New Gun Owner

[curtsr]

Ed,

PM me and we'll go to the range. I'm a CCW instructor, Marine Corps Expert many times over and Marine Primary Marksmanship Instructor.

I'm with RJPKRP on poly guns, I'm just old-fashioned and don't much like S&W's new BG series either. For beginners I recommend wheelguns (revolvers) too. If you want a Springfield XD or Baretta 92 I'll borrow them for eval.

Hanging with a Primer sounds like as good an excuse as any to get to the Miami Rifle and Pistol range then lunch at Quaker Steak and Lube in Milford. :biggrin: Open invite for any other local Primers too but will have to schedule separrately due to range guest rules. The plinking range there is VERY informal and allows for shooting of anything but shotguns. It is an incredible complex and dirt cheap at $80 / year. Probably the best kept range secret in the Ohio area and definately the best price.
http://www.miamirifle-pistol.org/index.php

I cannot however, make a shank out of a hefty bag and a lighter but can make a zip gun out of an old car antenna.

Do check state's reciprocal CCW agreements before travelling.

LMK,

Curt

 

[steveny]

sig sauer.

 

[Joshs]

I've got a g19 with tritium sights on the way, and the wife picked out a Mossberg 500c.

Any suggestions on safes? I like the sound of the biometric fingerprint safes for instant access to the glock like Vegas NSX mentions, but the reviews of most of those are iffy. I'll probably get a separate safe for the shotgun.

-Josh

 

[Vega$ NSX]

I’ve heard a lot of arguments regarding two particular items when it comes to guns. They are:

1) Preference for revolvers over semi automatic handguns.
2) Preference for an all metal handgun, over guns made from a polymer material.

Advocates for both of those preferences make a lot of valid arguments for their position. However, I almost rarely, if ever, hear a retorting argument and I feel that it doesn’t give a potential buyer of a handgun both sides of the argument. Here is why I’m a proponent of the opposite position for both.

1) I prefer semi-automatic handguns over revolvers for several reasons. The first argument that revolver proponents give is that it’s a simple system and that if a round ever fails, you can just keep pulling the trigger and a new round will chamber. That is true, however, like any complex system, a tool is only as good as the user. I practice all the time racking a semi-auto (ejecting a bad round, and feeding a new bullet) at the range by putting dummy caps (helps if a friend does it) randomly in a magazine. What this does is train your brain to instinctively identify a failed round and immediately re-rack your weapon. I can feed a fresh round almost as fast as I can pull the trigger again. The problem I have with recommending a revolver to a new gun owner is because if you train the brain to just keep pulling the trigger (basically dummy proofing) then you take away certain skills and instincts you would get if you only understood the semi-auto action. Rather than instinctually training them to re-rack a fresh round on a mis-fire, you train them to keep pulling the trigger, or take their gun off target while re-racking or stalling a few vital seconds while they have to actually “think” about re-racking. If someone is going to end up using a semi-auto, I don’t think they should buy a revolver as a “beginners” gun because it will impart instincts that will hurt them if they switch to semi-auto. If you are going to use a semi-auto, train with a semi-auto. Don’t train with a revolver and then switch. Secondly, in my opinion there are many more advantages of semi-autos over revolvers to offset the ability to just keep pulling the trigger. I think the form factor of a semi-auto is better. The round shape of the cylinder will always limit the width a revolver can ever be, and like cell phones, wallets and most other things we carry, slimmer is always better. Secondly, I prefer the larger magazine capacity and faster reloading (for the average person) of a semi-auto. Most revolvers are limited to between 5-8 rounds, while the average semi-auto will be anywhere from 6 to 15 rounds. I prefer how semi-autos take some of the “bite” off of a round because the slide will recoil back and will absorb some of the recoil. If the slide is balanced well, the forward momentum helps me snap my barrel back down on target. Conversely, a revolver’s recoil goes right into the gun and transmits right into the hand. To me it can be more painful, fatiguing, or many beginners will barrel drop/float in anticipation of the recoil. Also, the revolver will coil up, but since it doesn’t have a slide, the operator much manually re-acquire target, where I can often double tap a semi without minimal aiming because the return of the slide puts my barrel right back on target. Yes you can give an instance where, you only have one hand, a bullet mis-fires and if you had a semi-auto you would be screwed, whereas you’d be fine with a revolver. But for every one of “those” instances, you could give a scenario where you are in a shootout with someone in your house and you’ve shot all 6 rounds of a revolver, and can’t get to your ammunition and your semi-auto would have an additional 6 rounds. I feel there are more scenarios where the semi-auto advantages play a larger role than the few scenarios of mis-fired round. So in my opinion, the advantages of a semi-auto far outweigh a revolver and I always recommend a semi-auto to new gun buyers.
2) As far as all metal gun versus polymer guns, there is nothing wrong with adopting new and different materials especially if they are proven to be superior. Most of the nylon-polymers used in guns today are strong, more resilient, warp/deform less, become less brittle, and are more durable than their metal counterparts. Steel/metal has such a history and connotation that it’s hard to accept that “plastic” could actually be a superior material in certain applications. However, the perfect analogy is a car made from steel versus carbon fiber. One could say that they don’t trust layers of carbon or Kevlar (which is a plastic) fabric and epoxy, especially in something that your life depends on (structural rigidity of the vehicle). But as well all know, some of the best, most advanced cars use carbon fiber because it is far superior to steel or aluminum in many applications. The same holds true for many guns, where the use of plastics are actually superior to metal. Don’t let the negative connotation of plastic (i.e. cheap plastic junk) mislead you into thinking that steel is stronger or more durable, which has been proven that it is not. Is plastic pretty? No. Does it “feel” good? Nope. Is it the better material? One could argue and provide data. So remember, if you want a gun for looks, collectability, or feel, sure I would agree you can’t beat an all metal gun, just like big Detroit steel cars from the 40’s-70’s. But if you want the best performing car/gun, it’s hard to deny the newer more advance materials of today.

Just my 2 cents, but I wanted to give a valid retort to revolver/all steel supports just to give all sides of the story. Both are very valid arguments so you’ll need to find which is falls in line better for your needs, but at least now you have both sides of the argument.

 

[NsXMas]

Anyone have the Acura NSX gun racks and cases? http://www.autoanything.com/driving-accessories/Acura/NSX/111A50223A53799A0A5A295A1.aspx

Hehe google finds anything... :biggrin:

 

[Vega$ NSX]

I've got a g19 with tritium sights on the way, and the wife picked out a Mossberg 500c.

Any suggestions on safes? I like the sound of the biometric fingerprint safes for instant access to the glock like Vegas NSX mentions, but the reviews of most of those are iffy. I'll probably get a separate safe for the shotgun.

-Josh

I was totally with you when I was looking around for safes as well. I would love to have a shotgun but I don't want to keep a safe in my bedroom and I didn't want an unsecured shotgun sitting under my bed. When my house was robbed, the very first thing they did was scour the bed area (nightstand, under mattress, behind headboard) for guns.

I was very skeptical of a wall safe, especially a bio-metric one so I thought I'd just give it a try. Now I can never go back. The safe gets screwed into the wall in between the studs. It has a hidden key access just in case, but I've never needed to use it. Now the bio-metric part is a bit tricky. You need to practice it a lot, and it is very sensitive to moisture and pressure. However, once you get used to it, I can get it almost every single time (1 failure in about 50 tries). But it only takes about 2 seconds to try again. It does feel a bit gimmicky and cheap but I can't deny that it does exactly what I want it to. The key is to keep practicing with it. Any time I'm accidentally awakened at night (say a loud bang) I'll jump out of bed and open my safe to see how quickly I can get to it (even if I know it is a drill).

Here is the wall safe I have, although I recall getting it a lot cheaper:

http://www.earthtechproducts.com/p801.html

The only caution I give is a nice handgun safe by the bed stand is tempting however, my handgun was in a night stand drawer in a gun safe screwed into the drawer. They the thieves took the drawer (or they could have just used a pry bar to rip it out). The only way they'll be able to take the wall safe is if they chainsaw out the wall studs. If they try to use a pry bar they will only crush the drywall.

 

[Vega$ NSX]

Anyone have the Acura NSX gun racks and cases? http://www.autoanything.com/driving-accessories/Acura/NSX/111A50223A53799A0A5A295A1.aspx

Hehe google finds anything... :biggrin:

I've actually been looking for a lockable center console to carry my gun in for my '04 Acura MDX. I've seen them for Ford Explorers and Chevy Tahoes and they are awesome, like a safe in your truck. It's a great place to hold your gun, like if you are going to a school or airport and can't take your gun with your, yet feel safe that it's probably not going to get stolen (glove compartments are a joke). If you find one let me know! :smile:

 

[LMR]

I’ve heard a lot of arguments regarding two particular items when it comes to guns. They are:

1) Preference for revolvers over semi automatic handguns.
2) Preference for an all metal handgun, over guns made from a polymer material.

Advocates for both of those preferences make a lot of valid arguments for their position. However, I almost rarely, if ever, hear a retorting argument and I feel that it doesn’t give a potential buyer of a handgun both sides of the argument. Here is why I’m a proponent of the opposite position for both.

1) I prefer semi-automatic handguns over revolvers for several reasons. The first argument that revolver proponents give is that it’s a simple system and that if a round ever fails, you can just keep pulling the trigger and a new round will chamber. That is true, however, like any complex system, a tool is only as good as the user. I practice all the time racking a semi-auto (ejecting a bad round, and feeding a new bullet) at the range by putting dummy caps (helps if a friend does it) randomly in a magazine. What this does is train your brain to instinctively identify a failed round and immediately re-rack your weapon. I can feed a fresh round almost as fast as I can pull the trigger again. The problem I have with recommending a revolver to a new gun owner is because if you train the brain to just keep pulling the trigger (basically dummy proofing) then you take away certain skills and instincts you would get if you only understood the semi-auto action. Rather than instinctually training them to re-rack a fresh round on a mis-fire, you train them to keep pulling the trigger, or take their gun off target while re-racking or stalling a few vital seconds while they have to actually “think” about re-racking. If someone is going to end up using a semi-auto, I don’t think they should buy a revolver as a “beginners” gun because it will impart instincts that will hurt them if they switch to semi-auto. If you are going to use a semi-auto, train with a semi-auto. Don’t train with a revolver and then switch. Secondly, in my opinion there are many more advantages of semi-autos over revolvers to offset the ability to just keep pulling the trigger. I think the form factor of a semi-auto is better. The round shape of the cylinder will always limit the width a revolver can ever be, and like cell phones, wallets and most other things we carry, slimmer is always better. Secondly, I prefer the larger magazine capacity and faster reloading (for the average person) of a semi-auto. Most revolvers are limited to between 5-8 rounds, while the average semi-auto will be anywhere from 6 to 15 rounds. I prefer how semi-autos take some of the “bite” off of a round because the slide will recoil back and will absorb some of the recoil. If the slide is balanced well, the forward momentum helps me snap my barrel back down on target. Conversely, a revolver’s recoil goes right into the gun and transmits right into the hand. To me it can be more painful, fatiguing, or many beginners will barrel drop/float in anticipation of the recoil. Also, the revolver will coil up, but since it doesn’t have a slide, the operator much manually re-acquire target, where I can often double tap a semi without minimal aiming because the return of the slide puts my barrel right back on target. Yes you can give an instance where, you only have one hand, a bullet mis-fires and if you had a semi-auto you would be screwed, whereas you’d be fine with a revolver. But for every one of “those” instances, you could give a scenario where you are in a shootout with someone in your house and you’ve shot all 6 rounds of a revolver, and can’t get to your ammunition and your semi-auto would have an additional 6 rounds. I feel there are more scenarios where the semi-auto advantages play a larger role than the few scenarios of mis-fired round. So in my opinion, the advantages of a semi-auto far outweigh a revolver and I always recommend a semi-auto to new gun buyers.
2) As far as all metal gun versus polymer guns, there is nothing wrong with adopting new and different materials especially if they are proven to be superior. Most of the nylon-polymers used in guns today are strong, more resilient, warp/deform less, become less brittle, and are more durable than their metal counterparts. Steel/metal has such a history and connotation that it’s hard to accept that “plastic” could actually be a superior material in certain applications. However, the perfect analogy is a car made from steel versus carbon fiber. One could say that they don’t trust layers of carbon or Kevlar (which is a plastic) fabric and epoxy, especially in something that your life depends on (structural rigidity of the vehicle). But as well all know, some of the best, most advanced cars use carbon fiber because it is far superior to steel or aluminum in many applications. The same holds true for many guns, where the use of plastics are actually superior to metal. Don’t let the negative connotation of plastic (i.e. cheap plastic junk) mislead you into thinking that steel is stronger or more durable, which has been proven that it is not. Is plastic pretty? No. Does it “feel” good? Nope. Is it the better material? One could argue and provide data. So remember, if you want a gun for looks, collectability, or feel, sure I would agree you can’t beat an all metal gun, just like big Detroit steel cars from the 40’s-70’s. But if you want the best performing car/gun, it’s hard to deny the newer more advance materials of today.

Just my 2 cents, but I wanted to give a valid retort to revolver/all steel supports just to give all sides of the story. Both are very valid arguments so you’ll need to find which is falls in line better for your needs, but at least now you have both sides of the argument.

I could not have said it any better about the semi-auto vs revolver. You and I seem to think a lot a like. We should hook up next time I'm in Vegas and go shooting like I suggested in your "BORED" thread.

 

[RJPKRP]

Just my 2 cents, but I wanted to give a valid retort to revolver/all steel supports just to give all sides of the story. Both are very valid arguments so you’ll need to find which is falls in line better for your needs, but at least now you have both sides of the argument.

You'll notice that I said even though I prefer "non-poly" ...

a sidearm is a personal thing and they don't really come "one-size fits all". You should also try out some wheel guns too as they can sometimes be more comfortable/smaller for CCW. Once again personal preference plays a part in all of this.

It is the feel of an all steel gun that I prefer. That is an intangible as far as performance goes and one that falls into personal preference. I never actually claimed one material was superior to the other (and notice I do have a plastic gun). Although when it comes to a gun like the 1911 vs the G21, when we're all out of ammo, I'll club that crap outta my adversary with it!

Also, when it comes to semi-autos vs revolvers and capacity goes....well, it is all about shot placement. If I need 15 rounds to defend myself, well then maybe I should hit the range and become a little better acquainted with my protection.

Now, AT THE RANGE, higher capacity IS nice to decrease reloading time. Although sometimes I do find the "break in the action" for reloading kinda of nice on a hardcore day at the range.

Your arguments, however, on both counts are very valid. When one find a pistol that "fits" it is usually fairly obvious to them. It is like me with the FNX-9. Even though I prefer non-poly guns, the FNX fits my hand very nicely and the trigger pull is wonderful, smooth and DA breaks over earlier than most others I've fired. It was a great "fit" for me and I knew it right there in the store....and bought it on the spot without thinking twice about it.

I couldn't see having all autos or all revolvers. I enjoy hitting the range often and like a variety things to plink with when I do. If I had to have only one....I'd fire as many sidearms as I could and decide which one would be the best "fit" for my personal preferences and mission (in the case of the OP: range fun and PP).

 

[RJPKRP]

For transporting (either in car or between bedroom/cottage/RV, etc) my pistols, I have a......

Titan safe.

It is in the bedroom, can detach for a ride in the car or to be placed in the RV for the weekends we go camping, or out at the cottage, etc. Or I could have the mount in the car and detach it to bring it in the bedroom or RV, etc. I'm not worried about my 3 kids (all 10 and under) getting access to the loaded pistol within.

It has worked out to be a nice, versatile handgun safe.

As far as the long-guns and pistols that aren't currently being carried or stored in the Titan I just use a regular Satck-On 36 with shelving on one side for the pistols/ammo and long guns on the other side. I also prefer mechanical lock rather than electronic. That's a personal preference though.

 

[Vega$ NSX]

You'll notice that I said even though I prefer "non-poly" ...

I wasn't mentioning names and I definitely wasn't referencing your post specifically. I'm just saying in general if you do a google search for "beginner self defense handgun" most people are going to swear by an all metal revolver, like a .38 special S&W revolver. So much so, that when I was looking to buy a gun I almost bought a revolver. Knowing now what I know now, it would have been an easy decision but being relatively new to guns, I had to rely heavily on the advice of others. And there wasn't a lot of support for semi-autos, most of the more vocal people were old school die-hards which swore by the revolver.

I am so glad I didn't listen to them and so if I can give a counterpoint to keep someone from being swayed as I was, then I'll throw it out. It's gotten a lot better these days since semi-autos are now more of the norm, but back in the day, more than a decade ago, it wasn't quite the situation.

 

[Vega$ NSX]

I could not have said it any better about the semi-auto vs revolver. You and I seem to think a lot a like. We should hook up next time I'm in Vegas and go shooting like I suggested in your "BORED" thread.

Yup, yup anytime. The open invitation is still out there! :biggrin:

 

[SilverStone05]

Ed,

PM me and we'll take my collection to the range. I'm a CCW instructor, Marine Corps Expert many times over and Marine Primary Marksmanship Instructor.

You are welcome to shoot my S&W model 10 (like RJPKRP's Model 12 but steel frame vs aluminum- figures an NSX guy would opt for aluminum), micro 45's (Para Warthog and Springfield), Glock, or full size .45's (SIG, Springfield or Kimber), or my carry S&W Bodyguard Airweight. Then make a better informed decision for FREE.

I'm with RJPKRP on poly guns, I'm just old-fashioned and don't much like S&W's new BG series either. For beginners I recommend wheelguns (revolvers) too. If you want a Springfield XD or Baretta 92 I'll borrow them for eval.

Hanging with a Primer sounds like as good an excuse as any to get to the Miami Rifle and Pistol range then lunch at Quaker Steak and Lube in Milford. :biggrin: Open invite for any other local Primers too but will have to schedule separrately due to range guest rules. The plinking range there is VERY informal and allows for shooting of anything but shotguns. It is an incredible complex and dirt cheap at $80 / year. Probably the best kept range secret in the Ohio area and definately the best price.
http://www.miamirifle-pistol.org/index.php

I cannot however, make a shank out of a hefty bag and a lighter but can make a zip gun out of an old car antenna.

Do check state's reciprocal CCW agreements before travelling.

LMK,

Curt

Curt - i'll have to take you up on that. The father in law is itching to go as well. We can hit the range on a saturday morning and then maybe meet up with some other folks over at QSL (or if I manage to get my way- BW3's.) You guys just have to agree not to make fun of my domestic car. :tongue:

Vegas - thanks again for the information. In my admittedly limited experience, I myself don't like the look or feel of revolvers. I also don't like that the hammers can get stuck on clothing and dont' like the limited capacity for the prospect of range shooting.

Shooting some could, however, sway my prejudices.

Great thread.

 

[curtsr]

I practice all the time racking a semi-auto (ejecting a bad round, and feeding a new bullet) at the range by putting dummy caps (helps if a friend does it) randomly in a magazine. What this does is train your brain to instinctively identify a failed round and immediately re-rack your weapon. I can feed a fresh round almost as fast as I can pull the trigger again.

No home protection gun owner would ever spend the time at the range to become as proficient with their firearm as you. If you could get them to the range one time after their range time for their CCW permit that would be a stretch.

The problem I have with recommending a revolver to a new gun owner is because if you train the brain to just keep pulling the trigger (basically dummy proofing) then you take away certain skills and instincts you would get if you only understood the semi-auto action. Rather than instinctually training them to re-rack a fresh round on a mis-fire, you train them to keep pulling the trigger, or take their gun off target while re-racking or stalling a few vital seconds while they have to actually “think” about re-racking.

More tactical than home defense. Do you read "American Rifleman"? In the front is a monthly segment called "Armed Citizen". I have read this for probably 30 years and never have I heard of a home defense scenario that involved more shots than a 5 or 6 shot revolver can address. Never read about a homeowner that fired so many rounds that they had to reload. I have 3 years of back issues in my lobby and will verify.

If someone is going to end up using a semi-auto, I don’t think they should buy a revolver as a “beginners” gun because it will impart instincts that will hurt them if they switch to semi-auto.

Most home defense gun owners will never own more than the one gun that they rely on for home protection. They will buy to fill the need for their peace of mind and rarely if ever return to the range again, let alone move "up" the gun ladder. "Gun for home defense? Check".

If you are going to use a semi-auto, train with a semi-auto.

Yup! Active word = train

...in my opinion there are many more advantages of semi-autos over revolvers to offset the ability to just keep pulling the trigger.

For someone who shares OUR interest in guns and the desire to hit the range and send some rounds downrange, yes. For the homeowner that wants peace of mind, humbly no. Never even probably clean the gun.

a revolver’s recoil goes right into the gun and transmits right into the hand. To me it can be more painful, fatiguing, or many beginners will barrel drop/float in anticipation of the recoil.

Adrenaline/ fear will address this.

So in my opinion, the advantages of a semi-auto far outweigh a revolver and I always recommend a semi-auto to new gun buyers.

In the form of an opinion, sure. But what do professional instructors advocate? I'm one, ask me. I guess you don't have to. :smile: My father is also one with 50 years of LEO experience and provided expert testimony before the Ohio House in support of the passage of Ohio CCW law. He'd advise similarly. So do the rest of the instructors that I know. In education in general, you have to teach to the lowest common denominator. In this case we are talking about instructing people in the responsibilities of gun ownership and gun safety- not teaching someone to floss correctly. Different scope, different causes and effects.

2) As far as all metal gun versus polymer guns, there is nothing wrong with adopting new and different materials especially if they are proven to be superior.

Agreed! And I'm showing my age here but they just don't look like guns to me. Are they ergonomically superior? Yep. More customizable with different backstraps, mag extensions, etc moreso than a nice set of grips on a revolver? Sure, no question. Do I like the looks of my Fit more than my NSX? No.

Just my 2 cents, but I wanted to give a valid retort to revolver/all steel supports just to give all sides of the story. Both are very valid arguments so you’ll need to find which is falls in line better for your needs, but at least now you have both sides of the argument.

Yes, my gun-toting brother. But the main element that you are missing is that the casual CCW or home defense gun owner will not share our passion for firearms. It is simply a checkmark on their dance card (there I go again showing my age!) that helps them keep their belief system that everything is going to be OK intact. They will likely not pursue proficiency as we do.

You are absolutely correct about the advantages of automatics over revolvers and we owe John Browning greatly for this evolution. But you are atypical of 90% of CCW holders.

(sorry that all the quotes got broken, not sure how the formatting changed. Input encouraged...)

 

[curtsr]

The father in law is itching to go as well. We can hit the range on a saturday morning and then maybe meet up with some other folks over at QSL (or if I manage to get my way- BW3's.) You guys just have to agree not to make fun of my domestic car. :tongue:

Vegas - thanks again for the information. In my admittedly limited experience, I myself don't like the look or feel of revolvers. I also don't like that the hammers can get stuck on clothing and dont' like the limited capacity for the prospect of range shooting.

Shooting some could, however, sway my prejudices.

Great thread.

Father-in-law- is that a recent development?

Many autos have hammers too. Bodyguards and Centennial revolvers (handsome revolver) have shrouded hammers that don't snag. Obviously many polymer autos are hammerless too.

We can park your domestic at 275 and 50 and ride to the range in my import work truck. You will not want your Victory Red ride traversing the gravel range road and creek bed to the firing point which is an outdoor, covered location.

PM me for my cell or get it from Brian (Source).

 

[Ponyboy]

Absolutely correct. Training is essential and, to be frank, not training makes you as dangerous to yourself as you are to the assaulter. And it's not like so expensive to be out of reach of anyone who wants to go through it.

Magpul has some great videos and they go through almost everything one would go through in a beginning and advanced combat pistol class and you don't have to spend $400 for the class and $500 on 1200 rounds of ammo either:

http://store.magpul.com/product/DYN004/76

<iframe title="YouTube video player" class="youtube-player" type="text/html" width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ZTr8xvkUWp4" frameborder="0" allowFullScreen></iframe>

 

[Vega$ NSX]

No home protection gun owner would ever spend the time at the range to become as proficient with their firearm as you. If you could get them to the range one time after their range time for their CCW permit that would be a stretch.

I have to assume that when someone asks for advice/recommendation for a gun that they will be trained and proficient with it and I give my advice accordingly. Ponyboy is correct that training is an essential part of being a firearm owner and if people aren't going to put in the time and effort to become proficient with it then they shouldn't even own a gun and they sure as heck shouldn't get a CCW permit. No different than if someone asked me what breed of dog to get. I have to assume that they will train it, feed it, spend time with it and give my advice accordingly. If someone asked me what kind of breed of dog they should get but I knew they weren't going to train it, walk it, groom it or spend any time with it, then I would tell them to NOT get a dog in the first place. I would NOT give them a recommendation for a lower maintenance dog to over-compensate for their lack of dedication to care and training. The argument for a revolver being compensation for someone who is not going to properly train with a hand gun I cannot agree with. If they aren't going to do what is necessary to become proficient with a gun then they shouldn't own one.

Now I understand the reality that people will go off and buy guns and not train and not become proficient and not listen to people. But at that point, they are marching at the beat of their own drum so it matters very little as to what kind of firearm they get. Since they obviously aren't listening to people on being trained, educated and proficient, they aren't likely to be responsible with it anyway (lack of security, gun handling skills, maintenance etc.) so it will matter very little what actual "kind" of gun they have as the violations on proper handling will be so egregious to basically trump whether they have a semi-auto or revolver. I think bowing down to the lowest common denominator only makes for more dangerous gun owners, rather than providing greater safety. As you say people are going to buy guns and be irresponsible just as they will drink and drive irresponsibly. Should we recommend drunk drivers get cars with extra big bumpers and extra air bags?

 

[NsXMas]

FerFal (the Urban Survival guy from Argentina) also agrees a combat pistol (eg glock, sig...) is better than a revolver. Here's what he has to say about revolvers:

Handguns: Revolver or Pistol? Pistol ALL THE WAY! Yes, I saw the video of the guy that accurately emptied his S&W in ½ a second. I also saw the shooting range and the crowd behind him, watching the event. Can he shoot and reload that way if he is in his car, driving with one hand and shooting with the other, while a bunch of scum bags in another car are shooting at him? Hey, maybe he can. I know I can’t. Can you?
Generally speaking, the revolver is more difficult to master than the pistol. The double action is hard and it affects speed and accuracy. It can be done, but I found that pistols are easier, as did many shooters. Also, even though they seem to be more simple, revolvers are not as rugged as service pistols, the mechanisms that cycles the cylinder and cocks the hammer is both complicated and fragile compared to auto pistols.
Before anyone starts casting evil voodoo spells at me for insulting their prized S&W or Ruger: I own revolvers and like shooting them, I just don’t think they are the best option for self defense, and I see that everyone I talk to in my country who is worried about security as I am also chooses pistols. Quality pistols resist sand, mud and dirt in general better than revolvers, where a small pebble locked in the mechanism may render the revolver inoperable.

I don't have any revolvers but would like to get one or two...but it's a very low priority versus all the other crap I need to get done... :frown:

 

[Vega$ NSX]

FerFal (the Urban Survival guy from Argentina) also agrees a combat pistol (eg glock, sig...) is better than a revolver. Here's what he has to say about revolvers:

Hey, thanks for sharing that. Additional good arguments that I forgot to mention. :smile:

I think it's pretty safe to say that there are good arguments for both pistols and revolvers. ButI think the commonality we are finding is that proper training and handling of any gun will trump what type of gun you actually get.

 

[Ponyboy]

Semi-auto vs. revolver...blah blah blah.

All I know is that I'd love to own a Colt Python. And any one that says they don't is getting their Mancard revoked.

 

[RJPKRP]

Semi-auto vs. revolver...blah blah blah.

All I know is that I'd love to own a Colt Python. And any one that says they don't is getting their Mancard revoked.

I dunno...I might eventually end up with a Python, but I'm thinking a Model 29 might be my next revolver. I think it is fairly masculine!

 

[Vega$ NSX]

What those teeny, tiny guns? What you need is a S&W/Taurus 500 Magnum! :biggrin:

<iframe title="YouTube video player" class="youtube-player" type="text/html" width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/4EoJowwbhu8" frameborder="0" allowFullScreen></iframe>

<iframe title="YouTube video player" class="youtube-player" type="text/html" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/RoW8nHIVuRk" frameborder="0" allowFullScreen></iframe>

Of course being the Semi-Auto fan, I guess I should prefer the Desert Eagle .50AE! :biggrin:

 

[curtsr]

If someone asked me what kind of breed of dog they should get but I knew they weren't going to train it, walk it, groom it or spend any time with it, then I would tell them to NOT get a dog in the first place. I would NOT give them a recommendation for a lower maintenance dog to over-compensate for their lack of dedication to care and training.

My company ships 1,000 pet supply orders a day, please don't get me started on unqualified pet owners too! How many pet owners do you know with pets that have ZERO training? No training REQUIREMENT there either.

The argument for a revolver being compensation for someone who is not going to properly train with a hand gun I cannot agree with. If they aren't going to do what is necessary to become proficient with a gun then they shouldn't own one.

Agreed but this is your rule, not that of the states issuing permits. Once one has fulfilled his or her requirements at the front end there is no requirement for additional training after issue. "When I'm the boss ..." but until then it's per the old boss. "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss." Gawd, I love Deep Tracks on Sirius. (Off-Topic in Off-Topic- appropriate!)

I think bowing down to the lowest common denominator only makes for more dangerous gun owners, rather than providing greater safety. As you say people are going to buy guns and be irresponsible just as they will drink and drive irresponsibly.

I don't much care if people are irresponsible with their guns in their houses. This is Darwinism at work and they endanger primarily themselves and their immediate family. If people want to drive their cars around in their garage drunk I'm actually OK with that too. I just might do that later since we got 6 inches of snow today. Or maybe drink a little and play GT5.

The OP stated home security, occasional range use and "probably" OTR. All I heard for sure was home security and that's the only certainty- hence my recommendation for something that I know will suffice.

Semi-auto vs. revolver...blah blah blah.

All I know is that I'd love to own a Colt Python. And any one that says they don't is getting their Mancard revoked.

+1K

What those teeny, tiny guns? What you need is a S&W/Taurus 500 Magnum!

A good friend got one of those for Christmas. In the 2” snub nose. He could barely break paper with it.

 

[Vega$ NSX]

My company ships 1,000 pet supply orders a day, please don't get me started on unqualified pet owners too! :smile: How many pet owners do you know with pets that have ZERO training? No training REQUIREMENT there either.<O</O
<O</O

The parallels are almost eerie aren't they? :smile: Both can be put to good or bad use depending on the owner. Both require training and dedication to handle properly. Both are only as good as the owners handling it.

Agreed but this is your rule, not that of the states issuing permits. Once one has fulfilled his or her requirements at the front end there is no requirement for additional training after issue. "When I'm the boss ..." but until then it's per the old boss. "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss." Gawd, I love Deep Tracks on Sirius. (Off-Topic in Off-Topic- appropriate)
<O</O

I'm not saying "when I rule the world" what should happen. I'm saying that when someone asks me what to recommend, I'm going to question if they are going to be dedicated to training or not. If they are, then I'm going to recommend a semi-auto for the reasons I mentioned above. If I don't think they will be, then I'm going to recommend they don't get a gun at all. However, the main point I was trying to make is that if someone irresponsible is going to get a gun anyway, then it's not like they are going to listen to my suggestion or your suggestion for that matter. They are going to get what they are going to get, so the argument on semi-auto vs. revolver becomes moot when discussing that to an irresponsible gun owner. It's like trying to discuss the merits of manual vs. auto transmission, to an idiot who is going to just do burnouts and joy ride. All the arguments on "feel" and "control" just go right out the window just as arguments for guns of magazine capacity, or mis-fires. So basically the only time discussion of semi vs. revolver is relevant when you know you are dealing with a responsible owner who is going to be trained and proficient with their gun. In which case, I think a trained and proficient owner is better off with a semi-auto over a revolver.

I don't much care if people are irresponsible with their guns in their houses. This is Darwinism at work and they endanger primarily themselves and their immediate family. If people want to make like 348Tony and drive their cars around in their garage drunk I'm actually OK with that too. I just might do that later since we got 6 inches of snow today. Or maybe just play GT5.

I actually do very much care if someone is irresponsible with a gun within their own house, as much as I care if someone is cooking up some crystal meth in the basement. An ex-coworker had their unsecured gun taken by their son and shot a neighbor girl in the face. Fortunately she survived but irresponsible owners of guns ruin it for the rest of us. It makes all gun owners look bad and paint a negative stigma, whether they have their gun stolen or they accidentally shoot themselves or someone else. I'd prefer they not own a gun altogether then give gun opponents any fuel to say guns are dangerous.

And just how big of a garage do you have that you can drive around drunk in them? I've got a 3 car and I'd be lucky to get more than a few feet before I put it in the wall. :biggrin:

A good friend got an S&W 500 snubnose for Christmas. He could barely break paper with it but he's married to a great wife, no?<O</O

I got to hold one but not shoot it. It felt like I was holding ingot of metal. It's nice as a novelty but I can't see any real practical use for it. Would love to own one though (or Colt Python) just as a collectible though. That and a nice quality 1911; actually a nice matching pair of them.

 

[RJPKRP]

...That and a nice quality 1911; actually a nice matching pair of them.

What...Vegas with an antique!??!

Speaking of the DE .50 I was looking at a used one in a local shop the other day (I'm at the range/shop minimum of once a week). I thought about it long and hard because they don't show up very often....but in the end, like the Taurus 500, I think it would look ridiculous in my medium sized hands (I'm 5'7" 165lbs).

I did shoot a Taurus 500......I'd NEVER used the term "hand cannon" seriously until that moment! It was a thrill, but the gun doesn't fit me...at all!

Now out at the range today (yes, was twice this week for me) I decided to run some Mozambiques since I haven't done that in a LONG time. I'm always amazed as muscle memory! When I started with the PD we were told to "forget" Mozambique drills, for obvious reasons. I suppose it IS hard to get into a court room and say, "I was shooting to stop the threat" if that's how you train. However, with the 1911 today running Mozambique drills, my double taps were right at the breast plate and my single was......well, where it should have been. And that was doing reaction fire too....pistol sitting in front of me, grabbing, "acquiring and firing" as quickly as possible.

Yes, there is A LOT to be said for actually training with a weapon after you get one!