I agree... no one should have an AR in their car. They should have an AK.
Like I said, you be you, and I'll be me. It's what makes the world go round.
A Truck Gun, Fantasy or Reality - GRYlife Article
- Thread starter NEATFREQ
- Start date
I agree... no one should have an AR in their car. They should have an AK.
Like I said, you be you, and I'll be me. It's what makes the world go round.
While I sometimes do carry a "truck gun", the OP made several valid points. Like every single other consideration when talking firearms, tactics and techniques, you need to weigh the pros and the cons and make a choice based on what is most important to YOU. Everyone looks at things a little differently, and has different sets of life experiences and training, so not everyone will come to the same conclusion. Doesn't make them right or wrong, just......different.
There are a few things that I do consider wrong. Towards the top of the list is that if you carry a firearm, regardless of capacity, you need to carry at least 1 spare reload for that weapon. Statistically, if you're involved in a gunfight with a single assailant, you will fire every single round that was in your handgun. What if, like happens in the majority of the situations, there are 2 assailants? Whatcha gonna fight him with? After being in a fight for your life, how comfortable are you waiting for LE to arrive, while you sit there with any empty gun?
Never heard a valid argument for refusing to carry a reload. Most folks just don't wanna bother with additional weight/gear. That's just laziness and shows that your decision to carry a firearm for self-defense is either just window dressing, or delusional.
In Georgia, the defense for using deadly force is, paraphrased, "in defense of your life or to prevent serious bodily injury to yourself, OR TO PREVENT DEATH OR SERIOUS BODILY INJURY TO ANOTHER". So, once you have left the scene, it can be argued that you are no longer in danger, but you can easily argue that you are assisting the innocents still on the scene, to prevent their death or serious bodily injury.
This ain't Massachusetts. In Georgia you do not have an obligation to flee danger and leave the bad guy to his nefarious works. You can be the Good Samaritan and attempt to "save the day".
Amongst the many courses is teach is one I wrote specifically for civilians; Residential Room Clearing & Response to Active Shooter. All these considerations, and much more, are covered in depth and in detail.
I am still actively employed as a LEO and have been a LEO, either local or Federal, for over 20 years now. Large portion of that as an Instructor and SWAT member.
If you choose to carry any sort of firearm in your vehicle, it needs to be securely stowed, not just locked inside. Amazing what you can do with a heavy chain, a stout padlock, and a sturdy seat bracket.
There are a few things that I do consider wrong. Towards the top of the list is that if you carry a firearm, regardless of capacity, you need to carry at least 1 spare reload for that weapon. Statistically, if you're involved in a gunfight with a single assailant, you will fire every single round that was in your handgun. What if, like happens in the majority of the situations, there are 2 assailants? Whatcha gonna fight him with? After being in a fight for your life, how comfortable are you waiting for LE to arrive, while you sit there with any empty gun?
Never heard a valid argument for refusing to carry a reload. Most folks just don't wanna bother with additional weight/gear. That's just laziness and shows that your decision to carry a firearm for self-defense is either just window dressing, or delusional.
In Georgia, the defense for using deadly force is, paraphrased, "in defense of your life or to prevent serious bodily injury to yourself, OR TO PREVENT DEATH OR SERIOUS BODILY INJURY TO ANOTHER". So, once you have left the scene, it can be argued that you are no longer in danger, but you can easily argue that you are assisting the innocents still on the scene, to prevent their death or serious bodily injury.
This ain't Massachusetts. In Georgia you do not have an obligation to flee danger and leave the bad guy to his nefarious works. You can be the Good Samaritan and attempt to "save the day".
Amongst the many courses is teach is one I wrote specifically for civilians; Residential Room Clearing & Response to Active Shooter. All these considerations, and much more, are covered in depth and in detail.
I am still actively employed as a LEO and have been a LEO, either local or Federal, for over 20 years now. Large portion of that as an Instructor and SWAT member.
If you choose to carry any sort of firearm in your vehicle, it needs to be securely stowed, not just locked inside. Amazing what you can do with a heavy chain, a stout padlock, and a sturdy seat bracket.
As a LEO that owns a successive firearms training school, that teaches civilians, LE, and military, I am not influenced by whether or not the subject on the scene in plainclothes is carrying a handgun or a long gun. The LEO's that I know and know well are not influenced by this either.
This would be akin to trying to pick out the LEO due to his clothes or haircut.
This would be akin to trying to pick out the LEO due to his clothes or haircut.
So if my pants were at my ankles and I was holding my gun sideways I'm just as likely LEO as any other normal Joe? Puleeze.
Sadly, yes. I've seen LEO's that did exactly that during training scenarios.
During a Simunitions training scenario, I was trying to clue the plainclothes LEO in on the fact that he had yet to ID himself, either verbally or by showing a badge.
I kept asking, "Why should I listen to you? Who are you?"
He took his support hand off his gun, held it dead sideways, pointed it at me, and said, "Cuz I'm tha muthafuckin' po-leese, bitch!"
Not exactly the type of behavior one would prefer in a LEO during a stressful encounter, but there you are.
Cops were people long before they were cops. They bring to the table their own mannerisms, ingrained in them from the environments they grew up in, and oftentimes still live in. Add to that the fact that many folks, regardless of their chosen profession, are impressionable to things they observe on TV/movies/videos/social media.
I've been doing this for over 20 years now. I've seen folks act in a wide variety of ways.
In addition, you have officers that are working undercover, or have worked undercover for many years. In order to survive and play their role, they have to adopt methods of dress, speech and other mannerisms to make themselves more believable and effective.
I used to go out and buy crack from street corner dealers while working undercover. Do you think I didn't attempt to alter nearly everything about myself?
Once I worked undercover as a "hit man" who a neurosurgeon wanted to hire to kill his wife. Again, a change in how I conducted myself, in my mannerisms.
These were UC operations that I did that were relatively short-time. A few to a couple of weeks at a time. There are UC operatives that are in for YEARS. Hard to shake the mannerisms that you adopt.
I used to go out and buy crack from street corner dealers while working undercover. Do you think I didn't attempt to alter nearly everything about myself?
Once I worked undercover as a "hit man" who a neurosurgeon wanted to hire to kill his wife. Again, a change in how I conducted myself, in my mannerisms.
These were UC operations that I did that were relatively short-time. A few to a couple of weeks at a time. There are UC operatives that are in for YEARS. Hard to shake the mannerisms that you adopt.
That, I believe, is one of the issues here in this discussion. You state, "If I am ever in that situation....".
I have been in that situation, more than once, as have other LEO's here. We are speaking from PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, not armchair quarterbacking.
When someone who has never been a LEO "states" how LEO's will react or how they routinely operate, we understandably question your ability to make an accurate judgement. Just like I would not make the same type of judgements on the actions of a fighter pilot, school teacher, or garbage man. I haven't had the same training and REAL WORLD EXPERIENCES that they have had, so any calls I make on the actions they would take on their job are purely an exercise in mental masturbation.
So tell me this, do you purposefully not take into account prior experience and approach each situation as if you were brand new to interacting with humans, or in a high stress situation assume the guy dressed like a banker is a banker, and the guy dressed like a gang member is a gang member until you find out otherwise?
Just to try and get this train wreck back a little closer to its original lane; I like the article and enjoyed reading it. I will recommend it my students.
The author and I do not agree on a few points, but that does not mean that either of us is wrong......and I'm not saying that ANYTHING the author said is wrong, although we disagree. Me saying the author is wrong because he doesn't come to the same conclusion as me would be akin to me saying he's wrong because he said Golden Retrievers are the best dog in the world.
Both of us bring a different set of experiences to the table, as well as different training. We both looked at the same lists of pros and cons and simply ranked them differently. Therefore, the final decision ends up being different between us. Same facts, same circumstances, but we look at them differently.
When I get asked about whether or not someone should carry a truck gun, I attempt to give them the pros and cons and let them come to their own decision on the matter. Same as I do when asked about CCW. Quite frankly, a large portion of the folks that CCW really shouldn't. They're more of a danger to themselves and others than they are a help. Just so you don't think that I'm knocking on civilian CCW's, I also think that a large portion of LEO's need to find another job.
My personal/professional summary of the OP's article:
Good read with excellent points
I will recommend it to my students who have questions/concerns about carrying long guns in their vehicles
My results vary a tad
I do not, and never have. That's a recipe for disaster, it's against the training I've received, and contradictory to many real world experiences I've had.
To attempt to ID someone as a threat or not based simply on the way they are dressed is a bad tactic of the highest order. Not only that, if you end up in court, you will not be backed up in any way, shape, or form by any of your relevant training or accepted practices, rules, or regulations.
As a civilian, the statement, "I shot him cuz he looked like a thug" ain't gonna get you very far, either.
There are LEO's that I know well, and trust, that routinely dress like folks I used to arrest when I worked street crimes. I don't judge friends, or enemies, by the clothing they wear.
Not all active shooters are dumb, or cut from the same cloth. If I was going to shoot up a mall, why would I wanna dress like Jihad Joe? I would either dress like the average visitor to that mall, or go to Amazon.com and order a full black SWAT uniform, including large patches that say POLICE on them. Kinda puts a spin on things, don't it?
The ONLY exception to this would be if I were a LEO dispatched to the scene and the dispatcher gave me a specific description of the perp. Even then, I'm going to treat that description with a heavy dose of salt. I've had dispatchers give me the victim's description instead of the perp's. Also, the dispatcher is getting their information from someone with a cell phone. How do I know the complainant is seeing what they think they're seeing? How do I know the complainant on the phone isn't actually the perp, trying to muddy the waters?
All these things are considerations that I went through from Day 1 back in 1996. They aren't new thoughts brought on by this thread, although active shooter is a bigger consideration now than it was then.
Nowhere in the Official Code of Georgia Annotated (OCGA, the Georgia "lawbook") is there mention of offense or defense in regards to deadly force.
The bad guy is always going to start on the offense; that's what makes him the bad guy. We have to start on the defense, but as quickly as possible we need to go on the offensive. Going on the offensive is what wins fights, stops bad guys, and brings good guys home.
So, if the bad guy starts the ball rolling, and I take it and run it back into him, effectively going on the offensive, there is nothing in the OCGA saying that I cannot do so, as long as the threat is still a threat to myself AND/OR others.
Nowhere in the OCGA under the sections dealing with deadly force is any sort of mention firearms or any specific type of weapon. There is only "deadly force". So, no distinction between handguns/rifles/shotguns, knives, tomahawks, machetes, baseball bats, hammers, or the front bumper of my 2001 Dodge Ram 2500. Deadly force is deadly force. It is the intent and result of the use of the items, not necessarily the items themselves, that cause it to be deadly force.
If I'm driving down the road and I see a state trooper being shot on the side of the rode, I could:
A. Stop my truck, draw my handgun, and shoot the offender
B. Stop my truck, grab my "truck gun", and shoot the offender
C. Accelerate my truck and run over the offender
Same results, same statutes apply in all 3 scenarios.
I worked a domestic where the wife shot the husband. She was charged with Murder. I worked another domestic where the wife ran over the husband twice (forward and then back) with her Cadillac. I rammed her vehicle with mine and stopped her from running him over a third time. She was charged with Murder.
The bad guy is always going to start on the offense; that's what makes him the bad guy. We have to start on the defense, but as quickly as possible we need to go on the offensive. Going on the offensive is what wins fights, stops bad guys, and brings good guys home.
So, if the bad guy starts the ball rolling, and I take it and run it back into him, effectively going on the offensive, there is nothing in the OCGA saying that I cannot do so, as long as the threat is still a threat to myself AND/OR others.
Nowhere in the OCGA under the sections dealing with deadly force is any sort of mention firearms or any specific type of weapon. There is only "deadly force". So, no distinction between handguns/rifles/shotguns, knives, tomahawks, machetes, baseball bats, hammers, or the front bumper of my 2001 Dodge Ram 2500. Deadly force is deadly force. It is the intent and result of the use of the items, not necessarily the items themselves, that cause it to be deadly force.
If I'm driving down the road and I see a state trooper being shot on the side of the rode, I could:
A. Stop my truck, draw my handgun, and shoot the offender
B. Stop my truck, grab my "truck gun", and shoot the offender
C. Accelerate my truck and run over the offender
Same results, same statutes apply in all 3 scenarios.
I worked a domestic where the wife shot the husband. She was charged with Murder. I worked another domestic where the wife ran over the husband twice (forward and then back) with her Cadillac. I rammed her vehicle with mine and stopped her from running him over a third time. She was charged with Murder.
That's one of the good things about long guns; their versatility.
