Hell in a Handbasket

This is regrettable, but it is certainly understandable at the same time. Anyone who devotes all that time and physical exertion to gaining mastery of their martial art will not be happy if someone says that they have been wasting their time should they come up against a practitioner of this other style!

It isn't possible to advocate the carrying of concealed firearms for defense without running in to the same kind of debate. But while the major debate is over which specific martial art style is the best, with handguns it usually comes down to make and caliber.

There were two major camps in this debate for many decades. There were those who insisted that a 1911 style pistol chambered for the .45 ACP cartridge was the very best self defense tool ever designed by God or Man, and then there was the rest of us who really didn't want to sit through yet another rant about how we were utter idiots for not seeing this right off.

A 1911 / .45 ACP combination is an effective and useful self defense package, but what is really impressive is the extreme emotions it produced in those who favor them. There was one time when I was at my favorite handgun range with a few new shooters I was introducing to armed self defense, and a 1911 enthusiast insisted on interrupting the class so he could loudly denigrate me for "...teaching them wrong!"

His point was that I had to be ignoring my responsibilities to my students since they were practicing with something other than a .45 ACP. With any lesser caliber, so he said, effective self defense was pretty much impossible since a criminal would ignore their wounds and continue with the attack, only to die from blood loss later in the day. But anyone shot with a .45 couldn't help but stop immediately!

Like I said, the 1911 / .45 ACP combination is a respectable and useful self defense tool. It is also obvious that not all 1911 enthusiasts hold such extreme views, and the blowhard which interrupted my class was a very vocal minority. But that and similar experiences has made me cautious and wary when I meet someone who carries a 1911 until I find out if they are a fanatic.

I pointed out above that there were two major camps in the "mine-is-better" firearms debate for many years, but a third faction has arisen in the past ten years or so. These are the Glock enthusiasts.

People who favor Glocks as their choice for self defense insist that the gun is so rugged, and the design is so technologically advanced, that anyone who makes a lesser choice is mad! Which caliber the gun uses is simply meaningless, as all non-Glocks are inferior.

I would have to say that the pro-1911 crowd has an edge so far as the number of fanatics and their annoyance level, if only because no Glock fan has ever interrupted one of my classes. But, then again, 1911's have been popular for a lot longer than Glocks. Given enough time, I have no doubt that it will happen eventually.

It is certain that some of my readers will want to know my own opinions on some of the issues I discussed above, so I figure that it would be best to address them here instead of in a bunch of Emails.

So far as the "Glock vs 1911 vs everything else" debate is concerned, I think that any reliable handgun chambered for a reasonably powerful round is just fine and dandy for self defense.

Most of my students are people of limited financial means, and a fair number of them have turned to family heirlooms instead of shouldering the expense of buying a new gun. This means that I have cleaned up more revolvers chambered for the .38 Special cartridge than I could ever possibly count.

There certainly is nothing wrong with .38 revolvers, and I think that it is fair to say that they have been very effective in defending a great many people from violent criminal attack. I certainly haven't given even a single moment over to worry that my students are less than adequately armed if they choose this combination. A .45 might be more effective than a .38, but it isn't required for effective self defense.

In fact, I don't think the .45 ACP is the end all-be all of effectiveness. For that I would have to suggest the .357 Magnum.

So far as Glocks and 1911's specifically, I usually actively try to discourage my students from choosing either one if they are new to the shooting sports. There isn't anything wrong with either design, but I think they are more suitable for experienced shooters.

The 1911 has a reputation for being a finicky feeder, and some modifications might be necessary before it will reliably work with your favored hollowpoint defensive loads. A new shooter wouldn't know what was wrong if this happened, or what they need to do to fix the problem.

Glocks, on the other hand, are certainly more reliable than 1911's when it comes to chambering different bullet designs. But it has a decided lack of external controls, particularly a thumb safety. Since I have observed that the one safety rule that new shooters have the most difficult time following is "Never touch the trigger until you are ready to fire", I think it is best that they get some seasoning before they rely on a firearm without any external safeties.

(And, before all of you point this out, I know that guns are mechanical devices and safeties are not to be fully trusted. But they can be useful as a training aid.)

Looking at the long and rambling post above, I can't help but wonder at the cognitive cascade that eventually led us down here. We start on swords, which leads to the open hand martial arts, from there we discuss handguns that enjoy a grossly inflated reputation, and finally we discuss cartridge choice.

But, if you followed me all the way down to these nether regions of blogging, you must have found it to be somewhat interesting. Thank you kindly for your attention.