training with it.  Buying a gun and chucking it in your pocket is not improving your chances of surviving a self-defense scenario.  It's increasing the chances you'll shoot your dick off.  Guns are not magic wands.  You don't wave them around and things get better (although some have argued with me that they waved a gun around and things *did* get better, I think that's the exception rather than the rule).

My opinions on the subject are nuanced and frequently misinterpreted as being anti-gun.  I'm pro-gun, so please don't misunderstand me.  I'm anti-idiot, and a lot of idiots carry weapons and think they have protected themselves thereby.  Armed idiots are still idiots; they're just more dangerous to everyone around them.



> Anyone else CC and incorporate that in to your self defense plan, do you have an EDC pack you keep in your truck, or maybe just a few odds and ends you try to have around? I have a small pack I carry in the truck and with me to work. Honestly it's more to hold my lunch and a few cokes but I tossed in a few things to help in an emergency. Just a flash light, some rope a small stick to make a tunicate, gloves.



That brings me to another of my favorite topics.  "Self defense plan."  That's a good idea.  I think everyone should have one.  Unfortunately, I think most people do not even understand what one is.

Bug-out bags are nice.  Having first-aid kits and canned food and water and so on is nice.  It's all nice, and for the most part, it probably won't do any harm.

However...

Most people seem to think that a) they will somehow instantly know how to apply a tourniquet or staunch bleeding from a sucking chest wound or purify their water or read a topo map after TSHTF.  Again, just like martial arts and firearms, if you do not make yourself expert in the use of those tools and practice with them, they won't be of any use to you.

I also think that most preppers or survivalists or self-defense experts and so on never seem to consider the self-defense scenarios they are MOST LIKELY to find themselves in.  That is, we are far less likely to experience a nuclear detonation than we are a hurricane, tornado, earthquake, fire, mudslide, flood, or other_ force majeure_.

So, before packing up the tourniquets, it would be a good idea to have a fire extinguisher and to know the different types of fire and extinguishers and maybe even have practiced putting out a fire with one.  It would be wise to practice evacuating your own house, blindfolded, in the middle of the night, while crawling on the floor to simulate avoiding toxic smoke.  It would be a good idea to have an evacuation plan with your family so that everyone knows where the rally point is, so that you don't go running back into a burning house to save a family member who has already escaped but you just don't know where they are.

It would be wise to take some weather-spotting classes offered for free from FEMA through local governments.  It would be wise to actually become Red Cross certified in various life-saving skills, and to practice those skills.

It's nice to have a compass.  It tells you which way magnetic north is.  Close to useless unless you have a map to go with it, and have learned orienteering skills.  There are clubs where you can learn such skills.

You might want to learn to reload, since once you run out of ammo, you have a nice metal stick, not a gun.

Some tell me how they will hunt for food when TSHTF, but they've never been hunting, never gutted or skinned an animal, never eaten wild game.  Good luck with setting that snare if you've never done it and now have to survive based on your ability to do so.  Good luck hunting when you run out of ammo, or when you spoil the meat by puncturing the wrong organ while you fiddle-faddle around inside the critter's guts.

If you really want to get your learn on, volunteer at a local veterinary clinic or shelter, where if you're lucky, you might learn to give an injection, stitch a wound, and otherwise help sick animals (all of which can be used on humans in emergencies).

Most of us who are getting older also have medical issues that we tend to forget about.  Yeah, a year's worth of food in the garage, and no diabetes medication past thirty days worth.  Can you pull a rotten tooth?  Do you have replacement eyeglasses?

It goes on and on.  TEOTWAWKI may happen someday, heck it probably will, but the chances are that none of the preppers, survivalists, martial artists, weapons stockpilers, or etc are really going to be surviving it.  More importantly, your house could catch on fire (God forbid) or there could be a local flood or other weather event that puts you out of your home or turns off your power in the area for days, weeks, even months, and your bug-out bag won't be of that much use, especially if you just buy it and carry it around like a magic totem. 



> I would think even with martial arts a lot of people would incorporate a firearm into their plan? Maybe I'm way off.



You are correct.  But depending how far down the rabbit hole you want to go, it's a whole lot more than that.  Food for thought.

Personally, what *I* throw in my truck for emergencies is a good flashlight, a fire-starter, a sleeping bag, a charged (but deactivated) cell phone, and a good set of  socks and boots.  All of more importance to me than a firearm in most circumstances; and if someone breaks in and steals it, I won't be afraid they'll use it to kill someone.  I also have a AAA membership.  Best money I ever spent with regard to vehicles.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Nov 24, 2015)

And just FYI, in my opinion, most of the preppers are fashionistas.  They have endless discussions about which bug-out bag to buy, which bug-out-buggy to drive, which canned foods last the longest, and they could not stitch a wound or gut a rabbit if their lives depended on it.  Poseurs, most of them.   Fortunately, since they stockpile useful things, I will eat well when they fail to survive after TSHTF.


----------



## Danny T (Nov 24, 2015)

I've stated many times and continue to do so... Self Defense is much more than fighting.
To be good at self defense requires multifaceted thought processes and skill sets. To have the proper skills requires training, practice, and mindset. Unfortunately when it comes to self defense and security it is mostly false. It is more of a sense, a feeling of being safe. Feel unsafe, take a 2 hour self-defense fight back course, purchase a weapon, and feel good about your safety. False, false, false.
And then there are some of us who actually train and practice. Not just in the gym but outside in different environments with other experts who have different skills sets.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Nov 24, 2015)

Bill Mattocks said:


> And just FYI, in my opinion, most of the preppers are fashionistas.  They have endless discussions about which bug-out bag to buy, which bug-out-buggy to drive, which canned foods last the longest, and they could not stitch a wound or gut a rabbit if their lives depended on it.  Poseurs, most of them.   Fortunately, since they stockpile useful things, I will eat well when they fail to survive after TSHTF.



I think you're right. When the Zombie Apocalypse comes, I will be able to barter medical care for food.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Nov 24, 2015)

Dirty Dog said:


> I think you're right. When the Zombie Apocalypse comes, I will be able to barter medical care for food.



One of the few true post-apocalyptic skills that makes one truly valuable.  A good dentist will also do well post-TEOTWAWKI.


----------



## Blindside (Nov 24, 2015)

Conservatively I would say that half of my adult class carries on a regular basis.  Kali tends to skew toward a certain demographic, and lets face it we are training with other weapons every day.

I lived in Wyoming for 10 years, and each of our cars have "blizzard packs" which let you deal with the "oh crap, I just went off the side of the road and it may be three days before the snow stops flying enough for someone else to drive down this road."


----------



## GiYu - Todd (Nov 25, 2015)

OldGhost said:


> Is it looked at as taboo to Cary a pistol as a martial artist?


Most of the adult students in our school have CCW permits.  We conduct various scenario-based combat shooting classes throughout the year.  I look at CC as giving yourself an extra option for those situations where MA is insufficient.  But like MA, it's best if you keep yourself proficient and practiced.


----------



## GiYu - Todd (Nov 25, 2015)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> I personally carry besides my firearm a folding knife and a flashlight.


I always have either a knife or sidearm on me... but usually not both.  I was told of a case a couple decades ago of a guy who shot a knife-wielding attacker, but a jury later second-guessed his escalation since he also had a knife and "could have just used that instead".  Of course most of us know how idiodic it would be to choose a knife-fight, but a safe, comfortable jury protected by an armed bailiff may disagree.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Nov 25, 2015)

GiYu - Todd said:


> I always have either a knife or sidearm on me... but usually not both.  I was told of a case a couple decades ago of a guy who shot a knife-wielding attacker, but a jury later second-guessed his escalation since he also had a knife and "could have just used that instead".  Of course most of us know how idiodic it would be to choose a knife-fight, but a safe, comfortable jury protected by an armed bailiff may disagree.



I would have to see the cite to that case before I would believe it.  Sounds like an apocryphal tale to me.

If one has the legal authority to respond to an attack with deadly force, then they have the right.  What instrument they choose to respond with is not important.  Juries can certainly be composed of stupid people of the _"why didn't he just shoot the gun out of the bad man's hand instead of double-tapping him in the head,"_ but any defense attorney with a pulse should be all over that.

My suggestion is that people who choose to go about armed should carefully review the actual laws on self-defense, including those on the use of deadly force, in the jurisdictions where they live and work.  If there are questions remaining, that's when it is time to spend a couple bucks to consult an actual attorney.  

Michigan Legislature - Section 780.972

Here is an example of the law on deadly force where I live (Michigan):
*780.972 Use of deadly force by individual not engaged in commission of crime; conditions.*
_
Sec. 2.

(1) An individual who has not or is not engaged in the commission of a crime at the time he or she uses deadly force may use deadly force against another individual anywhere he or she has the legal right to be with no duty to retreat if either of the following applies:

(a) The individual honestly and reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent death of or imminent great bodily harm to himself or herself or to another individual.

(b) The individual honestly and reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent sexual assault of himself or herself or of another individual.

(2) An individual who has not or is not engaged in the commission of a crime at the time he or she uses force other than deadly force may use force other than deadly force against another individual anywhere he or she has the legal right to be with no duty to retreat if he or she honestly and reasonably believes that the use of that force is necessary to defend himself or herself or another individual from the imminent unlawful use of force by another individual.
_
Notice is says nothing about the choice of weapon involved.  Deadly force is deadly force.

Michigan concealed carry law specifies 'pistols', which would seem to preclude carrying concealed knives.  However, although it is still a bit of a gray area as I understand it, Michigan law does permit the carrying of concealed "hunting knives" so long as there is "no unlawful intent."  Again, I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice.

So at least in Michigan, again in my opinion only, if I were to have to resort to deadly force to defend myself, whether I drew a pistol or a knife would make no difference to the law; in fact, I could club them to death with a mackerel I guess.  I'd be very surprised to find that a jury had found someone guilty of using the more deadly of several choices when they were legally allowed to defend themselves with deadly force.


----------



## GiYu - Todd (Nov 25, 2015)

Great info, Bill... thanks.

As for the jury story, it's similar to many complaints against LEOs for shooting a knife-wielding subject.  Armchair quarterbacks saying they should have just disarmed/sprayed/tasered, rather than shot.


Bill Mattocks said:


> Michigan concealed carry law specifies 'pistols', which would seem to preclude carrying concealed knives.  However, although it is still a bit of a gray area as I understand it, Michigan law does permit the carrying of concealed "hunting knives" so long as there is "no unlawful intent." .


Here's a website I've used in the past that provides some info on state knife laws.  US Knife Laws

I'm still trying to find out if there's someplace I could legally carry my sword.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Nov 25, 2015)

GiYu - Todd said:


> Great info, Bill... thanks.
> 
> As for the jury story, it's similar to many complaints against LEOs for shooting a knife-wielding subject.  Armchair quarterbacks saying they should have just disarmed/sprayed/tasered, rather than shot.
> 
> ...



I use that site also.  However, one must always realize that such sources are only as good as the people who compiled the laws; at least they do cite the law in question.  However, armed with the statute number, it's a good idea to do one's own search of the actual state archives in question; most of them are online and current, which is important.  Get your information straight from the source, as it were.

I'm glad you do your research!  Sadly, most people seem to rely on what they heard someone else tell some third party about a cousin's brother in law.


----------



## GiYu - Todd (Nov 25, 2015)

Bill Mattocks said:


> I use that site also. However, one must always realize that such sources are only as good as the people who compiled the laws; at least they do cite the law in question. However, armed with the statute number, it's a good idea to do one's own search of the actual state archives in question; most of them are online and current, which is important. Get your information straight from the source, as it were.


I agree.  Also the laws can/do change, complicating things.  At least a site like this is better than guessing.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Nov 25, 2015)

GiYu - Todd said:


> I always have either a knife or sidearm on me... but usually not both.  I was told of a case a couple decades ago of a guy who shot a knife-wielding attacker, but a jury later second-guessed his escalation since he also had a knife and "could have just used that instead".  Of course most of us know how idiodic it would be to choose a knife-fight, but a safe, comfortable jury protected by an armed bailiff may disagree.



I agree completely with Bill. This is almost certainly urban myth. I do not believe any court in the US has ever required a fair fight when your life is in danger. It doesn't matter if you kill them with your hands, a knife, a pistol, a shotgun or by pushing them off the roof. All that matters is that the situation warranted a lethal response.

The Colorado "Make My Day" law can be found here.
A copy of the remainder of our self defense laws can be found here.

As you can see, there is clearly no requirement for a fair fight. 

The bulk of our firearms and weapons laws can be found here.

I have not done an exhaustive read of all the laws, but in the statutes I have read, there is never any requirement for a fair fight. 

Knives are a somewhat gray area, in that the law here says things like 'automatic knives are illegal except for police, EMS and those with a permit', even though the only permit issued is a concealed handgun permit.
I've talked to a number of police officers about this, and the consensus has been 'if you can carry a gun, why would we care what kind of knife you carry?"
I feel comfortable carrying my Benchmade Autostriker, because I have a CHP and because of my connection with EMS.


----------



## DaveB (Nov 25, 2015)

OldGhost said:


> I posted another thread a few days ago and a few replies down I brought up that I CC a 45 when ever I can a Sig P227 in bringing that detail up it somewhat derailed the thread. Some of the replies that were posted makes me wonder Is it looked at as taboo to Cary a pistol as a martial artist? Some question were legit questions, some were a little snarky advising just wear a vest or why have a gun since the situation I listed first the gun would not of been much help.
> 
> Anyone else CC and incorporate that in to your self defense plan, do you have an EDC pack you keep in your truck, or maybe just a few odds and ends you try to have around? I have a small pack I carry in the truck and with me to work. Honestly it's more to hold my lunch and a few cokes but I tossed in a few things to help in an emergency. Just a flash light, some rope a small stick to make a tunicate, gloves.
> 
> I would think even with martial arts a lot of people would incorporate a firearm into their plan? Maybe I'm way off.



My comments were nothing to do with a taboo in the martial arts. I.genuinely feel that fear of violence is a bigger problem than actual violence unless you live in Syria or somewhere similar .

Also armour might actually protect you where a firearm won't.

Bill Mattocks summed up my beliefs regarding firearms very well when explaining his own feelings.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Nov 26, 2015)

My analysis of my current lifestyle, based on geography, income (yes it matters, sadly), where I go and with whom I associate leads me to believe that although I live in the northern burbs of Detroit, my chances of having to defend myself against violence are relatively low. Most likely would be some kind of road rage situation.

I don't drink in public, hang out at bars, nightclubs or the like. I don't do drugs or buy sex; these are the things that increase risk of being in close proximity to violent people.

I am quite fortunate, I don't discount that. Not everyone has the advantages I do.


----------



## elder999 (Nov 26, 2015)

Bill Mattocks said:


> I don't drink in public, hang out at bars, nightclubs or the like. I don't do drugs or buy sex; these are the things that increase risk of being in close proximity to violent people..



*This*.

Unfortunately or otherwise, in terms of responsible concealed carry (and legally, in some places) it's unwise to carry in bars, nightclubs and the like. Ironic, then, that the place where one might be  most likely to need a gun is a place where you can't have it. I do drink in public, hang out at bars, nightclubs and the like-though I save "getting drunk" for home, mostly-but I don't carry when I'm drinking-booze and guns just plain don't mix. I don't do drugs or buy sex, but I have a history of hanging out in pretty low places-don't much anymore...self defense begins with not being in places where your risk of having to defend yourself is increased......if you're going to such places, having an exit strategy is also part of self defense....

If you have the will, means and training, carrying a weapon is also part of it.....most of the martial artists I've known don't have anything against firearms or carrying concealed, though...


----------



## Dirty Dog (Nov 26, 2015)

Do you have insurance, Bill?

I don't think the vast majority of us do not carry because we expect to need a gun. If I was going someplace where I anticipated the need for a gun, I wouldn't go. Or I'd go with a tactical assault team. 
But then, I didn't expect to be assaulted by a knife wielding mugger either. 
It's insurance. Hassle free if I don't need it. Vital, if I do. 


Sent from an old fashioned 300 baud acoustic modem by whistling into the handset. Not TapaTalk. Really.


----------



## elder999 (Nov 26, 2015)

Sorry, I couldn't resist Happy Thanksgiving, everyone!!


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Nov 26, 2015)

Dirty Dog said:


> Do you have insurance, Bill?
> 
> I don't think the vast majority of us do not carry because we expect to need a gun. If I was going someplace where I anticipated the need for a gun, I wouldn't go. Or I'd go with a tactical assault team.
> But then, I didn't expect to be assaulted by a knife wielding mugger either.
> ...



Agreed.  Again, I'm not against weapon carry.  I think I see the upside as well as the downside involved in making that decision.  What I am saying is that a) I am fortunate enough to live and work in an area that is relatively low in terms of violent assaults, and b) I take steps to minimize that risk.  That doesn't mean I would not carry as well; just noting that self-defense is more than strapping on a piece.

And I would not say that carry is 'hassle free'.  Most of us who have carried know that it's more than strapping on a watch every day in terms of hassle.  Then there's the issue of concealed weapons holders being required, in many states, to keep it concealed, which can suck in the summertime.  And of course, when one carries, it will be the one day when one is running late, in a hurry, and chooses not to pack that a weapon will suddenly be needed...Murphy's Law and such.

Choosing to carry is a responsibility, and not a simple one, in my mind.  I'm glad there are law-abiding concealed weapons carriers out there.  Unfortunately, when I point out some of the disadvantages of carrying a firearm, many people think I must hate guns or something.  Apparently, a person who favors concealed carry must never speak of the downside, lest they be thought a wuss.


----------



## elder999 (Nov 26, 2015)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Agreed.  Again, I'm not against weapon carry.  I think I see the upside as well as the downside involved in making that decision.  What I am saying is that a) I am fortunate enough to live and work in an area that is relatively low in terms of violent assaults, and b) I take steps to minimize that risk.  That doesn't mean I would not carry as well; just noting that self-defense is more than strapping on a piece.
> 
> And I would not say that carry is 'hassle free'.  Most of us who have carried know that it's more than strapping on a watch every day in terms of hassle.  Then there's the issue of concealed weapons holders being required, in many states, to keep it concealed, which can suck in the summertime.  And of course, when one carries, it will be the one day when one is running late, in a hurry, and chooses not to pack that a weapon will suddenly be needed...Murphy's Law and such.
> 
> Choosing to carry is a responsibility, and not a simple one, in my mind.  I'm glad there are law-abiding concealed weapons carriers out there.  Unfortunately, when I point out some of the disadvantages of carrying a firearm, many people think I must hate guns or something.  Apparently, a person who favors concealed carry must never speak of the downside, lest they be thought a wuss.



It's (pun intended, so be prepared) _a loaded situation_....

New Mexico is an open carry state-in fact, we didn't have concealed carry permits until 12 years ago (I know that because I've had to renew twice, and will again next year)....having open-carried, I have to say that it made people nervous, even in the forest, where it's kind of prudent-while I can carry into a convenience store, even one that sells liquor, it can be,  understandably, a bit unsettling for the people who work there...carrying concealed doesn't make anyone nervous, until they know you're carrying....


----------



## Dirty Dog (Nov 26, 2015)

Bill, it's no more a hassle than putting my keys or wallet in my pocket. 
It really is that simple. 


Sent from an old fashioned 300 baud acoustic modem by whistling into the handset. Not TapaTalk. Really.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Nov 26, 2015)

Dirty Dog said:


> Bill, it's no more a hassle than putting my keys or wallet in my pocket.
> It really is that simple.
> 
> 
> Sent from an old fashioned 300 baud acoustic modem by whistling into the handset. Not TapaTalk. Really.



Simple? Yes.

Putting on my watch is simple. Sometimes I still can't be arsed to do it.

Daily carry requires discipline that some do not have. I know many with ccw permits who carry when they think they might need it. I submit that Murphy will use his Law to Roger them with a corn cob.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Nov 26, 2015)

I agree, which is why putting my gun in the holster is as automatic as putting my wallet in my pocket. 


Sent from an old fashioned 300 baud acoustic modem by whistling into the handset. Not TapaTalk. Really.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Nov 26, 2015)

Dirty Dog said:


> I agree, which is why putting my gun in the holster is as automatic as putting my wallet in my pocket.
> 
> 
> Sent from an old fashioned 300 baud acoustic modem by whistling into the handset. Not TapaTalk. Really.



And again, you're not the norm, to the best of my personal experience.  I have no doubt you pack 100% of the time.  Others I know don't, because they've told me as much.  The gun you don't have with you isn't much use.  Thus, the imperative; if you carry, you have to carry all the time or what's the point.  You clearly get that; but let's not pretend all lawful carriers do, because I happen to know differently.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Nov 27, 2015)

Bill is making a point that is probably true.  A lot of ccw holders take a ccw course and never train or do anything else.  Which is not a lot different then how many LEO's get little to no training after the police academy.  They do not seek it out or their department does not require them to get regular training.  You DD, Elder999, myself and many of the people on the board are more of the exception.  We carry all the time, know the laws and actually train.


----------



## elder999 (Nov 27, 2015)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> W*hich is not a lot different then how many LEO's get little to no training after the police academy.  They do not seek it out or their department does not require them to get regular training*.



I am always a little amazed at the lack of shooting ability displayed by so many LEOs at the range.....at least they're there, shooting, but they don't seem to improve......they just _requalify_...I recognize that their sidearms aren't supposed to be their primary tool, but it would be better if they all shot at a higher standard. It's the same for CCW-the requirements and standards in NM aren't, frankly, that high-nor do they really need to be-getting the permit should be like first getting a driver's license, but most people don't practice nearly enough, or obtain more advanced training. For example, in NM you have to fire 25 rounds  total. 15 rounds at 3 yards, 10 rounds at 7 yards. Each shot is worth 4 points. You need a 72%, or 18 shots, to pass, with a 12" x 18" target.You qualify based on type of gun used, semi-auto or wheel. The largest caliber shot qualifies you for all smaller calibers. So with my .50 qualification I'm covered for just about every conceivable semi-auto caliber there is down to the smallest.I also qualified with a revolver that would be ludicrous for concealed carry, and it qualified me for just about everything.

I did not have to draw from concealment-something that's essential, and requires training. There is also no training required  for handgun retention, or any other essential close-quarters skills.

In some states it's even easier. 

Requalifying is essentially the same as the basic qualifications above, and, while some people seek out additional training like I have, most don't.


----------



## Tgace (Nov 27, 2015)

The fact of the matter is time and money.

It is a large organizational and financial effort to get officers ongoing training past simple qualifications.

And firearms training is just one skill amongst many that LEO's are expected to be proficient in.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk


----------



## Tgace (Nov 27, 2015)

And while "additional training" (as in Gunsite, Front Sight, etc.) is great, the real place skill is gained is ongoing practice. 


Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Nov 27, 2015)

*If we look at departments* though Tgace some place an emphasis on having their officers trained well and others well just do not.  Take an example of where I used to live in Michigan.  The city I lived in pretty much did not offer any training of consequence for their officers.  Maybe once a year and a requalification at the range.  The city just next to it which was headed by a friend of mine had requalification every three months and additional force on force and empty hand training every three months as well.  They paid for officers to become instructors so that they always had in house training experts to conduct training.  Unfortunately that is no standard across the country for ongoing training in regards to law enforcement.  Of course going back to concealed weapons permit holders there is even less initial training and well ongoing training is just recertification which as Elder999 showed very basic and disappointing.


----------



## Tgace (Nov 27, 2015)

Many States have DCJS/POST standards for required training hours, unfortunately most of those standards are for paper purposes vs substantial training.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk


----------



## elder999 (Nov 27, 2015)

Tgace said:


> The fact of the matter is time and money.
> 
> It is a large organizational and financial effort to get officers ongoing training past simple qualifications.
> 
> ...



And I wasn't really singling out LEO's with my post-it's just an observation I've made over decades. I'm more appalled by civilians who get their CCW permit whose training ends with qualifying to carry, which appears to be the majority of them....(though quite a few of them were competent marksmen with pistols beforehand)...


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Nov 27, 2015)

elder999 said:


> I did not have to draw from concealment-something that's essential, and requires training. There is also no training required  for handgun retention, or any other essential close-quarters skills.



Since you said, that, I'll share that when transitioning from Marine MP to civilian law enforcement, I heard many sneers about how 'unqualified' MPs were compared to their civilian counterparts.  Yet we put more rounds downrange PER MONTH than they did per year in my experience.  We trained, as you said, drawing from concealed carry.  Shooting from concealed or covered positions.  Shooting with the weak hand.  Shooting with the weapon upside-down and using the pinky finger to pull the trigger.  Firing with the weapon soaked in oil (simulating blood). Clearing multiple types of weapons malfunctions safely. Shooting with the weak eye.  It went on and on.  We did not just cup-and-saucer our pistols, bang out 25 shots at a silhouette target at 25 feet, and go get some beer.


----------



## Tgace (Nov 28, 2015)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Since you said, that, I'll share that when transitioning from Marine MP to civilian law enforcement, I heard many sneers about how 'unqualified' MPs were compared to their civilian counterparts.  Yet we put more rounds downrange PER MONTH than they did per year in my experience.  We trained, as you said, drawing from concealed carry.  Shooting from concealed or covered positions.  Shooting with the weak hand.  Shooting with the weapon upside-down and using the pinky finger to pull the trigger.  Firing with the weapon soaked in oil (simulating blood). Clearing multiple types of weapons malfunctions safely. Shooting with the weak eye.  It went on and on.  We did not just cup-and-saucer our pistols, bang out 25 shots at a silhouette target at 25 feet, and go get some beer.



Funny. I was just about to say that the military is not much better when it comes to individual "expertise" in firearms handling (on the average). While some units get good training, many get "check the box" range time. Much like civillian LEO organizations, much depends on the individual unit (company, battalion, etc.) and the leaderships commitment to weapons training. All that is "required" is qualification when it comes down to it.

Certainly there is a lot more weapon handling (exercises, "wargames", battle drills, etc) in the military. But routine, ongoing, live fire individual proficiency training isn't as common as many people may think.

The thing I think many people don't realize is that there's a difference between training and proficiency. You can go to all sorts of high-speed "training", but unless you practice it you will not become proficient at it.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Nov 28, 2015)

Tgace said:


> Funny. I was just about to say that the military is not much better when it comes to individual "expertise" in firearms handling (on the average). While some units get good training, many get "check the box" range time. Much like civillian LEO organizations, much depends on the individual unit (company, battalion, etc.) and the leaderships commitment to weapons training. All that is "required" is qualification when it comes down to it.
> 
> Certainly there is a lot more weapon handling (exercises, "wargames", battle drills, etc) in the military. But routine, ongoing, live fire individual proficiency training isn't as common as many people may think.
> 
> The thing I think many people don't realize is that there's a difference between training and proficiency. You can go to all sorts of high-speed "training", but unless you practice it you will not become proficient at it.



Agreed in general. But Marine MPs have to train more often than your typical yearly rifle and pistol qual. I don't know about other services or MOSs.


----------



## elder999 (Nov 28, 2015)

Tgace said:


> The thing I think many people don't realize is that there's a difference between training and proficiency. You can go to all sorts of high-speed "training", but unless you practice it you will not become proficient at it.



Well, yeaha, but _practice makes *permanent*......_and if all people have to practice (and become proficient at) is the same "requalification," then that becomes all they're competent at....and, in many cases, it's not enough...not even close.
_




(There's a few things Jim Grover and I disagree with ,philosophically, but this is the kind of thing I'm talking about)_


----------



## Tgace (Nov 28, 2015)

elder999 said:


> Well, yeaha, but _practice makes *permanent*......_and if all people have to practice (and become proficient at) is the same "requalification," then that becomes all they're competent at....and, in many cases, it's not enough...not even close.
> _
> 
> 
> ...



Sure. But my statement is more oriented at the folks who will shell out 1-2K for a yearly class taught by some former Tier 1 Operator and boast about how highly "trained" they are, but then they seldom practice the skills they paid all that $$ to learn.

Fiereams proficiency isnt really esoteric. Pretty much any quaified instructor is going to be teaching the same thing, just with their special flavor of "gung-ho" and personality. Yeah, the minutiae of things like tac reload vs emergency reload, yadda yadda my vary, but the bones of it are almost identical.

Once you have been taught the right skills, most people would be better off just practicing them vs looking for the next guru to give their money to.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Nov 28, 2015)

Tgace said:


> Sure. But my statement is more oriented at the folks who will shell out 1-2K for a yearly class taught by some former Tier 1 Operator and boast about how highly "trained" they are, but then they seldom practice the skills they paid all that $$ to learn.
> 
> Fiereams proficiency isnt really esoteric. Pretty much any quaified instructor is teaching the same thing (just with their special flavor of "gung-ho" and personality). Once you have been taught the right skills, most people would be better off just practicing them vs looking for the next guru to give their money to.



Same goes for martial arts seminars. Everybody wants to get their photo taken in a sweaty gi in a grip and grin with some famous martial artist. Who practices what they've learned, constantly, for the next dozen or so years? As most of us know,  running through a scenario a few dozen times on a weekend conveys no level of mastery. Guns, martial arts, flower-arranging, etc.


----------



## Tgace (Nov 28, 2015)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Same goes for martial arts seminars. Everybody wants to get their photo taken in a sweaty gi in a grip and grin with some famous martial artist. Who practices what they've learned, constantly, for the next dozen or so years? As most of us know,  running through a scenario a few dozen times on a weekend conveys no level of mastery. Guns, martial arts, flower-arranging, etc.



Exactly the same.


----------



## GiYu - Todd (Dec 1, 2015)

elder999 said:


> I did not have to draw from concealment-something that's essential, and requires training. There is also no training required  for handgun retention, or any other essential close-quarters skills.


We've invited LEO's to many of our weapons seminars.  Things our dojo trained regularly at our private range, like retention or scenario based stuff, seemed new to far too many of the professionals, who often had only done basic annual requals since they first got their badges.  The fun thing was after teaching them some things, they let us play with some of their full auto toys at the police range. I was glad we were able to convey some additional skills to the guys who did show up.  I know they have a tough job, and it's sad their departments don't offer more training to them.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Dec 8, 2015)

Firearms are as much a part of the martial arts as swords, knives and the staff.  They are a tool that one uses to either overcome an attacker or overcome an enemy (depending upon the circumstances).  No martial arts instructor or peer should discourage lawful firearm ownership, or seeking out competent training if not offered at the school (I offered firearms training along with our martial arts training). 

Several things to consider;  first, many Sheriff's and Chiefs are encouraging the citizens within their county/city to arm themselves.  Brevard county and Detroit are a couple of examples.  There are multiple reasons for this.  According to the Crime Prevention Research Center the number or CCW holders has nearly quadrupled since 2007.  During this time:


The number of concealed handgun permits is increasing at an ever-increasing rate. Over the past year, 1.7 million additional new permits have been issued—a 15.4% increase in one single year. This is the largest-ever single-year increase in the number of concealed handgun permits.

5.2% of the total adult population has a permit.

Five states now have more than 10% of their adult population with concealed handgun permits.

In ten states, a permit is no longer required to carry in all or virtually all of the state. This is a major reason why legal carrying handguns is growing so much faster than the number of permits.

Since 2007, permits for women have increased by 270% and for men by 156%.

Some evidence suggests that permit holding by minorities is increasing more than twice as fast as for whites.

Between 2007 and 2014, murder rates have fallen from 5.6 to 4.2 (preliminary estimates) per 100,000. This represents a 25% drop in the murder rate at the same time that the percentage of the adult population with permits soared by 156%. Overall, violent crime also fell by 25 percent over that period of time.

States with the largest increase in permits have seen the largest relative drops in murder rates.

Concealed handgun permit holders are extremely law-abiding. In Florida and Texas, permit holders are convicted of misdemeanors or felonies at one-sixth the rate that police officers are convicted.

Black Friday of this year saw nearly 200,000 new firearm purchases and nationwide the number of CCW applications is up 70% over this time last year. 

Of concern to the average citizen is the 'active shooter' situation.  The numbers have increased:



> Mass Shootings under the Last Five Presidents
> 
> Ronald Reagan: 1981-1989 (8 years) 11 mass shootings
> Incidents with 8 or more deaths = 5
> ...



Laying aside politics, the point is that danger to the average citizen has increased dramatically.  Added to the mix are potential and continued terrorist or lone wolf attacks.  In a recent Al Jezeera survey over 80% of muslims responded that they support Jihad.  Of muslims in America nearly 50% supported Jihad.  Add this to the equation of normal criminals, EDP (emotionally disturbed people) that woke up hating the world, increase drug use and the situation hasn't gotten better. 

In regards to muslims, I've lived in the M.E. and have family living there.  It is a substantial threat to consider in terms of lone wolf and terrorist cells (which I know first-hand to exist in this country). 

I've stated this before, but it bears repeating; an unarmed citizen is a victim-in-waiting.  Some things can be overcome with H2H but some things cannot.  As someone that has been in uniform for over 30 years the statement is true that when seconds count the police are minutes away.  S.B. police had a response time of 4 minutes which is excellent.  But in that 4 minutes 28 people were shot, 14 fatally.  A citizen is the first line of defense as they are the ones in attendance on the scene.  Everything else is reactionary. 

If a person choses not to carry that is their right just as it is a right for those that do chose to carry.  It is a responsibility to be taken seriously.  But it is also a responsibility to not rely on others to do what you could/should be doing for yourself.  Personal responsibility goes a long way.


----------



## GiYu - Todd (Dec 9, 2015)

In medicine, there's the concept of "herd immunity", where all people are safer once a critical percentage of the population is immunized against an illness.  Even if a few unprotected people catch the illness, it won't cause an epidemic to grow much.

This concept should also apply to defense against human threats as well.  If a sufficient percentage of the populace is willing/able to defend against threats, there should be a general reduction of those threats, protecting the whole population, including those uninclinded to protect themselves.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Dec 11, 2015)

Tgace said:


> Sure. But my statement is more oriented at the folks who will shell out 1-2K for a yearly class taught by some former Tier 1 Operator and boast about how highly "trained" they are, but then they seldom practice the skills they paid all that $$ to learn.
> 
> Fiereams proficiency isnt really esoteric. Pretty much any quaified instructor is going to be teaching the same thing, just with their special flavor of "gung-ho" and personality. Yeah, the minutiae of things like tac reload vs emergency reload, yadda yadda my vary, but the bones of it are almost identical.
> 
> Once you have been taught the right skills, most people would be better off just practicing them vs looking for the next guru to give their money to.



This is so true!!!


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Dec 11, 2015)

I'm just going to say that politics doesn't belong here, and with that, I am done with this thread.


----------



## elder999 (Dec 11, 2015)

Bill Mattocks said:


> I'm just going to say that politics doesn't belong here, and with that, I am done with this thread.


erm..uhhh....*what?*


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Dec 11, 2015)

Bill, I do not think we have tipped into "politics" yet on this thread and would hope that you would continue to participate as we move forward.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Dec 11, 2015)

Bill Mattocks said:


> I'm just going to say that politics doesn't belong here, and with that, I am done with this thread.



?


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Dec 12, 2015)

Saw in interesting piece on both Fox and CNN yesterday.  Had to do with the number of Sheriffs that have come out urging their law-abiding citizenry to begin carrying a firearm as well as offering advance training.  This is a very proactive approach and it's to be commended and applauded.  As one Sheriff put it bluntly, the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.  Simply logistics dictate that the average citizen is on scene long before first responders. 

This brings up another point that should be discussed, though perhaps a bit of a thread drift so my apologies to the OP.  But thought it worth tossing out for consideration.  If it's prudent for the average, law-abiding citizen to be armed, and it is because they are on scene long before first responders it is also equally true that the average citizen should have BLS/CPR/AED training as well for the very same reason.  The ability to take a live should be balanced with the ability to save a life.

Back on firearms, the news bits stated that the FBI is basically processing an application for CCW every two seconds.  The only negative I heard in the bits was from some advocate stating we were going back to the 'wild west'.  That is actually a very disingenuous talking point that has no basis in reality from the perspective of firearms related discussions.  The term 'wild' west did not refer to firearms, it referred to the pioneer conditions of the time period i.e. they were taming the wilds in which they were living and building communities.  From a firearm perspective the west was actually quite polite within the community.  Sure, you had your Jesse James and Billy the Kid types but you've got that anywhere and everywhere.  It was NOT like what Hollywood depicts in movies.  As one of our founding fathers stated, "And armed society is a polite society".  Stats and history bear that out. 

From a martial arts perspective, if the art is focused on SD then it makes perfect sense to include this as a skill set.  H2H has it's limitations and a firearm is a great equalizer. 

Some additional information/links for consideration:

The Armed Citizen


----------



## Tgace (Dec 12, 2015)

Kong Soo Do said:


> ?


I'm thinking he intended to post on a different thread. BTDT.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Dec 12, 2015)

Kong Soo Do said:


> This brings up another point that should be discussed, though perhaps a bit of a thread drift so my apologies to the OP.  But thought it worth tossing out for consideration.  If it's prudent for the average, law-abiding citizen to be armed, and it is because they are on scene long before first responders it is also equally true that the average citizen should have BLS/CPR/AED training as well for the very same reason.  The ability to take a live should be balanced with the ability to save a life.
> 
> From a martial arts perspective, if the art is focused on SD then it makes perfect sense to include this as a skill set.  H2H has it's limitations and a firearm is a great equalizer.



Absolutely agree, BLS/CPR/AED is excellent training for the average citizen' 

I also agree that if a systems main focus is personal protection then firearms should be in the skill set.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jan 8, 2016)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> Absolutely agree, BLS/CPR/AED is excellent training for the average citizen'
> 
> I also agree that if a systems main focus is personal protection then firearms should be in the skill set.


 
If a martial arts instructor was not trained (or well trained) in firearms it would be a rather easy matter to bring someone that was well trained (read:  qualified instructor) into the school to offer additional training.  Local LEO instructors or NRA instructors are usually readily available.  It would serve several purposes;  first it could bring added revenue into a school as it could be offered as a special class.  Secondly it could easily be part of a larger, more comprehensive SD class/course offered by the school.  SD isn't just buying a firearm and shooting it a few times.  SD is home security, vehicle security, travel security etc of which a firearm is a 'part' but not the whole.

If the martial art instructor is also a firearm instructor then it's icing on top of the cake.  As long as he/she is actually a qualified instructor and not just a hobbyist or recreational shooter.  There is a difference.

I just taught four women this last Tuesday in preparation for their CCW course.  All of them learned a lot and I was very proud of each of them.  Very enthusiastic and gained proficiency very rapidly.  And it gave them a sense of accomplishment, confidence and empowerment.


----------



## lklawson (Jan 21, 2016)

I'm late to this party too.  It's my own fault for spending most of my Forum time over on a gun forum where I'm a mod.



Bill Mattocks said:


> Third, I believe that carrying firearms changes the dynamics of any self-defense situation.  Now, you must not only defend yourself, you must defend your weapon; by which I mean you must keep it from being taken from you.


Looking at the available evidence, this is fairly easily achieved by merely being willing to press the trigger.  The available evidence seems to indicate that it's really quite hard for someone to affect a "gun disarm" while actively trying to not get shot.



> Fourth, just like martial arts, carrying a weapon is worse than useless if you are not highly skilled and continue training with it.  Buying a gun and chucking it in your pocket is not improving your chances of surviving a self-defense scenario.  It's increasing the chances you'll shoot your dick off.


I suppose that depends on your definition of "highly skilled."  Firearms generally take far less training time and require far less physicality to a given level of proficiency than most other weapons.  Further, "expertise" isn't really required for effectiveness, merely a minimum level of proficiency to a certain standard.  As an example, most Riflemen aren't rated at Expert but are still considered acceptably proficient after Basic Training.



> Guns are not magic wands.  You don't wave them around and things get better (although some have argued with me that they waved a gun around and things *did* get better, I think that's the exception rather than the rule).


While trying to avoid political entanglements, the available studies do indeed seem to indicate that merely displaying a firearm frequently can dissuade an attacker, but this is more because the attacker has a specific belief that a firearm is particularly dangerous and intimidating rather than realistic attributes of the firearm. That belief, as opposed to a more modest reality, is fostered by politics and pop-culture.  The simple version is that there is a disproportionate number of people, including bad men, who think "guns are scary" just because they are guns.



> I also think that most preppers or survivalists or self-defense experts and so on never seem to consider the self-defense scenarios they are MOST LIKELY to find themselves in.  That is, we are far less likely to experience a nuclear detonation than we are a hurricane, tornado, earthquake, fire, mudslide, flood, or other_ force majeure_.


Agreed. I've been saying this for years.



> You might want to learn to reload, since once you run out of ammo, you have a nice metal stick, not a gun.


Metal sticks make pretty decent bludgeons.  



> It goes on and on.  TEOTWAWKI may happen someday, heck it probably will, but the chances are that none of the preppers, survivalists, martial artists, weapons stockpilers, or etc are really going to be surviving it.  More importantly, your house could catch on fire (God forbid) or there could be a local flood or other weather event that puts you out of your home or turns off your power in the area for days, weeks, even months, and your bug-out bag won't be of that much use, especially if you just buy it and carry it around like a magic totem.


Barter?  I'm the lunatic who's stockpiled enough guns and ammo to outfit a small army.  My plan is to become the local Petty Warlord and exact "tribute" from the survivors and passers-by.  

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Jan 21, 2016)

elder999 said:


> And I wasn't really singling out LEO's with my post-it's just an observation I've made over decades. I'm more appalled by civilians who get their CCW permit whose training ends with qualifying to carry, which appears to be the majority of them....(though quite a few of them were competent marksmen with pistols beforehand)...


Console yourself with the knowledge that, statistically speaking, most firearms related self defense events occur at 5 to 15 feet and the average person only needs to be sufficiently proficient to place rounds on a target equal to about 1.5 feet wide by 2 feet high (human torso) at that range.  This is, again statistically speaking, most often accomplished by some variant of instinctive shooting, which most people can achieve by, well, instinct.  

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Jan 21, 2016)

Training keeps getting mentioned a lot, as does the expense of continual practice.  Here's a free tip.  Many of us (but, admittedly, not all) can engage in very inexpensive training by using .177 Pellet Pistols and Pellet Rifles.  There are a couple of companies which make semi-realistic-like CO2 Pellet Pistols, with reciprocating slides and more-or-less acceptable accuracy, for well under $100.  Pump-style Pellet Rifles can be had for as little as $40 or so.  .177 cal. pellets are available in lots of 500 from the local big box for well under $10.  Pellet traps are easy to build or cheap to buy and the lead can be collected and recycled or sold/given to a friend who casts their own "boolits."  While these aren't a perfect facsimile for your pistol, they do help develop and maintain fundamentals such as body position, sight alignment, trigger press, and follow through.

Further, with a functioning pellet trap, most training can be engaged in within the confines of your garage or even inside your home or apartment, or in your back yard (if legal in your area).  Yes, these are still sufficient in energy and penetration that you need to wear safety glasses and, particularly the rifle, can even be effective for hunting small game such as squirrel, rabbit, or nuisance pest animals.

The noise is low, the costs are low, the benefits are high.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jan 22, 2016)

Bill Mattocks said:


> First, if I did carry a firearm, you would never see me posting anything about it online.  Call it paranoia, but I don't think it's anyone's business whether or not I carry.  I certainly am not a licensed carry holder, mainly because a license to carry is defacto registration and I don't care to be registered.


 
While there is a wisdom in not advertising the carrying of a firearm, I cannot fully support the rest of your statement.  While I don't necessarily agree with the need for a CCW (in my opinion the 2nd Amendment is your CCW/Open carry permit) it is the law in most carry states.  And 'they' are going to know whether you have a firearm(s) or not regardless of whether you have applied/received a CCW simply based upon your purchases which can be tracked.  In other words, people that buy ammo or components are likely to have a firearm.  Unless you make all of your purchases under the radar i.e. pay cash. 

Not having a CCW (assuming it is required in the state of residence) and not carrying a firearm is defacto resigning yourself to being a victim-in-waiting. 



Bill Mattocks said:


> Third, I believe that carrying firearms changes the dynamics of any self-defense situation. Now, you must not only defend yourself, you must defend your weapon; by which I mean you must keep it from being taken from you


 
True, it is a possibility the firearm can be taken from you.  But as Kirk mentions, it is statistically remote.  Police officers carry plainly in the open for all to see, and though police have been disarmed, it is a very remote occurrence.  A citizen carrying concealed has even less of a chance of being disarmed because potential bad guys can't take what they have not seen. 



Bill Mattocks said:


> If you draw or otherwise brandish it, any self-defense situation has now become a deadly force situation.


 
Incorrect.  The situation is already a deadly force situation which is why the firearm has to be drawn. 



Bill Mattocks said:


> If you do that, you must a) be certain that you're legally permitted to do so, or you're going to become a bad man's boyfriend in prison, and b) you must be capable of taking a human life, because you just raised the chances considerably that you'll have to do so.


 
Most states require training in order to be able to apply for a permit, in fact every state does that I'm aware of (that issue CCW).  This includes training on state statute.  Statistically speaking, and as I pointed out above, a private citizen is five times LESS likely to make a mistake than a police officer when it comes to drawing/using a firearm according to the study I presented.

True, you have to have made the decision to use the firearm but it doesn't increase the chance you'll have to kill some one.  Again, as Kirk points out, there have been MANY instances where the presence of a firearm in the hands of a good guy has stopped the bad guy from doing bad things without a shot being fired.  It isn't something to count on of course, but it does happen with some regularity.  On the flip side, not having or not using a firearm makes it more likely that your safety is in the hands of the bad guy. 



Bill Mattocks said:


> Fourth, just like martial arts, carrying a weapon is worse than useless if you are not highly skilled and continue training with it


 
Again this is incorrect.  While being highly trained is vastly preferable to being untrained or lightly trained, there have been a plethora of real world situations where the citizen has successfully defended themselves with little or no training.  To say it is 'worse than useless' is ridiculous.  What is worse than useless is having no means of protection. 

While I'm a vocal spokesman of buying a firearm and getting REALISTIC training (strong and support hand shooting, loading, clearing, charging, shooting from various positions, dim light shooting, simunitions etc) for some it isn't as possible as others.  As with anything, you do the very best you can with what you have and what is available. 



Bill Mattocks said:


> I also think that most preppers or survivalists or self-defense experts and so on never seem to consider the self-defense scenarios they are MOST LIKELY to find themselves in. That is, we are far less likely to experience a nuclear detonation than we are a hurricane, tornado, earthquake, fire, mudslide, flood, or other_ force majeure_.


 
I think you have a TV/Doomsday Preppers view of people in that category.  And while there are loons within that community, they are the exception rather than the rule.  They just get the press from an uneducated media.   The VAST majority of people I know and associate with in the emergency preparedness/self reliance community are focused on the realities of the world we live in i.e. natural and man-made disasters that require critical thinking and pre-planning.  Priorities are having safe, clean drinking water and the knowledge of how to make it clean and safe.  Having food to eat.  Having realistic and necessary medical skills and supplies for individual needs.  And while firearms are on the list, for the majority of likely events they are way down at the bottom. 

One should be careful about making sweeping statements about 'preppers'  Being a 'prepper' is how most of our grandparents lived their lives.  Back then it was SOP and just smart.  Nowadays by most surveys/stats, less than 10% of Americans are prepared for a disaster (be it a storm, mudslide, forest fire, earthquake, social unrest, contaminated water supply, overturned chemical tanker on the highway, martians landing or zombies).  Let me repeat that because it sounds kinda important...less than 10% of Americans are prepared for a disaster in their community.  I kid about the space aliens and zombies but most people will freak if the water/power goes out for a week.  Something like that should be a mild hiccup and not a world changing event in your life. 

This is an area of expertise for me as I own a board, mod another and am a senior member of a third within this community.  Good people, most of whom have a solid game plan. 

I've offered factual statistics above for consideration.


----------



## lklawson (Jan 22, 2016)

Kong Soo Do said:


> NRA instructors are usually readily available.


My NRA Training Counselor told me something the other day which I'd not heard before.  Apparently the vast majority of NRA Certified Firearms Instructors have no intention of instructing either professionally or semi-professionally.  They merely want a solid base to start from and a well respected curriculum for when they teach family or are asked to train friends.

What that means, in the context of your statement, is that the population of NRA Certified Firearms Instructors is much higher than what may be apparent from the instructors listed in the Yellow Pages, Online, or at the local Range & LGS.  Those guys are just the tip of the iceberg.  

I suspect that it's very possible that one of the existing students at the martial arts school either already is an NRA Certified Firearms Instructor (or certified by some other organization such as The Second Amendment Foundation), or knows one.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## K50Marine (Jan 23, 2016)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Since you said, that, I'll share that when transitioning from Marine MP to civilian law enforcement, I heard many sneers about how 'unqualified' MPs were compared to their civilian counterparts.  Yet we put more rounds downrange PER MONTH than they did per year in my experience.  We trained, as you said, drawing from concealed carry.  Shooting from concealed or covered positions.  Shooting with the weak hand.  Shooting with the weapon upside-down and using the pinky finger to pull the trigger.  Firing with the weapon soaked in oil (simulating blood). Clearing multiple types of weapons malfunctions safely. Shooting with the weak eye.  It went on and on.  We did not just cup-and-saucer our pistols, bang out 25 shots at a silhouette target at 25 feet, and go get some beer.



I think it depends on the department Bill. I think military training in many cases is often times overrated. My department and it's officers train all the time. Also, I was an MP in the Army National Guard recently for a few years while at the same time working as a police officer. I found MP training in firearms very lacking compared to the training I had with my police department. I was in the Marines for 10 years (infantry) before I went to the Army or became a cop. Even the patrol rifle training I've received with my department was much better/more realistic than what I received in the Marines, although I did learn my fundamentals at Parris Island. Thanks for your service and your contributions to these forums. I find your posts to be very insightful. Semper Fi.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jan 23, 2016)

As K50Marine said it really depends on the department.  Some train frequently and have a good program and others not so much.  It varies considerably.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jan 24, 2016)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> As K50Marine said it really depends on the department.  Some train frequently and have a good program and others not so much.  It varies considerably.


 
Agreed.  It will range considerably depending upon the resources available to the agency in question.  As an example, in our area we have the regional training center for this part of the state (SEPSI).  This regional training center hosts training for several surrounding counties that entail a large number of agencies, some of which are quite large.  Has two ranges (indoor/outdoor), shoot house, simunitions, FATS, driving ranges and several D.T. rooms.  Folks like Tony Lambria, Tony Blauer, ISI, PCR etc. teach there.  Everything from advance D.T. to advance firearms training is available throughout the year.  This type/level of training isn't available everywhere though or the agency doesn't have the resources or manpower to send officers. 

Doesn't need to be that way though as many options exist to train-the-trainer so that an instructor can be trained and then take that training back to the agency.  A lot depends on how proactive the administration is for an agency.  Prior to the S.O. (2500 member agency) I worked for a local P.D. (50 member agency).  The P.D. had the same level of training as the much larger S.O. because of a proactive administration.  They didn't have the overall resources, but the training was comparable. 

Unfortunately, it is a case-by-case basis.  Large doesn't automatically denote _best_ and small isn't necessarily _Mayberry_.


----------



## Junbu (Feb 5, 2016)

A firearm can be a force multiplier during a strike , I am one to carry a tac pen, and a good flashlight .a samurai would use guns in this era do t let anyone shame you over being willing to protect yourself and others


----------



## Hudson69 (Apr 24, 2016)

I am an LEO by choice.  I am also a martial artist (student really) for the same reason.  I carry everywhere I go.  I think carrying a firearm is up to the individual whether they are a martial artist or not. My view on firearms is that they are part of "my" martial art. As a cop I have used (and taught) FBI DT, as well as PPCT and an agency specific system.  In two of those the firearm was a part of the DT curriculum as much as the baton, pepper-spray, strikes and kicks were. My classical background is EPAK, Wun Hop Kuen Do and Budo Taijutsu.  None of these would or should hinder the ability to carry a gun (unless you are talking about a roundhouse kick while employing a cheap ankle holster; that could go bad).

I think that if a martial artist wants to carry a gun then that is their option but having said that they should invest the time in learning to use that gun as much as they learn to strike, kick or grapple.   When asked I tell people to consider also having an intermediate tool for self defense as well as just a gun.


----------



## lklawson (Apr 25, 2016)

Hudson69 said:


> When asked I tell people to consider also having an intermediate tool for self defense as well as just a gun.


You should really define "intermediate" in this context.  

To some folks, it may mean "knife," which is still Deadly Force.  To some folks, it might mean "baton," or "tactical flashlight," which are still impact and might be considered Deadly Force in some situations.  To others, it might mean pepper spray, tazer, or some similar "less lethal" option.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Dirty Dog (Apr 25, 2016)

lklawson said:


> You should really define "intermediate" in this context.
> 
> To some folks, it may mean "knife," which is still Deadly Force.  To some folks, it might mean "baton," or "tactical flashlight," which are still impact and might be considered Deadly Force in some situations.  To others, it might mean pepper spray, tazer, or some similar "less lethal" option.
> 
> ...



I'd classify ALL of those as intermediate options, although the ones I generally carry are the knife and flashlight (in addition to a gun, least there be any doubt...).


----------



## jks9199 (Apr 25, 2016)

Dirty Dog said:


> I'd classify ALL of those as intermediate options, although the ones I generally carry are the knife and flashlight (in addition to a gun, least there be any doubt...).


I wouldn't consider a knife as intermediate, and neither would most courts.  It's lethal force, by definition.  It's a shorter range weapon -- but still lethal force. It's likely to cause significant injury or death.

Intermediate force options are generally considered to be things that may cause injury, but aren't particularly likely to cause death or injuries that are so serious as to significantly impact life.  Sure, you can kill someone with a baton strike to various targets, or blow out their knee... but generally, death or that sort of permanently disabling injury isn't highly likely.  You might get someone hypersensitive or even allergic to pepper spray -- but it's not all that likely. 

Low level force options are unlikely to cause any real injury; they're usually things like words or "mere presence" (especially of a uniformed cop/security), so-called "soft hands" which are techniques like pushes and holds.

Of course, anything could kill, if things break the right way.  These classifications look at reasonably foreseeable outcomes, not every possible outcome.  Push someone away, they might fall down and crack their skull... but it's not all that foreseeable.  Push 'em off a cliff and serious injury is a whole lot more foreseeable!


----------



## Dirty Dog (Apr 25, 2016)

jks9199 said:


> I wouldn't consider a knife as intermediate, and neither would most courts.  It's lethal force, by definition.  It's a shorter range weapon -- but still lethal force. It's likely to cause significant injury or death.



So I grab my Benchmade Barrage or Autostriker (the two I carry most frequently) and yank it out of my pocket. I don't open it. It's no more deadly than the little flashlight, and is used in pretty much exactly the same manner, other than shining it in someones eyes to blind them.


----------

