[quote]Varqanir wrote:
HolyMacaroni wrote:
Gregus wrote:
It’s actually why i prefer revolvers. Much safer and more powerful anyway, but heavier and bulkier. Perfect for home defense.
this is just a dumb statement. i don’t even know what to say back to it.
Well, yes and no. Gregus makes four statements, some of which are true, some of which are not. Let’s look at them.
- Revolvers are safer.
First off, let’s get semantics out of the way. Any gun is “safe” in the hands of a skilled user (assuming the gun is metallurgically and mechanically sound, and the ammunition has been loaded properly), whereas any gun would be “unsafe” in the hands of an idiot, a child, or someone who otherwise didn’t understand the basics of gun handling.
Now, mechanically, a double-action revolver is more difficult to fire unintentionally. You either have to manually cock the hammer and squeeze the trigger, or else squeeze the trigger through a long and heavy pull to cock and fire the piece. In either case, the action is deliberate. Not only that, but it’s consistent, if one trains only to shoot double-action, which is not a bad idea if you anticipate shooting for blood.
A single-action automatic pistol with an exposed hammer gives you many choices. You can carry with an empty chamber, racking the slide before the first shot. You can carry loaded and uncocked, cocking the hammer before the first shot. You can carry cocked and locked, working the safety before the first shot. And of course, after that first shot, you are cocked and unlocked, having to do nothing but squeeze that trigger again. Again, for the expert, this is all second nature, but for the novice, it’s a lot more confusing than “squeeze the trigger in a long, controlled pull for every shot.”
Sure, there are trigger-cocking-only handguns such as the Taurus Millennium and Heckler & Koch VP70Z, which allow a consistent mode of operation (as long as you ignore the Taurus’ quite superfluous thumb safety), but for simplicity, you just can’t beat the double action revolver. And simple means easily learned and retained, which translates to safety.
- Revolvers are more powerful.
Obviously not. There is nothing about the design of a revolver that makes it inherently more powerful than a semiautomatic pistol. A Colt .45 automatic and a Colt New Service revolver fire the same round, with equivalent barrel length. They are practically identical in the “power” department.
What can be said, however, is that revolvers are commonly available to fire more powerful cartridges than automatic pistols are. There are exceptions, such as the .44 Magnum Auto Mag, the AMT Grizzly, and the Desert Eagle, but I wouldn’t want to carry any of those monstrosities. They’re also ridiculously expensive, even if you can find them.
- Revolvers are heavier and bulkier.
Only if you figure weight divided by capacity, rather than weight divided by kinetic energy of the round it fires. Contrary to overwhelmingly popular opinion, you don’t need a handgun that holds half a box of ammunition in its magazine for self defense. What you need is a pistol that will end the engagement with the minimum number of shots fired. Knocking down an assailant with one center hit from a .45 is going to look a lot better to a jury than punching thirteen 9 mm holes in his worthless carcass.
A fully-loaded double action revolver is no heavier nor 'bulkier" than an automatic pistol firing an equivalently powerful cartridge, with equivalent barrel length. Even the Ruger Redhawk .45 Colt is three ounces lighter than the .45 Win Mag Grizzly, which you’d be hard pressed to find, let alone find ammunition for.
- Revolvers are perfect for home defense.
As I’ve said before, the “perfect” firearm for home defense is the one you have on you or within immediate reach when you need it. Any gun can be “perfect” if you are proficient with it, and it’s loaded with ammunition appropriate to the task.
That said, I’ll reiterate that for the vast majority of people, who probably won’t take the time to acquaint themselves intimately with the operation of their weapon, a large-caliber double-action revolver makes much more sense than a semiautomatic pistol for home defense, self-defense, and (as this video makes painfully clear) police work.[/quote]
You know what? Thanks for articulating exactly what i meant by my comment. I don’t know why it was misconstrued like i said autos are a less safe pistol due to some inhered design flaw. I was merely comparing the revolver and auto as the revolver being more stupid proof in regards to a screw up in leaving a round in the chamber.