self defense

InSights ABC’s

/ hsoi / 4 Comments

I have a fondness for InSights Training‘s ABC’s: Always Be Cool.

It’s a mode of being that helps to keep you out of trouble. Always Be Cool. If trouble happens to come your way, you need a level head and a demeanor to help you get out of the situation. Always Be Cool.

There was a recent discussion about dealing with police in the context of concealed carry (e.g. how to produce your license/permit, how to notify the officer that you are carrying, etc. in a way that won’t freak out the officer). Any time a police officer has to pull someone over, they’re going to be tense because they don’t know what to expect and must prepare themselves for the worst. If you are tense, if your body language is anxious, the officer is going to see it and will react accordingly. You are doing nothing wrong (other than your moving violation), you’re just tense because it’s a tense situation by its nature, but still… what can you do to make things better? Always Be Cool.

From Greg Hamilton:

I should of course add YOUR body language, demeanor, speech, etc. must be calm and nonchalant if you want the officer to be also. If you are stressed, anxious, etc you immediately lead the officer there.

[…]

InSights ABC’s: Always Be Cool; first step of being cool is LOOKING cool.

Calm demeanor, natural non-forced smile, normal tone of voice, all lead to you being “believed” They also produce a calm, matter-of-fact, just doing my job demeanor  in the officer.

The thing is, this goes far beyond interactions with police officers. It enters into the realm of interactions with anyone and everyone. If you come across calmly, smiling, looking like a nice and cool person, you will be perceived as a cool person and it makes so many things in life go smoother for you.

Whatever you’re doing and dealing with in life, just remember to Always Be Cool. It can take you pretty far.

Sometimes violence is the answer

/ hsoi / 2 Comments

Matthew, over at Straight Forward in a Crooked World, has an entry titled “Failure to Comply.”

It’s a compelling read, and you’d do well to take a few minutes to read it, then a few minutes more to think about what he wrote.

There’s one thing he wrote that really caught my attention:

We are taught early on and reminded as adults constantly that violence is bad and that it never solves anything, and that no one wins in a fight. This is simply untrue. In fact it is horribly untrue. This is the result of political correctness infesting everything. It skews how we set and train our minds to win.

Violence does solve problems.

Reactive violence can and does routinely stop evil offensive violence. When you are left (regardless of your sex) on the ground and fighting to win to keep your life violence is the answer…and it is the only answer. And you should not apologize nor back peddle for that.

It made me think about my children and what I teach them.

When I started my parenting career, we opted to do the “no hitting” thing. There was no spanking, we taught Oldest not to hit, period. Basically, violence was completely frowned upon for any and every reason, in every context, every angle, you name it.

It didn’t take long before we abandoned that to a small part. Spanking came around. Why? Because you can’t reason with a 2 year old; they just don’t know enough about life to understand greater things. We didn’t and don’t beat our children, but all living things respond in a simple manner: seek pleasure, avoid pain. We saved a swat on the behind for those times when you really needed to enforce a negative consequence to some action. That is, spanking was not the general punishment; it was reserved for times when you needed to make a strong negative impression because there was no natural negative consequence of the action. For example, child runs into the street; that could warrant a swat on the behind because there’s no question there could be tragic consequences of that action — it must not happen again. However, the action itself has no natural negative consequence (apart from the undesirable of the child getting hit by a car), so you must impart a negative consequence so the child will not undertake that action again. The child must know that action leads to painful consequences so they will avoid partaking in actions that lead to pain. Political correctness compells me to say that we also are into positive reinforcement; frankly that garners a lot more compliance and a happier household. But sometimes, a spanking is the right and only answer. Heck, even my old college roommate just went through a little “my son got whacked” situation. He’s still of the “no spanking” camp, but there’s no question the little whack his son got straightened him up and made for a better long-term experience.

When I started getting serious about self-defense, martial arts study, firearms study, I realized that when our kids hit each other, to condemn them and lay down a rule of “no hitting, never” was not correct. Here I was studying all sorts of violent things because I know that sometimes violence is the answer, and now I’m telling my children never to use violence? That didn’t jive, and I had to correct myself.

I teach my children differently now. I teach my children that yes, sometimes violence is the answer, but you must know when that is. If your sibling took your toy or is being annoying, violence is not an appropriate response. If someone is attempting to harm you, abduct you, your sibling, your friends, your Mother… then yes, violence can be an answer. I do what I can to teach my children the proper contexts, to know how to respond in these contexts. I wish my children to live peaceful lives, and while I know the world has mostly good people, there are enough bad people out there that we have to take care and be prepared.

Some months back I posted about guns and church and reconciling Christian doctrine against violent activity. It doesn’t preach it, it doesn’t desire it, but even it acknowledges that sometimes yes, violence is the answer.

It’s not pretty to think about, and it’s far from politically correct. But where do you choose to live? In fantasy or reality?

Paired Round Loading

/ hsoi / 4 Comments

I’m working my way through the postings at SnubTraining.com. I just came upon a set of postings regarding reloading your snub. This particular drill about “paired round loading” caught my eye. The background is that while at the range we might always reload our guns to full capacity, in a pressure situation we may not be able to. We may be able to unload the gun then only partially reload, either by choice or by time constraint, and then have to get back into the fight. So this drill is discussing that you may only be able to do a partial reload. Assuming your snub holds 5 rounds, maybe you can only get 2 rounds reloaded (thus “paired round”).

What Michael points out is how/where you do the reload. Chances are, we’re going to reload those rounds side-by-side. He presents some statistics worth considering:

If you were loading to protect your family wouldn’t you have better served them if you had loaded those roundsanywhere other than side by side?  When loading side by side you run a statistical risk of closing the cylinder and having to cycle through three or four empty charge holes (depending on if you loaded a five or six round cylinder) before you hit upon your first live round.  If you had split the loading then your chances for a live round earlier would have gone up to 25% with a five shot revolver and 20% with a six shot revolver.

Quite a good point. Yes with only a partial reload you have to keep pulling the trigger over empty chambers before you get to a loaded chamber, but now with the rounds spread out you’ve got a statistically better chance of getting at least one shot off sooner rather than later.

Furthermore, by practicing this way you give yourself an inexpensive “ball and dummy” drill. It can help you work to eliminate flinching. Load a couple rounds, spin the cylinder so you don’t know where they are, close the cylinder, then go. Work to eliminate any flinch or anticipation.

I’m not saying this is the best way to do things, or the worst. I do think it’s worthwhile food for thought.

Tactical Home Decor

/ hsoi / 1 Comment

Shoothouse Barbie just moved into some new digs. Consequently, decorating had to happen. She didn’t just throw up random nick-nacks… she made things were both decorative and functional.

Placement of mirrors and other reflective surfaces so you can see vital spots (e.g. front door) from secure and defensible locations is a good thing.

Knife rights update

/ hsoi / 4 Comments

As previously noted here and here, there were issues with the way US Customs and Border Patrol was reclassifying certain knives. It would have risked instantly criminalizing millions of law-abiding US citizens as well as removing many useful tools from everyday use.

I received an email update from the KnifeRights.org folk:

Customs Officially Backs Off

In a letter to Representative Kurt Schrader (D-OR), Customs and Border Protection has officially backed off their proposed revocations and rulemaking in recognition of the Amendment that was passed by the Senate which would add a new exception to the Switchblade Act covering assisted and one-hand opening knives, at least until the Homeland Security Appropriations Bill is acted upon in Conference Committee.

You can read the letter here <http://www.kniferights.org/Customs_response_07212009.pdf> , but the key paragraph reads “The amendment would effectively obviate the need for CBP’s proposed revocations and render the current issue moot. Additionally, due to the numerous comments received in response to the proposed revocation, it is unlikely that CBP will take any further action prior to passage of the Appropriations Act.

This is about as close to a victory as we can come at this time. It may not be over until the fat lady sings, and we actually get the Amendment through Conference Committee, but for all practical purposes, we shouldn’t have to worry about Customs reaching into your pockets for your pocket knives anytime soon. Do take note that Customs has included some ambiguous wording in their letter, leaving their options open, no surprise. But, make no mistake, they have gotten the message; don’t mess with our pocket knives!

This is a welcome bit of progress, and it shows how a vigilant citizenry is the only check against government running amuck across our lives. There’s still work to be done, but so far so good.

A Brief Analysis of Heaven Six

/ hsoi

Gun folk might know Michael Janich from his co-hosting of The Best Defense TV show. He’s also an accomplished martial artist with a background in escrima. Here’s a video with him explaining “Heaven Six”, a foundational drill in Filipino martial arts such as escrima, arnis, and kali.

What I like about this video is it shows how the basic “Heaven Six” movement goes beyond the sticks. Janich demonstrates a lot of empty hand application, from strikes, to blocks, to joint locks. Certainly he’s just touching the surface, but it does point out all that you can do with just that simple movement.

I haven’t regretted my decision to study kali. This sort of power in simplicity is awesome.

Snub ammo trials

/ hsoi / 4 Comments

I’ve been blogging a lot on the right ammo for snub nosed revolvers. I thought I’d try to pull things together here.

First, this isn’t about finding practice ammo, because any sort of .38 Special ammo will fill that bill (read: what’s cheapest and, especially these days, available). This is about finding the right ammo for carry. And not any .38 Special ammo will do because out of the short-barrel snub nose revolver, you can’t get much velocity and that can affect the ammo performance (e.g. ability for hollow-points to expand).

First, some back postings:

And now, we come to this.

Based on all that I’ve read, here’s the list of the snub nose carry ammo that I wish to try:

Are there more out there? Sure. But from what I’ve been reading, these tend to be the most popular.

Hey, just came across this very nice write-up from thehighroad.

A summary of what I’ve been coming up with. Note: the following is just based upon a lot of Google searching and reading:

  • Old school Nyclads were pretty good, but apparently the new Nyclads aren’t all that great. They’re not bad, just nothing to write home about. Their big advantage is they give reasonable performance from a standard pressure load, so if you need standard pressure, they’re not a bad choice.
  • The specific aforementioned Buffalo Bore are another standard pressure load and supposedly a lot more potent. They are also a semi-wadcutter bullet. Their big downside is they can be hard to find, and expensive.
  • Corbon is going to be hot hot hot. Potent, but hot.
  • The Speer Gold Dot short-barrel model seems to be extremely popular and apparently have good performance.
  • I already wrote up all I could about Hornady Critical Defense. I’m intrigued but skeptical. There’s enough anecdotal evidence that the load has problems. Hopefully Hornady can work things out as it’s a nifty approach. But am I willing to trust my life to nifty and unproven? Nope. Consequently, I’m not going to bother spending any money on this ammo to even bother testing it.
  • The semi-wadcutter seems to be a proven stand-by. It’s old technology, but it’s proven technology and many people stand by it. The Remington R38S12 seems to be the standard by which all others are judged.

In terms of my own testing, unfortunately I cannot do things like ballistics gel testing, or even just shooting through water jugs or wetpack newspaper. About all I can do is shoot them, report on accuracy, report on how they feel out of my S&W 442. And I can’t even do a lot of testing because I’m not made of money. But I can report what I do and can find.

Will I admit some initial bias? Yes. Nyclads I’m interested in because having a load that’s effective but not difficult to shoot has great appeal given the gun is already one that will be hard to shoot and control just due to its nature. Buffalo Bore and the Corbon I’m not looking forward to shooting because I expect they’re going to kick like hell. I regard Gold Dots favorably, they’re my choice of carry ammo in my 9mm Springfield XD. The semi-wadcutters are proven and old school, and I’ve a warm spot for that especially since it does have the long proven track record.

Furthermore, I’ll admit some initial favorable bias towards the LSWCHP because it does have the long track record, it’s apparently not too horrible to shoot, and supposedly is your best bet for contact shots. Whereas hollow points are designed to impact and expand, the intent of the contact shot is not to expand but to cut a hole… the wadcutter cuts the hole, but it’s the rapid expansion of gases into that hole that perform the tissue damage. Ugly, I know. But if the snub is to be used for contact shot purposes, the right ammo matters. Unfortunately I cannot find much data on this.

As well, 158 grain is considered the “standard” bullet weight for .38 Special. In theory, the fixed/integral sights on the snub would be set based on assumptions of shooting that sort of bullet. That puts a little bias against things like the Corbon DPX, but then the DPX is also loaded differently. YMMV.

We shall see.

Updated: Got to the range and was able to do some testing.

Updated 2: Since I got to shoot the above-mentioned Buffalo Bore, I was looking for some more data on the Buffalo Bore semi-wadcutter load. I found this at brassfetcher.com, that shows that very load fired from a S&W 642 and how it behaved in ballistics gel. Fairly consistent behavior. It’s got penetration and some expansion. It even had fragmentation, which can mean all sorts of things for defensive loads.

Same site also has some results of various .38 rounds into gel. Here’s one on the Gold Dot 135 grain. Here’s the Remington LSWCHP. The Cor®Bon DPX.

Check this: he did a contact shot test. I’d love to see more of this, comparing say hollow point loads like the Gold Dot 135 grain, DPX, even the Buffalo Bore SWCHP vs. the FBI load.

Looking at all of the brassfetcher .38 tests — and ballistics gel only tells us so much (it’s main advantage is controlability and consistency), it does seem many of the above-listed rounds are good. In fact, it makes me feel a little bit better about my current choice to use the Buffalo Bore (load 20C/20).

Just do what they tell you

/ hsoi / 2 Comments

I cannot stand modern “self-defense” tactics that teach things like just being passive, just give them what they want, if you just do what they ask you they won’t hurt you, blah blah blah.

Tell that to Teresa Butz.

Before she died, Butz talked to a neighbor, Albert Barrientes, saying of the attacker: “He told us if we did what he asked us to do, he wouldn’t hurt us. He lied, he lied.”

If someone has put you in honest fear of your life, if they have broken into your house, attacked you, threatened you with grevious harm, or anything of this ilk, that person has demonstrated they are irrational, dangerous, and untrustworthy. What makes you think they won’t harm you further? Why should you trust anything they have to say after the actions they’ve already presented?

6 is enough

/ hsoi / 4 Comments

Shoothouse Barbie goes off about the saying “If I can’t get the job done in 6 rounds then I’m in over my head”.

Commenter RevolverRob quotes Clint Smith from Thunder Ranch:

“Nobody has ever complained of having too much ammunition during a gunfight.”

Amen.

I make no bones about the fact that I like capacity. It’s one reason I like 9mm handguns over other calibers like .40 S&W and .45 ACP. Since all pistol rounds suck about the same, I think it’s useful to consider other aspects such as capacity. If .45 ACP and 9mm will both get the job done, and I can carry twice as many 9mm rounds well… hopefully I won’t need them, but gosh it’s nice to have them if you do. We’re back to one of those old adages for why you carry: better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it. So, nice to have more ammo if you can, eh?

Put it this way. I opted to carry only a 5-shot snub-nose revolver a little while ago, and just when I opted to do that I had an incident that had potential to be ugly. Thankfully nothing came of it and that we did have rifles, but boy those 5 rounds just didn’t feel like enough. Maybe if it was just one guy it’d be OK, but again we like to say that “2 is 1, 1 is none”, to be aware of that which you can’t see, and all that stuff. So if it did wind up being 2 or more attackers, would those 5-6 rounds be enough?

Shotgun chokes for home defense

/ hsoi

While a shotgun is not my #1 choice for home defense, it certainly can be used in that capacity. One thing that came out of the KR Training Defensive Long Gun class was the realities of using a shotgun in a home-defense situation.

Home defensive shooting is likely to go from 3 to 25 yards, or rather, very close range to the longest distance across your house. Measure it if you’re not sure, but most houses won’t be more than 25 yards. By nature, a shotgun shooting pellets will have those pellets spread. Just how much those pellets spread depends upon the shotgun’s choke and the load, even being different across manufacturers and brands.

Old_Painless over at the Box O’ Truth has BOT #44 discussing this very topic. He takes a look at how chokes affect patterns and how different brands of buckshot affect patterns. Conclusion? In general full choke does tighten groups up, but the actual load seems to matter a lot more. The take-home is that you shouldn’t just buy any old buckshot and expect it to behave like you want it to. You need to try different loads in your particular gun until you find the load and gun (and perhaps choke) “pairing” that works to give you your desired results. This is consistent with what came out of the KR Training class. Bottom line is you have to know how your tools will perform.

One nice thing that came out of BOT #44 was seeing that the Remington low-recoil buckshot worked so well. I believe Old_Painless used this product, but I can’t tell (his website doesn’t say exactly, and his box picture doesn’t match the Remington website, but this is likely the same load). Not only is that a tight pattern regardless of choke, but managed recoil is arguably a better choice for home-defense situations. The reduced range of managed/reduced recoil products isn’t an issue in the limited ranges of home-defense situation, it doesn’t beat you up as much, you can manage the recoil and get to follow-up shots faster. Win-win.