Carry without a round in a chamber = FAIL

[negolien]

My 2 cents is carry the way you want doesn't matter to me :<). I carry differant depending on the condition myself but it's what makes me comfy. What someone else thinks /shrug could give a rats butt lol especailly on some troll forum site. I can see both sides but some can't obviously not surprising here at calguns or any other forum to be honest.

[miles85916]

video

That video is a little disturbing.

[Spirit 1]

My 2 cents is carry the way you want doesn't matter to me :<). I carry differant depending on the condition myself but it's what makes me comfy. What someone else thinks /shrug could give a rats butt lol especailly on some troll forum site. I can see both sides but some can't obviously not surprising here at calguns or any other forum to be honest.

Ahhh, truly a breath of fresh air! Makes sense to me!

[tacticalcity]

Originally Posted by rogervzv
People who lose their cool under pressure to the extent that they cannot rack a slide to load a round are people who cannot be trusted to walk around with a round chambered.

My concern is less that I would loose my cool (provided I trained myself to do it) and fail to remember to chamber the round and more that there simply would not be time to do it. Not only do you have to remember to do it. You have to pause for a beat and think about what condition your weapon is in at the moment. That is critical time lost. Especially if you have years of muscle memory invested in reacting to your weapon having a round in the chamber. I have no doubt that if I spent the same amount of time training myself to pause fot that beat to remember what condition I am in, I would be able to remember to wrack the slide before pointing in and hearing a "click". But now my response time for both a full and empty chamber are drastically slowed down. Training myself to wrack the slide no matter what condition I am is not an option either. Since for reliability sake I don't top off my magazines (doing so is the leading cause of malfunctions) I simply cannot afford to donate a round to the ammo gods, especially in the middle of a firefight.

Think about the point at which you (the average Joe Citizen) would actually draw his weapon. You're not a cop (an assumption on my part for the sake of the argument). So if you draw our weapon and are wrong you could be in hot water. You are likely going to be a tad caught of guard. Here life was chugging along normally and now the situation has changed to the surreal. You are likely to be a little hesitant to believe what is happening is actually happening. Odds are unless you see "gun" you are not going to actually start to reach for your weapon, you are just going to observe. If you do see gun a mad rush of adrenaline and shock is going to hit you like a brick wall. If the bad guy does not see you, then you'll have time to wrack the slide. But since Murphy's law is alive and well, you're not gonna be that lucky. The bad buy will see you reach. Remember, he is already drawn. You get your gun clear of the leather/kydex...

1) If you had a round in the chamber you could point in and fire or fire from the hip if absolutely necessary. It is going to be a miracle if you get good hits before he can fire. And even if you do there is a damn good chance he will still be able to fire at you. Here is hoping you are better trained and he doesn't get a good sight picture

2) If you do not have a round in the chamber. You give the bad guy twice as much time to get a good hit. It is also a lot less stressful of shot because he is not yet staring down the barrel of your gun or seeing you actually fire. You are seriously stacking the odds in the bad guys favor.

Having seen countless drills of how quickly somebody can fire when they have no regard for who else gets hit, that is just not a chance I am willing to take. Having reached a point where my reactions are all muscle memory, I know that if I have to pause for a beat and ponder what condition my weapon is in, I will loose any benefit my years of training have given me. So for me the negatives far out way any positive I can gain from not having a round in the chamber.

Originally Posted by Spirit 1
OK, kiddies, for those who have requested & waited breathlessly for another scenario that justifies Con 3 carry, though I shouldn't have to 'justify' my personal decisions.

Well I appreciate the scenario, as it is the first I have seen that is not immediately countered by "get more training" or "buy a holster that meets your specific needs".

The first thought I had, is that loaded or not your hippie friends and relatives are still going to freak out and be judgemental and act wierd towards you. There simply is no getting around it. The anti's in my life certainly would not be appeased by it. So that kind of invalidates the scenerio right there. But for the sake of the argument lets give you that one and assume it would make them happy as can be to see it wasn't actually loaded and that made everyhing hunky-dory with them.

I will agree that a BBQ in your back yard is a bit different than walking around the worst parts of Oakland at 3am. So I can see how you would feel safer. Yes an incident could still occur, but the odds are more in your favor. The expectation of an incident goes down with all those people there in a nice area vs. being alone in the ghetto in the dark. I also, as I hinted at above, can understand how the pressure from non-gun owners, and some cases the wife, can cause us to compromise what we would prefer to do with regards to firearms.

A lot of other complicated issues that are involved would have me looking for another solution, however.

The biggest reason I have for not doing this (other than a firm belief that there will not be enough time to react if I did) is that it messes with muscle memory. Muscle memory that took a lot of time to aquire - and would take an enourmous amount of time and training to overide. My body is trained to draw and fire in a specific way. Beat for beat, number for number, it is instictual at this point. All the thought process is focused on confirming the threat, and verifying the target. The drawing of the weapon and the pointing in happens on its own. If have to stop and ponder? Hum, what condition is my gun in? Do I wrack or don't I? That all gets screwed up. It is just too risky in my opinion. I want the gun handling to be muscle memory so I can focus on making sure the threat is indeed real and the shot is clear. I want to simplify the things that can be simplified, so I can focus my attention and thought process on what cannot. Sure I could spend countless hours mastering how to both. But no matter how good I got, that time to think and remember what condition I am is going to be time lost. So the cons just seem too high to me. But that is me.

Another member pointed out that constantly switching between conditions of carry would increase the risk of NDs. I am not sure I agree. I wanted to at first, but the more I think about I think this falls back to how much training, practice, and confidence you have in your gun handling skills. I change the condition of my firearms constantly throughout the day with chamber-check, mag-check, chamber-check drills. I do it when I pick a gun up. I do it before I holster the gun. I do it when I remove the gun from the holster (unless I am firing). I do it when I put the gun away. I do when I want to clear the gun and show it to somebody or let them handle it. I do it constantly. I don't see how switching between conditions is any different. For me the issue is a combination of reaction time and messing with muscle memory that was very hard earned.

Surviving the fire fight is going to be challenging enough. I have no desire to make it even harder. So anything that messes with my muscle memory had damn well better have some dramatic upsides to it. For me, I just don't see 'em. I definately can see the cons, but not the pros are sort of iffy to me. Maybe someday I will find one and say to myself, darn that guy on Calguns was right? Who knows?

[Soldier415]

A few random comments regarding the discussion at hand:

There seems to be more than a bit of chest-puffery and pissing-match nonsense on the part of some. I would submit to you that if you really think condition-of-carry is some badge of manhood, tacticool-ness or awesomeness, then you've effectively disqualified yourself from being taken seriously. Please go play with your toys and let the adults have a conversation.

Stats & facts (which are not always the same thing) are stubborn things. There have been a lot of comments to the effect of "how do you know ...?", "what if ...?", etc. based upon the raw unsupported assumption that the absolute worst case is what will happen ... or at least that this is the case that one should prepared for, or risk otherwise incurring the "you aren't worthy" and "you're too paranoid to carry" wrath of their peers.

In this respect, I find it interesting to note that only some fraction of a percentage of us will ever find ourselves in a position where we need to defend ourselves. I've been there, so that statistic might ring a bit hollow personally, but the facts are what they are nonetheless.

Of the cases where a citizen uses a gun to defend themselves, they only fire the weapon in 1 out of 330 or so cases. That's 1 330th people, not even a 3rd or a 30th.

In 87% of the cases where LE are attacked and/or killed, they didn't even draw their sidearm.

I can demonstrate that the difference between C1 and C3 amounts to only hundredths of a second.

So it occurs to me that all of this dogmatic, almost religious insistence that C1 is THE way and the ONLY way (perhaps even the truth and the light) for everyone at all times (forever and ever amen) is really about splitting tiny little hairs regarding situations which are among the very most unlikely imaginable.

The evidence seems to indicate that mindset is a far, far greater determiner of survival than whether one can cock their head to the side and tell you "cocked-n-locked" with gravel in their voice and steely-eyed self-assurance of testicular fortitude they imagine such an attitude confers upon them. (I guess the C0 guy will get all the chicks though, huh?)

It brings into open question who is being paranoid and who is basing their opinions upon a calm rendering of reality. Past a certain point the whole thing begins to take on the tone of a SpinalTap-inspired farce, with amps "going up to 11" ... sheesh.

And seriously ... carry how you wish. Instruct your students however you wish. I'd never for a minute call into question your manhood over your decision in this regard. I'll do the same (which is usually, but not always C1) for whatever reasons seem good to me, confident that my training and mindset are sufficient to fill in the hundredths-of-a second advantage the rest of you imagine you have, thanks.

ZT,

I have seen that you have taken a lot of training courses, and are well versed/trained. My only question to you is, how many deadly force/life threatening encounters have you been in where you have had to use a firearm as a defensive tool?

[ZombieTactics]

... I have seen that you have taken a lot of training courses, and are well versed/trained. My only question to you is, how many deadly force/life threatening encounters have you been in where you have had to use a firearm as a defensive tool?

I don't wish to be squirrelly about your question, but I'll happily answer it if you'll answer a couple of mine first:

• Why does the question matter to you, or what do you think you can determine from the answer?
• If I answered that I am retired LE or military (and could verify it), what would you determine in either of those cases?

And I swear to you I will answer your question truthfully and completely if you'll answer mine first.

BTW ~ I love your sig line. It's very close to one of my favorites: "If your stance and grip are perfect, you're probably about to be shot ... MOVE!"

[Spirit 1]

Well I appreciate the scenario, as it is the first I have seen that is not immediately countered by "get more training" or "buy a holster that meets your specific needs".

The first thought I had, is that loaded or not your hippie friends and relatives are still going to freak out and be judgemental and act wierd towards you. There simply is no getting around it. The anti's in my life certainly would not be appeased by it. So that kind of invalidates the scenerio right there. But for the sake of the argument lets give you that one and assume it would make them happy as can be to see it wasn't actually loaded and that made everyhing hunky-dory with them.

I will agree that a BBQ in your back yard is a bit different than walking around the worst parts of Oakland at 3am. So I can see how you would feel safer. Yes an incident could still occur, but the odds are more in your favor. The expectation of an incident goes down with all those people there in a nice area vs. being alone in the ghetto in the dark. I also, as I hinted at above, can understand how the pressure from non-gun owners, and some cases the wife, can cause us to compromise what we would prefer to do with regards to firearms.

A lot of other complicated issues that are involved would have me looking for another solution, however.

The biggest reason I have for not doing this (other than a firm belief that there will not be enough time to react if I did) is that it messes with muscle memory. Muscle memory that took a lot of time to aquire - and would take an enourmous amount of time and training to overide. My body is trained to draw and fire in a specific way. Beat for beat, number for number, it is instictual at this point. All the thought process is focused on confirming the threat, and verifying the target. The drawing of the weapon and the pointing in happens on its own. If have to stop and ponder? Hum, what condition is my gun in? Do I wrack or don't I? That all gets screwed up. It is just too risky in my opinion. I want the gun handling to be muscle memory so I can focus on making sure the threat is indeed real and the shot is clear. I want to simplify the things that can be simplified, so I can focus my attention and thought process on what cannot. Sure I could spend countless hours mastering how to both. But no matter how good I got, that time to think and remember what condition I am is going to be time lost. So the cons just seem too high to me. But that is me.

Another member pointed out that constantly switching between conditions of carry would increase the risk of NDs. I am not sure I agree. I wanted to at first, but the more I think about I think this falls back to how much training, practice, and confidence you have in your gun handling skills. I change the condition of my firearms constantly throughout the day with chamber-check, mag-check, chamber-check drills. I do it when I pick a gun up. I do it before I holster the gun. I do it when I remove the gun from the holster (unless I am firing). I do it when I put the gun away. I do when I want to clear the gun and show it to somebody or let them handle it. I do it constantly. I don't see how switching between conditions is any different. For me the issue is a combination of reaction time and messing with muscle memory that was very hard earned.

Surviving the fire fight is going to be challenging enough. I have no desire to make it even harder. So anything that messes with my muscle memory had damn well better have some dramatic upsides to it. For me, I just don't see 'em. I definately can see the cons, but not the pros are sort of iffy to me. Maybe someday I will find one and say to myself, darn that guy on Calguns was right? Who knows?

You kiddin' me?? Hah, they all disowned me years ago, 'The nut'. But if somebody did scale a fence & come in blasting, I've got plenty of warm body empty skull cover to duck behind while I slam a mag & rack haha! About the only thing that a scenario like that would actually help is they might possibly NOT call the police to see if carrying a loaded gun was LEGAL???

On the Oakland comment, many years ago I had just finished an after hours job [the legal type!] on a bank and let myself out, walked over to a payphone [before cellphones!] to check in with a dispatcher. I'd gotten there just about 3:00 PM, broad daylight, now it was maybe 10 PM at night. Called in to my buddy in dispatch, check next assignment for the morning. "Okay, buddy, all's tidy here, what's next?"

NOTE: He was from that area! "Where are you, man?" and I named the city in the bay area. "Well ****, I know that, man, where ARE youse?" So I squinted up at the street signs and named the cross streets. He yelled, "HOLY ****, oh **** man, LOOK AROUND!! GET OUTTA THERE MAN!" and hung up! I did just that. Looked around and thought 'Holy ****!!!!' Day had turned to darkness of night, and 'They' were all there, all around, creeping, crawling, slithering, twitching, tweaking and moving my way, the night people! Snapped off the loop, slight tug and hand remained under my coat with tumb on safety as I made it for the truck, FAST! Yipes!!

Mistake: NEVER should have stepped out that door before reconnoitering the landscape & THREAT LEVEL!But it was so nice & peaceful in broad daylight when I had gone in....

I agree strongly with your scenario there about always carrying EXACTLY the same way, because of YOUR training/practice & continual drills! 'Muscle memory' if that is how you trained. Gotcha on the check, check, re-check to know condition too, yep! Me too.

In my particular case, and I have to be careful what/how I say, I have an unusual variety of experience and unusual habits myself, due to highly unusual 'Job descriptions' and training.

Because of that, a fluid state of change was the key to survival, and focusing on moment-by-moment Threat Levels continually was the only possibility of success and/or survival. Even another person's eye pupils suddenly dilating might be enough to tell you something's coming down, now! Almost like being in water and not forgetting you're swimming, even if you change strokes? Much like a soldier on the battlefield, he can grab a pistol, rifle, launcher, Gerber Combat or improvise & instantly be familiar with it, sorta like that. It's an impossible to describe, tactile NOW! state. When we're there, one is much more intimately absorbed in those things than somebody going about their normal daily business, trying to do the 'Ho-hum' thing and enjoy life as it ticks off.

So yes, training & experience dictates the best option for each of us, regardless of which is chosen.

For me the bottom line is that every one of us should study to know exactly how we're wired, what's best for US, learn to do it as well as possible, and do it!

Thanks...

[Justintoxicated]

Guy in the video didn't have a chance, but maybe he could have gotten in some dying revenge if he had one chambered, hard to say though, he was probably already in shock by the time he drew his gun.

[.40Cal]

Practice, practice, practice.... This is the bottom line, we all know & agree.

However, this incident happened in India, where every cartridge is accounted for by the police/law. One doesn't have the freedom to buy or shoot hundreds of rounds a month. Secondly, not too many shooting ranges/places available. Third, guns are very rarely owned by non-leo people...so, when someone has one he thinks he has the answer to control "any" situation. And everyone would fear him...just cuz he HAS A GUN! After all, he's the rare baddass who owns a gun. It may help their ego, and a status item to show off to friends/family. He may also believe that he "could" actually use it, if needed. The dumb part is he never realizes that he has no skills to use it...in "any" situation...

[Soldier415]

I don't wish to be squirrelly about your question, but I'll happily answer it if you'll answer a couple of mine first:

• Why does the question matter to you, or what do you think you can determine from the answer?
• If I answered that I am retired LE or military (and could verify it), what would you determine in either of those cases?

And I swear to you I will answer your question truthfully and completely if you'll answer mine first.

BTW ~ I love your sig line. It's very close to one of my favorites: "If your stance and grip are perfect, you're probably about to be shot ... MOVE!"

No worries, happy to answer.

Question 1. It is a question I routinely ask because even when you train and train and train, and have done everything to prepare yourself for that moment, everything is academic until you have had to perform and fight for your life. That's not to say that people who have not been in that encounter do not know their stuff, its just a matter of perspective.

You can understand in theory, and tick off the list of things that happen to your body in that encounter...but again, until you have experienced it first hand it is academic.

Case in point, me. I'm a SSG in a Sapper unit. I am well trained and a Small Arms Instructor at the Company and Battalion level. I did everything possible to prepare myself mentally, physically and emotionally prior to the latest deployment to Afghanistan as well as ensuring I was extremely technically and tactically proficient. I was as well prepared as I could be, but for me it was all academic and theory at that point as my reactions under fire had never been tested.

Well, over there it was tested and tested and I experienced firsthand what before had just been a learned understanding as far as what happens to your body in a deadly encounter and how your training can overcome it if you train as you fight.

I am fond of saying "In a deadly encounter you do not rise to the occasion, you fall to the lowest level of your training".

So to succintly answer the question, if someone has not been in a deadly force encounter it is hard for me to consider them to be speaking from a position of firsthand knowledge and authority when they are talking about what happens in a gun fight.

Question 2:
At face value neither of those would mean anything to me. You could be retired LE, but been a patrol officer in a sleepy town where nothing happens and never had to draw your firearm. Or, you could have been a SWAT team member or assigned to a dangerous area where you are in a fight multiple times per week. Its the details that matter.

As for military, same thing. At face value being retired Military doesnt mean anything to me. You could have sat behind a desk and never deployed your entire career, or you may have deployments but sat in a supply room or TOC on them. Or you could be a ranger/SF who has extensive experience in the fight with his dick in the dirt. Again, its the details that matter.

Being LE or Military does not automatically mean that they have some Jedi-like mastery of firearms that the rest of us can never be able to attain.


I hope that asnwers your two questions. I want to make the point that I am not trying to be a Richard Cranium, I genuinely wanted to know the answer to the initial question just to broaden my understanding of your postings.

[tacticalcity]

Guy in the video didn't have a chance, but maybe he could have gotten in some dying revenge if he had one chambered, hard to say though, he was probably already in shock by the time he drew his gun.

I don't know about that. There was a lot of time between his pointing in and hearing a soft "click", and getting to try and chamber a round only to hear it go "click" again before he got hit. And there was time after he got hit where he would still been able to continue the fight.

If his firearm were loaded and he had proper training he would have had an excellent chance of survival. He could have gotten a full magazine worth of well placed shots and finished a tactical or emergency reload all in the time it took them to make him fall to his knees, and he could of still continued fighting at the point. His two attackers took a lot of time to do their job.

It is not just that a guy gets killed in the video. It is how many things go wrong for him all at once. Things that they warn you about in training. Things that you fear Murphy's law will throw at you. On thing right after another.

SOMETHING THAT OCCURRED TO ME

Watching the video it also looked like the reason he may have thought the chamber was loaded because it should have been loaded, but because his magazine was not fully seated wracking the slide did not chamber a round a round. Not only have I seen this happen to a boat load of people during courses and on the range, it used to happen to me all the time when I was first getting into training regularly.

There are two solutions to this to prevent it from happening to you...

First, do not top off your magazines. For 10 rounders download them two rounds and for hi-caps download them by three. This relaxes the tension on the spring tension and allows the magazine to seat properly. Whether your springs are new or old, this is a good idea. The leading cause of malfunctions in a semi-auto is that the spring tension prevents the magazine from seating properly. It locks into place enough not to fall out, but not far enough so that a round will "reliably" chamber. Sounds crazy right? You don't have enough ammo as it is thanks to hi-cap bans and now you're gonna go with even less ammo? Ask yourself this. What good is a full magazine if rounds won't chamber? None at all my friend. It is just a paperweight. Better to go with 8 rounds than to go with none.

Second, after chambering the round do a chamber check. Gently pull back on the slide far enough to look into it and see brass, but not so far you start to eject the round. No brass, and you know you have a problem. Not only do you need to chamber a round but you need to re-seat the magazine and figure out why a round did not chamber the first time around (see solution one above for a probable reason why).

[tacticalcity]

No worries, happy to answer.

Question 1. It is a question I routinely ask because even when you train and train and train, and have done everything to prepare yourself for that moment, everything is academic until you have had to perform and fight for your life. That's not to say that people who have not been in that encounter do not know their stuff, its just a matter of perspective.

You can understand in theory, and tick off the list of things that happen to your body in that encounter...but again, until you have experienced it first hand it is academic.

Case in point, me. I'm a SSG in a Sapper unit. I am well trained and a Small Arms Instructor at the Company and Battalion level. I did everything possible to prepare myself mentally, physically and emotionally prior to the latest deployment to Afghanistan as well as ensuring I was extremely technically and tactically proficient. I was as well prepared as I could be, but for me it was all academic and theory at that point as my reactions under fire had never been tested.

Well, over there it was tested and tested and I experienced firsthand what before had just been a learned understanding as far as what happens to your body in a deadly encounter and how your training can overcome it if you train as you fight.

I am fond of saying "In a deadly encounter you do not rise to the occasion, you fall to the lowest level of your training".

So to succintly answer the question, if someone has not been in a deadly force encounter it is hard for me to consider them to be speaking from a position of firsthand knowledge and authority when they are talking about what happens in a gun fight.

Question 2:
At face value neither of those would mean anything to me. You could be retired LE, but been a patrol officer in a sleepy town where nothing happens and never had to draw your firearm. Or, you could have been a SWAT team member or assigned to a dangerous area where you are in a fight multiple times per week. Its the details that matter.

As for military, same thing. At face value being retired Military doesnt mean anything to me. You could have sat behind a desk and never deployed your entire career, or you may have deployments but sat in a supply room or TOC on them. Or you could be a ranger/SF who has extensive experience in the fight with his dick in the dirt. Again, its the details that matter.

Being LE or Military does not automatically mean that they have some Jedi-like mastery of firearms that the rest of us can never be able to attain.


I hope that asnwers your two questions. I want to make the point that I am not trying to be a Richard Cranium, I genuinely wanted to know the answer to the initial question just to broaden my understanding of your postings.

First, thanks for your service. Words cannot express my appreciation.

I personally fall into the deployed often but never had to fire a shot in anger camp. Trained for it, it was a possible if not probably aspect of job, but never had to use it. For most of us, that is just how it was during the 90s. Even the special operations guys we deployed with were likely to go their entire careers without firing a shot in anger. Things are definitely different in that regard today.

When I compare the quality of firearms and combat training I got from the military to the quality of training I have gotten on my own as a civilian willing to pay for the privilege it is scary as hell. The military training seriously sucked by comparison. Even scarier is the fact that my unit received ten times the training most units get because our mission was to deploy into harms way. So when guy's use their military experience to prop themselves up as experts I roll my eyes. I've trained side by side with active Seals, SF, Rangers, Marines, etc. Most of the time they aren't that impressive. Yes they can out run me any day of the week (these days) but most hover around my level of shooting...and I would expect them to make me look a complete noob given their job requirements. Meaning I am not trying to say I shoot great, but that I am surprised they shoot as poorly as I do and terrified at how often they shoot worse than I do. There definitely are the guys who are seriously tuned up and are impressive as hell, but they are the exception to the rule and not the norm - even among the special operations guys. It is very troubling.

With the law enforcement guys that I have trained my experiences have been more on par with your post. The beat cops and detectives are almost always seriously lacking, and the SWAT guys are almost always really tuned up. That is not to say I have not been seriously impressed with some non-SWAT guys. The best shooter I have ever seen was an investigator with the DOJ. For him it was a combination of natural ability and the fact that he LOVES to train on the range so he shoots daily even though it is not required. The absolute worst shooter I have ever seen with a badge worked for the Border Patrol. He made my mother, who has only fired a gun three or four times look like an expert. Not saying he was typical of the Border Patrol or Law Enforcement, just that it surprised me that guys who's job title makes them sound like they would be an expert could be so bad. So you just never know. Job title does not mean what we wish it meant. I've trained with Soccer Mom's and geeky accountants that were about as impressive a shooter as the best special operations shooters I've ever seen. It all goes in to how much time, money and effort they are willing to spend on their training and some natural ability as well.


My best friend since high school is a cop. We spend a lot of time training together. In some areas his skill and training level is way beyond mine. In particular, his situational awareness and retention skills put me to shame. He is very aware of everything going on around him and if you get anywhere near his firearm you can expect some trippy wrist lock that puts your face in the dirt. However, when it comes to the actual shooting he only recently began to exceed my abilities. That means that for years he was out there on the street, in a terrible area, with a lesser skill set that a computer geek. Now bear in mind I consider my own abilities at present barely adequate when tuned up and less than adequate when not. I see a vast amount of room for improvement and if I carried for a living I would definately be putting in the effort to bridge that gap. So that really worried me that he wasn't a vastly superior shooter. I have a feeling that if were not for the friendly competition between us, he would never have reached the skill level he has and a little worried he will start to tapper off now that his level has exceeded mine. Most guys rely on the small amount of training their department or unit gives them. They don't have a gun nut for a best friend that will ride them to train on their own and get as good as they can get.

[ZombieTactics]

... You can understand in theory, and tick off the list of things that happen to your body in that encounter...but again, until you have experienced it first hand it is academic ...

Agreed.

I am fond of saying "In a deadly encounter you do not rise to the occasion, you fall to the lowest level of your training".

My version of this is "You do not rise to the occasion, you default to the level of that you have mastered."

So to succintly answer the question, if someone has not been in a deadly force encounter it is hard for me to consider them to be speaking from a position of firsthand knowledge and authority when they are talking about what happens in a gun fight.

I have been a victim of violent crime on 4.5 occasions. The ".5" is a case where I am not sure it can be called "violent crime" (more like extreme stupidity), but it is the one instance where I was shot.

I was not carrying a firearm in any of these cases, and my experience is one of the reasons why I am now almost never without one. 1 of them left me with permanent internal injuries, which became life-threatening years later owning to complications, and requiring emergency surgery to save my life. 2 of of the other 3 could be reasonably called "in fear of my life or great bodily injury" situations, the 4th really little more than an altercation with a drunk. I have a pretty good idea how I react, and can verify most of the symptoms reported in books, reports, etc.

Given your experience, I'd be interested in your thoughts regarding the comments made by tacticalcity regarding the observed skill levels of mil/LE types at training courses. I've observed this phenomenon myself, even with "been-there/done-that" types, and it's always made me wonder a bit. Is there anything of value I should take from this observation?

[Brown Rock]

Once or twice in Afghanistan...

Respect.

[Lead Waster]

Guy in the video didn't have a chance, but maybe he could have gotten in some dying revenge if he had one chambered, hard to say though, he was probably already in shock by the time he drew his gun.

If he had a DA revolver, it might have helped too, as he was frantically pulling the trigger with slide racking mixed in there. If it was a DA revolver he could have just pulled the trigger, even if he missed the return fire might have made the bad guys back off a bit. But I guess a DA revolver is pretty much the same as a chambered autoloader.

Bottom line (for me) is ... don't give people a reason to send hit men after you, and if you do, then for goodness sakes carry a chambered fully loaded pistol or two and wear a dang vest.

As pointed out, this was a hit, so this guys life must have had some dangers in it that he was only half-way prepared for.