Top Menu

The Concealed Carry Podcast

CCWPodcastLogoQuick Links:

The Concealed Carry Podcast is a top ranked podcast syndicated via popular podcast channels including Google Play and iTunes. The Podcast is focused on concealed carry topics for American Gun Owners who believe in firearm related self-defense.

The podcast is hosted by Riley Bowman, a member of the executive team of Riley is often joined by Jacob Paulsen ( President) and other instructors in the training network.

The podcast is based out of the mile high city of Denver Colorado and is published twice a week. The podcast features include:

  • Justified: News stories about gun owners who have used a firearm in legal self-defense
  • Political News: Current events that affect gun-related policy and law
  • Training Tip: A weekly segment focused on a specific technique for maximizing firearm self-defense training
  • Main Topic: A weekly segment in which a major issue or topic specific to concealed carry or firearm training is discussed

Riley T Bowman – Host of The Concealed Carry Podcast & Jacob Paulsen President of


About is a national network of firearm instructors. works with instructors nationwide in bringing top quality in person training to American gun owners. also produces online firearm training programs and sells a variety of firearm related accessories and products via it's website and affiliates.

Subscribe to

Concealed Carry Podcast - Guns | Training | Defense | CCW

Or subscribe with your favorite app by using the address below

, , , , ,

25 Responses to The Concealed Carry Podcast

  1. Evan Watkins August 29, 2016 at 5:35 pm #

    Great podcast, I’ve listened since June and really appreciate the insight you share or get others to contribute. Sure you pushed the Gun Law course a LOT, but I bought it and think the content is valuable too. I really appreciate the time you put into this and like a few other listeners suggest…would listen if you did more too. In fact, we recently moved from CA to TX (woohoo gun free state) and I listened and re-listened to most of your shows during that long drive.

    Your interview with the cop in the first few episodes was well done and very insightful…taught me several things. Can’t wait to hear more.

    Recommendations for future podcasts…cover some gun laws of different states. IE in TX you can have a travel gun (who knew), but in CA all guns in the car (excluding carried CCW) must be locked and separated from ammo. I think it would be great and interesting to learn more about different states…also helps out those that travel between states (ie CA & NV).

    • Dennis Malone February 12, 2017 at 2:26 pm #

      Good work ,
      I’ve been a ccw’r for about 8 years. I really like the podcast you guys are my number one to listen too.

      I do have one question have you heard of or used the see all open sight , or the advantage tactical sights? I’m considering the see all for a H.D.R. (Home Defense Rifle ) and advantage fire fly sights for my Springfield XD s/c, and my Sig P320 compact. Maybe a show on alternate sights?

      Again love listening to the show I’m always looking forward for new episode’s, like another reviewer stated it’s like getting advice from a couple of buddies definitely 5 stars in my book

      • Jacob Paulsen February 14, 2017 at 8:11 am #

        Dennis, I’m not familiar with either of those sights but our instructor Matthew is actually currently testing both and will be publishing reviews on them shortly. It would be a good idea for a podcast episode to talk about for sure!

      • Matthew Maruster February 14, 2017 at 4:46 pm #

        Hi Dennis,
        Yes Jacob is correct. Funny you asked about both sight systems because I have been interested in these two sights for pistol sights and just recently started into the review process. I know you mentioned the see all you were considering putting it on a home defense rifle. I am just reviewing it for handgun, but I will definitely see if I can extrapolate anything I discover about the sight, and mention how it would apply for rifle application. A podcast on sights would be awesome, great idea. Stay tuned because I am going to work hard to get your questions answered in detail.

        Stay safe

  2. Stanley Orlowski December 8, 2016 at 11:37 am #


    Just listened to episode 75. You highlighted 2 companies that prefer not having guns, open guns etc. In their stores.

    I am a CCW holder in South Florida and frequent several local gun ranges and multiple gun shows – different companies. All of which have signs that inform me that they do not want loaded guns on premises, except on range, and gun shows, they put a plastic wire tie though the gun. To follow these requests, I need to sit in my car in the parking lot, drop the magazine and empty the chamber or at gun shows, leave the gun in the car.

    How is this different than Levis and Starbucks who prefer not have loaded guns on their premises.?

    As a CCW holder, I do not like gun free zones, especially businesses that “sell” the second amendment … in the name of safety?

    • Jacob Paulsen December 8, 2016 at 12:00 pm #

      Stanley, good questions! I don’t think its very different. Any private business (gun store, grocery store, or movie theater) should either allow private citizens to come in armed or they should provide armed security for patrons. I do understand why a gun store for example may not want loaded guns in the store. They might feel the risk is higher of someone confusing the loaded for the unloaded guns etc but if they want to have a policy then they should provide security for the shoppers… and many do.

    • Elvis Acosta December 14, 2016 at 6:02 pm #

      Hi Stanely:

      1) It’s simply, liability. Most average, Joe Citizen CCW holders do not carry liability insurance. And so, hosting vendors are leary of uninsured customers walking around with loaded guns.

      2) Its simply, liability. Law enforcement officers, whether on, or off duty, are “insured” by their hiring agency unless the officer does something reckless during a use of force (deadly) confrontation. Their agency will determine, based on facts, whether or not the officer was within agency policy at the time of the deadly confrontation. If he/she was, then they’re good to go. If not, then the agency will more likely than not, not represent them in a criminal or civil proceeding.

      3) It’s simply, liability. Both parties, in your scenario, will be held liable if you, the CCW holder, pull your gun and engage a bad guy in their venue. So, to minimize the possibilities, they do not allow you to carry your loaded gun on their venue.

      4) Vendors, in Florida, have the right to limit who can or cannot patronize their business. Yes, they can even prohibit law enforcement officers unless they are conducting official police police business. Now, is that a smart thing to do, no?!

      5) A vendor does not know if the person carrying a gun on their venue is a good guy or a bad guy…unless of course, they ask to see their CCW license, which they have the right to do. Now think what will happen if it’s a bad guy is asked for his “license?” He’s already inside the venue, or at least, in it’s threshold.

      6) Safety, in the example given, is not the issue since the CCW holder should not be drawing his gun from its holster unless at a range in the gun store. And if that’s the case, the CCW holder is theoretically in a safe environment. Same holds true when a patron rents multiple guns at the range.

      7) Do your research BEFORE you go to the venue to see if you’re allowed to carry your gun in the venue. That way, you avoid having to “clear” your gun in the vehicle, which is an accident waiting to happen as it allows for the potentiality of an accidental discharge.

      These are but a few examples; there are many more, I simply tried to address the comments made in this post with them.

  3. M Goddard December 10, 2016 at 5:04 am #

    Any chances there are transcripts of the podcasts? I am very interested in them but I am deaf.

    • Jacob Paulsen December 10, 2016 at 9:00 am #

      I’m embarrassed to admit that hadn’t crossed our mind. We will see if this is something we may be able to do.

  4. Greg December 16, 2016 at 7:53 pm #

    Excellent pod cast. I’ve only been listening for a few months. Now that all states (I am in the last state to adopt conceal carry) in our country has some form of conceal carry, your content is so completely valid and an important resource. Thanks for professional manner and usable content.

    • Jacob Paulsen December 17, 2016 at 3:59 pm #

      Greg thank you so much for the kind words! Carry on!

  5. Rob B. December 22, 2016 at 8:20 pm #

    I’ve gone back and listened to all the PodCast and find them informative as well as timely on the topic they cover. The approach Jacob and Riley take really is similar to sitting down with a knowledgeable friend and getting well thought out advice.

    Waiting for the next PodCast each time it comes out.

  6. Justin W. January 5, 2017 at 7:14 pm #

    Hi guys. I stumbled across your podcast a couple of months ago and have really enjoyed gaining new perspectives on our lifestyle. I’ve been an NC CCWer (CHP here) for about 10 years now and love learning every day. I decided to start at the beginning at episode 1 and I am almost caught up as today I listened to episode 70 on MMM. My question may have been covered in episodes that I haven’t gotten to yet, but here it is.

    Let’s say you are in a public place, and a BG with some type of weapon starts attacking people right near you. You decide that you have the opportunity to eliminate the threat and save yourself and others around you so you draw and fire. The BG hits the ground and you scan your surroundings and everything seems to be clear. Now not everyone in the area has seen the whole situation and for some bystanders you might appear to be the original threat. What would be a very clear and non threatening way to establish to the bystanders that you are not the BG? Again, they didn’t see or are aware of the whole situation. My concern would be either a potential mob of people attacking you, (thinking they would be a hero) or another CCWer in the crowd thinking that they need to “take out the guy with the gun”


    • Jacob Paulsen January 5, 2017 at 8:05 pm #

      Justin, thanks for listening. Not an easy question for sure. Here are my quick thoughts…

      Take control. Giving load and clear commands may help you dramatically. Shout to people around you to call 911. Tell people to hide and take cover. Shout out something like “Threat Down” to communicate the situation.

      I’m not aware of any history or research to suggest that in active shooter situations the sheep do anything but run and hide. If there is another sheepdog in the area I would only add that you stop being a threat (in their eyes) when you stop shooting.

      This is a good thing to ponder more on… maybe a future episode?? 🙂

  7. Mark Ketten January 16, 2017 at 10:20 pm #

    Found your podacst on Tune In Radio. I find your content to be very informative. Love the fast paced paced but very knowledgeable way you present the information.

    Currently working my way through all of your archived past shows.

    Thank you for your hard work.
    Stay safe.

    • Riley Bowman January 17, 2017 at 2:35 am #


      Thank you SO MUCH for listening and for your support!! I’m glad you enjoy the content!

      We are really looking forward to what 2017 has in store and have big plans with all things Concealed Carry Podcast and here with the new

      Take care, be safe, and do let us know if you have any questions or suggestions.

      Stay in touch!


  8. Kramer January 17, 2017 at 10:44 pm #

    On your training episode, to supplement supply demand issue for instructors, what about federal funds helping to encourage instructors to spend more time training?

    • Jacob Paulsen January 23, 2017 at 8:41 am #

      Kramer, I’m generally opposed to federal spending but this isn’t altogether a bad idea!

  9. Sspeelmans February 22, 2017 at 9:58 pm #

    Great podcast! I just found this podcast a little over a week ago and listen to about 3 a day. I’m already on episode 33 and can’t get enough! Although I’m not new to guns I just recently obtained my CCW in Ohio a few weeks ago and have been ccwing on a daily basis. I’m so happy to be part of such a fantastic community and can’t get enough of the justified stories and heroic actions people have done with their CCW. This podcast has gave me a lot of insight to some questions I had and also has made ask myself more questions that I would of never thought of before. I always look forward to learning more and can’t thank you guys enough. I can’t wait to be caught up to the latest episode but at same time I don’t want to be because I’ll only be able to listen to two podcasts a week. Keep up the great work!

  10. Ken March 21, 2017 at 7:53 pm #

    Awesome podcast!!! I HIGHLY recommend this to everyone who is even thinking about owning a hand gun and especially those who conceal carry. Riley, Jacob, and their guests do a fantastic job balancing out their discussions and comments. If you think this is just a rah rah for guns, you’re wrong. These guys have the right philosophy in my opinion. If they are reporting on a story where a gun owner is wrong, they’ll call them out, but at the same time they’ll make sure to tell you why and the correct way to approach the situation. This is extremely apparent with the number of times they will stress the importance of life over things and that it’s better to avoid a situation rather than jumping in just because you have a firearm. I have listened to every episode (up to episode 105 so far) and I have not been disappointed. GREAT job, guys!

  11. Caleb Fife March 24, 2017 at 9:11 am #

    Hey guys! Love the show, I look forward to both episodes every week. But I wanted to share something real quick. I was listening to the negligent discharge episode, and I heard where you told the story of the LEO in the gunshop in Kentucky who was handed a loaded gun. That shop is located in my hometown, and I refuse to go there anymore. I have been flagged several times when being presented a firearm, and when I brought it to their attention they shrugged it off and claimed they know that they were cleared. Luckily when the incident took place nobody was actually struck by the bullet. The LEO was injured, but it was from the position of which he was holding the firearm when it discharged. I believe it just strained his wrist, if I recall correctly. Anyways, I just thought I’d share that. Keep up the good work, and as always, stay safe!

  12. John Kesik April 4, 2017 at 7:31 am #

    Hi Riley,
    In response to the Oklahoma man using an AR-15 for home defense and why not just use a handgun. It’s my understanding that the.223 will not penetrate 2 sheets of drywall and is therefore safer in an urban environment and that is why the FBI and law enforcement agencies use the AR-15. I also want to thank you and Jacob for the excellent podcast you provide for us.

  13. msmithp2 April 18, 2017 at 1:09 pm #

    Just listening to podcast #113 where you are discussing your 1 star review and the advice to hold up a gun like a sticky sock. You comment that you don’t think police officers will shoot if you act like that because of their training, I believe you even asked for examples. I would agree with you that n 99+% of incidents with police you are probably correct, but it is that small percentage where they do that gets in the news.

    2 quick examples come to mind. First is the shooting of Tamir Rice. While the dispute on exactly what commands the police gave and Tamir’s actions, from police arrival to shooting took place so quickly, it is easy to argue that Tamir did not even have time to follow police commands.

    The second example is the Opelika, Ala., police officer Phillip Hancock shooting Air Force veteran Michael Davidson as he got out of his car with his wallet in his hand. Again this happened in a matter of seconds.

    In neither of these cases did the police officers seem to follow the training and restraint the Riley says is the standard and which the clam is made will keep you safe. Furthermore, in both these cases no charges were filed against the officers, which negates any argument that these officers acted negligently.

    It is these types of incidents which lead people such as your 1 star reviewer to believe that “holding a gun up while facing a cop will get you shot.”

    As is often mentioned, police do not know who the “good” guy is when they show up. They are also under the same adrenalin stress (tunnel vision, audio impairment, fight or flight, etc) as a civilian with all the effects that can have on judgement and decision making.

    Given all the above, not sure I would not be going way out of my way to seem harmless (empty visible hands, maybe even off my feet) when the police arrive.

    • Riley Bowman April 19, 2017 at 1:10 pm #

      Hey, thanks for your thoughts!

      Let me try to clarify something. I was not talking on the podcast about any situation except for ones where someone was forced to defend themselves with their gun against an active or possible threat, and they are then holding that individual at gunpoint until the authorities arrive. We’ve had several people write in and point out situations where innocent people got shot. But so far none–NONE–are exactly like the situation I described on the podcast.

      Tamir Rice–this situation was messed up on all kinds of levels. First of all, a man called 911 and reported a man, likely a juvenile, with a gun pointing it at people. He thought it was a kid with a probably a fake gun. The dispatchers failed to pass this on to the responding officers. That alone wasn’t responsible, however, for Tamir getting shot, just so that’s clear. The officers that arrived on the scene didn’t follow protocol in responding to what was thought of as a possible active shooter situation. Even still, that was not responsible for the kid getting shot. What got the kid shot was when officers arrived, he reached into his waistband. That’s going to get you shot every time. People will point to Tamir Rice not having time to respond to commands. But that’s not the issue. The issue was him immediately reaching into his waistband. The officers did not have the time to wait for him to comply. They perceived he was reaching for and pulling out a gun. Anyway, this story does not describe the hypothetical situation I talked about on the podcast.

      Michael Davidson–he’s holding something black in his hands as he gets out of his vehicle. You might think, “See, that’s no different than a good citizen holding a gun trained on a suspect after an incident.” Except that it is different. There is something different about arriving on a scene where you see a man holding a gun in the direction of a supposed suspect, that as officers arrive, the gun owner does nothing except stand there maintaining control of the gun in the direction of someone on the ground. The gun owner doesn’t move towards the officer. They don’t point the gun in the direction of the officer. They might even hold up their other hand, wave at the officer, and say, “Over here!” That is different than an officer pulling in behind a vehicle where they cannot see the occupant, and said occupant suddenly, without warning, exits the vehicle with something black in their hands. In one situation, the officer can see what’s going on, and they might not understand fully the circumstances, but they can begin making judgments and assumptions about the situation. In the other one, they cannot observe anything other than a stopped car. Suddenly that situation changes when the occupant exits (without being told to do so) while holding something that is the same color as most guns in their hands. This person then turns towards the officer. And upon being commanded “Show me your hands” they do show their hands, but they do not drop the object. These are two very different situations, and if you watched both play out in first-person POV, you would likely make the same judgments.

      People need to understand, and perhaps we need to do a better job of educating the public, that when a command like “Show me your hands” is given, it means, drop everything in those hands, raise them high, and don’t do anything else until you are told to do so!

      I think we are going to try to address this with additional clarity. Because clearly we haven’t succeeded at it.

      Thanks again for sharing your opinion with us. I would like to hear back from you, as to whether you agree or disagree with my analysis of the above, or also if you have additional thoughts or are able to find other examples that more directly apply to the type of situation I am talking about here. Thanks for listening!!!

  14. msmithp2 April 19, 2017 at 2:32 pm #


    Thanks for the detailed response to my post. I understand the distinction you are making between holding a gun pointed at a BG when a officer arrives and the situations of Tamir Rice and Michael Davidson. While I admit there are distinctions between these situations and it is hard to find a case that documents closely the situation you describe, my focus is more on the stress and decision making of the police and pointing out that does lead to poor decisions in some cases. They are human after all. Even in the scenario you are focusing on could quickly fall apart if for instance the police arrive in the blind spot of the CCWer and yell a command. The CCWer might reasonable turn to see what new factor has entered the situation and inadvertently bring his gun toward the police. In the high stress of a lethal force situation, it would required extraordinary training and self control to not turn towards someone yelling a command.

    My point is that relying on the CCWer and the police to both observe, orient, decide and act correctly to each other in this type of situation is risky and most of the risk on on the CCWer. The CCWer is very unlikely to deliberately assault a police officer, but the police office who does not know who the “good guy” is can and have assaulted the “good” guy.

    If you a have an active threat, ie a BG who is not disabled, then you probably have to hold you gun on them as the police arrive and hope the police correctly interrupt the situation. This is basically a risk assessment that says address the biggest risk (the BG) and accept and minimize where possible the lesser risks (arriving police).

    For me this is another reason why we as responsible armed citizens need to be vey careful in the situations we get involved in. Once committed, there are numerous risks which we incur of which we will have little control over (unexpected scenarios, bad decision by police, over zealous prosecutors, etc). We need to realize that you can do everything correctly and still get the short end of the stick.

    Thanks for al your work on the podcast. I think it is great that you make me think about these issues and get multiple viewpionts to ponder. These discussions and the analysis they create are the true value of you efforts.

Leave a Reply