uncle matt

As Oldtimr said, "The point of the article and I suspect it was for discussion purposes, was revolvers do not hold enough rounds making a large capacity pistol a better choice to defend your life."

This is true. I hoped the discussion would center on once in hand and firing. Let's sake of this discussion let's not consider any concealment or carrying issues.

Oldtimr

Uncle Matt, not quite sure what you are getting at for the discussion. Once a handgun is in your hand, what happens, good or bad is in the hands of the shooter. A person could have a .45 APC with a double stacked magazine and be in a firefight with a guy with a single action .22 long rifle revolver and if the guy with the .45 can't shoot or can't shoot that gun, but the guy with the 6 shot .22 knows his gun and knows how to shoot it, advantage goes to the guy with the .22 revolver. It all goes back to Hickok's statement. "You can't miss fast enough to make up for poor marksmanship". Granted, police officers who were experts with their weapons have been shot by bad guys who couldn't his a bull in the azz with a 2x4 at 6 inches, but those things were freak occurrences and not really relevant. Are you are getting at something specific or just trying to expand the discussion?

Bocajnala

I might be nit picking here at your terminology and if so I apoligize, not intending to start an argument.. but, I wouldn't call those "Freak Occurrences", it happens too often to be freak occurrences. I would guess that many times the pistol used to injure or kill an officer has never been fired by the person doing the killing (agreeing with your statement about "bad guys who couldn't his a bull in the azz with a 2x4 at 6 inches") .... I would call it action beating reaction. You know this already, but for others, as an officer, we have to be better at controlling the situation and controlling all of our surroundings so we're not getting caught a half second behind. A half second can be the difference between going home after the shift or not. I see Officers get lazy all the time with allowing people to put their hands in their pockets, reaching back into their vehicles, etc... that's just asking for trouble. A person well trained will absolutely fair better in a situation than someone who isn't. The exception to that is when the well trained person doesn't see the attack coming until it's too late. Which is what happens allot of times in officer shootings. I got a little off subject there.


I love my revolvers, I shoot them often, and do well with them. But they aren't what I carry or what I "train" with. Nothing wrong with someone that does. Carry a reliable and quality firearm. Train with what you carry. Be comfortable and proficient with it. That's the main thing.
-Jake

Oldtimr

" Carry a reliable and quality firearm. Train with what you carry. Be comfortable and proficient with it"'

That's statement above is the main thing".

That is the key, not how many rounds it holds or what kind of handgun you carry. Freak occurrences probably was not the correct term, what I was getting at was all things being equal, not counting an ambush, the person who is prepared and knows the weapon and how to use it well will usually prevail, no matter what caliber or kind of action it is.

Bocajnala

Agree on that
-Jake

CalHunter

Words of wisdom. Flags also brought up a point about training to confront multiple targets with a reduced semi-auto pistol mag. Doing an exercise like that forces you to think your way through the tactical problem and confront the "assault" by think and using tactics, not just shooting until the mag runs empty.

Anybody who carries CCW should be doing some kind of training like this because of the old training maxim. When under stress, we default to our training. If we didn't train, then we don't have a plan to follow and often feel overwhelmed and can't slow down the process/thinking/anxiety level to focus enough on thinking our way through the problem.

In the Marines, we used to say the more you sweat in peace, the less you bleed in war. As a cop, we've always said when you get into a stress situation, you will default to your training, whether it was good training, bad or no training.

And even if you don't carry CCW but still have a gun and think it will be available for self defense at home, you should still train on tactics and probable scenarios.

I know I'm preaching to the choir here but wanted to interject this into the discussion.

hunters_life

Please pardon my confusion on this or if I step on a toe or two here but my beliefs that were drilled into my head from a very young age is that concealment and comfort are both factors in CCW. There is an old saying, if the thing isn't comfortable to carry you might be less inclined to carry it. I know I hate when a firearm is poking me in the side all day as I have carried every day for around 30 years now. I learned early on what position I drew from the best for reaction times was just a bit back from middle waist side and a revolver in that position was just about as uncomfortable as one can get. Especially a revolver with a cartridge large enough to quickly bring the peace to a situation if ever needed. My choice, the Sig Sauer P227 SAS Gen 2 .45acp, has a 10 round mag and that really didn't factor into my decision to purchase that weapon in the least. I have carried BUG firearms that held as little as 6 rounds and never felt under gunned since I was trained well. Like a couple of the other people on here, I feel training is the key to any situation as well as situational awareness. Know the firearm you are carrying better than you know the back of your hand as every firearm I have ever owned has had it's own personality.

MudderChuck

Pretty much nailed it.

I'd say 60% of the time I knew it was coming, sometimes days or weeks before hand and prepared.

On the practical side, outside of the military, I've never needed to fire more than three rounds.

Three times I needed to shoot somebody, one round, two rounds and three rounds. One round with a revolver (actually a two-for, bullet went through the bad guy and his partner), two rounds with a shotgun (shot to wound)and three with a semi auto.

Twice I fired a warning shot. Both times a semi auto.

Once a guy found himself looking down the barrel of my twelve gauge and decided he'd made a big mistake. Another time a group of carjackers changed their minds looking down the barrel of my .357 Blackhawk.

In summary the best solution is likely to be the firearm you have with you at the time. And being able to hit what you are shooting at reliably.

I had a acquaintance that got corned in a bar by a gang of bikers. The bar was wall to wall people. He fired two high capacity magazines (28 rounds I think) and hit three people. I was amazed, I went to that bar the next day and looked around. Holes in the walls, the ceiling and many cars in the parking lot. That bar was around 300 square feet, with around forty+ people in there and he hit three people.

uncle matt

Personally I would feel safe carrying a revolver I could work well.

I am just looking for people's insights and opinions. I don't want any arguing or insulting, just conversation like we are all sitting around a little fire. Hey, could someone grab me a cold one?

Nomercy448

I've never even remotely bought into this manner of thinking...

Effectively, you're proposing these thoughts are going to go through an attack victim's mind:

"Oh schitt, a bad guy with a weapon... I better pull my pistol to save my own life - good thing I have lots of rounds, I don't need to count on the first one to save my life, and don't need to stop this threat as quickly as possible..."

I don't buy it...

OR, you're proposing THESE thoughts are going to go through the attack victim's mind:

"Oh Schitt... a bad buy... I better not waste a single round..."

I don't buy that either...

In studying these things, as well as they are often documented, the ACTUAL thoughts going through the attack victim's mind are more like this:

"Oh schitt, a bad guy..." followed by "bang bang bang..." And the self-defender reports few if any actual thoughts in their mind throughout the event.

Carrying a revolver doesn't force the shooter to manage his rounds any more than would carrying a pistol, nor does it bestow any mystical mental capacity to manage emotion during a high stress event. The shooter is in control - if he pulls the trigger while on target, he'll get hits, if he pulls the trigger while NOT on target, he'll miss. It's really that simple.

Guys who either do not sufficiently train to sustain, or do not PROPERLY train to sustain their marksmanship skills will fail when the moment comes. A guy who never practices with his revolver will be no more apt to connect on target than if he had a pistol. A guy who practices every week with his revolver, but never does anything but load up the cylinder and DAO down as fast as he can will not connect any better than someone with a pistol. A shooter who trains according to a structured program managed by measurable metrics will be more likely to connect in a high stress situation than any of these other cases, regardless of what he's carrying.