Irresponsible to carry a revolver to protect others?

[bushmaster1313]

No concealed carry in my jurisdiction so this is only hypothetical

However, if you were charged with, or took it upon yourself, to carry for the protection of your place of worship, would it be responsible to carry your favorite revolver, or would it be better to carry a comparable size autoloader with a spare magazine.

Your thoughts please

 

[Andy Lowry]

Since shooting incidents usually seem to involve a single perpetrator, rather than a pack of them, I think I'd be okay with a revolver. Even a 5-shot one.

 

[Shark Bait]

You carry whatever you can shoot accurately. Stopping the threat is the goal.

 

[Kurusu]

No concealed carry in my jurisdiction so this is only hypothetical

However, if you were charged with, or took it upon yourself, to carry for the protection of your place of worship, would it be responsible to carry your favorite revolver, or would it be better to carry a comparable size autoloader with a spare magazine.

Your thoughts please

Not entirely related, but...

Some 10 years ago, in a day I was training, I walked from the 25/50 meters range to the half a mile distant IPSC practicing range. Since there were reports of feral pack dog attacks in the area, I took with me my .44 40 gunbelt and SAA. When I arrived there, there 2 folks with Glocks shooting at metal plates(4 inch) at about 15 yards, with them was the Commando lieutenant(at the time, I think he is a Major now) I was looking for. I saw them(in disbelief) empty 18 round mags to hit 6 plates. After they were done I asked if I could have a go at it. With some smugg faces they said it was OK and went to set the plates for me.

I loaded the 6th chamber (empty at the time) and holsterd, asked them for the beep, and after that draw(one handed) and shot all the six plates down (with some authority I might add) after that kicked the empties out reloaded another 5 and reholstered. The LT almost choked laughing.

So I guess a revolver is fine.

Edit. After that I did the same thing with one of their Glocks, only put six rounds on the magazine.

 

[stansdds]

You carry whatever you can shoot accurately. Stopping the threat is the goal.

Bingo! That is the correct answer.

 

[nachogrande]

SINCE YOU ASKED.

Not sure if you are asking a what gun is best question, or a legal/moral one. I find your choice of the words, "took it upon yourself" & "to protect others" interesting. NOT JUDGING, but taking it upon yourself, in an area that does not allow CC, sounds risky if not illegal, & protecting others would be the job of LEOS. SELF defense is just that. If you want to be part of a church security detail, I'd recommend getting a permit, or some type of permission. For the gun, for your defense, whatever you are better with. For protecting the flock against a mass shooting, a higher capacity weapon.

 

[RGVshooter]

No concealed carry in my jurisdiction so this is only hypothetical

However, if you were charged with, or took it upon yourself, to carry for the protection of your place of worship, would it be responsible to carry your favorite revolver, or would it be better to carry a comparable size autoloader with a spare magazine.

Your thoughts please

I would strongly advise you to first become very intimately familiar with your state/local firearm laws. A responsible law abiding gun owner should already know the answer to this question.

 

[Watchdog]

No concealed carry in my jurisdiction so this is only hypothetical

However, if you were charged with, or took it upon yourself, to carry for the protection of your place of worship, would it be responsible to carry your favorite revolver, or would it be better to carry a comparable size autoloader with a spare magazine.

This is nothing but the same old question as to which is better, a revolver or semi-auto.

And the question will never be answered to everyone's satisfaction.

 

[Lostaro]

It's irresponsible to carry a gun you aren't completely confident with...we can "what-if" all day long and still not get the right answer.
Revolvers have been used "responsibly in the defense of others" for a rather long time!

 

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

Irresponsible to carry a revolver to protect others?

Read Kurusu's post (#4). Is it irresponsible to carry a Glock to protect others?

 

[rwsmith]

It's not target practice...

If I had a serious security job (even as a member of a congregation) I would get the best thing for picking out a target across a crowded room. I think a red dot sight or maybe a laser would be essential unless you are Dick Deadeye, unless there is something more capable that I don't know about.

I could hide all kinds of things under my choir robe, and I had a good vantage point, too.

Actually something in disguised scabbard would be best for me, not something I'd carry on my person. I saw a 9mm carbine I can't remember the name of right now, but it would work handily.

PS I looked it up and it is Steyr AUG. Something even smaller that I could use well would be my Kel Tec 9 or similar. It's not a 'real' SD quality gun, but with a red dot it would be fast, steady and straight.

 

[Old cop]

I was a working cop for 30 years and survived three deadly force confrontations w/my issued .38 revolver so I know they will do the job. I'm still more comfortable w/that platform so my answer to your Q is what weapon system do you handle & shoot the best? If you chose an auto loader b/c it holds more rounds but you're not comfortable w/it you might hurt yourself or an innocent bystander. Real life deadly confrontations seldom play out like they do on TV or in the movies.

 

[AzShooter]

I still carry a 4 inch S&W Model 10 and have no problem with it. I've carried lots of autos in my days but I know the Model 10 will hit whatever I aim at and will not jam at an inopportune time. I also keep two speed loaders with me just in case.

 

[Mister X]

I carry a snub revolver more than anything else and believe it to be adequate and a great personal defense weapon, but my primary goal is avoidance and disengagement.

If I was responsible for protecting others, I would definitely opt for a high capacity autoloader.

It is with good reason that law enforcement switched to high capacity semi-automatics. In the context of an attack on a church, I would have the mentality that I would likely have to be ready to defend against a homicidal/suicidal individual likely armed with an assault rifle or at least a high capacity handgun and possibly wearing body armor. I just can't see wanting a revolver in that scenario. That's just my perspective, YMMV.

 

[31FordA]

I carry a revolver (or two) everyday for work. My colleagues have no objections to my revolvers because they know that I am very, very good with a revolver. They carry pistols, and I'm good with that for the same reason, I know they shoot them well. The type of gun is much less important than your skill with the gun you choose.

 

[riverrat38]

"and possibly wearing body armor. I just can't see wanting a revolver in that scenario."

Maybe a revolver would be best; a S&W 500 MGN. If it won't penetrate, it likely will spoil their aim!

Best,
Rick

 

[LoboGunLeather]

In any armed confrontation the only shot that truly counts is the last one fired, which ends the fight. I would rather do that with a good revolver than miss 18 or 20 times with the most modern "plastic fantastic" pistol made.

Spent two tours in Vietnam, most of the time carrying a US M1911A-1 pistol with 3 seven-round magazines. Spent most of my 24 years as a cop carrying a 6-shot revolver with another 12 rounds on my belt. Somehow I am still here, but a couple of other guys aren't anymore.

YMMV

 

[Ransom]

Personally, I think it would be better to carry an semi-automatic with more capacity. The M&P Shield will carry 8-9 rounds and the M&P 2.0 Compact will carry 16 rounds. And then I'd get good and comfortable with it, learning to shoot it as accurately as I can. I don't know of any reason it couldn't be as accurate as a revolver. If you're set in your ways, stick with the revolver--it'll do fine.

 

[AzShooter]

Personally, I think it would be better to carry an semi-automatic with more capacity. The M&P Shield will carry 8-9 rounds and the M&P 2.0 Compact will carry 16 rounds. And then I'd get good and comfortable with it, learning to shoot it as accurately as I can. I don't know of any reason it couldn't be as accurate as a revolver. If you're set in your ways, stick with the revolver--it'll do fine.

If you need that many rounds you should have a radio so you can call for backup. Make your shots count instead of counting your shots.

 

[JayFramer]

I carry a snub revolver more than anything else and believe it to be adequate and a great personal defense weapon, but my primary goal is avoidance and disengagement.

If I was responsible for protecting others, I would definitely opt for a high capacity autoloader.

It is with good reason that law enforcement switched to high capacity semi-automatics. In the context of an attack on a church, I would have the mentality that I would likely have to be ready to defend against a homicidal/suicidal individual likely armed with an assault rifle or at least a high capacity handgun and possibly wearing body armor. I just can't see wanting a revolver in that scenario. That's just my perspective, YMMV.

It's not the arrow, it's the indian.

First rule of a gunfight: have a gun.

A .38 in hand is better than the Glock or other large auto left at home. Statistically speaking, 5-6 are plenty for defensive encounters. Revolvers work for many members here. They are proficient and accurate with them, THAT is what will end the fight quickly, not the bucket of bullets under you latest plastic fantastic wonder pistol.