DocJD
Basic Member
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2016
- Messages
- 11,498
DocJD, I'm not far behind you, with extensive experience in competitive shooting, marksmanship instructing, and hunting.
What you say is true -- IN A PERFECT WORLD, barring any extraneous factors that happen at random. If you think enough
planning and training will enable you to successfully negotiate every factor in your environment, to include disruptions such
as physical assault or getting shot by aggressors, that's a very pleasant, reassuring delusion. Enjoy. See example below.
While I understand the well trained, thoughtful, and careful use of Glocks and similar pistols, and own such, I'm still
a believer that an added margin of safety is a good thing, *within reason*. A local incident from a few years ago illustrates.
A Physician's Assistant went to the local Forest Service range to practice. Being in a wooded area, without other people around,
he brought his dog along to get some much-needed stimulation and exercise. While walking forward and re-holstering (or otherwise
manipulating?) his Glock, his dog was joyfully frisking and gamboling beside him, delighted to be out with his master. Life happened,
and the dog got tangled up in his feet somehow...
He tripped and shot himself... through the liver.
He drove himself to the local ER, where he managed to live for a few minutes, but couldn't be saved.
You can offer every theory in the world as to how one "would" (should) never be in such a situation due to superior
training, technique and 100% awareness at all times, but the fact is, we are all human and we DON'T have control
of every single factor in our environment at all times -- or at any time. Sure, there are plenty of areas that 20-20
hindsight lets us see how this could easily have been prevented, but this is just one example. There are only about
a billion other factors out there...
Having over 50 years' experience shooting the 1911, plus a great variety of other arms, I believe that if he'd
been well schooled with a 1911, Browning HP or similar, the safety's presence/use very likely would have prevented this.
As I was taught, the safety goes back ON automatically when firing is complete -- just as it comes off during the safest part
of the draw. Add in that one factor, and he'd likely be living happily ever after with his family, instead of being a sad memory.
[Aside: I've always wondered if the dog made it into the car for the ride to the hospital. I sure hope so. I love dogs!]
As far as they go, "muscle memory"/the subconscious mind are wonderful things. Example: I grew up shooting a side-by-side
(double barrel) shotgun from age 10 or so. Every time the lever is opened, it pushes the safety back to the "on" position.
Thus, after loading, in order to fire one must again take off the safety. After entering the Army and serving away from
home for a few years, I took my Dad out for a couple of rounds of skeet. Naturally, we brought our only shotguns -- a pair of
family heirloom SxS's. At this time, I'd say it had been maybe 6-7 years since I'd handled a shotgun. As I was shooting skeet
with it, I became aware that there was a "problem" with the mechanism. The lever didn't seem to be activating the safety
as it should. I was just raising the shotgun and firing, without having to activate the safety -- or so I thought. In examining
it further, I found that the safety was working perfectly -- I just was automatically taking it off when shouldering the gun to fire,
purely subconsciously.
"And that's all I have to say about that."
John
When I'm around other armed individuals , it's not one's who've carried and used firearms , properly, safely, and frequently over many decades that make me nervous .Repetition of safe handling does not increase the risk of accidents . Quite the opposite .
I've tied my shoe / boot laces countless times . Increasing the number of repetitions (once I learned how as a child ) has not resulted in any failures as yet .
