The Guardian Broadcast
"Providing Concealed Carry & Armed Self-Defense Wisdom."
A podcast by Patrick Kilchermann, founder of the Concealed Carry University.
"Loyalty to Truth and Effectiveness"
This week we want to discuss a bit of CCU philosophy and approach to self-defense in response to some observations about the community as a whole.
Listen using the audio player above OR read the text transcript of this podcast below.
Note: 100% accuracy on text transcription is not guaranteed.
Hello my friends, fellow guardians.
This week, I want to mull something over with you, because after the last two broadcasts, I received some emails posing a simple question – or rather, leveling a simple accusation, if you will: That the Concealed Carry University is too hard-core. Too hard-core, that is, for the average person who carries concealed.
Well, I’m going to begin with my counter assertion: Am I hard-core? Absolutely not.
The back story here is this: The last two broadcasts dealt with the observable and measurable reality that guns with heavier slides have less energy retained at the apex of their cycle range than guns with slides that weigh less. I discussed our in-combat and in-training observations that guns with heavier slides are, therefore, more prone to failure to extract or failure to feed malfunctions when either common concealed carry related obstructions like lint or grime are introduced into that weapon, or if the shooter is unable to obtain a solid enough grip on that handgun. Two conditions that are unfortunate quite common in dynamic, adrenaline-addled, self-defense combat.
This is a hard teaching, because my hypothesis, which we’ll soon test and obtain data for, is that several very popular guns are near what I call the ‘unacceptable imbalance’ threshold for what sort of reliability a combat piece should be capable of. Now I’m nowhere near the point yet of suggesting that anyone go out and change pistols. As I’ve said, my conclusions thus far are that we need only to make sure we’re using heavy self-defense loads, that we keep our guns clean and lubed, and that we practice our draw strokes dry to the point of muscle-memory, from all body positions, including while moving. But nevertheless: This talk that not all “Tier 1” guns are created equal: that there may be some that are better suited for dynamic combat than others… naturally caused a bit of ruffled feathers and push-back. Nobody likes to have the confidence they’ve placed in their weapons come into question.
Okay, now I’d like to talk about Trust.
First, when it comes to being ‘hard-core’ or not, I’ll remind you that a lot of trainers in this space don’t like some of my teaching. They don’t like some of them, because they either seem boring or counter-intuitive. Spending four hours inside a concealed carry course talking about Avoidance, De-Escalation, and Escape is boring. Talking about making prudent decisions on whether or not to use force is boring. Sitting in a classroom is boring. And practice? Practice is boring. Doing the same thing again and again and again is boring. But we also teach a lot of things that are counter-intuitive, and educators who don’t do a lot of independent thinking, but who instead buy a 3-ring binder filled with someone else’s incongruent assembly of many far ranging topics, they have a hard time with counter-intuitive concepts, strategies, and tactics. The idea that 95% of fights are settled when your opponent’s psychological will to continue attacking you is defeated is a counter-intuitive teaching. The idea that only 5% of fights are settled when your opponent’s physical ability to continue attacking you is defeated is a counter-intuitive teaching. And when you do the only rational thing at that point, and adapt all of your philosophy, strategy, tactics, and gear choices to this truth – this results in counter-intuitive teachings. Some gear choices, some tactical analysis, some strategies may ruffle feathers. They may deviate from what is popular.
I’m also not politically correct. I’ll leave that to the politicians. I am not afraid to tell you that the purpose of a gun is to destroy and kill. I don’t wince when I tell you that if you shoot someone in the chest with a combat-caliber handgun, and if they don’t get medical attention promptly, there is a very good chance they will die from that wound. Politicians are afraid to acknowledge facts like these, and therefore, their attempts at education will never hit the mark. I don’t blame them for shying away from these difficult topics that are not court-room friendly, but I also do not believe they should attempt to educate if they cannot discuss the full truth.
Some of our teaching is counter-intuitive. Some of it is not politically correct. But I believe that it is all Truth. And when life and death are at stake – your life; your death – I do not believe we can mince words. Politicians can’t afford to. That’s why the Concealed Carry University exists. I am independent. I am self-sustaining. I answer to nobody except my continually expanding understanding of what the truth is.
Now here’s the thing: truth may be universal, but the nuance of balance within that truth: that is what separates the fanatical from the practical. Balance and moderation, which come about through discipline and wisdom and understanding, are what makes for a good education. And that is what I believe we specialize in here at the Concealed Carry University. I do not believe in forsaking the ‘good’ for the sake of the ‘perfect.’ I believe in the 80/20 principal. I do not believe we must abuse ourselves in training. I do not believe we must all carry full size pistols with two spare mags in order to consider ourselves effectively prepared guardians. I do not believe we all need to be in top physical condition in order to survive 95% of what life may throw at us. I do not believe we need to spend twenty hours at the range a year, or even to reach defensive combat proficiency. I believe that ‘good enough is good enough.’ But in order to know what or when it’s good enough, we must first understand reality. Only once we know what reality is… what will actually be demanded of us if we’re ever forced to defend ourselves… only then can we call ourselves ready, or good enough.
Describing reality in this way… taking you into the middle of gunfights and synthesizing alongside you lessons from reality… painting that picture more vividly and showing you what does and doesn’t work under fire… and then showing you how to learn strategies and tactics that will help you survive: this is my primary mission at Concealed Carry University.
In this mission, I can promise you something: I will always be honest with you. I’ll always tell you the truth as I’ve come to see it. I won’t BS you. I won’t lure or trick you into chasing that 1%, where we’re practicing 1-second speed reloads that we’ll never use. I will always tell you the difference between ‘good enough’ and ‘the ideal standard.’ I will not scare you with worst-case hypotheticals, but I also won’t lower the bar just to give you false confidence, the way at least 80% of those who call themselves trainers or educators in this space will.
Will it be hard sometimes? You’re damn right it will be. Of course it will be hard sometimes. It will get physically hard, and it will get mentally hard. It’s hard for me, too, my brothers; my sisters. Becoming and remaining an effective guardian is a struggle. The struggle is life. That’s what life is. The challenge is life. And I just think that is so beautiful.
And listen: I am with you in that struggle. I am teaching you things that may mean the difference between your life and death one day, and I do not weigh lightly or flippantly that duty, that honor of your trust and attention. This isn’t a hobby for me. This isn’t a business for me. This is my work, and it is as important to me as my children are. It is more important to me than my life is. Through this, as my students, I am bonded to you for life. I love you.
Hard-core? Maybe I am… ;)