Skiprr wrote:My humble opinion is that carrying without one in the chamber provides you with, in the majority of instances in which you might need it, a potentially useful striking implement.
When this subject comes up, there is always a lot of discussion about the added time--not to mention the practice--it takes to draw, rack, present, and engage as opposed to draw, present, engage. But I'd argue that time is perhaps not the most important factor.
Outside of your home or an active shooter event, the best information we have shows that 90% of the time employment of use of deadly force will happen at a distance of less than 15 feet: 6 to 15 feet, 9%; 3 to 6 feet, 47%; contact to 3 feet, 34%. This is one reason to disregard examples of carry by the military (other than SpecOps), including Israeli Carry. Concealed carry in an urban environment is quite dissimilar to the typical military carry. Remember, too, that seeing multiple assailants in violent crimes is not uncommon.
Inside a radius of 10 feet, defending your life is about fighting, not about marksmanship. If you were Zatoichi and could slice a fly on the wing in half with the 28-inch katana you hada at your side, you very likely wouldn't need to carry a handgun. But we can't carry a sword, don't have those kinds of skills, and need something to help put us on (nearly) equal footing with the felon.
Reaction will always be slower than action. If the bad guy is even 15 feet from you and has immediate intention to do you harm, you're already way on the downside of the OODA Loop; you need every bit of help you can get. That means training first--both evasive and combatives--and tools second.
With a handgun, it isn't so much about the additional time needed to rack the slide as it is the additional hand required to do it. Essentially, it's the difference between carrying an Uncle Buck manual folding knife compared to a modern, spring-assist folder. If the only tool you have on your person is a knife and a bad guy rushes you from 15 feet, or has already encroached closer than 6 feet to ask if you the directions to wherever, which do you want? The Uncle Buck or a tactical folder that you can bring to play with one hand?
I have no misconceptions about my physical abilities as they decline with age. If I have to defend my life or my family's, I would choose a quickly deployable tool that fires an effective projectile rather than a 32-ounce metal-and-polymer mini-club.
This is also why I advocate a draw stroke that includes an indexed position pressed high against the ribcage before press-out. I'm not an advocate of the rock-and-lock...but even that is seldom practiced by most CHLers. The most practiced drawstroke, and what you'll see in IDPA and USPSA competition, is the one that rewards presentation to full, extended sight picture as quickly as possible. Statistics show that 81% of the time, the bad guy will be 6 feet or less from you. Patterning the conventional drawstroke is a recipe for failure at that distance.
Inside of 6 feet, even if you have time, you absolutely do not want to extend the gun toward the target at all. You want that handgun high and tight to your body where it's very difficult to grab or deflect, and you want your offhand free to block or strike. We seldom have the ability to practice this at the range simply because of the inherent safety concerns. But there's always dry-fire and Airsoft. IMHO, this pectoral-indexed position and the ability to deliver shots to the pelvic girdle of an attacker within arm's length should be practiced by every CHL holder to the point of unconscious competence. To me it stands to reason that if 80% of potential engagements happen at close distances, handling that situation should get 80% of my training.
And if you don't have one in the chamber ready to go, your best hope is that the bad guy is frightened enough by the mere site of your gun that he runs away. Just sayin'...
