Trego's Mountain Ear

"Serving North Lincoln County"

Tag: shooting

  • I’ve Never Fired A Glock

    It isn’t that I’m some sort of a bigot – or perhaps it is. With a long double action trigger, I tend to shoot low and left. Not a big deal – with the SCCY, I took the sight pusher – a tool that uses a bolt thread to move the rear sight – and put the rear sight in a spot that corrects for my weakness. The SCCY is different from a Glock – a plastic frame and a stainless slide – and double action only – but what do I know? I’ve never fired a Glock. When Glocks first came out, I was learning the ins and outs of the 1911 – and it didn’t seem that good habits for the 1911 transfer seamlessly to the Glock.

    As a kid, it was pretty much revolvers. Dad packed a Smith Victory model that he had salvaged from a sunken plane, and he started me with a High Standard Sentinel. Dad liked 4-inch barrels and double action revolvers. And I learned to use them single action. When I started teaching at Trinidad State, in the mid-eighties, they taught me that God carries a model 1911A1. I learned to hone the sear so I could have a 3 pound trigger pull (the other important changes were a fitted national match bushing in the front, and a tight link at the back. When the trigger doesn’t move far, and doesn’t take much pressure, it’s a lot easier to hit. And the model 1911 (like the 1873) is single action only.

    I guess my first match quality pistol was Thompson Center’s Contender – I used it with a heavy 22 barrel when I hung out with a bunch that shot metallic silhouette. Renata medaled. I never did. In most of my competitive shooting I’ve been treated respectfully, but never had the ability to regularly finish at the top.

    Glocks call their striker fired action ‘safe actions’. They may well be – but the early striker models (around WW1) depended on some cheesy safeties. So, as Glock was coming on, I was learning the 1911. I’m not bigoted against the Glock – it’s just that it came out in the mid-eighties, and it’s probably a bit too modern for me.

  • Use Enough Gun

    I think it was Robert Ruark who coined that phrase. Most occasions where I needed to follow that advice, I’ve had a 22 – which the experts do not classify as enough gun. Whether it’s defense against bears, or against human predators, the experts generally start with a recommendation of using a caliber that starts with 4.

    There are few really good studies that provide data that gives a conclusive answer. Weingarten’s data (https://www.ammoland.com/2024/05/bear-defense-with-handguns-update-20-more-cases-98-effective/) includes “162 handgun-only incidents, not counting the three indeterminate cases. Over a dozen incidents are under investigation. Four failures out of the 161 incidents calculate to a 98% success rate. ” One of the failures was a 44 magnum, and another was a 22 pistol on a polar bear. While there were a lot of 44 magnums in Weingarten’s data set, the biggest takeaway I had from his numbers was that carrying a pistol is more important than the caliber.

    To me that makes sense – I know that a 357 didn’t seem adequate when two of us were less than10 feet from a large Grizzly – fortunately the bear felt the same about being outnumbered 2:1. And there’s always the Bella Twin story from 1953 – she not only took the year’s largest bear with a single shot 22, she used 22 long cartridges instead of 22 long rifle.

    Greg Ellifritz did his own data collection on handgun stopping power (https://www.activeresponsetraining.net/handgun-stopping-power-science-vs-40-years-of-experience ) He begins his article with a simple statement: “Most gunwriters are idiots.” He explains why, then shares a link to his own study (https://www.activeresponsetraining.net/an-alternate-look-at-handgun-stopping-power) That study begins with this graph:

    It’s no surprise to me that the 22 scores higher than the 25ACP – heck, 25 ACP is the only caliber he displays that I’ve never owned. Still, look at how close the 22 is to the 60% line – and realize only the 32 surpasses it. Still, Weingarten has a data set with less than 200 incidents, and Ellfritz’ data set is slightly over 1500 incidents covering ten different calibers. Both data sets suggest that the caliber is of less importance than just having the pistol. Ellefritz says “I also believe the data for the .25, .32 and .44 magnum should be viewed with suspicion. I simply don’t have enough data (in comparison to the other calibers) to draw an accurate comparison. I reported the data I have, but I really don’t believe that a .32 ACP incapacitates people at a higher rate than the .45 ACP!”

    I don’t have a recommended caliber for bears. As a kid, I took 10 black bears with either my single shot 22 or my 22 revolver. Never really knew that I wasn’t using enough gun – and bullet placement is a lot easier when you get in close. My most important rule about a gun in bear country is to have a gun. It’s amazing how much better a 22 has made me feel when the alternative was praying.

    I’m no longer young. I’d like to believe in bear spray – but it’s a new tool, and requires practice to develop the skills needed to use it effectively. I may be slowed down – I am slowed down. But the years have included a lot of practice with revolvers and Browning designed pistols.