Just can't like pocket carry....

[BehindBlueI's]

You maintain positive possession of the firearm and remove yourself from the situation. Anyone who continues to advance on someone with a weapon is looking for a violent encounter and is to be presumed a deadly threat.
Reholster slowly, preferably out of your waistband when the threat is gone.

Interesting assumption, and one counter to my experience. Also assumes you can leave. Also ignores you may have someone in your group injured.

At what point do you get to shoot someone for walking toward you angrily? When can you convince an investigative entity and/or jury that they presented a deadly threat by walking toward you?

Lots of assumptions about what encounters look like, but like I said, make your own decisions. Just understand they have real consequences when it's in meat space and not a pretend scenario in your head to discuss online. I'm damn glad I have equipment that lets me safely and rapidly reholster and, therefore, have the option to do so.

 

[duboismd]

Thoughtful scenarios, thank you. I do pocket carry occasionally based on the situation. P365 in Alabama kydex pocket holster In right front. Fits in all my pants (I use 5.11 jeans for extra pockets) and always have a pocket knife too.

 

[Brad69]

I am I the only one that thong carries ?

Just throw my Raven .25 on top of my junk and I am ready for the innermost parts of the city.

Do you wanna approach a dude you just threatened.
When he just stands there calmly unzipping his pants ?

 

[hoosierdaddy1976]

I am I the only one that thong carries ?

Just throw my Raven .25 on top of my junk and I am ready for the innermost parts of the city.

Do you wanna approach a dude you just threatened.
When he just stands there calmly unzipping his pants ?

 

[two70]

Interesting assumption, and one counter to my experience. Also assumes you can leave. Also ignores you may have someone in your group injured.

At what point do you get to shoot someone for walking toward you angrily? When can you convince an investigative entity and/or jury that they presented a deadly threat by walking toward you?

Lots of assumptions about what encounters look like, but like I said, make your own decisions. Just understand they have real consequences when it's in meat space and not a pretend scenario in your head to discuss online. I'm damn glad I have equipment that lets me safely and rapidly reholster and, therefore, have the option to do so.

Thanks for presenting some scenarios to think about, it is an excellent thought exercise. Yes, there are a lot of assumptions being made but none of them seem to be quite as big as the assumptions that the possible assailants in the scenarios you presented were unarmed and not a serious threat. To me no visible weapon doesn't equal unarmed nor does unarmed equal not a serious threat. Re-holstering quickly is well down the list of my concerns in those situations regardless of how I chose to carry at the time.

IMO, the first and third scenarios are excellent examples of why it is a good idea to carry OC spray on the weak side opposite our firearms. Especially in the third scenario where deploying the OC spray may have prevented the need to even draw and fire in the first place.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Thanks for presenting some scenarios to think about, it is an excellent thought exercise. Yes, there are a lot of assumptions being made but none of them seem to be quite as big as the assumptions that the possible assailants in the scenarios you presented were unarmed and not a serious threat. To me no visible weapon doesn't equal unarmed nor does unarmed equal not a serious threat. Re-holstering quickly is well down the list of my concerns in those situations regardless of how I chose to carry at the time.

You can only make decisions based on what you know or reasonably should know. The fact anyone could hypothetically be armed is not actionable. It leads us back to at what point are you going to shoot someone for walking toward you angrily waving their arms?

Nobody is advocating assuming they aren't armed or aren't a serious threat. What I'm advocating, and what I've done, is transition to managing unknown contacts when appropriate.

 

[two70]

You can only make decisions based on what you know or reasonably should know. The fact anyone could hypothetically be armed is not actionable. It leads us back to at what point are you going to shoot someone for walking toward you angrily waving their arms?

Nobody is advocating assuming they aren't armed or aren't a serious threat. What I'm advocating, and what I've done, is transition to managing unknown contacts when appropriate.

I think we're probably splitting hairs here but my point was that in scenarios 1 and 3, the only reason presented to re-holster in the first place was the assumption of the aggressor being unarmed. In order for re-holstering to even be a consideration, regardless of carry method, you have to decide on it early enough in the proceedings for it to be a viable option. IMO, the threat level is going to remain unknown in the scenarios presented until well after the time for re-holstering has passed so it would be better to focus on fending off lesser threats with one hand while maintaining control of the pistol.

 

[ECS686]

I think we're probably splitting hairs here but my point was that in scenarios 1 and 3, the only reason presented to re-holster in the first place was the assumption of the aggressor being unarmed. In order for re-holstering to even be a consideration, regardless of carry method, you have to decide on it early enough in the proceedings for it to be a viable option. IMO, the threat level is going to remain unknown in the scenarios presented until well after the time for re-holstering has passed so it would be better to focus on fending off lesser threats with one hand while maintaining control of the pistol.

Respectfully that’s a great theory but have you ever tried having a fight with one hand and keeping a gun from being taken?

If deadly force isn’t warranted or “reasonable” having it out and trying to go hands in or deflecting someone is gonna be a bad thing.

Yes some can say “well he came at me so I’m within my rights” OK
One of you misread the situation and he was doing nothing if that was you what would your reaction be?? Probably similar charge/deflect the firearm

There’s not a lot of set in stone answers. Why some that do revolvers recommend the clip for post deployment rapid stashing!

 

[two70]

Respectfully that’s a great theory but have you ever tried having a fight with one hand and keeping a gun from being taken?

If deadly force isn’t warranted or “reasonable” having it out and trying to go hands in or deflecting someone is gonna be a bad thing.

Yes some can say “well he came at me so I’m within my rights” OK
One of you misread the situation and he was doing nothing if that was you what would your reaction be?? Probably similar charge/deflect the firearm

There’s not a lot of set in stone answers. Why some that do revolvers recommend the clip for post deployment rapid stashing!

That is why I said the scenarios made a compelling argument to have OC spray on the opposite side from my gun in my first response.

I'd much rather fend off an apparent weaker threat with one hand than re-holster prematurely only to then find out I was severely mistaken on the threat level.

 

[bwframe]

Force on force classes are the way to test out your gear and your working knowledge of whether your carry setup actually works or not.

The scenarios that play out in our heads could be far from what could actually happen if an experienced determined attacker would target you and yours.

These classes were quite the eye opener for me and a lot of my classmates. I'll never forget Coach's after action report, from his first FOF scenario class. "This will change the way I do things going forward..."

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I think we're probably splitting hairs here but my point was that in scenarios 1 and 3, the only reason presented to re-holster in the first place was the assumption of the aggressor being unarmed. In order for re-holstering to even be a consideration, regardless of carry method, you have to decide on it early enough in the proceedings for it to be a viable option. IMO, the threat level is going to remain unknown in the scenarios presented until well after the time for re-holstering has passed so it would be better to focus on fending off lesser threats with one hand while maintaining control of the pistol.

One of the core tenants of Craig Douglas' ECQC is don't access a weapon in an entanglement/near entanglement until you're in control of your opponent. Else it just becomes a fight over the weapon. Then you're in a deadly force situation that could have been avoided. I'm not up for fighting one handed while trying to keep my weapon in a solid retention position. If I'm backing out (the "remove yourself from the situation" plan, hopefully people aren't considering turning their backs and running...) I want my hands free to catch myself if I stumble, etc.

*For me* the unknown threat is lessened by removing the one known deadly weapon in play from the equation, having both hands free to do whatever else I need to do, to have one less thing to think about while I process a rapidly evolving situation. When I'm an an older and frailer man, disparity of force concerns will enter sooner.

Everyone can do what they're big enough to get away with. However the fact remains: There is no downside to having the option to holster quickly if you choose to while there is a downside to not being able to safely do it should you decide that's the best option in the moment.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Force on force classes are the way to test out your gear and your working knowledge of whether your carry setup actually works or not.

The scenarios that play out in our heads could be far from what could actually happen if an experienced determined attacker could pull on you and yours.

These classes were quite the eye opener for me and a lot of my classmates. I'll never forget Coach's after action report, from his first FOF scenario class. "This will change the way I do things going forward..."

Getting entangled with a weapon is one of the main causes for losses in my personally kept statistics. Yet so many gun owners expect to be able to just 'shoot them off me' and expect that to work quickly enough to save them.

 

[ECS686]

That is why I said the scenarios made a compelling argument to have OC spray on the opposite side from my gun in my first response.

I'd much rather fend off an apparent weaker threat with one hand than re-holster prematurely only to then find out I was severely mistaken on the threat level.

I’m also a proponent ofnOC. However I would disagree with the ideal of fighting one handed with a weapon.
As BBI mentioned Craig Douglas has an excellent program as does Cecil Burch and others. I’d really consider taking a class from one of those folks.

There is no good way to do it. There is a thing called Congenital mirror movement. Where one hand mimics what the other hand does. Training if not a lot of people are shot accidentally by that reason!

 

[bwframe]

Getting entangled with a weapon is one of the main causes for losses in my personally kept statistics. Yet so many gun owners expect to be able to just 'shoot them off me' and expect that to work quickly enough to save them.

This is one reason I don't frequent pocket carry. the pocket is just prohibitively slow to draw and nearly impossible to reholster quickly and safely, especially under stress.

Along the same line, I'm not quick to bring my pistol out. Knowing the pistol in hand could well be commiting the pistol to the fight, I'd rather have the option to take my hand off of my belt holstered pistol and get my hands out in front of me to "bridge" or the like for evasive moves to create space.

 

[two70]

It all comes down to the assumptions made, the person in questions ability and the consequences of assuming wrong. If you choose to re-holster in those scenarios, you better be right in your assumption that the aggressor is unarmed and that you have the ability to control him physically. The consequences are extremely steep if you're wrong on either account.

 

[bwframe]

...consequences of assuming wrong. If you choose to re-holster in those scenarios, you better be right in your assumption that the aggressor is unarmed...

Meh, I ALWAYS assume everyone I encounter is armed.

What's in their hand? Where are their hands going?

My money is on a never ending working knowledge of self defense technique and dry fire until I can't get it wrong. Once in a while I go shoot some competition to see how I fair on the scoresheet against more regular gun handlers.