Podcast: Play in new window
Earlier this week, I posted my review of Justin’s new book, Competent & Dangerous. Today I’m posting an interview I did with him back in November 2025 after I finished my read through of the book and had a lot of notes to chew on. We’d been working to set up another podcast since the summer, but schedules kept misaligning and we didn’t get to it until the fall.
Originally, we were going to dive in on the 1911 topic since that was a passion project for 2025. While that was part of conversation, for sure, we spent a lot of time talking about the REAP methodology for choosing a handgun that he discusses in his book. REAP stands for Reliability, Ergonomics, Accuracy, and Portability.
As the conversation rolled on, we get into revolvers (again)- and this was shorty before I bought my GP100. Pistol dots came up, as well. At another point, we also touched on law enforcement training standards and considerations.
As you can see, this was a wide-ranging conversation, so I hope you enjoy it!
What follows is an auto-generated summary of each segment.
Episode Time Stamps and Summary
1) Welcome back + what this episode is (00:00–00:59)
I open with the Everyday Marksman intro and bring Justin back on the show. I mention we’ve been trying to make this happen for months—my schedule, his schedule, and me getting sick and losing my voice all got in the way.
I frame the episode as a fun one and set expectations that we’re digging into a topic Justin and I have been orbiting for a while, with handguns as the main focus.
2) Justin’s book: Competent and Dangerous (00:59–02:52)
I start by congratulating Justin on his new book and tell him I thought it was the most comprehensive “cover-every-important-topic” book I’ve read in this space. He explains it as a long-term passion project—three+ years writing, but really a lifetime of experience behind it.
He also talks about how he didn’t want to write past his credibility: when he felt weak on a topic, he went and read more, trained more, or gained more experience. I connect it to his “what would James Bond do?” theme—being broadly competent enough to handle a wide range of problems.
3) Why Justin’s background matters to this handgun discussion (02:52–05:51)
Before we get into pistol selection, I give listeners a quick overview of Justin’s background: Marine special operations roots, contracting, technical training work, EMT school, law enforcement, and experience around natural disasters (including lessons we discussed during the North Carolina hurricane situation).
My point is that he’s not just theorizing—he’s seen the practical and human consequences side, and he’s also spent a lot of time testing old qualification standards and evaluating pistols in a very “results first” way.
4) The REAP framework for choosing a handgun (05:51–08:13)
I tee up REAP because I think it’s a clean way to give advice without getting dragged into brand wars. Justin explains the acronym—Reliability, Ergonomics, Accuracy, and (his modification) Portability. He credits the original version to Seeklander/AWS, and he explains why he swaps “Power” for “Portability”: caliber is usually a secondary issue, and if you just default to 9mm you can stop obsessing over “power” and focus on more meaningful factors.
What I like about it is that it matches my own “after enough guns, they’re all kind of the same” experience. The differences that matter are: will it run, can you run it, can you hit with it, and can you actually carry/support it in the real world.
5) The hidden tax of oddball guns: holsters, support, and ecosystem (08:13–10:38)
I give a personal example with my Beretta 92A1: after getting it worked over, it’s awesome to shoot—great trigger, great reset, and it feels like a “serious” pistol. But the dream died when I realized it doesn’t fit common holsters because of the specific slide/rail/trigger-guard differences versus the more standard M9 variants.
Justin agrees and widens it: it’s a “Glock 19 world,” and the further you move away from mainstream platforms, the faster your support options drop off. The gun can be great, but if you can’t carry it properly and get gear for it, “great” becomes a range toy.
6) What accuracy should actually mean (11:07–14:57)
I ask Justin what a realistic accuracy standard looks like, and he gives a practical benchmark: keeping shots in the IDPA down-zero zone (about an 8-inch circle) at 25 yards. He emphasizes that most factory guns are mechanically more accurate than the shooter, so what matters is what you can realistically extract from that platform.
I add my own framing: I like the idea of an 8-inch circle standard across platforms (pistol, rifle, shotgun, PCC), and then you choose the tool that lets you meet that standard at the distances you might actually need. The larger point is to stop chasing “maximum accuracy” that you can’t use and won’t need.
7) Ergonomics, “pointing,” and platform familiarity (15:07–18:55)
I talk about how some guns just “point right” for me—my CZ PCR is a good example. When I clear the holster, it lands on target naturally, and that first shot confidence matters.
Justin brings in his experience switching between 1911s and Glocks: the grip angle difference sounds small, but it’s enough to require deliberate practice, especially if you’ve spent decades building one presentation pattern. He makes the key point that it’s not a moral issue—either platform can work—but experience and anatomy can bias what’s easiest for you.
8) Striker vs DA/SA vs 1911: triggers, safety margin, and why DA/SA is underrated (18:55–25:41)
Justin says the “easy button” advice is usually Glock 19 or Glock 48, mainly because the system is simple and the support ecosystem is huge. But we spend time on DA/SA because I prefer it and I think people don’t appreciate it until they’re ready to.
Justin argues DA/SA offers a bigger safety margin—longer/heavier initial trigger pull and the ability to thumb the hammer while reholstering, especially relevant for appendix carry. We also talk about the myth that you can’t master the transition from DA to SA; he thinks it’s very doable with fundamentals and reps, and that learning DA well makes everything else feel easier.
9) 1911s: why they’re not a “first gun,” and what makes them tricky (25:41–31:03)
I ask Justin directly why he doesn’t recommend 1911s as a first handgun, even though he carries one. He’s clear that 1911s can be reliable, but the platform tends to demand more of the shooter and owner: more complex manual of arms (especially safety use), a light/short trigger with less margin for sloppy handling, and a more fractured market where “a 1911” is really many different interpretations.
I also share my own hindsight: my first pistol was a 1911, and I didn’t know what I didn’t know. Maintenance cycles, fitted parts, and springs are a different lifestyle compared to modern striker guns that will run forever with minimal fuss.
10) Special units and the .45 1911: why did they stick with it? (31:03–36:41)
I ask why certain units stuck to .45 1911s when everyone else moved toward 9mm and high-capacity pistols. Justin doesn’t see a clean, logical answer—logistics and maintenance are burdensome, and capacity is objectively limited.
We both circle around the idea that “being different” and the cool factor may be part of it, and we touch on the legacy “stopping power” narrative. He’s skeptical of the practical justification, especially when you consider ammo logistics and the reality of modern 9mm performance.
11) Caliber, “stopping power,” and why handguns mostly just poke holes (36:41–44:41)
I bring up the tension between modern research and old anecdotal stories about .45 being uniquely decisive. Justin responds from a medical/trauma perspective: handgun wounds largely “drill holes,” and unless you hit CNS or major vessels/heart, people can keep functioning longer than you’d like.
We both push back on “energy dump” as a dependable mechanism. The consistent answer is still penetration and shot placement. If anything else helps, it’s a bonus—not something to build your whole decision around.
12) Niche calibers (38 Super, 10mm) and the money problem (44:41–47:46)
I bring up 38 Super as a way to get 9mm performance in a longer cartridge for potentially better feeding in 1911s. Justin enjoys the nerdy caliber discussion and mentions other interesting options (10mm, 357 SIG), but he keeps returning to the same anchor point: cost drives training volume.
His argument is basically that ammo is the long-term cost—not the gun—and spending more per case adds up to thousands of dollars over years. If a cartridge reduces how much you practice, it’s probably a downgrade in real capability.
13) The “ideal 1911” wishlist + single stack vs double stack reality (47:46–55:33)
We revisit a prior discussion where Justin laid out his “ideal duty 1911” specs (9mm commander, steel rail frame, optic-ready, checkered front strap, ambi safety, etc.) and the frustration that the market rarely delivers that exact package without expensive custom work.
Then we get into why he still likes single-stack 9mm for carry: thinness and comfort. Even though double stacks are great, a gun that’s uncomfortable won’t get carried consistently, and his personal tolerance for bulk is limited. I also ask about possible future magazine limits and whether that changes caliber thinking; he says, maybe, but he still can’t get past the training-cost math.
14) Revolvers: QC problems, speedloader stagnation, and why it’s frustrating (57:25–1:04:07)
I finally pull the revolver thread because we go back years on that topic. Justin basically waves a big warning flag: revolver QC across major brands is rough right now, and buyers should be prepared to send guns back.
He also vents (fairly) about the revolver ecosystem being stuck in time—speedloader tech stalled decades ago, good options are scarce, and companies don’t seem motivated to innovate. For me, the draw is still learning a different manual of arms and being able to shoot certain competition divisions, but it’s clear the revolver path is a “do it because you love it” decision, not a frictionless one.
15) Red dots on pistols: why they’re becoming the default (1:05:03–1:12:23)
Justin brings up optics as the big modern shift. His eyes aren’t what they used to be, and he’s found pistol dots dramatically improve his precision—especially at distance—because he can stay target-focused and simply superimpose the dot.
We talk about the main learning curve: consistent presentation so you’re not hunting for the dot, and how reps/dry practice solve it. I share my own experience: dots help me a lot on 15–20 yard partials/small targets, but close targets from the draw can feel slightly slower, and I’ve found co-witness irons help me “find” the dot faster.
16) Training reality: law enforcement, budgets, and why capacity isn’t the core issue (1:12:23–1:17:38)
I ask about the idea that higher capacity might encourage poorer marksmanship habits. Justin’s answer is basically: the bigger issue is training—budgets, culture, and baseline expectations. A lot of officers view the gun as just another issued tool, and many agencies do minimal annual qualification.
He also notes there are exceptions—high performers, SWAT, people who seek outside training—but the institutional average is limited by money and priorities. We close with that reality check: equipment matters, but training culture and repetition matter more.
