One shot breech load pistol may even fail less than a revolver, but is anyone going to argue that a single shot breech loader is superior? How about a two shot Derringer? Anyone going to argue "2 shot for sure" than "may be 6 rounds"?
There is no one thing that is most important. Reliability is impoartant, but it is not the single most important factor. If reliabliity is important over everything, then soldiers would be carrying single shot rifles.
What my decisions are based on is the total package. What is more likely to get the job done.
I don't prepare fights with "A sound of a gun shot, and they all ran" kind of opponents. If you have those opponents in mind, then you might as well carry a starter pistol and call it good.
As I have said in these threads before, do not confuse a "shooting incident" wtih a "gun fight." Those two are nothing like each other.
As far as my examinations and research on actual gun fights, when determined fighters are involved, as soon as opponents' number go over 1, my chances with only 6 shots look really grim.
People with no clue about the dynamics of gun fight have a hard time understanding why 6 shots can dry up very fast. Let's say you are attacked at "bad breath" distance by a mugger armed with a knife. As you pull the gun, he tries to jab his knife, you grab his arm, and struggle follows. He is on top of you.
Bang!
"Is he hit?"
Bang!
"Is he hit? Is he falling? I can't tell. Is he forcing me down, or is this just his body weight? I can't see his other hand. Is it dangling down or is it trying to jab a knife?"
By the time you thought through the above sentence, your snubby is empty, unless you intend to hold fire to see if you feel a knife digging into your gut that is.
Your opponent may have been dead at the first shot. Your opponent may be just stunned, but would try to kill you in a moment. Now, Imagine there is a second opponent.
I am not even talking about misses. In the above scenario, you had a 100% hit.
Another issue some fail to take into account is the advances in training methods. If you shoot once, assess, then decide to shoot again, then you might be able to get 1 shot per one opponent. Are you seriously going to do "Bang! Umm, yeah he is still standing. Bang!" when your opponent at "bad breath" distance is shooting a gun or swinging a knife at you?
Modern traning method is to maintain continuous fire until you perceive the opponent dropping beyond the view of your sights. Even if the first shot did its job, you may have fired off 3 shots before you noticed it took effect. Even assuming 100% hits and first shot incapacitation, now you're down to 3 shots.
There is no one thing that is most important. Reliability is impoartant, but it is not the single most important factor. If reliabliity is important over everything, then soldiers would be carrying single shot rifles.
What my decisions are based on is the total package. What is more likely to get the job done.
I don't prepare fights with "A sound of a gun shot, and they all ran" kind of opponents. If you have those opponents in mind, then you might as well carry a starter pistol and call it good.
As I have said in these threads before, do not confuse a "shooting incident" wtih a "gun fight." Those two are nothing like each other.
As far as my examinations and research on actual gun fights, when determined fighters are involved, as soon as opponents' number go over 1, my chances with only 6 shots look really grim.
People with no clue about the dynamics of gun fight have a hard time understanding why 6 shots can dry up very fast. Let's say you are attacked at "bad breath" distance by a mugger armed with a knife. As you pull the gun, he tries to jab his knife, you grab his arm, and struggle follows. He is on top of you.
Bang!
"Is he hit?"
Bang!
"Is he hit? Is he falling? I can't tell. Is he forcing me down, or is this just his body weight? I can't see his other hand. Is it dangling down or is it trying to jab a knife?"
By the time you thought through the above sentence, your snubby is empty, unless you intend to hold fire to see if you feel a knife digging into your gut that is.
Your opponent may have been dead at the first shot. Your opponent may be just stunned, but would try to kill you in a moment. Now, Imagine there is a second opponent.
I am not even talking about misses. In the above scenario, you had a 100% hit.
Another issue some fail to take into account is the advances in training methods. If you shoot once, assess, then decide to shoot again, then you might be able to get 1 shot per one opponent. Are you seriously going to do "Bang! Umm, yeah he is still standing. Bang!" when your opponent at "bad breath" distance is shooting a gun or swinging a knife at you?
Modern traning method is to maintain continuous fire until you perceive the opponent dropping beyond the view of your sights. Even if the first shot did its job, you may have fired off 3 shots before you noticed it took effect. Even assuming 100% hits and first shot incapacitation, now you're down to 3 shots.
Last edited: