self defense vs 'tactical'? what are your thoughts?
This is a discussion on self defense vs 'tactical'? what are your thoughts? within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; OK I admit this is a little esoteric and out there and I'm probably in the mood for more of a discussion around the campfire ...
September 16th, 2012 12:09 PM
self defense vs 'tactical'? what are your thoughts?
OK I admit this is a little esoteric and out there and I'm probably in the mood for more of a discussion around the campfire than a nuts and bolts search for any true advice but I wondered if any of you see any difference between an armed citizen wanting to protect him/herself and family vs a police officer or soldier and how that difference can effect their choice of weapons etc?
I guess what I am getting at is I have gotten the impression over the years that manufactures will market a firearm for police use and will boast of all it's 'tactical' advantages and market how it will benifit the officer in performing his role whether it be street patrol, undercover, SWAT etc. Then when the police buy-off on it then it spreads throughout the civilian market.
Same is somewhat true of the military. Look at the rise in popularity of the AR platform and how much the M4 has entered the civilian market.
Now don't get me wrong, I own and enjoy a variety of guns and have a Saiga (AK platform) SKS, have had several wonder-9s over the years and I do have an AR stripped receiver and parts kit - just haven't put it together yet.
But now that I have been making a commitment to carry whenever I leave the house and have a loaded defensive firearm on every level of the house, I am wondering if law enforcement/military "tactical" really applies or is relevant to an armed citizen defending his castle or his person? I am not a police officer apprehending felons or raiding a drug house. I am not a soldier in combat. I am just a common Joe protecting his home, family and self. should armed citizens be following law enforcement/military's lead when it comes to self defense or are our needs better served by a completely different paradigm?
Do I need an M4 or tactical this or that to defend my home and castle or it is even wise to do so?? I have the feeling that in reality more home invasions have been stopped and more muggings and rapes and assaults have been prevented with harsh language and pissed off demeanor than everything else combined (not that I want to bank on that or have that as my only option)
Case in point, I am soon to inherit my father's 50+ year old Colt Detective Special. I am planning on teaching my wife to shoot it (she does like to shoot) and putting it into service as one of the home defense guns. Will it really be any less effective as a castle defender than a high-cap Glock?
Does someone really need to get an M4 when they have Grandpa's old lever action 30-30? Is a 'tactical' shotgun with all the rails and gizmos really more effective and practical than a New England Firearms break-open single shot that you can buy at pawn shops all day long for $100? Is it??
Again, I am just wanting to hear your thoughts and musings on armed citizen self defense vs 'tactical.' are they different? are they the same? are they similar or on completely different planes of reality?
What say you?
September 16th, 2012 12:09 PM
September 16th, 2012 12:20 PM
A break-open single shot would be a huge pain in the event of a home evasion by multiple thugs, especially if you miss one. Granted: its better than a sharp stick. Why not implore technology that will help you keep your family safe? Its not like you are setting up claymores and lobbing grenades to stop the threat.
My view it this: If I can aide me in keeping me, or my family safe it could save our lives or reduce injuries. I may be able to stop a threat with a level action, but I also may get shot or killed while taking the extra time needed to work the action as opposed to just pulling the trigger.
Is a cap-n-ball SOA revolver deadly? Of course, but I can defend myself much more efficiently with a modern auto-feeder that has a higher capacity and quicker reloads.
I have a laser-site on my EDC, is it needed? No. But I could afford it, its perfectly legal, doesn't make it any harder to conceal, and certainly could help me in a SD situation. Its certainly not going to get in the way or impede me.
Tactical or otherwise,...Is it practical enough to meet a purpose or it just to look cool? Will it actually aide me in the event of "defecation meeting the ventilation"?
"To blame a gun for a mans decision is to foolishly attribute free will to an inanimate object"- Colion Noir.
September 16th, 2012 12:25 PM
Well, how tactical do you think a 1903 Springfield in .30-06 or a M1 Garand are? Back in the day they were the tactical cat's pajamas.
The explosion of the AR onto the civilian market is a logical step if you look at the history of the civilian firearms market. The M-16 is the longest serving rifle in the history of the US military, millions of veterans have become intimately familiar with them through service. So, it is a natural place for them to look when they want a civilian rifle. The same has been true through virtually the whole history of this nation.
And "Tactical" gets mis-used a lot. It actual denotes something that is " of or relating to combat tactics."
When you are defending yourself, you really need to have some sort of tactical profeciency. I am not saying dress in all black and duct tape SAAPI plates to yourself. But you need to understand basics of cover vs concealment, defensive mindsets, and other techniques.
Tactical is more about mindsets than tools, just because something is black and plastic, doesn't make it tactical, and doesn't make it more deadly that something that is walnut and steel.
Fortes Fortuna Juvat
Former, USMC 0311, OIF/OEF vet
NRA Pistol/Rifle/Shotgun/Reloading Instructor, RSO, Ohio CHL Instructor
September 16th, 2012 12:32 PM
In the famous words of somebody, "if you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck"... With this in mind should someone come in my house I plan to have them so gloriously outgunned that they run like a spotted ape (in the best case.) Between the AR 15 loaded with 2 mags of Hornady tap to high capacity pistols with lights attached to all and the advantage of the home field advantage, I only plan on being the" victim" only when the court is concerned. As a matter of fact I don't like the idea of being a whimpering victim type in any facets of my life... So I give myself every advantage by not limiting myself with nostalgia. If it's in my self defense scheme it will have proven modern technology and hold enough rounds that I won't be at a firepower disadvantage... Ever.
September 16th, 2012 12:34 PM
I, too try to give myself the best chance possible through equipment, training and mindset when the unlikely does occur.
"Who are the ones that we kept in charge? Killers, thieves, and lawyers"
Tom Waits, God's Away on Business
September 16th, 2012 12:50 PM
Great subject of conversation.
I think everyones concept, and needs differ at least slightly.
A lot of people make assumptions, and some follow staistics, and a few are working from first hand
experience. Personal and home defense choices are just that... personal. When reading posts I force myself to keep this in mind. What works for one person may not work for me. Also that another person may not have the resources available to me.
Tactical IMO gets the crown for the most mis-represented word in the english language. No particular piece of equipment or firearm is more tactical than any other. Tactics IMO is the pre-event thought proscess for dealing with a situation. Tactical is the adaptation of available equipment and weapons to be effective in the given situation. Do some weapons and equipment tend to lend themselves to be easier adapted in police, military, or self defense situations?... of course.
My mantra is to train with what you have, and fight with what you have. If all you have is a single shot break top shotgun, and a 6 shot detective special? Work with that. A single shot shotgun, and a detective special in hand beats an M-4, and a 92F on layaway everyday of the week.
September 16th, 2012 01:01 PM
I think the term "tactical" as applied to shooting gear has been grossly over-used as a marketing strategy.
But like it or not, a lot of the stuff hawked as "tactical" is equipment that truly has earned its stripes in hard use. Yours to pick and choose from as necessary. A vertical foregrip on an AR is a highly useful "tactical" accessory, but I don't run one on either of the ARs, by choice. A thigh holster clearly has a "tactical" purpose, and its use for armed civilians is probably unnecessary at home and ill-advised for concealed carry outside of the home.
To your question of the Detective Special vs a Glock, only you can answer "how much is enough." Statistically, the mere presence of a gun has been an effective deterrent to a lot of crime, but the mindset attached to the bearer of the gun is probably a more critical element than the specific gun. And the question of Dick Special vs Glock is moot if the gun is six rooms away from you when the door comes crashing down.
NRA Endowment Member
September 16th, 2012 01:12 PM
"Tactical" is no more than a buzz word anymore. That's why I carry thermonuclear hand grenades--I'm going strategic!
(Take out the BG AND his whole Hood!)
Last edited by OldVet; September 16th, 2012 at 05:39 PM.
Retired USAF E-8. Avatar is OldVet from days long gone. Oh, to be young again.
Paranoia strikes deep, into your heart it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid...
"For What It's Worth" Buffalo Springfield
September 16th, 2012 01:16 PM
strategic!... That's awesome!
Originally Posted by OldVet
September 16th, 2012 01:21 PM
Whatever word they use to describe it, I will continue to train and keep a proper mindset about what Im doing.....
Don"t let stupid be your skill set....
September 16th, 2012 01:24 PM
Tactical to me is training and mindset. I feel very comfortable in my ability to defend myself and my home with a 6 shot .357 and a M1 carbine or pump action shotgun.
If I were going into combat I would choose something else like a M1A2 Abrams
Sometimes I wonder who the old man in the mirror is....
Lord, Grant me a good sword and no need to use it.
September 16th, 2012 01:28 PM
If a feature offers a practical improvement for actual "street" (combat, whatever) performance, then I'm interested. But poseur features are just that, mostly (all?) marketing hype to present something new.
Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
self defense (A.O.J.).
How does disarming
the number of victims?
Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos)
NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.
September 16th, 2012 01:35 PM
ok I'll bite, can you give me an example of a poser feature... Not trying to be argumentative, I just for the life of me think of a major firearms maker offering an utterly useless feature besides maybe an integral trigger lock.
Originally Posted by ccw9mm
September 16th, 2012 01:42 PM
Just a case in point, last week there was a local news story about a home invasion in an affluent, predominantly white suburb of the city I live in. 3 large African
Originally Posted by Ghettokracker71
American males with lengthy criminal histories in their 20s broke out a basement window and entered the home and when they made it upstairs they encounterd a little white trophy wife who was home alone at the time. She yelled, "get out of my house!"
The police caught two of them still in the neighborhood a few minutes later.
Now she was lucky and fortunate and I don't want to have to rely on anger, harsh language and the good will of criminals to keep my family safe but for the common citizen it is very rare that they will be encountering a disciplined force of motivated assailants who will continue to advance in spite of taking fire. the vast majority will flee at the first sign of ANY resistance.
Now if my home were to be invaded would I rather have that single shot in my hands or would I rather have the M4 with 30 rd mags and lasers and tac-lights etc???? Gimme the M4. I was in the military and trained on the AR platform and I am good with it.
But here is something else to add to the discussion. for the cost of that M4 I can get 10 single shot shotguns and have in every room of the house. I am trained in the AR but my family is not. I can teach my wife and both minor children how to safely and effectively use the single shot and with one stashed in every room of the house my home and family does not have to rely on me to get to the room where the M4 is kept and every person can arm themselves regardless of what room they are in.
Now will even that discplined and motivated force continue to advance with 4 people armed in separate rooms delivering fire???
Not a realistic scenario I know but the point is still valid.
September 16th, 2012 02:05 PM
I'm sorry the whole thread seems suspect to me. It's almost as if the OP wants us to admit civilians don't need similar weapons as LEOs & the military.
When it comes to being an American citizen, "Needs" shouldn't have anything to do with it.
As an American "citizen" I should have the right to use whatever means I see necessary to defend my family from any threats. That includes "criminal" bad guys in a HIR or a government that throws the constitution out the window & seeks to infringe further on our rights by sending foreign troops to police American citizens.
Search tags for this page
defense v.s. tactical in handguns
difference between defense or tactical gun
if it's a fair fight your tactics are wrong
self blowjob tactic
self defense rifle tips tactics
selfsuck tactics pic
tactical vs defense handgun
tactical vs self defense
what is difference between defense and tactical rifle
what is the difference between tactical and defensive pistols
what isa difrence in tactical self defense gun
Click on a term to search for related topics.