Old Dog
Member
Not seeing the relevance. Most defensive uses of firearms are reactive.
Why Only Semi's for Carry??
- Thread starter Redcoat3340
- Start date
- Status
trackskippy
Member
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2010
- Messages
- 3,501
Yea, and surprise works both ways.
The pocket carry guys always tell you its so quick because you have your hand on the gun, until real life kicks in, and you dont every second of the day. If youre lucky, you "might" see it coming and try, but the thought of getting caught with my hand in my pocket, up close to someone who can very easily trap it there, gives me the heebie jeebies.
Not that I expect to change opinion, I'm not naïve, but here are three civilian (LE doesn't count for you, amiright) examples where 5 hits did not quickly incapacitate:
https://www.opposingviews.com/category/video-burglar-paul-slater-shot-five-times-armed-mom
https://www.robesonian.com/news/113489/police-burglary-suspect-shot-5-times
We don't expect to make poor shots or miss do we? Nah 100% good hits. LOL
How about if there is a 2nd attacker? Nah. Forget that, can't happen in a "good area" psychos / criminals are conveniently immobile, you have to go to them. LOL
trackskippy
Member
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2010
- Messages
- 3,501
I saw that last video a while back. While there was a lot of pretty scary gun handling and things going on there, its probably pretty indicative of what you can expect from your average gun carrier/owner, who think "I have a gun, Im good to go" and dont do anything to prepare beyond that.
Just watching them shoot, and the one shooting at the bad guy with her partner in the line of fire yet, is very telling. Shes also lucky that the other woman ran the gun dry as the bad guy took it and then tried to shoot her with it. I guess thats one positive to low cap.
If youre going to have a gun there, you'd best know what to do with it, or youre probably better off not having the gun there.
And if it is going to be there, theres no reason for it not to be a full size, high cap gun. Many of those types of robberies are not a single bandit sort of thing.
John Correia has a lot of those sorts of videos on YouTube that are well worth watching, and they should be an eye opener to anyone serious about this. What you see in them is reality, and not speculation.
Just watching them shoot, and the one shooting at the bad guy with her partner in the line of fire yet, is very telling. Shes also lucky that the other woman ran the gun dry as the bad guy took it and then tried to shoot her with it. I guess thats one positive to low cap.
If youre going to have a gun there, you'd best know what to do with it, or youre probably better off not having the gun there.
And if it is going to be there, theres no reason for it not to be a full size, high cap gun. Many of those types of robberies are not a single bandit sort of thing.
John Correia has a lot of those sorts of videos on YouTube that are well worth watching, and they should be an eye opener to anyone serious about this. What you see in them is reality, and not speculation.
John Joseph
Member
- Joined
- May 5, 2016
- Messages
- 1,441
And if your pocket piece is a hammerless revolver you can shoot multiple shot right through the pocket.Yea, and surprise works both ways.
The pocket carry guys always tell you its so quick because you have your hand on the gun, until real life kicks in, and you dont every second of the day. If youre lucky, you "might" see it coming and try, but the thought of getting caught with my hand in my pocket, up close to someone who can very easily trap it there, gives me the heebie jeebies.
Not than anyone would walk around with their hand in the pocket anyway
trackskippy
Member
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2010
- Messages
- 3,501
Yea, you could. If thats the plan, am I to assume you practice shooting that way on a regular basis? Or is the plan just to wing it?
You can walk around with your hand in your pocket all you want. If youre dumb enough to let someone you dont know and may be sketchy, get that close to you with it still in there, I dont think youve really thought this out.
You can walk around with your hand in your pocket all you want. If youre dumb enough to let someone you dont know and may be sketchy, get that close to you with it still in there, I dont think youve really thought this out.
Can’t refrain-Never have I seen opposition to a opinion like this before. Like a pack of wolves… Semi automatic fan’s saying how foolish it is to carry a revolver.
Many many examples of Almost an attack on one opinion …. is that how it’s done here at the High Road to a new member? Someone has a different opinion and Ridiculed for it… multiple times over by various member including a Moderator?
Revolvers had and have save many lives! And Many Police officers didn’t want to change to semi auto in the 80s Becouse the 357 1 stop shot was so effective. Are they foolish for the first hand knowledge they had?
Answer me this oh wise ones of The Intermediate Road -Is the 1911 45 acp with its single stack mag ineffective? Or a terrible choice?
I ask Becouse The 686 7 shot I carry mainly is Just about as fast to reload. Is there opinion that a 14 shot 357 magnum round revolver is not a efficient defense weapon In today day and age? If so- I’m sorry yet this is a very odd Forum full of some very narrow minded individuals.
Many many examples of Almost an attack on one opinion …. is that how it’s done here at the High Road to a new member? Someone has a different opinion and Ridiculed for it… multiple times over by various member including a Moderator?
Revolvers had and have save many lives! And Many Police officers didn’t want to change to semi auto in the 80s Becouse the 357 1 stop shot was so effective. Are they foolish for the first hand knowledge they had?
Answer me this oh wise ones of The Intermediate Road -Is the 1911 45 acp with its single stack mag ineffective? Or a terrible choice?
I ask Becouse The 686 7 shot I carry mainly is Just about as fast to reload. Is there opinion that a 14 shot 357 magnum round revolver is not a efficient defense weapon In today day and age? If so- I’m sorry yet this is a very odd Forum full of some very narrow minded individuals.
trackskippy
Member
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2010
- Messages
- 3,501
I dont think its narrow-minded due to just being narrow-minded. Its more based on learning from use and experience what is most likely going to be the best tool for the job.
A lot of what you see in these types of threads is based more on emotion, than on a realistic evaluation. People have a gun they like, and dont like people saying it isnt what they think it is.
Some go through a more deliberate process of making decisions, where others go with their hearts and the whim of the moment. Ive seen people here swear by one gun as "the best" and want to argue to the death it is, yet, a month or two down the road, they get something new, and now its "the best", and off we go again. Then you have the nostalgia crowd that swear the older guns are still the best and have history to prove it, even though those guns were outdated and surpassed decades ago, along with the standard methods of use of the time.
Back when everyone was carrying a SAA, or similar arms of the era, then yea, they were a good, more or less even choice. If you inject a Glock 17 or SIG P226 into that era, which gun do you think will be the better choice, and once seen, the one most in demand by those who know and understand why it is the better choice?
If you want to carry a 5, 6, or 7 shot revolver, no one is telling you not to. Carry what you want. All thats being said, which you dont seem to like, is, based on whats been learned by others in use and proving things, that there are other, better choices available, that you might want to consider.
The only way I know to figure this out, is to run some more realistic courses of fire with the gun you choose and then compare with something else. Which one will likely provide you with the best shot at prevailing if you put the time and effort in to be proficient with it.
That "time and effort" thing above, regardless of the guns carried, is the most important thing in the whole equation. Yet more often than not, it seems to be the least considered.
Just an FYI here too, I know the gun you carry very well, I have one too, and shoot it all the time. Great gun, but heavy for what it is (I actually prefer my 2.5" 19's more), and while a great shooter, it doesnt offer or allow what I can do with the Glock 17 I carry. And thats based on a lot of trigger time and use with both.
A lot of what you see in these types of threads is based more on emotion, than on a realistic evaluation. People have a gun they like, and dont like people saying it isnt what they think it is.
Some go through a more deliberate process of making decisions, where others go with their hearts and the whim of the moment. Ive seen people here swear by one gun as "the best" and want to argue to the death it is, yet, a month or two down the road, they get something new, and now its "the best", and off we go again. Then you have the nostalgia crowd that swear the older guns are still the best and have history to prove it, even though those guns were outdated and surpassed decades ago, along with the standard methods of use of the time.
Back when everyone was carrying a SAA, or similar arms of the era, then yea, they were a good, more or less even choice. If you inject a Glock 17 or SIG P226 into that era, which gun do you think will be the better choice, and once seen, the one most in demand by those who know and understand why it is the better choice?
If you want to carry a 5, 6, or 7 shot revolver, no one is telling you not to. Carry what you want. All thats being said, which you dont seem to like, is, based on whats been learned by others in use and proving things, that there are other, better choices available, that you might want to consider.
The only way I know to figure this out, is to run some more realistic courses of fire with the gun you choose and then compare with something else. Which one will likely provide you with the best shot at prevailing if you put the time and effort in to be proficient with it.
That "time and effort" thing above, regardless of the guns carried, is the most important thing in the whole equation. Yet more often than not, it seems to be the least considered.
Just an FYI here too, I know the gun you carry very well, I have one too, and shoot it all the time. Great gun, but heavy for what it is (I actually prefer my 2.5" 19's more), and while a great shooter, it doesnt offer or allow what I can do with the Glock 17 I carry. And thats based on a lot of trigger time and use with both.
Great post and I certainly agree. Very informative and polite. That’s what a discussion should be. Not the Low road version.
Yet please tell me, is the 1911 45 acp not effective? I ask again because it’s a example. Second count I get that- I shoot a revolver better and a 7 shot 357 can be reloaded (moon clips even faster) almost just a fast.
Yet please tell me, is the 1911 45 acp not effective? I ask again because it’s a example. Second count I get that- I shoot a revolver better and a 7 shot 357 can be reloaded (moon clips even faster) almost just a fast.
Just watch Jerry Miculik- I Don’t feel that the Reload is slow, it’s reliable and Plenty Fast shooting.
I’ve seen others similar in speed…. yet It’s not a semi auto. Ok! so it’s not Your tool to use- Other people have other tools
Some shoot a Revolver more accurate!
That is the number one reason I carry one.
I’ve seen others similar in speed…. yet It’s not a semi auto. Ok! so it’s not Your tool to use- Other people have other tools
Some shoot a Revolver more accurate!
That is the number one reason I carry one.
Attachments
"Effective"?
On some occasions, defenders have had to fire more than seven or eight rounds, without being afforded an opportunity to reload. On many occasions, three or fewer rounds from a five shot revolver have sufficed.
I carried a high end, all-steel, 1911-pattern, Officer's frame .45 for some time. I found that I could not use it as effectively in defensive shooting drills as a service-sized 9mm or .40. The primary reason was the effect of recoil on the rapidity of controlled shooting.
I switched to a double-stack 9.
I now carry a single-stack 9 with the capacity of a 1911.
Is it "effective"? No one can know whether or not it will be effective until the event--and the answer will be valid only for that one occasion.
There are too many variables--what is the entry point and entry angle of each bullet, how much time is available for the stop, how many attackers require physical stops, how rapidly can the defender fire with defensive accuracy, what is the capacity....
No one can reasonably advise that any hand gun "is effective" or "is not effective" for SD. It's a fool's errand.
tubeshooter
Contributing Member
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2006
- Messages
- 2,147
So the 1911-You say is Maybe a effective tool?
Really!!! ????
Kleanbore please-
That could be construed as A statement advocating your 9mm and is very much something Many Many people will disagree with You about...
Its a proven fact the 7 shot 1911 Is a sufficient effective handgun for defense.
Fact!
And if???!!! the power and speed of the 1911 can be duplicated- it’s nonsense to not agree that Said firearm would be just as effective….. In most situations.
Don’t agree- That’s ok, Becouse it’s a discussion.
Yet don’t tell me the “Car I drive” isn’t safe and dosnt get me to point B from point A - just Becouse it isn’t a modern vehicle.
Really!!! ????
Kleanbore please-
That could be construed as A statement advocating your 9mm and is very much something Many Many people will disagree with You about...
Its a proven fact the 7 shot 1911 Is a sufficient effective handgun for defense.
Fact!
And if???!!! the power and speed of the 1911 can be duplicated- it’s nonsense to not agree that Said firearm would be just as effective….. In most situations.
Don’t agree- That’s ok, Becouse it’s a discussion.
Yet don’t tell me the “Car I drive” isn’t safe and dosnt get me to point B from point A - just Becouse it isn’t a modern vehicle.
tubeshooter
Contributing Member
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2006
- Messages
- 2,147
Your 5 shot revolver may be enough.
Your 10 shot auto may not.
I happen to prefer revolvers for reasons outside of capacity.
I have autos I can use, too.
There are no guarantees, of course. And these kinds of threads might generate a smidgen of good info here and there, but generally result in more heat than light and more noise than signal. Lots of people talking past each other, and acting like other people can't count beyond 5 or 6. Getting condescending about other viewpoints, and inferring that people aren't serious or sophisticated enough to know what works for them SD-wise, even though maybe they've spent a lifetime employing exactly that. In a simple phrase - these threads generally suck.
But great post, Kleanbore (I am buying a Power Play ticket today...).
Your 10 shot auto may not.
I happen to prefer revolvers for reasons outside of capacity.
I have autos I can use, too.
There are no guarantees, of course. And these kinds of threads might generate a smidgen of good info here and there, but generally result in more heat than light and more noise than signal. Lots of people talking past each other, and acting like other people can't count beyond 5 or 6. Getting condescending about other viewpoints, and inferring that people aren't serious or sophisticated enough to know what works for them SD-wise, even though maybe they've spent a lifetime employing exactly that. In a simple phrase - these threads generally suck.
But great post, Kleanbore (I am buying a Power Play ticket today...).
I did not.
I found--and so, in fact, did many of the other participants in my first class--that I could handle a larger 9 much more effectively in defensive drills than a .45. Almost all military and law enforcement users have concluded the same thing.
Alrighty then. But many very knowledgeable people have selected other choices.
You obviously did not understand the post. Again, the gist is this: no one can reasonably advise that any hand gun "is effective" or "is not effective" for SD. It's a fool's errand. That's because of the number of variables involved, including in particular the complexities of handgun wounding mechanics. Some are likely to perform better than others, but all are compromises.
That is absurd in the extreme.
My 44 spl revolver has similar Power to the 45 acp.
A impact with that equivalent cartridge is more effective than a lesser cartridge.
I prefer the 44 spl or - 357. It makes sense to me any many others
The 9 mm semi auto lacks a lot of power and in my opinion is best suited to a purse gun.
My opinion.
A impact with that equivalent cartridge is more effective than a lesser cartridge.
I prefer the 44 spl or - 357. It makes sense to me any many others
The 9 mm semi auto lacks a lot of power and in my opinion is best suited to a purse gun.
My opinion.
JTQ
Member
The 1911 is my choice for a handgun, and has been for over 30 years. However, a Tom Givens quote I often share is...
"The 1911 is a one or two bad guy gun, in a three or four bad guy world."
Tom Givens has probably done as much study of the civilian use of firearms as anybody. He was a long time 1911 guy, who switched to the G35 and I think is now using a G17.
I like to think everybody is free to choose whatever they like. They have probably assessed their potential daily threats and weighed that against their preferred lifestyle. No matter what their choice, it is probably going to be right for them until it isn't.
We can pick on the 5 shot revolver guys, and tell them a Glock G34 is easier to shoot, and has a higher capacity. However, at some point, the G34 guy will be out gunned, because he should have brought a rifle, or a shotgun, or a tank, etc.
Choose what works for you, but trying to convince somebody else their own personal choice is wrong is an up hill battle.
trackskippy
Member
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2010
- Messages
- 3,501
A hit with any of the major rounds, in the exact same spot, will likely bring the same result, either way.
People who argue that it matters are usually those who arent willing to put in the effort to be competent with the gun and are looking for an easy way out.
Handguns are pretty poor manstoppers. The only recourse, with any of them, is to be lucky enough to hit the switch right off, something many would have trouble doing with a static target, if they even knew where it was and why they wanted to hit it, or, shoot them to the ground and keep shooting until they stop doing what they were doing. There are no magic calibers, and skill trumps caliber, every time. Capacity is a big help too.
The 1911 is a great gun, assuming you get a good one, which can be a challenge sometimes these days, and like a revolver, there is nothing wrong with them, but they suffer some of what the revolvers do. I carried one on a daily basis for 25 some odd years, and moved on to other things, for a couple of different reasons. I havent carried one since either, although I still shoot a couple, all the time.
A lot of this still comes back to what you know and what you dont. I shoot a 1911 well, but I shoot other things better, so I made the choice to choose and use the ones I shoot better, because of what I know. And for me, the fact is, a 9mm gun is easier for me to shoot well with, in a realistic manner, than the 45's. I shoot both regularly, and see it every time I shoot. The difference in the performance of the calibers is nil, so why would you chose the one that is harder to shot with?
People who argue that it matters are usually those who arent willing to put in the effort to be competent with the gun and are looking for an easy way out.
Handguns are pretty poor manstoppers. The only recourse, with any of them, is to be lucky enough to hit the switch right off, something many would have trouble doing with a static target, if they even knew where it was and why they wanted to hit it, or, shoot them to the ground and keep shooting until they stop doing what they were doing. There are no magic calibers, and skill trumps caliber, every time. Capacity is a big help too.
The 1911 is a great gun, assuming you get a good one, which can be a challenge sometimes these days, and like a revolver, there is nothing wrong with them, but they suffer some of what the revolvers do. I carried one on a daily basis for 25 some odd years, and moved on to other things, for a couple of different reasons. I havent carried one since either, although I still shoot a couple, all the time.
A lot of this still comes back to what you know and what you dont. I shoot a 1911 well, but I shoot other things better, so I made the choice to choose and use the ones I shoot better, because of what I know. And for me, the fact is, a 9mm gun is easier for me to shoot well with, in a realistic manner, than the 45's. I shoot both regularly, and see it every time I shoot. The difference in the performance of the calibers is nil, so why would you chose the one that is harder to shot with?
- Status
Similar threads
