The Revolver vs. the Pistol for self defense. Which is better?

[WR Moore]

Actually, IIRC, the stats were from an IACP (International Association of Chiefs of Police) study, don't recall the date, but you can find it cited in Ayoob's "The Semi-Automatic Pistol in Police Service". I expect you can also get ahold of a copy of the original study if you try. I always did wonder how the reports could reconcile a 2.7 rounds per encounter stat with a published hit probability in the same report of 20%.

Now, those were averages. I recall a western highway patrol unit that was running mid 60% with round guns. NYPD has had some notable incidents where multiple officers emptied their Glocks with minimal results. Training is the more important issue, but the trigger of the average stock auto isn't as stiff as the average stock revolver, therefore easier to hit the target with. Our average qual scores went up when we made the transition back in the early 1990's. In fact, we went something like 8 years without anyone who required qualification enhancement (PC for remedial) training.

The number of shots/encounter I'm quoting are from the last publicly available NYPD Police Firearms Discharge Report that I studied. At 33K cops, they make up the bulk of the FBI stats anyway. NYPD incidentally, is meteculous in their stat keeping. The widely publicized old stats included AD/ND/UD incidents, suicides, putting down critters and other discharges that weren't 'gunfights'. The first time NYPD only counted actual BG/GG armed encounters the average number of shots jumped from 2.7 to 4.7. That was before they accounted for 'shootings' and 'gunfights' differently. And yes, the numbers do change somewhat from year to year.

Perhaps the most troubling part of the NYPD report was the section on unintentional discharges. 75% of them happened during what most of us would consider routine handling, including loading/unloading. The disturbing part of the report was that 50% of those UDs causing personal injury, generally of the person handling the weapon.

 

[Fir Fer]

I was raised with shotguns and hunting, no handguns. When I joined the Navy in 1978, I was exposed to handguns for the first time and fell in love with the 1911. I have shot various handguns over the years, but I have always shot better with an auto. I bought the MP45 in Sept. and not a 1911 because I could not afford the later. I have to say I love the MP.

Last week I shot a friend's SW .38 Airweight, I have to say it sucked, long heavy trigger pull, more kick than my .45 and did not feel good in my hand. Though I did hit the target, I would never carry it. By the way, my friend is in the market for MP45.

 

[Badkarma 1]

Ok I'll toss my hat in here...
BOTH! Revolvers excel at accuracy and surviving neglect, also their great for sticking IN the aggressors belly and sending rounds on there way! They SUCK at in gun firepower and dint stand up to abuse very well ( note the poster who packs a wheelgun yet carries 30 rounds for it.)
Autos excel at in gun firepower, the ability to reload quickly, and can take abuse (i.e. dust, dirt, sand, mud, blood), yet they SUCK at accuracy (except for most of the hi-end guns like SIG and HK) and MUST be maintained on a regular basis!
I own both and have used both, they BOTH have their places in the defense arena. Dale

 

[kbm6893]

Well, maybe I'm ignorant (I've encountered more than a few people and a mother-in-law in my life that seem to agree) but I don't see what that matters for the average civilian. I am not SWAT trained, nor was I ever a SEAL or Ranger, or anything like that...my firing experience has been at the range or out in the country, plinking at cans, etc. So, if I am in the situation you describe above, I am certain to be scared. If there is shooting, I will almost certainly be shooting to slide lock (or if I have a revolver, until it goes "click" instead of "bang") without counting my shots. Once the slide locks back, I hope my impulse is to drop the magazine, insert a new one, sling shot the slide, and keep firing. If I am carrying a revolver, and if I have either a speed loader, or speed strips, I'd have to open the cylinder, dump the fired rounds, and then reload the cylinder. (This is why I favor a pistol for carry over a revolver...a pistol reloads faster and easier for the average person.)

I just don't see how a magazine disconnect makes a difference...I can see it if you want to fire a pistol without a magazine in it, but I don't see me firing one and reloading it simultaneously.

I agree. I was being sarcastic to the other poster who posted that very same situation as his reason to carry a hi cap semi auto with extra reloads. The avergae Joe Civilian is not gonna get into an extended gunfight, unless he works in a high crime area and deals with cash, like a convenience store clerk. if i worked in a 7-11 in a ghetto, I wouldn't pack a revolver, either. Then again, I wouldn't risk my life for 7 bucks an hour, either.

 

[kbm6893]

Actually, IIRC, the stats were from an IACP (International Association of Chiefs of Police) study, don't recall the date, but you can find it cited in Ayoob's "The Semi-Automatic Pistol in Police Service". I expect you can also get ahold of a copy of the original study if you try. I always did wonder how the reports could reconcile a 2.7 rounds per encounter stat with a published hit probability in the same report of 20%.

Now, those were averages. I recall a western highway patrol unit that was running mid 60% with round guns. NYPD has had some notable incidents where multiple officers emptied their Glocks with minimal results. Training is the more important issue, but the trigger of the average stock auto isn't as stiff as the average stock revolver, therefore easier to hit the target with. Our average qual scores went up when we made the transition back in the early 1990's. In fact, we went something like 8 years without anyone who required qualification enhancement (PC for remedial) training.

The number of shots/encounter I'm quoting are from the last publicly available NYPD Police Firearms Discharge Report that I studied. At 33K cops, they make up the bulk of the FBI stats anyway. NYPD incidentally, is meteculous in their stat keeping. The widely publicized old stats included AD/ND/UD incidents, suicides, putting down critters and other discharges that weren't 'gunfights'. The first time NYPD only counted actual BG/GG armed encounters the average number of shots jumped from 2.7 to 4.7. That was before they accounted for 'shootings' and 'gunfights' differently. And yes, the numbers do change somewhat from year to year.

Perhaps the most troubling part of the NYPD report was the section on unintentional discharges. 75% of them happened during what most of us would consider routine handling, including loading/unloading. The disturbing part of the report was that 50% of those UDs causing personal injury, generally of the person handling the weapon.

As a retired NYPD cop, I can respond here: NYPD cops qualify 2 times a year for 100 rounds a pop. Most NYPD cops are not gun guys. When we went to the 9MM, they said we'd quailfy 4 times a year, then 3 times a year, then twice a year. If you fail, the range officer will often stab your target with his pen and you magically have enough holes to pass. I recall a guy drawing and presenting his model 10, and a both of petrified french fries fell out of his holster. Until 1988, we had spurred hammer revolvers, but the accidents that occured with cops cocking the hammer made the job switch to DAO revolvers. The semi auto's were all given 12 pound trigger pulls and were DAO, also. NYPD cops have piss poor firearms training, and unless you take the time to do it yourself, you're never gonna be moe than basically trained.

 

[Knightrider03m]

Pistol for me. It covers both your "3 shot avg SD shooting" and your 3-5 thugs that want to prove a point to you. I would like to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.

 

[therevjay]

Depends on how much time you are willing to devote to practice and maintainance. Alot?=semi auto. Little or none?=revolver.

 

[1 old 0311]

Depends on how much time you are willing to devote to practice and maintainance. Alot?=semi auto. Little or none?=revolver.

As far as SHOOTING, a SA is a bit easier because after the first round you have a light trigger. If it does NOT go bang is where the SA is at a great disadvantage, speed wise, over the wheelie.

Each to his own. As I said, I don't frequent crack houses, biker bars, or hookers in the ghetto at 2:00 a.m. so the odds of me, a civilian, actually needing to use my carry piece is like.00000001%

 

[dwever]

Glock .40 Model 22 on duty per agency mandate. 8 Shot N frame .357 revolver snubbie (2.625") otherwise.

 

[Armed Babysitter]

I should also mention that my decision is also based upon the fact I don't shoot revolvers all that well. I could with more practice, but I started out shooting semi-autos then tried out revolvers, which is the opposite of how most of you guys started out.

 

[walnutred]

I thought revolvers WERE pistols !?!

 

[wheelyfun66]

There is no BETTER when discussing revolver vs pistol.

After owning most of the modern high-quality semis over the years..... I am now all-revolver for defensive carry purposes..

But am equally confident in Glock/Sig/Beretta/Colt/ etc...

I just like the revolvers because they meet my criteria for a defensive weapon, and....well...they are Smiths!

 

[GKC]

I thought revolvers WERE pistols !?!

Technically, they are. The term "pistol" came into use somewhere in the 1500s, and referred to the single shot handguns in use at the time. So, while ALL handguns are pistols, I think most people today use the term pistol to refer to a semi-automatic:

"When distinguished as a subset of handguns, a pistol is a handgun with a chamber that is integral with the barrel, as opposed to a revolver, wherein the chamber is separate from the barrel as a revolving cylinder."

 

[18DAI]

I recall someone saying once that "you will be out of time long before you are out of bullets."

My real life experiences would seem to validate that opinion. In sixteen years working robbery/homicide in the DA's office in both urban and now rural jurisdictions, I've yet to see anyone shot and killed because they ran their gun dry. I've not seen anyone set upon and killed by more than two assailants either. In over 200 gunshot homicides I've only seen one decedent shot more than two times. The vast majority of gunshot homicide victims I've seen, were also laid to rest by 9mm or less. BTW, based on what I've seen I think those "shot placement" folks are on to something.

I think the chances of "joe average" who doesn't hunt felons, serve warrants, kick in doors or storm beaches seeing any of these things are less than mine.

So I think folks are best served by whatever they are proficient with. Whatever you can place a fast, accurate shot on target with, be it semi auto or revolver, that is what you should use and carry. The first shot is the most important shot in an exchange of gunfire, not the fifteenth or seventeenth.

I'm a revolver guy and when I've been required to, I carry semi auto's. When the decision is left up to me, I carry a revolver. Make mine a 4" 66-2. I'll be armed just fine, thanks! YMMV Void where prohibited. If it lasts longer than four hours....ect. Regards 18DAI

 

[Springfeildkid585]

I thought revolvers WERE pistols !?!

Actually on a technical basis no. It's like the difference between a "mag" and a "clip." To most people the difference doesn't really matter, but then there's guys like me who get caught up in technicalities.

 

[1 old 0311]

I should also mention that my decision is also based upon the fact I don't shoot revolvers all that well. I could with more practice, but I started out shooting semi-autos then tried out revolvers, which is the opposite of how most of you guys started out.

Well at last a HONEST poster. Some people shoot one platform easier than the other. My little girl, 12, can shoot a wheelie better than most men can shoot ANYTHING, but she hates bottom feeders. she says it "just doesn't feel right."

I shoot a bottom feeder a LOT better than a wheelie BUT wheelies are vastly more reliable so that is what I carry, and that is what is on my nightstand. YMMV

 

[Lost Lake]

Well at last a HONEST poster. Some people shoot one platform easier than the other. My little girl, 12, can shoot a wheelie better than most men can shoot ANYTHING, but she hates bottom feeders. she says it "just doesn't feel right."

Now doesn't that depend on the two handguns you are comparing? Which do you think my 10 year old prefers, my 6" .357 wheel gun or my model 41 .22? (Actually neither, he likes the Ruger Standard )

I don't like the angle of a Glock grip. I like my M&P's. I don't care for the way the grips on most wheel guns are curved so the recoil flips them up, and the barrel is often higher above your arm centerline for more twist.

So within each species there are thousands of variations. The argument here is in design differences and safety is the implied criteria. Safety encompassing usability, accuracy, reliability etc. because if it isn't reliable, it isn't safe to carry.

 

[Bombsaway]

Which ever one gets the job done.

 

[kbm6893]

I recall someone saying once that "you will be out of time long before you are out of bullets."

My real life experiences would seem to validate that opinion. In sixteen years working robbery/homicide in the DA's office in both urban and now rural jurisdictions, I've yet to see anyone shot and killed because they ran their gun dry. I've not seen anyone set upon and killed by more than two assailants either. In over 200 gunshot homicides I've only seen one decedent shot more than two times. The vast majority of gunshot homicide victims I've seen, were also laid to rest by 9mm or less. BTW, based on what I've seen I think those "shot placement" folks are on to something.

I think the chances of "joe average" who doesn't hunt felons, serve warrants, kick in doors or storm beaches seeing any of these things are less than mine.

So I think folks are best served by whatever they are proficient with. Whatever you can place a fast, accurate shot on target with, be it semi auto or revolver, that is what you should use and carry. The first shot is the most important shot in an exchange of gunfire, not the fifteenth or seventeenth.

I'm a revolver guy and when I've been required to, I carry semi auto's. When the decision is left up to me, I carry a revolver. Make mine a 4" 66-2. I'll be armed just fine, thanks! YMMV Void where prohibited. If it lasts longer than four hours....ect. Regards 18DAI

Careful, now! Someone with far less experience than you will soon chime in that carrying a revolver is putting you at a tactical disadvantage, and when the armed terrorists storm your location, you'll be screwed with a 6 shot revolver. It's funny how real world experience gets ignored or written off as "lucky for you so far", while internet rumor and tactical TV shows pushing a product are treated as gospel! Stay safe, brother!

 

[Joe Kent]

I tend to agree with 18DAI. I remember a discussion back in the early 70's between an pro 45 Auto instructor and a group of metro coppers where the instructor took the position that only the Gov't Model was the gun to carry. One of the old timers basically ended the discussion when he said' "the last three men I shot with my 357 went down never to get back up". I think that were we knowingly going into a fight , a squad of fully equipped Marines would be my carry choice,otherwise I would suggest carrying whatever you personally could shoot the best with. With over 40+ years of carrying a handgun , my thoughts have not changed and the guns I carried at 21 are not too different than the ones I carry at 62. I should say also that my carry guns involve both autos and revolvers, depending on when and where I am going. I don't think there is a problem by having more than "one" choice, just spend the time to be able to use what you carry.