No immediate harm to a person present - no way justified.
That’s either fake news or a piss poor ADA.
This goes into legalities of duty to render aid. Common citizens have no duty to render aid to anyone. However, if you start you must see it through (legally). The most common example for this is if you see someone drowning. You don’t have to help them, but if you choose to you cannot begin to help and then abandon them without consequence.
All researchable incidents. Joe Horn is the most prominent.
“Justified” seems to be dependent on geopolitical location. I personally have no problem with the shooting of a thief/robber in defense of property even if they don’t pose an immediate threat of death or injury.
I’m not even close to alone in that sentiment where I live, but I realize if you poll any random Joe on the street in Los Angeles, NY or whatever they would likely find the idea abhorrent.
Dialing back from protection of property to protection of another’s life or wellbeing, it does absolutely blow my mind that people would see legal red tape in doing so.
This i agree with. Protecting another from physical harm or death should be allowed if evidence shows clear and immediate harm to the person being protected.
Neither do I. I actually would have no problem (well, no huge problem with…depending on the amount of time between) with the victim of a theft hunting down and killing the thief long after the criminal act. There would be a simple way to prevent such incidents: Don’t take other people’s shit.
Agreed.
For the lady shooter:
A lot of holsters still feel huge or uncomfortable, and as a result I end up purse-carrying or not carrying at all. But this one is actually so discreet and comfortable that I have no excuse not to anymore. Highly recommend.
You pocket carry a P365?
Nope.
Alright. I was trying to figure out how you were able to pocket carry one in women’s clothing when I can’t even see mine fitting in any of my pockets.
Sorry for the short answer the other night. I was exhausted and getting ready for bed when I saw that!
So I used that sticky for appendix carry. I have a couple Kydex holsters and a leather one, but could never conceal them well enough or even get comfortable.
But the one I linked to felt so good even while sitting and bending over. You can’t really see the holster here because it’s black and blends in, but this was where I had it.
What do you guys think of PCC’s? I like the idea of interchangeable magazines for a given caliber. And this guy makes them look like a ton of fun. 
I like mine. I put a blast forwarding device on it. If you can find subsonic ammo that stays subsonic thru the longer barrel, it’s comparatively quiet. I ran different ammo thru a chronograph and was surprised to get over 500ft/lbs of energy with some cheap CCI ammo.
These are not sub rounds either.
B&T PDW SPC with a 8.2 inch BT QD can.
I have a slew of PCC’s. Most of them are pretty decent. Some stand out.
Depends on the design, but generally they’re pretty rad. I have a 9mm AK variant that I adore.
Our shooting world is full of stuffed egos with no practical or combat experience, if you are going to pay your hard earned dollars for training, do some serious research. A lot of the best openly compete and are not hestiate to show their skills.
A friendly challenge for all the big name or not so well known instructors out there… Your class standards and challenge coins or pins are cool but if you want to say you’re a top level shooter and speak so arrogantly about your level of skill, please put your skills on display at a match for everyone to see. I’ve seen some really great shooters look like a fish out of water when they actually have to display their skills in a competitive setting. If you don’t actually go out and compete with the weapons you instruct on you are a paper tiger as far as your proclaimed skills go. You can do things in controlled environments but not when you haven’t set the stage for performance. Just my friendly opinion or observation.
Nailing a demo in class or meeting your own defined standards that you’ve shot 1,000’s of times means that you can perform a practiced and rehearsed set of skills when required in a controlled setting. In a competition or match you are required to display a variety of different skill sets which cover a larger range of skills. Stationary shooting skills are important… but so are a bunch of other skills. Put yourself out there in uncomfortable settings. On top of that it’s fun. I know those who I’ve tagged are all doing it whether they promote it or not.
In addition… holding a specific rank or classification in a certain method of competition only matters if you can actually shoot at that level. Making it to a certain classification means you were something at one specific point in time. If you can’t continue to perform at that level anymore you shouldn’t be defined by that respected classification. You were once somebody in a given performance metric… but are you still?
For the students out there, If you want to get better, go out and shoot a match. Your current skill level will be exposed. Good or bad. But you will have a laundry list of things to practice and focus on. Don’t put hours into practicing an instructors standards because you want a fancy trinket to give yourself some self worth or validation. Here’s a honest question to ask yourself… Why are you even training in the first place?
