The Firing Line Forums
Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > S.W.A.T. Magazine

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old October 25, 2004, 11:24 PM   #1
Tamara
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: March 11, 2000
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 15,930
I can't believe I'm doing this, but...

...I'm going to publically disagree with *gulp* Pat Rogers.

Pat brought up a point in an article in the 12/04 issue of SWAT that set off something that's been a slow-simmer issue with me for a year or two now.

It started with the "no-snag" sights that are de rigeur on custom 1911's for several years now, all the various versions of Heinies and Novaks and whatnot. Why are all these sights backwards? They're all aerodynamic from the wrong end, and I couldn't figure that out until a friend who'd just returned from an advanced Pistol Skul commented on how the standard sights on his older Springer tore hell out of his hand when they were doing clearance drills on FTE's. Over and over and over and over again. Well, that's fantastic: Novaks will definitely keep you from drawing blood on your fifteenth stovepipe clearance drill, but they're worse than useless if you need to rack the slide of your sidearm on your belt because your non-dominant hand is full of screaming kid or has a big ol' bullet hole in it. "No-snag" sights are, therefore, great for Gun Camp, but lose some functionality in the Real World.

What brought this to the surface was that, in the December article on the Hilton Yam custom 1911's, Pat was teeing off on checkering on a 1911 frontstrap, pooh-poohing it as a cosmetic froofraw that would chew your hand to bloody rags in a high-round-count course at Gunsite or Thunder Ranch. No doubt it will, but I don't like 20-lpi checkering for the way it looks or for how comfy it is in my hand at gun camp, I like it for the way it locks my pistol into my hand if I have to draw it under panic-sweat-less-than-optimum conditions. Should I wind up going to gun skul, I'll bring a couple of non-checkered 1911's to help keep my hand from getting ripped to shreds while shooting a couple of cases of ammo in three days, but should I need to draw down in an alley, I'll take the gun that won't shift in my grip without tearing skin loose, thanks. I've no doubt it would hurt after a several day school, but it's quite tolerable in my nightly presentation drills and weekly courses of fire, and I sincerely believe it would be preferable should I ever have to (Vishnu forbid) use the gun for real.

All this being said: If it's my money paying for checkering, looks are secondary. What I prefer is really coarse and sharp 20lpi stuff that will definitely abrade the skin off your hand (especially if you have no shooting callous) over a long day's course of fire. Next would be skateboard tape or various types of scalloping or stippling. Last would be 30lpi checkering, which I find to be more cosmetic than anything else.


Disclaimer: This is just some chick's opinion. I have never slain tangos or gone through the door or anything like that, so I might well be talking completely out my arse. I await discussion on these points.
__________________
MOLON LABE!
2% Unobtainium, 98% Hypetanium.
The Arms Room: An Online Museum.
Tamara is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 25, 2004, 11:49 PM   #2
tc300mag1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 17, 2004
Posts: 117
Wow someone speaks out on this trend ... I appluade (sp bad spelling tonight for sure ) you on this and i agree while i wouldnt want rough checkering and such for a class.

But i sure would on a carry gun for grip retention and as said on the sights a way to cock the gun is one had is wiped out .. Course i also havnt been jumping though windows shooting it out in detroit etc etc

But i agree with ya As this makes more sense to me..
tc300mag1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 26, 2004, 01:15 AM   #3
Tim L
Junior Member
 
Join Date: October 26, 2004
Posts: 1
Tamara,

There are options for cycling the slide one handed on a belt or other surface in the event of an emergency. Some advocate hooking the rear sight on the belt, heel, or other hard surface as you describe. Another method is to simply use the front sight blade to accomplish the same task. The most universal method is to simply use an edge of the ejection port.

As for checkering, that is the beauty of the 1911: everyone can have it their way. I am currently using a 20lpi checkered pistol on duty while my regular duty gun, with front and backstrap scallops, is having a Dawson rail installed. I find no functional difference in traction between the two textures, and the scallops are indeed easier on the hand. (Both were built by Hilton Yam, have endured high round counts, and are utterly reliable.)

Respectfully,

Tim
Tim L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 26, 2004, 09:07 AM   #4
Pat Rogers
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 31, 2001
Posts: 303
Hi Tamara,
Disagree- it's a good thing.

I'll stand my ground on my opinions- else why have them.
While i agree that you can get by with sharp edges for short periods, how do we get the skill set necessary to save your life. An option would be a near mirror image gun. sans checkering- but expensive.
Again- based on seeing hundreds of shooters with moleskin, riggers tape, gloves and so forth on their paws, and observing that learning and pain are mutually exclusive, i'll consider checkering not something that i could vere recommend.
I do like the Chuck Rogers golf balls, as they don't abrade as much and therefore provide the gripping surface that some feel is necessary.

As for one hand cycling- Tim hit the nail on the head. We use the ejection port for this if necessary, but applying pressure against any sight will allow you to cycle the slide.
I know of some who mod their Novak's to make a more vertical surface and allegedly make this possible, but scores of Marines (and others) are doing it- and have been doing it, for a long time. There is no problem in the real real world. We do it all the time.
In short, this is a non issue.

I've been carrying a gun for almost all of my life. I'll mirror Hilton when he states that he has become sensitive to carry issues. Sights, hammers and checkering all work on clothing and skin. If your favorite blaster chews through the lining of your Sunday go to school jacket- how long will you actually carry thay piece?

We are all slaves to our frame of reference, and mine may be different than yours, and that may be different from Tim's and so forth.
What is good for you may flat be terrible for someone else.
I don't like checkering- but Tim does. Is either of us more (or less) correct?

Get the best possible equipment that you can. Then seek the best training available.
And when you are finished, train some more.
__________________
S/F

Pat sends
www.eagtactical.com

Last edited by Pat Rogers; October 26, 2004 at 10:08 AM.
Pat Rogers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 26, 2004, 10:27 AM   #5
Denny Hansen
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2001
Location: Prescott Valley, AZ
Posts: 2,361
My primary pistol has seen so many presentations that the sides of the slide and the frontstrap look as though they have nickel plating. Still don't have a problem getting a good grip. IMO the stocks are what need the texturing, not the frontstrap. Never could understand those beautiful, highly polished stocks on a carry gun.

I use the ejection port, not the sights to clear a malfunction. As a side note, I was admonished in one class to not use the port. The instructor explained that "most folks will still have their finger in the trigger guard and will shoot themselves if they clear using the ejection port." Riiiiiight!

Just .02 from a high-drag, low-speed kind of guy.

Denny
__________________
S.W.A.T. Magazine
Weapons, Training and Tactics for the Real World
Join us at TFL or at AR15.com or on Facebook
Denny Hansen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 26, 2004, 06:57 PM   #6
Jeff Gonzales
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 9, 2004
Location: Prescott, AZ
Posts: 126
Good points

Pat, I love you like the angry Irish step father I never had, but I dislike the snag free sights for the reasons explained regarding strong/weak hand only manipulations. While I know that folks can do it, it is my experience that they don't seem to do it consistently. I look at gear that enhances combat efficiency and not reduces it. If I can make the snag free sights snag on everything possible while maintaining the same attributes of a good sight then it is a win/win.

We have worked with Novak sights to produce our version of a snag sight, it is made from the Low Mount sight where the top is cut back and under up to the tritium vials. It provides an excellent surface to grip just about any surface space available.

I am not about to dispute the ability of the Marines to manipulate the handguns with the snag free sights, but I will contest that in their case concealability is less of an issue than combat effectiveness. That being the case, I would request how well they can do the clearance techniques on the move.

Here is the reason why I ask. Our Strong Hand Only program came from me and a few other having to create a program for team mates who were injured in training accidents and lost extremities. Together we learned more about Strong Hand Only shooting. It was then that I created the program we have currently. In the process these guys wouldn't settle for anything less than realistic techniques. Our barometer for success was can we consistently do the techniques while on the move. Our rational for this concept was we were already injured any technique that grounds or limits mobility is immediately discarded. Once injured the best weapon available is the ability to move. We were able to really see what works and what seems to work. When working with snag free sights it was agreed they were not sufficient for their usage. So, if the argument centered around using them in a strong/weak hand only format they really performed poorly.

To summarize, our thinking is can we consistently do the technique and then can we consistently do the technique while on the move. I am sure that folks can replicate the technique on a square range, but have them move and try to fix it. I think anything that can enhance the effectiveness is worth pursuing. The cut-back sights definitely do it and I have been carrying mine for over a year concealed and haven’t had any problems regarding the shreding of my garments.

The only issue that has not been addressed is the damaged caused during training. Like Pat, I have seen lots of folks bandaged up during class. This is a real issue, but the wounds obtained in training heal and while that is not much consolation I think it is better than the alternative.

V/R,
__________________
Jeff Gonzales
Director of Training
Trident Concepts, LLC.
Jeff Gonzales is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 27, 2004, 08:26 AM   #7
Pat Rogers
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 31, 2001
Posts: 303
Angry??? Intense maybe..
We have been running malfuncion drills on the move for a long time. Like you and others the understanding of the dynamic of fighting dictate the drills necessary to provide the skill sets to win the fight.

We run the pistol off the arm hole of the vest. It had been sufficiently consistent with out shooters.
As a side note, they were the ones who requested the Novak sights over the PWS made one.

When we looked at the time available for the shooting, and what skills were actually required, we had to look hard at the circumstances that would require (for example) a weak hand only Type 3 clearence.
Those circumstances would require a lot of stars to be out of alignment for that to occur. While teaching both weak and strong hand malfunction drills with the pistol are taught, there are other skill sets that require more attention.
On the non mil side, i would venture that 90% of those on any forum are in the debit side when it comes to basic gun handling, and certainly fighting. This can translate to any classes taught, and while there are exceptions, 3-5 days on a range does not a gunfighter make.
The fact that once one leaves a class the sustainment training necessary to slow the degradation of skills starts down the slippery slope.
Consequently those strong/ weak hand drills, especially related to malfunctions also fall by the wayside.

If one sight works better for someone, i am all for it.

I still don't like checkering. I have never found that useful, and only aggravating when someone cannot perform due to pain.

But hey, wadda' i know?
__________________
S/F

Pat sends
www.eagtactical.com
Pat Rogers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 27, 2004, 08:42 AM   #8
Jeff Gonzales
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 9, 2004
Location: Prescott, AZ
Posts: 126
Intense

Pat,

Intensity is a better word, but it doesn't allow me to make a cool acronym...AISF

The vest hole is a great idea and I am confident there would be no problems working through any problems with a solid and ambidextrous location.

I really like the Novak sights and am glad they went with them. The sights were nothing more than me dissappointed with the inconsistency we got with them, which is why we cut them back. Since then I have felt like I got to have my cake and eat it too.

Checkering is one of those things that I haven't taken sides with yet. There are days when I am grateful for them and then there are days when I am cursing them. The good news is now there are options for folks to choose from that can hopefully meet everyone's personality.

As for your last comment, more than me...

Later,
__________________
Jeff Gonzales
Director of Training
Trident Concepts, LLC.
Jeff Gonzales is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 27, 2004, 03:46 PM   #9
OBIWAN
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 16, 1999
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,340
Wow....you guys could give lessons on internet civility...(I mean that)

There will be no living with Tamara now!.... (that was a joke!)

I don't feel qualified to comment except to say that I am really fond of the scallops on my STI guns...very secure and not abusive/abrasive...

Similar to the Golf Balls Pat mentioned..I believe
OBIWAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 27, 2004, 10:14 PM   #10
Tamara
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: March 11, 2000
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 15,930
Pat Rogers,

Quote:
An option would be a near mirror image gun. sans checkering- but expensive.
Granted, I'm probably coming at this from the standpoint of an "embarrassment of riches." I have enough 1911's that I can leave a couple of them with un-checkered/-textured frontstraps so that I have guns on call for high round-count intensive shooting courses. Still and all, the point I'm questioning is this: Is it efficient to have your gun set up to avoid pain in super-high-round-count training courses, even if it doesn't cause hand trauma in daily training/matches/local one day workshops? What if the modifications made to accommodate the special conditions of Gunsite 250 make the sidearm less efficient for the shooter in question should they have to use it in Dark Parking Lot 101? Understand that I'm not trying to make definitive statements, but just tossing out musings...

On the sights issue...

I've tinkered with using the front sight and the ejection port, as well as using alternate striking surfaces for cocking. It's probably more a condemnation of my level of physical coordination than it is of the techniques, but the rear sight (on a gun so set up; read: "Trijicons") worked against the mouth of a rigid holster seems to me to be the way for me, personally, to go. Being Suzy Civilian, I can't always use the "arm hole of the vest" since I may not be wearing a vest, or one with an armhole rigid enough to use for cocking, but I'll always have A) My holster, or B) A boot heel. (Ideally, I'd use "C) The nearest doorframe, table edge, or corner" since I relocated the dang FLGR to "D) The trash can." )

Anyhow, thanks for more to think about. I'll give the ejection port technique another whirl, as mastering that would probably be cheaper than milling the rears on all my guns that have aerodynamic sights. Any pointers on orienting the gun or where on the belt to pop the ejection port that can be described without pictures? Or do I need to find out your training schedule? (Please don't throw me in that briar patch. )
__________________
MOLON LABE!
2% Unobtainium, 98% Hypetanium.
The Arms Room: An Online Museum.
Tamara is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 28, 2004, 09:54 AM   #11
KSFreeman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 9, 2001
Location: Lafayette, Indiana--American-occupied America
Posts: 5,416
Never had a problem, but then for fun I beat up sand bags, chunks of wood and have people beat on my arms and legs. (Sand bag conditioning are the only fights I can win--no hitting back! ) Makes sense to me that as with any "art" physical conditioning must be an element of the overall picture.

Tam, why does it have to be the belt? The thigh and the ribs work and I have swoopy sights, even works in the buff.
__________________
"Arguments of policy must give way to a constitutional command." Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573, 602 (1980).
KSFreeman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 31, 2004, 04:37 PM   #12
Pat Rogers
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 31, 2001
Posts: 303
Obiwan,
Civility is reserved for those who deserve it. Generally speaking, my pesonality is blunt (how's that Jeff?), and patience is something in the ether along with wave propogation.
However, Jeff is a friend, and i respect his talent and ability, so why bother rolling around on the floor with a buddy over TTP's?
The disinformation cowpath is full of bump fire bozo's and gunshop professors (which is why i seldom post...) who can wail and cast their limpid eyes skyward while fantasizing about airsoft babes and computer games.
I have a life (which is kinda' busy right now) so civility is easy- in this case.

Tamara,
Finger straight! Try rotating the pistol inward (that is, so the top of the gun) is toward your body. Angle the muzzle slightly away (finger straight) and attempt to catch the rear of the ejection port against the desired target. You body type, wardrobe etc will all be a determining factor on how this works.

You apparently shoot, so TTP like this will benefit you. Others who struggle to perform a reload and get a decisive hit will probably be frustrated.
More frustrated if they are airsoft bubba's.
__________________
S/F

Pat sends
www.eagtactical.com
Pat Rogers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 5, 2004, 03:54 PM   #13
IamNOTaNUT
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 6, 2000
Location: Michigan
Posts: 477
I'll throw one other situation out there, no disrespect intended to our learned colleagues.

Some of us carry a firearm on duty that will not allow the use of the ejection port for a clearance drill. To keep as much of the training transferrable to the 1911 platrorm as possible, I use my sights for one handed drills for whatever semi-auto I may go armed with.

BTW, I've never played with an airsoft.
__________________
IamNOTaNUT

I didn't do it, but I thought about it. Next time I might.

NRA
IamNOTaNUT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 7, 2004, 08:39 AM   #14
trapshooter
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2002
Location: Missouri
Posts: 902
Just for the heck of it...

When I decided to 'build' a 1911, I couldn't decide if I wanted the checkering or not. During one of my design sessions with a Brownells catalog, I discovered the 'fake' checkering thing that (IIRC) Wilson Combat makes. Basically, a very thin metal strap, checkered, that you can put on under the grips that emulates a checkered FS. A way to try it without the expense of doing it to the gun, and is reversible, if you decide that you don't like it.

This is not something I would advocate for a (semi-)permanent installation, as it could be easily damaged by real-world use, but it did save me a bunch of money and a frame, in the end. If you find you like the checkering, then you spend the money. If not, the thing comes off and you are back to the original in the same amount of time it takes to change the grips.

I guess you could put it on for range work, and take it off for carry, but this doesn't seem to make a bunch of sense to me. TEHO.

Checked the records and found this in my Brownells file:

Stock # - 965-100-001, #100B Checkered Front Strap, Blue. $8.95.

I just went to Brownells. Yep, Wilson Combat, and they still offer it in Blue or SS. Now it's $9.95. Inflation, I guess. Still a throw-away.

Last edited by trapshooter; November 7, 2004 at 08:54 AM. Reason: add info
trapshooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 2, 2004, 09:36 PM   #15
CAGoatee
Member
 
Join Date: November 30, 2004
Location: "Kah-leefornia"
Posts: 64
Wow Tamara, You Know Your...umm, 'Stuff' (REVISED)

Quote:
...I'm going to publically disagree with *gulp* Pat Rogers.

Pat brought up a point in an article in the 12/04 issue of SWAT that set off something that's been a slow-simmer issue with me for a year or two now.

It started with the "no-snag" sights that are de rigeur on custom 1911's for several years now, all the various versions of Heinies and Novaks and whatnot. Why are all these sights backwards?
Kudos Tamara! Not to knock an acknowledged, and respected, expert's opinion at all... But regarding the shape of the front of a combat pistol's rear sight, you raise a very valid question.

As Tamara pointed out, if the front side of that rear blade is flat; or has some sort of feature that is blunt enough to easily snag something (there are brands of excellent after-market sights that are designed this way), then you can at least try to catch it on your belt and/or the corner/edge of one of your pants pockets for example; or some other nearby object, and rack the slide. It may work, and it may not - at that moment - but at least you have that option available to you.

Tim L mentioned some alternate techniques: (1) Use the edge of the ejection port. Yes, that is a good idea, but not all ejection ports have square, notched, and/or very snagible (sp?) edges. (2) Using your front sight. Another valid suggestion; especially if you are hunkered down, but try doing that while moving, shooting and scooting, or running for cover (in a real-life stress situation)? Much more difficult!

Jeff Gonsales, another acknowledged expert, also weighed in to support Tamara's line of questioning/thought as well.

I noticed in one of Pat Roger's rebuttals, that he said something along the lines that, the techniques he's describing do not apply to over 90% of the people who read this stuff, and he's right! Alhough, I'd take that one step further by stating, that the hook your sloped and rounded rear sight on the armhole of an external ballistic vest technique, also does NOT apply to the vast majority of uniformed LEO's in the U.S., who wear their vests underneath their uniforms.

If LAPD/LAPD SWAT (or anyone else) likes their sloped rear-sighted Kimbers; and can consistently rack that piece one-handed under stress, then all power/blessings to them. However, their rival, the mean, lean, Tan & Green Machine, aka: the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department, (LASD), wants nothing to do with such gun sights. And neither do their special weapons and tactics team (S.E.B.), nor their undercover units, Detective Bureau, Patrol, nor any other of the various units in that agency (as per departmental policy).

I like options, and reducing one of them, by installing slippery slope rear sights; when there are other excellent sights available that will get the job done, just doesn't seem like a very good idea. However, catching a nice chunky rear sight, with nice rounded non-gotcha-during-training-corners, is way easier/faster; as trapshooter pointed out, than trying to snag an ejection port, for example. I am not knocking the later procedure, or Tim L either, (as it is another valid technique to put in your tool box).

As all of us are quite aware, it is extremely important that we continue to think ahead, and play 'what if games'; before the shtf, and give ourselves as many options as practical. I am very grateful for this forum (new member), and have forgotten many things over the years. I personally appreciated the valuable dialogue that this topic generated!

Parting Thought: Most of us are cognizant of the fact, that the original Colt automatic pistols (M1911 & 1911A1) were designed specifically for the military, and were G.I. with flat bladed rear sights. It's not mere coincidence, that many of today's modern pistols; that are also designed for military and/or law enforcement, also come with similar rear sights too (excluding Kimber, and/or other manufacturers like them, who are trying to garner a larger market share of the Colt 1911 clone market).

Happy Holidays to all, and stay safe!


PS: If it were not for the so-called, "bump fire bozo's et al", or other armchair wannabe warriors, then I would dare say, that the publishers of "S.W.A.T. Magazine", would not be generating the sales that they currently, or previously enjoyed! And what in heaven's name, has an article like, "The Cane vs. The Knife: Simple Walking Stick or Serious Sell-Defense (sic)?", got to do with any U.S. law enforcement agency's authorized SWAT team tactics??? Or have things changed that much in the last 3 years since I retired?

Deputy Donald B., LASD (Retired)
__________________
"To win 100 victories in 100 battles is not the highest skill, but to defeat the enemy without fighting, that is the highest skill". (Asian Martial Arts Proverb)

"Those who ignore history, are doomed to repeat it." (Anon.)

Last edited by CAGoatee; December 5, 2004 at 08:09 PM. Reason: Clarification
CAGoatee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 3, 2004, 12:00 PM   #16
SA Scott
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 11, 2000
Location: DFW, Texas, USA
Posts: 322
I feel out of my depth posting in this company, but here goes. I have Trijicon sights on my primary carry pistol. I find that this resolves both poles of the discussion. The sights have never snagged during presentation/manipulation, but give the flexibility of one-handed clearance as a gross motor function. In addition, I get a good sight picture. I don't like the way they look, lacking the "cool" appearance which I really do appreciate in Novak/Heinie, etc. But I'm comforted by their functionality and continue to resist the urge to change them.

As a counterpoint, I've sought out alternatives to traditional front strap checkering, from grip tape to rubber to less aggressive stippling. We are fortunate in having the luxury of discussing alternatives which meet our individual needs.

SA Scott
SA Scott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 3, 2004, 12:52 PM   #17
PaleRyder
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 16, 2004
Posts: 149
Hello folks. I have a question [excuse my ignorance]:
In a danger situation, if you're carrying a 1911, why isn't it cocked and locked, rather than having to rack it one handed?
PaleRyder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 3, 2004, 12:56 PM   #18
Rosco Benson
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 20, 1998
Posts: 374
Pat alluded to this earlier, in noting that one could have
two pistols...identical except one being checkered...to
permit one to have a checkered carry gun and a smooth
"school" pistol. This is a good plan, in that it provides one
an excuse to buy another pistol . Seriously though, the
degree to which one's hands suffer from checkering is
different when firing, say, 1500 rounds over 5 days versus
firing 100 once a week in skill-maintenance drills. Both are
different than a less-than-a-full-magazine usage to save
one's life on the street.

IMO, checkering offers some advantages in the last two
scenarios, related to offering a secure grip. It becomes a
nuisance only when shooting a high round round over a
short time, as in attending a shooting school. Perhaps this
is a case wherein the notion of (very slightly) different tools
for different jobs applies.

I think any experienced practical pistol shooter would agree
that--checkered or not--the pistol needs to be well-dehorned
and devoid of sharp sight blades, pointy safety levers, and other
edges that cut and abrade hands, holsters, and clothing. There
are also other forms of texturing that can be applied to the pistol's
butt--stippling, serrations, "scallops", even skateboard tape--that
vary in their degree of abrasiveness.

Lastly, bear in mind that a textured frontstrap can be covered with
rubber wrap-around stocks if a marathon shooting session is
anticipated.
Rosco Benson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 3, 2004, 12:59 PM   #19
pax
Staff
 
Join Date: May 16, 2000
Location: Washington state
Posts: 6,904
PaleRyder ~

They're talking about worst case scenarios: you got shot or otherwise injured one hand, and you had a jam or simply needed to reload.

pax
__________________
Kathy Jackson
My personal website: Cornered Cat
pax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 3, 2004, 01:00 PM   #20
Denny Hansen
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2001
Location: Prescott Valley, AZ
Posts: 2,361
PaleRyder-
You're correct that a 1911 should start off in Condition One. This thread is discussing how to perform malfunction drills with one hand if things go South.

Denny
__________________
S.W.A.T. Magazine
Weapons, Training and Tactics for the Real World
Join us at TFL or at AR15.com or on Facebook
Denny Hansen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 3, 2004, 01:25 PM   #21
PaleRyder
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 16, 2004
Posts: 149
Thanks for clarifying. All I had to do was think about it for a second and realize of course that would be what was being discussed.
PaleRyder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 4, 2004, 09:01 AM   #22
trapshooter
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2002
Location: Missouri
Posts: 902
It doesn't look like there is any disagreement about being able to do one-handed racks. And normally the easiest way to do that is by using the rear sight. Seems like the folks who make and sell sights could come up with a rear sight design that is 'smooth', but accomodates this ability. Maybe not. I'm not a design guy, after all. And it's a sure thing that somebody wouldn't like it.

On the other hand, real world, if I thought I might get into a gunfight and I didn't/couldn't have a rifle, I think I'd just be ready to do a New York reload with a wheelie or something. Which is one advantage of that design in this respect. (One-handed operation, that is). But this plan requires twofers with a wheel gun BUG, which isn't always an option. One still needs to practice and train for all eventualities. Unfortunately, Murphy will almost always tap us on the shoulder at the most inappropriate time.

Edited to add:

That got me thinking about what I did on the street way back when. I had a Model 15 duty gun and a Lightweight Commander BUG. Applying my own logic, that should have been reversed. But you do what your agency tells you to. Besides, I would have had to run out of ammo for the 15 (under most scenarios) before resorting to the Commander. And that (running out of ammo) was a low-probability at the time, because my particular situation made extended fights unlikely, and I carried way more full speedloaders that I thought I might need.
trapshooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 5, 2004, 07:46 PM   #23
CAGoatee
Member
 
Join Date: November 30, 2004
Location: "Kah-leefornia"
Posts: 64
"Bump Fire Bozos"

If it were not for the so-called, "bump fire bozo's et al", or other armchair wannabe warriors, then I would dare say, that the publishers of "S.W.A.T. Magazine", would not be generating the sales that they currently, or previously enjoyed! And what in heaven's name, has an article like, "The Cane vs. The Knife: Simple Walking Stick or Serious Sell-Defense (sic)?", got to do with any U.S. law enforcement agency's authorized SWAT team tactics??? Or have things changed that much in the last 3 years since I retired?

Deputy Donald B., LASD (Retired)
__________________
"To win 100 victories in 100 battles is not the highest skill, but to defeat the enemy without fighting, that is the highest skill". (Asian Martial Arts Proverb)

"Those who ignore history, are doomed to repeat it." (Anon.)

Last edited by CAGoatee; December 6, 2004 at 02:38 PM. Reason: Clarification
CAGoatee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 6, 2004, 11:26 AM   #24
Rich Lucibella
Staff
 
Join Date: October 6, 1998
Location: South Florida
Posts: 10,162
Cag-
Interesting insight, there. I'm not certain how to categorize it....but it is "interesting".


I'm certain we have our share of "armchair warriors" and retired types. But I think the content of SWAT, being geared toward Training and Tactics, tends not to be attractive to the Whiz-Bang-New-FireStick-From-Hell crowd.

As to the Cane vs the Knife: I commissioned that one. I carry a cane in venues where I can't carry a gun....highly effective, go-anywhere weapon. Similarly, I'm the one who developed the direction for SWAT. It's evident in our Mission Statement:
Quote:
To promote the responsible use of defensive weapons, tactics and training; to encourage law enforcement and civilian firearms owners to recognize and exploit issues of common ground in our mutual effort to preserve a free and safe society.
Obviously, had I chosen to word that as "U.S. law enforcement agency's authorized SWAT team tactics", we'd be producing a different magazine. Me, I'm proud to be associated with a "serious shooter's" magazine, rather than the "serious shooters who happen to wear badges" variety.

Best regards-
Rich
__________________
S.W.A.T. Magazine
Weapons, Training and Tactics for the Real World
Join us at TFL or at AR15.com or on Facebook
Rich Lucibella is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 6, 2004, 12:30 PM   #25
Handy
Junior member
 
Join Date: August 31, 2001
Posts: 8,785
Seems like the crux of this argument is contained in Tamara's statement:
Quote:
It's probably more a condemnation of my level of physical coordination than it is of the techniques,
Why limit you're available avenues to perform a clearance drill when the whole idea behind a one handed drill is that you are already physically handicapped?

Pat said the ejection port method would be unusable by 90% of shooters. If only 10% can do it when they're healthy, how many can perform the task while starting to go into shock, or just shaking with adrenaline and fatigue?


If this one handed clearance stuff is actually valuable (how often should a decent combat gun ever jam?), then the drill should be performable by someone NOT at the top of his game. Because someone working with one arm, in a gunfight, probably isn't at the top of theirs.



As an aside, it is always amusing to see how much training infrastructure has evolved to service JUST 1911s. As someone pointed out, the ejection port trick isn't going to work on many guns, including most anything with a modified Browning lockup. And you are only able to use that front sight because no one has yet made an effort to 'Novak' it to match the rear. I was talking to a gent that was having problems in a class locking open his gun to perform a particular clearance drill. Nevermind the fact that gun couldn't jam in the manner the drill taught - so he had to train for the circumstances and methods of a 1911 malf, even though he wasn't going to be using one.
Handy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Page generated in 0.14426 seconds with 7 queries