pps
Member
Hey...I still see a little room on one of the tac rails for tactical cappuccino maker.
The Revolver vs. the Pistol for self defense. Which is better?
- Thread starter sirrduke2010
- Start date
Hey...I still see a little room on one of the tac rails for tactical cappuccino maker.
Tracer_Bullet
Member
Where's the can-opener and scissors on that bad boy? 
venomballistics
Member
Springfeildkid585
Member
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2011
- Messages
- 487
- Reaction score
- 141
I am from a stop off for the drug runners between Chicago and Indy. When the Chicago projects closed, they emptied out into the Lafayette projects. I have never felt under-gunned with my 1911. Which only provides me with one more bullet than a revolver. I will admit that I often carry two spare mags and a small fixed blade. I would only carry one as I believe in the old boyscout motto, but Springfield Armory was kind enough to provide me with a double mag carrier so I might as well carry two and the knife is for weapon retention or in extremely close quarters, as is the case in mugging, not for fear of running dry.
Still, if I make a quick run to the grocery store or something it's often just the gun.
I vote for consistent simplicity.
In a stressful situation....Point, shoot, bang.
What will I actually carry each day?
Am I capable with the weapon?
Had to work very, very hard on my shooting skills and now feel confident with a snubbie.
Currently, my EDC is a Glock 26.
So to answer your question... likely both...
In a stressful situation....Point, shoot, bang.
What will I actually carry each day?
Am I capable with the weapon?
Had to work very, very hard on my shooting skills and now feel confident with a snubbie.
Currently, my EDC is a Glock 26.
So to answer your question... likely both...
Last edited:
You can carry pretty much what you want. You're just going to have to wear more than a T-shirt to do it. Maybe. If the T-shirt is opaque enough and loose enough and long enough, you might even be able to get away with that. You can start from naked, if you want, or just swim trunks, and ask yourself what you can carry, or you can start from what you want to carry, and ask yourself how to dress.
Your choice.
everReady Rob
Member
1973Glenfield25
I think Model520Fan is spot on, you'll have to conceal by means of long vest, baggy shirts, jacket or a shoulder bag. I put a camera logo on my bag and people don't seem to give it a second look. Depending on your climate location and work situation it can be PITA but only the hottest days are really a problem. People around you get use to your attire and new people you meet don't really seem to pay that much attention.
I have pocket holsters for my J frames but don't really care for them. You can not remove the weapon very fast, at least I can't.
Good luck, I think you'll adapt pretty quick.
I think Model520Fan is spot on, you'll have to conceal by means of long vest, baggy shirts, jacket or a shoulder bag. I put a camera logo on my bag and people don't seem to give it a second look. Depending on your climate location and work situation it can be PITA but only the hottest days are really a problem. People around you get use to your attire and new people you meet don't really seem to pay that much attention.
I have pocket holsters for my J frames but don't really care for them. You can not remove the weapon very fast, at least I can't.
Good luck, I think you'll adapt pretty quick.
Well 25 years of carrying both here's my advise. If the bad guy is unarmed, not to big and by himself, I'll chose the revolver. Otherwise I want my Glock, now I don't mind a revolver for back-up.
It's like saying you would you choose a P47 over a F15 for a dogfight, you may feel nostalgic for the old warbird but sooner or later you got to upgrade if you want to stay alive. If the revolver was so great why did we depend so heavily on the shotgun when the S#%# hit the fan. The only reason you were in a shootout with a revolver was because you couldn't get to your shotgun. After we got Glocks the shotguns stayed in the squad cars.
I wouldn't depend on a revolver for home defense these days. In my area the big thing is home invasion, anywhere from 3-5 guys heavily armed with pistols and AK's and you want to defend your family with a 5 or 6 shot revolver. Surrender isn't really an option they are there more for the rape and murder then money.
Don't get me wrong I love revolvers but I love my life more. Trust me before we went to autos you felt naked, the bad guys aren't stupid they arm themselves to win and they don't carry revolvers unless that's all they have available.
Now that we got this one wrapped up lets get a real topic like "is 223 enough for deer" or the greatest all time topic " which is better the 308 or 30-06".
It's like saying you would you choose a P47 over a F15 for a dogfight, you may feel nostalgic for the old warbird but sooner or later you got to upgrade if you want to stay alive. If the revolver was so great why did we depend so heavily on the shotgun when the S#%# hit the fan. The only reason you were in a shootout with a revolver was because you couldn't get to your shotgun. After we got Glocks the shotguns stayed in the squad cars.
I wouldn't depend on a revolver for home defense these days. In my area the big thing is home invasion, anywhere from 3-5 guys heavily armed with pistols and AK's and you want to defend your family with a 5 or 6 shot revolver. Surrender isn't really an option they are there more for the rape and murder then money.
Don't get me wrong I love revolvers but I love my life more. Trust me before we went to autos you felt naked, the bad guys aren't stupid they arm themselves to win and they don't carry revolvers unless that's all they have available.
Now that we got this one wrapped up lets get a real topic like "is 223 enough for deer" or the greatest all time topic " which is better the 308 or 30-06".
Last edited:
ol' geeser
Member
Truth of the matter is this...he (or she) who creates a massive disruption of electrical power or causes a dramatic decrease in hydralic pressure...first...WINS...period
If you're gonna carry...you owe the rest of society to train...
Train to think and evaluate quickly...
Train to constantly evaluate your surroundings...
Train your mind to a winner's set...
Train to know when to get your loved ones elsewhere AND train them
to follow your instruction without question or hesitation...
Train, Train, Train...
As a great guru once said, "There is NO second place winner"
Thank you MR. Jordan and may you find rest...
If you're gonna carry...you owe the rest of society to train...
Train to think and evaluate quickly...
Train to constantly evaluate your surroundings...
Train your mind to a winner's set...
Train to know when to get your loved ones elsewhere AND train them
to follow your instruction without question or hesitation...
Train, Train, Train...
As a great guru once said, "There is NO second place winner"
Thank you MR. Jordan and may you find rest...
Springfeildkid585
Member
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2011
- Messages
- 487
- Reaction score
- 141
In your area I'd recommend a move if possible, if not I'd say a semi-auto shotgun before the glock.
1 old 0311
Member
dwever
Member
Really? I tried to get you the e-mail to the guy pictured and his SWAT team:
Wish I Could Carry A Revolver On Duty photo - Doug Wever photos at pbase.com Apparently they haven't gotten the word to ditch their revolvers, and I thought you could let them know they were endangering themselves because he looks pretty vulnerable to me too.
Peace
Amen.
This copy of Bill's book was autographed to me at the 1976 Camp Perry Matches. I had the honor to talk with him several times at different events back in the '70s in South Texas area.
Memories I cherish.
Funny he doesn't have a bolt action rifle. They are easier to use, don't jam, you can use more powerful ammo in them, they're easy for beginners to master....
Besides, the guy is from Europe. He probably drives a 70cc econobox with the steering wheel on the wrong side.
dwever
Member
Yeah well, his agency didn't choose a bolt action rifle, and his agency didn't choose a semi-auto side arm either. I don't know, I guess they just chose their best option in both cases.
Last edited:
IMO in general a DA revolver is better for self defense. The automatic has some inherent advantages in combat but in general these are not significant in most self defense situations and are countered by a revolver's simplicity. I would qualify that with 2 exceptions:
1. For deep concealed carry you have a better ammo selection in an automatic. While you can get a .357 in a subcompact revolver that caliber is not any more effective than a .38 special in a very short barrell, and with tremendous recoil and flash to boot. A 9mm or .40 will generally be a better self defense round out of a very short barrell and are available in sub compact autos. Now that said my prefered subcompact is a 5-shot .38 special snubbie. When you move up to a compact to large size handgun though that advantage disappears and I don't think any pistol out there has a significant advantage over .357 or .44 special in terms of stopping power out of a 4 or more inch barrell.
2. the second case where an auto would be better is if you have some reason to expect an attack in force vice being a target of opportunity. For example if you are a drug dealer, carry around wads of cash or jewels or have pissed off a gang and you think you may be specifically targeted. This is no longer the typical self defense use but is essentially a combat situation and I would want a high capacity automatic over a revolver (and a rifle or shotgun over either).
1. For deep concealed carry you have a better ammo selection in an automatic. While you can get a .357 in a subcompact revolver that caliber is not any more effective than a .38 special in a very short barrell, and with tremendous recoil and flash to boot. A 9mm or .40 will generally be a better self defense round out of a very short barrell and are available in sub compact autos. Now that said my prefered subcompact is a 5-shot .38 special snubbie. When you move up to a compact to large size handgun though that advantage disappears and I don't think any pistol out there has a significant advantage over .357 or .44 special in terms of stopping power out of a 4 or more inch barrell.
2. the second case where an auto would be better is if you have some reason to expect an attack in force vice being a target of opportunity. For example if you are a drug dealer, carry around wads of cash or jewels or have pissed off a gang and you think you may be specifically targeted. This is no longer the typical self defense use but is essentially a combat situation and I would want a high capacity automatic over a revolver (and a rifle or shotgun over either).
Last edited:
CelticSire
US Veteran
If the bad guy is unarmed, not too big and alone, why do you have a gun? If a revolver is enough for one bad guy, is it good enough for two? What if they're two really small bad guys? Three? Where's the dividing line?
The P47 was notoriously sluggish in dogfights due to its heavy armament which is why pilots preferred the P51. However, the P47 was good for attacking stationary targets.
If the Glock is so great, why is it that departments across the country have supplemented the shotguns with patrol rifles, i.e. AR15s? We never had to have those when we carried revolvers. And any Officer who leaves his shotgun in the car when he knows the S#%# is going to hit the fan doesn't need to be there to begin with.
So if the only option a homeowner has is a revolver I guess he might just as well roll over and give up, because apparently the revolver is utterly useless for home defense.
Really? Gee, I've been carrying a weapon in uniform or plainclothes for thirty years now. Most of the time it's been a revolver. Thanks for pointing out that I've been walking around naked and stupid for most of that time. How did I ever survive?
If the above sounds a bit harsh, well, it just might be. The opinion that a person isn't truly armed unless he or she carries the latest and greatest fantastic plastic with all the bells and whistles is just ****. From personal experience I can tell you that surviving a gunfight has much less to do with the equipment used than the mindset and tactics of the person involved.
dwever
Member
I'm not sure the data supports that, but also you didn't give a specific measurement on "very short barrel." Even with +P the .357 comes out on top from a 2.5" snub, with standard .38 the difference is even more dramatic.
From a snub nose web site, the following velocities were published for a 2.5 inch snub nose. These are not muzzle velocities, but taken ten feet away.
Ammunition Average Velocity (ft/sec):
Federal .38 Special 129-grain Hydrashok +P: 846 ft/sec
Winchester .38 Special 158-grain LSWCHP +P: 858 ft/sec
Remington .357 Magnum 125-grain SJHP: 1243 ft/sec (1,450 ft/sec published by Remington and in an independent article, no doubt measured from a longer barrel).
Article conclusion: While neither [ammo] is at its best in the snub, the magnum is the more potent of the two.
Last edited:
I can't recall anyone ever pushing a revolver out of battery during a struggle at bad breath distance.
I've not seen a semi auto that could be fired - twice - from in an overcoat pocket either.
I do recall a Red Flag excercise at Nellis AFB in the 1980's. A bunch of "antiquated" Northrop F-5's armed with "simple" heat seeking missles merged with a couple of flights of technically superior F-15's armed with all their goodies. The F-5's ate the F-15's up. IIRC analysts scratched their heads wondering how inferior aircraft could get a shot at such high tech aircraft as the F-15.
Simple answer, it's the Indian not the arrow.
YMMV. Void where prohibited ect ect.....
I've not seen a semi auto that could be fired - twice - from in an overcoat pocket either.
I do recall a Red Flag excercise at Nellis AFB in the 1980's. A bunch of "antiquated" Northrop F-5's armed with "simple" heat seeking missles merged with a couple of flights of technically superior F-15's armed with all their goodies. The F-5's ate the F-15's up. IIRC analysts scratched their heads wondering how inferior aircraft could get a shot at such high tech aircraft as the F-15.
Simple answer, it's the Indian not the arrow.
YMMV. Void where prohibited ect ect.....dwever
Member
I can't recall anyone ever pushing a revolver out of battery during a struggle at bad breath distance.
I've not seen a semi auto that could be fired - twice - from in an overcoat pocket either.
I do recall a Red Flag excercise at Nellis AFB in the 1980's. A bunch of "antiquated" Northrop F-5's armed with "simple" heat seeking missles merged with a couple of flights of technically superior F-15's armed with all their goodies. The F-5's ate the F-15's up. IIRC analysts scratched their heads wondering how inferior aircraft could get a shot at such high tech aircraft as the F-15.
Simple answer, it's the Indian not the arrow.
Well said. STOP READING, I'M GOING WAY OFF TOPIC: 18DAI: I/we supported F-5 Aggressor Squadron's in that time frame CONUS- Nellis and in conjunction with EWCAS out of Hurlbert; and, overseas at San Miguel Naval Communication Station woking with GCI's out of Wallace Air Station electronically engaging F-5's and others out of Clarke AB and off ships as part of the USAF Electronic Security Command. I was at Kadena when F-15's were delivered.
Similar threads
- Locked
