View Single Post
Old 02-25-2013, 10:46   #401
Senior Member
PhotoFeller's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Midwest and SW Florida
Posts: 3,749
Blog Entries: 2
Originally Posted by tnedator View Post
For me, it isn't just that 1/2 second, because lets face it, we often have that much variance in how we carry (location wise). Let's say the difference between OWB with a jacket, vs. IWB with a shirt, then if you happen to be tucked, even slower.

So, no doubt there is a time factor, and under stress, if you flub the rack, then it might be even longer (assuming you don't use something like a Kahr that isn't reliable with a slingshot rack).

For me, as I've mentioned earlier in this thread, the bigger issue is making the assumption that everything will be perfect in that critical moment when you need to defend your life that you will be able to use both hands. I'm not talking about the arm hanging limp at your side because you were shot in it (one of the reasons they teach one handed chamberings), but instead the more realistic scenarios such as trying to fend off an attacker with your weak hand, while drawing your weapon, or a struggle where you are on the ground with the attacker on top of you, or countless other scenarios where it is impossible to use both hands to rack a weapon, and where attempting to rack the weapon on your belt or boot would be impossible or very, very difficult.

That said, it is like everything in life, something that has to be decided by balancing the pros and cons and likelihoods. Many on here that are proponents of C3 justify it in large part based on the fact that chances are they will never have to use a gun to defend themselves. This is true. Granted, that's the same argument that many in the anti-gun community use to argue why nobody needs to carry period.

Personally, I'm hoping and praying that I am one of those people that NEVER have to draw their weapon to defend themselves and that the only time I ever fire my weapon is at the range. That said, there are a LOT of cases where people need to use a weapon to defend themselves and if the time comes that I have to do so, it doesn't matter if the odds are 1 in a million or 1 in 5 trillion that a person will have to use a weapon to defend themselves, because the bad guy won't be saying, "hey, since the odds were against you ever having to defend yourself, I realize you probably aren't ready, why don't you take 10 seconds to compose yourself and then I will attack you."

Fact is that you either take the "hope/pray for the best and be prepared for the worst" or you just bury your head in the sand and pretend that you will never be that 1 in a million.
I accept almost everything you say in this post as statements to support your carry mode, but the final paragraph where you slip in the knife with the old "...bury your head in the sand..." remark really is unwarranted; its aimed unfairly at C3 proponents who thoughtfully take the risk of ND along with the low probability of attack into consideration. You have your preferred method, which is fine, and we have ours.

To me its amusing that many C1 advocates don't care if the probability of attack is 1 in a million, or 1 in a billion, carrying in C1 is a high, 24/7 priority. Yet the real high-risk things we do routinely, such as allowing our kids to ride on school buses without seat belts, don't even show up on the list of dangers we want to protect against. Are there other routine daily activities that present greater risk than assault by a bad guy...things that we fail to do everything possible to prevent? You bet there are.

We all are guilty of "putting our heads in the sand" to some extent. I suggest that we be careful not to do it with risks that really have serious consequences and are more likely to strike us and our loved ones. I don't worry much about 1 in a million risks.

Last edited by PhotoFeller; 02-26-2013 at 21:11..
PhotoFeller is offline