The 1911 vs Double Action Pistols Part 1
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ก.ย. 2024
- The first part of a series that looks critically at 1911s and double action pistols. I will talk significantly about 1911s in this series and the things that make more reliable or less reliable.
Re: AIWB
I carry AIWB constantly and acknowledge that it is somewhat more dangerous.
For those who prefer not to carry that way, I say it is always best to follow your own instincts.
My thoughts on the topic: AIWB is somewhat more dangerous, but to argue against it on that basis, with logical coherence, one must argue against many things which we do daily.
Tail-risk mechanical failures (like a failing handgun) are omnipresent in our daily lives, and a defective machine could kill or seriously injure us in many ways each day.
We drive cars every day, which could result in a stuck accelerator. We use elevators which could result in a variety of malfunctions. We walk on sidewalks, trusting vehicles - that we have never inspected - to keep us alive.
One may argue that these are necessary risks, and AIWB is unnecessary. My friend drives many classic cars which don’t enjoy the safety additions of today - would they also tell him that it is an unnecessary risk over a 2024 Prius?
I believe the danger argument is licit and valid. It is legitimate for choosing strong-side or other carries when they would be equally as concealed+comfortable as AIWB.
However - it is often an unfairly presented argument, not taken to its proper conclusions. One must argue against vintage cars and other “unnecessary” dangers to remain logically consistent. Especially considering that collectors cars offer little to no advantages over modern cars, while AIWB can be necessitated by weather/concealment requirements.
You're absolutely right, logical consistency is important.
The comparison of classic cars is also a good one. Considering that one is more likely to die or get injured in a car crash, I actually think the argument for safety features in cars is a stronger one than the argument against concealed carry.
After all, a car crash can be caused by someone else's carelessness and you may be just a hapless victim.
We all have are levels of comfort in regards to danger as well. For example, I won't even eat raw cookie dough, due to the concern for possible sickness.
I know it's not likely that I'll get sick, but the consequences are significant enough that I am unwilling to take the chance.
@@infogunvault6920 Yes that’s a reasonable recognition of limited reward vs. substantial risk.
Regarding risk appetite, I tend to find that we all have a very similar risk tolerance, expressed in different ways based on what we perceive as valuable.
For example, one fellow may seem like he has a higher risk appetite because he drives dangerously, but is extremely conservative with investments on the basis of potentially losing money. Here we see a personal valuation of wealth over health.
I find this (fear of losing money) to be the most common indicator that someone is not actually high risk-tolerance, he simply has a different set of fears or valuations than I do.
It’s actually a supremely interesting topic that I have given long thought towards.