I own a various array of handguns and rifles, but I claim no expertise when it comes to weapons. I personally do not like the looks of a Glock, no matter how great a weapon it is......... I prefer a wheel gun in .357 or my 1911. Laugh if you will, but a Lady Smith in .357 is fairly compact for the backwoods.

Now to my story; about 10 years ago......
Getting ready to go into the desert one weekend, I proudly displayed my new 92FS to a camping buddy, a TRUE gun afficianado. He looked at it and said "Nice, but not good."
What! How could this be? I just acquired a handgun approved by the US Military and one I had contemplated purchasing for some time.
I have to add that he too owns one.
So, the set up. Making sure the weapon was empty, I held it on him per his instructions, as if I were warding off an attacker. With one swift move of his hand, he removed the slide and barrel of the gun while I still held he useless frame in my hand.
Unglaublisch!
I was stunned to say the least.

He told me that a street wise criminal would spend hours with this type of weapon in a vise, training himself to make this move in order to disable the 92.
I have to add, he is not a criminal, at least as far as I know, but after hearing of this, he did spend enough time with his own 92 to become proficient at it.

So, a word to the wise on the Beretta 92. A nice weapon, but subject to unwanted dismanteling at the wrong time.

FWIW.
<img src="/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

This is a well-known "issue" with the M92. There are at least 2 relatively easy counters for such "snatch the top of the gun" tricks.

First, and perhaps easiest, is to remove the "shelf" from the takedown lever (the protruding part that you press on to rotate the lever). A few minutes with a Dremel or a file will solve the problem, and render your 92 immune to such snatches. Mine is so modified, & people who thought they would "show me something I didn't know about the 92" got a rude surprise instead (all in training, of course).

I'm also partial to Massad Ayoob's comments re: this "problem" with the Beretta 92 (I'm paraphrasing): If you can guarantee that every punk I ever face over the Beretta will try this snatch, I'll gladly carry the 92 for the rest of my life, and shoot the SOB with my backup gun while he's holding the top half of the 92 & laughing at me.

Of course, you held still for your buddy's attempted grab, too, which greatly improves the odds of it's success. In a real-life situation, you likely would not do so; it's much harder to hit the release button and the takedown lever simultaneously when the gun is in motion. Also, you should be able to put at least one bullet into the attacker, which probably would slow him up, if not completely change his mind about continuing the attack.

Just my 2 cents.

David

FWIW, this probably belongs in "around the campfire".

Regarding the takedown issue, I wouldn't worry much about it. For one, it would be a pretty hard trick to pull off "for real".

Also, if you think about it, most firearms have weaknesses when you are physically close enought to grapple.

For example, if you push back on the slide of many autos and then grasp the "nose" of the gun, holding the slide in a pushed back position, the slide is in the way of the hammer. This is probably much easier to do and isn't specific to just one model firearm.

There is also the case of grasping the cylinder of a revolver tightly.

This isn't really an issue with the 92FS. It is an issue that you are too close. :-)

-john

I have also trained with jamming my hand between the hammer and firing pin. Such moves aren't pleasant, but a blood blister or shredded palm is nothing compared to a bullet.

But to the point of the original post: if you have an assailant within arm's reach of you and you have your weapon drawn, unable to move in any direction, you should demand that they back away outside of your reach. If they refuse and/or tense for an attack (there are many tells for this) they have just taken a job as a hot lead catcher. Start firing and don't stop until they do. Obviously, being aware that this slide removal *might* be possible in extremely rare circumstances, you have forknowledge to not let your assailant get that close. Check your local laws for legality of said defensive strategy - IANAL.

FWIW I also own this fine piece of weaponry. Don't let someone tell you it's not a worthy gun. The JMH home defense ammo is pretty nasty (even if it's not a .40 or .45). Practicing against a vice or other non-moving target (you) is NOTHING like doing it to someone who's trying to avoid and squeeze off a round. I'd like to meet the person who can pull off my rail as fast as I can pull the trigger. This is one for movies and bar bets. Oh, and the 92FS is a pig - it eats everything I feed it... it just keeps firing round after round and never ever jams.

Then don't let me near it. <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> I make 92-family pistols do bizzare stupidity. Never met one that would NOT jam for me.

If your attacker is within 21 feet, then he can usually get to you before you can stop him (except with a head shot). If he suddenly rushes towards you, you will have perception time (wow, this guy is actually rushing me, even though I have a gun pointed at him), and reaction time (should I shoot, move, both?). In a well trained person, this total time is about 0.8 seconds. In an untrained person, it is 1.5-2.2 seconds, even after telling the untrained person what the attacker is going to do. In California, you have no DUTY to retreat if attacked, but you may want to move away (usually laterally, not backwards) to give yourself more distance (and therefore time). While you are doing this, I would be giving clear and loud commands. Have him put his hands up all the way, and kneel down. This position allows you the advantage over time. If his hands are empty, it simply takes him too long to get to a weapon (or you) and cannot overcome your perception and reaction time. If he gets into that position, tell him that if he moves or drops his hands, you will assume that he is going for a weapon or is going to attack you, and you will shoot him. If others are nearby, say it loud enough for them to hear it too. That may be very valuable later if you do have to shoot him, as it goes to your intent (self defense), and his intent.

And, of course, have someone call 9-1-1 and tell them that you are holding an attacker at gun point. You do not want responding police to shoot you.

Shooting another human being is not a natural act. It may disturb you afterwards, it may not. It may cause you criminal or civil problems later. You should think these things through now, not in the heat of the moment.

Being well trained with a firearm also includes practicing the art of talking to people that you are holding at gun point. Do not allow them to talk to you, as this is a classic distraction technique. Give them clear commands, one at a time. Tell them what will happen if they do something other than what you want.

You might also include training in when NOT to shoot. If your attacker, seeing your handgun, puts up his hands and turns and walks away, you might not shoot him. But you might keep the gun on him for awhile. Lots of factors to consider besides handgun make and caliber.

Heh heh, the infamous "Lethal Weapon 4" Beretta take-down <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I too have heard stories of criminals practicing this maneuver (Lots of cops in Kali, particularly LA, are/were issued the 92). Even firearms/tactics instructors I respect have passed on this warning. Can't say I have ever heard of it actually happening though.

FWIW, Beretta makes a factory dissassembly lever without the ledge, so you don't have to dremel yours if you don't want to.

But I wouldn't worry about it overmuch. I doubt many criminals would recognize the model in a low light situation and a grappling match for the pistol is a serious affair, regardless of the make. Better to learn some retention skills than stress over a perceived weakness. There are LOTS of pistols out there that can be disabled by manipulating the slide and a slide stop or dissassembly lever, not just the Beretta.

True enough... I train all the time for fast responses to attacks (though admittedly I haven't with the gun for a while - I know what I'm doing next weekend!), and getting away laterally is usually better than simply going back. It allows for momentum and your attacker's own delayed response. Plus, I'm prepared for hand-to-hand if it comes to it.

It's not like I carry a gun, so the only time I'd probably get into this situation is while hunting or in my house. Stupid carry laws - if this happens on the street, at best I have a knife or my hands. But I can GUARANTEE that if someone broke into my home, I wouldn't be hesitating on pulling the trigger. Great advice and interesting information on the reaction time. It makes the whole slide scenario more plausible I suppose. <img src="/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

Maybe it's time to break out the dremel. <img src="/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

I knew there was a reason I didn't like that piece (not to mention, it's not a .45) <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Troy

Nice summary. Thanks for taking the time to inform.

You bring up a good point about the impact of using a gun, even if in justifiable self defense.
I read an article, from the American Rifleman I believe, where the author had inteviewed a large number of people who used a gun to defend themselves, all within the law.
The reactions were very impressive, even from LEO's who used their weapons in the line of duty.
I can't be sure of the number, but about 90%+ of them said they wish they had not used the weapon (there was no indication of what the outcome would have been had they not defended themselves) due to what they went through after the event.
The majority of them, even the LEO's, suffered psychological issues at having fired at and hit another human being. Others, even though the use had been deemed "justifiable" by law were subject to civil lawsuits which, even though found innocent, placed a very large financial burden on them.

It is easy to show bravado in text messaging, but I am sure there is a price to be paid for legally defending ones self, even if justifiable and even for the most well trained who carry a weapon for a living, military combat aside.
If my survival comes down to the point of having to shoot another individual, I sure hope I have exhausted every other means of solving the issue first.