cabba2203 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 do buy a certain car because someone on a guitar forum told you to? he should do his own research. i have heard the same crap repeated so many times. I bet you think a woman should always get a revolver because it's easier to use. That slide is just too hard for the average woman to work, right? i have heard that 138348572304587 times too....at gun shops, on forums and at gun shows. and by the same guys who ALWAYS tell someone to get a snub as a first handgun. . Oh, I 100% agree with always backing up anything you hear or read with your own research, as well as trying things hands on. I shoot with women who have no trouble handling 1911's so NO, I know what you mean but in general most non-gun interested, never going to do much shooting past any required training course fare better with a revolver than an auto. I also would never recommend a snub as a 1st handgun either. It's not just from my personal experience as a shooter and other shooters I talk/network with but from the general consensus of trainers who write books on the subject. I'm not trying to argue with you. I'm sure your opinions are based on your experiences as well. Just like I'm sure there are trainers who have the same opinion as you - in the end, it depends on what's best for the individual shooter. My whole thing was that comment trying to discount other's differing opinons as being from "internet commandos" (except for yours). There was a lot of sound advice given but yes, YMMV and always do your own research. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FennRx Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Don't buy a Glock either because somebody else likes them - as does my brother on a professional basis. The smaller Glocks make better sense for many people than the full-size, double-stack versions too. Even if you're a pro. Depends on usage. "Internet commando" isn't exactly a nice term to use for some folks who may have a bit of experience with firearms. A lotta folks differ on opinions of firearm brands and styles, and that's what keeps more than one company in business, just as with guitars. The revolver generally is recommended to beginners not because it's that much easier to operate - although there are some advantages to some designs - but more that it may require less disassembly type of maintenance in "home use." There's no chance for a stovepipe from a too-loose grip. It's also generally, depending on specific design, easier to determine if it's loaded without even touching it, even for one not trained with a given arm. A revolver has more ammunition options than any semi-automatic that has certain recoil and bullet shape requirements to properly function. There have been a number of variations of firearms issued to various U.S. military units for specific purposes over the past 150 years or so. I s'pose some recent special issues may have been Glocks, but I'm personally not aware of it. I don't care to have 15+ rounds of ammunition in the grip of any firearm carried in concealment because of the weight if not the size. A rural sheriff friend even quit carrying his 1911 on duty and went to a baby 1911 .380 because of back problems. I have had a number of types, shapes and sizes of sidearms; never a Glock. But I've also had a lotta guitars and never an LP or similar clone. Just never cared for either, personally. m i never said the military carried glocks (they cant because they dont meet the criteria to enter into the gov's competition. But his isn't a Glock vs ALL thing. You missed my point. My point is that the knee-jerk "a beginner needs a revolver" line isn't always true. and i've used Glock as evidence of that as well as pointing out that no US LE or military agency issues revolvers anymore. And a glock with 15 rounds of 9mm vs a 4 inch Smith .357? I bet those weights are similar. my internet commando line was not intended to smear anyone here, so i do apologize if my comment was taken that way. What I was getting at was that the OP should do his own research and try as many guns as possible...and not just take the advice of total strangers who may or may not have any real world experience. Again, my apologies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff-7 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 In this situation, you have to stop and ask yourself: WWBD? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damian Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 If you get a .357 Mag, you can also shoot .38 special in it as well. .38 is usually cheaper and has less recoil than the .357 magnum. It will allow you to practice longer and cheaper, then your home defense round will be the .357 Mag. Now, you still need to practice with your defense round as well, but you have the benefit of using both with one handgun. [thumbup] ..........yes..............with a decent length barrel... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabba2203 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 my internet commando line was not intended to smear anyone here, so i do apologize if my comment was taken that way. What I was getting at was that the OP should do his own research and try as many guns as possible...and not just take the advice of total strangers who may or may not have any real world experience. Again, my apologies. I apologize as well, It's all cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FirstMeasure Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 No offense here, but I don't think home protection the best reason to buy your first gun. All you'll do is introduce a weapon your not comfortable with into a situation your not prepared for. The person you'll pull it on, however, is comfortable breaking into houses and hurting people. The last thing you want to do is introduce a gun into that situation. A baseball bat, a dog, and a home alarm system would be my advice. If you're too freaked out to use a baseball bat on an intruder then you're too freaked out to use a gun. Now, if your willing to "Get Into Shooting", then you might want to consider a gun for home protection. You have to be very comfortable with using a firearm before you go using it, and I don't mean a couple classes and a trip to the range. I mean putting hours on it and shooting 1000 rounds or so a month until you are "Proficient". Remember, the Criminal you pull your gun on is likely to be pretty proficient with his weapon, and you wouldn't want to get on stage trading licks with Joe Bonamassa if you couldn't hold your own, same could be said for a gun fight. Guns don't protect your home, only your willingness and ability to use the gun will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fringe Lunatic Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I don't recall ever reading about any private person foiling a crime due to having a gun. The security value of owning a gun exists only in the owner's head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FennRx Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I don't recall ever reading about any private person foiling a crime due to having a gun. The security value of owning a gun exists only in the owner's head. you're kidding right? maybe if all you ever read is the Huffington Post. there are THOUSANDS examples every single year. And that doesn't include the ones that are not reported. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FennRx Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 http://www.theindychannel.com/news/9699752/detail.html http://www.theindychannel.com/news/3320630/detail.html http://www.theindychannel.com/news/5591346/detail.html first page of my google searh. one was a cop, but he was off duty and alone at his home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FennRx Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 http://www.wkrg.com/crime/article/robbery-victim-fatally-shoots-his-attacker/1203926/Jan-10-2011_7-42-pm/ http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=Gun+stops+intruder+%28and+Spader+trial+witness%29+at+lawmaker%27s+home&articleId=df5ec12d-4fc1-4f01-954d-ee4cae03a889 http://www2.wsav.com/news/2011/jan/05/beaufort-man-shoots-intruder-ar-1304059/ a couple more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FennRx Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 and read about this guy: http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/ he started as out as an anti, trying to prove the opposite of what he found. And he is way smarter than any of us. lolz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabba2203 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 No offense here, but I don't think home protection the best reason to buy your first gun. All you'll do is introduce a weapon your not comfortable with into a situation your not prepared for. The person you'll pull it on, however, is comfortable breaking into houses and hurting people. The last thing you want to do is introduce a gun into that situation. A baseball bat, a dog, and a home alarm system would be my advice. If your too freaked out to use a baseball bat on an intruder your too freaked out to use a gun. Now, if your willing to "Get Into Shooting", then you might want to consider a gun for home protection. You have to be very comfortable with using a firearm before you go using it, and I don't mean a couple classes and a trip to the range. I mean putting hours on it and shooting 1000 rounds or so a month until you are "Proficient". Remember, the Criminal you pull your gun on is likely to be pretty proficient with his weapon, and you wouldn't want to get on stage trading licks with Joe Bonamassa if you couldn't hold your own, same could be said for a gun fight. Guns don't protect your home, only your willingness and ability to use the gun will. None taken, you make a valid point. I can only hope nobody ever has to be put in the situation where they have to take a life to keep their's in their own home, but if they have to, I'd rather they have something other than a baseball bat to use. Physically attacking someone with a bat, especially against someone armed with a gun or knife takes a lot more skill than the muscle memory of draw, aim, squeeze. A lot of times brandishing the gun will defuse the situation. Home invaders want easy loot and easy prey. I know my mother isn't going to be able to beat down a young thug with her cane to save her life, but her pistol will give her better odds. One can only hope that people choosing to get a gun for defense will get more into shooting and training with their weapon than the minimum required, but it's not a perfect world. I've seen POLICE qualifications where officers barely pass because they just view their handgun as another tool on their duty belt and do maintenance on it more than shoot it. Most people think the Police are well trained shooters. LOL - not so. Still, it's better they have it than not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Searcy Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 True Fenn, But the average person never hears those stories. The NRA web site is a good place to read about people defending them selves with guns. There are also the cases where Mr. BadGuy thinks he's going to rob Joe public. Joe flashes his weapon and Mr. BadGuy changes his mind. No one gets hurt and the news worthy story is avoided all together. But I will admit that I have never used my guns to defend my home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabba2203 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I don't recall ever reading about any private person foiling a crime due to having a gun. The security value of owning a gun exists only in the owner's head. Wow, I'm sorry - You must have a very narrow and blinded selection of reading material and live media. To each their own. People only see and believe what fits their comfort zone. At least we can agree on great guitars! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Fenn... Actually, even more than with guitars, I think there are reasons for a number of types of firearm. I wouldn't personally recommend larger firearms for concealed carry for the average person who may need to carry. That would include certainly a Mod. 27 Smith as well as most double-stack semiautomatics. Personally I've never felt a need for large cap magazines although I'd lie if I said I've never used them. I look at 'em kinda like I look at Telecasters. They make sense for special circumstances, but not my usual sorts of considerations. I don't even own a Tele. ... As for how often firearms are used without even being fired to defuse a bad situation, you have some differentials in terms of who will accept what kind of a "report" that such had been done. Some studies indicate hundreds of thousands of times a year. I dunno. Fenn and I will agree wholeheartedly that it's far more than some folks might imagine and definitely more often than anti-firearms folks wanna admit. m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FirstMeasure Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 None taken, you make a valid point. I can only hope nobody ever has to be put in the situation where they have to take a life to keep their's in their own home, but if they have to, I'd rather they have something other than a baseball bat to use. Physically attacking someone with a bat, especially against someone armed with a gun or knife takes a lot more skill than the muscle memory of draw, aim, squeeze. A lot of times brandishing the gun will defuse the situation. Home invaders want easy loot and easy prey. I know my mother isn't going to be able to beat down a young thug with her cane to save her life, but her pistol will give her better odds. One can only hope that people choosing to get a gun for defense will get more into shooting and training with their weapon than the minimum required, but it's not a perfect world. I've seen POLICE qualifications where officers barely pass because they just view their handgun as another tool on their duty belt and do maintenance on it more than shoot it. Most people think the Police are well trained shooters. LOL - not so. Still, it's better they have it than not. The bold part is the issue. Most people who think "Guns kill people", the come around to thinking "Guns Protect my Home" seldom fully realize that "People Kill People" and "People Protect Their Homes". If that point is never fully realized, the new gun owner will Brandish his weapon right into the hands of the intruder who may or may not practice gun safety. My argument is not against using guns for home defense, it's against using a gun without respect or genuine interest for the weapon. I'd argue that your Grandma is better of locking herself in a safe room and calling the police "IF SHE IS NOT QUALIFIED ON HER WEAPON". If she is qualified then she know what to do and she doesn't need my advice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaxson50 Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Jax... RE: the .22 - yeah, because it was really the first cartridge arm as we know it today. <grin> The problem always with this sort of discussion is that even "the old guys" never really agree on equipment or tactics, and largely because of personal experience at this or that. It comes back to my very first comment here... Everything can work, including a pillow, nothing always works regardless of theoretical advantages. I seriously believe that guitars and personal firearms are incredibly similar in that "playability" is somewhat subjective and also is tied to one's entire life training and the perceived venue of usage. As for home safety... so many, many variables and probably a fire extinguisher in the kitchen is as good a home safety device as anything... for a number of reasons. EDIT: Tartan... if people had no inclination to hurt others outside overt military circumstances, why shouldn't they have even a tank if they have the place to play with it? It's probably safer than a multi-engine airplane regardless. m A bar of soap in a sock is a lethal weapon...every bit as dangerous as a black jack (which nobody under 30 knows about)...How about a rubber mallet? Remember when every cop was trained in the art of the night stick!?! Now they carry a Taser and pepper spray and a gun, handcuffs, cell phones, radios... One thing I have taught my kids and told my wife, if you are alone and in danger, like say in a parking building, or a office building after hours...pull a fire alarm! You will scare off the bad guy pronto! There are so many things a person can do to stay safe..that do not include a weapon...just go to a shopping mall and watch the people, how many of them are aware of what is going on around them? I chew my wife out all the time because she doesn't take her keys out of her purse until she is at the car..or she gets in the car and doesn't lock the door right away, then she starts the car and sits there dinking around with the doors unlocked!..Be ready to get in the car. Lock the doors, start the engine and get going... How many people check for the nearest exit when they go into a public building? It's the first thing I look for..(just before I look for the head).... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fringe Lunatic Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Jax, thanks for adding some common sense perspective. I have no political views on gun control, but I do have personal views about gun owners with BS reasons to own them. It's not the ownership that I fear; it's the delusional owners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Jax... And how many males are aware of surroundings in a public restroom in a shopping mall... m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabba2203 Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 but I do have personal views about gun owners with BS reasons to own them. It's not the ownership that I fear; it's the delusional owners. I have the same feelings on automobile ownership. The automobile is one of the most deadliest things a citizen can own and it requires even less training, permitting and regulations than what a gun owner has to go through. We even toss the keys to people as young as 15 years old. I fear people's lack of ability to control their vehicle more than anyone I've ever met with a firearm. I've seen more death caused by drivers of automobiles than privatly owned firearms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabba2203 Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 The bold part is the issue. Most people who think "Guns kill people", the come around to thinking "Guns Protect my Home" seldom fully realize that "People Kill People" and "People Protect Their Homes". If that point is never fully realized, the new gun owner will Brandish his weapon right into the hands of the intruder who may or may not practice gun safety. My argument is not against using guns for home defense, it's against using a gun without respect or genuine interest for the weapon. I'd argue that your Grandma is better of locking herself in a safe room and calling the police "IF SHE IS NOT QUALIFIED ON HER WEAPON". If she is qualified then she know what to do and she doesn't need my advice. I couldn't agree more with you in wishing people who half-heartedly buy a gun for personal defense would put in the time and interest in becoming as proficient as they can with the tool they chose to defend themselves with. I love training with my guns. I'm very proficient with every weapon I own. I help new gun owners out whenever I can. I do disagree with you on the grandma scenario. Yes, even in states where you have the castle doctrine and aren't required to retreat, I would suggest that to my mother as her first step, hide and dial 911 but when it comes down to her having done that and her life still being threatened, I'd rather she have the weapon as an option regardless if she chose to put in extra time at the range. As I've said, she'd be no less better off than some law enforcement officers I have seen who walk the streets every day with more chance to be put in a use of lethal force scenario than my mom or "granny". As I said, we just differ slightly - I mostly agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FirstMeasure Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 I couldn't agree more with you in wishing people who half-heartedly buy a gun for personal defense would put in the time and interest in becoming as proficient as they can with the tool they chose to defend themselves with. I love training with my guns. I'm very proficient with every weapon I own. I help new gun owners out whenever I can. I do disagree with you on the grandma scenario. Yes, even in states where you have the castle doctrine and aren't required to retreat, I would suggest that to my mother as her first step, hide and dial 911 but when it comes down to her having done that and her life still being threatened, I'd rather she have the weapon as an option regardless if she chose to put in extra time at the range. As I've said, she'd be no less better off than some law enforcement officers I have seen who walk the streets every day with more chance to be put in a use of lethal force scenario than my mom or "granny". As I said, we just differ slightly - I mostly agree. Yeah, I can see your point, too. I just like to point out the reality of owning a gun for personal protection is USING the gun for personal protection lies in the user, no the gun. Just like the guitar doesn't play itself, the pistol isn't going to hit the target. (I Forgot to stay a little on topic) I'd get a Smith & Wesson SD9. Great learner, easy to operate and not much kick. Or a nice Pump action 12 gauge, if you don't mind some Kick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeoConMan Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 And you guys may wanna think twice about making fun of Granny. Fringe Lunatic - listen up... My mother is in her seventies, and will kill somebody graveyard dead with her 22Mag revolver. (I took her 38 away, so she doesn't break bones in her hand.) She has displayed a gun three times since she was 50, to change the mind of some youthful dirtbag. In this thread, I wonder how many of YOUR mothers would have been victims instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeoConMan Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 My point is that the knee-jerk "a beginner needs a revolver" line isn't always true. It almost always is. I've introduced many, many women to shooting over the years. My wife was shooting when she was a child, and uses my 10mm with absolutely no problems. My mother was shooting for food when she was a child in the 1940s. They almost universally prefered a revolver. As my wife now says, it's the original "point & click" interface. When it counts, my mother and wife will go to a revolver every time. My oldest daughter likes a semi-auto, same reason she likes a clutch in a car. Shames the boys... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FennRx Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 i can counter your anecdotal evidence with my own. i yielded to that advice myself and was quite unhappy with my purchase. even though my wife was a good shot with my Smith, she didn't like it either; she much preferred my Bobcat .22. if the man wants a semi-auto, don't beat him to death with a revolver; that's all. Kinda like when someone says "should I buy a Deluxe Reverb or Bassman?" and everyone tells him to get a Marshall JTM45. there are a lot of advantages to pistols such as the Glock, which I laid out in my first post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.