Defensive Weapons - Fully Loaded?

[user]

There's a pet movie peeve of mine. Someone in the scene has a gun and starts giving orders, as if the gun were a magic talisman that authorizes the holder to be obeyed without question. The bad guy becomes like a dog that suddenly realizes that the other dog is the dominant male, and rolls over on his back in submission. And in the movies, it works.

Here's another: the idea that pulling the slide on a semiautomatic pistol to chamber a round, cocking the hammer on a revolver, and cycling a pump-action shotgun all make noises that are supposed to intimidate a bad guy so he'll stop doing bad stuff, give up and go away. Especially in conjunction with a laser-generated red dot on his chest.

What people don't seem to get is that the defensive use of weapons is supposed to be purely defensive. The purpose of such weapons is not to intimidate or make bad guys submissive. They're only to be used in an emergency, i.e., the present and serious threat of imminent danger to life and limb.

The difference between me and law enforcement officers is that they not only have defensive needs, they have offensive needs. They have to be able to stop crimes in progress, execute search warrants, and stuff like that. They have to try to make people who are doing bad things become compliant. They're not supposed to use deadly force in such situations, but have to be able to demonstrate a clear and present willingness to do so if the need arises. They have an intimidation requirement that I don't have.

So questions like "do you carry a round in the chamber and is your gun always cocked?" kind of throw me. I'm not going to pull the thing out unless there's a "present and serious threat of imminent danger to life and limb." That's an absolute last resort! And if I'm in that situation, I want to be able to pull the trigger and have the gun go "bang!".

I have no intimidation requirement, and I can't assume that the bad guy will go into submission mode; I have to assume that as soon as he sees that I've got a gun, he'll try to shoot me. I'm not going to put a dot on his chest and say, "drop the weapon!"; that's a sure way to get myself and those I'm trying to protect dead in a hurry. Instead, I'm going to put a dot on his head and pull the trigger as quickly and accurately as I can, then repeat the process as required or until I'm satisfied the threat is removed.

And when I have a stroke, or develop a sleep disorder, or some other problem that makes me less than reliable and responsible with a loaded weapon, then I'm going to take steps to make sure the gun is "safe" and get me a big dog. I hope the dog will provide sufficient distraction to give me time to make the gun "not safe". When that happens, I'll be living in a place that has about thirty humans per square mile.

But in the meanwhile, whatever gun I have with me has a cartridge in the chamber and no "safety". (And all the others are securely locked up.)

[Roadkill]

My wife has a business - small cafe / bakery - we have a loaded .38 revolver in the store room and whatever I'm carrying is loaded. Always. And I won't give a warning shot or shout "freeze" either. Some times it sucks to be the bad guy.

[Pistolenschutze]

I must entirely agree with you, user. If the situation one is faced with is sufficiently dangerous to draw a weapon in the first place, it is sufficiently dangerous to use it if an actual need arises. Anyone who does not have the mindset to USE the weapon if necessary, should not be carrying one or have one available for home defense. What the hell, you can always call the police if intimidation doesn't work . . . they'll certainly get there just in time to call the coroner to preside over your remains.

[pickenup]

Defense firearms are ALWAYS condition one. Ready to fire. I have argued the intimidation factor with pumping a shotgun, with a few people. They just don't seem to get it.

[Vladimir]

Maybe I'm tainted because my dad is a LEO but...

They're not supposed to use deadly force in such situations, but have to be able to demonstrate a clear and present willingness to do so if the need arises. They have an intimidation requirement that I don't have.

I think we have the same need to "demonstrate a clear and present willingness" to protect people. If I can use my weapon to intimidate a perp before I have to shoot him, great. If that puts me in a greater chance of being forced to use my weapon, that's fine, because unless someone can prove otherwise criminals are whimps. Most criminals day-to-day aren't armed, out of those who are many wouldn't be willing to actually used them. I just read a story on here from a poster in Ecuador who pulled on a robbery in the doctors office. He probably could have given it more time, gotten great clean, and covered shots at the perps, waiting for them to pose a more significant IMMEDIATE threat.

Instead he pulled, they ran off dropping the knife and gun (which turned out to be a fake). If he had waited for them to make a more certain threat, appear like they are about to execute someone, it could have been different. Instead he opted to give them an easy way out right away, they take a hostage he pulls they are already in a defensive position and your one-upped.

I will carry to protect others, not myself. Okay, I'd probably try and get the other guy before he got me, but if putting myself into greater risk increases the chance of a "peaceful" resolution, so be it. That being said, I agree with you. I mean a gun is intimidating enough, I don't think safety switches and whatnot are necessarily unneeded, but if you carry a weapon for any reason other than to use it, you shouldn't be carrying.

I mean like I'm a big guy, so I'm more likely to have to carry in an un-conventional way. If I had a nice well-built IWB holster or such I'd probably feel very comfortable without an engaged safety. But I'm looking at frequent pocket carry, maybe the smart-carry pouch, maybe even in a backpack frequently, where I cannot be as confident that the weapon is safe without an engaged safety. Even with a safety I definitely wouldn't always have it engaged.

[Xaiver56]

I agree with everyone as well. When I carry, it is with a round in the chamber.

[Rommelvon]

My mossberg sits next to my bed fully loaded, my pistol also fully loaded and a nice german shepherd who hears every sound withing 3 blocks....yje way I see it...if a thug crosses the threshold to my home.....he will get lead poisoning and puncture wounds from my dawgs teeth

[southernshooter]

Guns are just hammers if they aren't loaded. Especially semi-autos a lot can go wrong if you try to chamber a round, If their is one in the pipe you know you atleast got one shot

[noslolo]

Vladimir has a good point, but I do have one that is ready to go, and I have a Boxer which lets me know when it is go time. Beyond that, she is a licking machine. Hopefully none of us will have to deal with this type of situation. As the G-man once stated "if it's not loaded, then it's just a very expensive club.

[cec]

I am also in the "cocked and locked" camp.

My pet peeve with guns in movies is cocking the hammer on a semi auto. A revolver I can understand, but a semi-auto? Other than making a noise, it is not needed. The only noise needed is "BOOOM" which will happen naturally.

[CampingJosh]

Originally Posted by cec

My pet peeve with guns in movies is cocking the hammer on a semi auto. A revolver I can understand, but a semi-auto? Other than making a noise, it is not needed. The only noise needed is "BOOOM" which will happen naturally.

When I carry (which isn't much.... I don't have a good gun for it yet), it's a DA/SA auto that I carry with one in the chamber and the hammer down. But when I pull it out, if I don't need it right away, I do cock that hammer back, because I am more accurate in SA (12 lb. pull reduced to 4).

I know this probably isn't the most common way of doing things, but it's not entirely ridiculous to include in a movie.