Guns

It takes time to process and react

/ hsoi / 3 Comments

It’s common when people hear about (police) shootings to wonder why the person kept shooting — because obviously the attacker was no longer a threat (in the eyes of the armchair examiner). This often comes up in the context of “being shot in the back”.

In Force Science Institute #260, there was a presentation titled “Can cops really avoid ‘extra’ shots? A realistic research review.” The premise:

A flashpoint of controversy in some officer-involved shootings is when officers do not immediately cease fire the moment a deadly threat ends and they are no longer in mortal danger.

An officer’s ability to instantly stop pulling the trigger once a “stop shooting” signal becomes evident is not always considered. Instead, the officer behind the gun may face harsh media criticism and daunting legal action alleging deliberate excessive force for firing “unnecessary” extra rounds.

While it may be understandable to cry out in this manner, it tends to ignore the reality of the fact we are human and things take time.

Numerous tests were run to look at things like reaction times. A simple reaction time test? Ranged from 0.17 to 0.5 seconds to react to a stimulus, averaging about 0.25. While that doesn’t seem like much time, it’s still time.

Another test had officers shooting as fast as possible and when given a signal were to stop shooting. How many rounds were fired after the signal? from 0 to 6, with an average of about 2 rounds.

A third test changed the signal from a simple stimulus to one that required perceiving the stimulus, deciphering it, making a decision, then proceeding if the signal was the proper one. This increased complexity caused average reaction time to increase to 0.56 seconds. Remember: that’s average, which means some people were faster and some were slower.

In the end, what is demonstrated by these and other performed tests was that time is involved. A stimulus happens, you must perceive it, process it, decide what to do, then react to it (OODA loop), and that takes time. Think about what we (should have) learned in driving school about maintaining a safe stopping distance.  Part of why we maintain a safe driving distance is to account for the time it takes to run through the OODA loop. Something external happens, and what we do in regard to that external thing does not happen immediately: it will take time for us to react, and during that time things continue to happen be it your car continues to hurtle forward or a person continues to shoot.

For further reading on this topic, here’s an article from Greg Ellifritz about how it can happen that someone can be shot in the back.

This is not to say people WANT to shoot more than they need to, that people WANT to shoot someone in the back, that “extra shots” are always excusible under the above logic, or any such thing. It just must be understood that there are legitimate and explainable reasons why things like this CAN happen.

Should you carry with a round in the chamber? Addendum

/ hsoi / 3 Comments

In continuing with the discussion about if you should carry with a round in the chamber (or not), I’d like to offer some recently published hard data from Claude Werner.

Claude wrote an article on Gunhandling. In this article he discussed two recent experiences: one was shooting the Swiss concealed weapons qualification test, the other was regarding the handling of malfunctions at an IDPA match. While the malfunctions experience is worthy of discussion unto itself, it’s the Swiss test that I’m focusing on today.

I assert that one should carry with a round in the chamber. One key reason? Time matters. To have to rack a round into the chamber is going to cost you time. How much time? Claude writes:

To get an initial feel for the difference between chamber empty and loaded chamber start, I did five one shot unconcealed draws using each technique. Overall, chamber empty was slower to the tune of .48 seconds average. I was shooting my Beretta 92G Centurion from a Safariland 567 open top holster.

So drawing and having to rack one into the chamber cost him about half a second.

Note: this is Claude Werner. He’s a Master-class IDPA shooter, and was chief instructor at the elite Rogers Shooting School for a number of years. He’s also a guy that runs exercises such as “1000 days of dry fire” (yes, 1000 consecutive days, dry firing every day… you miss one day, you lose and have to start over — and he completes it). The point is, Claude’s level of skill and gun manipulation is far above average, and likely far above your skill level.

So if it takes a highly skilled person half a second, how long is it going to take you?

Let’s go back to the typical gunfight of “3 shots in 3 seconds within 3 yards”. So if you have 3 seconds, now you only have 2.5 seconds – if you’re Claude. If we’re talking 3 shots, again assuming a high level of skill and 0.20 seconds between shots (splits), that’s about 0.40 seconds to shoot 3 shots. So again, high level of skill, you’ve now got about 2 seconds to react to the stimulus, draw, and start shooting. A 1.5 second concealment draw is considered good. So, if you’ve got the skills, you might be able to pull all this off. But do you have such a high-level of skill? And if you are anything less than honest in your assessment, you’re doing yourself and your life a disservice.

In addition to time (speed), there is another consideration: accuracy. Claude writes:

Having established a baseline difference, I proceeded to shoot the Swiss qual course twice, once with the chamber empty and once with a loaded chamber. I used the same gear but also my favorite concealment vest, a construction worker’s fluorescent vest. What I found was that chamber empty was not only slower (0.48-0.67 seconds) but somewhat less accurate than having a round in the chamber. I had to work really hard to get the front sight on target after loading the chamber. Unlike a smooth loaded chamber drawstroke, there’s a lot of rotational movement of the pistol going during the period of driving the gun to the target. I didn’t have any trouble making the times, but it’s not exactly a cakewalk, either. Not long into the course, the safety ears were beginning to hurt my fingers, which may have had some effect on the results, too.

Years ago, I took a pistol course from Kelly McCann. He said that the Israelis just accept that they are going to throw away the first shot when using the chamber empty technique. After doing this exercise, I can see why. With all the gun movement, and if using the strict Israeli technique, 90 degrees of rotating of the gun, it’s hard to get even the muzzle indexed on target, much less get the front sight on it. Notice also the inclined to the low left classic group, indicating the trigger jerking that was going on. I expect this is because of the amount of complex (gross simultaneous with fine) motor skills that are involved.

Again, we’re talking Claude Werner level of shooting skill. While he was able to make the times, it was difficult. There’s so much going on, so much extraneous movement, and now there’s an increased level of difficulty in getting acceptable hits. Take a look at Claude’s targets.

BTW, I wouldn’t recommend the Israeli philosophy of throwing away the first shot. The first shot is too important (click through, read why)! While it’s not a wise thing to do, understand the reasoning – because all this fumbling around is likely going to equate to your first shot being unacceptable, and that… is unacceptable.

Compounding matters, if you take the issues of time, speed, accuracy, gunhandling, all of these things into account, and now throw in Paul Ford’s statistic that in a gunfight you’ll perform at 70% of your worst day on the range, can you see how not having a round in the chamber is going to magnify your troubles? How it’s going to really work against you?

If you still wish to carry without a round in the chamber, that’s your decision. Consider the above. Consider how much further it puts you behind the curve. Consider how it increases complexity.  Then consider, if it’s really the wisest decision to make.

2014-08-01 training log

/ hsoi

No gym today.

I’m officially starting with Renaissance Periodization. Paid my money for 6 months of diet protocol.

Yeah… 6 months. I reckon I’ve probably got 50# to drop, at least.

Today, day off. Rest up. Work and personal life will be kinda crazy and stressful the next few days, so I figured more rest and reduction/removal of anything stressful that I could (including lifting) would be good.

Next week… Monday I’m going to test squat and deadlift. Wednesday I’ll test bench. And then after that, whenever the RP stuff is ready to go, I’ve done the needed shopping to get started, etc….. well… then I start.

Lifting will be bodybuilder style. I actually may start off with basebuilding, but that may be too much for the diet. Still, I’ll stick with it as long as I can, then transition to bodybuilding style if it’s just too much. The goal is fat loss, and the lifting direction will be to support that.

Here we go!

Should you carry with a round in the chamber?

/ hsoi / 8 Comments

Short answer: Yes.

Long answer:

I saw this posted on Facebook somewhere. The answer is “yes”.

Let’s put it another way: why would you NOT want a round in the chamber? For many, it’s because they are afraid. They are new to carrying a gun on their person, and they are afraid of what might happen. That the gun could “go off”. Well, modern handguns only “go off” in news stories and movies. Modern handguns are drop-safe, meaning you can drop them on the hard ground and they won’t go off from the impact. Guns don’t just magically fire; usually when they “go off” it’s because someone violated the rules. If the gun is securely in your holster and you aren’t fingering and fiddling with it, you have nothing to worry about.

So the fear is understandable (I went through it myself), but you must realize there is nothing to worry about, so long as you follow the rules. And a key rule is: holster it and stop fiddling with it.

I’ll put it yet another way. Do you know how fast an attack unfolds? Average gunfight lasts about 3 seconds. And given we’re the good guys, we only get to react thus we are behind the curve from the start. How much time does it take to rack one into the chamber? Maybe just a second, but if if you’ve got 3 seconds total to work with, that’s 1/3 of your time lost and you are that much further behind the curve; and that’s provided you don’t fumble. That’s unacceptable when every fraction of a second matters.

I’ve seen it over the years with some students that come to class with no round in the chamber. We have them perform some simple drills under modest but friendly pressure, and even giving them every advantage we can (e.g. round in the chamber, start from a ready position, fully mentally prepared). They often fail to take care of business within 3 seconds. So how can they be expected under extreme life-threatening pressure with far less advantage and head-start to be able to do what needs to be done? I had one student that actually had some conviction about no round in the chamber and racking on the draw. He held up modestly during class, but as the pressure of class increased, his skills decreased and I watched him fumble and fail numerous times. By the end of class, he was begrudgingly convinced that it was an unwise technique.

Yes, there are examples of people that can perform things like this wicked fast with fancy tricks. Great for YouTube videos, but just not a solid life safety technique.

In the end, I suppose you’re welcome to carry how you want. I would say if you don’t keep one in the chamber out of fear, I would recommend doing whatever it takes to overcome your fear, because when the flag flies, that fear is going to hold you back and slow you down far more than the lack of a round in the chamber (seek more professional training to become more comfortable and competent with your pistol). If you carry this way for other reasons, I would say to put your choice to the test. Take some Force-on-Force classes with Simunitions and try your technique out and see how it holds up under pressure. If you can make it work for you, more power to you. The key is ensuring you can have a technique set that truly works and covers the vast majority of cases. For most, a round in the chamber will serve them better.

Aim at something – specific

/ hsoi

When aiming a gun, it’s vital to aim at something.

But what should that something be?

When hunting, people talk about the “kill zone”. It varies from animal to animal, but they talk about a general area… a zone… a somewhat large space. Take a look at this feral hog kill zone:

Look at the description: behind the shoulder. While it’s true anywhere in the zone is good, that’s not really how you should aim.

When talking about defensive firearms skills, people often talk about the notion of “center of mass”. I don’t care for that phrase because it’s not accurate enough. The center of mass relative to what? If of the whole body, I guess the center is around the bellybutton. If just the torso, then it’s around the diaphragm. Neither of these are good places to aim for. Consider an article I wrote a few years ago about “ignoring the X-ring” on a B-27 target because it’s not anatomically correct. At the end I suggested a better aim point:

Thus if you’re using a B-27 target, aim at the target where the upper “8″ and “9″ are printed.

But since I wrote that, I’ve stopped offering that suggestion and offered a better one: to aim at the line between the 8 and 9 rings (really, it’s the 9-ring’s outline line). And I point to where to aim.

Why this? I’m trying to give a more specific aim point.

Claude Werner writes:

I tell my students that one element of my plan is that as soon as I meet someone, I pick out the spot on their body that I am going to aim at, should it become necessary to shoot them. Then I describe to each person in the class what the aiming point for them would be. This tends to generate considerable discomfort but makes the point very clear.

Pick out something specific. How about a button on their shirt? Or if it helps you visualize better, you know how a button tends to have 2 or 4 holes in it so you can sew the button to the shirt? Pick one of those holes – a smaller, more specific target. Granted, sometimes getting too small and too specific is tough because you cannot see it. But the intent is to impress in your mind a very specific target to aim at, not just “center of mass” or “the A-zone/-0 zone” or “within the 8-9-X rings”.

Trick shooters like Bob Munden and Tom Knapp knew that the center of a target, the center of a coin, the center of an aspirin — they were all the same size. That whole “aim small, miss small” thing.

Yes, there are trade-offs, yes there are different sorts of sight pictures (see: Brian Enos). But the key take-home here is that somehow, on some level, you do have to aim. And when you aim, aim at something specific.

The right time, captured

/ hsoi / 1 Comment

Herra Kuulapaa has spent the past 7 years involved in high speed  ballistics photography.

Here’s a gallery of his work.

Here’s his website to see more.

What’s so awesome is how he’s able to capture the moment. Shooting a gun happens extremely quickly, but there’s an amazing amount of things that happen in that short time. Watching the moment the powder ignites, the bullet leaving the barrel… it’s truly fascinating from a ballistics, scientific, and artistic perspective.

You also get to see a lot of things that you may not have known happens when a gun is fired. For example, if you go to this page and scroll down to “19. July 2013 – 9mm STI”, look at the massive amount of debris that flies out of the muzzle. In fact, you see debris in a lot of pictures, which prompts Herra to repeat over and over:

Safety first: Remember to wear your safety gear always when shooting. Some pictures show clear burning particles flying backwards to shooter!

If you want to see some really fun pictures, go look at the “high power” revolvers. That will make it pretty clear as to why you need to keep your thumbs (and other body parts) away from the cylinder (gaps) when shooting.

KR Training – 2014-07-19 – H:BtB/SB Quick Hits

/ hsoi

A fine day at KR Training. Due to that polar vortex, weather was abnormally wonderful: didn’t get higher than the mid-80’s, partially overcast, and tho it was very humid, you couldn’t ask for a better day. Classes on tap ere Beyond the Basics: Pistol and Skill Builder. These are solid intermediate-level classes that help to drive home the fundamentals. Look at any sport, any discipline, and the best in that area know that fundamentals are what everything is based upon. Mastery of fundamentals is key, and here, that’s ultimately about trigger control.

Or at least, that was the order of the day. Yes, trigger control was the biggest issue all day, tho by the end of the day there was marked improvement with very little trigger slapping going on.

Here’s some comments about what I saw.

Trigger Control

Slapping, yanking, jerking, whatever you want to call it… it’s when all your shots wind up low-left, or more generally, they go where you don’t want them.

It comes back to what we kept saying throughout class: slow down, press the trigger. Yes, the feel of the trigger gets heavier as you press, but you don’t need to smack it to then overcome that resistance – just keep pressing.

Work this in dry fire. Start out working slowly, getting the feel, reinforcing that feel. Focus on the front sight, don’t let it be disturbed by your trigger press. But remember that one drill we did? The “ball and dummy” drill? Remember how the first time we’d do it slowly, but later on we did it faster, where you’d press the trigger, round goes off, and as soon as the gun came out of recoil and you had the sight picture we’d have to press again? Work that too. Don’t always make it a slow, deliberate pause between presses, because ultimately you’re trying to get faster so you have to work faster. It will smooth out. Push yourself a little faster, a little faster, until you see things break down; stay there for a bit and keep working it.

Grip

A few people had issues with shots going all over the place. From what I could see, it’s a grip problem.

First, it’s about griping hard enough. Yes, it’s going to make you tired because you need to clamp down as hard as you can on the grip. You’re not used to that, your muscles will fatigue, and you will lighten up your grip to alleviate the discomfort. Don’t do this! Keep clamping down, because you need to build up that strength and endurance. Remember how we were saying just 10 minutes of dry fire every other day? Well, you should be able to work that clamp grip every time you dry practice, and you just watch! Give it two weeks of consistent work and you’ll see your grip improve.

Second, it’s about gripping properly. Remember to get your primary hand up high on the gun, with that cushioned part of your hand between your thumb and index finger smooshed up into the beavertail area. Remember to cant your support hand forward, get it high up on the gun, and clamp hard with this hand. Do this every time. Work to have consistency in your grip.

Third, consistency. Be sure that you grip the same way every time. That you are gripping hard enough every time and that that grip pressure remains as constant as you can make it. Try this. Hold the gun in a proper but very loose grip and line up the sights with your eyes. Now, don’t move anything else and just clamp down your grip on the gun. Did you notice the gun moved? The sights are now off and you do not have a proper sight picture? Try it a few times, and notice how not only things move, but they move differently each time. Often what happens is people start out with a loose grip, then they know the gun is about to go off so they suddenly clamp down their grip and you get what you saw above. That sudden clamping shifts the direction of the muzzle, a different way every time, and so you wind up with almost no consistency nor accuracy in your shots.

.380 ACP

A few yeas ago .380 became the new hotness. All these small guns, the growth of women and people recommending guns chambered in .380 to them. Trouble is, there are problems with .380.

First, the shame is that there are few guns that are of decent quality in that chambering. So many of the .380 guns are cheap and of questionable quality and reliability. Usually when we see a .380 in class, there are problems and failures with it. If this is the gun you’re betting your life on, you need to trust your equipment and know it will perform when called upon.

Second, it’s a marginal caliber. I don’t need to say much here, as Greg Ellifritz recently wrote a good article on this very topic.

A .380 is better than nothing, but I would encourage folks that choose a .380 to step back and examine why they chose the .380  and to see if there’s a better alternative that can satisfy your same reasons and requirements.

For the Ladies

The student body was majority female, and just about everyone stayed all day. I forget what chapter they were from, but most were from A Girl and A Gun, and it was great to have them out there.

What I wanted to mention here was the notion of “drop and offset” holsters. This is a holster where the belt loop is of course at the belt line, but then the holster itself is dropped down a bit and offset a bit from the belt, which helps to work with a woman’s body structure (hips). Take a look at the International from Comp-Tac. See that picture? See how the holster is dropped down and offset from the belt loop? That’s what we’re talking about.

Granted, this isn’t the best solution for every day carry, but for classes, for range work, for competing, it’s an option to look into.

Thanx

Thank you all for coming out and choosing to spend your day with us. It was a pleasure to have you, and we look forward to seeing you again on the range.

 

Not the odds, but the stakes

/ hsoi / 9 Comments

Wil Lewis escaped poverty in Guatemala when he was adopted at age 7. Loving parents raised him in Wisconsin, where he found his two passions: photography and the woman who would become his wife.

He attended art school in Milwaukee and moved to Chicago two years ago. He was looking forward to starting a new job Monday, finally ending the rat race of freelance photography.

Lewis, 28, and his wife moved into a new Rogers Park apartment just two weeks ago. They were thinking about starting a family.

On Saturday, gunfire upended their plans. Lewis was standing in the 1300 block of West Devon Avenue about 3:20 p.m. when a gunman approached on foot and shot him in the back, Chicago Police said. He was pronounced dead less than 40 minutes later.

“He was looking to start a family. He was talking about having children,” said Warren Rader, a close friend and fellow photographer. “Everything was going right for him.”

Full story here. (h/t Mike Cox)

A young man, who overcame so much, his life was opening up and looking so incredible — so much ahead. And senselessly killed in what appears to be a gang battle; an innocent man caught in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Here’s the crazy thing:

Rader recalled a conversation he had with his friend in Milwaukee a year or two ago, before Lewis moved to Chicago.

“We were talking about conceal-carry gun licenses and how much nonsense it was and how unlikely it was that you’d ever get into a confrontation . . . He just thought it wasn’t something an everyday person would have to deal with,” Rader said.

It is true. The odds of getting into a confrontation aren’t high, especially if you live your life by a simple set of rules, e.g. don’t go to stupid places with stupid people and do stupid things, and be in bed by 10pm (h/t John Farnam). But even then, as Lewis’ tragic story shows, you can try to do everything right, and yet tragic things can still happen.

It’s important to realize…

It’s not about the odds.

It’s about the stakes.

Teach your children these four vital things

/ hsoi

Our society puts high value on three things:

  1. Our children
  2. Their education
  3. Their safety

We value our children because we love them, because they are our future (and our legacy), and because they are vulnerable and prone to make mistakes (such is childhood). That’s why we put such high value in their education: they need to not just survive but thrive in their adult life, and education is key towards ensuring a bright future. But since “stuff happens” and “kids can be kids” we value the safety of our children, because want to see grandchildren, because we don’t want to bury our children, because we know that mistakes can be costly, so we’d rather see them be a source for education and growth.

Our children,

Their education.

Their safety.

We value these things so highly.

Because of that, I am dumbfounded when I see people going out of their way to keep their children ignorant. I do not understand why someone would do such a thing. Yes, we homeschool our children, but we refuse to shelter them or only expose them to a single mode of thought. How will that serve our children as they enter the adult world? How will that enable them to seek knowledge and truth? How will that keep them safe?

I keep thinking back to a time when I was putting on the Eddie Eagle GunSafe program. I saw numerous parents make an overt effort to keep their children away and not attend the program.

OK, I do understand why. It’s because it involves “guns” and “the NRA” and is probably just some covert indoctrination into that world of gun-toting, Bible-thumping, Tea Party rednecks, right? People just see trigger-words like “gun” and “NRA” and immediately clam up, putting their fingers in their ears, closing their eyes and refusing to hear what has to be said. OK, I can understand why, but I think it’s doing a grave disservice to your children.

You can hate guns all you want. You can be on the crusade to ban guns and wipe guns and gun-loving-people off the planet. That’s totally fine. But in the meantime, guns are still around, and your children could encounter them.

In July 2008 an Austin Police K-9 unit was at a park. Apparently the dog jumped on his handler, knocking the officer’s gun out of its holster. The gun was found by a mother and her child.

“I know that having a 2-year-old, they’d pick that up without a problem,” Bendt [a frequent park visitor, with her 3 children] said.

In January 2013, a school security guard in Michigan left his handgun in a school bathroom.

Chatfield parent Tris Fritz told mlive.com that the incident was “a big mistake”: “I think that some kid might not think it’s a real gun. They might think it’s a toy. They’re going to be curious, that’s the nature of a child.”

Consider that many who despite and hate guns and want them banned do consider police acceptable people to have guns. But police, like you, are fallible; as you can see, so long as there are guns in this world, there is opportunity for your child to come in contact with one.

So while you crusade for a better tomorrow, you must accept the reality of today: guns exist, and you and/or your child may come in contact with one at some point in their life.

When this contact occurs, will your child know what to do to stay safe?

Are you willing to educate your child on how they can keep themselves and their friends safe?

Or would you rather you and your child remain ignorant, perhaps costing them their life?

It’s your call, but I would hope you’d be willing to swallow your pride and at least teach your child these 4 vital things to do if they ever come in contact with a gun:

  1. STOP!
  2. Don’t touch.
  3. Leave the area.
  4. Tell an adult.

I’m not saying this to shill for the NRA. I’m saying this because I don’t want to see your child become a statistic.

What do you recommend for… a gentle disagreement

/ hsoi

Dr. House tackles the subject of “What do you recommend for…”

In short:

In a simple sentence, I don’t.

I can’t, in all honesty and truth, prescribe anything guaranteed to fix your problems. What, “you,” need for self-defense, in terms of guns, holsters, sights, etc., isn’t like I am giving you a treatment plan to treat a specific medical condition you have. I can’t diagnose you…

Nobody else can tell you what is best for you, either. It requires experimentation. What some people recommend for others to use, or warn them against using, is frankly quite silly. It makes no sense. Me, dictating to you what to use is as idiotic as recommending you wear a certain type of eyeglasses, with MY prescription in it. Sure, it might work for you, but it probably won’t!

On the whole, I agree with him. We cannot tell you exactly what will work for you. This is because your situation and specifics will be different, and it’s quite true that what works for one may not work for another.

But where I differ from Dr. House is that this just can’t be done.

We are not special snowflakes. The simple reason much of human existence works is precisely because while we’re all different in the specific, we’re all the same in the general. We generally walk on 2 legs, have 2 arms and hands, 2 eyes, our eyesight and hearing and other senses work the same basic way, our body mechanics work generally the same. Yes there are exceptions, but they are just that and not the rule. This is why we can design cars with ergonomics of the seat style, steering wheel location, pedals, controls, where and how we do. This is why we can design “off the rack” clothing, which while it may not be as ideal a fit as a custom tailored suit, it works well enough to get us by in our lives.

So can I tell you what is best for you? No, but I sure can give you a lot of good guidelines to get you close (enough) and further down the road.

Sometimes it may just be my own experience. For example, my recent experience with the Ergo Delta Grip. I think in part it may be my own problem, because of the level of discomfort I personally felt in my hand. You may not feel this same discomfort due to the nature of your hands, or a higher tolerance for pain. But objectively we cannot deny the shape of the backstrap being more pointed and thus it will direct more of the force into a single point in the palm instead of a wider backstrap dissipating the force. So we can still give general guidance here.

After years of teaching and thousands of students, you start to see patterns of what works and what doesn’t work. You start to see that guns like Glocks and M&P’s run pretty reliably and students in general have less trouble and struggle running those guns. When people bring cheap guns, weird guns, DA/SA guns, guns that are too much for them to handle (e.g. frail older woman with small hands trying to shoot a Sig P226 in .40 S&W just doesn’t end well), well… we know how the story will end – usually – and we also know how we can redirect the situation towards a more successful, fruitful, and satisfying end (e.g. give them a Glock 19). This doesn’t mean there aren’t exceptions, but again, they are exceptions.

Maybe I’m just reading Dr. House’s writing the wrong way, because I do think we’re more in agreement than disagreement (thus my “gentle” disagreement). I think he’s right when he writes:

Next time someone tells you that carrying a pistol with a manual safety (like a SHIELD) or a DA/SA semiautomatic pistol will, “get you killed,” it might be wise to take everything they continue to say with an even BIGGER grain of salt. NO PIECE OF EQUIPMENT will replace skill…regardless of what the equipment may be. You can defend yourself with anything, under any condition, with preparation. PERIOD.

Because in a case like that, it’s a matter of being able to back up your recommendations with concrete and factual evidence, not Internet jackassery or gun store bravado. For example, I can back up the above example of the P226 by talking about gun fit, how the P226 is a poor fit for someone with small hands, which requires holding the gun in an awkward manner that provides sub-optimal control over the gun, recoils over the thumb knuckle (ouch!), a long heavy trigger is difficult for them to press due to strength and leverage issues, then the snappy recoil of a .40 S&W adds to the mix; then replacing with a Glock 19 (probably a Gen4 with the small backstrap) allows for a better fit, the trigger is of lighter pull-weight which their level of strength and leverages can more easily work, the milder recoil of the 9mm doesn’t present as much of a problem for their level, and so on. Can the assertion be backed up by proper reasoning?

So no, we cannot tell you exactly what formula will result in the ideal solution for you. However, it is possible to start you down a path with good footing and a solid start. You will need to experiment, you will need to discover precisely what works for you, but we can help you on your way.