So a left-leaning pro-gun control commentator watches a video of a courageous commuter tackling an armed robber and advises viewers “don’t try this at home kids I’m telling you you’re going to get shot.” Whether or not you think that’s wise counsel isn’t really the point. This kind of armed encounter involves so many variables it’s impossible to play ‘parse the pistol.’ But one thing’s for sure: if you’re going to attack your attacker, do so with as much force as you can possibly muster. Go all in as quickly and violently as you possibly can. No holds barred. (Forget the friggin’ iPod.) It’s that aspect of Krav Maga, rather than any trick techniques, that makes it such an effective method of self-defense. But you don’t have to master it to use it.
STOP! My foot is stuck!
I made the mistake of giving these budding Statist hypocrites another view on a video on their channel. None of them have had any idea of what they’re talking about, regardless of whatever the issue that they bring up, for a helluva long time now.
In the beginning, they were able to actually form coherent arguments. Now they’re just establishment Dempublican (or should I say Repulicrat?) stooges.
The only one here who’s right is Farago.
These folks seem to attract the viewers on a large scale but I’m not sure why after trying to watch an episode or 2 ??? Mossberg could probably do better for an endorsement spokesperson/s.
Desert Eagle in .50 AE. I have BIG pockets.
Seriously, I am personally vacillating between a Makarov and a Beretta Nano as far as “small” guns go, but even they I won’t carry in a pocket.
There’s a 90% chance you die, eh? And, he said it so authoritatively. Uh-huh.
the first day I got my c9 I put 100 rounds through it with no problems! I even had the guy in the next line asked me what brand it was because I just like the rapid fire, when I showed him he looked surprised that it was a Hi Point because of the jokes and bad mouthing from the shooting straigh staff, in the other hand when I got my first glock 19 out of the box i have a feeding problem, so buck by buck the hi point is worth the price and it does the job, by the way I do have experience with weapons, I still prefer a revolver over a semi-aut. but over all the HP C9 is a good gun !! and check your grip! there is no reason why your hand needs to touch the slide at all!!
I liked the long clip posted here before–this krava maga guy was not the first holdup target, he was like number three or four. This punk kid was just going through the bus robbing people. I wonder if the gun was even loaded…
As a long time marketing guy, a few observations:
This pistol strikes me as Glock arrogance, foisting what they think the market should want and buy. I’ve seen big successful companies in my own market do this, and they always fail. Sure Glock will sell some pistols – to the few who really want a “full size” 380, or newbies who feel safe buying the Glock brand.
It’s rather obvious that the big unmet market demand for Glock is the single stack (thin) sub compact carry pistol. Unless Glock quickly follows with a version in 9mm, the G42 may actually damage Glock’s brand – especially with first time buyers who feel they were done wrong by Glock for buying the G42 in 380.
I agree. I think this gun will be a marketing disaster. It should have been a nine. [I still wouldn’t buy one, but that’s just because I never liked the ergos or the unshielded trigger of the Glock. My first pistol was an XD, and one of the reasons I bought it was because of the grip safety.]
This is the 380 I thought S&W should have originally come out with. I stayed away from the integrated laser model because I would rather have it as an accessory that can be upgraded when it becomes obsolete or when it breaks and parts are no longer available.
I’m a whole lot more likely to buy one of these than the Glock 42.
Cameras, damm cameras. Remember that the likelyhood of your encounter being filmed increases each day. So when you get carried away and evacuate the bad guys eye sockets AFTER you’ve rendered him unconscious it probably won’t go over well with the local DA. And if you decide to go Donner Party on him and break out the de-boning knife think twice about it please. Remember the cardinal rule: AT SOME REASONABLE POINT STOP. Even Navy SEALS have rules.
Breach Bang and Clear mentioned 10 points about violence. One of those was quite apt.
“More violence, sooner.”
Simply put, start with maximum force and step down if the situation calls for it. It’s a lot easier to go from kill to maim/wound to stun/incapacitate than the reverse.
Or as my friend Keith put it so eloquently: “Hulk Smash for _my_ safety.”
Hey lee wong, thats not what I meant when I said I’d hit that
IMHO If I’m going to be taken out I hope to make it so absolutely painful for the bastard who takes me out that he will not do so again without remembering me. If I am going to go I’m going to take a piece of the bastard with me!
If you see the pistol size overlayed on top of the G27 you really have to ask WHY GLOCK WHY?!
Lets see… 9 rounds of 40sw or 8 rounds of 380.
I don’t know who the woman is, but the other guy is Cenk Uighur, “the Smirking Turk”. Got canned from MSNBC.
You can be canned from MSNBC???
Hang together or hand separately. Interesting in that your story about the homosexual gun owners who support Obama. Clearly your homophilia has not been reciprocated, so to speak.
Wow. I like Glocks but they completely shit the bed on this one.
So it sounds like these anchors are trying to cover their asses legally by saying “Don’t do this.”
I will tell you though, the IDF folks are trained in this stuff and the guy who taught me the same gun disarm technique shown in the video was a former IDF Special Forces guy – although the guy in the video didn’t quite do the Krav Maga gun disarm the way I remember it’s supposed to be done and (shocker) I could be wrong.
If that gun disarm technique is good enough for the IDF, let alone the aforementioned no non-sense former IDF SF soldier, then it’s good enough for me.
Last time I checked these journalists weren’t special forces for any military, which makes me think they’re not the most credible people to listen to when it comes to this stuff.
Maybe they should stick to being to the facts and leave their opinions out of things they don’t know.
What they should do is get the Calif shield out instead of working on these new guns, I’ve been waiting more than 18 months and nothing. What’s with the .380 bandwagon? is it cheaper to make? it’s not more effective.
Feels fake. Out of everyone there he turns on the krav guy perfectly picked the wrong guy. Feels staged.
Yeah just keep saying its fake so people wont feel empowered to stop being victims and being scared to death of guns and black people. I know how left wing propaganda works.
Didn’t look very much like Krav Maga to me. As I was taught step one is to frame the weapon with your hands, step two: grab and push upwards while ducking, step three: rotate the weapon towards the attacker and push it downwards, step four: left arm strikes the attackers forearm to break their grip, step five: back away, cycle the slide bring the weapon up on the attacker.
They used to teach a disarm knocking the weapon to the side, but that one was different too, against a right handed attacker the left hand would strike the forearm while the right hand grabbed the pistol and pushed it left. While it was effective, they now prefer to disarm by forcing the weapon upwards as it reduces the chance of a bystander being shot.
This seems more to me an act of desperation rather than training, but nonetheless commendable.
FYI your point of impact will be completely different depending on what side of the helicopter you are shooting from. With your standard American style helicopters (the rotor spins counter clockwise) you have to aim high on the right side and low on the left. If you are in something like a Puma or a MI-8 I assume it will be opposite (clockwise rotor). FM 1-140 will tell you more than you ever need to know about helicopter gunnery.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/1-140/AA.HTM
I guess since her career is all but ruined, she’s the perfect spokesbitch for any of the Prez’s intrusive policies.
This is just feel-good action by the dems. I’ve read the same press release print all over the web, but nothing on how it will actually work or be implemented. Who is doing the reporting? Hospitals? LEO? What are the standards? What sort of checks and balance are being put into place to prevent abuse? If your name is put on by mistake, how is it removed?
Honestly, this is the first wave of a “Terrorist No Fly List” for the rest of us. In the near future I’m guessing that hundreds of thousands of political enemies will end up on this list.
What is to prevent a nurse or doctor with a grudge against someone they know that owns guns to add them to the “no-gun” list?
Metcalf became an elitist, ergo, he sold his soul. Too bad for him, he made his bed.
“This proposed rulemaking is carefully balanced to protect and preserve individuals’ privacy interests, the patient-provider relationship, and the public’s health and safety.”
Carefully balanced always means: “We’re taking away something that we don’t think you should have.”
Doctor-patient confidentiality is now gone. Even the term is gone. It’s now patient-provider relationship, with the “provider” being just another tentacle of government.
peckerwood made his own bed now he doesn’t want to sleep in it….quit crying dick!
“This proposed rulemaking is carefully balanced to protect and preserve individuals’ privacy interests, the patient-provider relationship, and the public’s health and safety.”
BS. There is nothing in the current rule making or clarification at the federal level that has anything to do with privacy. I am no expert here but everything I see in this has to do with involuntary commitment. Involuntary commitment, whether inpatient or outpatient is a matter of public record. Any mental heath issue used to deny a right must be a matter of public record or we lose our right to due process.
So if they are talking about balancing privacy then in my opinion they are talking about future changes that would encroach on privacy and I am seriously worried about where this goes next. It has already gone too far in some states where things that should be private can be used to deny your right to own a firearm.
Saying that involuntary outpatient commitment qualifies as a prohibiting reason doesn’t make sense to me. I get especially worried when we also consider the following statement from the linked article. “The administration is committed to making sure that anyone who may pose a danger to themselves or others does not have access to a gun,” Anyone may pose a danger to themselves or others. That is not the proper standard. It should be anyone who has a high likelihood of posing a danger. What they are saying is someone is not dangerous enough that we should lock them up and we trust them enough that they can roam free in society but we don’t trust them to have a gun. That is not logical to me. It is saying that the gun is the only reasonable tool that can be used to harm themselves or others so by taking away the tool you are preventing the possible harm. If someone is so dangerous that we must permanently deny their right to own a firearm then they should be removed from society until they no longer pose that danger.
From the article, “At the same time, the Administration is committed to making sure that anyone who may pose a danger to themselves or others does not have access to a gun.”
Sounds like the administration is committed to overstepping their bounds. The right of the people to keep and bear arms cannot be infringed based on someone’s aversion to a potentiality (i.e. that they “may” pose a danger to themselves or others). In fact, part of the reason people arm themselves is because they want to preserve/ensure their ability to pose a danger to others – specifically, to those “others” who mean to do them harm.
Does the poll really matter? As we have seen time and time again, politicians will push what they want. They don’t give a rats a$$ what the people want nor do they care what the constitution says.
This is all well and good and I applaud the effort of these people against seemingly insurmountable odds.
That said there has to be a master plan somewhere, if not it is all doomed to failure. You have to get the whole nation on track, and that is not easy, You have to get the leaders of each individual movement to agree to a common goal.
I wish them the best though.
So many layers of wrong. That story is the lasagna of wrong. My god.