Why New Shooters Give Up

Shooting is similar to other skill-based hobbies -- such as golf, bowling, flying, and archery -- in that it is much harder to master than anyone admits.

Many guns sit unused after the initial enthusiasm wears off and there's no evidence of improvement.

The cycle is predictable:

1. Buy a new gun
2. Learn all about it
3. Finally get to the range
4. Set up target at 25 yards (like everyone else)
5. Scatter a few hits, send most bullets somewhere into the backstop
6. Leave, happy to have finally shot, a bit disappointed that the accuracy was so poor

"I'm bored with this...."

Repeat steps 4-6 until the novelty wears off and other interests take over.

"Good riddance to bad rubbish, I says..."

When asked "You ever going back to the range?" the response is usually, "Yeah, I need to get out there..."

The old-timers keep shooting, the new person drops off, and the shooting sports lose another enthusiast.

Why?

There are many reasons people drop a hobby, but I'll propose the a common reason is no sense of improvement.

After all, it's pretty easy to assess improvement target shooting -- you either get more holes inside the ring or you don't.

If you spend several hundred dollars on equipment, targets, range fees, and ammunition you expect to improve.

Sadly, the new shooter "practices" a few times yet sees very little improvement.

Wow...

Since the assumption is every American is a Natural Born Marksman the new shooter is embarrassed to shoot with others. He/she does not join a group or league, avoids busy range times, and refuses to ask for help as it is an admission of failure, or at least weakness ("Who would I ask? How should I ask?").

Isolation makes the sport even less attractive.

So the gun gets put away, the gear gathers dust, and we lose one more potential trained and armed civilian defender.

How to Fix the Problem

First, we have to stop claiming that "shooting is easy!"

While the fundamentals are certainly simple and readily learned, it takes a lifetime to master consistency, speed, and accuracy.

Shooting is a complex sequence of actions that all have to be accomplished well to get a good result.

If you've been shooting long enough you forget how hard it is to do all the required actions -- it's become instinctual.

But even the best shooters fight mood, stress, lack of focus, tiredness, distractions, that conspire to widen groups or cause a flyer.

So let's admit shooting well -- defined as "Shooting accurately at the maximum effective range of the firearm within a set time frame" -- is a skill to be mastered over time, and that the mastery of the skill is its own reward.

Tight groups at distance reflect the skill mastered, but are not the ultimate end. The value of any hobby is the camaraderie of like minded people, the challenges and new vistas it opens, and the sense of progress and accomplishment it provides.

If it was just about tight groups we could set up a gun in a vise and blast away at a target 5' away.

Second, let's allow people to move up gradually.

We all love new gear. When a new person starts asking about guns we're quick to help sell the latest and greatest.

But perhaps what he or she needs is a .22 auto pistol such as the Browning Buckmark or Ruger SR 22.

Sure, it's heavy, not concealable, doesn't sport a Picatinny rail, and shoots a puny rimfire round.

But the new shooter won't flinch at recoil, won't be subject to painfully loud noise, and won't burn $50 worth of ammo every trip to the range.

We should also reduce the tendency to blather about arcane trivia to prove how much we know. Sure, you just finished conducting ballistic gel test for all .357 SIG factory ammo available for sale in North America, but does the new guy really understand -- or even care?

Squelch the urge, simplify the vocabulary, avoid jargon, and let them feel smart about deciding to shoot a gun.

Here's a short post about "Training Guns" that expands on this point.

For more, check out "Which Gun? Part One" and Part Two

Third, we need to take a long term approach to shooting. It's a lifelong skill with a wide variety of applications. Often new people have very narrow or even warped views of what guns are and what they can do.

What I THINK I will be doing at the range....

Often disappointment sets in when the reality doesn't quite match the movie playing in the mind.

That's fine and normal.

Our job is to help the folks who want to get past that.

Some don't -- and we can't change that either.



Fourth (and finally), we need to be able to move form novelty to training and skills acquisition with the new shooter.

... what it ACTUALLY looks like.

Novelty wears off. Sure, it's fun to expose a new person to firearms and let them see how much "fun" it can be.

But this is a recruiting event, a movie trailer, a free sample at Costco.

IF they express interest in continuing, it's time to lay out a plan that demonstrates that the cotton candy phase is over.

If they decide, "You know what? I really don't want to invest more in this..."  That's fine.

You at least helped reduce the anti-gun phobia of one person.

But most adults (and even mature adolescents) will appreciate a mature, methodical approach and buy-in to the acquisition of a simple yet ever-challenging skill.


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

In a subsequent post we'll explore how flight training can offer some important lessons to those interested or currently teaching new shooters.

The Lifecycle of "The Truth"

Some scientists make claims.

A few celebrities make the claims a cause.

Media reports on The Truth.

The chattering class endorses The Truth.

Documentaries, news broadcasts, talk shows, podcasts, and articles present The Truth.

Popular books, magazines, newspapers publish The Truth.

Studios release movies that capitalize on The Truth.

Politicians use The Truth to expand power and influence.

Government is compelled to embrace The Truth.

Everyone who knows anything accepts the Truth.

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

But there's a small problem.

There's conflicting evidence.

Some evidence contradicts The Truth.

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

In our post-modern, media-driven culture, "truth" isn't an objective value independent of the observer. Rather, "truth" is malleable -- a mere convention of language, which can be replaced.

Some claim that "power" controls language to create "truth" convenient to power. Others assert "truth" is mere convention -- whatever most of us say it is.

"Celebrity" wades in the midst of this swirling cauldron of uncertainty, swaying the conversation to define truth for the balance of us not possessing a microphone, captive screens, or ten-million clicks.

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

Sound familiar?

"In her painstakingly researched book, The Big Fat Surprise, the journalist Nina Teicholz traces the history of the proposition that saturated fats cause heart disease, and reveals the remarkable extent to which its progress from controversial theory to accepted truth was driven, not by new evidence, but by the influence of a few powerful personalities, one in particular.
Teicholz’s book also describes how an establishment of senior nutrition scientists, at once insecure about its medical authority and vigilant for threats to it, consistently exaggerated the case for low-fat diets, while turning its guns on those who offered evidence or argument to the contrary. John Yudkin was only its first and most eminent victim.
Today, as nutritionists struggle to comprehend a health disaster they did not predict and may have precipitated, the field is undergoing a painful period of re-evaluation. It is edging away from prohibitions on cholesterol and fat, and hardening its warnings on sugar, without going so far as to perform a reverse turn."

The Sugar Conspiracy 

If you decide to speak out against The Truth, be prepared for some legal action:

Attorneys General worked with Green groups to punish political opponents

The OADA Cycle (Observe, Assess, Decide, Act)

I learned about Colonel John Boyd (1927 – 1997) reading Robert Coram's Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War.

Colonel Boyd was a USAF fighter pilot whose innovative theories changed aircraft acquisition and military tactical planning.

His two greatest contributions to military theory were studies in energy management and the Observe-Orient-Decide-Act decision loop (popularly known as the "OODA loop").

After WW2, the new US Air Force acquisition approach was skewed toward faster, heavier, and consequently less maneuverable aircraft. Military strategists wanted aircraft capable of carrying nuclear weapons to enemy targets in Europe quickly. They also needed fast aircraft with the ability to destroy Soviet bombers before they reached US territory.

Boyd rejected this premise, believing instead a fighter aircraft's primary trait should be maneuverability, not high speed. Boyd drew his conclusions from his experience in the Korean War, where the ability to transition from one maneuver to another quickly was more important than ceiling or max airspeed.

A maneuverable aircraft allowed the pilot to cycle through the OODA loop faster, giving him an advantage over his adversary. In other words, whoever processed the relevant data then reacted was more likely to win.

The OODA Loop from COL Boyd's Briefing

Boyd promoted his view to anyone who would listen. As is typical in bureaucracies, Boyd's thinking was too far ahead of the herd, so he was relegated to offices away from the Pentagon.

Nevertheless, Boyd and his supporters (the self-styled "fighter mafia") waged a relentless struggle to change Air force thinking.

The result was a series of lightweight, maneuverable fighters, with the F-16 Fighting Falcon the epitome of maneuverable post-war fighter.

What's This Have To Do With Personal Defense?

Well.... it has everything to do with personal defense -- perhaps even more in a civilian situation, since we don't have sophisticated Friend or Foe sensors, radar, predetermined rules of engagement, wingmen, AWACS....

Colonel Boyd very succinctly summarized the key activities in any engagement, and the OODA loop is applicable to many situations besides air-to-air combat.

But with a slight difference.

Fighter pilots in air-to-air combat must continually orient themselves and the trajectory of the airplane with the threat. The opposing pilot's airplanes are moving continuously across three dimensions: up, down, right, left or some combination (a climbing right turn, for example), and at varying speeds (one of Boyd's signature moves required a rapid turn which reduced velocity and changed aspect).

Civilians in defensive situations are typically not moving in three dimensions at high speeds.

We're moving in two dimensions on flat planes with only slight variations in height.

"Orientation" is a constant (except for those rare times when we are disoriented and have no idea where we are -- in this case a defensive shooting posture is probably not an option).

Therefore I suggest we modify the Boyd OODA loop to Observe, Assess, Decide, Act, with "Secure" appended to the end once the cycle is complete.

The Observe stage should be normal every waking moment. Jeff Cooper advocated the color code levels of alertness, but I prefer low, medium, and high alert.

Low alert is most of my day -- in familiar surroundings with known people in controlled environments (If I worked in a convenience store I wouldn't have this luxury).

Medium alert is the balance of the day -- driving, shopping, walking, bike riding. If I'm in public I'm aware of my surroundings, people in the immediate and moderate distance, and what my options are if something unexpected happens.

<rant>

This should be everyone's approach to driving, but Lazy Boy Recliner seats in rolling infotainment centers with theater surround sound have all conspired to insulate drivers from the reality. Today's cars are so quiet and comfortable that we forget we are hurtling down roads at deadly speeds.

Anyone who rides a motorcycle on public roads for a few years will tell you "They're all idiots." The low regard for the majority of drivers is based on observing stupidity daily. They don't look, they're distracted, and they have no concept of speed, effective braking distance. maneuver capabilities, or traction.

Since they're all idiots you have to ride as if EVERYONE is about to swerve, brake, tailgate, run red lights, pull out in front of you, cut you off. If you assume that you ride ready, because you don't have to think, "What just happened?"

You KNOW what' just happened and you react appropriately because you've considered it.

See kids playing fetch with a dog in the front yard?

Be prepared for the dog or kid to run out in front of you.

See the cell-phone distracted mother in the minivan waiting to pull out from the CVS lot?

Yep, she's going to "not see you" and pull out when you're 50' away.

You can only drive defensively when you are engaged and actively assessing the situation, conditions, potential threats near and far.

</rant>

A safe approach is the get to medium alert the moment you step out the door into the public -- whether driving, walking, riding. Whatever places you in proximity to unknown people with unknown intentions exposes you to threats. Not all are criminal. in fact, most threatening situations are due to negligence or inattention.

High alert is reserved for situations that are rapidly evolving towards threatening.

Back to OADA....

The Observe, Assess, Decide, Act loop can be used in all threat levels. In fact it's best to make it a habit so there is no mental overload those times when you shift from low to high in moments (it happens).

Observe: be aware of your surroundings, people (known and unknown), posture, and anomalies -- things that don't belong or look out of place: a person leaving a backpack unattended, a car idling with lights off, people looking nervous or glancing at you then quickly away...

Assess: Your eyes and ears are open (there's a reason many muggers and assaults happen to people wearing earbuds), you're processing information, and you're making assessments every moment. The frequency and intensity of the assessments are situation dependent.

<rant>

In our hypersensitive world we're NOT to "assess", judge, predetermine, profile people unknown to us. There is some good intent here in that looks can be deceiving, and the "rough looking dude" might be a teddy bear whose only flaw is not calling his mom every week. Therefore the assessment must be done fairly and appropriately.

Assuming "all black young men" or "guys with tattoos" are threats is useless -- you will not be able to distinguish who actually is a threat.

Conversely, predetermining that "all Mormons are peaceful' might be a nice sentiment, but it's useless because you can't look at a person and determine if he or she is Mormon.

"So how am I supposed to assess if i can't pre-judge?" 

Here's how: Become a better observer of people -- ALL people. 

Good street cops know how to do this from long practice. Have you ever walked in a city where patrol officers are still on foot? You might be surprised to meet a gaze. They are assessing you -- your walk, demeanor, body type -- everything -- constantly. They're like tellers at a bank handling real money all day so that an anomaly -- a counterfeit -- is easy to spot. 

Therefore carrying a defensive firearm should make you less prejudiced, less bigoted, and less close-minded because you take people one at a time, on their own terms, and not wrapped in a bunch of preconceived notions.

</rant> 

This assessment is not merely "Is this situation dangerous?"

Civilians are constrained by practical (available weapons, ballistic protection, sensors), intelligence (Who is a threat? Where is the threat? What is the intent?) and legal constraints.

The legal analysis is critical, but necesary. Your assessment must include "Would it be legal to take [whatever action you're considering]?"

Legal justification will require that you can demonstrate:

• Opportunity (the attacker was within range of causing harm to you or a person who was defenseless)
• Jeopardy (the attacker had to ability and intent to cause harm by wielding a "deadly weapon" or significant disparity of force)
• Ability (the act was about to happen -- there was no chance for avoidance or delay in responding).

In other words, you or a defenseless person were subject to an immediate threat in a way that placed your life in jeopardy, and there will be a reasonableness test applied.

That is, would a reasonable person come to the same conclusion as you did in the situation, given what you knew at that time?

You are walking down a city street, notice a man with a knife or gun acting strange one block away. In the eyes of the law the reasonable act would be to stop, not approach the man, and summon law enforcement. You should be in condition red, but if the situation changes: the man approaches you, aims the firearm at you -- either of these would place you in immediate jeopardy.


Decide: The decide step is thought (action comes next). We've all had the experience where time seems to slow during a crash or a game or a fall. The 'slowing" is the brain rapidly processing huge amounts of information. Therefore it's very important to practice the decision process so you can use that time to make a quick decision.

We've all had moments where we just "froze," unable to act as we observed something happen. That's the natural reaction -- but we can train to not freeze.

Training means practice.

Fortunately it's easy and no one will know. You can work through scenarios anywhere: at work, at the mall, in a convenience store, in line at a grocery store, sitting in traffic, walking down a street....

For example: You drive up to the Gas Mart at night. There are three other cars at the pumps. What type cars? Who is in them? Look around the lot as you get out -- is there anyone walking? Standing in front of the storefront? Certain you've spotted everyone in proximity you pull out your wallet to use the pump  what would you do if someone came behind the pump and demanded your wallet --and he is holding a knife... or a gun...

What if a car raced into the lot and three guys wearing masks jumped out with guns and ran inside the store?

This isn't far-fetched. Here's Massad Ayoob discussing "Stop and Rob"

You can run these mental exercises constantly, gaming out what you would or would not be able to do. But you can't stop at "I think I might..." You have to decide that you would act.

And you have to rehearse that action mentally, and eventually physically.

A Note about De Escalation

A critical part of the "decide" step is to determine if the situation can be avoided by not escalating the situation from a mere encounter to a physical confrontation. De-escalation is a combination of:

• Posture: Defensive, but not aggressive.
• Verbal: Establish boundaries: "Don't come any closer."
• Position: Establish Distance -- keep space between you and aggressor

So if in the example above you decided you would "Draw my pistol from concealment and shoot him twice in the chest" can you draw your pistol and put two shots on target in less than a second? If he's at arms length holding a pistol on you it's likely he can squeeze a trigger before you draw.

"OK, well then I would head butt him..."

Fine.

Have you practiced that? Wearing street clothes?

It's very important to be able to decide quickly, but then you need to act just as quickly in a way that is possible. You may have watched Bruce Lee movies but unless you've practiced 10,000 roundhouse kicks it's unlikely you're going to kick your way out of a mugging.

Billy Jack can. Can you?

Act: Finally, you must act. The action may be "Here's my wallet."

But whatever you do, do it with intent.

Nothing emboldens a criminal more than weak prey. Indecision is weakness in that world and if you seem frazzled, uncertain, hesitant -- well, the wallet will probably be the first thing you lose.

If you chose to take defensive action: a punch, kick, head butt, gun draw -- do it with commitment. The deciding part is over -- it's time to do.

Few things are more disorienting to an attacker than a sudden, vicious counter-attack by a committed opponent. Thugs, punks, banger, and trash are not used to victims responding aggressively. You might shift the balance very quickly in your favor.

I grew up in a pretty nasty part of industrial corridor New Jersey. I had a friend, Glen, who was not particularly big or strong. But no one would fight him (there was a fight every day after school -- it was expected, like dinner).

A kid pushed him too far one day at a local park and I quickly learned why no one fought him.

He became enraged -- completely, totally committed to destroying his opponent. He threw punches, screamed, kicked, bit. his eyes were wild and he looked like a demented rabid badger.

That fight ended when the other kid broke free and ran for his life, screaming, "You're crazy! He's crazy!"

I learned two very important lessons that day:

1. Don't make Glen mad.
2. Crazy can be very effective.

Secure: It's not over until the scene is secure.

If you have used deadly force, immediately call (or have someone else call) 911.

Tell the 911 operator you were attacked, you defended yourself, your location, and your description,

Then hang up.

There is NO BENEFIT to staying on the line with 911 (ask George Zimmerman).

Maintain vigilance as you wait OR move to a safe space and await law enforcement. Your job is done when the attack is ended. You're not justified in chasing down suspects or meting out justice.

Observe, Assess, Decide, Act -- practice it daily and you will be better prepared if evil comes your way.

Here's a good discussion of "What to do after a self-defense event:"

Deciding to Defend: A Christian Position on Self Defense (Part One)

This blog is intended to explore and present a cogent, supportable position on defense rooted on Christian theology and ethics.

Assumptions

Every argument begins with assumptions. "Christian thought" is not monolithic or totally consistent. therefore I'll lay out several assumptions that should apply:

• "Good" is whatever God says is good. Human conceptions of "good" or "right" are tainted by self-interest, cultural myopia, personal experience and preference, peer pressure, societal expectations, explicit and implicit philosophical assumptions, and sin.
• Christians understand that we live in a fallen, greatly disfigured and misaligned world. Sin has warped the "good" of creation. Sin is not mere misbehavior -- it is an assault on God's rightful place as Sovereign Lord. Sin began when Satan asked Eve, "Did God really say...?" Sin describes the vast conspiracy of mankind to create himself in his own image, reject God, and establish himself as lord.
• Christians appreciate and revere the Law of Moses and the Old Testament. Jesus told his Disciples that the entire old testament testified about Him. However the advent of Jesus changed the means God used to convey Grace. Jesus also replaced the standard of behavior from rule-adherence to love -- a far more exacting and comprehensive "rule."Love is not mere conformance -- it is all encompassing. Therefore an act of love can appear to conflict with a moral rule. While law accepts "good enough," love expects and demands all.

Terms

First, lets define terms: For this discussion we'll define "defense" as an individual using force --up to and including deadly force -- to prevent or end an attack on self or others. Defense in service to the nation or the law is beyond the scope of this discussion as each presents a unique set of circumstances and challenges not relevant to civilian self-defense.

Civilian Challenges

Some of the unique challenges presented to civilians include:

• Use of force must be a response to a proximate (close enough), capable (possessing the capability to harm you or someone else), and immediate (the act is happening NOW and there's no time to wait for law enforcement). 
• The force must be proportional. While the US Army can call for artillery on an enemy machine gun, we are limited to relatively lightweight firepower. Use of force that exceeds what is necessary to end the threat can be deemed excessive by the law.
• The use of force is limited to situations where the immediate threat of violence cannot be prevented by the state's agents (police) because no police officer is present.
• The defender must be reacting to an attacker. Thus, setting up an ambush is not an option for civilian defense.
• There is no requirement to maintain skills, knowledge, or equipment. While police and armed forces are required to train at some frequency with issued weapons, there is no such requirement for civilians.
• There is no widespread civil support for civilian defensive posture. While police and military can be deemed "heroes," even the most selfless act of civilian use of force is viewed with suspicion.

Therefore, while the support infrastructures for the civilian are few, the responsibility is greater.

There will be no commander on the radio ordering you to fire. There will be no monthly use of force briefing at the precinct. There will be no firearms qualification test. There will be no mandatory legal briefing.

You will not have a state-funded legal team to consult. You will pay for your own equipment, ammunition, range time, carry gear, cleaning products, and security containers.

And you probably won't be wearing a body cam to record the event and help prove justification should you be accused of homicide.

On Your Own

The decision to defend should not be taken lightly. The consequences of poor decision-making, unpreparedness, or incompetence can be tragic.

Defense requires a high level of dedication to performance in the most unexpected circumstances and has the potential to expose you to life-long guilt or remorse if you act unwisely.

The rewards are few -- in fact your commitment and dedication may never be appreciated by the ones closest to you.

Few will know that your increased confidence and alertness is due to a commitment to defend, to include the concealed carry of a firearm. Few will know the situations avoided or detected before they become life-threatening events. Few will be aware of the costs in time, equipment, ammunition, training, and study.

People that know you carry will ask if you are paranoid. They may not feel safe around you or in your house.

Politicians will call you insane, racist, fearful, uneducated, testosterone-fueled, paranoid...

It's likely that if you are called upon to defend yourself or others, some of the innocents you protect will second-guess your actions (perhaps even during the event).

You may lose friendships, associations, social status, and even employment such as the pharmacist who acted to save his own life and yet lost his job:.

"A pharmacist at a Michigan Walgreens was dismissed from his job at the drugstore chain after he fired his own handgun at an armed robber. Now the man is suing Walgreens and his lawyers have released footage of the incident to defend their client.
Around 4:30 a.m. on the night of the incident, armed robbers entered the Benton Harbor, MI, store and began demanding cash. According to the pharmacist, one robber jumped over the pharmacy counter and attempted to fire a gun at him but it didn't work. That's when the Walgreens staffer decided he needed to use his own weapon, stowed in his pocket holster.

"At that moment, [the pharmacist] reasonably and justifiably believed that the was going to be shot and either killed or seriously injured by the armed robber," says his lawyers. "[He] then fired his handgun several times in self-defense and in defense of his co-workers."

The pharmacist says he had alerted his superiors at Walgreens about possible security concerns at the store, which had been robbed four years earlier.
Walgreens dismissed the man for violating its "no escalation" policy and disagrees with the plaintiff's contention that he had a "right to carry or discharge a concealed weapon on its premises at any time."

"Walgreens had a plausible and legitimate business reason to justify its decision to discharge [the pharmacist]," attorneys for Walgreens have stated.

No Hero

If you kill an attacker you may be marked the rest of your life as a "killer,"  no matter how justified the shooting.

In certain jurisdictions you may be exposed to criminal prosecution and civil legal proceedings by

unscrupulous anti-defense zealots or attorneys looking to get into your "deep pockets."

As long as you understand your status will not improve -- and in fact may be damaged -- you can consider this with eyes wide open.

You choose to become a defender because it is the right thing to do. You will protect the weak, the helpless, and defenseless. They will not pay you back and may not even appreciate your actions.

But you do it anyway because it is right. the consequences may be severe, and yet you stand firm in your convictions and act accordingly.

This does not excuse reckless or careless behavior. In fact you are more careful, more guarded, and more aware of dangers to avoid.

Your commitment to defense may mean you take the bullet intended for someone else. You may need to expose yourself as a target so the innocent can escape. You might need to stay back and prevent the continued attack as others flee.

Doing right in spite of the consequences is the heart of Christian morality.

The Christian understands that God is the ultimate judge who weighs the heart, not merely the "available evidence." He will know your intent and all the cascading downstream effects. Christians are able to plead for His mercy because the finished work of Christ provides absolution.

Still Interested?

So far this doesn't sound like a very good recruiting pitch. Who needs this?

Thankfully a few people are willing to accept all the negatives because there is evil which must be recognized, confronted, contained, thwarted, and in some cases stopped.

Most people walk through life ignoring or blissfully unaware of the evil that swirls about them. Perhaps you know people who have lived next to a drug dealer and are shocked when the police raid the place early one morning.

"He was so nice! I can't believe it..."

Or the parents blissfully unaware of the evil their son was plotting. Every parent winces when they hear the post-mass shooting interviews, where people ask, "How could they not know he was capable of doing this!?"  We wince because we wonder what we have overlooked or ignored, or were too disinterested to ever see.

People have been subject to all sorts of crimes, all the while wondering "How can this be happening? to me!"

Don't Expect a Warm Welcome

Some are aware of the evil that lurks just beneath the superficial veneer of civilization. Some know that anyone is capable of tremendous evil, given a certain set of conditions and circumstances.

Anyone who says, "I would never ..." is fooling themselves.

It's not a pleasant knowledge. In fact it's depressing. But it's also liberating, in some ways, because it frees you from unsupportable hopes. You reduce your expectations and don't need a long processing time to come to grips with reality.

"Of course this is happening --  this is how I will react because I've considered this possibility a thousand times..."

This is yet another way in which Christianity encourages and even enables a realistic approach to defense. We know all people are capable because we have confronted our own failures. We know how low we can go, and we know how capable anyone is of evil. Christianity isn't polish on a statute -- it's a reclamation project -- archeology, where the shard is pulled form the long-abandoned cesspool.

This realistic assessment of humanity enables but also provides hope that even the worst can be redeemed.


What It's Not

For most gun enthusiasts it's not about shooting people.

We really don't want to and most of us never will.

We enjoy firearms because we like well-made machines and enjoy functional design. We like sharing in the history and development of a centuries-old craft. We enjoy being challenged to improve a skill, enjoy the moment the shot hits exactly where we aimed. We enjoy hunting.

We like the feeling when a clay target explodes overhead. We enjoy the camaraderie of a day on the range. We like keeping up with advancements in ballistics, optics, propellants, grips, recoil management, and even cleaning products. We like spending time with, handling, and learning about these complex yet incredibly efficient objects of industrial design.

Gun handling is like many skills that stress precision. We will never completely master the skill at all times in all situations -- but we try anyway. The stakes of failure are high (in certain conditions) but that just adds to the appeal.

(There's a reason gun enthusiasts are often motorcyclists, pilots, dirt-bike riders, hunters, fishermen and other complex and inherently dangerous pursuits -- we like the challenge).

People who describe guns as "killing machines" (such as this article in The Atlantic) simply have no idea.

Its likely their entire experience with handguns has been limited to TV, video games, and movies, where gunfights are staged ballets with none of the real-world noise, confusion, and rapid conclusion.

Movies and TV Substituting for Actual Experience

The few "realistic" gunfights committed to film are notable because they are so rare.

No sight picture, weakened recoil control, likely next round jam...

In most movies and TV the gunplay is clearly impossible. Sadly, many people don't know that the scene is impossible and assume guns can fire endlessly, have no recoil, start vast explosions, kill immediately, cause large men to fly backwards on impact,  can be fired accurately while sprinting, and are more accurate fired sideways.

Many people have a hard time distinguishing between what they saw in a movie or on a TV show and what actually happens in the real world because they have no experience. Worse, some believe virtual experience prepares them for the real thing.

Sergeants encounter this when recruits who have 10,000 hours playing Call of Duty show up at Basic. There's a whole lot of retraining required...

Flight Instructors encounter students who have spent many hours "flying" on a desktop Flight Simulator. Many hours of retraining are required to unlearn bad habits picked up on the simulator (flight simulators can be effective teaching tools with preparation and a complete understanding of the limitations and pitfalls. See more on that topic here).

So what does this mean for those of us who choose to be armed for the sake of defense of ourselves, loved ones, innocents, or defenseless?

• First, we should do our best to educate and train those who have no or minimal exposure to firearms. We don't need converts, we need allies. An hour so on a range shooting a .22 will do wonders for perceptions. Every person who walks away from a range with a good experience is an ally. He or she has friends, co-workers, family, acquaintances who can be corrected, challenged, or even introduced to firearms.
• Second, we should be sure we don't have unrealistic views of handgun effectiveness. Maybe more gun enthusiasts than we care to admit are drawn to firearms after watching a super-cool action sequence. That's fine -- we all start out ignorant in a new hobby. But if the foolishness persists -- well, now we have a problem.
• Third, we need to exhibit all the positive qualities not seen in TV and Movie heroes and villains. Dirty Harry carried "the most powerful handgun in the world," but that's a poor selection criteria for concealed carry. We need to go the extra mile in care, discretion, safety consciousness, competence, self control, trustworthiness, and temper. It takes time but people will learn who can be trusted and who should not. If you are not trustworthy AND they know you have a handgun -- well, you are not helping the cause.

More To Ponder

This post is long enough but it should serve as an introduction to the topic. In a subsequent post I intend to review some key differentiator for the Christian who chooses to be armed:

• Am I Gifted?
• Am I Capable?
• Am I Mindful?
• What Should I do?

We will also explore key approaches every defender should exhibit:

• Deliberation
• Commitment
• Preparation
• Practicalities
• Locations
• Situations

The Defender Position

In this blog I intend to provide an alternative position for Christians that rejects pacifism and encourages active defense of the innocent.

This question is not answered conclusively in Scripture, as there are passages that appear to support either side of the argument (“appear” as many verses are taken out of context and are therefore unfairly used to support one side or the other).

Even the commandment -- “Thou Shalt not kill” -- requires examination for original word meanings and intent (If this command is absolute why does God then follow this command with law that includes offenses punishable by death?).

Therefore proof texting one side or the other of this argument is a flawed approach (as it usually is).

The Bible is intentionally vague or silent on many issues, including the Trinity, what life will be like in heaven, the purpose of the other galaxies, the details of creation, God's providence and apparent human freedom... the list is extensive.

This means we are either not supposed to know (“Will we have pets in Heaven?”), or meant to struggle with in our time with the current church body (“What does the Bible teach about the nature of God?”). These questions require engagement with the Scriptures, with each other, with historical precedent, the current situation and facts, and with the larger community.

Therefore there is no "proof text" that supports the Defender position. Rather, the position is the result of extensive study, varied experience, a significant understanding of the state of the world and of man, and reliance on the ultimate justice of God.

There are few iron-clad positions this side of eternity, so we must make a case based on a variety of factors and then apply it consistently and dispassionately.

Isn't Christianity Pacifist?

The simple answer is no, Christianity is not pacifist (even though some Christian denominations have embraced or encourage pacifism).

"Pacifist" is a recent word, coined by the 19th century French activist Émile Arnaud. Only a few Christian denominations are pacifist, and it has remained a minority view since the early church.

The pacifist position holds that any form of violence is incompatible with Christianity. Pacifists tend to define “violence” broadly, encompassing oppression, compulsion, injury, and killing. Pacifists believe Christians should not be violent, since Jesus instituted a New Covenant in which “turning the other cheek” and suffering for the sake of the Gospel were marks of the sanctified believer.

I join the majority of Christians who reject pacifism for a number of reasons (which we'll explore in another post).

But for the purposes of this short post I'm going to assume it's not enough merely to against, as we must clearly articulate what we are for, and what a pro-defense position should be.

There are several reasons pacifism is not required or even expected for all Christians at all times:

• Rules and Intent: There is a very short list of forbidden behaviors in the New Testament, and defensive force is not on that list.
• Salt and Light: Christians are commanded to be salt and light in the World, in the world, but not of the world.
• Commanded to Act: Christians are commanded to act, not merely believe.
• Called to Act: The Church Body has many members, with many spiritual gifts, spirit enablements, and talents.

As there is no simple description for “those that disagree with the pacifist position,” I’ll use “Defenders” to describe an alternate Christian view.

I'll address each of the four supporting reasons in a separate post.

"Training" Guns

Firearms owners, trainers, and vendors can learn some hard-earned from General Aviation (GA).

Evector SportStar -- a Light Sport 2 Person Trainer

While flying an airplane is not a right (the privilege must be earned through a various series of tests and qualification assessments), there are many similarities to the problems, challenges, public perception, and overall approach to owning and operating a machine that can cause harm.

Here are a few similarities:

• GA is populated by enthusiasts with varying levels of commitment, training, and experience.
• GA "accidents" get wide press.
• GA pilots are often the cause of concern (and rightly so when they do dumb things).

GA has several advocacy groups, but the most effective combine public advocacy and training and support (AOPA for pilots, NRA -- to some degree -- for gun owners).

My purely anecdotal, non-scientific estimates of the distribution of commitment to safety and proficiency (as a Flight instructor I get to fly with a wide range of pilots for training, re-training, and flight reviews):

• 25% of pilots are committed to training, safety, and proficiency.
• 50% meet standards and seek to improve or at least maintain proficiency.
• 20% are barely proficient.
• 5% are hazards.

I'd guess the distribution is similar for legal handgun owners (illegal owners are all in the "hazard" category as they have not pursued the most basic requirement of gun safety -- remaining legally unblemished).

The View from the left seat

Here's where the similarities end.

Basic Training

The majority of GA pilots learn on a simple trainer (Cessna 152/172, Cherokee 140/160/180) with basic instruments and move up as knowledge and proficiency increases. This is a function of the availability and cost for high-end aircraft (there are some who learn in a $500k Cirrus, but most do not).

The Standard Flight Trainer: Cessna 152

Does it make sense for someone who wants to learn handguns to start with a a"trainer?"

I think so.

For example, a new shooter might start with a Browning Buckmark .22 LR. The pistol is as heavy as most service pistols, has similar operation (safety, slide, magazine), and shoots inexpensive .22 LR ammo.

Browning Buckmark Camper .22 LR

The new user has plenty of time to focus on sight picture, grip, bod position, loading/ reloading, and safety fundamentals before graduating to a louder, sharper shooting duty pistol.

The BuckMark is equivalent to the Cessna 152 - operates and handles close enough to larger aircraft to inculcate good fundamentals, while being the least expensive way to burn holes in the sky. It is also relatively docile and predictable, so the novice has time to adjust and learn the correct response.

You can still crash a 152, so it is not completely safe. But flying is not inherently "safe" -- and neither are firearms. So there's enough potential danger to teach respect also.

Of course there are other .22 LR pistols, but I found the Buckmark to be the perfect compromise of quality, durability, accuracy, and price. It's an excellent platform for introducing new shooters to handguns without the distractions of recoil, loud bangs, and muzzle-end flash.

Which Gun? Part Two

In Part 1 we began to to answer the perennial question: "Which gun should I buy?"

Instead of a list of Totally Awesome Guns!, I provided a rather prosaic list of characteristics every gun buyer should evaluate prior to purchase and carry.

Let's assume you've done an objective analysis of your body type, flexibility, daily habits, workplace, exposure, practice, budget, legal knowledge, decision-making, and commitment and have determined you should purchase a handgun for concealed carry.

Great! You're the type person who should be carrying concealed and you make everyone around you safer.

NOTE: No one is paying me for this blog. I don't sell ammunition, firearms, or related gear. I have carried various pistols for self defense. If you are happy with your .22 pistol, great. If you carry a 9 mm, great. If the .45 is the only acceptable handgun, fine. My assumption is that the mission and the capabilities will vary, and the handgun should be selected that meets all the various criteria while still providing an effective deterrent (in most cases) or ender-of-badness (if it comes to that).

So now it's time to look at some more characteristics of the best concealed carry handgun for you. These include:

• Caliber
• Capacity
• Size & weight / Carry-ability

There are others and we'll address those in part three of this series.

Every firearm has advantages and disadvantages, pros and cons, benefits and liabilities. The purpose of this exercise is finding the optimal combination of defensive capability and the constraints upon your ability to carry a defensive weapon.

ASIDE

If there were no constraints I would heartily recommend an M1A2 Abrams Main Battle Tank. The stabilized main gun and improved ballistic computer, thermal sights, 7.62 coaxial machine gun, .50 caliber commander's machine gun, loader's MG, treads and armor make it the ultimate defensive weapon. But gas mileage is terrible (1 gallon per mile), parts and maintenance not exactly cheap, and they are not available on the civilian market.

My Former Ride

While they are excellent defensive firearms for some situations, shotguns and rifles are not an option, as the intent is to carry concealed.

Therefore we're trying to identify a small, lightweight package that provides defensive capability to civilians in normal civilians operations.

Civilians are not conducting assaults on fortified compounds, seizing objectives, or hunting terrorists.

Therefore we're constrained to handguns -- the least effective firearm that is the most concealable, portable, and rapidly deployed weapon available.

So we've already determined some constraints: portability and concealment.

So selecting the perfect gun for you isn't simple.

But it can be fun.

Click here for some consideration about "Training Guns"

Caliber

NOTE: Even though I don't think it's the most important factor, I would be dismissing widely-held professional and amateur opinion. So I'll set my own thoughts aside and suggest we begin our gun search with a discussion of calibers.

Caliber (or calibre) is the approximate internal diameter of a barrel and the projectile it fires. There have been many calibers developed over the past 150 years, but the market for modern defensive handgun calibers has been reduced to a fairly small subset.

While variety and choice is excellent, and we're fortunate to live in a place that permits competition and provides such abundance, too many choices can be confusing. So while I appreciate the wide variety available, I'll stick to the common, readily-available calibers.

The handgun calibers are listed from smallest to largest in the table below:

Caliber	Common Description	Pistol or Revolver?	Availability	Comments
22 LR	“Twenty-two long rifle”	Pistol and Revolver	Widely available	Small round, not acceptable as a defensive round for most self-defense advocates
380 Auto	“Three-eighty Auto”	Pistol	Available	Small round, considered the absolute smallest acceptable round by most defensive carry advocates
9mm Luger	“Nine millimeter” or “Luger” or “NATO”	Pistol	Available	The most popular handgun round on earth. Accepted as a suitable defensive round by most advocates
38 Special	“Thirty-eight special” or “Police special”	Revolver	Available	Once the primary round of police revolvers, until replaced by 9mm and other rounds with the widespread adoption of auto-pistols beginning in the 1980s.
357 Mag	“Three fifty seven magnum”	Pistol	Available	A popular police round highly regarded for high velocity and penetration
40 S&W	“Forty”	Pistol	Available	At one time a very popular compromise round adopted by the FBI.
10mm Auto	“Ten millimeter”	Pistol	Some shortages, expensive	The smallest of the “big bore” rounds meant to fire a larger bullet at high velocity.
44 Special	“Forty-four special”	Revolver		A larger revolver round with good velocity and mass.
44 Mag	“Forty-four magnum”	Revolver	Available	A larger revolver round made famous by Dirty Harry movies. It is no longer “The Most powerful handgun in the World,” but it’s still one to avoid being shot by
45 Auto	“Forty-five” or “Forty-five ACP”	Pistol	Available	The GI round, adopted by the US Army in 1911, used in World War Two, Korea, and Vietnam. Probably the most loved pistol round by enthusiasts.
454 Casull	“Four fifty four Casull”	Pistol	Rare, expensive	These are very large handgun rounds more suitable for hunting bear and buffalo than carrying for self defense.
460 S&W Magnum	“Four sixty Smith and Wesson magnum”	Pistol	Rare, expensive
500 S&W Magnum	“Five hundred Smith and Wesson magnum”	Pistol	Rare, expensive

I'll limit this discussion to the rounds highlighted in yellow above.

NOTE: If you want a more complete and detailed handgun ammunition comparison chart, this one by Genitron is very good.

Keep in mind that the purpose of a defensive round is to stop the attack, not necessarily kill, injure, or maim the attacker (though that might happen!).

Therefore the round most likely to end the attack is most effective.

If you're squeamish maybe you should pass on this article that discusses "Stopping power" in handgun rounds.

"Always" and "Perhaps"

There is no absolute anything in life so stating that "This round will always..." or "That round will never..." is silly.

All we can say with certainty is "This round will most likely in certain circumstance produce this effect." Anything else is guessing and belies a misunderstanding of all the various factors that apply to a shooting incident.

Bullets produce five terminal effects when they strike a body (animal or human):

• Penetration: The distance traveled through clothing and tissue (human or animal skin, muscle, fat, and bone)
• Wound Cavity: The hole left in the body after the bullet passes through
• Temporary Cavity: The momentary expansion as the bullet’ passes through.
• Fragmentation: The separation of the bullet into smaller fragments which depart from the wound cavity and travel in different directions than the major mass of the bullet
• Shock: The perception of impact from a high-speed projectile on the struck portion of the body.

There is no way to accurately predict the performance of any bullet in the wide variety of conditions and targets presented in defensive situation. The best we can do is select a projectile that combines the five terminal effects to cause immediate incapacitation.

Helpful Graphic from the great Walther Forums site

Bullets also cause effects when they don't strike a target:

• Shattering: the surface struck shatters and disperses fragments
• Ricochet: the bullet changes direction when it strikes an object sufficiently dense to resist the bullet.
• Over Penetration: the bullet flies through sheetrock, drapes, windows, or some other fragile or light material and continues past the intended target.

These are not desired and so bullets that have so much mass or density that they tend to overpenetrate or ricochet, or are so brittle they shatter into fragments are not necessarily the best choice for self-defense.

Thus an entire industry has evolved around the development and production of defensive bullets (a "bullet" is the portion of the round that actually flies towards the target).

Defensive encounter conditions are not static or predictable. A 350 pound attacker bundled up for winter in Minnesota presents a different problem than a 150 pound flip-flop and gym short wearing carjacker in Miami.

So there's no way to be certain any round listed below will stop all attackers in all conditions.

Here's a well-written essay on Handgun Stopping Power.

So The Best Bullet is...?

There is one strongly correlated indicator of success (notice the lawyer-like careful selection of words? It's intentional), and only one. 

It's not caliber, velocity, or penetration in ballistic jello.

It's shot placement.

A .22 to the bridge of the nose will be more effective than an arm-graze with a .500 S&W Magnum.

Keep that in mind as we review the most common defensive handgun rounds.

Some Common Handgun Calibers

22 LR
The ubiquitous .22 is a fine round for target practice, small game hunting, and learning how to handle a rifle. The round's lost cost, weight, recoil, and noise is why it's usually the first round fired by children and adults new to firearms.

Beretta Neos

The round is used in a small number of tiny handguns. Very few defensive carry advocates recommend the .22 as a defensive round as it is not very large and does not seem to be sufficiently forceful to stop an attacker. The concern is that a determined assailant will likely shrug off a hit from a .22 and continue the attack. 

Nevertheless there are some people who cannot carry a larger pistol or revolver for a number of reasons, and it is probably best to assume a defender armed with a Beretta Bobcat in .22 Long Rifle will be more successful than an unarmed defender.

I'm not an advocate for the .22 LR as an effective defensive round BUT I think it can be effective in certain conditions and situations. If you've done the analysis and think only a pocket .22 will work for you, that's fine -- just understand that you have a gap in coverage. Multiple, drug-crazed, and/or large/powerful attackers might ignore a .22 unless the shot is well-placed.

Recommended .22 handguns include:

• Walther PPK/S .22
• Smith & Wesson M&P .22
• Beretta Neos .22
• Ruger SR22

38 Special

This round was the standard issue for police forces across the country from the 1920s until the early 1990s. It is still the most popular revolver round and used by many as their primary defensive firearm.

Smith & Wesson 637 Airweight 

Revolvers have some advantages which enthusiasts are quick to mention. Despite having less capacity than most auto-pistols, revolver simplicity, durability, reliability, and tolerance to dirt and abuse make them a solid choice for a defensive firearm. The .38 special is a solid choice for a defensive round that combines reasonable bullet weight and speed with manageable recoil.

Recommended .38 Special handguns include:

• Ruger (several models)
• Smith & Wesson  (several models)
• Taurus  (several models)

9 mm
I'll admit a bias here: All defensive handguns I own are 9 mm. A common caliber simplifies ammunition buying, helps ensure every gun in the house has ammo, everyone in the house knows how to operate the guns, and a single caliber across all guns reduces the chance of putting the wrong ammo in a weapon under stress.

Sig Sauer P229 9mm (non-rail)

We have a Browning Buckmark .2 LR for target shooting and campsite plinking. Eventually I'll add a super-cool custom 1911 to the collection.

But after owning and shooting a .40 for years it just came down to practicalities: 9 mm is cheaper to shoot and easier to find.


Now that's over, we can discuss the merits and shortcomings of the 9x19 Parabellum (or Luger.) The round has been around for a long time, and took off in the US with the widespread adoption of auto-pistols by police forces and government agencies. When the US Army dropped the long-tenured 1911 and picked up the Beretta M9 in 1985, the 9 mm became an acceptable addition to the civilian and law enforcement arsenal.

The 9 mm was the standard NATO round, and the Army adopted the same round to maintain cordial relations and logistical simplicity with our European allies. It also helped that the M9 carried more rounds in the magazine (M9 had 15 vs. 1911 7 rounds), had tamer recoil (the mass of the M9 is about equal to the 1911 but shoots a lighter projectile), was easier to field strip and clean, and had a single external safety.

Walther PPS 9mm

But the 9 mm round was criticized for lack of "stopping power." Again, this characteristic is somewhat nebulous, since "stopping power" in a military operation is different than a civilian defensive situation.

Smith & Wesson M&Pc

The Army's job is "close with and destroy the enemy," while the civilian concealed carrier's job is to end the attack. Assuming that half of all handgun presentations result in the assailant fleeing, it would seem "stopping power" doesn't require a heavy projectile.

In addition, the 9 mm has proven effective at stopping many people in many situations. Very few humans can shrug off a 9 mm hit without some degradation of capacity to continue to harm.

And of course shot placement matters with a 9 mm. One or two well-placed shots from a 9 mm will stop any attacker, no matter how drug-fueled or insane.

There are hundreds of 9 mm handgun makes and models, so any list will be incomplete. Here are a few (very few) recommended 9 mm handguns that I've either owned, fired, or handled:

• Sig Sauer P229/ P239 / P224 / P238
• Smith and Wesson M&P 9(full size and compact)
• Smith and Wesson Shield
• Walther PPS
• Walther PPQ
• H&K P30 series / USP
• Ruger LCP

40
The .40 Smith & Wesson (S&W) was developed for law enforcement to replace the FBI's 10 mm Auto, which was considered a hot round with a significant recoil, limiting the agents who could successfully fire the gun accurately. The design requirements of the .40 were also the ability to fit into a medium-frame semi-automatic handgun. 

The .40 is a fine compromise round, and I carried one for years.

But the high cost of ammo and the high stress on the firearm meant it was not a good practice round. I shot less because it cost more in the short and long run.

Most manufacturers have a .40 variant of their 9 mm handguns.

Like most compromises, the .40 has the worst as well as the best of both sides. While many people appreciate the ballistics of the .40, many have left it behind and moved (as i have) to the 9 mm or to the .45 ACP round.

Which brings us to the....

45
The .45 Automatic Colt Pistol (ACP) or .45 Auto was designed by John Browning in 1904 for use in the Colt semi-automatic pistol. The final design (which became the US Army M1911 pistol) became the benchmark by which all handguns were judged. The capacity, accuracy, durability, rate of fire, and terminal performance were all acceptable to the US Army in 1911 until the US Army decided to drop the 1911 and pick up the 9 mm NATO standard.

Since then the walls have gone up dividing between to .45 adherents and everyone else.

(It's a shame, but it's typical. We love our tribes: Harley v. every other motorcycle, Apple v. Microsoft, .30-06 v. .270, Infantry v. Armor, Steelers v. Ravens...)

I could never shoot my GI-issue 1911 well. My hands are not large and by the time I gripped the grip safety hard enough, maneuvered my thumb up to the safety and aligned my sights my hand had moved so much it was a different grip every time.

The GI issue was phased out and then the whole world (or so it seemed) started building 1911s. Not just run-o-the-mill 1911s, but really, really nice 1911s.

Sig Sauer Fastback Carry 1911 (SWEET!)

Wilson Combat Carry 1911 (SWEET!)

But this isn't about the gun, per se, but the ammo. And the .45 is a proven defensive round with many, many examples of successful engagements around the world in civilian and military applications.

We can list the bullet weights, velocity, shape -- all the various factors that make up a bullet's terminal performance, but just about anyone will agree that you can't be wrong with a .45.

So why isn't the .45 the universal round? Why even have other rounds?

It all comes down to a few factors:

• Capacity: A larger round will consume more space (shocker) and thus fewer rounds can be stored inside the magazine which is usually inside the hand grip on most modern auto pistols.
• Bullet Shape: Auto pistols were designed around a specific shape and dimension round. While the curve on the front of the bullet can vary the overall shape needs to remain within some fairly tight tolerances to work reliably in the loading mechanism.
• Recoil: Force = Mass * Acceleration. The heavier the mass, the greater the force at the same speed. A bullet leaving the handgun exerts a small force over a very short period of time. This is termed "recoil" and is the reaction to the bullet firing action.

The weight of a bullet is small -- so light to be almost insignificant in the recoil equation. The majority of the felt recoil is a function of the sudden expansion of gasses that propel the round down the barrel.

If you compare the common handgun round sizes, you'll see the .45 is larger than the 9mm or .40 S&W rounds.

Therefore the perceived recoil is more in a 1911 .45 than a Browning Buckmark .22 LR (both guns weigh about the same).

Of course this an oversimplification, but many people choose not to carry the .45 due to reduced capacity, increased recoil, and more expensive ammunition ("larger" = more brass, lead, powder...). That's perfectly fine and understandable.

So that's a short list of common defensive rounds. The list is not exhaustive and the descriptions not encyclopedic, but if you decide to do more research, have at it! There's plenty of information out there (but not all of it is good, so tread carefully), and many people have invested decades exploring the vast world of ballistics. It's a complex but rewarding subject where equations and predictive analysis meets real world experience.

If this is enough information, great! Let's quickly discuss bullet types before moving on to the next characteristic.

(This is about buying the right gun, right?)

Bullet Types

• Armor Piercing (AP): A bullet made from steel or tungsten alloys in a pointed shape typically covered by a thin layer of lead and or a copper or brass jacket. 
• Flat Nose Lead (FNL): Similar to the above, with a flattened nose.
• Full Metal Jacket (FMJ): Lead core surrounded by a full covering of brass, copper, or mild steel.
• Jacketed Hollow Point (JHP): Lead core surrounded by a partial covering of brass, copper, or mild steel with a concave shape at the ballistic end.
• Jacketed Soft Point (JSP): Lad core surrounded by a covering of brass, copper, or mild steel with the ballistic end of lead exposed.
• Round Nose Lead (RNL): An unjacketed lead bullet.
• Wadcutter (WC): Completely cylindrical, with a slight concavity in the nose. 
• Semi Wad Cutter (SWC) identical to the WC with a smaller diameter flap pointed conical or radius nose. 

NOTE: If calibers and performance metrics are interesting and you want to know more, there are many, many good books and references. Here's a site that provides metrics on various handgun calibers: Ballsitics by the Inch

Choosing

There is no right answer. If you are new to shooting or very recoil sensitive, or your hand hurts after shooting a .38 special, or you just don't want to carry a "heavy' firearm -- a .22 may be your best carry choice.

Make a choice based on the factors that make sense to you and then be aware of the limitations or gaps in coverage and plan accordingly.

If you want to carry a .22 because the gun is light and you walk alot during the day, maybe it's a different gun for home defense since you're not carrying it there. Or maybe you need to exercise and build up your stamina. Either way, choose and then be wise about what capabilities you have available.

You can't go wrong with a .45 if you're a large, reasonably fit male or female that enjoys shooting and has no recoil sensitivity. But that's not everyone, so a 9 mm or even a .38 Spcial might be the best choice.

Every round I've listed has been used effectively to stop another human being from continuing an attack. But every round also has documented cases of attackers ignoring the hits and continuing the attack.

Far more important than round size is shot placement, and you'll only hit what you're capable of hitting repeatedly in practice.

So your choice must include this question: "Can I afford to practice with this/ Will i enjoy practicing with this?

Answer those questions and you will have narrowed down the choices to a couple.

Then pick the one that's cheaper. Trust me -- you'll shoot more.

Capacity

Any gun you select must offer sufficient capacity to effectively end any threat situation. That's easy to write because it isn't very specific. how many is enough?

Most gunfighters will tell you "There's no such thing as being too rich or having too much ammo!"

Cute, until you have to carry all that ammo. It's heavy! (lead, brass, packed powder...)

So again, we face a compromise, and again, the compromise results in some gaps.

For example, my Walther PPS 9 MM stores 7 rounds with the extended magazine. My Sig P229 9 mm has a 15 round capacity. More than double the capacity -- so a full load plus one spare magazine equals 30 rounds -- that's a pretty decent amount of firepower for a civilian in the threat situations I am most likely to face.

But the fully-loaded P229 is heavy. And it's slightly wider than the Walther so it's not as easy to conceal (it can be done, but it requires certain wardrobe choices).

So I often choose less capacity in exchange for better concealment.

You will have to make this same tradeoff. For many people the revolver is the perfect firearm -- simple, low maintenance, small size, fairly lightweight. But the capacity of a standard revolver is 5 to 6 rounds -- hardly "high capacity."

Thus you must consider this factor when selecting a carry gun -- enough rounds to meet the majority of situations you expect to encounter.

Size & Weight /Carry-ability

This is a very important factor in carry gun selection. It might look great in the ads, on the shelf, in the magazines, in the store display. But if its so big and heavy you don't like carrying it it's worthless.

Choose the smallest, lightest gun you can find that fits the round you've chosen. Then find a place where you can rent one or find someone who will let you shoot his. A light gun will not resist recoil and so the recoil will seem "snappier." You need to be sure you can handle the recoil for more than 10 shots, because you'll want to fire at least 50 when you take the time to visit the range and practice.

So yet another compromise: gun size and weight is constrained at the big & heavy end by your capacity to actually carry it, and on the small & light end by your ability to effectively shoot it.

Err towards lighter and smaller. better to carry it and develop a tolerance for the recoil than leave it at home.


----------

Coming soon: Which Gun? Part Three

• Durability
• Accuracy
• Reliability
• Aesthetics
• Conceal-ability
• Suitability