JayG asks that question in his friday gun prOn today while he shows off his .380 Makarov.
I would like to highlight two of my carry guns the first will be my first carry gun. The second will be my first gun bought specifically for carrying.
Bought while I was in College from an at the time co-worker for a price that would make a gunnie today cry (it was a heck of a deal) this S&W 686 with a 6” barrel was my first handgun. later on a place I worked in would ask that all employees open carry a firearm. As I only had one this is what I carried. After my first week of open carry I obtained a Bianchi 350 Hurricane Holster, Sam Browne Belt, Safariland Speedloader Holder and some belt keepers. The holster today would be referred to as a level III security holster. I have shot tens of thousands of rounds through this gun in practice and in IDPA style competition. With loads ranging from 110 grain screamers to 180 grain hunting loads. The round it has seen most is a 158 grain cast lead bullet at 1100 feet per second. This gun has also introduced many a lady to shooting with .38 target loads. Most still shoot today. When I needed to conceal the gun (and I did) it went into a Bianchi X15 shoulder holster and either some speed strips went into my pocket or I clipped a speedloader or two to my belt.
The gun I bought specifically for carrying is the 3” S&W Model 65 .357 magnum. It can claim to have Bill Jordan as part of its heritage as he was responsible for the K-Frame .357 magnum. The gun balances well in the hand and carries like it isn’t there in spite of its weight. While this gun has not seen as much use as my 686 it does make forays out with me regularly and if I’m not packing a 1911 this is usually what resides in a pancake holster at about the 4 o’clock position. It has digested the same loads as my 686, though not nearly as many and sees the same load for practice as the 686.
This gun is also a favorite of many of the lady shooters I know and proved so popular that S&W even produced these as a part of their “Ladysmith” line. It’s good looks combined with decent ergonomics and a well-tuned trigger are part of its appeal. The other is its ability to dispense a wide variety of self-defense ammunition that could be tailored to match the user’s perceived recoil tolerance. With proper attire and a good holster the gun disappears making it one of my favorite carry pistols.
In what may be the most mind-numbingly stupid thing to come from the most mind numbingly stupid Administration yet in the history of our nation we have this (See post dated 06-20-12).
In another nauseating series of "Virtual Learning Center" brainwashing courses that Border Patrol agents are forced to sit behind a computer for hours and endure, we are now taught in an "Active Shooter" course that if we encounter a shooter in a public place we are to "run away" and "hide". If we are cornered by such a shooter we are to (only as a last resort) become "aggressive" and "throw things" at him or her. We are then advised to "call law enforcement" and wait for their arrival (presumably, while more innocent victims are slaughtered). Shooting incidents cited in the course are Columbine, the Giffords shooting and the Virginia Tech shooting.
These types of mandatory brainwashing courses and the idiocy that accompanies them are simply stunning when they are force-fed to law enforcement officers. Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows that any three of the above shootings would have been stopped cold by an off-duty law enforcement officer or a law abiding citizen with a gun. The Fort Hood shooting would have been stopped cold by someone with a gun as well. The shooters in these situations depend on unarmed and scared victims. It gives them the power they seek. We could go on and on with examples of shootings that could have been stopped by someone with a firearm. One of the videos in this course actually shows a terrified female hiding behind a desk as an example of how to "hide" from some deranged shooter. Multiple quizzes throughout the course and a final test ensure repeatedly that we know that we only have three options when encountering some murderous thug in a public place. 1. Run away; 2. Hide; and 3. Only put up a fight as a last resort by acting aggressively and throwing things at the shooter. Not one mention anywhere of "if you are carrying a gun and you have the opportunity take the shooter out". Calling 911 in these instances is obvious, but we all know that waiting on the arrival of uniformed law enforcement will ensure more people are killed, injured, or taken hostage. Telling law enforcement officers that in all instances they are to run away and hide from some thug while innocent victims are butchered is simply inexcusable and pathetic.
It is always comforting to know that for those of us who carry a weapon when we are off-duty, if we should encounter such a situation, stop a shooter and save countless lives, we can look forward to being disciplined or fired by the Border Patrol because we should have run away to hide and then maybe thrown objects at the deranged killer instead of taking action and stopping him with a firearm. This, in addition to the scrutiny and second-guessing that will come from local authorities and the inevitable possibility of lawsuits and criminal conviction.
I really wish Bill Jordan was available for comment about this development. Last I heard he was furiously spinning in his grave.
Obama wants to turn us into a Nation of Cowards.