Handgun Carry

[DoggyDaddy]

Maybe I should have clarified my earlier response somewhat. Obviously, if you're in the military or LE and you're issued a handgun that you must use, then you'll eventually get used to it and learn to use it as effectively as you can. But starting from scratch so to speak, it makes more sense to me to start with something that feels good to you. You'll be more likely to practice with something that you feel more confident in IMHO. There is a psychological aspect to that.

Back when I used to golf, I read a lot of articles on how to choose the best clubs for yourself. Almost without exception, they acknowledged the psychological impact of how the clubs "look" to you when you're addressing the ball.

For example, with putters, there are all kinds of different looking club heads, from the basic type that you'd likely rent at a miniature golf place to some with really odd shaped heads, counter weighted heel and toe, etc.. What was found was that most people would putt better with the one that made them "feel" the most confident when they looked down at the club head, even though with enough practice one could probably learn to putt just as well with the "Putt Putt" club as they could with one costing several times as much.

When I first started looking for my first handgun, I really wanted to like Glocks, because let's face it, they have an excellent reputation for reliability, etc.. I'm not questioning that at all. But they just didn't feel "right" to me. YMMV of course.

 

[Expat]

Since the US military chose the Sig P320s, that should be the only allowable choice for new shooters. It has been tested and approved as the best pistol.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Since the US military chose the Sig P320s, that should be the only allowable choice for new shooters. It has been tested and approved as the best pistol.

bold part...sorta. Tested, but not to the protocols originally set forth. The military version is doubtlessly a fine pistol, but there's always going to be an asterisk due to that.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

If you start with a glock I'm sure it's not a problem. When you have not shot one and you are over 50 and then decide hey I want this inexpensive super reliable light weight pistol and you buy one then find out the hard way it doesn't feel right or aim like everything else you have used your entire life it is very irritating to say the least.

Sure. Nobody is saying you have to buy a Glock and you have to like a Glock. I never fired one until the Academy and thought mine was broken due to the trigger feel. Glocks with finger grooves *literally* don't fit my hand because due to breaking it I've got crooked fingers that lay over the ridges instead of between them which results in nearly insta-blisters.

But the "points naturally" is an excuse for "don't want to put in the work to learn it." There is no points naturally. You did not naturally point a 1911 or a k-frame or a Sig P226 etc when you first started. Frankly, most people never get to the level of automaticity to "point naturally" period, they just learn to correct faster.

 

[Jaybird1980]

Does anyone else carry a Glock 19? I'm new to carrying but it seem to be the best carry firearm around.

I didn't read the whole thread. Just wanted to say that the 19 is a fine choice, It's also the choice I make quite often.

That being said, put the time and effort into getting comfortable and proficient with it. If you feel like it just doesn't click for you, don't be afraid to move on and try something else. To many quality handguns out there to just struggle needlessly.

A lot of people say they don't shoot glocks good, I don't know if it's just they haven't put the work in or if it just flat out disagrees with the person. Either way there are enough choices available that you should be able to find something you like. Heck maybe you already did.

 

[DadSmith]

Sure. Nobody is saying you have to buy a Glock and you have to like a Glock. I never fired one until the Academy and thought mine was broken due to the trigger feel. Glocks with finger grooves *literally* don't fit my hand because due to breaking it I've got crooked fingers that lay over the ridges instead of between them which results in nearly insta-blisters.

But the "points naturally" is an excuse for "don't want to put in the work to learn it." There is no points naturally. You did not naturally point a 1911 or a k-frame or a Sig P226 etc when you first started. Frankly, most people never get to the level of automaticity to "point naturally" period, they just learn to correct faster.

Upto 10yds I just bring it up look at the front sight and see it's on target and pull the trigger. I usually put 2-3rds within 3-4" shooting like that in the mid torso, but beyond 10yds I have to use rear as well which is slower but more precise. It seems natural to do that even with a glock.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Upto 10yds I just bring it up look at the front sight and see it's on target and pull the trigger. I usually put 2-3rds within 3-4" shooting like that in the mid torso, but beyond 10yds I have to use rear as well which is slower but more precise. It seems natural to do that even with a glock.

"Natural pointing" would indicate you would not need visual verification of sights at all. You'd just "naturally point" and be on target.

"Natural pointing" is really "learned index" in this context. You know what it should feel like to present the gun in a manner where the sights are, more or less, already aligned and then execute it based on that feel. You then verify sight picture, make any small adjustments required based on that verification, and press the trigger. The feel of the correct index is built up by experience and repetition. At very high levels you could shoot very similarly blindfolded based solely on the feel. That's because eventually it becomes so automatic that it feels natural. In reality it's as artificial as throwing a fastball. Nobody throws a fastball correctly the first time they touch a baseball, nobody throws a perfect upper cut when they first learn to punch, and nobody has a perfect presentation/index when they first start with a pistol. People bowl, they cowboy, they present and then fish for the sights, etc.

To continue the sports analogy...

Throwing a baseball with the correct form eventually "comes naturally" to an MLB pitcher, but how he throws is different then the same "comes naturally" of a NFL quarterback and a football. Neither is actually natural, both are just the result of experience and reps. While you could say a baseball or a football feels better you aren't going to perform at a high level with either with what is actually natural. Same with a Glock or 1911 or Sig or what have you.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

A metric butt ton of people do. "Best" is almost certainly going to create a spirited discussion. I'll just say that the hardware is not as important as the software, but the Glock is a solid piece of hardware that won't hold you back. The same could be said of several alternatives. The same could not be said about other "just as good as..." alternatives.

We are fortunate to live in an age of a freight car full of solid pistol choices. Throw them all in a sack, jumble up and select one at random, you are good.

Training/education will save you. Magic swords are nothing more than humanity's wish casting so they do not have to take the time and effort to train.

Go to school. Choice of pistol is way down on the list of concerns.

 

[DadSmith]

"Natural pointing" would indicate you would not need visual verification of sights at all. You'd just "naturally point" and be on target.

"Natural pointing" is really "learned index" in this context. You know what it should feel like to present the gun in a manner where the sights are, more or less, already aligned and then execute it based on that feel. You then verify sight picture, make any small adjustments required based on that verification, and press the trigger. The feel of the correct index is built up by experience and repetition. At very high levels you could shoot very similarly blindfolded based solely on the feel. That's because eventually it becomes so automatic that it feels natural. In reality it's as artificial as throwing a fastball. Nobody throws a fastball correctly the first time they touch a baseball, nobody throws a perfect upper cut when they first learn to punch, and nobody has a perfect presentation/index when they first start with a pistol. People bowl, they cowboy, they present and then fish for the sights, etc.

To continue the sports analogy...

Throwing a baseball with the correct form eventually "comes naturally" to an MLB pitcher, but how he throws is different then the same "comes naturally" of a NFL quarterback and a football. Neither is actually natural, both are just the result of experience and reps. While you could say a baseball or a football feels better you aren't going to perform at a high level with either with what is actually natural. Same with a Glock or 1911 or Sig or what have you.

Now you have given me something new to try. Close my eyes and see how far back I can hit

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Now you have given me something new to try. Close my eyes and see how far back I can hit

If you've built a solid index, further then you think...as long as you don't change anything. Rotate your hips 15 degrees, or do it while taking a step, or move the target 5' left from your center line and you'll probably find the rails fall off pretty quickly as the feeling changes. Which will further show you the learned experience vs natural.

 

[bwframe]

Since the US military chose the Sig P320s, that should be the only allowable choice for new shooters. It has been tested and approved as the best pistol.

I believe that's an excellent second choice. Maybe one day, first choice as go to first carry gun?

When there are more P320's than Glocks in the holsters of LEO, private carriers and trainers, then they one day could be the best choice. Until then, the choice is obvious.

Learn and adapt to shoot THE most prevalent pistol platform out there. It only makes sense, for so many reasons.

 

[Expat]

My understanding about the trainers from comments I have read, is that they started carrying Glocks to class because that is what a plurality if not a majority of their classes were showing up with. There was a video someone posted a few weeks ago of Hackathorn and Ayoob. They commented on that even though they clearly did not like a striker fired trigger but they said they got used to it, because they felt they had to.

 

[DadSmith]

When there are more P320's than Glocks in the holsters of LEO, private carriers and trainers, then they one day could be the best choice. Until then, the choice is obvious.

Yes a CZ P10 S C or F.

 

[bcod151]

Glock 19 meets every mark im looking for in a carry gun. If I need something smaller for whatever reason always have the glock 43 around.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

"Natural pointing" would indicate you would not need visual verification of sights at all. You'd just "naturally point" and be on target.

I understand what you're saying BBI, and I agree for the most part, but wouldn't you agree that some pistols are easier to learn that "indexing" more quickly than others? Here's an example...

DoggyMama's dad wanted to get a handgun several years ago to take with him to Florida. He had a couple - a Dan Wesson revolver and a Colt 1903, but not much experience in shooting either. I took him to the range with me with a few of my handguns to see how he liked those. Now let me also mention that his eyesight had already started deteriorating by that point - he has macular degeneration and is now nearly blind.

I forget now which guns I let him try, but he was having a less than optimal time with any of them until he tried my CZ-82. With that, he was able to put rounds on target much better right off the bat. He said it was because it "pointed naturally" for him. So he had me find him one.

I also like the CZ-82 for the same reason. It was just noticeably more comfortable and seemed easier to point, index, whatever you choose to call it.

Two others that I have that also seem to point more naturally for me (index more easily?) are my old Savage 1907 and 1917. They just are - for me. Now are they optimal defensive weapons? No, but for shooting accurately, they just work.

 

[KJQ6945]

I’m gonna back up BBI here. The + or - 4 degrees, of a Glock versus a 1911 is, or shouldn’t be an issue. It’s all a matter of training and repetition. (Aka, what you’re used to.)
Our dear friend Churchmouse has shot 1911’s since JMB invented it. He gets a pass in my book.

Everyone else, do the work and lose the excuses. As a gun guy, you should be able to pass a basic qualification with any fully functional modern handgun, regardless of make or a couple degrees of grip angle.
We all have our favorites, and that’s fine, but the I can’t shoot brand new X, I can only shoot brand Y, is a cop out and nothing more.

 

[Pepi]

I thought that way until last summer and all the crap that went down with the BLM / Antifa crap...that's when I added a 9mm to the rotation, and in the process, added capacity to the equation.
Still like my 5-shot 340DAO...but when I'm out with the family, being able to better defend them against larger numbers, if necessary, became a factor.

I carry the Airweight around our local area (small). When we go to Indy or travel I carry my Sig 365 and my wife carries the Airweight.

 

[fullmetaljesus]

Does anyone else carry a Glock 19? I'm new to carrying but it seem to be the best carry firearm around.

Hahaha, that's one hell of a sense of humor for a new guy.

You'll fit in just fine.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I understand what you're saying BBI, and I agree for the most part, but wouldn't you agree that some pistols are easier to learn that "indexing" more quickly than others? Here's an example...

DoggyMama's dad wanted to get a handgun several years ago to take with him to Florida. He had a couple - a Dan Wesson revolver and a Colt 1903, but not much experience in shooting either. I took him to the range with me with a few of my handguns to see how he liked those. Now let me also mention that his eyesight had already started deteriorating by that point - he has macular degeneration and is now nearly blind.

I forget now which guns I let him try, but he was having a less than optimal time with any of them until he tried my CZ-82. With that, he was able to put rounds on target much better right off the bat. He said it was because it "pointed naturally" for him. So he had me find him one.

I also like the CZ-82 for the same reason. It was just noticeably more comfortable and seemed easier to point, index, whatever you choose to call it.

Two others that I have that also seem to point more naturally for me (index more easily?) are my old Savage 1907 and 1917. They just are - for me. Now are they optimal defensive weapons? No, but for shooting accurately, they just work.

More comfortable? Sure. Tilting your wrist a few degrees may not be quite as comfortable as not. That's not necessarily going to equate to better performance. It's probably more comfortable to huck rocks like most of us huck rocks then do that crazy contortion that pitchers do to get real performance out of a throw.

What does "more natural" mean and how is it measured?

Index matters when speed matters and is irrelevant to slow fire accuracy. Things like the FAST will test index.

 

[Denny347]

Carried a G19 for the last 7 years as my off-duty, concealed carry rig. That is until I just bought a G43X and added a few Shield Arms 15rd metal mags. LOVE this gun. I carry the same number of rounds as my G19 but 2/3 the size.