Tag: handguns

Firearms for the physically disabled

Posted by Mostly Genius – May 8, 2009

Since this stirred up enough controversy amongst the advocates for the disabled I figured I would address some of these issues in a separate post.

The wrong gun. There are guns that are just wrong for some people. If you are smaller and/or weaker than a lot of larger guns are going to give you problems. A gun that doesn’t fit your hand and doesn’t let you reach the trigger properly isn’t going to work for you. If you can’t rack the slide then you have the wrong gun. All firearms require a certain amount of strength and dexterity to operate, and some require more than others.

Exchanging the problem. If the starting place is having the wrong gun, the next step is to start making modifications. A lighter recoil spring will make the gun easier to rack, but the gun won’t function as reliably. Adding some external lever or handle might make it easier to manipulate, but it will make it harder to carry and more prone to malfunction (should the lever get hung up on anything.) This isn’t an apparent liability if all you do is square range target shooting.

Shooting is only part of the process. Getting the gun ready to shoot isn’t the whole equation. You still have to keep the gun running. Clearing malfunctions and reloading are also important skills. If we discount these operations then we could simply start with an unmodified gun in Condition One (loaded chamber, loaded magazine, and all safeties engaged) and hope for the best. There are also a complete set of techniques for one handed manipulation of a semi-auto handgun that work if you have the necessary strength and dexterity to accomplish them.

Consider a revolver. Depending on the existing limitations a revolver might be the answer, since there is no slide to rack, basic malfunction clearances are simple, but reloading can require a bit of dexterity. The trigger pull on a double action revolver is going to require more strength than most semi-autos.

Stupid Gun Inventions: The Glock Charging Handle

Posted by Mostly Genius – May 7, 2009

glock charging handleI do not see any point to this at all. Considering that a right handed shooter is going to need rack the slide with his left hand, he either needs to reach across the top of the gun (whereby he could simply grasp the slide and rack it) or the charging handle would need to be on the left side, which isn’t going to help your holstered carry.

This will change the slide weight and provide one more thing for the slide to hang up on while it is cycling. Thus making your reliable gun less reliable for the sake of some edge case where you are injured and can’t rack with your other hand. I guess the inventor of this monstrosity never heard of racking using the rear sight against equipment.

You can buy one here for $70 if you have more money than sense.

Handgun Retention

Posted by Mostly Genius – April 23, 2009

Much of the argument that people will be disarmed of their weapons and have those weapons used against them stems from a long history of police officers being shot with their own firearms. To combat this problem law enforcement has adopted various handgun retention systems.

While the private citizen carrying a concealed firearm isn’t as likely to be a target for a disarm while the firearm is holstered, I can certainly see a number of scenarios where an assailant might make an attempt against a drawn gun.

If a criminal doesn’t believe that you are going to shoot, or is willing to risk a bullet to escape arrest they might decide to try to do a disarm.

Get good equipment. I frequently see $1000 guns in $20 holsters, worn on $2 belts. A good holster and a belt are a significant portion of the holstered retention equation. Cheap holsters will not keep the gun from falling out, or will rip right off of the belt leaving the attachment loops behind. Holsters that snap or clip onto the belt offer almost no resistance. I highly recommend purchasing high quality holsters, and belts. While much more expensive they truly do last much longer so the expense is justified in the long run.

Use good ready positions. Some ready positions lend themselves to gun grabs more readily than others. The weaker the position the more inviting it is for a grab. The classic low-ready (arms extended at about a 45 degree angle) is one of the worst for both shooting and retention. Keeping the firearm tucked against the body is the mechanically strongest un-holstered position.

Don’t use the wrong tactics. People that want to hold the assailant at gun point until the police arrive expose themselves to a greater risk of disarm attempts. The time spent in proximity to the criminal is a window of opportunity for something to go wrong. Complicating that with trying to dial 911 and communicate with the dispatcher creates a distraction that most people could do without. It would be better to get a good description and have them run and then call the police after they have left. The legal justification for using your firearm is a threat to your life, the subject’s non-compliance may or may not constitute a threat that you can justify shooting him for. It would be much better for us if we didn’t have to shoot anyone.

You can’t always ‘Just shoot’ them. A common answer to people grabbing for an un-holstered handgun is to shoot the person making the grab, but this isn’t always as simple as it sounds. If the assailant has a hold on the gun it can retard the action of the slide (or bind the cylinder on a revolver) preventing more than one round from firing. When the gun discharges it might not be oriented toward the assailant, so gambling on the ‘one shot stop’ is even less of a good bet.

There is also whole class of gun-grabbers that we don’t want to shoot. It might be a friend or spouse who thinks you are over-reacting, it might be the 70 year old grandmother of the assailant who just wants to protect their grandchild. We might be able to make the argument that shooting this class of people is legally justified by the circumstances but again, it would be preferable not to have to do so.

Martial arts or combatives might help you. These can fulfill at least part of the role of retaining the gun. The problem is that a lot of martial arts are largely incompatible for fighting with a drawn gun. Whatever arts or techniques you intend to apply must maintain control of the muzzle and be aware that this fight is going to take place in a clinch. If you need distance to execute your technique you are probably not going to get it. Losing control of the firearm generally means that you are now in the position of needing to perform a disarm in order to ultimately retain the gun. Disarming techniques are part of retention.

Don’t abandon the gun. I have seen it advocated to let go of the gun, and either transition to another weapon or apply combatives or martial arts techniques to recover it. It would never be my primary plan to loose physical control of the gun. At best such a strategy provides the assailant with a club, and at worst a fully functioning firearm.

Transition to another weapon. I am all for transitioning to another weapon if it is available, but I would keep control of the primary whenever possible. In such a situation I would prefer a knife to a backup firearm. A few good cuts should produce some psychological and mechanical advantage.

Training, Practice, and Testing

Posted by Mostly Genius – April 20, 2009

Training is taking a class. I am trying to stretch this definition into reading a book, watching a video, but it really boils down to being taught something by someone. There are some subjects that can be “self-taught” but really fighting and/or shooting isn’t one of them. I would also say that getting a few “tips”, or “pointers” from somebody really isn’t training either. I can tell you to look at your front sight and press the trigger, but that isn’t the same as “training” you to actually do it. Without feedback and correction it isn’t really training.

Practice is going to the range (or it’s equivalent.) This where you repeat what you have learned in training. Practice makes you better at what you know, but it doesn’t do much for learning new things. If you practice looking at your front sight and pressing the trigger it won’t make you better at reloading the gun or clearing malfunctions. Practice is what creates a “habit” (good or bad.) Undisciplined practice really isn’t practice at all. I see people at the range all the time making their guns go bang: magazine after magazine, box after box of ammo, and they never seem to show any improvement.

Testing is any sort of competition. Shooting IPSC/IDPA, ring fighting or martial arts tournaments are an objective measure of a set of skills. It’s not combat, but it is being forced to produce results under stress. There are those in the “tactical” shooting world that dismiss the guys that play gun games as “gamesmen” or point out that some piece of the game isn’t really “real world.” I would point out that the top-tier military units all seek out and train with the best competitive shooters and try to learn speed, accuracy and gun handling from them. They don’t seem to have any problem with tactics or real world performance.