Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: dual carry

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    west bend, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    26

    Post imported post

    is it ok to dual carry opened or can u only carry one gun openedly? and on another note i have no guns as when i move i sold them so im just looking for ideas as it would help me end up buying according to what is commfortable to me im thinking dual 44 mags or 357 revolvers as there kinda my main thing if not a revolver prob a custom pair of 1911s

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member springfield 1911's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Racine, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    484

    Post imported post

    There is nothing stating you're limited to oc carry only1 firearm but I think it would feed into the public perception of the wildwild west gunslinger and have a negitive effect at this point and time.

    Welcome to the forum
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJQ34JTqk0I

    In the ashes burns an ember of liberty, We are the fuel to ignite the ember into a flame of liberty.

    The embodiment of our founding fathers will not be found in one man , But in Many.

    ****** give it away ( Our rights ) prostitutes sell it (Mandated training).

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    west bend, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    26

    Post imported post

    lol i can see that but i think nomatter what imma get crap personaly i have a few tattoos and peircings

  4. #4
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    196

    Post imported post

    tattoos and piercings wont matter..no matter what anyone else says rights dont care what you look like. its how you handle yourself that matters... if you pull a gun just because someone says something derogatory towards you.. then you will be charged.. and probably deserve it..

    leave it in the holster until you have to use it.. and noone should care.

    and welcome to the forums

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    west bend, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    26

    Post imported post

    i would never pull a gun unless i was going to kill someone not to sugar coat it but thats what would happen if i did or i would be dead



    edit wow makes me sound like ied look for trouble and or that i have no gun experiance older folks in here gimme ur input sm i right or wrong

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran GlockMeisterG21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Pewaukee, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    637

    Post imported post

    Going out with dual pistols not only puts out a bad image but is extremely impractical for self-defense proposes. You are far more accurate with 2 hands on your gun than only one. Then comes reloading issues....I just don't recommend it.

    As for your last statement do some reading or maybe take a course in firearm self-defense. Instruction is always your best course of action but it can get pricey so a few good books can be a good second choice.

    “The 1911 pistol remains the service pistol of choice in the eyes of those who understand the problem. Back when we audited the FBI academy in 1947, I was told that I ought not to use my pistol in their training program because it was not fair. Maybe the first thing one should demand of his sidearm is that it be unfair.” — Col. Jeff Cooper, GUNS & AMMO, January 2002

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,422

    Post imported post

    *

  8. #8
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Yuma, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    923

    Post imported post

    One of the most effective dual carry techniques is to carry one openly and one concealed. That way you get some of the benefits of both. I also recommend carrying a good folding knife with you.

  9. #9
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Yuma, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    923

    Post imported post

    GlockMeisterG21 wrote:
    Going out with dual pistols not only puts out a bad image but is extremely impractical for self-defense proposes. You are far more accurate with 2 hands on your gun than only one. Then comes reloading issues....I just don't recommend it.

    As for your last statement do some reading or maybe take a course in firearm self-defense. Instruction is always your best course of action but it can get pricey so a few good books can be a good second choice.
    Haven't you ever heard of a "New York Reload"? It is where you empty one pistol and instead of reloading it, simply grab another loaded pistol. Another advantage is that if one pistol malfunctions, you have another instantly available. I don't see that carrying two pistols creates any worse image than carrying one. Many police carry two pistols, and at least one federal agency issues three. I even read of one case where the first two pistols were discovered in a "frisk" and the third one was used to save the officer's life.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Decoligny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Rosamond, California, USA
    Posts
    1,865

    Post imported post

    uncledrew23 wrote:
    i would never pull a gun unless i was going to kill someone not to sugar coat it but thats what would happen if i did or i would be dead


    edit wow makes me sound like ied look for trouble and or that i have no gun experiance older folks in here gimme ur input sm i right or wrong
    I think you are wrong on this one. I was alway taught "Never point a gun at something you aren't willing to shoot" and "Never shoot something you aren't willing to kill".

    "Willing to kill" and "going to kill" are two very different statements with distinct connotations.

    In a self defense/defense of others situation, you should only pull your gun if use of deadly forcewould be warrented.

    If you have to use your gun, then only shoot to stop the threat. Do not shoot to kill. Intent is critical here. If you post that you will only pull your gun to kill someone, a determined DA could find your post and use that as grounds for a "pre-meditation" arguement and possibly go for Murder One charges.

    If you shoot to stop the threat, and the person dies due to the threat being stopped, well, that is just the bad luck of the person who was the attacker.

    If the person stops being a threat at the sight of the gun being drawn, i.e. throws up his hands, turns and runs, or just stops in his tracks, then the threat has been stopped, no need to fire the gun. This is the case in the vast majority of gun owner vs. bad guy encounters. Over 2 million crimes are stopped each year by gun owners who haven't had to fire their weapon (FBI stats).



  11. #11
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Yuma, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    923

    Post imported post

    Those are good points that you are wise to relate. Another point is that you do not give a statement to the police except for perhaps: "I feared for my life" and I have been advised not to give a statement until I talk to my lawyer.

  12. #12
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818

    Post imported post

    ccwinstructor wrote:
    Those are good points that you are wise to relate. Another point is that you do not give a statement to the police except for perhaps: "I feared for my life" and I have been advised not to give a statement until I talk to my lawyer.
    I personally like the one I heard on TV last night.

    [with your hands where the officer can see them]

    "Officer, his weapon is over there, my weapon is unloaded and over there, I fired in self defense. I'm willing to cooperate fully but would like to have council present when doing so."

    Then shut up.


    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  13. #13
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    New Berlin, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    844

    Post imported post

    "Officer, his weapon is over there, my weapon is unloaded and over there, I fired in self defense. I'm willing to cooperate fully but would like to have council present when doing so."

    Then shut up.
    Even that is too much talking. You've already admitted things you shouldn't have. You admited it was your weapon. You admitted you fired it. You even admitted you had the calmness of mind to unload your weapon. ALL things that could be used against you. The 5th Amendment was not intended to keep criminals from incriminating themselves, it was intended so that the innocent wouldn't incriminate themselves.

    Never talk to the police without your attorney: SAY NOTHING

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08fZQWjDVKE

  14. #14
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Racine, WI
    Posts
    367

    Post imported post

    The class I took gave me 4 (and only 4) things to say when the police arrive... I have it posted up on my desk so I can read it every day...

    1. He/she attacked me.

    This states you are the victim.

    2. I'll sign a complaint.

    Again, you are the victim and willing to cooperate.

    3. There's the evidence.

    Point at items if need be.

    4. I need to talk to my lawyer, and I don't consent to any search.

    This is just as others have stated, and the video in the link. You have just been through a very stressful situation, you adrenaline is rushing, you aren't thinking clearly... talking can only hurt your case, the police are going to try to get information out of you (it's their job), your job is to ****. If you don't feel well ask to be taken to the hospital, this will also give you more time to calm down and clear your head.

  15. #15
    Campaign Veteran GlockMeisterG21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Pewaukee, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    637

    Post imported post

    ccwinstructor wrote:
    GlockMeisterG21 wrote:
    Going out with dual pistols not only puts out a bad image but is extremely impractical for self-defense proposes. You are far more accurate with 2 hands on your gun than only one. Then comes reloading issues....I just don't recommend it.

    As for your last statement do some reading or maybe take a course in firearm self-defense. Instruction is always your best course of action but it can get pricey so a few good books can be a good second choice.
    Haven't you ever heard of a "New York Reload"? It is where you empty one pistol and instead of reloading it, simply grab another loaded pistol. Another advantage is that if one pistol malfunctions, you have another instantly available. I don't see that carrying two pistols creates any worse image than carrying one. Many police carry two pistols, and at least one federal agency issues three. I even read of one case where the first two pistols were discovered in a "frisk" and the third one was used to save the officer's life.
    Yes, I have though not under that name. By carrying two pistols, I was assuming that the OP was speaking about carrying on both hips. Carrying two guns of the same size and caliber, to be used at the same time. As I said, I don't personally like this for it's image and it's impracticality. But that's only MY opinion. The OP has the right to do this if he wants, it's just not something I would do. Please understand that OCing here has only recently become practical and we're fighting antis left and right to keep it. Some people may disagree but I think the image we put out could affect us in the long term.

    On to backups. WI has a no-CC law so carrying a concealed backup is illegal. It's total BS, but that's the law. Personally I think having a concealed backup is a good idea and would have one myself if it were not illegal here. Something small, on the ankle, would be my personal choice. I've been looking at several small automatics and am thinking about the a .380 Bersa. Just floating the idea around if CC ever passes.
    “The 1911 pistol remains the service pistol of choice in the eyes of those who understand the problem. Back when we audited the FBI academy in 1947, I was told that I ought not to use my pistol in their training program because it was not fair. Maybe the first thing one should demand of his sidearm is that it be unfair.” — Col. Jeff Cooper, GUNS & AMMO, January 2002

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    west bend, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    26

    Post imported post

    reply lol guys im not looking to argue back and forth for most things if im ready to shoot a person .i feel im am going to die . i would not pull a gun unless i would. i have alot of gun experiance. i just sold my guns when i moved back to west bend as they can be a bit of how should i say.they willtry to bust u for nothing.i say on here if i pull a gun ied kill someone .if i didthe reason why is i dont am to wound. i have trained not to wound but to kill and there is something called muscle memory. i also know u could be shaken up in that situation .if i did wound it would be because i am shaken up that my be better then killing a person.the point is even if a DA were to send me down the river why should i care prison for doing what is right over being dead for second guessing ??? ied rather take prison.this world has become weak, people on here argue this is right and wrong .i say just do what u believe.btw if i could ied carry four guns i would but thats to impractical .if i did something like that ied want a ccw to pass think of a gun as jewelry as that what it is unless u have to use it. a gun is harmless is harmless in no ones hands .so is that gun also harmless in a holster ? yes until u have to use it to protect u and urs .i am a bit different i think a person should be able to carry anything and my point is would people want missiles if they knew there neighbor owned one ? i dont think so. i think guns and knifes are a fundimental right cause they have more uses then say something that causes total devestation.i think people long ago started there cry wolf guns kill, knives kill and didnt think people that follow the laws dont do that.then u also have human rights u have the right to die and thats about it in this modern world .but if u are a criminal or rich u have more rights then the men that run ur country by making u all ur money .

    PS I BITCH AT TIMES my rights and beliefs are not bases on the constitution or god there based on freedom and it sure aent something most people have in there world of delusion

  17. #17
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818

    Post imported post

    hugh jarmis wrote:
    "Officer, his weapon is over there, my weapon is unloaded and over there, I fired in self defense. I'm willing to cooperate fully but would like to have council present when doing so."

    Then shut up.
    Even that is too much talking. You've already admitted things you shouldn't have. You admited it was your weapon. You admitted you fired it. You even admitted you had the calmness of mind to unload your weapon. ALL things that could be used against you. The 5th Amendment was not intended to keep criminals from incriminating themselves, it was intended so that the innocent wouldn't incriminate themselves.

    Never talk to the police without your attorney: SAY NOTHING

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08fZQWjDVKE
    I've watched the videos in the links that you put up in the other thread. Maybe what Isaw on TVisn't the best but I don't think that saying absolutely nothing is the best either. Maybe something in-between.

    In the real world the officer is going to want to know that he is safe so that you don't get shot. You need to somehow identify yourself as the victim. Maybe unloading the weapon isn't the best option, maybe you should just put it out of reach. You will be asked, and should answer where the weapon is, especially if you're at gunpoint.

    Another real world scenerio. You and your attacker are the only witnesses and you have to call the police. What do you do? Call and just breath heavily into the phone until someone shows up? No. But your taped 911 call is as good as talking to the police and weall know that not calling 911 is a worse idea so your going to have to say something.

    Once the police show up I think that you should let the officer know that you are willing to cooperate but should, in no uncertain terms, tell them that you will do so only when your lawyer is by your side.

    So maybe something like this would be more appropriate:

    1. All hell breaks loose.

    2. Make sure you aren't in any more danger.

    3. Call the 911 and tell them to send the ambulance and police as there has been a self defense shooting. (they're gonna ask! You have to say something! Might as well say self-defense shooting and not just shooting)

    4. When you see that the police are close, get rid of your weapon and walk into an area where they will be able to easily spot you when they get there,with your hands where they can see them.

    5. Say "I've been attacked, the attacker is over there. I'm willing to cooperate fully but won't answer any questions until I have legal council."



    That seems like more of a real-world scenerio to me.

    And of course, if they have to ask, don't consent to anything. Most likely they won't ask anyway as they most likely have probable cause at this point.

    All I'm saying is that I think the ROBOTIC "I plead the 5th, I plead the 4th" doesn't really make sense in a situation where you need to look out for number 1. Specifically by not being shot by the police.




    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    west bend, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    26

    Post imported post

    oh and btw my email is UNCLEDREW23@yahoo.com and uncledrew23 for my yahoo messenger to people we need to talk and get out much more then we already do as i dont have a gun maybe i can get a shirt right now. i love the economy and being layed off

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    Decoligny wrote:
    I think you are wrong on this one. I was alway taught "Never point a gun at something you aren't willing to shoot" and "Never shoot something you aren't willing to kill".

    "Willing to kill" and "going to kill" are two very different statements with distinct connotations.

    In a self defense/defense of others situation, you should only pull your gun if use of deadly forcewould be warrented.

    If you have to use your gun, then only shoot to stop the threat. Do not shoot to kill. Intent is critical here. If you post that you will only pull your gun to kill someone, a determined DA could find your post and use that as grounds for a "pre-meditation" arguement and possibly go for Murder One charges.

    If you shoot to stop the threat, and the person dies due to the threat being stopped, well, that is just the bad luck of the person who was the attacker.

    If the person stops being a threat at the sight of the gun being drawn, i.e. throws up his hands, turns and runs, or just stops in his tracks, then the threat has been stopped, no need to fire the gun. This is the case in the vast majority of gun owner vs. bad guy encounters. Over 2 million crimes are stopped each year by gun owners who haven't had to fire their weapon (FBI stats).
    I believe that 'point' is too narrow for safety's sake and teach, "Cover with the MUZZLE only that which you would destroy."

    LOADED - All guns are loaded until they are not and proven so to all concerned.

    MUZZLE - Cover with the MUZZLE only that which you would destroy.

    TRIGGER - Keep your finger off the TRIGGER. Keep YOUR finger off THAT TRIGGER.

    TARGET - Know and love your TARGET and what is beyond.

  20. #20
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    New Berlin, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    844

    Post imported post

    Another real world scenerio. You and your attacker are the only witnesses and you have to call the police. What do you do? Call and just breath heavily into the phone until someone shows up? No. But your taped 911 call is as good as talking to the police and weall know that not calling 911 is a worse idea so your going to have to say something.
    I think there is a distinction. If you are in danger, you don't have a choice sometimes. You have to do things that might expose you to liability. Lets face it. Defending your life exposes you to liability. But since defending yourself is better than being dead, its the option we choose.

    However when you are out of danger, your best option remains DON'T talk to the police. Don't agree to be interviewed, don't say anything.

    Does it really matter if you identify yourself to the police? It shouldn't? If its not patently obvious to an officer arriving to the situation who the victim and who the perp is, saying "I'm the victim" doesn't (shouldn't) mean a thing to the cop anyway. How do they know its not the homeowner laying dead and the thug saying "I'm the victim" The police will probably put you on the ground either way.



  21. #21
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818

    Post imported post

    hugh jarmis wrote:
    I think there is a distinction. If you are in danger, you don't have a choice sometimes. You have to do things that might expose you to liability. Lets face it. Defending your life exposes you to liability. But since defending yourself is better than being dead, its the option we choose.
    I agree, you're being exposed to liability whether you like it or not.
    However when you are out of danger, your best option remains DON'T talk to the police. Don't agree to be interviewed, don't say anything.
    Once you are out of danger, I totally agree.
    Does it really matter if you identify yourself to the police? It shouldn't? If its not patently obvious to an officer arriving to the situation who the victim and who the perp is, saying "I'm the victim" doesn't (shouldn't) mean a thing to the cop anyway. How do they know its not the homeowner laying dead and the thug saying "I'm the victim" The police will probably put you on the ground either way.
    I just thinkyou have to at least imply that you are not the wrong doer andlet them know that you want to cooperatebut will be exercising your rights. Once again, I just don't want to get shot,especially after going through all that work to defend myself afew minutes ago.
    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,422

    Post imported post

    *

  23. #23
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Racine, WI
    Posts
    367

    Post imported post

    I like the additional items, I added them to my list...

  24. #24
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    , Illinois, USA
    Posts
    778

    Post imported post

    hugh jarmis wrote:
    "Officer, his weapon is over there, my weapon is unloaded and over there, I fired in self defense. I'm willing to cooperate fully but would like to have council present when doing so."

    Then shut up.
    Even that is too much talking. You've already admitted things you shouldn't have. You admited it was your weapon. You admitted you fired it. You even admitted you had the calmness of mind to unload your weapon. ALL things that could be used against you. The 5th Amendment was not intended to keep criminals from incriminating themselves, it was intended so that the innocent wouldn't incriminate themselves.

    Never talk to the police without your attorney: SAY NOTHING

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08fZQWjDVKE
    Not exactly. In large part the 5th was mostly a recognition that most defendants would lie if forced to testify. It has more recntly morphed into something else.

  25. #25
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Yuma, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    923

    Post imported post

    ilbob wrote:
    hugh jarmis wrote:
    "Officer, his weapon is over there, my weapon is unloaded and over there, I fired in self defense. I'm willing to cooperate fully but would like to have council present when doing so."

    Then shut up.
    Even that is too much talking. You've already admitted things you shouldn't have. You admited it was your weapon. You admitted you fired it. You even admitted you had the calmness of mind to unload your weapon. ALL things that could be used against you. The 5th Amendment was not intended to keep criminals from incriminating themselves, it was intended so that the innocent wouldn't incriminate themselves.

    Never talk to the police without your attorney: SAY NOTHING

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08fZQWjDVKE
    Not exactly. In large part the 5th was mostly a recognition that most defendants would lie if forced to testify. It has more recntly morphed into something else.
    I thought it was put in place mostly to prevent forced confessions under torture or other threat.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •