View Single Post
 
Old 01-08-2010, 03:27 PM
NVBob NVBob is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ajpelz View Post
1. Being a smart***** does not get you real far, especially on an internet forum.

To answer your question, it is not, and never will be as reliable as a gun without a lock. The probability of malfunction, no matter how small, is greater than the probability of malfunction when the system does not exist. You may know psychology, but seems like your math could use some work

Shooting hundreds of rounds to test for function is usually more important in autoloaders, not wheel guns. You are checking for FTF and FTE, these do not exist in a revolver. If the load is accurate, performs adequately and you can shoot it confidently, you are good to go with a revolver.
It was "tongue in cheek smart*****" in response to the implication that using an IL revolver for self defense equates to lack of brains. I am an admitted novice at this, but I do not buy that argument.

Seriously though, one of my revolvers was having a problem with light primer strikes. This manifested itself early, and I fixed the problem. I didn't "trust" the gun until I fired hundreds of flawless rounds. Now I trust it.

Seems to me that there are a variety of mechanical things that can go wrong with any handgun, but if particular handgun performs flawlessly for thousands of rounds, is not that particular handgun by definition reliable?

I believe that on average, IL revolvers are less reliable than revolvers without the IL, no matter how statistically minute the difference might be. Problem is that statistics like this apply to populations and not individuals.

So, being the admitted novice that I am, I would still argue that if a person shoots thousands of flawless rounds through his gun, he could safely assume his gun is "reliable" by any definition, and he would not be "lacking brains" if he carried the gun.