Jeep you see the biggest problem with you and eng208 "though he isn't as bad as you at it" is you make statements in absolute terms , often then slightly retreat from that statement but never the less you have made it in a public forum .
When it comes to a CCW holder using their weapon with legal justification or a Police officer having to use his if there is anything to be learned from studying the subject is that there are no absolutes .
CCW holders have the legal justification "Note I said justification NOT obligation" to act in the defense of others not just their personal defense . yet you make this statement
but for DEFENSIVE purposes, 30 yards is out of the question.
Fact of the matter is not too long ago a CCW holder acted for defensive purposes "just not for his personal defense" at extended ranges and saved the life of an on duty police officer .
I recall reading that in Florida there was a robbery in progress and the officer had taken up a position of cover outside covering the buildings entrance . What he didn't know was that there was either a member or members outside of the building and they were working their way into position behind him to ambush him , a CCW holder saw it all unfolding and got behind the perps and shot them instead . The officer never had a clue that he was about to die .
Another statement you both seem to be in agreement on that is nothing but opinion yet is presented it as fact
The 30 yd shot might be fun and a challenge, but serves no purpose in qualifying concealed carry use. A 30 yd shot by a concealed carry holder would be torn apart in court.
Fact of the matter is if the force is used within the demands of local/state laws governing the use of deadly force distance doesn't matter . To continue to insist otherwise is just begging for some Antigun politician to take notice and pass some stupid law .
If you've done much reading of the popular writers on the subject you may find a case in which Massod Ayoob testified for the defense of a person being prosecuted by a PA making the same erroneous assumptions you make .
Because the weapon used by the aggressor was a 2 inch barreled revolver and the distance between the two men was unusually long the PA insisted that the person really wasn't in grave danger due to some assumed inaccuracies of short barreled guns at extended ranges .
MR. Ayoob took a few examples of snubbies to the range and tested them at the range of 100 yards and proved that yes indeed you are in grave danger at those long ranges .
One glaring example in favor longer than assumed range shooting has long been an established drill for law enforcement officers .
Ever heard of the Tuller Drill ? For years it was assumed that a person with a knife at the extended distance of 21 feet wasn't an imminent threat to a person and therefore deadly force wasn't justified . Tuller laid all of the assumptions and fantasies to rest .
While I will agree that a person who carries a weapon for defense needs to do so in a manner in which it is first carried in a safe manner so they never lose possession of it yet it is easily accessible . And that they need to practice accessing the weapon and drawing it to be certain that cover garment doesn't interfere with the draw .
Once the hand is firmly on the weapon the draw needs to be fairly quick and clean , what the problem of insisting on pure speed is it implies "and will be taken by all of the novices that read it as such" a quick grab for the weapon "ala the opening of a episode Gunsmoke" .
As stated this is all but avoided in most circumstances by a person being aware of their surroundings and it is also rather a dangerous thing to practice with a loaded weapon as G21 pointed out .
Just as a Police officer places his hand on or near their gun when approaching a vehicle at a traffic stop so does a CCW holder need to do when they sense that a danger to themselves may be near .