"Hand on the Gun"

[Roger Phillips]

The "hand on the gun" concept is the concept of having a gun in one of your front pockets with a firing grip already on the gun. This concept is one of the many things that I teach inside of my "Fighting at Night" courses and one of the most deadly dirty tricks that there are.

In this discussion I would like to concentrate on the gun in the front pocket of your pants, not on the gun in the jacket pocket.

When the hand is already on the gun you can reduce your draw stroke time 50%. So if I have a .75 draw stroke (and I do) I can acheive around a .37 -.38 draw stroke. Not bad considering that Jelly Bryce had a .43 draw stroke and Bill Jordan had a .22 draw stroke.

When things do not look right, having the ability to put the hand in the pocket and acquire a firing grip, without anyone being the wiser that you just completed 50% of your draw stroke is a huge advantage. When you work this with the "flashlight in the hand" concept it makes for some devastatingly dirty night fighting tricks. A .37 draw stoke combined with a blinding white light borders on being as easy as shooting fish in a barrel (if you don't believe me come on out to my Low Light FOF courses and you will be made a believer.)

The point of this thread is to nail down the optimal hardware to go along with this optimal tactic. I would like to hear what others are doing, using, tried, found to have worked well, or found to have not worked well.......and why.

We all know that a J-frame is not an optimal weapon. But when it is used inside of it's proper context it can be pretty close to being optimal. As it stands my "go to" "hand on the gun" weapon is my J-frame. The gun already has it's niche as my non-permissive enviroment (NPE) deep concealment gun, so I do get a very significant amount of training with it. Since I do like consistancy across catagories it also doubles as my "go to" "hand on the gun" weapon.

I carry my J-frame in a Garrity leather right handed pocket holster. The gun disappears in NPE's and is smoking fast out of the pocket, as long as it is already in my hand. It is not that quick in a reactive draw stroke, but then again, the vast majority of times that I carry my J-Frame it is as a secondary to my G19 (all except NPE's)

My "gun in the hand" training is predominately about getting the J-frame into action, emptying it into the adversary, then tossing it on the deck and transition to my G19.

I know there are some fine pocket semis out there such as the Rohrbaugh, but the number you can depend on or are actually small enough to draw well from the front pocket seems to be quite low. I own a G26 and would love to find a way to have this work well from my pocket, but have yet to see a solution that allows that huge Block to not print horribly or be drawn well.

Let's discuss this and build the ideal solution......a solution that will allow the "gun in the hand" to be the most ruthless of the dirtiest of tricks.

[Roger Phillips]

The "hand on the gun" is a concept.

There are varying levels of readyness.

1) Hand on the gun with gun in holster

2) Hand on gun with gun partially out of holster

3) Hand on gun with gun nearly all the way out of the holster

4) Hand on gun with gun completely out of the holster yet still in the pocket

5) Gun in hand and out of pocket hidden by palming, behind the leg, in the Secret Service stance, with folded arms, and out of the Jack Benny.

6) Gun in hand and in the action!


Yellow......Orange......Red.......and black.

Being off sides is a very good place to be, especially when nobody knows that you are not just off sides.........you are WAY off sides!

[thesecond]

good thoughts, more comments to follow, but ....

I agree that the j-frame (particularly centennials) potentially can be the fastest type of gun 'out-of-the-pocket', and good within a very specific context of circumstances.

The advantages are no sight snag, rounded at the top lending itself to a faster upward cant as the gun leaves the pocket, not so much apprehension of a 12 lb. trigger dropping a hammer 'early' or 'unanticipated' and all that that implies, and, if one's close enough, all of the other advantages typically associated with enclosed-hammer snubs (e.g., more available point-shoot entry angles to get a round to COM considering that, at contact distances, there invariably will be arms and attempts to 'foul' a shot, ; relatively harder for the assailant to induce a malfunction, thus, more than one round should be available even where one is in 'physical contact' with an assailant; the 'action' of a revolver is more 'covered' than a semi -, and less likely apprehension of a failure to fire simply because the muzzle was covered, the previous round, by a hand or forearm or, maybe some other solid object).

So .... Short-sight radius and manueverability, fires upside-down and all-around, ability to death-grip, reasonably efficient bludgeon/blunt-trauma/improv capabilities without compromising its ability to fire.

There would be definite disadvantages during extended exchanges of fire against normal/high-capacity semi-autos, from outside 20 yards. But I guess that would assume I'm not otherwise able or smart enough to get in a vehicle to exit, or get behind cover or jump a fence or sprint to an entry or do any number of things I'd probably be doing with or without any gun, upon sight of multiples and sounds of 'semi-auto rhythm' ....

When the j-frame is secondary to the G19, is the Glock, for you, same side at 3:30-5, or opposite diagonal at 7-8:30?

How has this affected the positioning of your magazines/speedloaders/speedstrips?

Does your hand bias (tendency to be more left or right-handed, or having greater weakness in the 'weak' hand) affect not only position of primary, but also the positioning of mags/speedloaders/speedstrips?

I've always felt a semi is sub-optimal from the pocket. G26? No way, for me, out of a pocket. I have no interest in learning how not to fumble 'THAT acquisition', when the confluence of the factors come together: relatively light trigger and a short distance/travel, the excess of space, for me, between the front of the trigger guard and the face of the trigger, and the g26 volume compared to overall pocket volume, i.e., despite a covered trigger and a trigger-finger riding high on the slide, the remaining volume in the pocket for the hand to enter and acquire a positive grip doesn't give comfort in the 'margin of error', and I don't consider myself remarkably uncoordinated.

That said, the G26 has its own advantages. It'd just be deployed from elsewhere, e.g., IWB, or the aforementioned man-bag. A higher-capacity 'secondary' like the G26 is more easily deployed if 'clear of physical contact' (yet still under threat of fire, of course). A reasonably fast reset is better suited to quicker follow-ups at extended distance, all things being equal and not-Jerry-Miculek with a modified 625 and full-on holster and moonclip rig. Other subcompacts in the class (PF9, LC9, etc.) have much heavier and longer DAO triggers.

[Roger Phillips]

When the j-frame is secondary to the G19, is the Glock, for you, same side at 3:30-5, or opposite diagonal at 7-8:30?

How has this affected the positioning of your magazines/speedloaders/speedstrips?

Does your hand bias (tendency to be more left or right-handed, or having greater weakness in the 'weak' hand) affect not only position of primary, but also the positioning of mags/speedloaders/speedstrips?

I carry my full size Glock appendix at the 1:00. My pocketed J-frame is in my right front pocket. There is plenty of room for both guns.

My J-frame may become the secondary gun, but the draw stroke from a pocket really sucks unless you have put your "hand on the gun" before the gunfight even starts.

The "hand on the gun" concept is one where the J-frame is actually my primary and my full size Glock becomes the secondary, when there is a possibility of proactive gun fight. The hand goes to the gun as I try to make the ID or stop the encroachment. The plan is to dump five rounds into the badguy, dump it on the ground, and go to the full size Glock. By having the hand on the gun, I cut my draw stroke in half and can be legally "offsides" without any risk of brandishing charges.

If you break away from thinking about the pocket gun as your secondary in a reactive gunfight and look at it as a way to be "offsides" during a proactive gun fight many of the problems with the draw stroke become no issue.

I am about 85% ambidextrous, it would be 100% if it were not due to actual physical damge to the left hand. But even then, I tend to start fighting on the right side just due to the realities of the loss of fine motor skills when you are in a reactive gunfight. I can access my appendix Glock with either hand quite easily.

[MrTuna]

I read your "Flashlight in hand" article and I have a question. If I have profiled a bad guy that looks very dangerous and he tracks me, does not stop when I yell stay the f@&$ back, am I justified to shoot without IDing a gun as your article states? I know my physical limitations and would most likely lose in hand to hand with a 18-30 year old male.

[Bulleteater]

Originally Posted by Roger Phillips

I carry my full size Glock appendix at the 1:00. My pocketed J-frame is in my right front pocket. There is plenty of room for both guns.

I don't have a pocket pistol but I do carry a HAK (Hide Away Knife) in my right front pocket - my "weak" side. Not sure what made me decide on that set up, but after reading Roger's comment above, I decided to move the HAK to my left front pocket, closer to the G19, which rides at 11 o'clock (along with a spare mag on right hip). This leaves all the options I carry accessible to my strong hand in case of an emergency - much more sensible wouldn't you say? At the same time I carry a Surefire flashlight in my right hand whenever I'm out at night, as Roger suggests. The flashlight in hand concept has already paid dividends for me during a random neighborhood dog attack.

Since I don't have a pocket gun the G19 will be the primary, with my knife in pocket for SHTF close quarter work. Everything is situationally dependent. And all my gear works in conjunction with the Surefire as first line of defense for ID'ing an encrouchment. I have no problem with hand on my G19 even in appendix carry. As I understand brandishing laws, the gun has to be "up and out" in a threatening manner to constitute brandishing. Hand on my appendix gun (especially in low light) just looks like I'm scratching my ribs. Not to mention that I'm approaching that age when I'm allowed to scratch at will.

[Roger Phillips]

Originally Posted by MrTuna

I read your "Flashlight in hand" article and I have a question. If I have profiled a bad guy that looks very dangerous and he tracks me, does not stop when I yell stay the f@&$ back, am I justified to shoot without IDing a gun as your article states? I know my physical limitations and would most likely lose in hand to hand with a 18-30 year old male.

It is all about "reasonable fear." If you can articulate reasonable fear of death or grave bodily harm you will most likely be ok.

You do not have to ID a weapon to be able to ID a threat of death or grave bodily harm. When we look at disparity of force there does not even need to be a weapon involved. People die from punches, kicks, and heads hitting the ground all of the time.

Things do not happen inside of a vacum, usually there is a sequence of events that lead up to somebodies death. This sequence of events can be called "the back story." The more aware you are the easier it is to recognize the events that become the back story.

1+1+1+1 adds up to something. To ignore or deny the backstory is a sure way to end up dead.

In the "flashlight in the hand" article moves were made that forced the BG to "show his hand." Most BG's will move onto somebody else if you force them to show you their hand and that is what we want. But if somebody is going to continue on with "the backstory" after we have blinded them, commanded them, and warned them........then something is going on, more than them just wanting to know the time. I am not saying that we shoot "too soon" but we definitely can not wait "too long."

This is all situationally dependent. As long as you are a reasonable person you will most likely know when it is time to use lethal force. Lethal force should be our last option, but we can not wait so long, to the point where we are likely going to lose. That is not an option!

The color code of awareness is a great tool! The life long commitment to avoidance, deterrence, and de-escalation goes hand in hand with that awareness. But we can not allow the "fear mongering" training of the recent past to allow us to hesitate or be in denial.

What was the weapon in this video? Could somebody have been killed?

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headline...rutal-beating/

[thesecond]

+1 "reasonable fear of immediate death or serious bodily injury" is not a 'when' question, but an 'if' question ....

Unarmed doesn't preclude a person from presenting an imminent threat of serious bodily injury or death to you. It's more clear if you can identify something in his hand, or if an approach is combined with obscuring the hands, for example; Less clear if he approaches open-palmed, but that doesn't mean continued approach, despite one, two, or three calls, would not justify your fear, simply because there was nothing in his hands. Watch the hands to the extent that you can. He'll try to keep your eyes on his eyes.

Were you scared of being seriously hurt or killed? Why? How well can you articulate it? I believe this is what Roger's talking about. At the same time you are practicing avoidance and creating opportunities for de-escalation (causing one or more to break off an attack), you are demonstrating, cumulatively, along the intervals of the time line, that his/their 'continued' behavior (approach) created a reasonable fear, at the very least, of serious bodily injury.

The steps Roger emphasizes serve not only to ready you, but to eliminate the ambiguity inherent to a predator's method. Rightly or wrongly in the criminal-legal sense, the robber will make any and all attempts to allay your fear, because one of the objects of a robber who relies on physical strength (or extension weapons, or even a firearm) is to close distance. If you've identified him prior to him being within range, he needs a pretext to continue his approach.

Be proactive by communicating in a way that would leave no doubt, in the mind of a bystander, or in that of the predator, that you fear his continued approach because you believe he's trying to harm you. Of course, he'll tell you, "It's not like that .... Don't be like that!", because, for him, it isn't communication .... it's a script he intends to finish.

And, despite what should be long-discarded playground morality, no one is required to go hands-on; A fight that is forced upon you, and particularly one premised on merely a perceived insult, is a forcible felony (assault, maybe aggravated).

"NOT SO CLOSE!" "STAY AWAY!" even a "Hey, Hey, Hey!" even putting the flashlight hand out (not yet in use) in a 'stop!' gesture, and, of course, "Step the F- back!". Keep it short, but do it loud. I agree that you can't default by simply squaring up, and getting in a stance. You must be prepared to backpedal or move laterally/diagonally, as required. Make use of the off-hand if it can communicate a "NO, get away, don't want any, don't misbehave" (and, incidentally, it's the hand that would be 'engaged' first, if physical contact is unavoidable).

A criminal will always argue to you, and to the police officer, stuff like ....

"I just wanted to know the time from this stranger"
"I just needed a light from this stranger"
"I just needed directions from this stranger"
"I just needed to poke my head in my neigbor's apt. to see if they were home so I could welcome them to the neighborhood/hang out"
"The hand in my jacket pocket was because I wanted to give him my business card"
"I just wanted to ask this stranger if he had any beer on him"
"I though this stranger was waving for me to come over"

.... sometimes, they simply may mumble unintelligibly as they approach (totally unresponsive), hoping that you underestimate their feigned 'drunkenness' .... maybe there will be a group, and their conversation/sitch will 'migrate' toward you.

Did he/they recognize you were there? (Flashlight in the hand - use a lanyard if you feel you're not quick enough to fish around in your pocket to have it ready to go.) Did he/they know that YOU KNOW that he saw you?

Caveat: Folks who don't like to be id'd will NEVER take kindly to being flashed with a bright light. Be advised that this will cause immediate departure (coupled with gestures of indignance) or it will escalate the situation (either because of that same 'indignance' or because it's an excuse offered up to obscure the original intent of his approach).

[MrTuna]

Originally Posted by Roger Phillips

It is all about "reasonable fear." If you can articulate reasonable fear of death or grave bodily harm you will most likely be ok.

You do not have to ID a weapon to be able to ID a threat of death or grave bodily harm. When we look at disparity of force there does not even need to be a weapon involved. People die from punches, kicks, and heads hitting the ground all of the time.

Things do not happen inside of a vacum, usually there is a sequence of events that lead up to somebodies death. This sequence of events can be called "the back story." The more aware you are the easier it is to recognize the events that become the back story.

1+1+1+1 adds up to something. To ignore or deny the backstory is a sure way to end up dead.

In the "flashlight in the hand" article moves were made that forced the BG to "show his hand." Most BG's will move onto somebody else if you force them to show you their hand and that is what we want. But if somebody is going to continue on with "the backstory" after we have blinded them, commanded them, and warned them........then something is going on, more than them just wanting to know the time. I am not saying that we shoot "too soon" but we definitely can not wait "too long."

This is all situationally dependent. As long as you are a reasonable person you will most likely know when it is time to use lethal force. Lethal force should be our last option, but we can not wait so long, to the point where we are likely going to lose. That is not an option!

The color code of awareness is a great tool! The life long commitment to avoidance, deterrence, and de-escalation goes hand in hand with that awareness. But we can not allow the "fear mongering" training of the recent past to allow us to hesitate or be in denial.

What was the weapon in this video? Could somebody have been killed?

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headline...rutal-beating/

Thanks Roger!
He was lucky he was not killed. A friend of mine was jumped from behind at a gas station due to road rage and beaten up pretty bad by one guy. He did not even know what he did on the road to piss him off. Point taken.

Chad

[G19Tony]

I always figured I would have my hand on my gun if things look sketchy. I have a Kel Tec P32. I shoot it well and I can dump the 7 rounds pretty quick COM if I'm 5-7 feet. I'm upgrading to my Kahr CM9 soon. Like my CW9, it needs to go back home for work. But I know Kahr will make it right and it will be as reliable as my CW9.

Thanks, Roger for another good discussion. I hope to get to another class soon.