1. Thanks for the Eden Carl Blog link Mas. Such interesting stuff!

  2. I well remember showing up for LFI I at a facility near Atlanta in the late 80s. My holster was Milt Sparks “Bruce Nelson cross draw” worn midline, just like of all people Ray Chapman. The slightly left foot forward and modified Weaver stance (aka Isosceles) were both quick and accurate. You requested a demo draw (because the Georgia IPSC Champion next to me was worried about being swept). I even had the audacity to carry a Combat Commander in….wait for it…9mm.

  3. Thanks for the history bump. I got one of the Detonics, and it’s still fun to shoot.

    When we started teaching the Texas licence to carry class, September of 1995, one of our first students asked if he could take the practical with his single-action .44. He shot faster than the folks with semiautos, and reloaded faster than the D.A. revolver shooters. After 50 rounds from 3, 7, and 15 yards on a Texas DPS target I could cover his group with my hand.

    Of course, he had been carrying that gun for 40 years. (He was in his 70s.) People had told him S.A.s were obsolete for self-defense so he should get a semiauto, and he asked my opinion.

    Which was: “Ain’t broke; don’t fix it.”

    • Reminds me of Doc Holliday. According to wyatt Earp, Doc was the most adept pistolero of his day, with both Doc’s single action pistols and Doc being fully loaded, the pistols with the smoky black powder rounds, and Doc lubricated with something like Old Turkey whisky. Glad everybody doesn’t try that, though. Also glad that these old pistol champs were “good guys with guns,” and would they have made good school-grounds security guards! We might never have been afflicted with Joe Biden’s “gun free zones” (aka mass killer power vacuums).

    • Despite what many preach, there is no “one size fits all” approach to firearms. People are different and that difference should reflect in their firearm choices.

      Here is a personal example. I have a 1911 in .45 ACP that I shoot well. However, when I elected to take the MAG-40 class, I wanted to use a new FN .40 S&W pistol that I had just purchased. However, I did take along my 1911 (with some .45 ACP ammo) as a back-up to the new FN.

      Well, I shot the new FN during the first few days of instruction. My performance with the new gun was only mediocre. I seemed to have a tendency to pull my shots low and to the right with it.

      On the final day of class, when we were supposed to shoot for a graduation score, I decided to lay aside the new FN and pull out the old familiar 1911. My shooting immediately improved and I easily produced a passing score. The instructor helping me (not Mas but one of his assistants) observed “that is the gun you should have been shooting all along”.

      By the specifications, the FN is a superior pistol. It is a newer design. It has a polymer frame and advanced metal coatings for rust protection. It has double the magazine capacity of the 1911. It is super easy to take down for cleaning. It is chambered for a very modern cartridge. It is also an absolutely reliable firearm. I can’t remember ever having a malfunction with the gun when shooting factory ammunition.

      In contrast, the 1911 is a century old design shooting a century old cartridge using old-fashioned, single-stack magazines. Nevertheless, in my hands, I can shoot the 1911 better then this new FN design.

      So I agree with you. If something works for you, then stick with it. If it is not broken, then don’t fix it. “Newer” does not always mean “better”. At least, not when individual abilities come into play. The person is more important than his equipment.

  4. You do realize that YOU are also an OLD master, Mas? 🙂

    (Sorry, but I mean that in the nicest, most respectful way possible!)

    The Guns magazine cover brought back some old memories – I had a Detonics Combat Master stainless in .45, bought it about 1985 from a colleague in Tennessee. One of those guns I wish I still had! Pretty nice little gun, in fact I think it was the first 1911 style pistol I owned.

    Thanks for the blog link – I didn’t realize he was still with us. I’ve seen some pics of him with other pistoleros from the SW Pistol League – one in particular was Ray Chapman, Eldon Carl, Thell Reed, Jeff Cooper and Jack Weaver –

    Speaking of Cooper, this is an interesting old article about him that I had somehow missed –

    https (colon)//

  5. The Elden Carl blog is excellent. Don’t forget to also check his motorcycle blog. The man is still riding!!

  6. Mas,

    Off topic question here about defending property with a gun. Imagine a store owner standing in front of his store with a shotgun to protect it from rioters/looters. A rioter approaches the store with a brick. He informs the store owner that he does not want to harm him, he only wants to throw that brick through a store window. If the store owner shoots the rioter, the legal system could say that is not sufficient cause, because the store owner’s life was never in danger. The rioter only wanted to break a window, so he should not have been shot for that.

    If the law frowns on shooting people over property, what good does a firearm do to prevent vandalism or looting?

    If the protestors told the McCloskeys that thay were going to burn down the home, but not hurt the McCloskeys at all, what good does it serve for the McCloskeys to try to defend their home with guns?

    • @ Roger Willco – I don’t believe that the two cases, that you mentioned above, are really the same from a legal point of view. Here are a couple of points to consider:

      (1) Tossing a brick through a store window would generally be charged as vandalism and/or simple destruction of property. In most jurisdictions, this would be a misdemeanor.

      Burning down someone’s home is arson which is a clear felony. Indeed, in many jurisdictions, arson is considered to be a “heinous felony”. In addition, the Castle Doctrine, depending upon the jurisdiction, may apply to protecting one’s home whereas it may not apply to a retail property.

      So, your above examples are really “apples to oranges” from a legal point-of-view. Since the McCloskeys were defending their home, they may have additional legal leeway that would not apply to a store-owner facing a brick-thrower.

      (2) Also, one final point regarding the lesser example you mentioned. A rioter may tell you that he only wants to break a window but how does one know that he is telling the truth? Once it starts, mob violence tends to escalate. Remember the case of David Dorm. See this link:

      The initial broken window may quickly lead to (a) looting of the store, (b) burning of the store, (c) an assault upon the store-owner and, possibly, even to the (d) murder of the store-owner. Once that first domino is knocked over, who can tell what will be the final result?

      The person holding the brick is already threatening to commit a criminal act. Why should anyone take a criminal at his word? By threatening to smash that window, the individual holding the brick is condemned as a criminal out of his own mouth. His credibility is already shot.

      • TN_MAN,

        Thanks, TN_MAN. You make sense. If you were the judge, a citizen defending his property with a gun would be viewed favorably, and given the benefit of the doubt. But a lobotomized Leftist judge may see the disparity of force, and accuse the citizen of being a vigilante.

        The current trend of police management refusing to support their officers in the field may work in the citizens’ favor. If the police stand down, and citizens choose to defend themselves, the police might not see anything that happens.

  7. One “Silver Lining” that is coming from this obscene “Covid and Chaos” campaign, launched by the Democrat-Media Complex and their child organizations of BLM and Antifa, is that it has truly made many of the American People appreciate their 2nd Amendment Rights. The following information comes from an article published by the Firearm Industry Trade Association, the NSSF:

    “retailers reported an increased number of first-time gun buyers, estimating that 40 percent of their sales were to this group. This is an increase of 67 percent over the annual average of 24-percent first-time gun buyers that retailers have reported in the past. Semiautomatic handguns were the primary firearm being purchased by first-time buyers, outpacing the second-most purchased firearm, shotguns, by a 2 to 1 margin. Modern sporting rifles, revolvers and traditional rifles rounded out the top five types of firearms purchased by first-time gun buyers.

    Retailers noted that these new customers were spending $595 on an average sale and that 40 percent of first-time gun buyers in the first four months of 2020 were female. The main purchase driver among the group was personal protection, followed by target shooting and hunting. Also of note was that 25 percent of first-time buyers had already taken some form of firearms safety course and 63 percent inquired about taking a firearms safety course in the near future.”

    The full article can be found at this link:

    Years ago, when these “Old Masters” were “Young Masters”, it was largely the firearms enthusiasts who drove firearm sales. In the 1950’s, America was an orderly country with crime rates fairly low. In this safe and secure environment, many Americans were complacent about our 2nd Amendment Rights and readily believed the lies and spin put out by left-wing anti-gun groups.

    Nowadays, the scales are FINALLY falling off the eyes of the American People. The entire basis for the proceeding decades of firearms-prohibition propaganda is being exposed as pure, unadulterated horse-manure. How does one simultaneously support the arguments that: (A) You don’t need a firearm because the Police are there and will ALWAYS be available to protect you and (B) the Police are corrupt and racist to their core and need to be defunded and disbanded?

    They say genius is the ability to hold two contradictory ideas in mind at the same time. Under that standard, everybody in the American Left must qualify as “Einstein-Level” geniuses.

    On the other hand, maybe George Orwell was actually correct when he said (and I quote): “There are some ideas so absurd that only an intellectual could believe them.” We certainly know that academia and government is dominated by left-wing intellectuals. Judging by their fruits, I would say that George Orwell was 100% correct! 🙂

    In any event, all these new gun-owners represent an opportunity. According to the NSSF, many are seeking training with their new firearms. I say that we (gun people and firearms trainers) should eagerly provide this training to them. And while we are doing it, we should also educate them as to the true value of the 2nd Amendment and our Gun Rights. This may be a golden opportunity to fight against and counteract the constant drum-beam of anti-gun propaganda that has been pushed by the lying Anti-American Media for decades.