As a firearms trainer for more than 30 years, I often ask my students: “If you went home today and found an invitation stating that you would be attacked at a certain time and location by a specific person — and that he or she would try to take your gun — would you change your mindset today?” Each time I ask, the answer is an emphatic “yes.” My follow-up question is, “So, what are you waiting for?”

This question highlights a central truth: Every responsible firearms owner must be prepared for the worst-case scenario. Stories of people who are attacked and disarmed often follow the same tragic pattern: The individuals are overpowered, their firearms are taken, and, in many cases, they’re shot with their own guns.

Real-World Encounters

According to most federal and state publications, if your firearm is taken from you during an altercation, you are more than likely to be shot with your own firearm. Many of these disarms are not the mistakes of rookies; they involve experienced professionals. Yet the risks are universal, and, unfortunately, consistent training standards or regulations for those who carry a firearm simply do not exist.

Some responsible firearms owners receive excellent instruction in weapon retention, while others receive only minimal training or a brief reminder to protect their firearms.

Training should go beyond theoretical discussions and emphasize practical drills, where individuals learn to physically respond to disarmament situations.

While rare, incidents in which individuals carrying concealed firearms are disarmed and shot with their own firearms do occur.

In 2018, a concealed carry permit holder was involved in an altercation during which the aggressor managed to disarm him and use his firearm to cause injury.

In another instance — a 2020 robbery attempt — an assailant disarmed a concealed carrier. The perpetrator then used the victim’s firearm to commit further violence.

Both incidents illustrate the necessity for concealed carriers to receive proper training in weapon retention and situational awareness.

Personal Responsibility

An individual’s emotional and mental levels of alertness, as well as training and practice, can dictate a successful or unsuccessful response to a gun-grab incident. It’s unfortunate that some people carry a firearm merely for the sense of safety and emotional reassurance they believe it provides. In many cases, training is only evaluated or expanded after a tragedy occurs.

Trainers are responsible for providing the most effective and up-to-date instruction, a responsibility that requires ongoing learning of their own. That can mean anything from watching a video to hearing a story to attending multi-day instructor clinics. Unfortunately, some firearms instructors do none of these and rely on outdated methods, diminishing responsible firearms owners’ preparedness for real-world threats. Sometimes, handgun-retention training is skipped altogether, especially during initial concealed carry instruction.

Ultimately, it’s the firearms owner who must take ownership of personal safety. Even the best training is of limited use without practice, and each individual must make a deliberate effort to regularly review and rehearse retention skills.

A perpetrator may visualize and even practice taking your firearm. The cold truth about a gun-grab attack is that the assailant has practiced the skill. Have you practiced yours?

Retention Strategies

Stress significantly affects your ability to perform fine-motor tasks. A high-stress situation instead engages gross-motor skills, which are movements involving larger muscle groups. For this reason, you must practice retention techniques that leverage gross-motor skills to help ensure reliable performance under stress.

Additionally, selecting the right belt, holster and gear is essential. A quality security holster provides good retention and can reduce the risk of a gun grab, but you need to practice extensively with your specific equipment to build muscle memory and response speed.

During a physical struggle, the perpetrator may have just as much access to the firearm as you do. That’s why physical fitness and readiness are critical.

In a gun-grab scenario, you have three primary options:

  • Disengage: If possible, move safely away from the attacker.
  • Stabilize: When disengagement isn’t possible, focus on securing control of the situation to prevent further escalation.
  • Escalate: If neither option is viable, using defensive techniques — including other weapons or methods — may be necessary.

One technique, called the “power lock,” allows you to secure the attacker’s hand on the firearm. By using either hand, you can lock the attacker’s grip, creating a controlled point of contact. With the power lock, you can control the attacker’s arm, allowing you to disengage, stabilize or escalate as needed.

Once you’ve controlled the attacker’s hand, you should:

  • Maintain balance and pivot.
  • Evaluate the situation and consider possible next steps.
  • If necessary, use force through elbows, knees or other non-lethal methods.
  • Everyday Vigilance

Remember, your equipment alone won’t protect you. Regular practice with retention techniques is essential. Even if your resources are limited, take time to personally review these skills. The knowledge and habits you build can save your life and protect those around you.

The Greater Danger Theory

The Greater Danger Theory is a principle used in self-defense and law-enforcement training to guide decisions on escalating force when faced with an imminent, life-threatening situation.

The core idea is that when you face the risk of severe harm or death, you may respond with a level of force that would normally seem excessive in order to counteract a greater danger. The theory provides a legal and ethical framework for the use of escalated force to protect yourself or others when no other safe options are available.

The theory applies when there’s a clear and imminent danger that threatens severe harm or death. For instance, if a responsibly armed citizen is disarmed and the attacker is poised to use the firearm, the defender may employ necessary means to regain control or stop the threat.

In practice, the theory helps explain why heightened force may be justified when it is the only viable means to avoid serious harm or death.