Taurus pt 24/7 g2 compact .40 s&w conceal options

[TechnicalHillbilly]

This is my first post... I'm looking for suggestions on carrying this pistol (Taurus pt 24/7 g2 compact .40 s&w). Clothing choices. Holsters etc.


I grew up in a place that let me open carry pretty much everywhere. Now I live in Denver area and I'm fairly new to concealing. Last week I picked up my license. Due to the increasingly high rate of murders here, I'm pretty intent on a high rate of carry. I'm going to carry when I exercise, to church, out to eat, at home depot, when mowing the lawn... pretty much all the time/everywhere! Including into businesses who may be against it (so long as I'm not specifically requested not to / didn't notice any signs! :happy So, 100% not visible is important. People here are becoming increasingly afraid of guns due to the changing culture and many murders shootings that happen here despite of course the more restrictive gun laws (maybe because of) and the legalization of pot and all the out-of-state psychos moving here in droves. I don't want some moron at Costco for instance seeing my pistol, calling the cops and then getting gunned down in front of my wife and kids like Eric Scott. More than that, I fear occurring is what happened last week to the guy who was killed by hooligans for no reason in front of his family in commerce city, or the guy on the bike killed for no reason in the springs. I'm simply not willing to be a victim. My pistol is as mentioned. I also have a G42, but that's mostly for my wife.


I am 175lb 6' tall, and I tend to dress mostly un-tucked button-up shirts or T-shirts, but fairly slim fitting (though I wouldn't say tight) clothing. Either active wear or a button up t-shirt. I often will go on runs in my neighborhood, but i'm fine with concealing my wife's G42 inside the waistband when I do that. My .40 cal is my weapon of choice, I've always liked / shot .40 cals and I have a ton of practice with this one in particular. I am looking for something comfortable, I honestly like the idea of carrying in front of me or to the side more than the small of my back just because I can see it and know that it's hidden and I can see if someone else is looking at that area of my body. But, I don't know that it's possible with a larger pistol or practical / best. I feel very comfortable carrying my wife's pistol and concealing it pretty much anywhere / any situation. Though, i feel a lot more comfortable shooting my .40. The G42 shoots fine, I guess I just want to carry the pistol I don't even think about when I'm shooting it. I am a point shooter at 40 yards, I don't use the sights and I think that's important for concealing. All that aside, if you all think it would be better to just get a smaller pistol given my desired ability to carry everywhere, please say so. I'll go buy another G42 and fire off 1000 rounds till it feels like an extension of my bloody and bruised hand, then call it a day.

 

[bofh]

Welcome to the forum.

• Shorter posts with less rambling and direct questions may yield better answers.
• Stop obsessing about concealment. People do not notice bulges in your clothing. If they do, tell them it is medical equipment.
• A good gun belt and a good holster are key. Don't carry your $500 life saving device in a $10 holster on a $10 belt.
• Carry IWB at 4 o'clock or appendix. Your choice. If you get a holster that can accommodate both positions, then you can try them both out. Small of back carry (6 o'clock) is something different.
• There are different holster solutions for physical exercise, such as jogging.
• Point shooting at 40 yards (i.e., without using sights): "That's not how it works... that's not how any of this works!":girl_wacko:
• This sentence segment is pure nonsense: "I don't use the sights and I think that's important for concealing".:no:
• Carrying a smaller firearm for concealment is your personal choice to make. Carrying a backup magazine, however, is more important.
• For reference, I am 130 lbs and 5'7". I carry a 9mm Glock 19 at 4 o'clock concealed in a NSR Tactical LLC-4 holster and at least 1 backup magazine. For jogging, I carry a 9mm Glock 26 and a backup magazine in a SmartCarry holster. While hiking, I carry a 10mm Glock 20 concealed in a CrossBreed holster and 2 backup magazines. I will change to the NSR Tactical LLC-4 holster for the Glock 20 once it arrives.

 

[TechnicalHillbilly]

Hm...
Maybe I rambled, maybe this just isn't a very active forum. In any case, thanks for replying.


"That's not how it works... that's not how any of this works!"
"This sentence is pure nonsense"
Had a long response here... decided I'd ask if you care to elaborate before I assume you're misinformed about something. Honestly, not sure what your'e getting at.



Back to subject
Maybe you're right about being obsessed with people seeing a bulge in my clothing. The LLC-4 doesn't have any options for any Taurus handguns. Looked up the "SmartyCarry." I really like this. I think this might be my first try. https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/sma...sible-holster/ ... nice! This seems like me. Honestly... i'm having difficultly finding much for Taurus that has many reviews. Maybe I'll just buy a Glock 22 and ditch the Taurus. With the popularity of Glocks for concealing, it just seems easier to find holsters with specific reviews. But, I'll try the smarty first. Just ordered one.

 

[BluesStringer]

Smart Carry is great for one thing, and one thing only - deep concealment. Otherwise, even wearing the loosest pants possible, you will be putting yourself at a great disadvantage in drawing your weapon. Honestly, the SC is quite literally impossible to draw from while sitting in a car where the steering wheel and floorboards will prevent you from making the contortions it takes to straighten out your torso enough to get a hand down your pants and draw. Maybe it's not "literally" impossible to draw from a sitting position while in a chair, but it is dang sho' 'nuff very difficult. I used one for a few months while driving for a company where getting caught carrying would've been an instant termination. I went to a Crossbreed Super-Tuck after (finally) figuring out that I'd be dead before I even got all my fingers started down my pants with the SC, and I'm just about positive that the Crossbreed is available for all fairly current models of Tauruses. It may not be *quite* the deep concealment that the SC is, and it too can slow down your draw from OWB rigs with just a light shirt or other light cover garment, but the SC is the slowest, most unnatural draw I've ever attempted to learn how to do efficiently, and I never did feel comfortable with the loosest clothing while standing at the ready during practice sessions.

What handgun with no sights at all did your friend who served between '02 and '06 carry in Force Recon? And are snipers known for their prowess with handguns? Do they even train at all with handguns? Neither I nor anyone I went through training with or served with ever touched or got the first classroom in-service on handguns while in the Army, but admittedly, I wasn't SF.

You might be surprised at the level of training and experience people on this board have, low though the daily activity here may be anymore. I don't want to challenge the knowledge or experience of people you love, respect and/or trust to give you good advice. I'll just say that wars aren't fought, and certainly never won, with handguns, and it's the very rare exception to the rule where whatever handgun training is acquired within a military environment, translates well at all to civilian life carrying concealed for defensive self-protection on the streets of America, and leave it at that to take with however many grains of salt you think it deserves. Good luck.

Blues

 

[BluesStringer]

Had a long response here... decided I'd ask if you care to elaborate before I assume you're misinformed about something. Honestly, not sure what your'e getting at.

Well, yeah, and that long response is what made at least part of my last post make sense. I should've quoted it. Oh well, you can answer the questions that pertain to the edited out part(s), or let sleeping dogs lie. Up to you.

Blues

 

[bofh]

Hm...
Maybe I rambled, maybe this just isn't a very active forum. In any case, thanks for replying.


"This sentence is pure nonsense"
Opinions from people who've never killed anyone are pretty much all over the place I suppose. Family members/friends taught me to shoot from age 9. My uncle (1st Marines, Chosin Reservoir): "When you have to shoot someone at close range, you will point-shoot whether you practiced it or not." Childhood friend: (Force Recon, 2002-2006): "I actually carried side arms that had no sights, no one practiced anything but point shooting when it comes to pistols." My dad (2nd MAW 72-76, Vietnam): "Anything less than 40 yards, whether rifle or pistol you pretty much don't use the sights". My brother-in-law (Marines 2002-2006) "practicing both is important." Child-hood friend, (Marine Sniper 1996-currently deployed) "You get about 1 - 3 seconds tops from deciding to use your pistol to actually pulling the trigger." Pretty much any serious tactical class instructor will disagree with you. (read this: Link Removed)

From Link Removed:

But in a self defense emergency the lighting will be less than ideal, the situation will be moving and off-balance, your adrenaline pumping, you'll find it hard to focus your eyes on anything except the attacker, things will happen quickly, and the target is likely to be within 10 feet. There is no need to try to draw properly, assume the correct stance, line up the sights, focus on the front sight, etc. You won't have time, the target isn't going to hold still while you do so, and your human instincts are going to compel you to act differently.

Point shooting is for close range (e.g., 10 feet) and not for 40 yards (i.e., 120 feet). Fast drawing and point shooting a pistol at a threat that is 40 yards away is pretty much the dumbest thing I have heard of. As for your references to military training, there is a huge difference between the use of a firearm on the battlefield and in civilian life. Spray and pray does not work out well in civilian life. There is a lawyer behind every bullet you fire. With a 40 yard threat, taking cover and sighted return fire is the standard for self defense training. Pretty much any serious self defense firearms instructor will disagree with you.

Can you hit a moving target that is 40 yards away while you move without using the sights? Can you even hit a stationary target while you move without using the sights? Hitting a stationary target while being stationary without using sights (surgical point shooting) can be done with training: Tactical Shooting Academy | Surgical Point Shooting. This, however, has nothing to do with self defense or concealed carry. If you don't move to cover, your are an easy target and will likely die. If you are already behind cover, why not use the sights? In contrast, high speed point shooting at close ranges is for self defense: Tactical Shooting Academy | High Speed Point Shooting 2 of 4 and Tactical Shooting Academy | More High Speed Point Shooting 3 of 4.

I understand that you received advise from friends and family members that served. However, you need to understand that concealed carry and civilian self defense with a firearm is completely different. You are setting yourself up for failure. Please consider taking an advanced defensive pistol class.

Back to subject
Maybe you're right about being obsessed with people seeing a bulge in my clothing. But, honestly sometimes I feel about as safe in this backwards city un-armed as I do armed. Regardless, I'll conceal out of principle. Money is not an issue. The LLC-4 doesn't have any options for any Taurus handguns. Looked up the "SmartyCarry." I really like this. I think this might be my first try. https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/smartcarry-invisible-holster/ ... nice! This seems like me. Honestly... i'm having difficultly finding much for Taurus that has many reviews. Maybe I'll just buy a Glock 22 and ditch the Taurus. With the popularity of Glocks for concealing, it just seems easier to find holsters with specific reviews. But, I'll try the smarty first. Just ordered one.

As for the holster, I was mentioning the NSR holster just as a style reference. You may need to look around a little bit. If you decide to ditch the Taurus, go for the Glock 23 over the 22. Glock magazines for the same caliber are compatible, i.e., 15-round Glock 22 magazines fit in the Glock 23. In fact, my backup magazines are all 17-round 9mm Glock 17 magazines, despite the fact that I am carrying a 15+1-round Glock 19 or a 12+1-round Glock 26.

Thanks again, I don't mean to be in your face rude about point-shooting. But for the sake of anyone else reading, know that to say the least maybe people just have different opinions / comfort levels with what is effective. Though, military with combat experience all disagree with you.

This is a discussion forum. There will be discussion. Please find me a single firearms instructor that recommends point shooting for a 40 yard threat in a self defense situation.

 

[bofh]

Smart Carry is great for one thing, and one thing only - deep concealment. Otherwise, even wearing the loosest pants possible, you will be putting yourself at a great disadvantage in drawing your weapon. Honestly, the SC is quite literally impossible to draw from while sitting in a car where the steering wheel and floorboards will prevent you from making the contortions it takes to straighten out your torso enough to get a hand down your pants and draw. Maybe it's not "literally" impossible to draw from a sitting position while in a chair, but it is dang sho' 'nuff very difficult. I used one for a few months while driving for a company where getting caught carrying would've been an instant termination.

Blues is absolute correct. I use the SmartCarry only for jogging as it is literally impossible for me to draw while sitting. See Reid Henrichs | Workout Pistol Carry Options.

 

[bofh]

"That's not how it works... that's not how any of this works!"
"This sentence is pure nonsense"
Had a long response here... decided I'd ask if you care to elaborate before I assume you're misinformed about something. Honestly, not sure what your'e getting at.

To elaborate in a more concise form:

• Point shooting at 40 yards (i.e., without using sights) is a sport. It has no practical applicability in self defense with a firearm.
• "I don't use the sights and I think that's important for concealing." Why is not using sights important for concealing a firearm?

 

[TechnicalHillbilly]

I don't think we're going to agree much. And this entire thread is completely out of control now because I mentioned point shooting at 40 yards -- once. While I don't conceal until now, and appreciate any advice I can get there, I am a very experienced shooter and see little benefit in changing what works for me.

There is a huge difference between the use of a firearm on the battlefield and in civilian life

..says everyone who's never been on the battlefield. Note, battlefields are seldom fields anymore. They are mostly urban areas

Can you hit a moving target that is 40 yards away while you move without using the sights

Yes and no. I've killed plenty of things point-shooting that were moving at 25-30 yards away. I practice moving while point shooting on the range at all distances up to 40 yards. I've done this with rifles and pistols. No, I've never practiced moving while hitting a moving target. I've only shot moving targets while hunting... and yes, I've killed things at up to 30 yards while point shooting while the animal was moving. My second kill at 12 years old was 30 yards away and it was just taking off to run. Clean kill right thru the lung cavity.

Please consider taking an advanced defensive pistol class.

I have - with my wife. I was allowed to point-shoot thru the entire course. And was commended for it. Thanks very much.

Point shooting is for close range (e.g., 10 feet) and not for 40 yards (i.e., 120 feet).

Most self defense pistol shootings will happen at short range and not 40 yards. You should practice at all ranges. This is a non-point.

Fast drawing and point shooting a pistol at a threat that is 40 yards away is pretty much the dumbest thing I have heard of.

I doubt this is the dumbest thing you've heard of. You're making a lot of assumptions. Like: I can't actually do this in reality. Since I can and it was all I was ever taught and since I am effective at it, I'm going to stick with it whether a random forum warrior thinks it's dumb or not. Works for me and I really could care less.

To elaborate in a more concise form:

• Point shooting at 40 yards (i.e., without using sights) is a sport. It has no practical applicability in self defense with a firearm.
• "I don't use the sights and I think that's important for concealing." Why is not using sights important for concealing a firearm?

I disagree for obvious reasons.
This is all I was ever taught. I see people in class with me, who were far less effective at using their sights. Their draws were slow and labrsome. They were seldom accurate until the 2nd or 3rd shot. Regardless, I never berated anyone for doing what works best for them. I just assumed I was trained better and carried on. Had no idea this was a touchy subject for some or that such egotistical opinions existed.


To answer the other poster's question about what my force Recon friend carried: I didn't ask / don't know. I assume it was a desert eagle and he removed the sights . He is now a paid Merc in Italy and I've lost contact with him for over a year. I know his preferred carry weapon and the one he makes his crews carry are Kahr .45s. When he was active, he would make a lot of claims about he and his men being allowed to mostly carry whatever they wanted for side arms.

Appreciate the advice regarding SmartCarry. Looks like I'm buying several different holsters. All that aside, I guess I'll probably ditch this forum as I didn't get any active posts until a big flaming rage session about point shooting started up and wasted a lot of time. I own two businesses and work full time. This isn't really what I was looking for... will likely be my last response. I appreciate everyone who carries for the most part even if I think your'e kind of an egotistical ass ---bofh. Carry on. Have a great life.

 

[BluesStringer]

I appreciate everyone who carries for the most part even if I think your'e kind of an egotistical ass ---bofh. Carry on. Have a great life.

Even if your conclusion that he's an ass were correct, it may very well have more to do with being a highly-experienced, highly-trained ass than an egotistical one.

Otherwise.........

 

[phillip69]

and yes, I've killed things at up to 30 yards while point shooting while the animal was moving. My second kill at 12 years old was 30 yards away and it was just taking off to run.

I doubt this is the dumbest thing you've heard of. You're making a lot of assumptions. Like: I can't actually do this in reality. Since I can and it was all I was ever taught and since I am effective at it, I'm going to stick with it whether a random forum warrior thinks it's dumb or not. Works for me and I really could care less.

I respectfully suggest you are FOS! IF you did point, shoot, and kill as 12 year old at 30 yards it was pure luck.

No one can point and shoot @40 yards and consistently hit anything other than the side of a barn! iF YOU INSIST YOU CAN, YOU ARE FULL OF IT.

 

[bofh]

He is now a paid Merc in Italy and I've lost contact with him for over a year. I know his preferred carry weapon and the one he makes his crews carry are Kahr .45s.

All that aside, I guess I'll probably ditch this forum as I didn't get any active posts until a big flaming rage session about point shooting started up and wasted a lot of time. I own two businesses and work full time. This isn't really what I was looking for... will likely be my last response. I appreciate everyone who carries for the most part even if I think your'e kind of an egotistical ass ---bofh. Carry on. Have a great life.

I have my personal opinions and I stand for them. You should do the same for yours and not simply ditch a forum because you didn't like being questioned for your opinions.

You clearly failed to understand my posts. You do whatever think is best for you, but realize that there are many different schools of thought. You seem to be set on what you have learned and don't want to learn any different. That's certainly your choice. Something to think about: Viking Tactics | Some thoughts on point shooting. Also, read the "Quick-Fire Point Shooting" section of the US Army's Field Manual. I do not know a single firearms training school here in Tennessee that teaches point shooting other than for close contact (e.g., 3-6 feet) engagement. None of them teach point shooting using the "social finger" as trigger finger. Some of the training classes include shooting past people down range. You will likely get kicked off the range for performing unsighted shooting during or in preparation for such classes.

I do not know anyone carrying a Kahr .45 as weapon while being a contractor.

The term merc is derogatory.

 

[J.powers]

Welcome to the forum.

• Shorter posts with less rambling and direct questions may yield better answers.
• Stop obsessing about concealment. People do not notice bulges in your clothing. If they do, tell them it is medical equipment.
• A good gun belt and a good holster are key. Don't carry your $500 life saving device in a $10 holster on a $10 belt.
• Carry IWB at 4 o'clock or appendix. Your choice. If you get a holster that can accommodate both positions, then you can try them both out. Small of back carry (6 o'clock) is something different.
• There are different holster solutions for physical exercise, such as jogging.
• Point shooting at 40 yards (i.e., without using sights): "That's not how it works... that's not how any of this works!":girl_wacko:
• This sentence segment is pure nonsense: "I don't use the sights and I think that's important for concealing".:no:
• Carrying a smaller firearm for concealment is your personal choice to make. Carrying a backup magazine, however, is more important.
• For reference, I am 130 lbs and 5'7". I carry a 9mm Glock 19 at 4 o'clock concealed in a NSR Tactical LLC-4 holster and at least 1 backup magazine. For jogging, I carry a 9mm Glock 26 and a backup magazine in a SmartCarry holster. While hiking, I carry a 10mm Glock 20 concealed in a CrossBreed holster and 2 backup magazines. I will change to the NSR Tactical LLC-4 holster for the Glock 20 once it arrives.

Bravo!!!

 

[bofh]

From an instructor that teaches integrated sighted fire and unsighted fire - The Correct Context of Point Shooting by Roger Phillips, Owner and Operator of Fight Focused Concepts:

NOVEMBER 4, 2015

The Correct Context of Point Shooting

By Roger Phillips, Owner and Operator of Fight Focused Concepts

I find it amazing that the act of bashing a combat proven skill set, one in which all highly trained self-defense minded hand gunners use, has arisen from the grave and has become common place once again. This debate had been put to rest for over a decade, through testing in force on force (FOF) training, the mitigation of the use of semantics, the establishing of the correct definitions, and the correct context of point shooting.

Anyone that tries to tell you that the art of the handgun is an “all or nothing” world is either being intellectually dishonest or willfully ignorant. Anyone that tells you that the use of the sights is not a superior form of aiming, either does not know how to use the sights, or does not understand the correct context of sighted fire. Anyone that bashes point shooting, all while practicing/teaching/advocating contact shooting, retention shooting, soft focus, tucked shooting, hip shooting, type one focus, close contact shooting, type two focus, bad breath distance shooting, or a myriad of other “play on words” is just using semantics in order to bash something that they do (at a relatively low skill level) that is nothing more than low-level point shooting. Point shooters accept the fact that all of these “plays on words” are just ways to justify point shooting, without actually accepting the fact that they are point shooting.

The difference between people who accept the term point shooting and those that refuse to accept the term, is that the people who accept the term understand the fact that “the more you know, the further you can go.” Point shooting is a skill that can be taken to amazing levels, just as sighted fire can be brought to amazing levels. A highly skilled point shooter will be better at contact/retention/hip/bad breath distance shooting than a person of lower skill, just as a highly skilled sighted fire shooter will be better at precision shooting than a person of lower skill level. Both of these skills are absolutely essential if you want to be as deadly as you can possibly be. To excel at one and to dismiss the other will leave you wanting in regards to be able to be well-rounded, fluid, and adaptable to the ever-changing dynamics of a fight.

I see the rise of this long dead debate, over the last couple of years, due to two main reasons. The first comes down to point shooters, that do not accept or understand the correct context of point shooting. They know how to do it, yet they take it outside of its intended purpose and its intended role. Whether this is intentional or not, it does cause damage to the advancement of the art. Point shooting has a very definitive purpose and an absolute role. It is an aiming method that is designed to work well inside the very worst of situations. It is what you default to when things are very close, extremely fast, horribly bad, and you simply cannot get to your sights. It is not designed to be used when you can actually and safely achieve more visual input on the sights of your gun. The perpetuation of the incorrect context of point shooting, by point shooters themselves, is one of the main reasons that people jump onto bashing these life saving skills. People that do not know any better are listening to people who do not know any better. That makes point shooters look dumb and an easy target for a hit piece. The simple fact is and I say this inside of every class, “get the maximum amount of visual input on the gun that the situation will allow. If you can get to your sights…….GET TO YOUR SIGHTS! But, do not die trying to get to something that is simply not going to be there.”

It is not about sighted fire -vs- point shooting……it is about the seamless integration of sighted fire (the traditionally correct use of the sights) and unsighted fire (aiming the handgun using methods other than the traditionally correct use of the sights.) It is all about seeing what you need to see, to get the hits that you need to make, all inside of the specifics of the situation.

“Situations dictate strategies, strategies dictate tactics, and tactics dictate techniques……techniques should never dictate anything.”

Any Instructor out there that does not prepare you (at least minimally) for the very worst of gun fights, all while bashing those that do prepare you for the very worst of gunfights, should be seen for what they are…….nothing more than salesman promoting their product, while denouncing their competitor’s product.

On the other hand, any Point Shooting Instructor that does not advocate a very high skill level, in regards to the use of the sights, all while denigrating high skill level “marksmanship base” Instructors, is just as bad as their counterpart. I for one, believe that we should see the skills for what they are and accept the necessity of the skills as an absolute fact. Sure, I have my point shooting specialty, but I also practice, teach, and advocate very high level sighted fire skills. I find that being open-minded, inclusive, accepting, and a perpetual student to be much more beneficial to the students than being closed-minded, exclusive, intolerant, and arrogantly ignorant of my ignorance.

The second reason for the recent surge of bashing inside of this topic is one that must be tread upon very carefully. It must be addressed with the appropriate amount of respect in place, unless disrespect was given first.

What I am talking about is the newer tier one military Instructors who have made a very good name for themselves on their return from Iraq, Afghanistan, or other overseas deployments. While most of these men have earned a high level of respect from me for their service, their opinions, knowledge, training, and skills on point shooting may be a very different story. Some of the most out spoken of these Instructors tend to only see things from a military context, since it is the only context that they have experience with. Most point shooting advocates work from a civilian or a law enforcement context. I find it telling that law enforcement and civilian trainers are coming around to accepting point shooting, more and more, while the tier one military Instructors push further and further away from it. Could it be that it is the difference in “the correct context of point shooting” that is what drives this phenomenon? Could it be that the correct context of point shooting plays a much heavier role for civilians and law enforcement? Could it be that the context of military application creates a much smaller role for the need of point shooting?

The civilian context of getting up in the morning, getting ready for work, holstering up their CCW handgun, and going out to make a living is very different from the military context of collecting intelligence, making a plan of action, gearing up with all of your buddies, with the best weaponry of any military, and going out to find people to kill. The civilian context leads to a much higher possibility of a confrontation being a reactive event, with the use of a handgun. The military context leads to a much higher possibility of a confrontation being a proactive event, while using a rifle. These are key points that are often overlooked.

The correct context of point shooting is much more suited for the civilian context and for Instructors that focus on the civilian context. This would be the reason why the bashing of the skill has begun to become common place, from the tier one military Instructors and their followers. It has nothing to do with an Instructor teaching a superior curriculum. It is much more about an Instructor teaching what they know, what they are capable of teaching, all while casting disdain on what they may not know and what they may not be capable of teaching. The simple fact is that if you do not understand the correct context of point shooting, you believe that the only context is a military context, or that you do not believe that the military context is very different from a civilian context it is very easy to sit back and disparage a combat proven skill set…….at nothing more than a glance.

I feel that as an Instructor, we should all be teaching our students the very best material that we know and that we can find. This means that every Instructor out there should be running his curriculum through his very personal and private set of filters……….based on his very personal and private set of experiences. That means that we should all be teaching something that we absolutely believe in and that is different (even if just slightly) from everyone else. We all need to have our mission……..our focus…..our specialty…….our niche……..and our hook that sets us apart from everyone else. Embrace what makes you different, but remain the perpetual student, and look to see what you can learn from the accomplished man, that sees things very differently from you.

 

[bofh]

For completeness, here is the just released part two of that article: The Correct Context of Point Shooting Part Two by Roger Phillips, Owner and Operator of Fight focused Concepts.

 

[golddigger14s]

Why bother replying, since the OP is in Tahiti?