# Is dual wielding Pistol's used by any government agency? How Many weapons is to many?



## Rojack79 (Nov 25, 2015)

Hey everyone. I have an idea for a character that works for a government agency that tracks and monitor's all of the supernatural activity in the U.S. Think if the X-File's got merged with Supernatural. That's my story in a nutshell. The only issue i am having is that when i was thinking of a code name for my character i came up with the name Arsenal. As some of you know an arsenal is "[FONT=arial, sans-serif-light, sans-serif]a collection of weapons and military equipment stored by a country, person, or group." This Character would be wielding a vast array of weapon's from pistol's to shotgun's, S.M.G's to Assault Rifle's and everything in between and beyond. So i have it in my head however that his main weapon's will be a dual pair of Glock 18's with 3 round burst instead of full auto and a fire select switch. These would be his main weapon's throughout the saga of him and his time in the Supernatural Protection Agency The F.B.I.'s Special Investigation Unit. So what do you guy's think?[/FONT]


----------



## Joe_Bassett (Nov 25, 2015)

Well, as long as he's not pulling a rocket launcher out of thin air I'd say go for it.

_BUT..._

You also got to think about the practicality of it all.  In reality, good firearms are expensive. Not to mention high powered weapons aren't the most easily transported.  They can be pretty heavy. So unless he's absolutely loaded with money, he's gonna have a hard time collecting so many weapons.  Also some places have restrictions on the types of firearms a person can have. That might be negated by the fact that he works for the government but it might still restrict where he can take these weapons.  

Also, if the caliber's higher than .22 or _maybe_ 9mm he's gonna have to deal with a lot of shoulder pain.  There's a reason most people fire a gun with two hands. It helps with accuracy and lessens the strain on the shooter's arms. I'm not sure what the calibre of a glock 18 is, but I think it's higher than .22.  I definitely would not suggest firing a .45 or higher with one hand.  It might dislocate your shoulder. 

Hope this helps.


----------



## Plasticweld (Nov 25, 2015)

As someone who has carried a firearm for more that 30 years carrying two 18, is unrealistic, they are too heavy and impossible to conceal.  I am guessing by your description that he is a suit and tie, conceal carry guy not an open carry.  For years I carried the PPK which is easy to conceal, stainless steel do it does not rust, sweat and salt from your body corrode any blue finished guns.  Which is why the Glocks are so popular.  They are light, the 19 pictured next to the 23 are the same size and realistically about the biggest size you can carry all day and conceal.   The 26 holds only ten rounds but with the shorter handle is easier to conceal in the summer months.  The gun next to my cell phone is smith body guard which I carry all the time, I put it next to my cell phone for size comparison is light and you never know it is there, that goes with me 100 percent of the time, the other 90 percent of the time I carry either the 19 or the 23 in a belly band type holster, which make them just about impossible to detect and would let you do jumping jacks and not loose it.  


How a gun is carried is one of the most important aspects related to choice of what you carry.  Sitting, physical activity and what you are wearing all have more impact than almost anything else.  Big heavy guns are not carried by people who do so every day. 


The belly ban is a little slower to draw from, the hip pancake pictured next to it is the easiest to draw quickly from but is not designed for sitting for long periods.  The same case the carries the body guard smith just breaks up the out line so you can't see the imprint of a gun in my pocket.  That is used for me as an oh shit gun or back up just because it is slow, it no problem to always carry the others take more effort, My pants are measured with a holster, the shirts I chose to wear our based on how the blouse so that there are no sharp lines if I bend over.  

hope some of the info helps with your story line...Bob


----------



## Ariel (Nov 25, 2015)

No, no duel-wielding pistols is not used by any government agency.  Having a back-up weapon is used by most though.  Recoil is a thing and it sucks to smack yourself in the face with a gun (I haven't done so but that's because I was taught to shoot by a former police officer).  There are also certain guns that I just wouldn't fire, personally.


----------



## Rojack79 (Nov 25, 2015)

GuitarHiro97 said:


> Well, as long as he's not pulling a rocket launcher out of thin air I'd say go for it.
> 
> _BUT..._
> 
> ...


The Glock 18 is a 9mm machine pistol in real life. In my story i'm going to make it fire in 3 round burst.


----------



## Rojack79 (Nov 25, 2015)

Plasticweld said:


> View attachment 10688View attachment 10689
> 
> 
> As someone who has carried a firearm for more that 30 years carrying two 18, is unrealistic, they are too heavy and impossible to conceal.  I am guessing by your description that he is a suit and tie, conceal carry guy not an open carry.  For years I carried the PPK which is easy to conceal, stainless steel do it does not rust, sweat and salt from your body corrode any blue finished guns.  Which is why the Glocks are so popular.  They are light, the 19 pictured next to the 23 are the same size and realistically about the biggest size you can carry all day and conceal.   The 26 holds only ten rounds but with the shorter handle is easier to conceal in the summer months.  The gun next to my cell phone is smith body guard which I carry all the time, I put it next to my cell phone for size comparison is light and you never know it is there, that goes with me 100 percent of the time, the other 90 percent of the time I carry either the 19 or the 23 in a belly band type holster, which make them just about impossible to detect and would let you do jumping jacks and not loose it.
> ...


He is not a suit and tie character. This branch of the agency is exclusively field work operative's with a heavy paramilitary emphasis on how they work and operate. I always picture him with what i think are called thigh holster's one strapped to each leg. He also has several more gun's that he carries around with him. Basically these guy's are not about stealth. They are about terminating whatever threat they come across with extreme prejudice. In there line of work they can literally go up against Edritch abomination's and god's so i think heavy fire power is the least of there worry's.


----------



## popsprocket (Nov 25, 2015)

Arsenal is the name of a DC superhero

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Harper_(comics)


----------



## Rojack79 (Nov 25, 2015)

NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! There goes months of planning, research, time and energy, and...... Ok i'm over it. But really? That suck's!


----------



## Joe_Bassett (Nov 25, 2015)

Rojack79 said:


> The Glock 18 is a 9mm machine pistol in real life. In my story i'm going to make it fire in 3 round burst.



Even at 9mm, it would make your shoulders sore, especially when firing three round bursts.  But then again I have weak arms


----------



## Rojack79 (Nov 25, 2015)

MARKIPLIER!!!!! OMG i love him!!!!!!!


----------



## Bishop (Nov 25, 2015)

There is, nor ever has been, a trained agent of any type who would primarily use two pistols. No one trained with weapons at all would use dual pistols. Video games and movies are lying to you; it's impractical, inaccurate, and tiring. In a situation where a highly trained soldier or agent of any kind would find two of the same pistol, it's far more likely they'd use one at a time and discard the first when one goes empty.


----------



## Rojack79 (Nov 25, 2015)

Honestly i fail to see how it is inaccurate. Having shot i 9mm pistol with two hand's and one hand i can safely say that my accuracy did not degrade one bit. I even fired it in rapid succession and the result's were the same perfect accuracy. Now a .45 on the other hand. That gun was a beast to fire with both hand's. Heck even the mythbuster's tested out the theory of dual wielding and concluded that it was a viable way to use a pair of pistol's.


----------



## popsprocket (Nov 25, 2015)

[video=youtube;JlN_4MMTdPs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlN_4MMTdPs[/video]


----------



## Rojack79 (Nov 25, 2015)

popsprocket said:


> [video=youtube;JlN_4MMTdPs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlN_4MMTdPs[/video][/QUOTE
> 
> I remember this video. His point's are valid but i feel like people should give dual wielding a fair trial. I wish i had two pistol's and a camera just so i could show people what someone could do with dual wielding. If you train yourself you can be vary good at it.


----------



## Ariel (Nov 25, 2015)

Obviously you're going to do whatever it is you want.  Duel-wielding pistols is highly impractical because human eyes do not operate (note: aim) independently.


----------



## Rojack79 (Nov 25, 2015)

Honestly i want to do what is realistic. The only thing is that dual wielding is looked down upon by some people who just think it's for TV or video game's. Contrary to popular belief it has it's place in combat situation's. Just because "Expert's" don't condone it's use dose't mean it can't be useful or practical. I'm sorry if i sound like i'm trying to step on anyone's toe's. I just hate it when the so called expert's claim that something is not practical or useful. I've had a history of people telling me that thing's can't be done and I've proven every single one of them wrong. Back in high school i use to tell my peer's that it was possible to use a great-sword one handed. Did i get it from a game. Yes i did. And everyone kept on telling me that it was impossible. But i proved them wrong and I still practice it to this day. So sorry for getting off topic and ranting. But for me if someone is going to say that something is impossible then they better have a lot of proof to the contrary.


----------



## Pluralized (Nov 25, 2015)

Wielding two pistols is unapologetically bad ass. Believable or not, the bullets will come out of the guns in double the quantity. Everything we see in movies is essentially bullshit when it comes to firearms anyway; aiming to actually hit a human-sized target at anything beyond about ten yards is much more difficult than most people think. I cannot tell you how I know this but I have fired many guns.


----------



## Rojack79 (Nov 25, 2015)

wow. i wander how much training it take's to be able to shoot a moving target then?


----------



## kilroy214 (Nov 25, 2015)

Rojack79 said:


> Hey everyone. I have an idea for a character that works for a government agency that tracks and monitor's all of the supernatural activity in the U.S. Think if the X-File's got merged with Supernatural. That's my story in a nutshell. The only issue i am having is that when i was thinking of a code name for my character i came up with the name Arsenal. As some of you know an arsenal is "[FONT=arial, sans-serif-light, sans-serif]a collection of weapons and military equipment stored by a country, person, or group." This Character would be wielding a vast array of weapon's from pistol's to shotgun's, S.M.G's to Assault Rifle's and everything in between and beyond. So i have it in my head however that his main weapon's will be a dual pair of Glock 18's with 3 round burst instead of full auto and a fire select switch. These would be his main weapon's throughout the saga of him and his time in the Supernatural Protection Agency The F.B.I.'s Special Investigation Unit. So what do you guy's think?[/FONT]



To answer your original question, no. I don't believe any government agency actively trains their agents to dual weild pistols. I understand that it is bad ass to light up bad guys with a pair of pistols, it is highly impractal in reality to do so.

1. Just because you fired a pistol with one hand and it didn't affect your aim doesn't mean that firing one in both hands won't. Like it is stated before, human eyes don't work like that and your hero is going to waste a lot of ammo firing into the wild blue yonder.

2. Even if he could aim properly with both hands firing independently, unless he is totally ambidextrous he will always favor his dominate hand and result in his non-dominate hand firing less accurately.

3. The only reason I can see when it would be appropriate for aprofessionally trained agent to use two pistols at once wouls be to fire a lot of sporadic bullets for fire suppresion or to provide covering fire, both instances are not meant to be accurate fire.

4. If he's using auto pistols like a glock 18, he's going to want to use his free hand to keep his gun hand stable as even on 3 round burst, a short barrel, like those in a pistol, are going to rise quite a bit. This barrel rise will make his last two shots of that 3 round burst go sailing over the targets head, which nulifies the advantage of a three round burst.

5. If he's going to use an auto, why not just have him use a concealable SMG like a P-90 or a Steyr TMP, or a H&K MP7, or a bevy of others. Pistols serve a purpose, and "full auto" machine pistols are impractical and are just expensive toys for gun nuts who want to spend that kind of money.
You wouldn't use an Uzi for a 700 yard well placed head shot, and adding features to the Uzi to make it do so is going to leave the reader wondering, "Why didn't he just use a deer rifle?"

6. If this guy is the "Arsenal" and is trained in all these firearms, I think it is a safe bet he would realize pros and cons and the limitations of guns. He would try his hardest to choose the right gun for the job, not try to make his side arm(s) do it all.


----------



## Bishop (Nov 25, 2015)

Rojack79 said:


> Honestly i fail to see how it is inaccurate. Having shot i 9mm pistol with two hand's and one hand i can safely say that my accuracy did not degrade one bit. I even fired it in rapid succession and the result's were the same *perfect accuracy.*



I find that incredibly hard to believe, unless the target was right in front of you. Countless tests have been done, and it's proven without a doubt that dual wielding is less accurate. Two hands, by their very nature, have greater stability in recoil. Not to mention, your eyes do not work that way. Even professionals perform worse with two weapons than they do with one. Not to mention, the goal of a government agency is efficiency in their kills. Shooting one bullet with steady accuracy to take down a target (or two, for a double-tap) is far easier, cleaner, and quicker than blasting twin weapons.



Rojack79 said:


> I remember this video. His point's are valid but i feel like people should *give dual wielding a fair trial*. I wish i had two pistol's and a camera just so i could show people what someone could do with dual wielding. If you train yourself you can be vary good at it.



They have. Professionals have. If all it took was practice, don't you think FBI agents would dual wield? They have nothing to do but practice during training. And again, I do not believe that you have the ability to attain perfect accuracy with twin weapons. If people who make shooting their job and passion cannot do it, I highly doubt anyone can. Perfect accuracy itself is nearly impossible, let alone with a gun firing in each hand.



Rojack79 said:


> Honestly i want to do what is realistic. The only thing is that dual wielding is looked down upon by some people who just think it's for TV or video game's. Contrary to popular belief it has it's place in combat situation's. Just because "Expert's" don't condone it's use dose't mean it can't be useful or practical. I'm sorry if i sound like i'm trying to step on anyone's toe's. I just hate it when the so called expert's claim that something is not practical or useful. I've had a history of people telling me that thing's can't be done and I've proven every single one of them wrong. Back in high school i use to tell my peer's that it was possible to use a great-sword one handed. Did i get it from a game. Yes i did. And everyone kept on telling me that it was impossible. But i proved them wrong and I still practice it to this day. So sorry for getting off topic and ranting. But for me if someone is going to say that something is impossible then they better have a lot of proof to the contrary.



Name a combat situation where dual wielding has been recorded. Any. Seriously, cite a source and I'll eat my words. Am I saying it's impossible to shoot two weapons at once? No. I AM saying it's impossible for it to be more accurate than one weapon with two hands on it.

If you write this into a novel, you'll seem juvenile and uninformed. They get away with it in movies and video games because most people who absorb those mediums have a greater tolerance for suspending disbelief. It will not work in a book, unless you're writing the novelization of the Expendables. And even then, most of the expendables don't dual wield. (Stupid Barney and his pistol fetish...) Similarly, being an avid gamer, I can tell you that EVERY game that has dual wielding that I've played (which is, sadly, MOST of the games) will have greater accuracy for the guns on their own rather than dual. Of course, before about 1999, games didn't really have separate recoil coefficients for dual wielding, but that's not because Goldeneye 64 was trying to say it's more accurate, it was just trying to be a James Bond game and they didn't care to program multiple methods where they didn't need to.

Also. It's a video game.

So if you want realism, stick to what the ACTUAL police, FBI, CIA, NSA, DHS, and Secret Service have proven to be true, and continue to live by... Two pistols will always be less accurate than one. It's just physics. The human arm cannot stay that steady, the human eye cannot focus that way. The mythbusters proved it.


----------



## ppsage (Nov 26, 2015)

Most of this is way outside my area, but there has been some research into the neural basis of vision in independent-eyed critters -- mostly birds, I guess, but bugs and arthropods, not sure about any mammals -- and it turns out that the basic wet-ware seemingly isn't specialized. Instead the chemical transmitters seem the main difference, like they're tuned to each eye. Or facet, if it's a bug. These form parallel overlapping electrical patterns in the response center. One thing I remember, these transmitters are molecularly similar to some designer drugs which cause visual effects. Not hallucinations exactly, more like auras and halos. Sort of visual dissonance, like the binocular connection was out of synch. Anyway, just the sort of thing the secret ops labs will be scouring the crap out of, so, if a supernatural investigation bureau decides that dual pistol-ling is somehow a bonus, I'm pretty sure they'd quickly get the targeting problem solved, with a combination of psycho-active substances and training. Be a pretty obvious advantage too, if you ran out of bullets and had to go to whacking.


----------



## Sam (Nov 26, 2015)

Rojack79 said:


> Hey everyone. I have an idea for a character that works for a government agency that tracks and monitor's all of the supernatural activity in the U.S. Think if the X-File's got merged with Supernatural. That's my story in a nutshell. The only issue i am having is that when i was thinking of a code name for my character i came up with the name Arsenal. As some of you know an arsenal is "a collection of weapons and military equipment stored by a country, person, or group." This Character would be wielding a vast array of weapon's from pistol's to shotgun's, S.M.G's to Assault Rifle's and everything in between and beyond. So i have it in my head however that his main weapon's will be a dual pair of Glock 18's with 3 round burst instead of full auto and a fire select switch. These would be his main weapon's throughout the saga of him and his time in the Supernatural Protection Agency The F.B.I.'s Special Investigation Unit. So what do you guy's think?




No. 

Dual-wielding is a trope of Hollywood. No trained shooter would attempt it, because when you hold a gun, your off hand is what steadies the weapon and adjusts for the recoil. Without that, you miss. 

A lot.

It's not badass; it's the kind of stupidity that will get you killed in the field.


----------



## J Anfinson (Nov 26, 2015)

I've tried dual wielding 9's and 45's and I'm good with just about any gun you could give me. Sure, you can still hit what you're aiming at most of the time if it's within a stone's throw, but I've concluded that anything human-sized over fifteen to twenty yards away will probably never get hit unless you at least take the time to look down the sights with one of the guns.

9mm has about half the recoil of a 45, so it's typically easier to control with one hand but still not nearly as accurate as with two hands at any real distance. Dual wielding is impractical, IMO. If you need to throw that much lead to kill something then it would make more sense to use one bigger gun. Give them a desert eagle 50 cal or a 454 Casul or something.


----------



## Rojack79 (Nov 26, 2015)

Bishop said:


> I find that incredibly hard to believe, unless the target was right in front of you.



If memory serves the target was about 20 yard's away. And now that i think about it shooting it in rapid succession was only accurate because i used both hand's. 



> Countless tests have been done, and it's proven without a doubt that dual wielding is less accurate. Two hands, by their very nature, have greater stability in recoil. Not to mention, your eyes do not work that way. Even professionals perform worse with two weapons than they do with one. Not to mention, the goal of a government agency is efficiency in their kills. Shooting one bullet with steady accuracy to take down a target (or two, for a double-tap) is far easier, cleaner, and quicker than blasting twin weapons.



No argument there. But how is it that a person's eye's cant track more than one target at once? I mean what would someone have to do to be able to track and fire at to target's at once? For me i just cant see how hard that can be. 




> They have. Professionals have. If all it took was practice, don't you think FBI agents would dual wield? They have nothing to do but practice during training. And again, I do not believe that you have the ability to attain perfect accuracy with twin weapons. If people who make shooting their job and passion cannot do it, I highly doubt anyone can. Perfect accuracy itself is nearly impossible, let alone with a gun firing in each hand.



Sorry didn't mean perfect accuracy. But i did hit the target's center mass with all of my bullet's. Really wish i still had my shooting target's from that day.




> Name a combat situation where dual wielding has been recorded. Any. Seriously, cite a source and I'll eat my words. Am I saying it's impossible to shoot two weapons at once? No. I AM saying it's impossible for it to be more accurate than one weapon with two hands on it.



I would have to say the old west. Gunslinger's kept and used two guns quite often even firing both of them at once. 



> So if you want realism, stick to what the ACTUAL police, FBI, CIA, NSA, DHS, and Secret Service have proven to be true, and continue to live by... Two pistols will always be less accurate than one. It's just physics. The human arm cannot stay that steady, the human eye cannot focus that way. The mythbusters proved it.



You make a valid point. I guess i could give him two pistol's and just have him use them one at a time. When one run's out he can whip out the other and be like "surprise".


----------



## Rojack79 (Nov 26, 2015)

kilroy214 said:


> To answer your original question, no. I don't believe any government agency actively trains their agents to dual weild pistols. I understand that it is bad ass to light up bad guys with a pair of pistols, it is highly impractal in reality to do so.
> 
> 1. Just because you fired a pistol with one hand and it didn't affect your aim doesn't mean that firing one in both hands won't. Like it is stated before, human eyes don't work like that and your hero is going to waste a lot of ammo firing into the wild blue yonder.


I have to admit that this line confuses me a little bit. Do you mean to say that firing a pistol in one hand is not as accurate as firing it with two?



> 2. Even if he could aim properly with both hands firing independently, unless he is totally ambidextrous he will always favor his dominate hand and result in his non-dominate hand firing less accurately.


Ok so i make him totally ambidextrous. Problem solved.



> 3. The only reason I can see when it would be appropriate for aprofessionally trained agent to use two pistols at once wouls be to fire a lot of sporadic bullets for fire suppresion or to provide covering fire, both instances are not meant to be accurate fire.


That is what dual wielding is used for tactically speaking. Suppression fire. 



> 4. If he's using auto pistols like a glock 18, he's going to want to use his free hand to keep his gun hand stable as even on 3 round burst, a short barrel, like those in a pistol, are going to rise quite a bit. This barrel rise will make his last two shots of that 3 round burst go sailing over the targets head, which nulifies the advantage of a three round burst.


Ya now that i think about it giving him two auto pistol's even with three round burst would be stupid.



> 5. If he's going to use an auto, why not just have him use a concealable SMG like a P-90 or a Steyr TMP, or a H&K MP7, or a bevy of others. Pistols serve a purpose, and "full auto" machine pistols are impractical and are just expensive toys for gun nuts who want to spend that kind of money.
> You wouldn't use an Uzi for a 700 yard well placed head shot, and adding features to the Uzi to make it do so is going to leave the reader wondering, "Why didn't he just use a deer rifle?"


Well full auto pistol's do have there place in the military. There not just expensive toy's. There meant to give the soldier using them the advantage's of an S.M.G. in a smaller less threatening looking and easier to use package.  



> 6. If this guy is the "Arsenal" and is trained in all these firearms, I think it is a safe bet he would realize pros and cons and the limitations of guns. He would try his hardest to choose the right gun for the job, not try to make his side arm(s) do it all.


He's not really trying to make his side arm do it all. There just his go to gun's for a fight.


----------



## Rojack79 (Nov 26, 2015)

ppsage said:


> Most of this is way outside my area, but there has been some research into the neural basis of vision in independent-eyed critters -- mostly birds, I guess, but bugs and arthropods, not sure about any mammals -- and it turns out that the basic wet-ware seemingly isn't specialized. Instead the chemical transmitters seem the main difference, like they're tuned to each eye. Or facet, if it's a bug. These form parallel overlapping electrical patterns in the response center. One thing I remember, these transmitters are molecularly similar to some designer drugs which cause visual effects. Not hallucinations exactly, more like auras and halos. Sort of visual dissonance, like the binocular connection was out of synch. Anyway, just the sort of thing the secret ops labs will be scouring the crap out of, so, if a supernatural investigation bureau decides that dual pistol-ling is somehow a bonus, I'm pretty sure they'd quickly get the targeting problem solved, with a combination of psycho-active substances and training. Be a pretty obvious advantage too, if you ran out of bullets and had to go to whacking.


Wow. You should totally use this in a story. I was thinking of something like this for my book but instead of psycho-active drug's i was going to give the main character the psychic ability of precognition.


----------



## J Anfinson (Nov 26, 2015)

> Do you mean to say that firing a pistol in one hand is not as accurate as firing it with two?



Typically it's not. Recoil is best handled with a two hand grip, and using both hands enables you to get your sights back on target after each shot faster. And recoil and the anticipation of recoil have a huge effect on how accurate each shot is. There's a reason why police and military use a two hand grip for training. Firing one handed like John Wayne may look cool but most of the time you won't be as accurate.


----------



## Bishop (Nov 27, 2015)

Rojack79 said:


> If memory serves the target was about 20 yard's away. And now that i think about it shooting it in rapid succession was only accurate because i used both hand's.







Rojack79 said:


> No argument there. But how is it that a person's eye's cant track more than one target at once? I mean what would someone have to do to be able to track and fire at to target's at once? For me i just cant see how hard that can be.



Unless your eyes work independently of one another, you cannot track two targets at once. Your vision is set such a way that your eyes look to a fixed point. You're not a chameleon, with independent eye sockets.



Rojack79 said:


> Sorry didn't mean perfect accuracy. But i did hit the target's center mass with all of my bullet's. Really wish i still had my shooting target's from that day.



Unless you're highly trained, I still doubt it. Twenty yards is a long  distance in shooting, especially with two guns. I doubt every shot hit  center of mass. I doubt every shot hit.



Rojack79 said:


> I would have to say the old west. Gunslinger's kept and used two guns quite often even firing both of them at once.



No, they did not. In that era, bullets had to be loaded one at a time through a load slot on the cylinder of the revolver. If you're carrying two, it's impossible to reload without setting one down, loading each of the six shots, then grabbing the other one and loading its six shots. Also, the hammers on guns in that era were manual. You had to pull back after each shot. So if you have two, you're contorting your hand and losing aim over the weapon to reach a thumb up, pull back the hammer, and shoot. With two hands on the gun, one can steady while the other pulls. Or as trick shots do, one is lain flat over the gun and rapidly flicks the hammer back between quick shots. Similarly, guns were a major expense back in that day. And while Hollywood wants to make people think that everyone walked around the frontier with a pistol at their belt, the reality is that the majority of families and citizens had rifles for hunting/survival purposes. They were not manufactured and mass-available either, they had to be hand crafted--even the ones made my major makers like Colt or Winchester were still made and put together by human hands for the most part. 



Rojack79 said:


> You make a valid point. I guess i could give him two pistol's and just have him use them one at a time. When one run's out he can whip out the other and be like "surprise".



Even then, I'd advise--if he's in a government agency--just one gun, and multiple clips. It's far more efficient and no government agency would want to fund a guy who fires his glock to empty and then just tosses it aside.


----------



## ppsage (Nov 27, 2015)

Rojack79 said:


> Wow. You should totally use this in a story. I was thinking of something like this for my book but instead of psycho-active drug's i was going to give the main character the psychic ability of precognition.


Thanks. I got a million of them already. What everybody is saying here is, if Arsenal has this ability, then it's an extraordinary talent. Just, I think, what you want for him. Your duty as the writer is to make it plausible, is my point. Give him the lizard eye extract (chameleon was a great suggestion!) and have him practice the Hindu vision pradvas for a few months. You can probably get him shooting with one of his feet as well, if the web of your fantasy is cohesive enough.

edit: plausible in the story context! i meant


----------



## Xander416 (Nov 27, 2015)

Rojack79 said:


> The Glock 18 is a 9mm machine pistol in real life. In my story i'm going to make it fire in 3 round burst.


If you want a machine pistol with 3-round burst instead of full auto and aren't dead set on the Glock "cool" factor, Beretta has a quality offering for you. Personally, I think mechanical burst limiting sucks and it generally results in a bad trigger. Hence why the US Army is replacing its semi/burst M4s with semi/auto M4A1s.

As far as the dual wielding, or "akimbo" as it's called, it generally depends on how authentic you intend to be. Sort of like how shooting from the hip works in "Rambo", but isn't going to fly in "Act of Valor". It's okay to break a few realism rules, but generally when it comes to which ones are okay and which ones aren't, you should ask yourself if you were the reader instead of the writer, would it make you stop reading and say "this is just too unrealistic"? If not, then go for it. If so, then stop with it. For example, my bad ass mob hitwoman Alexis Cross who lives in Liberty City will happily bust out a pair of Glocks and light off. But my trained and disciplined Delta shooter Dante Smith who's fighting ISIS in Iraq wouldn't do any such thing.

As for recoil causing shoulder pain, that's generally only going to happen if you're pumping off thousands of rounds of high caliber (i.e., .50 Action Express or .500 S&W) in a single day and night. And 9mm recoil is certainly not enough to make one hit themself in the face with the gun.


----------



## Ariel (Nov 27, 2015)

If you want to see a movie with duel-wielded pistols that explains it in a semi-plausible way try Equilibrium.  Instead of explaining it with aiming or drugs or anything like that the movie explains it with computer analysis of gun fights and the development of a series of "positions" based on martial arts that are most likely to cause most damage to the assailants and the least damage to the practitioner.  It's indescribably badass to watch but the movie is fairly well-known in science fiction circles.


----------



## PhunkyMunky (Nov 27, 2015)

Government guys who use a firearm for a living use only one handgun. If more than one firearm is involved, they will use a long gun (primary) and a handgun (Secondary). The exception to this is the "Back up" gun... Usually something small, a little 9mm or 380 usually an ankle gun or pocket gun. These are rarely actually used and if they are, it's because whatever else they are using has had a malfunction or failed somehow. 

If you're concealing them, it's heavy. I have a Glock 22 and have been considering a smaller frame myself, it's a bit big to conceal on my 5'6 body but I can pull it off. But two? No way. Besides, what am I going to do with two that I can't do with one better? Well, except waste more ammunition. But there is a reason governments train people like this, using one weapon at a time... Because it works. There are those out there who may be able to shoot both hands simultaneously and do well, but I myself have never seen it in 20 something odd years working firearms dependent jobs. And I've met some seriously badass shooters! 

You can transition from a long gun to handgun fairly quickly if you're set up right, and you won't slow your rate of fire this way. You can keep the momentum going, look up the tactical shooting competitions for reference. They learn all the same things that real world shooters have to learn and then some.... It's a good place to look to see real world use of firearms in competition. You'll notice zero people dual wielding anything. 

But it's fiction, man. You can make it up however you want. Just don't expect "realism" to shine through with it.


----------



## Plasticweld (Nov 27, 2015)

I bought one of these a couple of months of go just for the cool factor.  Short enough that with the tactical sling that comes with it, it hangs just about to your mid section leaving your hands free, is as far as I can tell one of the newest tac guns out there.

With dual tubular mags it holds up to 36 of the mine shotgun slugs or up to 7 rounds of double 00 buck, I load mine with mini slugs on one side and buck shot on the other, with a flip of the switch you can change tubes.  

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/12/robert-farago/gun-review-kel-tec-ksg/


----------



## PhunkyMunky (Nov 27, 2015)

Awesome! I've been thinking about getting one myself.


----------



## Plasticweld (Nov 27, 2015)

PhunkyMunky said:


> Awesome! I've been thinking about getting one myself.



Everyone should have one!  :}


----------



## Rojack79 (Nov 27, 2015)

amsawtell said:


> If you want to see a movie with duel-wielded pistols that explains it in a semi-plausible way try Equilibrium.  Instead of explaining it with aiming or drugs or anything like that the movie explains it with computer analysis of gun fights and the development of a series of "positions" based on martial arts that are most likely to cause most damage to the assailants and the least damage to the practitioner.  It's indescribably badass to watch but the movie is fairly well-known in science fiction circles.


I have that movie. Very awesome movie.


----------



## Rojack79 (Nov 27, 2015)

Xander416 said:


> If you want a machine pistol with 3-round burst instead of full auto and aren't dead set on the Glock "cool" factor, Beretta has a quality offering for you. Personally, I think mechanical burst limiting sucks and it generally results in a bad trigger.


I had considered this gun for awhile but then i saw the full auto glock and was like yes.


----------



## Rojack79 (Nov 27, 2015)

Plasticweld said:


> View attachment 10706
> 
> I bought one of these a couple of months of go just for the cool factor.  Short enough that with the tactical sling that comes with it, it hangs just about to your mid section leaving your hands free, is as far as I can tell one of the newest tac guns out there.
> 
> ...


My friend a few streets over has one of these.


----------



## Rojack79 (Nov 27, 2015)

Oh before i forget i found this video on youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgOnKxBKnAs


----------

