“The incident happened at about 6:45 p.m. in the 500 block of Saratoga Lane,” Missouri’s stltoday.com reports. “Police said three masked men knocked on the front door of the home and the resident, 51, answered. The men forced their way inside. The man was struck several times with a handgun, the suspects stole an assault rifle, and fled. The man was taken to a hospital with several cuts on his head and was in stable but serious condition Thursday night.” Judging from that information it seems that the bad guys . . .
were destination robbers. They knew what they were coming for: the modern sporting rifle. Which means that they knew it was there. How they knew that is anybody’s guess. I heard stories of a Rhode Island antique dealer who sold customers valuable objects and then paid thugs to steal them back. Thugs who tied-up and beat the customers before leaving with the goods.
Face it: maintaining total secrecy about your gun ownership is about as doable as marrying Barbara Palvin. People are social animals and social media is the 800-pound gorilla in the room. Someone’s going to know you have guns. That someone’s only a few degrees of separation from someone else who’d like to steal your firearms.
Bottom line: gun owners need to be especially alert to the possibility of burglary and armed intruders. That means scanning the environment around your home before entering, not entering if it looks like you’ve got uninvited guests, not opening the door to strangers and, yes, home carry. Amongst other things. Including a retention holster.
I’m all for open carry. But doing so increases the possibility of a gun grab – when compared to concealed carry. I reckon a retention holster reduces the odds of a successful gun grab from near zero to nearer to zero. Yes, retention holsters are a bit bulkier. But if you’re going to open carry, a retention holster adds a potentially life-saving layer of security to mission critical situational awareness.
I know: the antis’ exploit the prospect of a gun grab morphing into murder to put people off of the idea of armed self-defense. But just because it’s misleading – anyone that violent is ready, willing and probably able to kill you anyway – and statistically improbable doesn’t mean you shouldn’t consider the possibility that your gun could be used against you.
In other words, take steps to reduce the risk of non-governmental firearms appropriation. A Krav Maga class or two, for example, wouldn’t go amiss. Any other ideas would be most appreciated.