The Truck Gun

[Matt Landfair]

In a discussion on Facebook the concept of a truck gun came up. A serious discussion was had about combat around vehicles, optimal guns, and cover versus concealment (in regards to cars). It seemed there was a theme with some of the participants that they felt a truck gun was similar to a shovel – a tool that can be thrown in the back of the truck/car/trunk and no further care would be given. Worse was the concept that the cheapest option would be the best option.

So let’s think about this further. The fact a crappy gun is present is sufficient for their comfort – they have a safety blanket and all will be well. If you are committing this offense – think about it for a minute. Why do you have this gun? The purpose if this firearm is to help you survive (and maybe escape) a violent incident. Is an unmaintained cheap option going to fit that specific need? NO!!! There is a standard for weapons that one would rely on in life or death options, they typically run closer to the high end of the spectrum compared to the cheap options.

Instead of spending money on your “SHTF” truck gun, invest in some training. Make your primary carry a more effective option for you. Too many people buy more guns without any training with the guns they already own. Occasional shooting or competitions are not a replacement for actual training. Without training, you are a liability and you might as well take the strategy of many open carriers - hope.

It seems many apply this wrong logic of the truck gun to carry weapons, holsters and belts as well. The cheapest option is popular. This is blatantly obviously with about every open carrier I have ever seen. Many open carries have the hope the mere presence of a firearm will deter crime/violence – hope is not a plan of action. This hope is magnified by their lack of mindset. So here is the typical rundown - condition white, some form of holster that either helps you shoot yourself or is a $7 Cordura special with a suboptimal firearm. This strategy is no different than the crappy SHTF rifle.

If you feel your life is worth a $500 AR15 – you may need to reassess your life. I honestly believe your life is worth at least a $1000 AR15 and lots of training.

 

[Austin Black]

If you think the FB discussions are bad, try sitting at a gun show and talking with people on this subject. I try to be polite (and of course sell a gun to them) but it really does show how misinformed some are!

 

[Oldrotorhead]

Gun shows for the most part suck. If you have a reasonable good pistol, rifle and shotgun training is more valuable than bells and whistles

 

[Austin Black]

I agree, some people will spend thousands on the newest add-on, but cringe at spending $700 on a case of ammo and some formal training. Those are the people I try to avoid!

 

[Oldrotorhead]

My new truck gun. Remington 870 used, excellent condition $225 , Wilson +2 extension $53 +/- 18 1/2" barrel new $140.72 and done. Next $100 mixed ammo, slugs, buck and maybe #6 shot and a 1 day shotgun class as a tune up $200-250 and call it a good start. If I go to rural areas switch to a rifle.

 

[DocGKR]

Despite being utter an POS I use M1A's as trunk/car/truck guns, as a result of California's illogical laws preventing me from routinely having AR15's in my POV's...

 

[Detmongo]

no truck for me. Just the two pistols i have on me. When traveling i will have a long gun in the truck, but it is usually because i'm going to teach a carbine class or going hunting.

 

[Longeye]

My echo chamber take on this.

I do not understand the concept of location specific firearms in the context that most are used in. Why does one need a very specific piece to serve as a Truck gun, House gun, Nightstand gun, Cabin gun, Hiking gun, Office gun, CCW pistol, Class gun, Car gun, Hog gun, General Purpose gun, etc?
What is wrong with just using the pieces that one already owns, supports, and presumably trains with for all these roles?
I have one 12.5" AR, an M&P 40, and a MP Shield. These cover pretty much everything I need to do with regard to the above categories regardless of location or mode of transport.
Adding some unwieldy Mauser or POS AK to my "truck" and leaving it there does nothing to streamline my logistics, training time, or ability to control my immediate surroundings. All it does is provide evidence that I am too lazy to move my well equipped rifle from the house to the vehicle.
Theft from vehicle? If you travel in an area that features crime levels so high that this is a frequent, legitimate concern, shouldn't you just carry the carbine with you into the store, restaurant, or movie theater in a sneaky bag? If those are the realities, why would you send any more time in that barrio than necessary? If those are the realities, wouldn't you want the most efficient weapon systems available?
From another angle, if one conceded that theft is a high ranking criteria, and will consequently drive the choice of equipment, one must also accept that the opportunity to use the piece is high. This means that at any given time, one will have several of his "truck" guns impounded because of the various recent shooting he was involved in. So, by extension, one should be buying these cheap Mosin or Yugo rifles when on sale in ten packs.
Logically, one would then be focusing training with these cheap rifles, since they are so likely to be used and subsequently locked in evidence. By extension, we should be seeing these cheap guns with frequency in classes. And there should be a cottage industry built around cheap, quick barrel chops to make these inexpensive long guns into shorter, more useful truck guns. But we don't and there is not. And statistics seem to bear out that there is not a huge epidemic of truck break-ins, or vehicular based shootouts involving longguns on a routine basis. So the theft and evidence room arguments do not hold water at this time.

I am all for having weapons in the vehicle and primary structures. If I am going to the trouble of procuring, frequently training with, supporting, and carrying weapons, then I want the highest efficiency, most reliable systems I can reasonably afford. I want the fewest possible serial numbers so as to lower my maintenance requirements. And I want better situational awareness, so that I can either avoid a fight or move to a dominant position from which I can prosecute the fight to my overwhelming advantage. Boiled down, this means my "Truck gun" and "Nightstand gun" is the well equipped AR and M&P that I move from task to task and from house to vehicle, and that I stop reading posts about truck guns on the smart phone while waiting for my wife in the parking lot.

 

[Austin Black]

My echo chamber take on this.

I do not understand the concept of location specific firearms in the context that most are used in. Why does one need a very specific piece to serve as a Truck gun, House gun, Nightstand gun, Cabin gun, Hiking gun, Office gun, CCW pistol, Class gun, Car gun, Hog gun, General Purpose gun, etc?
What is wrong with just using the pieces that one already owns, supports, and presumably trains with for all these roles?
I have one 12.5" AR, an M&P 40, and a MP Shield. These cover pretty much everything I need to do with regard to the above categories regardless of location or mode of transport.
Adding some unwieldy Mauser or POS AK to my "truck" and leaving it there does nothing to streamline my logistics, training time, or ability to control my immediate surroundings. All it does is provide evidence that I am too lazy to move my well equipped rifle from the house to the vehicle.
Theft from vehicle? If you travel in an area that features crime levels so high that this is a frequent, legitimate concern, shouldn't you just carry the carbine with you into the store, restaurant, or movie theater in a sneaky bag? If those are the realities, why would you send any more time in that barrio than necessary? If those are the realities, wouldn't you want the most efficient weapon systems available?
From another angle, if one conceded that theft is a high ranking criteria, and will consequently drive the choice of equipment, one must also accept that the opportunity to use the piece is high. This means that at any given time, one will have several of his "truck" guns impounded because of the various recent shooting he was involved in. So, by extension, one should be buying these cheap Mosin or Yugo rifles when on sale in ten packs.
Logically, one would then be focusing training with these cheap rifles, since they are so likely to be used and subsequently locked in evidence. By extension, we should be seeing these cheap guns with frequency in classes. And there should be a cottage industry built around cheap, quick barrel chops to make these inexpensive long guns into shorter, more useful truck guns. But we don't and there is not. And statistics seem to bear out that there is not a huge epidemic of truck break-ins, or vehicular based shootouts involving longguns on a routine basis. So the theft and evidence room arguments do not hold water at this time.

I am all for having weapons in the vehicle and primary structures. If I am going to the trouble of procuring, frequently training with, supporting, and carrying weapons, then I want the highest efficiency, most reliable systems I can reasonably afford. I want the fewest possible serial numbers so as to lower my maintenance requirements. And I want better situational awareness, so that I can either avoid a fight or move to a dominant position from which I can prosecute the fight to my overwhelming advantage. Boiled down, this means my "Truck gun" and "Nightstand gun" is the well equipped AR and M&P that I move from task to task and from house to vehicle, and that I stop reading posts about truck guns on the smart phone while waiting for my wife in the parking lot.

This guy wins the internet for the rest of next week.

 

[Chris Taylor]

This guy wins the internet for the rest of next week.

Brother @Longeye knows what time it is.

 

[Darth Tater]

And what of the issue of securing the gun in the vehicle? In my area, a significant amount of our recovered violent crime guns were stolen in vehicle burglaries where they were left unsecured in the passenger compartment. Bad guys have figured out that a $2 window punch from the quickie mart makes for easy pickings in a parking lot. My agency, in the last year, has had (off the top of my head) two ARs, a UMP, two shotguns, and five handguns taken from parked agency vehicles (both marked and unmarked). Each incident has resulted in significant discipline.

 

[Longeye]

Do your agency not have locking weapons racks? Are guys leaving visible weapons in take home rides that are parked on the street while off shift?

Are the unmarks true unmarks or do they have gov plates, motorpool stickers, steel rims, radio antennae, visible radios or hand mics, throw vest in the back seat, etc?

Are the drivers unmarked, or are they the type that wears a belt badge and OWB handgun?

On the civside, there is a lot to be said for not having tattle tale stickers or vanity plates. NRA, Magpul, I don't call 911, ensured by Smith and Wesson. Keep honking, I'm reloading You know- all the typical dumbass stuff.

Then keep your stuff under cover. I feel for the guys who live in bad neighborhoods that have to cleanout their rig after a day at the range or wherever in full view of everybody. Now the skells know the stuff is in the house.

 

[treehopr]

My echo chamber take on this.

I do not understand the concept of location specific firearms in the context that most are used in. Why does one need a very specific piece to serve as a Truck gun, House gun, Nightstand gun, Cabin gun, Hiking gun, Office gun, CCW pistol, Class gun, Car gun, Hog gun, General Purpose gun, etc?
What is wrong with just using the pieces that one already owns, supports, and presumably trains with for all these roles?
I have one 12.5" AR, an M&P 40, and a MP Shield. These cover pretty much everything I need to do with regard to the above categories regardless of location or mode of transport.
Adding some unwieldy Mauser or POS AK to my "truck" and leaving it there does nothing to streamline my logistics, training time, or ability to control my immediate surroundings. All it does is provide evidence that I am too lazy to move my well equipped rifle from the house to the vehicle.

To play devil's advocate, I believe that there is room for specificity.

For those that don't carry a badge for a living, trying to balance out having enhanced equipment capability with living a "normal" life is the challenge.

A "house gun" can have a 16" AR with no compromises on cost or concealment.

To your point of bringing that same carbine with you everywhere, that becomes an issue as those that know what to look for will recognize it as a gun no matter what kind of bag you put it in. An AR pistol as a "truck gun", with a similar manual of arms as the "house gun" may be a better solution for those that live in areas where having a loaded rifle is illegal but having a loaded pistol is not.

I believe its also a mistake to confuse the terms cheap or inexpensive with low quality. A Mauser 98 or Norinco SKS with iron sights may be inferior compared to a tricked out AR with optics but it offers a lot more capability than a Glock 43...

I would argue the commitment to role-specific weapons is the opposite of your point of being too lazy to carry the same weapon(s) everywhere.

Remember that there are large chunks of the population in this country that live in decidedly anti-gun states. For those that live in such places, the willingness to be armed in spite of the laws governing mag capacity or bullet buttons require more effort. It's easy to be in Texas or Montana and say that you'll just bring your 12.5" SBR everywhere but that ability does not translate to places like California or Massachusetts or New York.

 

[Darth Tater]

Do your agency not have locking weapons racks? Are guys leaving visible weapons in take home rides that are parked on the street while off shift?

Are the unmarks true unmarks or do they have gov plates, motorpool stickers, steel rims, radio antennae, visible radios or hand mics, throw vest in the back seat, etc?

Are the drivers unmarked, or are they the type that wears a belt badge and OWB handgun?

On the civside, there is a lot to be said for not having tattle tale stickers or vanity plates. NRA, Magpul, I don't call 911, ensured by Smith and Wesson. Keep honking, I'm reloading You know- all the typical dumbass stuff.

Then keep your stuff under cover. I feel for the guys who live in bad neighborhoods that have to cleanout their rig after a day at the range or wherever in full view of everybody. Now the skells know the stuff is in the house.

Marked vehicles have weapons racks. One AR and shotgun were taken from the racks of a marked vehicle. LEO left the guns in there off-duty in violation of policy. One UMP and two handguns were taken by car hoppers that broke into an unmarked. The others were inside a UC narcotics vehicle that had the key fob stolen at the beach while the agents were at a training conference. The first unmarked was a low viz car with windshield lights behind tint but no markings or antenna, and a confidential tag. The UC car was no different than any other one in the parking lot.

We don't have (unfortunately) a culture of concealed guns outside of some of the surveillance/apprehension units and narcotics. Exposed badge/gun on belt are required in policy for plain clothes personnel outside of extenuating circumstances, surveillance, details, etc. Most of our people also think putting a Serpa under a schmedium t-shirt is "concealed" also.

I'm in CID, and I am also a TEMS guy. I drive an unmarked minivan with confidential tag, hidden lights, and a lockbox inside the liftgate/trunk, A-team style. The vehicle is alarmed (required for select fire weapons) and the lockbox is bolted to the vehicle. I'm good all day/night long if I leave my long guns in the lockbox. If I didn't have a lockbox, I would have to take them inside the house after duty each day (also required of racked guns).

I agree 100% about the stickers. I call them target indicators. Same for FOP/PBA/Thin Blue Line stuff.

 

[Craw]

Serious question: Would a department allow you to put some really "earthy" brand's stickers on the bumper of the UC cars?

 

[Grizzly]

I believe its also a mistake to confuse the terms cheap or inexpensive with low quality. A Mauser 98 or Norinco SKS with iron sights may be inferior compared to a tricked out AR with optics but it offers a lot more capability than a Glock 43...

But what situation are you thinking this will play out in? I'm assuming if you are whipping out a rifle the world has gone way down hill. In which case you'll want to be proficient with the weapon in your hands. Which mean's for me hundreds or thousands of dollars in ammo or training with a given weapon. So adding that training cost to a SKS or Mauser 98 makes it more expensive than an additional AR configured the same as my main house/duty rifle.

At the end of the day it makes more financial sense to risk loosing a fancy AR than it does becoming proficient with a second cheaper and less capable weapon. (Stolen logic from longeye, I just happen to agree completely)

 

[treehopr]

But what situation are you thinking this will play out in? I'm assuming if you are whipping out a rifle the world has gone way down hill. In which case you'll want to be proficient with the weapon in your hands. Which mean's for me hundreds or thousands of dollars in ammo or training with a given weapon. So adding that training cost to a SKS or Mauser 98 makes it more expensive than an additional AR configured the same as my main house/duty rifle.

At the end of the day it makes more financial sense to risk loosing a fancy AR than it does becoming proficient with a second cheaper and less capable weapon. (Stolen logic from longeye, I just happen to agree completely)

Are you suggesting that there are some situations where you would only draw your pistol and others where you would deploy an AR instead?

If it's a situation that may require deadly physical force, why wouldn't you deploy the most capable weapon you have in all situations?

By that logic, if the AR is more capable then why bother to carry a pistol at all? Why not just bring that everywhere?

If that's not feasible due to concealment or portability concerns, then why bother having an AR at all when you could invest all your time and money in to training with just your pistol?

Sight alignment and trigger press are as universal as it gets with different weapons platforms, manipulations like loading, reloading and malfunction clearances may require more training time, but a lot of it can also be done without the use of live ammo.

Despite being utter an POS I use M1A's as trunk/car/truck guns, as a result of California's illogical laws preventing me from routinely having AR15's in my POV's...

I've also read Nyeti's posts regarding traveling armed and carrying a revolver with non-hollow point ammo to comply with laws in places like New York and New Jersey. So in those niche instances, does not make sense to train with specific weapons designed to fit a narrow parameter?

As nice as it would be to have a 100% solution, 100% of the time- it may not be practical (or legal) so I'd rather adapt to the situation and if that means spending time and money on specialty platforms that can be a 100% solution to a 20%problem then I'm okay with that.

 

[Grizzly]

Are you suggesting that there are some situations where you would only draw your pistol and others where you would deploy an AR instead?

If it's a situation that may require deadly physical force, why wouldn't you deploy the most capable weapon you have in all situations?

By that logic, if the AR is more capable then why bother to carry a pistol at all? Why not just bring that everywhere?

If that's not feasible due to concealment or portability concerns, then why bother having an AR at all when you could invest all your time and money in to training with just your pistol?

Sight alignment and trigger press are as universal as it gets with different weapons platforms, manipulations like loading, reloading and malfunction clearances may require more training time, but a lot of it can also be done without the use of live ammo.

No I'm saying if it is a situation that requires and allows me to reach for a long gun I don't want to be reaching for a cheap gun I haven't trained with as much as my expensive gun. And I'd rather not split training between two weapons when the only reason for the second platform is to have a cheap truck gun.

 

[Lobsterclaw207]

This is interesting. I think I agree with Longeye et al. about 80%. My difference of opinion is that it's OK to have multiple weapons, if they are the same/similar types. For example, I just tonight completed my AR pistol and stashed it in my pickup truck. Now, I *could* move my patrol/SWAT carbine from the trunk of my UC vehicle (regular plates that don't come back on file, no lights, no siren, no visible "cop stuff"... it's just a sedan) every single time I got out and wanted to take my truck somewhere. For me, my nature tells me I won't go through that trouble. I'd also risk forgetting it in the truck and not replacing it in it's bag in the state car.

So, I got myself an AR pistol and equipped it similarly to my patrol carbine. Not identical, but similar. This way I can stash it in my truck and leave it there, without having to worry about which rifle is where and whether or not I moved it or forgot to move it.

I'm not really afraid of car burglary, because I don't have target indicators on either vehicle. Darth Tater dude.... where the hell are you that cars are broken into with such frequency that COP cars are getting hit that much??? Even cop cars that don't look like cop cars... that's one year? I'd start looking into maybe bad guys doing counter surveillance / writing down your license plates while guys are at the station/court or something, cuz that seems more than random to me (not knowing where you're at...).

treehopr - I see what you're saying too, and obviously Nyeti and DocGKR are heavyweights in any discussion. I'm suggesting there are situations where I would only draw my pistol, like if I'm not near one of my rifles. If the rifle is accessible and time/situation allows, that's what I'm going with. There is obviously a big difference, as I'm sure you know, between an in extremis CCW handgun draw/employment and maybe being in the mall parking lot when gunshots start popping off across the way. THAT is what decides for me which to use.

 

[Chris Taylor]

I don't want to put words in his mouth, but I don't think Longeye is saying "don'thave duplicates", more along the lines of "don't buy a specific, limited use, gun to fill a niche when you have a serviceable item on hand." IE: why buy a 38 revolver for a "nightstand gun", when you can take off your CCW right before bed.

The cheddar you drop on a limited use gun could be spent on training, ammo, or a duplicate if your main use gun goes down.

Re: "truck guns"... Time and ammo for training is an investment. Barring special circumstances*, why invest in something you're never gonna use? It's like having a Ferrari in the garage that you never drive for fear of damage, but drive a 20yo Honda and soup it up for a daily driver.

By the time you buy a Mosin and make it serviceable as a modernized rifle (bbl cut, better sights, fix or replace the stock, buy ancillary accessories, not to mention training and practice to become proficient) you're well on your way to the cost of an inexpensive AR (6920 etc) that you've already invested the time and treasure in.

* Special circumstances, like NPEs, high crime areas, or even limited budget can make a huge difference. Hell, I've rolled with a lever action 30-30 when other options weren't on the table, since a "friendlier" gun.

There is no one size fits all option, but invest some skull sweat before you run out and buy specific use guns to fill a perceived need. 2nd and 3rd order effects are things.