[marv]

Does anyone install dovetailed iron sights on the P3AT?

 

[lop]

Marv, your best bet might be to check out Goldenloki's site:
http://www.goldenloki.com/

He's a KTOGer from way back, and if he can't, he can probably tell you who could.
Lop

 

[dirksterg30]

Check out http://www.apwcogan.com/custom_carry.htm

Also, I remember reading a thread over on the Firing Line that user Bill DeShivs installs P11 sights on P32/P3AT/LCP pistols for $125. I've contacted him to see if he has pictures available. If/when I hear from him, I'll post them here.

If you have a 1st Gen P3AT, you could also go with the P-Sight, which is a rear sight blade that you glue into the rear sight cavity: http://www.psenhancements.com/

 

[rosieK]

Hey Y'all: Not trying to be impudent but what do most of you 3ATers think you will be doing with your firearm? It is a close-in defensive CC firearm ideally made for point shoot vs aimed shoot (that certainly is one reason it has literally no sights). Sights and lasers are nice to have; have at it if it makes you feel better but spend some time on learning how to point shoot. Aiming with a sight or even acquiring a laser takes fractions of a second that you do not have when someone is less than 10 ft from you and probably only 5 ft (statistics are heavily weighted on the 5 ft distance); point shoot will provide you with the quickest reaction and, when practiced within the small distance, it will amaze you how your eyes and nose will connect to your arm and the aim of a firearm. If you want the 3AT to be an effective defensive firearm, learn, practice and spend time with point shoot; it will amaze you, once you master it, how little the sight will matter.

 

[abuck50]

These are not target pistols! I have added a Crimson Trace to mine though and do like it lots!

Craig

 

[dirksterg30]

Hey Y'all: Not trying to be impudent but what do most of you 3ATers think you will be doing with your firearm? It is a close-in defensive CC firearm ideally made for point shoot vs aimed shoot (that certainly is one reason it has literally no sights). Sights and lasers are nice to have; have at it if it makes you feel better but spend some time on learning how to point shoot. Aiming with a sight or even acquiring a laser takes fractions of a second that you do not have when someone is less than 10 ft from you and probably only 5 ft (statistics are heavily weighted on the 5 ft distance); point shoot will provide you with the quickest reaction and, when practiced within the small distance, it will amaze you how your eyes and nose will connect to your arm and the aim of a firearm. If you want the 3AT to be an effective defensive firearm, learn, practice and spend time with point shoot; it will amaze you, once you master it, how little the sight will matter.

You are assuming that if I get into a defensive situation, that the attacker will be at arms length from me. Statistically, that is likely, but not certain. What if my attacker is 10 yards away? Personally, I'd rather have the capability to make aimed shots further away if need be.

 

[rosieK]

Hey dirksterg30: You agree that statistically you will be within a close distance more likely than not. If that is the case "statistically", you would think that you would embrace point shooting and become proficient at same. I have no problem with lasers and multi-yard distances as potential defensive scenarios and no problem with laser and sights etc, but just wish to point out the obvious "statistically" and the necessity to be prepared for its more obvious scenario. IMO if you are concerned with distances beyond 21 ft, you should probably be armed with something larger caliber; that little powder cartridge behind the bullet can only go so far with stopping power.
PS: I do have and carry a P3AT because it is small and lightweight and I do not feel like I am lugging an elephant in my pocket, but I also realize that it has its limitations and I am prepared to deal with those limitations by becoming expert at point shooting with the least amount of miliseconds delay. If you feel that the laser is helpful and will fulfill your requirements for defensive carry, I support your decision; just want you to appreciate what I perceive as an invaluable defensive tool for a limited firearm.

 

[dirksterg30]

Here's what Bill DeShivs' P11 sight install looks like on a P3AT:

Link to site: http://billdeshivs.com/bd/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=4&products_id=32

EDITED TO ADD: Apparently, Bill will only do this for 1st gen P3ATs/P32s.

 

[BillK]

Hey Y'all: Not trying to be impudent but what do most of you 3ATers think you will be doing with your firearm? It is a close-in defensive CC firearm ideally made for point shoot vs aimed shoot (that certainly is one reason it has literally no sights). Sights and lasers are nice to have; have at it if it makes you feel better but spend some time on learning how to point shoot. Aiming with a sight or even acquiring a laser takes fractions of a second that you do not have when someone is less than 10 ft from you and probably only 5 ft (statistics are heavily weighted on the 5 ft distance); point shoot will provide you with the quickest reaction and, when practiced within the small distance, it will amaze you how your eyes and nose will connect to your arm and the aim of a firearm. If you want the 3AT to be an effective defensive firearm, learn, practice and spend time with point shoot; it will amaze you, once you master it, how little the sight will matter.

+.9  

Take care...

 

[diamond]

I don't carry a gun because of statistics. Statistics mean absolutely nothing.

I carry a gun to keep my family, myself and perhaps others around me safe from bad guys.

Consider a hostage situation. A guy grabs your child. He stands 10-15 yards away. He doesn't see you and you have a clean and clear headshot. I would take that shot with my P3AT...with or without custom sights.

Just because my P3 is designed for up-close and personal protection does not mean that I would not want to be good enough with it to take the long shot.

 

[johnfrommd]

Within 21 feet, you can point the muzzle and hit the target. If you add a laser, you can shoot center of mass easier and faster. However, if someone grabs a person as a hostage, I don't think you would want to try a head shot with this gun.

I can stage my trigger pretty well on a paper target, with no adrenalin pumping through my veins and no shouting and screaming in my ears and still not always hit exactly where I aimed. It also has to do with the short barrel ballistics and the SD between shot to shot along with the double action trigger and small, light frame.

I shoot IDPA with my gun all the time and I know its limits. Even with my Kahr P9, a much more accurate gun, longer ranges are problematic when you are moving or stressed.

Please don't try to save your child with a head shot. You can't live with the results if you miss.

John

 

[doubloon]

On the topic of sights.

I chose the CTC to help me aim at the range and I'm not sure it will be a lot of help nor am I counting on it in a defensive situation. But, at the range, it helps validate my trigger control on the tiny pistol in my fat mitts by seeing a hole appear in the paper fairly close to where the little red dot is fluttering.

On the topic of defense.

If you ever find yourself in a situation where you need to draw for self defense chances are it will be in low light conditions, everyone will be moving and there's a good possibility the threat will be closing distance on you ... (if he's running away from you then you're not "defending" yourself anymore, you're hunting).

What all of us will end up doing is either what we practice or whatever our panic stricken little brain comes up with first and I wouldn't assume everything will always work as smoothly as it does at the range.

I suggest finding a defensive combat professional in your area and getting some training. The advice you get there will be based on fact and experience and much better than anything you'll get from guessing what to do.

An analysis of a real life shooting
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43ojSGUfetY[/ame]

A segment from the Outdoor Channel's Best Defense
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vaC6jCIyLo[/ame]


On the subject of opinions ...

... What if my attacker is 10 yards away? ...

I wouldn't want to be standing in court trying to prove someone I shot from 10 yards away was an "attacker".

...
Consider a hostage situation.  A guy grabs your child.  He stands 10-15 yards away.  He doesn't see you and you have a clean and clear headshot.  I would take that shot with my P3AT...with or without custom sights.
...

This is just ridiculous, some related light reading at this link, you may want to invest in some trauma plate for the kiddos.
http://lonelymachines.org/mall-ninjas/

 

[Chopper]

I too have a CT on my P3AT and I painted the sights with very bright nail polish for outside in daylight, it turned out very nice but I did feel weird buying nail polish.

 

[burley]

I wouldn't want to be standing in court trying to prove someone I shot from 10 yards away was an "attacker".

Sorry but that is utter BS. A threat is a threat no matter the distance...

 

[JB-Norcal]

I agree with burley, but I have to say, sometimes I don't feel very good about a jury of my peers having to define what is "reasonable".
Especially here in CA. :-X

 

[Toforo]

On the topic of defense...

...I suggest finding a defensive combat professional in your area and getting some training. The advice you get there will be based on fact and experience and much better than anything you'll get from guessing what to do...

A segment from the Outdoor Channel's Best Defense
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vaC6jCIyLo

On the subject of opinions ...

GREAT POST- GREAT EXAMPLES - GREAT SUGGESTIONS!

We each have our own unique experiences, knowledge, and ideas considering "self-defense" and the weapons we choose to use - and when (and this includes the BRAIN)

I'll leave my commentary OUT of this (because we EACH have our own "arguable" thoughts/ideas/experiences) but I would like to add is that regardless of MY knowledge and experiences, the Missouri CCW course (at least the one I took) taught me about MISSOURI STATE LAW, the DO's and DON'Ts regarding those laws, and the basic premise of self defense as it applies to a CCW (as doubloon posted)

I've talked to my friends in other states who went through their CCW class with absolutely no mention during their classes of the examples that doubloon posted (what to do and when to do it after the shot is fired, the police on-scene, when and HOW to make your police "statement" - civil liabilities, etc)

Personally, I couldn't believe NOT having this information, and at many of my friend's requests, I sent them the DVD/video of the class that I took - which included similiar information (plus much more) to the video from "Outdoor Channel's Best Defense" that doubloon posted.

My "self-defense scenarios" aren't based on my "sights" - the type of bullet I use - nor the size of the gun I carry, but hopefully the correct combination of those things (and a few other factors)

 

[doubloon]

[quote author=doubloon link=1266987844/0#11 date=1268495656]
I wouldn't want to be standing in court trying to prove someone I shot from 10 yards away was an "attacker".

Sorry but that is utter BS. A threat is a threat no matter the distance... [/quote]
I didn't say something 10 yards away cannot be a threat. You're entitled to your opinion and I won't even call it BS.

There are a lot of variables here and to me distance is one of them.

In my home or my car in Texas I am not under duty to retreat but that's not the way it is everywhere. Outside my home, Texas puts the defendant under a heavy burden of proof that the action was the only means available to avoid the risk of death or serious injury.

Based on that it's my understanding there is a lot more to it than a simple threat or no threat decision. Outside your "home" if you can avoid shooting someone by walking away then in theory you are not justified in shooting the "threat" at any distance.

I'm not saying *you* shouldn't shoot but I'm still saying I would not want to the be the one standing in that courtroom.

http://www.10thcoa.courts.state.tx.us/opinions/HTMLOpinion.asp?OpinionID=7750

Timothy Lamont Lewis was indicted for murder to which he pleaded not guilty.  The jury found Lewis guilty of manslaughter and assessed a fifteen-year sentence.  Lewis now appeals, arguing that the evidence does not support the conviction, admission of a photograph resulted in prejudicial error, and the court improperly limited the scope of his voir dire.  We affirm.

In his first point of error, Lewis argues that the evidence is factually insufficient to support the jury’s rejection of his self-defense claim.  Specifically, Lewis claims he acted out of fear of death or serious bodily injury and he attempted to retreat.

The defendant must first produce “some evidence” supporting self-defense.  Zuliani v. State, 97 S.W.3d 589, 594 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003); In re S.S., 167 S.W.3d 108, 114 (Tex. App.—Waco 2005, no pet.).  Once the defense is raised, the State “bears the burden of persuasion to disprove the raised defense.”

A person commits manslaughter by recklessly causing an individual’s death.  See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 19.04(a) (Vernon 2003).  Self-defense is justified when a person “reasonably believes” that “force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the other’s use or attempted use of unlawful force.”  Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 9.31(a) (Vernon 2003).  The use of deadly force is warranted only where “self-defense is justified under Section 9.31, a reasonable person would not have retreated, and when deadly force is reasonably necessary to protect against another’s use or attempted use of deadly force.”  Bumguardner v. State, 963 S.W.2d 171, 173 (Tex. App.—Waco 1998, pet ref’d) (emphasis original); see Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 9.32(a)(1)-(3) (Vernon 2003).

Lewis testified that he feared Branch and Davis planned to cause him death or serious bodily injury.  He further claimed that throughout the incident, he attempted to retreat to the inside of his home, but Branch stood in a “baseball stance” with the pipe and blocked his exit.  Morris testified that Branch stood near a car, but later testified that Branch was chasing Lewis with the pipe.  According to Williams, Branch stood still while holding the pipe.

The evidence is conflicting as to (1) the circumstances surrounding the gun’s firing; (2) Lewis’s conduct during the altercation between Davis and Richardson; and (3) whether Branch blocked Lewis’s exit such that no other avenues of retreat existed.  However, it was the “exclusive province” of the jury to resolve these conflicts.  Wesbrook v. State, 29 S.W.3d 103, 111 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000); see Mosley v. State, 983 S.W.2d 249, 254 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998).[1]  In doing so, the jury could reasonably conclude that Lewis did not act in self-defense.

 

[rosieK]

I read all kinds of comments on this thread and just shake my head when I read about a host of "what ifs" with a P3AT. If you are serious about "what ifs" involving some degree of distance, strategies, moving around in some kind of serious gun battle, then you really should be armed with something very different than a P3AT with its limited 380 punch. IMHO, in the hands of someone like myself who does not consider himself to be "expert", strictly carries for more "personal self defense" meaning less than 7 yards, and will only pocket carry, the P3AT is made to order and has a limited use and I understand that and will act accordingly. If you must think about very good sights and lasers and lights, and many scenarios involving distance and movement, I think you are just in the wrong gun and the wrong caliber. If you are that good at it, I wish you well but I think you will be outgunned if you enter a fray armed with a little 380, and not a 38 or a 9 or bigger. Hey--lets all have fun talking this stuff up and never have to face any of our "what ifs". Be safe forum brothers.

 

[james__12345]

Not sure about other states, but Tennessee is a stand your ground state. You have no duty to retreat, a reasonable fear of severe bodily injury or death is all it takes.

I could have swore I remember reading that in Texas you can even chase down and shoot someone for stealing from you if you feel its the only way to get your stuff back and you remained in direct pursuit from the time of the took it to the time you dealt with them. That doesn't sound too consistant with them having duty to retreat. Maybe that wasn't Texas though.

There was a video posted here a while back from youtube, i think it was just called "dont talk to police." I'll try to find it again and post it here. It was a VERY good thing to watch in my opinion.

 

[doubloon]

...  

I could have swore I remember reading that in Texas you can even chase down and shoot someone for stealing from you if you feel its the only way to get your stuff back and you remained in direct pursuit from the time of the took it to the time you dealt with them.  That doesn't sound too consistant with them having duty to retreat. Maybe that wasn't Texas though.
...

A quick google for <your state> penal code deadly force should turn up sufficient hits to do some reading on your own.

I think only at night, only if it's not insured or in any other way recoverable and I don't believe there is any entitlement to pursuit, at least not beyond your own property line. Also keep in mind that what constitutes "reasonably" will not be determined by the shooter, that determination is reserved for a judge and/or jury. We can't all just make up our own reasons for taking another life like "he need killin'".

Now, even though I am not a lawyer, I am thinking it would work out to your advantage if you were the one doing the chasing and shooting when a law enforcement team rolled up behind you. I'd have to think the guy doing the chasing and waiving the gun is going to look to the sheriff like the aggressor that needs to be shot to be stopped.

§ 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY.  A person is
justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or
tangible, movable property:
(1)  if he would be justified in using force against the
other under Section 9.41;  and
(2)  when and to the degree he reasonably believes the
deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A)  to prevent the other's imminent commission of
arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the
nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime;  or
(B)  to prevent the other who is fleeing
immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated
robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the
property;  and
(3)  he reasonably believes that:                                            
(A)  the land or property cannot be protected or
recovered by any other means;  or
(B)  the use of force other than deadly force to
protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or
another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.  
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.