American View: Understanding and reconciling competing threat models at the gun range

Risk Management24 Feb 2025

I’m proud of my kids. They’re long past being mischievous little tykes; they’ve grown up and become productive civic-minded adults holding down full-time jobs. They pay attention to current events, consistently vote their conscience, and do their best to make our community a better place. They watched their mom and me growing up and learned from our examples, both good and bad. I reckon a parent can’t ask their offspring for much more than that. 

This topic came to mind over the weekend when my youngest asked me for some help at the range. He’s assessed the current state of the country and — after much soul searching — reversed his former position on carrying and employing lethal weapons. He’s decided to join the increasing number of Texans who carry a concealed firearm, both for his own protection and for the protection of others. I understand his new position and I promised to help him learn which pistol would be best for him. 

Before going to the range, we had a long discussion about effective, legal, and ethical applications of lethal force. Especially about the risk of causing harm to innocent bystanders. My kid understands the implications of acting irresponsibly with a firearm. Fortunately, he’s a Texan; he grew up around them and has been shooting since he was a kid. His grandfather took him to a ranch for basic rifle marksmanship when he was young. He earned his rifle and shotgun shooting merit badges in Scouts before he high school. He’s had hands-on training with everything from black powder muskets to a World War 2 vintage Sten gun. My kid thoroughly understands and practices gun safety, responsibility, and self-discipline. Still, I insist that we go over the basics before every range visit. Holdover from running ranges back in the Army, I guess.

Fortunately for both of us there’s a really nice indoor range just up the road. We took four of our own concealed carry pistols for him to try out and rented another two from the range to see which would “fit” him best. All in all, it was a productive and enjoyable trip: As expected, my kid’s enormous bear paws were the main factor influencing his preferences. Even though he could consistently drill the 9- and 10-rings with each model, he consistently did his best shooting with a larger pistol than his mum or I would normally carry.

Just because it’s trendy and macho to walk around Texas loaded down with highly visible firearms, we find that garish and unwise. If you’re carrying, no one should be aware of it.

I say all this to set the scene. My kid’s is many things — goofy, clever, upbeat — but he’s no fool. He took this trip seriously and was strictly on-task the entire time we were there. We had no issues with positive weapon control, safety, or professional conduct … Even when an ejected cartridge ricocheted off the wall and bounced behind his protective eyewear. He blinked, but his pistol remained pointed downrange with his finger off the trigger. His grandfather would be danged proud to see his lessons paying off.

That said, when we had a casual chat with a salesperson out on the shop floor, my youngest might have come across as a big teddy bear but looks are deceiving. He knew his stuff and had a lot of hands-on experience to draw on. To his credit, the sales dude did have lots of good advice to share about pistol sizes, innovative carrying techniques, and other elements of the concealed carry experience. Trouble was, the sales dude advanced one argument that left my kid deeply sceptical about the man’s credibility.

Specifically, the sales guy’s personal carry piece is a full-size semiauto duty pistol bedecked with a flashlight, laser sight, and red dot optic. My kid was not impressed; I’ve raised him on the principle that if you can’t reliably hit your targets with iron sights alone, then what you need is more practice — not a bunch of expensive geegaws clamped to your sidearm. Those stylish accessories, though, weren’t the sales dude’s credibility killer: what tanked his credibility was when he insisted that he valued magazine capacity over all other factors when selecting a pistol. Dude was over the moon that his concealed carry piece had a 17-round dual stack magazine and that his carry rig allowed him to carry a spare magazine. 

My kid’s initial take was that the sales dude was a “gravy SEAL” … That is, a poseur. Someone cosplaying an action hero. I understood his reaction; even when I mentioned to the sales dude that “if you need 17 shots to end an altercation, something has gone catastrophically wrong” the fellow stood firm that he valued quantity. I bit my lip so I wouldn’t roll my eyes.

The temptation to ask, “have you got a drum mag for that thing?” was nearly overwhelming.

When we got to the car, though, I pointed out to my kid that there was a factor he might not have considered. Specifically, the difference in their personal threat models. From my kid’s perspective, he’s carrying a pistol to protect himself and others from unexpected acts of violence in public places. He doesn’t need to be armed at or for his job and he’s there’s very little threat of violence in his flat. The biggest risk he expects to face comes from indiscriminate strangers: road ragers, mass shooters, and domestic terrorists. Think about the El Paso Walmart shooter from a few years back. Senseless events that have happened many times here and are likely to happen again.  

The sales dude’s threat model, though, was likely completely different from my kid’s. Sales’s dude’s number one threat, I suggested, probably came from his job. After all, the dude is a salesman in a commercial business that has more shooting irons on display than my last military unit had in our entire armoury. They’ve got actual machineguns for rent for the macho adventurous types. Plus, they pull in a ton of cash. The store is constantly busy and the stuff they’re selling tends to be pricey. Just the sort of place an ambitious and foolhardy armed robber might try to knock over. 

Based on that risk, the sales dude’s prioritization of ammunition capacity over concealability or other factors makes sense: he’s planning how best to survive a running fight with multiple long-arm equipped adversaries in circumstances that might require suppressive fire to cover the retreat of innocent customers. Therefore, him having 35 rounds immediately at hand (two mags of 17-rounds each plus one in the pipe) makes some tactical sense. 

That doesn’t make sales dude’s approach to concealed carry iron wrong; just different. I might take issue with his tactical conclusions, but I get where he’s coming from. That’s important, both in planning your concealed carry iron, and — more generally — in trying to understand other people’s seemingly inexplicable behaviours. 

“But the email said it was from our HR department! See? It came from Not-a-Scammer@WeLoveScams.RansomwareFactory.ru … Uh …”

From a more traditional security perspective, one of the toughest challenges we deal with is users simply refusing to obey mandatory security controls. I can tell someone a thousand different ways that they’re required to keep ahold of their work laptop while travelling, but if a user decides they don’t need to because it’s a private car or it’s late at night, or no one wants a give year all Dell, then nothing I tell them will stop them from leaving it on the train.

This is why I feel strongly that it’s crucial to work with the most frustrating users to understand their perspectives. What threats are they expecting? Which countermeasures are simple to implement and which require effort? What risk model are they operating under? I’ve found that it’s common to discover that wilful noncompliance with mandatory security protocols isn’t due to ignorance, malevolence, or incompetence. Otherwise baffling decisions are perfectly logical and reasonable once you understand the lens the user applied to their context. The user truly believed that their actions were appropriate in the moment. Once you reset the user’s worldview it’s surprisingly easy to get them back into compliance. That whole “seek first to understand” thing.

To his credit, my youngest grokked my argument swiftly and took it to heart. He’ll adjust his own thinking and try to temper his initial negative reaction the next time something like this happens. Meanwhile, part of me wants to drive back to the store and argue with sales dude just to see if I guessed his perspective and perceived needs correctly.