The article reports that the NYPD has instructed its officers to stop carrying the Kahr K-9 pistol off duty.  The Kahr K-9 has a standard 7.5-lb trigger pull, and over 5,000 of them have been sold to the NYPD over the years for use off duty.  This 7.5-lb trigger is reportedly “so light” that it has been blamed for a series of accidental discharges—more than a dozen of them in the last few years, none of which has resulted in a fatality.

The article details how, after five years, Kahr was unable to supply pistols to the NYPD with the requested 13-lb trigger pulls.  “We worked for about three years to try to modify the gun,” Kahr’s Frank Harris stated.  “After three years of trying to meet their requirements, we just had to give up.”  Glocks issued to NYPD officers have 12-lb pulls—the “New York Plus” trigger.

In 2010, the NYPD had 21 reported incidents of accidental discharges and in 2009 there were 23.  Of those 44 incidents, only 14 occurred during a confrontation with a suspect.

There are so many things wrong with this story that I hardly know where to start.  It continues the horrible precedent the NYPD has set by blaming equipment for bad training.  The Kahr K-9 is an excellent, safe weapon, and no one who knows anything about shooting would call a 7.5-lb trigger “light”.  The trigger pull on the Kahr isn’t exactly short, either.

RELATED READ: Review: Kahr CM9

The NYPD is apparently incapable of training its officers to keep their finger off the trigger, so instead of increasing or improving their training (which would cost the department money, as well as be an acknowledgement that the training was the problem), they mandate that the gun companies provide them modified weapons.

I don’t dislike Glocks, I love Glocks.  I carry a Glock every day, and am in fact wearing one right now as I write this.  However, Glocks equipped with the 12-lb New York Plus trigger are an abomination. A few years ago at an editorial roundtable, the InterMedia Outdoors staff had a friendly competition involving a Glock with such a trigger.  Everyone involved reported that the pistol was nearly impossible to shoot.  G&A’s Handgun Editor Pat Sweeney (a veteran pistol competitor and Master-Class USPSA shooter) won the contest, but to do so, he used a technique he wouldn’t recommend anyone use—he was pulling the trigger with both his index fingers. A 12-lb trigger on a Glock only makes it harder to shoot fast and accurately, thereby increasing the chances that an officer’s bullet won’t end up where he or she intended.

No one suggests putting horrible sights on a handgun will make someone shoot it more accurately, so I’m hard pressed to find the logic (that’s assuming there is any) behind equipping a handgun with a trigger that is worse than the factory offering.  No one has ever suggested a heavier trigger enables a user to shoot a handgun faster or more accurately, and if they did, they’re an idiot.

If you have been properly trained in how to use a handgun, you know to:

• not point it at anything you are not willing to destroy, and…
• to keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target and you’re ready to shoot.

If you follow just these two simple rules, I could make the argument that a lighter trigger pull was safer than a heavier one, for it would result in less sight movement during the trigger pull process.  The only people who like heavy trigger pulls are lawyers and bureaucrats.

The problem here is training, not hardware (at least not the way the NYPD brass means).  The brave cops of the NYPD deserve better—better guns (Glocks and Kahrs with trigger pulls not measured in metric tons), and better training.

The tactical vest is a popular choice for IDPA and other shooting competitions, but the author believes the vest is a dead giveaway that you're carrying concealed in a real-world/street setting.

If you attend an IDPA match, you’ll see that the great majority of competitors wear 5.11 tactical vests as their covering garment during the competition.

RELATED CONTENT: Getting Started in IDPA

That is perfectly fine. What I want everyone to realize, however, is that these kinds of tactical vests are the fashion equivalent of the unmarked cop car when it comes to real world carry. I highly caution against wearing them as a covering garment for your legally concealed handgun when out on the street.

The tactical vest is as much a victim of its own success as anything else, but the fact of the matter is, when I see anyone wearing one, no matter where I am, I immediately assume they’re armed. There is a reason why, locally, we refer to the 5.11-type tactical vests as the Shoot-Me-First vests or the IDPA Cape. They have become synonymous with concealed carry, and a lot of the bad guys know this as well.

Now, if your intention is to let everyone around you know you are carrying a gun, without the burden of true open carry, that’s fine. Wearing 5.11 apparel, you can be immediately recognized by those in the know as a member of the in-crowd, much like driving a Prius is a symbol to the “I care more about the Earth than you” liberal crowd. If, on the other hand, you are concealing your pistol because you want to pass unnoticed amongst the general populace, the tactical vest is not for you.

If you just must wear one on the street, get it in black, or green; any color other than “contractor” khaki. Your concealing garment should help protect you, not make you a bigger target.

The Beretta 84F Cheetah chambered in .380 ACP

I find that I have gotten to that certain age where I have more guns than I need, but less than I want.

New models are always coming out, so there is always something new in the “want” category, and while I don’t have the disposable income I once had before my children came along, I still manage to buy new guns from time to time. This has resulted in my collection growing slowly over the past fifteen years or so.

There are pistols I own that I carry every day, and some that I don’t carry but enjoy taking to the range from time to time to shoot.  And like many people I have several pistols that just sit around gathering dust. Usually dust-magnet pistols don’t last forever; I end up trading them for something new that has caught my eye.  But there’s usually one pistol in my collection that, while I never shoot it, I’d never trade. This popped an article title to mind–The Favorite Gun You Never Shoot.

I’m not by nature a collector, I buy guns I intend to shoot. Many of you who buy collector pieces may have many handguns you love that you never shoot, but that’s not the case for me. Guns are for shooting, they exist for that one reason. For the last five years or so, the favorite gun I own that I never shoot has been a Beretta 84F.

I originally bought the Beretta for my wife over fifteen years ago, but because it’s a traditional .380, it features a straight blowback recoil system, which means a very strong recoil spring. Between that and the double-action first shot, my wife didn’t like the pistol, but to my surprise, I did.  A lot.

RELATED READ: The Five Best Sci-Fi Handguns

This 13+1-shot aluminum-framed .380 is too big to be a pocket gun.  The barrel is nearly four-inches long, and the pistol itself is almost seven inches.  In fact, it’s almost a mid-size pistol the size of a Glock 19 (fully loaded it weighs 29 ounces), so if I was going to carry something its size I would carry a pistol chambered in something more powerful than the .380 ACP.  That said, I love this gun.

The Beretta fits my hand, points naturally, and between the low bore and the .380 chambering felt recoil is negligible.  I can get my whole hand on it.  While it has a decocking safety, I can ride it with my thumb (like a 1911) without decocking the hammer (push UP to decock).  The double action trigger pull is smooth and not too heavy, and the single action pull is crisp.  It’s a good-looking gun, and with the signature skeletonized Beretta slide it resembles a miniature M9/92.  It’s very reliable—in fact, it’s never jammed on me. The pistol even has a chrome-plated bore, something I find hard to understand on a .380. It has a magazine disconnect safety, which I have no use for, and mediocre sights, but overall I really like this gun. And yet, I’ve only fired it once in the past ten years, and that for an article. Before I took a photo of it for this post, I had to blow a layer of dust off it.

I’ve sold pistols I shot more frequently than I do my Beretta 84F, and yet I’m never going to sell it. Currently it sits loaded with Hornady XTPs in an out-of-the-way but easily accessed spot in my house, patiently waiting. I’ll take you out to the range someday soon, I promise…

While I love single-actions, double-action wheelguns are often just as lovely. Early double-action revolvers such as the Smith &Wesson Triple Lock have a classic look and feel. I’m fortunate enough to own a couple of Triple Locks, both in .44 Special. Another of my favorites is the Smith & Wesson Model 29 in .44 Magnum. Though it’s a burden to carry, I really like the 8 3/8 inch barrel, particularly now that my eyes aren’t what they once were.

Colt double-actions are also some of the most handsome of handguns, in particular the Colt Python. I owned a fine one years ago that had been tuned by Fred Sadowski, one of the best Colt double smiths of his time. It was one of the smoothest DA revolvers I ever fired, and I wish I had it back.

The good news is that Colt has stepped up their production of single-action revolvers. I had the chance to handle a couple of them recently at the SHOT show in Las Vegas, and was really impressed. The company is also re-issuing the New Frontier, which was their adjustable sighted single action. I handled one of those as well, and can’t wait to burn some powder through one.

Who knows, if Colt keeps churning out great single-actions, perhaps they’ll go back to producing great DAs, too. I’m of the opinion that they would do well in offering a new Python.

If you could influence any of today’s handgun manufacturers to bring back a gun from the past, what would it be?

Taurus 1911 in .38 Super

When I was a kid my dad turned me on to Mickey Spillane’s tough guy hero, Mike Hammer, and by extension the Model 1911 pistol. While I was many years away from being old enough to buy a 1911, that didn’t stop me from poring over the Shooter’s Bible that lived on the nightstand next to my bed. The choices for manufacturer back then were pretty much Colt, Colt and Colt, and I agonized over whether I should get a basic Government model, a Commander or maybe a Gold Cup Match.

Mike Hammer, of course, shot a .45 ACP, but in my feverish study of ballistics of cartridges available for the 1911 I took one look at the .38 Super and thought, “This is it! Why wouldn’t everyone shoot this?” It was fast and offered lots of energy, relatively speaking (Winchester’s 125-grain Silvertip load spits out of the barrel at 1,240 fps for 427 ft.-lbs. of energy). Also attractive to a kid: It has the word “Super” in it. A no-brainer.

Nowadays I know maybe a little bit more about guns than I did then and understand all the reasons why the .45 and 9mm are popular in the 1911 and other autos while the .38 Super is not.

But guess who loves the .38 Super? Speed/action shooting enthusiasts. They love it because the bullet gets out of the barrel and to the target quicker and because the low recoil lets them transition to the next target faster.

I’ve had only one opportunity to shoot a Super over the years, a Para 1911 with a shiny chrome finish and faux ivory grips (a style said to be popular with shooters south of the border, in countries where owning guns chambered to military cartridges such as the .45 and 9mm isn’t permitted). I tested it and loved shooting it but wasn’t taken with the look, so I sent it back when I was finished.

Do I need a .38 Super? No. Do I still want one? Oh, yes. Will I be able to justify the purchase to my wife? Dicey. But the choice fits with my predilection for “oddball” calibers, and it will be fun shopping for one. My choices here in California boil down to Smith, Para, Taurus, Springfield, Kimber and Armscor.