Fat Boy
Member
I recently read an article comparing revolvers to semi-automatics...interesting thoughts for me; along the lines of a semi-auto that is totally in parts and a revolver totally in parts. Assemble the parts of the semi-auto and you have a functioning gun. Assemble the parts of the revolver, and you need to do a lot of fitting, adjusting, timing, etc to make it function...
The gist of the article seemed to be addressing the old concept that revolvers are simple and semi's are complex.
Further conversation/commentary (maybe in another article) addressed the importance of safety systems on handguns vs. none. The idea was the danger of picking up a revolver, and inadvertently pulling the trigger in the process vs. a semi-auto with safety system that would preclude such an event. This strikes me as interesting in that I have historically thought of the value of having a revolver since it didn't require deactivating safeties, etc. to fire. I have always understood and functioned with the rule of not putting my finger on the trigger until ready to fire- I realize a Glock is similar, in that there are no manual safeties other than the ones "built-in" to the process.
All this comes about in that I am considering a "one-gun fits all" handgun purchase, and trying to find the best gun for the purpose- Historically, I would have almost always gone for the revolver; now I am thinking about a semi....
"Purpose" by the way, would include paper-punching, home and possibly some day CCW defense, and possibly being pressed into service in a TEOTWAWKI scenario for hunting small game...(not likely, I realize)
What do you think?
The gist of the article seemed to be addressing the old concept that revolvers are simple and semi's are complex.
Further conversation/commentary (maybe in another article) addressed the importance of safety systems on handguns vs. none. The idea was the danger of picking up a revolver, and inadvertently pulling the trigger in the process vs. a semi-auto with safety system that would preclude such an event. This strikes me as interesting in that I have historically thought of the value of having a revolver since it didn't require deactivating safeties, etc. to fire. I have always understood and functioned with the rule of not putting my finger on the trigger until ready to fire- I realize a Glock is similar, in that there are no manual safeties other than the ones "built-in" to the process.
All this comes about in that I am considering a "one-gun fits all" handgun purchase, and trying to find the best gun for the purpose- Historically, I would have almost always gone for the revolver; now I am thinking about a semi....
"Purpose" by the way, would include paper-punching, home and possibly some day CCW defense, and possibly being pressed into service in a TEOTWAWKI scenario for hunting small game...(not likely, I realize)
What do you think?
Last edited: