From reading the comments about Handgun retention it seems like a lot of people believe that a “retention holster” (of whatever level) does something more than buy you a little time. A thumb snap is not a replacement for retention training.
Category: equipment
Flashlights
Posted by – August 17, 2009
Rereading the results of the private citizen equipment poll I noticed that only about half of the respondents are carrying flashlights. I have written about flashlights before, but I think this boils down to people picking the wrong light for their application.
High Output vs. Size Everyone wants more and more powerful lights. Unfortunately this usually comes with an increase in size of the light. I believe that the reason more people are not carrying flashlights is because the powerful flashlight they want is too big to fit into their lives, or that they don’t fully understand the role of the flashlight.
The old Surefire 6P was revolutionary about 10 years ago, because of it’s high light output (approximately 80 lumens) in a relatively small package compared to the full size Mag lite. Xenon bulbs, a better reflector, and a better battery (SF123A) were a major breakthroughs at the time. Now LED technology has improved to the point where flashlights like the Fenix LD10 (pictured) can get 120 lumens out of a single AA battery.
Enter the pocket clip. Ten years ago, I was carrying a 6P on my belt in a kydex holster, but I never really liked that system. Now we can get flashlights with greater light output than the old 6P that are small enough to use with pocket clips (I wish Fenix would start putting pocket clips on their smaller lights.)
I don’t really foresee a situation where I am going to need to quick draw my flashlight. If my flashlight is going to be part of a self defense scenario it needs to be already in my hand otherwise it’s probably not going to be a factor. I generally get by right now with just dropping my light in my pocket because it is small enough to do that.
Making do with less. If you look at a larger flashlight like the SureFire M6-CB (pictured) it has some impressive light output (250-500 lumens) that totally surpasses a small pocket light, but it wasn’t designed with private citizens in mind and it wasn’t designed to be a personal everyday carry light.
If I can’t get 500 lumens in a pocket size flashlight then I will have to make do with less light output. If I can’t fit a normal pocket-size light into my life then I will have to make do with an even smaller light and less light output. Whatever flashlight I end up with is going to increase my capabilities in the dark. I am not arguing between the merits of different flashlights, I am arguing against the idea that because you can’t have the perfect flashlight you go without one entirely.
Reloads and Back Up Guns
Posted by – August 6, 2009
Some other results that surprised me from the Private Citizen Equipment Poll is the number of people that are carrying multiple handguns and multiple reloads.
Redundancy vs. capability. We carry a primary firearm to engage deadly force threats at distance, this is a capability we wouldn’t have without a firearm. Adding a backup firearm doesn’t increase this capability, but it adds a level of redundancy that should something happen to the primary handgun (malfunction, disarm, etc.) so that we will still have a deadly force capability at distance.
Magazines add redundancy, but not capability. Having an extra magazine is the same as having a redundant ammunition supply and feeding mechanism for the firearm. The extra magazine doesn’t increase our capabilities, it preserves the deadly force at distance capability under a certain set of conditions: shooting the gun empty, dropping the primary magazine, or a failure of the primary magazine.
Back up guns add redundancy, but not capability. Having an extra firearm has pretty much the same benefits as having a spare magazine and will maintain the deadly force at distance capability in the event that the primary gun should break, or get lost in the scuffle.
Back up gun deployment speed. There is a lot of conventional wisdom that a second gun is the fastest reload or that transitioning to another firearm is faster than clearing a malfunction. A lot of this is dependent upon the operator, the firearms involved, and where they are positioned. Drawing a second gun might be faster than reloading a revolver, but is it faster than reloading a semi-auto assuming some reasonably ergonomic placement of the reload?
Ammunition capacity. There is a balance between how much ammunition we can carry versus the nature of the threat we believe that we will reasonably face. We can invent scenarios where no practical amount of ammunition will be sufficient, but in reality a gunfight that goes to even a single reload is a pretty rare occurrence for private citizens, especially with the prevalence of handguns with more than ten round capacities. Two reloads is almost unheard of in self defense shootings by private citizens.
Extreme circumstances. There are extreme circumstances where simply having a gun and a reload is not going to be enough to solve the whole problem. Putting effective fire on an assailant and/or securing an escape route is a pretty good (if not complete) solution to active shooters or similar situations. Considering that the role of the private citizen is self defense (or protecting a third party) we cannot really expect to stop a Mumbai style attack, but we might be able to mitigate the damage in our immediate area.
Conclusions. Balancing the need for redundancy against all of the other things I need to carry I don’t feel that I have a use for more than one reload on my body. That reload is really not for the extra ammunition as it is for having a redundant feeding system for the gun. I believe that the most likely case for needing a spare magazine would be a fumbled remedial action clearance.
If you believe that you need more than a reload or two as private citizen, I question what other pieces of useful, capability enhancing, equipment are you sacrificing to make room for extra magazines and/or back up guns.
Less Lethal Weapons and Use of Force
Posted by – August 2, 2009
Via Scott at Spartan Cops, I came across a study on less lethal weapons and use of force titled “Less Lethal Weapon Effectiveness, Use of Force, and Suspect & Officer Injuries: A Five-Year Analysis” by Charlie Mesloh, Mark Henych and Ross Wolf.
While the use of force (UOF) by Law Enforcement Officers (LEO) is different from UOF by citizens in terms of goals, there are also a lot of similarities. This document is well worth reading to gain further understanding of UOF issues, particularly regarding less lethal weapons. I will point out a few items from Scott’s post that are relevant to the ongoing Oleoresin Capsicum (OC) discussion here at Brillianter.
The ability to end a confrontation between officers and suspects is the measure of the effectiveness of a force level or weapon. This report lists the success rate of weapons and control techniques that were attempted at the beginning of a confrontation:
Taser – 69%
Police K9 – 69%
Chemical agents – 65%
Impact Weapons – 45%
Takedowns – 41%
Compliance Holds – 16%
The authors point out that previous research looks at the highest levels of suspect resistance and police force as the only factor of a confrontation. This study looks at the whole event and examines each point where officers used force to overcome the suspect’s resistance. It then studies the cumulative effect of all those points and finds that both officers and suspects are more likely to sustain injuries the longer the confrontations go on.
[emphasis mine]
As Mostly Genius has mentioned, stopping a confrontation in its earliest stages can be critical in avoiding serious injury or death.
The authors coin a term, “force deficit”, which describes when officers consistently use less force than may be justifiable or necessary to subdue the suspect and end the confrontation. A force deficit causes the incident to drag out longer and raise the cumulative amount of force used. They point out that decisive force early on appears to be the solution and reduces the likelihood of additional injuries caused by the subsequent applications of force.
[emphasis mine]
Using the appropriate amount of force at the earliest stages not only resolves the confrontation quickly and therefore reduces injuries on both sides, but also shields the defender from legal liability for inappropriate (excessive) use of force. As mentioned previously, the lack of alternatives to deadly force can create a situation where someone can be seriously injured or killed simply because the defender doesn’t know what else to do. Ideally, we want to avoid having to kill anyone.
The authors recommend that officers should be prepared to use decisive force when verbal techniques of de-escalation fail. When a suspect engages in active physical resistance, the authors show that immediately using a TASER, Police K9, or chemical agent is the most reasonable method to quickly end the confrontation.
[emphasis mine]
A few bloggers have stated that they have been sprayed with OC and were less than impressed with the results. I also have been sprayed and sprayed others. I have seen the gamut of reactions exhibited by people who have been sprayed, ranging from panic to indifference. Basically, I have a good idea of what to expect when I spray someone, and I think it is worth carrying.
Some things to keep in mind when using OC is that it is a very low level of force, less force than grabbing or punching someone. Also, the element of surprise is a significant factor in making it effective. Warning someone before you spray them allows them to prepare themselves both physically and psychologically. Resolute, goal oriented people, whether they are protesters passively resisting police, law enforcement or military personnel completing a training event or aggressive assailants firmly intent on committing acts of violence will not be effected by OC the same way a less committed aggressor will be. This does not mean it is worthless.
Those people who dismiss OC as worthless for self defense are missing a valuable capability. The overwhelming majority of confrontations in your lifetime will not be deadly force encounters. Carrying a firearm for defense is certainly useful, and when deadly force is called for, OC is clearly not appropriate. This is not an either/or decision, since they are on opposite sides of the force continuum and are not a substitute for each other. OC is not a deadly force tool, and a firearm obviously cannot be considered less lethal. In between these two ends of the continuum, there are numerous other force options, but deadly force, which so many people seem obsessed with, is only justifiable under a very specific set of circumstances, extreme situations where all other means of defense have failed or cannot reasonably be employed. Contrast this with OC, which can be employed quite freely with little worry about liability. Determining what type of situation you are facing and choosing the appropriate course of action (OODA loop) is a matter of experience and training.
There are also some people who recommend martial arts or less lethal techniques only, as a catch all solution to all confrontations; they are also wrong. Martial arts, combatives, defensive tactics or whatever you want to call them are certainly a valuable component of a well prepared person’s self defense plan, but they fall somewhere on the lower side of the middle in terms of the force continuum. They are valuable techniques and like OC, they are more broadly useful than deadly force options like knives and firearms, but they don’t replace them, either. All of these methods have an appropriate place and they are generally poor substitutes for one another.
Some people complain that carrying all these tools and learning all these techniques is a burden. Presumably, they would rather carry only handguns and knives and call it a day. They have very good and redundant deadly force capability, but ignoring the remaining five or six levels of the force continuum does not actually prepare someone for most defensive situations.
Subscribe to 
