Veteran's Stance: Revolvers over Semi-Auto's

[robpetry84]

So I'm sure there are other threads to this affect, so if this is stupid of me, feel free to talk smack, I've got thick skin.

I own a .357 Mag Smith, and a Ruger SR9 (along with other firearms, but these are the two I will focus on). During the winter months I always conceal carry my 686 4" barrel in a cross draw holster. I always chose it to conceal carry over my SR9, which stays in the glove box of the car with some extra mags.

In the Summer I Carry an LC9, but I digress.

What I pose to you gentlemen is, and what I catch a lot of flak about from my buddies, Why carry 7 rounds of .357 Mag, when you could carry 17+1 of 9mm? Now I have my reasons, I feel the .357 Mag is a much more destructive round in terms of energy dispersed on target than 9mm.

Now about my buddies that totally dissagree, they have their points as well. I am in the Army, so we have all deployed to Afghanistan or Iraq or both. Their stance is, if a large caliber revolver really is better in a close quarters/self defense engagement, why wouldn't Special Forces, Delta, Rangers, Seals, (fill in SOF component of your choice), use them on a more regular basis?

It is a good point. As the old adage goes: "The man who wins the gun fight is usually the one with one more round in his magazine".

My side is, I am most likely when stateside to encounter a much different type of engagement. I am not going to have the possibility of an extended engagement under attack by Taliban fighters, as one would in Afghanistan.

Here in the US, I am most likely going to be in a self defense situation where the Police will be showing up shortly thereafter, and the assailants don't want to stick around just to kill me.

Anyhow, thought I would open this up to any Veterans, or anyone, on here who think like me. (Thats why I posted it to the Revolvers section of the forums)

 

[JJEH]

Here in the US, I am most likely going to be in a self defense situation where the Police will be showing up shortly thereafter, and the assailants don't want to stick around just to kill me.

You make a very good point sir. In an urban environment LE and EMT are basically right around the corner.

However, if you are in the middle of nowhere (working, living or just passing through) the response time is way longer for rescue to arrive.

Therefore, no matter what somebody chooses to carry, I'd make sure I have plenty of ammo with me.

With that being said, usually we know where we are going. If you go just down the street to buy some cigarettes you might just take a small pistol/revolver with 5 or 6 round capacity. If you are in an scenario I described earlier you might want to take more firepower.

I'm growing a bit tired of those "suitable caliber/sidearm in a SD scenario?" questions. No offense, not your fault.

Who said that one size has to fit all? No one, right. Just have an open mind and adapt to the situation that you know about. Plan ahead and make smart decisions.

And if something unexpected happens, well, then it doesn't matter what we have with/on us. Then we have to make the best with what we've got...

 

[walkinghorse]

This is an age old discussion that actually has never had a clear cut definitive winner on either side. Military use versus civilian use, police use versus civilian use, military use versus police use, etc. Different uses, different needs, and there is overlap between.
Large caliber, possibly less number of rounds, smaller caliber more available rounds, concealed carry, open carry, high speed cartridge, slower speed cartridge. Enviroment where there are multiple adversaries, eniviroment where one may be assaulted by one or more, multiple good guys around, one by themselves, enviroment where pistols can be encouraged, enviroment where a firearm is seen, and then you get to meet authorities who may not be on the carrier's side, e.g. political. Carrying a firearm for defense against large animals up close (the ongoing best bear caliber ) versus defense against other human beings. No way to win this discussion, too many variables, too many opinions or facts!

 

[dcopper]

This sounds like the thought process of todays shooters. More rounds downrange the better. They sacrifice accuracy for lots of rounds. I with you. I am a one and done kinda guy. Keep on revolving!

 

[robpetry84]

Agreed, all good points, not trying to start any kind of argument, just seeing what you all thought, and if anyone could reinforce my side of this thing. My buddies talk endless smack about me and my "paperweight" I tote around during the winter months when I can conceal it with a jacket.

 

[DR505]

Where I often work there is no one "just around the corner" and backup can be an hour (or more) away. But that is LE work and different from civilian CC.

I suggest you carry the following:

1. A firearm you can actually have with you.
2. One you can get it into action quickly and accurately hit with your first shot.
3. You can make repeated fast and accurate follow-up shots.

Caliber is largely irrelevant with today's premium SD ammo...all 9mm and up work well and relatively similarly. However, a handgun is always a compromise. Semi-auto v. revolver is also irrelevant as long as it works and you are proficient in its use. Carry what you shoot best.

 

[friendlyfire]

Wasn't this a plot thread in the original Lethal Weapon Movie?

 

[tbgunner88]

I would say carry what you are comfortable and confident with, as far as round count goes, most popular single stack edc pistols only have a couple round advantage over a revolver.

 

[Electraclyde]

I carry a 5 shot model 642. That should tell you how I feel about it.

 

[wheelyfun66]

In Iraq, I carried an M4 and an M9.

In the US....I've carried semis, revolvers, fixed blades, and a Leatherman tool......

Situational Awareness and constant vigilance is my "thing".

(carrying a S&W 686 snub right now)

 

[snubbyfan]

I carry a 5 shot model 642. That should tell you how I feel about it.

I'm with you, my 442 goes with me everywhere I go.

 

[scooter123]

Have you ever tested any of your ammunition choices with a Chronograph? The reason I am asking is because people are so hung up on the Energy produced by a specific caliber that they tend to overlook the effect of Barrel Length. Ammunition makers are quite aware of this and many HYPE the powder of their ammunition by using longer than normal barrel lengths. This Hyping is MOST predominate with the 357 Magnum.

So, how bad is this hyping? I have a 6 inch Dan Wesson 15-2 and Federal's American Eagle 158 grain SJSP 357 Magnum will average 1200 fps. The placard on the box claims a velocity of 1250 fps. Finally, the Dan Wesson revolvers have a tensioned barrel that permits the Barrel/Cylinder gap to be tuned, in my case that gap is set to 0.004 inch. I'm guessing but Federal is probably using a 6 1/2 inch barrel with a lot of wear on it or a 7 to 7 1/2 inch barrel with less wear to determine their ballistics.

Now, in the case of the 357 Magnum there is a second factor in play. As a reloader I've become very familiar with the booming muzzle report of a "slow" powder. Those Federal loads sound identical to my 158 grain 357 Magnum Rifle loads that feature Hodgdon H110 smokeless powder when fired fomr the Dan Wesson. Whether or not Federal is using H110 is obvious to me they are loading this round with a powder with a burn rate similar to H110.

So, whats the big deal about that. The big deal is that "slow" powders are effected by shorter barrel lengths a LOT more than faster powders. Take that Federal load and out of a 4 inch barrel I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a velocity in the 1050 to 1100 fps. range. Put that same load in a 16 inch Carbine and you'll probably see a velocity in the 1600-1700 fps range.

My point here is that many times the "books are cooked" with some revolver calibers and your results will vary by a LOT. With the semi auto ammunitions the ammunition makers have sort of adopted a Gentleman's Agreement and the 9mm and 40 caliber are typically tested with a 4 inch barrel. With the 45 ACP it's a flip of a coin between a 4 or 5 inch barrel. In addition, due to the smaller case capacity semi auto calibers are typically loaded that would be considered "fast" by someone used to loading for a revolver Magnum. My point in all this is that you probably aren't carrying with as much devastating energy as you thought.

 

[pnbrown]

Being a old f--- i do not chase others wives , or hangout in bars my need for a carry gun is usually wally world parking lot , or similar place a 5 shot j frame or 8 shot shield make the grade . Each job requires a proper tool , you decide my friend . good thread

 

[Kernel Crittenden]

... feel free to talk smack, I've got thick skin.

Based on your number of post, you're new here. We don't "talk smack" on this forum, and we like it that way. You sound like a very nice and respectful guy, so I'm not impugning you I just wanted to touch on that.

Regarding your .357. Carry what you like. Seriously. You're a grown man capable of making adult decisions. (And I think a correct decision). Who cares what your buddies, or anyone, thinks?

In 99.9% of SD scenarios if you unleash 17+1 rounds of 9mm your gonna have some long discussions with the District Attorney... and not the friendly kind. Your choice of a .357 is good, as it has a very high one-shot-stop percentage.

 

[Arik]

Not a veteran (thanks for your service) but I choose a mag fed over a revolver. If I carried a small single stack I suppose the difference in ammo capacity is moot but I carry a 15+1. The reason behind this is that a semi auto fit my hands better. Maybe it cause what I'm used to but still. And because while I live 2 min from the police station. ..it's just a station, it's not where the cops are. But anyway, assuming they are within 5 min I still feel that a revolver limits my ammo capacity. After all how often do you hear that there was 15 rounds fired within a min and a half!

 

[Buford57]

Thank you for your service.

You are quite correct to distinguish between appropriate equipment for combat vs. law enforcement vs. self defense. We can never be fully prepared for every situation, but need to assess the most likely equipment needs and act accordingly.

Someone will always throw in the old "but what if you are attacked by 8 assailants when carrying only a 7-shot revolver?" line as the final word in favor of hi-caps autos. Funny, that argument is never used to discourage use of an 8-shot 1911, nor are the stakes upped to 20 assailants to make a Glock 17 inadequate. There may be scenarios where a citizen minding his/her own business will have to deal with 8 assailants solo. If you find yourself in one of those, I suspect that whatever handgun you are carrying, you will wish you had your M4, body armor and backup. I also suspect you have sense enough to realize that it is not feasible to equip yourself that way every time you make a run to the grocery store, because the likelihood of one of those situations presenting itself is infinitesimal.

During my law enforcement career my assignment, the shift I was working and even the season of the year affected my equipment decisions, to the extent they were mine to make. The totality of my circumstances (mine, not anyone else's) still dictates my equipment choices.

It is interesting, but not entirely reasonable, to apply statistics from shooting incidents involving multiple police officers to personal defense situations for an individual citizen, who often has an option not available to LEOs - avoidance or flight. Running doesn't sound macho, but it may be the best option for avoiding not only death or injury, but also unpleasant interaction with a grand jury.

I'm not as fast, limber or strong as I was when I was on the job, and admit I fire far fewer practice rounds each month, but even then I would not have figured my odds of surviving an encounter with 8 armed opponents were very good, no matter what Mel Gibson or Bruce Willis can do on screen. If you are confident with what may be the best .357 Mag on the market today (especially with a quality 9mm in reserve) then you are better off than the fellow with the 17-shot primary weapon who is constantly worrying about whether he brought enough magazines or whether he should have bought the ammo with the extra 50 fps of velocity. But you knew that.

 

[theoneff]

Not a veteran either and thanks to all who have served. I carry a revolver for a totally different reason. Used to carry a Kimber 1911 which I loved. Thing is when I went to the range I had a much better time shooting my revolvers. I hated chasing my brass and had more fun with the wheel gun, so found I "practiced" more with my revolvers so I made the switch. If I cant go somewhere feeling comfortable with that i dont want a "sidearm", I want a rifle. Theo

 

[kthom]

As the old adage goes: "The man who wins the gun fight is usually the one with one more round in his magazine".

Sir, I would respectfully disagree with this statement. The man who wins is the man who can deliver his rounds of whatever caliber to the location most likely to cause the most and quickest disruption in the activities and effort of the other party(ies) in the gunfight. Cause and effect of bullet strikes, as I'm sure you know, can be quite different depending on the state of mind or level of drugs or adrenalin present in the one who is struck. There are no guarantees!!

Edit: The guns I most often carry are revolvers that hold five or six rounds. I have a large capacity S&W 9MM or .45ACP close at hand in my home to repel boarders, but the one I always have with me holds five or six rounds. I am entirely comfortable with that.

I firmly and strongly agree with the statement made above by DR505. What he states is not conjecture but fact born out by actual experience over many years. As for the firearm of choice, it needs to be something that one is comfortable with and that one can use most effectively (both functionally and accurately). But the single most important factor in the gunfight is the person holding the gun. It is most assuredly not the size of the dog in the fight (within reason), but it is the amount of fight in the dog. And many times the smallest dog will put the largest dog to flight!!

We like to discuss calibers and platforms endlessly, and that's OK. What you should use is what works the very best for you under the circumstances. All equipment and ammo involves some compromise. Nothing works BEST for every situation and circumstance. Unless your firearm is not within arms reach at all times and if you cannot (or will not or are hesitant to) use it to maximum effectiveness, it's not worth much to you. What works for you might very well not be what works for any one else, but if you can and will use what you have effectively, then you are likely to win the gunfight, especially if you don't give up before it is done!!

Thanks for your service. Just remember that all of us learn as we go along. I've been carrying since the 60's, and I have certainly changed my mind many times about this very issue during that time. Mostly I have learned that I need to pay attention as I go along because there is always something to learn, and that starts with what I learn about myself. But when something works for me, I am not quick to change it based on someone elses comments or opinion. I listen, pay attention, but the handguns I am most competent with (and I think most effective with) are those that I've carried and used and practiced with the most. The ones I carry most often are those that are old friends.

Perhaps a more appropriate idiom is the one about being very careful around the man who only has one gun! He is likely able to use it very well, and it is the use of it that is most important in a serious social encounter.

 

[zelda]

l am a veteran and have been to lraq, M16 there. My Model 15 snubbie with 6 of Dad's Ammo is plenty for here.

 

[Pvt.Joker]

Just my humble opinion, but I look at it as taking the appropriate level of response to the anticipated situation.

A quick trip to the friendly neighborhood small-town grocery? 65-3 on a belt holster with a shirt tail tucked over it should be plenty.

Errand into a bad part of town with local hoods expected to be hanging around, looking for "easy prey"? FNX-45 in a belt holster and spare mags.

REALLY bad part of town? That, and the S&W 500 Mag in a shoulder holster.

Going in to rescue elderly relatives in the middle of some Ferguson-type anarchy/mass civil unrest? Both the above, AND the Zastava M85NP AK pistol with arm brace and 100-round drum of 5.56 (along with some back-up 30-round AR mags), for when running into a large, dangerous car-tipping-sized violent crowds is likely. One person against a 100 or more suddenly makes that "handgun" seem like a sensible precaution, and depending on the circumstances, is not impossible these days. Even if YOU aren't out looking for trouble, trouble may erupt around you over something YOU have no control over or blame for.

As a civilian, of course the BEST situation would be to avoid such places like the plague, but who is going to leave mom and pop there on their own in that kind of danger?

Anyway, that's MY take on it. It's better to have "enough" gun with you IF you need it, than to have an arsenal back home in the safe. Of course, it also depends on your state's carry laws as well. Best to stay legal, should you have to face that grand jury previously mentioned.