Of course you have something there. Doubt I own much less could carry a $900 anything. Well, maybe the 3" 657 is worth that now. However I have 2 revolvers that are serious contenders to replace the 9mm. One is a M357PC and the other a M65-5 3". I have not shot either near enough to trust it with my life, but that may change here. Until that time, the 9mm gets the nod.
Why did you choose a revolver over a semi auto for carry?
- Thread starter Marshal Tom
- Start date
Of course you have something there. Doubt I own much less could carry a $900 anything. Well, maybe the 3" 657 is worth that now. However I have 2 revolvers that are serious contenders to replace the 9mm. One is a M357PC and the other a M65-5 3". I have not shot either near enough to trust it with my life, but that may change here. Until that time, the 9mm gets the nod.
Capt Steve
US Veteran
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2008
- Messages
- 1,678
- Reaction score
- 3,014
My two carry pieces are the 649, shrouded hammer in 357 and the MP9 compact. Either one carries well in a leather fanny pack worn across my stomach. When not being carried the 649 lives bedside as my bride can handle it easily - she isn't as comfortable with the MP9. Both are easy to carry and provide plenty of pop but I do like the extra firepower the MP brings plus the extra magazine. If the poo hits the fan 20 is better than five but on the other hand if 5 from a 357 doesn't get the job done you should have practiced more. (o; Like the man said "Opinions vary".
When choosing a sidearm all you need to do is make a list of all the things that matter the most to you, caliber, ergonomics, capacity, etc, etc. Then you must also figure in any limiting factors such as availability, legal restrictions, etc. When I chose a duty weapon I always picked a revolver because my number one priority was speed of the draw and with a thumbsnap holster the revolver beat the autos with no problem. And since S&W revolvers are my favorite handguns anyway, it was an easy choice.
However for concealed carry it is a different situation. I hardly ever carry concealed, in fact the only time I do is when we go to pick up the wifes only grand-daughter. (Don't get me wrong she is Poppys' little 'Fartbucket' too.) However the city has a residency requirement for city employees and when her mother took the job of village idiot she had to move to the 'hood. Anyway, since that is the only time I carry now I chose an open top paddle holster so thumbstraps aren't in the equation anymore. I wanted something with reasonable power and a high capacity magazine since I don't carry any extra ammo. I own 43 semi autos of which 37 would have been acceptable so then I was only restricted by one limiting factor, what was immediately avaible for a lefty? I ended up with a Fobus paddle holster for my Glock 20. But I usually stick a Taurus 445 in my pocket instead because I hate paddle holsters.
For around the house I keep a 20 gauge shotgun and an SKS out of the safes.
However for concealed carry it is a different situation. I hardly ever carry concealed, in fact the only time I do is when we go to pick up the wifes only grand-daughter. (Don't get me wrong she is Poppys' little 'Fartbucket' too.) However the city has a residency requirement for city employees and when her mother took the job of village idiot she had to move to the 'hood. Anyway, since that is the only time I carry now I chose an open top paddle holster so thumbstraps aren't in the equation anymore. I wanted something with reasonable power and a high capacity magazine since I don't carry any extra ammo. I own 43 semi autos of which 37 would have been acceptable so then I was only restricted by one limiting factor, what was immediately avaible for a lefty? I ended up with a Fobus paddle holster for my Glock 20. But I usually stick a Taurus 445 in my pocket instead because I hate paddle holsters.
For around the house I keep a 20 gauge shotgun and an SKS out of the safes.
pps
Member
One other thing I failed to bring up, forgive me if I'm repeating someone else's words since I didn't read all the posts, is that a complete beginner can pick up a revolver in an emergency and have a cursory idea of how to use the gun. Point at BG, click, repeat as needed until compliance is elicited.
Yes you will run out of bullets before a semi-auto would, but that would be a moot point for someone not used to a semi.
Well....let's see....I started off in the 70's carrying a Browning High Power, and had that one for about 10 years. Moved from Washington to Arizona, and got into revolvers. Carried a snub for a few years.....got a Glock 19, which I still carry sometimes...and decided to keep the 9mm in the nightstand for home defense and back to carrying snub for CCW...just easier to hide...and no reliability issues.
Still don't have a concealead carry permit....on the "To do" list...
I've fooled around with pistols, holsters for years. I love autos. Fun to shoot, damn accurate. I have a fair collection of assorted Sigs, 1911's, some with extensive mods, trigger jobs,etc. Even with some full boat customs, the gun I shoot the best is a bone stock West German Sig 225. It fits my hand perfectly. Point and shoot.
If I were to carry a pistol in public, I'd opt for the 340PD, with Crimson Trace grips. It's a pain in the ass to shoot, but it's small enough, light enough, that there's no reason to leave it behind.
Phisiologically, I'm kind of limited. Male, with long legs, short torso. Tried 4 different very expensive holsters with a Sig 239/40. Kramer gunbelt, the works. Nothing fit right. I always ended up with a pistol butt in the ribs, front, back, or side. Not a fan of cross draws, behind the back holsters for a few reasons. Ended up selling the gun, and most of the rigging, as I couldn't see it ever being a usefull CC rig, which is what that gun was meant for. Hated to see the 239 go, as it had a sweet trigger.
A girlfriend made the mistake of going with me to Gander Mountain about 3 years ago. I ended up drooling over a 340PD. She bought it for me as a Christmas present.
I had 2 problems, one my fault, one a S&W production fault.
My fault was trying smoking hot .357 Doubletaps meant for 4" or greater barrells in the 340PD.
Blew the case up. Had to be pounded out with a rod. No big deal. Cylender fine, don't use that ammo.
Second problem was a broken trigger return spring. At the time it broke, I had less than 300 rounds down the barrel, maybe 3,000 dry fires. Replaced under warenty, no problems. Just now hitting around 3,000 rounds, 10 times as many dry fires. No problems.
I'm a little old school, in that I believe a gun has to put 1,000 rounds down range before being considered reliable. The 340PD has passed the test.
My carry considerations are gone. It goes in the breast pocket of a casual jacket, would fit in any but the tightest jeans. I've got a Mika's pocket holster on order, might have to go for the cc license sometime this summer.
I hate the trigger, though that's gotten better with time. I hate the recoil. Love the size and weight. Why revolvers? No spring compression issues, DA simplicity, reliability. If you can carry it everywhere, you might have it when needed. Sorry for the ramble.
Mark
I've fooled around with pistols, holsters for years. I love autos. Fun to shoot, damn accurate. I have a fair collection of assorted Sigs, 1911's, some with extensive mods, trigger jobs,etc. Even with some full boat customs, the gun I shoot the best is a bone stock West German Sig 225. It fits my hand perfectly. Point and shoot.
If I were to carry a pistol in public, I'd opt for the 340PD, with Crimson Trace grips. It's a pain in the ass to shoot, but it's small enough, light enough, that there's no reason to leave it behind.
Phisiologically, I'm kind of limited. Male, with long legs, short torso. Tried 4 different very expensive holsters with a Sig 239/40. Kramer gunbelt, the works. Nothing fit right. I always ended up with a pistol butt in the ribs, front, back, or side. Not a fan of cross draws, behind the back holsters for a few reasons. Ended up selling the gun, and most of the rigging, as I couldn't see it ever being a usefull CC rig, which is what that gun was meant for. Hated to see the 239 go, as it had a sweet trigger.
A girlfriend made the mistake of going with me to Gander Mountain about 3 years ago. I ended up drooling over a 340PD. She bought it for me as a Christmas present.
I had 2 problems, one my fault, one a S&W production fault.
My fault was trying smoking hot .357 Doubletaps meant for 4" or greater barrells in the 340PD.
Blew the case up. Had to be pounded out with a rod. No big deal. Cylender fine, don't use that ammo.
Second problem was a broken trigger return spring. At the time it broke, I had less than 300 rounds down the barrel, maybe 3,000 dry fires. Replaced under warenty, no problems. Just now hitting around 3,000 rounds, 10 times as many dry fires. No problems.
I'm a little old school, in that I believe a gun has to put 1,000 rounds down range before being considered reliable. The 340PD has passed the test.
My carry considerations are gone. It goes in the breast pocket of a casual jacket, would fit in any but the tightest jeans. I've got a Mika's pocket holster on order, might have to go for the cc license sometime this summer.
I hate the trigger, though that's gotten better with time. I hate the recoil. Love the size and weight. Why revolvers? No spring compression issues, DA simplicity, reliability. If you can carry it everywhere, you might have it when needed. Sorry for the ramble.
Mark
Mine is a sp-101 with laser grips. If it's a dark street and if I can walk away after a shoot out, I will....so I don't want to leave any empties behind that can be traced to me. Unlike Bernard Getz, I'm not turning myself in....they gotta find me.
If there are several witnesses that can place me at the scene, I'll stay put....but if there are several witnesses, there probably wont be a mugging anyway. Either way, I'll keep my empties off the street with a small wheel gun.
If there are several witnesses that can place me at the scene, I'll stay put....but if there are several witnesses, there probably wont be a mugging anyway. Either way, I'll keep my empties off the street with a small wheel gun.
Win,
Justify any shooting your willing to participate in, and walk away from, and still call yourself an honorable, ethical citizen?
I'm not particularily christian, but I do believe in cursing the darkness.
I do have a problem with folks seeking to commit a crime.
Your proposition implies the lowest logic: "If I don't get caught, it's OK"
Excuse the implied language, but F@%K that.
You emberrass responsible gun ownership, and responsible citizen gun ownership.
Reality check #1 How many muggings happened in West Virginia last year?
Reality check #2 By your logic, you are a criminal waiting for an opportunity. The idea that you percieve a threat, respond violently, and walk away without judicial review, and go back to baking cookies, or whatever you do is ridiculous.
Your post implies the not unique concept of "It's only illegal if I get caught"
Check your local correctional institution. Theres a few folks that might agree with you.
This is meant to be a challenge to your thinking, rather than a personal attack.
My personal ethics are significantly different.
By the way, evidence recovery teams don't need a shell casing. It just helps.
One more rant off,
Mark
Justify any shooting your willing to participate in, and walk away from, and still call yourself an honorable, ethical citizen?
I'm not particularily christian, but I do believe in cursing the darkness.
I do have a problem with folks seeking to commit a crime.
Your proposition implies the lowest logic: "If I don't get caught, it's OK"
Excuse the implied language, but F@%K that.
You emberrass responsible gun ownership, and responsible citizen gun ownership.
Reality check #1 How many muggings happened in West Virginia last year?
Reality check #2 By your logic, you are a criminal waiting for an opportunity. The idea that you percieve a threat, respond violently, and walk away without judicial review, and go back to baking cookies, or whatever you do is ridiculous.
Your post implies the not unique concept of "It's only illegal if I get caught"
Check your local correctional institution. Theres a few folks that might agree with you.
This is meant to be a challenge to your thinking, rather than a personal attack.
My personal ethics are significantly different.
By the way, evidence recovery teams don't need a shell casing. It just helps.
One more rant off,
Mark
Wyatt Earp
Member
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2007
- Messages
- 996
- Reaction score
- 16
Don't forget the cameras as you walk away. Better have a good explanation.
cREbralFIX
Member
Many people equate law with ethics. In many cases, I would agree with this. However, when a law is in conflict with government directives in the state and Federal Constitutions, is it a valid law?
It is clear to me that, nowadays, the law has nothing to do with ethics and everything to do with power and control of the population.
I do not consider a man who carries without a permit to be a criminal. That person is expressing their right to keep and bear arms. They may, however, be violating the law. Such a person needs to be willing to pay the price because the state will have no mercy.
It is clear to me that, nowadays, the law has nothing to do with ethics and everything to do with power and control of the population.
I do not consider a man who carries without a permit to be a criminal. That person is expressing their right to keep and bear arms. They may, however, be violating the law. Such a person needs to be willing to pay the price because the state will have no mercy.
rjmorel
Member
I take my 14 year old son to the range with his Walther P22 semi-auto and give him a box of 525 22lr. I have my S&W 317 rev . Guess who has lots and lots of shells to pick up after we're done. My back thanks you very much S&W.
cREbralFIX
Member
As for "why" -- I don't carry a revolver. That will change in a bit as an experiment.
1) "Why I carry a revolver": it's a lesson in concealed carry issues. They are very different and I am in the business of providing revolver gear to people. Over the course of the experiment, I'll figure out what really needs to be addressed.
2) "Why I don't carry a revolver."
A) Self-defense vs. self-offense
Several posters have mentioned "offensive" versus "defensive" situations. I think this is playing with words in a public forum for any future courtroom testimony.
It's a fight for life...nothing more, nothing less. Sometimes, we'll be behind the curve and have to react. Other times, we'll see it coming and have the gun out (you're stupid if you have the opportunity but don't draw). Calling such a situation "offensive" or "defensive" is very misleading because it only describes the situation in terms of aggressor or victim. We engage in "defensive" tactics when reacting to an attack and engage in "offensive" tactics when we strike. Note the difference. Yes, we'll use different words in court, but this is the essence of the idea.
There are times where I know the enemy (criminals, terrorists, whatever) are setting up for an attack. In such a situation, I'm going to strike first because self-preservation requires it. The aftermath will require me to articulate why I chose that action and I have the vocabulary to do so. But, people engaging in this activity MUST know how to manage the legal system.
B) Reliability
Reliability how? Is a revolver always more reliable? Or is a semi-auto more reliable? As far as I can tell, it depends upon the situation.
Revolvers can have more trouble when they get dirty. We're all familiar with what dirt can do. Certainly, the weak point in the system is the ammunition if a revolver sits in a desk for two decades. Many semi-autos will do just fine in a drawer for a couple of years before showing problems. But, seriously, do people serious about fighting neglect their tools that way?
For me, the only answer to this question is to test frequently and maintain my weapons. Some of that testing involves attending shooting classes with high round counts. This yields confidence, though it does cause wear and tear. Then again, I always have duplicate models.
C) Capacity
Capacity is important. It is more important than terminal ballistics. The reasons include: 1) criminals are attacking in packs, and 2) the terminal ballistics of bullets fired from handguns are not good. Handgun shots cannot be relied upon to stop an attack quickly (or even slowly). Therefore, multiple shots will LIKELY be required.
When I think of this, I think in terms of bursts. A generally define a burst at 2-6 rounds, depending upon the situation. Therefore, a handgun with 15+1 capacity carries between 3 and 7 bursts. If my first burst to the body doesn't stop the attack, then another burst will be fired at the head.
Considering that most revolvers hold five or six shots, that's only one or two bursts. That's one attacking goblin. Even a S&W 627 with eight shot capacity is equal to that of a single stack 1911 or SIG P220 (two to three burst guns).
Some will cry out "Spray-n-pray! Spray-n-pray!" That's one way to look at it; it's also misleading. I would agree that a shooter using burst fire from a handgun at 50 feet would be engaging in "spray-n-pray". But, at five feet or even 15? Given the dynamics of real gun and knife fights, this is not unreasonable and the odds of success are high.
Accept that you will miss. This is reality, not some fantasy where you get to be picky about your shots. If only a knee is available, take it! Perhaps you're getting your weak arm sliced up by a knife as you attempt to disengage...it won't be easy (so say my instructors and guys who have been there).
So, if you account for misses, burst fire, multiple assailants, and non-range conditions, higher capacity is a BIG DEAL.
It really comes down to playing the odds. Will they attack if you put a gun in play? If they proceed (or don't notice), will it be sufficient? Will you have sufficient time to engage such that their multiple attacks against your one won't matter?
1) "Why I carry a revolver": it's a lesson in concealed carry issues. They are very different and I am in the business of providing revolver gear to people. Over the course of the experiment, I'll figure out what really needs to be addressed.
2) "Why I don't carry a revolver."
A) Self-defense vs. self-offense
Several posters have mentioned "offensive" versus "defensive" situations. I think this is playing with words in a public forum for any future courtroom testimony.
It's a fight for life...nothing more, nothing less. Sometimes, we'll be behind the curve and have to react. Other times, we'll see it coming and have the gun out (you're stupid if you have the opportunity but don't draw). Calling such a situation "offensive" or "defensive" is very misleading because it only describes the situation in terms of aggressor or victim. We engage in "defensive" tactics when reacting to an attack and engage in "offensive" tactics when we strike. Note the difference. Yes, we'll use different words in court, but this is the essence of the idea.
There are times where I know the enemy (criminals, terrorists, whatever) are setting up for an attack. In such a situation, I'm going to strike first because self-preservation requires it. The aftermath will require me to articulate why I chose that action and I have the vocabulary to do so. But, people engaging in this activity MUST know how to manage the legal system.
B) Reliability
Reliability how? Is a revolver always more reliable? Or is a semi-auto more reliable? As far as I can tell, it depends upon the situation.
Revolvers can have more trouble when they get dirty. We're all familiar with what dirt can do. Certainly, the weak point in the system is the ammunition if a revolver sits in a desk for two decades. Many semi-autos will do just fine in a drawer for a couple of years before showing problems. But, seriously, do people serious about fighting neglect their tools that way?
For me, the only answer to this question is to test frequently and maintain my weapons. Some of that testing involves attending shooting classes with high round counts. This yields confidence, though it does cause wear and tear. Then again, I always have duplicate models.
C) Capacity
Capacity is important. It is more important than terminal ballistics. The reasons include: 1) criminals are attacking in packs, and 2) the terminal ballistics of bullets fired from handguns are not good. Handgun shots cannot be relied upon to stop an attack quickly (or even slowly). Therefore, multiple shots will LIKELY be required.
When I think of this, I think in terms of bursts. A generally define a burst at 2-6 rounds, depending upon the situation. Therefore, a handgun with 15+1 capacity carries between 3 and 7 bursts. If my first burst to the body doesn't stop the attack, then another burst will be fired at the head.
Considering that most revolvers hold five or six shots, that's only one or two bursts. That's one attacking goblin. Even a S&W 627 with eight shot capacity is equal to that of a single stack 1911 or SIG P220 (two to three burst guns).
Some will cry out "Spray-n-pray! Spray-n-pray!" That's one way to look at it; it's also misleading. I would agree that a shooter using burst fire from a handgun at 50 feet would be engaging in "spray-n-pray". But, at five feet or even 15? Given the dynamics of real gun and knife fights, this is not unreasonable and the odds of success are high.
Accept that you will miss. This is reality, not some fantasy where you get to be picky about your shots. If only a knee is available, take it! Perhaps you're getting your weak arm sliced up by a knife as you attempt to disengage...it won't be easy (so say my instructors and guys who have been there).
So, if you account for misses, burst fire, multiple assailants, and non-range conditions, higher capacity is a BIG DEAL.
It really comes down to playing the odds. Will they attack if you put a gun in play? If they proceed (or don't notice), will it be sufficient? Will you have sufficient time to engage such that their multiple attacks against your one won't matter?
Mr Benchrat,
Thanks for your opinion on how, if I am being mugged, robbed or car jacked and I shoot in defense of my life, or the lives of my family members, I am then 'honor bound' to submit my actions to judicial review. Your observations of our courts must be different than mine. First, if you are TOTALLY justified in a shooting and found not guilty, you are only out many thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of dollars, in legal fees to get your acquital. (There goes your house and your 401k money).
But even if found not guilty, then comes the personal injury lawsuits. Mr. mugger can't 'get it up' after being shot, so his wife sues you for loss of spousal services. Or he has recurring nightmares...or post traumatic stress syndrome...or a thousand other real or imagined disorders, and suddenly the original victim, is now the bad guy who must be made to pay. Maybe I used hollow points to defend my life....oh my God, that adds another quarter million in damages I owe because a fast talking lawyer is able to convince the jury that I am a NRA member from the stone age with a callous disregard for the rights of my poor Meth smoking mugger.
My adult son, who practices law, has one jawdropping story after another of things he sees every day in the court room... injustices inflicted upon the muggee, not always the mugger. Your theory sounds good, and in a perfect world, I would agree with your sentiments. But on the advice of my lawyer, (and since I spent thousands getting him through law school, you will forgive me if I listen to his experience rather than your opinion), if I can walk away, undetected after an attempted assualt upon my person where I had to shoot to defend my life, I'm walking....and the SP-101 and remaining ammo will get thrown in the deepest part of Ohio river on my way home.
But please, don't let my thinking on this subject sway your actions should you ever be involved in a shooting. IF you have good witnesses, that can be located after the fact, who will back up your story, you will probably be found not guilty. However, if I may, I recommend you buy lots of personal liability insurance (it's about $300 a year for a million in coverage...not that expensive when you consider the risk of going without)....cause there WILL be a personal injury attorney somewhere, willing to take you to court, to rob you in a way your original attacker.... could only dream about.
Thanks for your opinion on how, if I am being mugged, robbed or car jacked and I shoot in defense of my life, or the lives of my family members, I am then 'honor bound' to submit my actions to judicial review. Your observations of our courts must be different than mine. First, if you are TOTALLY justified in a shooting and found not guilty, you are only out many thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of dollars, in legal fees to get your acquital. (There goes your house and your 401k money).
But even if found not guilty, then comes the personal injury lawsuits. Mr. mugger can't 'get it up' after being shot, so his wife sues you for loss of spousal services. Or he has recurring nightmares...or post traumatic stress syndrome...or a thousand other real or imagined disorders, and suddenly the original victim, is now the bad guy who must be made to pay. Maybe I used hollow points to defend my life....oh my God, that adds another quarter million in damages I owe because a fast talking lawyer is able to convince the jury that I am a NRA member from the stone age with a callous disregard for the rights of my poor Meth smoking mugger.
My adult son, who practices law, has one jawdropping story after another of things he sees every day in the court room... injustices inflicted upon the muggee, not always the mugger. Your theory sounds good, and in a perfect world, I would agree with your sentiments. But on the advice of my lawyer, (and since I spent thousands getting him through law school, you will forgive me if I listen to his experience rather than your opinion), if I can walk away, undetected after an attempted assualt upon my person where I had to shoot to defend my life, I'm walking....and the SP-101 and remaining ammo will get thrown in the deepest part of Ohio river on my way home.
But please, don't let my thinking on this subject sway your actions should you ever be involved in a shooting. IF you have good witnesses, that can be located after the fact, who will back up your story, you will probably be found not guilty. However, if I may, I recommend you buy lots of personal liability insurance (it's about $300 a year for a million in coverage...not that expensive when you consider the risk of going without)....cause there WILL be a personal injury attorney somewhere, willing to take you to court, to rob you in a way your original attacker.... could only dream about.
Glock1911
Member
I own three autos that are extremely reliable and accurate: Colt OACP, Glock 20 and a BHP. I can hit anything with multiple hits up to 25 yards with any of these guns. I love them!
I have four wheel guns. One is accurate to 7 yards(S&W 940). Two are accurate up to 25 yards(S&W 65-3 3" and Ruger Alaskan .454 Casull). The other is accurate to 75 yards (Dan Wesson 15-2 8").
I really can't fault my autos for having less reliability than my wheel guns because they don't. However, the autos do require decent magazines to perform reliably. The wheel guns just need good ammo.
I have four wheel guns. One is accurate to 7 yards(S&W 940). Two are accurate up to 25 yards(S&W 65-3 3" and Ruger Alaskan .454 Casull). The other is accurate to 75 yards (Dan Wesson 15-2 8").
I really can't fault my autos for having less reliability than my wheel guns because they don't. However, the autos do require decent magazines to perform reliably. The wheel guns just need good ammo.
Mr Win,
I agree there there are 2 schools in play.
1. The way things ought to be. (Basis of civilization, etc.)
2. The way things are.
Your argument says we should continue with things the way they are.
We should avoid responsibility. We should blame the system for lacking justice, and take no responsibility for our actions. Our actions should not be reviewed by our peers.
We should take no opportunity to change or challenge that which is unreasonable, or unethical.
We should do what's easy, rather than what's right.
I understand the dilema, I just don't agree with your solution.
I'm no virgin. I know what a .45 tastes like.
It's sorta like sucking on a penny. Scars suck.
I'm a believer in HVLT (High Velocity Lead Therapy) I also believe in taking responsibility for any therapeutic technique I might employ.
That's just me.
I can't see myself ever fulfilling all the roles of judge, jury, and executioner.
and sleeping nights.
Mark
Sorry for the thread hijack. I'm done.
I agree there there are 2 schools in play.
1. The way things ought to be. (Basis of civilization, etc.)
2. The way things are.
Your argument says we should continue with things the way they are.
We should avoid responsibility. We should blame the system for lacking justice, and take no responsibility for our actions. Our actions should not be reviewed by our peers.
We should take no opportunity to change or challenge that which is unreasonable, or unethical.
We should do what's easy, rather than what's right.
I understand the dilema, I just don't agree with your solution.
I'm no virgin. I know what a .45 tastes like.
It's sorta like sucking on a penny. Scars suck.
I'm a believer in HVLT (High Velocity Lead Therapy) I also believe in taking responsibility for any therapeutic technique I might employ.
That's just me.
I can't see myself ever fulfilling all the roles of judge, jury, and executioner.
and sleeping nights.
Mark
Sorry for the thread hijack. I'm done.
Mule88
Member
I just seem to be able to shoot a revolver more accuratly than a semi.
I was a LEO for 34 years and carried both revolvers and autos. Both are good choiced for
personal protection but both require regular practice to be reliable tools in an emergency self protectiob role. I prefer the revolver as I find it easier to carry concealed and with 5 or 6 rounds is more than adequate for the normal
self protection encounter. I prefer the revolver
for the following reasons:
1- Used them for most of my career and feel very comfortable with them. They are in my opinion more reliable than an autoloader.
2- I find the revolver easier to conceal and more comfortable to wear.
3- Revolvers are fine with ammo changes and will generally not fail to operate with different types of ammo.
4- Reloading for a revolver is in my opinion easier than for an autoloader and bullet choices are better as well.
5- Revolvers are easy to make changes to such as grip changes which can greatly alter the gun
to different uses such as concealability or ability to handle magnum loads.
6- Reloads are in my opinion easier to carry concealed and can be carried loose or in speed loaders or speed strips.
7- Revolvers lend themselves to practice in dry firing which will not compare to an autoloader.
8- Revolvers are nostalgic, they have been around since the early 1800's and have proven themselves over and over in every type of environment and conflict and in every type of application, even in taking big dangerous game.
personal protection but both require regular practice to be reliable tools in an emergency self protectiob role. I prefer the revolver as I find it easier to carry concealed and with 5 or 6 rounds is more than adequate for the normal
self protection encounter. I prefer the revolver
for the following reasons:
1- Used them for most of my career and feel very comfortable with them. They are in my opinion more reliable than an autoloader.
2- I find the revolver easier to conceal and more comfortable to wear.
3- Revolvers are fine with ammo changes and will generally not fail to operate with different types of ammo.
4- Reloading for a revolver is in my opinion easier than for an autoloader and bullet choices are better as well.
5- Revolvers are easy to make changes to such as grip changes which can greatly alter the gun
to different uses such as concealability or ability to handle magnum loads.
6- Reloads are in my opinion easier to carry concealed and can be carried loose or in speed loaders or speed strips.
7- Revolvers lend themselves to practice in dry firing which will not compare to an autoloader.
8- Revolvers are nostalgic, they have been around since the early 1800's and have proven themselves over and over in every type of environment and conflict and in every type of application, even in taking big dangerous game.
TAC
Member
I like revolvers because they're all metal! They don't make revolvers out of Fantastic-Plastic! Revolvers are real guns for real men! You never saw John Wayne shooting an automatic!
luangtom
US Veteran
I,too, was a part of Law Enforcement for over
thirty years. I am now retired. I carry revolvers
for various reasons. The multiple-attacker theory
is not one of them. Statistically, less than what
I carry in my J-frame is fired in an encounter.
So, I carry for ease and comfort of carry. My
revolvers fulfill that. I also am arthritic, so
the revolvers sit better for less pain in firing
and reloading. Sorta hard to work the slide on
an auto with gnarled fingers and joints.
thirty years. I am now retired. I carry revolvers
for various reasons. The multiple-attacker theory
is not one of them. Statistically, less than what
I carry in my J-frame is fired in an encounter.
So, I carry for ease and comfort of carry. My
revolvers fulfill that. I also am arthritic, so
the revolvers sit better for less pain in firing
and reloading. Sorta hard to work the slide on
an auto with gnarled fingers and joints.
Similar threads
- Poll
