Carrying a gun without knowing the law? Words just fail me. (sticky)

If you carry a gun for self-defense, you have to know the law.  Just because you are skilled at driving a car does not mean that you know the laws of the road and are safe driving on them.

Invest the money you’d spend on shaving a tenth of a second off your splits with Andrew Branca’s book or seminars — it’ll pay far greater dividends. Visit this link to learn more, and use the discount code “streetstandards” for a 10% discount.

Also, strongly consider shooting self-defense legal “insurance” plans.  They are NOT all the same.  I believe in the model and services of the Armed Citizens’ Legal Defense Network.  This link explains the different models of after-the-event legal aid.  Caveat emptor!

“Why I am Not a Gentlemen”

There’s this hour before bed when I’m done with TV and too tired to do anything intelligent, so I mostly surf.  Been reading a bunch of men’s style blogs and websites lately (none of your damn business, but short answer: I’d like to dress a little less like a schlub).  Turns out there are a number of them run by masculine men who carry concealed (and have tips on doing that stylishly).  This guy, Tanner Guzy, one of them, has a rant that will set you to cheering and put into words a few things that you probably already feel.  His description of real men vs. what we too often today call “gentlemen” is is apt to too many gun geeks as well.  Seven minutes:

What to say when you’re asked to teach a new shooter (or any shooter for that matter)

We’ve all seen it since the election: a flood of requests from our lefty, formerly gun-antagonistic acquaintances asking us to teach them to shoot.  While my first reaction had been, “Sure”, on the assumption that having them as shooters is better than not*, Marty Hayes suggested a better comeback to me last week: “I’d be happy to if you’re an NRA member”.

Because the only reason they even have the option of learning to shoot now is because of the NRA, and not the ACLU.

So that’s my answer from now on.

 

*For the record, I think their fear of government-sanctioned violence against them because of their beliefs or lifestyle is silly, but having a lefty as a shooter seems better than not having them as shooters.

Two great articles

Note the British spelling in the titles – both of these great articles come from countries where guns aren’t allowed, so people really have to pay attention to what’s bullshit and what’s not.

The Truth About Improvised Weapons For Self Defence

http://www.combativemind.com/2012/10/27/the-truth-about-improvised-weapons-for-self-defence/

This is what I’ve been saying for decades, and mirrors my “Why I Dislike Gimmick Weapons” post below.

Self-defence against knife attacks: a full review

http://www.urbanfitandfearless.com/2016/09/self-defence-against-knife-attacks.html?m=1

This is an exhaustive review and analysis of all the stuff that’s taught on this subject.  Empty-hands knife defense is the most difficult problem in all of martial arts/combatives.   This article will easily dispel the “My answer to a knife attack is my gun” line of thinking, or rather, not-thinking-the-problem-through.

Tip of the ol’ beret to John at Active Self Protection for turning me onto one of these.

If there’s enough light to ID the target there’s enough light to see the sights — not!

That old bromide is so demonstrably false that I am amazed that it’s still around…yet it is.  Like herpes we just can’t seem to eradicate it.

Way back when I was a new shooter I figured this out by getting behind my bed in my dark bedroom, and pointing my unloaded gun at the night-light (barely) illuminated hallway.  I could easily ID any person in that hall, but the light near me, or it’s lack thereof, wasn’t sufficient to see the sights.

Pretty damn easy experiment to try.  You’d think that anyone promoting the shibboleth above would’ve, too.

So if you want to hit precisely in true low light, you need either a white light or night sights.  Both are a good idea.

On the other hand, Tom Givens’ data indicates that lack of sufficient light to make a good shot simply wasn’t a factor in his students’ shootings.  So while most shootings do indeed, as we’ve all be taught, take place in low light after sun down, the data (for civilian self-defense shootings) suggest that insufficient light to either ID your target or see the sights sufficiently well simply isn’t an issue.  Good to know!

There’s an old thread over at pistol-training that is full of gold on this subject, and I refer you there for wisdom.

For my part, I’ll just leave you with the thought: Why are so many demonstrably false things and bad tactics still being taught?