[bobbthompson]

I kinda strayed from the topic at hand on the best self-defense ammo thread in the ammo bunker. But there seems to be interest and differing opinions on the role of a carry gun. So I started this thread.



What is the role of your carry gun? What is your philosophy on it's use, setup, etc.? Why did you choose the M&P as your carry gun?



My oppinions:

A carry gun is just that; a gun that you carry with you away from your home, into the unknown. I carry an HK USP compact .40, in a Milt Sparks VM2 holster. (Until I receive my full size M&P .40 this Friday or Saturday. I shot my buddies M&P 9 at an IDPA shoot and fell in love) I carry 8 rounds of Federal Expanding Full Metal Jacket ammo in a 12 round mag. Federal EFMJ because it's what my local PD shoots. 8 rounds because it's what the defense lawyer who talked to my CC class recommended.



The only place I have no duty to retreat is my home. If someone breaks into my home, I'm not going for a handgun. I'm grabbing my 8 + 1 12 gauge fully loaded with reduced recoil hydrashock slugs.



But out in the real world things get much more complicated. There is no Castle Doctrine. The chances of getting attacked by one guy is small. The chances of getting attacked by 2, 3, or more guys is even smaller. And the chances of me engaging multiple targets with one handgun, even with 15 or 30 rounds, is exceedingly small. Plus the fact that I have no duty or desire to hold my ground at the Quick-e-mart or the park. I am perfectly willing to shoot and run or to not shoot at all. My goal isn't to kill the bad guy. My goal is to get everyone away from the bad guy and not get thrown in jail for doing it.



I chose the M&P because it’s a fun gun to shoot. It’s comfortable, affordable, produced by a reputable manufacturer, accurate, and hopefully reliable.

 

[carteach0]

I carry for reasons I have already stated.

One simple reason I left off..... While I would usually prefer running

away to engaging in a defensive shooting, I don't run so good.



Why did I choose the M+P? Honestly?



I went into the store to look at XD's. The counter man also laid out the M+P compact. I like it, wife liked it, it came home with us.



After the fact rationalizing....... It's an American made quality

product with excellent reviews and ratings. The platform is rapidly being adopted by many police departments nationwide, which speaks in it's favor.



The compact over the full size, as my carry tool....... Because I carry concealed and the compact makes sense for that.



9mm...... why? It's the one they had. Many police nationwide carry the caliber. Good enough for me.



I carry 12 rounds of my handloads with the spare magazine in a pocket, also the same hand loads. I carry 12 because it holds 12. If it held 10 I would carry 10, if it held 17 I would carry 17. That's what it was designed to do.



I carry my handloads because that is what I can afford to shoot in practice, and most police agencies now stress practicing with what you carry. They have taxpayor funds to spend, I don't.



Nothing is lawyer proof for a properly motivated lawyer, but I don't sweat the lawyer thing so much. I do what makes sense to me.



The last two lawyers that I 'engaged' with chose to withdraw from the confrontation. Even lawyers can have common sense.

 

[bobbthompson]

You are brave to carry hand loads.

I love my .40 full size so much that I'm thinking of getting a compact .40 when they come out. Is the compact significantly smaller than the full size? How is it to carry?

 

[carteach0]

Whats the problem with carrying handloads? Everyone says it's a legal liability...... everyone but someone who can actually point out a real live case. The best Masad Ayoob could come up with (A top industry expert witness) was a case involving a woman who committed suicide with her husbands pistol and the police could not run proper ballistics because it was loaded with handloads.



I have yet to hear of a single *real* case of a self defense shooting where the shooter suffered for using handloads.



Like I said..... I carry the same as I practice with, just as many police agencies do and recomend doing. It's handloads because thats what I can afford to practice with. If I could afford 150-200 rounds a month of factory defensive ammunition then I'd practice and carry factory. At about $1 per round it's out of the question.



I do not own a full size M+P........ YET. I can only speak for my M+P 9c compact. It's the most comfortable pistol I have ever carried. I can wear it all day without issue, hardly even noticing it's on.



I prefer shooting my Colt Commander, by a hair. It's much easier to shoot with accuracy, and thats always fun. Carry on the other hand... as much as I enjoy shooting my Colt it's not so easy to carry. It's heavy on the belt, and I seldom wear something all day that will conceal my Galco shoulder holster.



The M+P compact fits my Galco JAK belt slide very nicely and really stay concealed with no printing that I or my wife can pick up on. It seems to be 100% reliable and shoots pretty straight with my handloads. I trust it

as far as I trust any man made mechanism.

 

[Guest]

My Carry right now

Right now I have a Glock23 a XD-45 Service three 1911s in .45acp 3"4"5" all Kimbers. But am looking at the S.W. and HKs. The jury is still out. Have nothing against handloads for range but no way I would use them for defence. There is lots of really good carry defence type Ammo. so this is the way I choice to go. :roll:

 

[bobbthompson]

I don't have any case law to back me up. If you shoot someone with handloads then I'll have some case law. Here's my 2 cents: do you really want to be the one who finds out? If you do that's cool. I don't believe in telling other adults what to do.



But you could buy some self defense ammo for carry, pull one, and load a round that was VERY similar for practice.



It's not about eliminating liability; it's about limiting it. If I get a new gun from Smith, and I shoot someone, and the gun is brought into question, Smith will most likely be in my corner. They have a vested interest because they share liability. If I modify that new gun, I have eliminated any liability that Smith may have had.



Similarly, If I carry Federal ammo, and the ammo is brought into question, Federal will most likely be in my corner. They will probably invest their time, resources, money, and energy to my defense because they share liability. If I carry handloads, I'm all alone.



If I didn't modify the gun, and I didn't modify the ammo, then the only thing in question should be whether the shooting was justified or not. As opposed to being found innocent of manslaughter, but found guilty of carrying a dangerous weapon because I modified my gun, or being found innocent of manslaughter, but guilty of reckless endangerment because I modified my ammo.



It also matters A LOT where you live. You will be judged by 12 random people from where you live. If I lived in Texas, I'd worry much less about liability because the average Texan has a gun and would also shoot a bad guy. If i lived in California,...



...well I wouldn't live in California, but the average Californian is scared of guns, knows nothing about them, and would be more concerned with the bad guys childhood than with my safety or the safety of my family.



These are just some of my thoughts. In the USA you have the right to do anything which doesn't infringe on my personal freedoms. And you carrying handloads certainly doesn't impact my personal freedoms in the least.



WHEN (not if) you get a full size, post your thoughts. I'd be interrested in your oppinion.

 

[UPSguy]

bobthompson, where are you getting all this BS from? Sounds like Combat Handjobs magazine. Why in the world would you download a 12 rd mag to 8 rounds? Federal EFMJ ammo is for people who are not allowed to carry HPs. I know you read in a magazine that it is the greatest thing ever to come down the pike. You might try some other forums for some more information. Try Tactical forum or 10-8 forum and look up the posts of a known ballistics expert, DocGKR. Each response I have seen you post seems like, well, BS. I have already questioned you in another thread about not modifiying a carry weapon. There are indeed well proven modifications you can make to your chosen weapon that will stand up to scrutiny in a court of law. This bit about shared liability with the manufacturer is nonsense too. They will most likely be trying to be sued for even making the weapon. YOU!!! not the weapons manufacturer will be scrutiniezed for YOUR actions. If you should recommend someone not put "Kill em all" grips on their gun that would be good advice. To not modify it at all is again-----BS!

 

[bobbthompson]

I'm getting it from a friend of mine who is a defense lawyer. Law and common sense rarely walk the same path.



Just because your gun is safe, and your ammo is safe, and the shooting was justified; is no guarantee that you will be found innocent in a court of law. There will be people in that room trying to send you to a bad place for a long time. And they will fight dirty to put you there. They will bring up everthing they can and hope something sticks.



The odds say that the more stuff they throw at you, the more likely it is something will stick. My opinion is just to give them less stuff to throw at you.



I don't carry EFMJ because I think they're great. I carry it because it's the round that the police in my area shoot, and my defense lawyer friend said I should go with what they shoot.



If you shoot someone, and go to court: the prosecutor is going to try to portray you as a gun-toting, trigger-happy, menace to society who carries enough bullets to kill 30 people and altered your gun to better kill people.



I just think it's a good idea to make his job harder. If YOU remove a SAFETY from a gun, you don't think they might ask YOU about that. If YOU do NOTHING to the gun, they're not going to ask about the gun because they don't want to go up against Smith & Wesson. That's my point.



If you look at these risks and determine that they are mitigated by your need to stop a potential threat, then that's great. Carry whatever you want. How you carry doesn't impact my personal freedoms at all.



But to say those risks don't exist, is (in my opinion) inaccurate.

 

[JohnN]

I'm getting it from a friend of mine who is a defense lawyer. Law and common sense rarely walk the same path.



Just because your gun is safe, and your ammo is safe, and the shooting was justified; is no guarantee that you will be found innocent in a court of law. There will be people in that room trying to send you to a bad place for a long time. And they will fight dirty to put you there. They will bring up everything they can and hope something sticks.



The odds say that the more stuff they throw at you, the more likely it is something will stick. My opinion is just to give them less stuff to throw at you.



I don't carry EFMJ because I think they're great. I carry it because it's the round that the police in my area shoot, and my defense lawyer friend said I should go with what they shoot.



If you shoot someone, and go to court: the prosecutor is going to try to portray you as a gun-toting, trigger-happy, menace to society who carries enough bullets to kill 30 people and altered your gun to better kill people.



I just think it's a good idea to make his job harder. If YOU remove a SAFETY from a gun, you don't think they might ask YOU about that. If YOU do NOTHING to the gun, they're not going to ask about the gun because they don't want to go up against Smith & Wesson. That's my point.



If you look at these risks and determine that they are mitigated by your need to stop a potential threat, then that's great. Carry whatever you want. How you carry doesn't impact my personal freedoms at all.



But to say those risks don't exist, is (in my opinion) inaccurate.

Sounds like a replay of a Massad Ayoob article in Combat Handguns. IMHO, Mr. Ayoob has scared many a potential gun carrying citizen into using less than ideal parameters for their personal defense. I don't quite understand the need to download your magazine either.



Unfortunately, all this information may be running through your head when you must make the decision to act in self defense and delay you enough that it may be too late.

 

[UPSguy]

[quote name='bobbthompson']I'm getting it from a friend of mine who is a defense lawyer. Law and common sense rarely walk the same path.



Just because your gun is safe, and your ammo is safe, and the shooting was justified; is no guarantee that you will be found innocent in a court of law. There will be people in that room trying to send you to a bad place for a long time. And they will fight dirty to put you there. They will bring up everything they can and hope something sticks.



The odds say that the more stuff they throw at you, the more likely it is something will stick. My opinion is just to give them less stuff to throw at you.



I don't carry EFMJ because I think they're great. I carry it because it's the round that the police in my area shoot, and my defense lawyer friend said I should go with what they shoot.



If you shoot someone, and go to court: the prosecutor is going to try to portray you as a gun-toting, trigger-happy, menace to society who carries enough bullets to kill 30 people and altered your gun to better kill people.



I just think it's a good idea to make his job harder. If YOU remove a SAFETY from a gun, you don't think they might ask YOU about that. If YOU do NOTHING to the gun, they're not going to ask about the gun because they don't want to go up against Smith & Wesson. That's my point.



If you look at these risks and determine that they are mitigated by your need to stop a potential threat, then that's great. Carry whatever you want. How you carry doesn't impact my personal freedoms at all.



But to say those risks don't exist, is (in my opinion) inaccurate.

Sounds like a replay of a Massad Ayoob article in Combat Handguns. IMHO, Mr. Ayoob has scared many a potential gun carrying citizen into using less than ideal parameters for their personal defense. I don't quite understand the need to download your magazine either.



Unfortunately, all this information may be running through your head when you must make the decision to act in self defense and delay you enough that it may be too late.[/quote]Amen!

 

[killer]

A little off topic but. My best friend father was a sheriff about 30 years ago. He used to reload his own duty ammo for his .357 ruger black hawk

(i guess single action .357 were the rage back then why i dont know?)

his reloads were 3 00 buck pellets on top of a hot charge.

Any way his wife the night before thought see heard a intruder

and cocked the black hawk well no intruder. But she was scared to decock the black hawk. Soooo she just put it back in the holester

and didnt tell him. The next morning he put on his uniform,belt,&holster

in front of the mirror he streached his arms and let them fall to his side.

Kaboom all three pellets went into leg just bellow his knee cap one pellet stayed in his thigh the other 2 traveled out of his thigh and hit his foot then traveled through his foot into the floor .

Nobody at home he nearly bleed to death before the ambulance arrived.

He recovered from it but he no longer a sheriff he works for the city now. And the ruger black hawk stays in the case unloaded forever.

He said he learned a good lesson that morning..A single action revolver

is not want you want in a duty arm, never trust women,&wach out about killer hand loads you mite get shot by.

One lucky SOB that he kept his leg and can know joke about it.

 

[bobbthompson]

Dude, I swear to GOD I've never read Combat Handgun, and my info is comming from a defense lawyer. He is a member of the ACLU, and he doesn't carry a gun because he's not willing to shoot anyone. But he is also a constitutionalist who believes gun rights are protected. And he defends gun rights in court.



Come up with a different reason I don't know what I'm talking about.



I really think that if I was ever in a shooting situation, I wouldn't have time to think. That's why I compete in limited 10 production class with a stock gun. The idea is that I create muscle memory so I don't have to think.



And I've set myself up ahead of time with a system wich gives me the best chance of not going to jail. So I don't have to think about that.



I don't think either of you read my post. You both totally ignored my question, so I'll ask it again:



IF YOU REMOVE A SAFETY FROM A GUN,



AND END UP IN COURT,



YOU REALLY DON'T THINK THE PROSECUTOR IS GOING TO MAKE A BIG DEAL ABOUT THAT?

 

[m4arc]

and my info is comming from a defense lawyer. He is a member of the ACLU, and he doesn't carry a gun because he's not willing to shoot anyone.

Say no more!



It all makes sense now :wink:

 

[UPSguy]

[quote name='bobbthompson']and my info is comming from a defense lawyer. He is a member of the ACLU, and he doesn't carry a gun because he's not willing to shoot anyone.

Say no more!



It all makes sense now :wink:[/quote]Yes it does, and he got his info from Combat Handjobs :roll:

 

[JohnN]

[quote name='bobbthompson']and my info is comming from a defense lawyer. He is a member of the ACLU, and he doesn't carry a gun because he's not willing to shoot anyone.

Say no more!



It all makes sense now :wink:[/quote]



And you somehow think an ACLU attorney doesn't have a slanted opinion on CCW???? Don't believe for a minute that shooting a match or two is going to really prepare you when the ballon goes up. It helps but it doesn't change your mental process. If you somehow think you are going to go for your blaster without thought and commence to shooting the bad guy you are dangerous.



As long as you can articulate to a jury why you disabled those safeties I doubt you will have a problem.IMHO

 

[bobbthompson]

You both seemed to leave off the part of the quote about him being a constitutionalist who supports gun rights. He defends gun rights at a reduced rate because it is a constitutional issue. He defends all constitutional rights at a reduced rate.



If he's so anti-gun, why would he read Combat Handguns? I don't know why you hate combat handguns so much because I've never read it, but I think you need to devote some time to it in therapy. You seem pretty pissed at them. But in the interest of fairness, I'll ask him if he's ever read combat handguns.



I've given you lots of reasons why I THINK (not know) people shold carry stock guns, with the ammo the cops ues. Your responses to that argument have been, "You don't know what you're talking about. You must be reading combat handgun. You could hire 3 exprts to testify for you. etc."



You're basically just sayin, "nuh-uhh, nuh-uhh." Defend your position. Convince me why I'm wrong. I believe there is an INCREASED RISK (not a definate outcome) to modifying your gun, carrying the most leathal load you can find, and carrying 30-45 rounds of it.



It's going to be hard to convince me that risk doesn't exist at all. So convince me why I should take that risk. Why do I need a 3.5 lb pull? Why is the mag safety dangerous? Why do I need to use THE MOST lethal ammo I can find? Why isn't the fifth most lethal ammo good enough? Why do I need 30-45 rounds (realistically)?



I wanted the version of the M&P with no lock or mag safety, but they're harder to find on gunbroker for a good price. I got what I got and the potential liability of modifying it is more than I am currently willing to take. So change my mind.



I shoot at least 2 matches per month, usually 3 (2 IPSIC and 1 IDPA). I shoot at least 600 rounds per month, usually closer to 1000. I shoot at different yardages, practice drawing, shoot from different positions, strong hand, weak hand, rapid fire, retreating, advancing, behind cover, etc.



What else should I be doing? Inform me, please. Don't just tell me I'm wrong and not even explain why I'm wrong.



Thanks.

 

[UPSguy]

People, including me, have given reasons for their postitions. I think if you go back and read them again you might find some answers. There is no problem if that is how you want to carry your weapon, none whatsoever. But this all started with you say "do not" modify your gun. You very well indeed may have gotten this information from you ACLU lawyer friend. He got if from Massad Ayoob. I have read his works for years. Some of it I agree with, he has earned his opinions through years of service behind the badge. Doesn't mean they are always right though, they are afterall opinions. Just like your and just like mine. As for the version of the M&P without extra locks or safties, mine 2 only cost me $10 more than the ones with them. If you change the sear block to the version without the extras, just who will know that you did that? It is a factory part. There are good points and bad points to everything, including mag disconnets. Why change sights? Because they just might be easier to see when all your senses are on overload and one realizes that all the IDPA/USPSA matches in the world didn't prepare us for when the target is shooting back. Why a smoother trigger (just might happen to be lighter), very simple, it is usually our trigger pull that turns a well aimed shot into a miss. Since every fired bullet has a lawyer attached to it a smooth grit free trigger is just insurance. Again, Bob, if you dont want to modify your gun that is your business and no one elses. But many here, me included think they are silly bordering on stupid. We choose to go about a different path. Please just quit trying to tell everyone of their inpending peril and doom if they choose to modify their weapons. One last thing, the man, Mr. Ayoob who your lawyer is quoting many times mentions that there are many modifications that make a better fighting gun and can indeed be defensed in a court of law should the worst fear come to pass. Just skip the "kill em all" engraved grips.

 

[UPSguy]

I promise this will be my last post on this subject unless someone other than bubbathompson asks for it (which I doubt will happen

) I am not sure what your background is. Mine was formed by having an FBI special agent as an uncle, formed by me service behind the badge of a state police department, formed my much study and practice and matches as possible. Formed by many years carrying a weapon in defense of family, friends and strangers that didn't take on the responsibility for themselves. I applaud you for all your practice but I swear to you the calm and composure you show when the buzzer goes off during a match will not be the same feeling you have when the glass breaks at 3am.



You made a point that the chances of being involved in an insident with one perp is remote, that is true but we still carry just incase. In todays world the perps travel in packs, just like dogs or other wild animals. Don't believe me, might want to start doing some case work checking. You ARE much more likely to be attacked by multiples than by one assalant. Still a small chance but we prepare anyway.



Why not download a handgun magazine. Easy, they are designed for the stated amount so fill em up. It is the cycles of full to empty that wear out the spring. Leaving it full and stored does no harm to a proper quality spring. If you are buying ProMags that is another story. Contrary to poplular belief and movie lore, our handguns, no matter what the caliber are not equivilant to a lightning bolt from God. It will probably take more than one shot and there probably will be more than one bad guy lurking in the shadows.



Now to the BS about why not carry the 5th best round, not the best. Again, since these are not death rays, why handicap yourself with inferior ammo. Federal EFMJ was made for those who CANNOT by law or regulation use hollowpoint ammunition. That is from Federal. Might want to check why your police department is carrying it. In Detroit the officers are up in arms over having to use it, it hasn't worked real good for them and they are in a lot of shootings. Their police chief was trying to portray a kinder gentler police force, so let's do away with the hollow points and use these.



Those are my thoughts, do with them as you please. I am done here unless someone wants to talk more.

 

[IAShooter]

OK, I have to add my .02 cents to this one.

I don't believe there is a gun board on the internet where this discussion has not come up.

It usually ends with this statement.



Show me a case, anywhere in the USA, where someone was convicted in an otherwise justified shooting incident because their firearm was modified ie; lighter trigger,sights etc..etc.. and/or they were shooting ammo they reloaded themselves.



I've looked extensively, I can't find any.

I used to be a firm believer that my CCW gun should be stock with stock ammo until I was challenged to provide fact to back up my way of thinking.



NOT TRYING TO START A WAR HERE, but I have yet to find any case law to back it up.

If a legitimate case is ever presented to me, you can bet I will change my CCW practices.

 

[m4arc]

I’d make the argument that your lawyer friend isn’t gun friendly because he’s perpetuating a lot of BS and internet folk lure. He’s scaring you into a disadvantage when dealing with the criminal element. In addition he’s not defining the difference between civil and criminal court.



You stated that you can’t name a single case (criminal I assume) where the issues of ammo or gun modification have come into play. The bottom line is this; if a defensive shoot is good you have nothing to worry about. If a shoot is bad, the type of ammo is the least of your worries. A DA is not going to drag a law abiding citizen into criminal court because they shot an intruder with Gold Dot 124gr +P and a polish firing pin plunger. Not going to happen. However, if you can find me a criminal case where this was the basis for criminal charges, I’ll change my mind.



Now a civil suit is a whole different ballgame and those things he’s saying probably will come up. But it’s a civil matter and not criminal. I’m certainly not going to arm down for a civil matter but YMMV.



Criminals don’t care about having the fifth most lethal ammo or a modified gun. They are criminals for a reason. When it comes to protecting my family I want the best…I want every little advantage I can get as my family is far more important to me than some civil lawsuit. I’ll deal with the civil matter later because I don’t want it impacting my split-second-last-minute-decision.



As a side note I do agree that it’s best to leave a gun stock but for different reasons than you’ve stated.