uncle matt

That was the title of the story.

I thought anyone here who wanted to participate could read this and we could dicuss our opinions in a nice, friendly discussion.

https://tacticalprofessor.wordpress..../#comment-3288

younggun308

Sample size is awfully small (7).

Despite this, I think the case may be strong case that one doesn't need large ammo capacity to deter robbery in public places, given that's what most of these cases are. It seems robbers generally want to go through as little trouble as possible, and a handgun of any sort immediately makes the confrontation no longer worth their while.

However, if someone fears some other kind of encounter, say with people who are drugged or have other intents that would drive them to stick around for any reason after the first shot is fired, then more ammo could be life-saving, especially if you're dealing with more than one determined assailant.

CalHunter

First off, I think this is a great topic to discuss.

I don't agree with the premise on the title (revolvers will get you killed) but that appears to have been used to draw interest, not as an actual position or opinion. In fact, the author came to an opposite conclusion that revolvers won't get you killed if "head space and timing" are correct (you keep your cool and think your way through the incident).

I'd agree that this sample set is small at 7 but the FBI publishes statistics of shootings every year and combined over several years or decades, one can get a pretty accurate picture of what to expect in a average shooting situation. IIRC, most shootings happen at 7 yards or less with just a handful of rounds fired. A person with a revolver would not be under-gunned in such a situation at all.

I realize that revolvers aren't the weapon of choice for people concerned about finding themselves in the middle of a zombie apocalypse or some type of robbery/assault with long guns or shotguns but one of those exists only in fantasy and the other is extremely rare. Let's face it, if you find yourself in some robbery/assault where the bad guys are using long guns, you're going to want to find cover quickly and ride out the storm, hopefully overlooked but with the means to still defend yourself at close range if the bad guys are looking for you.

I will readily concede that I have carried semi-autos for my LEO career (pretty much mandated & required) and for most of my off-duty carry as well. I have used a revolver as a backup for duty at times and occasionally for off-duty CCW. I never felt under-gunned in either case. For most of my CCW needs while off-duty, I find that different semi-autos work the best for me (lots of muscle memory from duty training). However, YMMV and I would never criticize a person for choosing a revolver or think they were somehow under-gunned.

Oldtimr

I carried a revolver on duty for 32 years, actually I carried two the first one was replaced because my agency rightfully determined they were not strong enough, that was a S&W mod 66 .357 mag, the next was a S&W mod 686 .357 mag. This was during the time that the 15 round magazine mania was running wild among police departments in the country and my state. Quiet frankly, I never felt outgunned because I practiced religiously, I was a firearm instructor and we qualified 3 times a year, one daylight, one nighttime and once winter, cold weather with heavy winter uniform. Our officer could shoot their service weapons and at one time we had to shoot one course of fire from 50 yards. That mod 686 is still my favorite handgun, I rarely carry it any more, it was presented to me when I retired, because it is hard to conceal, I usually carry a Kahr MK 40, however, it has a 6 round magazine so I have 7 rounds with one in the chamber. I have always subscribed to the Bill Hickok theory of gun fighting, and that was "you can't shoot fast enough to make up for poor marksmanship". I am 70 years old, and I still qualify once a year in order to maintain my nation wide carry permission as a retired law enforcement officer. The qualification is a 50 round course from 3 yards back to 25 yards. It includes drawing and firing a required number of rounds, either 2 or three and re holstering for body armor drills, drawing and firing and emptying the gun and combat reloading. The course is shot with a silhouette target, the kind with the bowling pin shaped kill zone in the center from the head to the waist. Each hole inside the bowling pin is 2 points and each hole outside the bowling pin but still in the kill or disable zone is one point and there. 3 of those holes must be in the head for the body armor drill. At 70 YO, I scored a 98 out of 100, except for the 3 in the head and 2 outside the bowling pin but in the scoring zone, I had a group the size of a saucer. A 15 round magazine would not have helped me shoot better. Any training program should be instructing people to take cover when available and not stand up like an old west gunfight. Take cover and let the guy with the large capacity magazine empty it and then nail him if you have a chance or before he runs out if you get the chance. As I remember the police wanted the large capacity mags because the pukes on the street had them so their department bought them. Heck, most of the people I dealt with had rifles or shotguns so a 15 round mag would have done me little good. This is just one of those things that all people will never agree on, fun for discussion but that is about it.

hunters_life

I'm not a huge proponent of the need for large capacity magazines for CCW. The only real reason I carry semi auto's is mainly the profile is easier and more comfortable to carry IWB. I am sure anyone that has carried a revolver IWB will be able to confirm that. Those wheels are awfully uncomfortable to put it mildly. Even covered in leather from the holster the fatter profile just doesn't lend to easy concealment. I was raised shooting both and, according to the handgun of course, am just as accurate with either. I find IWB to be the easiest for me to access and bring to bear on target so I carry what is the most comfortable. The old man most always carried in a shoulder holster so he could get away with hand cannons if he wanted. Though he usually carried one of his favorite .45's I caught him carrying one of his 4 inch .500 Smith & Wesson handguns on more than one occasion. I guess he was worried he would encounter a T-Rex or something.

Nomercy448

Despite my reality as a lifelong "revolver guy," I more often carry an auto pistol. Not because I feel under gunned, or short on round count, but simply because it's easier to conceal my pistols, and easier to conceal rapid-ready reloads. I most often carry a single stack small frame or micro frame pistol, so I really have no more rounds available in a semi-auto pistol than I do in my revolvers.

I don't carry a handgun because I expect to need to use it. I carry a handgun in case I unexpectedly found myself needing to use it. In those varied circumstances, there is no one answer which exactly suits, without excess in any other circumstance.

Sheridan

Almost a generational thing ?!?!

Ole' timers love revolvers ................. but "carry" pistols.

Oldtimr

Sheridan, there is a difference between carrying a handgun on a duty belt and carrying concealed! If my 686 revolver was easy to conceal, I would not be carrying a pistol for concealed carry. 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. To which I say, learn to shoot your sidearm no matter which kind it is and you won't need over a half a box of ammo in your magazine and 30 more rounds in reserve on your belt. The point of the article is more than generational, it is a mind set that more ammo is more important than being better than proficient with your sidearm.

Sheridan

Perhaps I should have stated; that ANY shots you take where you are not hitting your target don't count..........What's no matter how many shots you take !

More often (from my experience); the younger guyz seem to prefer to shoot AR's, short barreled shotguns & pistols + they like to empty the magazine as quickly as possible.

Older guys seem to gravitate toward wheel guns, break guns,levers & bolts.

Just a observation, not data taken from a study.


In either case, missing still doesn't count !

flags

The man with fewer shots available will not waste them. Guys with high capacity magazines tend to spray bullets all over the place with very little control. Shots that hit flesh count. Shots that hit sheetrock don't.

I know when I was on active duty and we were doing a lot of shooting with the 9mm we often put less than 5 rounds in a magazine and did exercises where we needed to take down 2 assailants. That sort of stops the wasting shot thing. I wouldn't feel at all handicapped if I had a 357 or 44 in my hands and the other guy has an auto, but then I've been trained at close quarters combat shooting so I probably have an edge no matter what I'm using.

Additionally I don't use a handgun for home defense, I use a 12 gauge pump and the best thing for self defense on the streets is situational awareness.