My options are somewhat limited by price, more than anything, so it's not likely to be imported or custom-made or even customized.
At the moment, I had one of these in mind:
Colt model 01991. The site lists it as Carbon steel frame, 5" barrel, 8 1/2" overall length, spur hammer, rosewood grip, standard grip safety, single action.
Most of the reviews I've read about it are quite positive-- Colt's really improved their baseline government model handgun, to the point where many people don't even really want to customize it much because it works so well out of the box. But I'm not really set on any specific pistol, and I'd want to test fire it in order to see if it really suits me, so I'm open for suggestions.
Feel free to talk about guns in general, especially detailed recommendations.
One thing I've wondered (as handguns are rare where I come from)- where would you store the gun, if it's for personal protection?
My brother was an advocate of always (or as much as possible) having it "on you" if you have it for that reason. I've read other arguments for storing it in a gun case.
I use guns for hunting, and wouldn't be comfortable with owning one for self protection I think (I'm a klutz) but I'm interested to know what you guys think.
Colt makes a fine weapon, I haven't read any negative reviews on em.
.45 is going to be a bit rough, though if you've fired a lot before you may be fine with it. Hell you may carry a 10mm for all I know. They do make 9mm versions, I don't want to start a "my bullet is better then your bullet" argument, but either one would do ya. Shot placement is all that really matters.
That and you can punk guys on dates when they mention their little glocks and make them feel like chumps for their plastic toys.
I know you mentioned Sigs, my boy is a Fed and his duty and off duty pistol is a Sig, a very nice pistol, didn't fit my monkey hands that well, but you are paying for the name of Sig.
I just recommend staying away from Taurus, Hi Point, and a few others. And while I despise Glocks for so many reasons, they are not a bad pistol to own. But god their ugly.
I guess I gotta ask, what do you want the pistol for? Bump in the dark nightstand? Target Practice? Do you plan on carrying it day to day, either on the body or in a purse?
Da Boss wrote:One thing I've wondered (as handguns are rare where I come from)- where would you store the gun, if it's for personal protection?
Depends on if I'm at my home or out about in the city. In the city, I'd be obeying the oddly strict concealed carry laws that Texas has for handguns (but not shotguns or rifles, go figure). In my home, I'd probably have it on a case on the top shelf well out of reach of my bratty nephews, with a loaded magazine ready in case of someone breaking into my home, but not actually inserted into the gun as a precaution against the kids.
Sckitzo wrote:I guess I gotta ask, what do you want the pistol for? Bump in the dark nightstand? Target Practice? Do you plan on carrying it day to day, either on the body or in a purse?
Target practice with my father, and carrying it on me as personal protection.
I'd like to own a gun at some point. I need to move into my own place first and then do a bunch of research. Like seriously, all I have to go on for now is "what gun seems really cool" and that'd be a Walther PPK, IMO. Absolutely no idea what the pros and cons of a PPK are so...... like I said, research. Lots and lots of research.
Melissia wrote:FITZZ: Nice! That's a piece of history, there!
I inherited it when I turned 21, my Mother had been holding it after she and my Father divorced and she gave it to me.
I've had to have some work done to it, but it still fires like a champ...
Though for the most part my primary firearm ( as I tend to baby the Colt), is the Taurus PT92..
..
It's chambered for 9mm, but it's a damn fine pistol.
Da Boss wrote:One thing I've wondered (as handguns are rare where I come from)- where would you store the gun, if it's for personal protection?
My brother was an advocate of always (or as much as possible) having it "on you" if you have it for that reason. I've read other arguments for storing it in a gun case.
I use guns for hunting, and wouldn't be comfortable with owning one for self protection I think (I'm a klutz) but I'm interested to know what you guys think.
In the US, it's State dependent, some States require they stay locked up, some don't.
My expensive and historic pieces (I have a few rifles and such from WW2) stay in the safe, the shotgun stays by the bed and the pistol on the kitchen counter. I have no kids, and the only guests that come over know firearms and not to touch my guns without asking.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
RatBot wrote:I'd like to own a gun at some point. I need to move into my own place first and then do a bunch of research. Like seriously, all I have to go on for now is "what gun seems really cool" and that'd be a Walther PPK, IMO. Absolutely no idea what the pros and cons of a PPK are so...... like I said, research. Lots and lots of research.
For the love of god no, my Mom has one, I hate that pistol. You know that webbing in between your thumb and index finger? That area of skin right above it? Do you like it being there? If so, don't get a PPK.
Their what I consider a purse gun, great for CC but painful to shoot.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
MrDwhitey wrote:Why on earth would you do that? Why hide it and not take it out for some practice at least?
Because they cost 2k dollars are people are afraid of scratching them up
It drives me insane, I just want to adopt that poor pistol from them
Melissia wrote:
Sckitzo wrote:I guess I gotta ask, what do you want the pistol for? Bump in the dark nightstand? Target Practice? Do you plan on carrying it day to day, either on the body or in a purse?
Target practice with my father, and carrying it on me as personal protection.
1911's ain't to bad to carry, I suggest a cross breed holster if decide to on body carry (though most of my girl friends hate carrying inside the waste band, you women and your hips)
If you have a pretty fat budget, that Colt will be great, if you sell your car, buy a Kimber .45's are a bit pricey though, your dad doesn't happen to reload or anything does he?
My buddy Randall carries, and when he first started doing that he had a colt .45. He loved shooting it an all that, but he said it was just to cumbersome to carry all the time. It was even some model designed for carry I guess. He swapped it out for a lightweight 9mm and he loves to carry that one so much more. So you might want to reconsider if your planning on carrying the gun
KingCracker wrote:My buddy Randall carries, and when he first started doing that he had a colt .45. He loved shooting it an all that, but he said it was just to cumbersome to carry all the time. It was even some model designed for carry I guess. He swapped it out for a lightweight 9mm and he loves to carry that one so much more. So you might want to reconsider if your planning on carrying the gun
I carry a Beretta 90-Two in .40 http://www.beretta90two.com/ and it gets uncomfortable, it's a full sized pistol like the 1911. I started using a pocket pistol in warmed weather, but I still carry the Beretta.
He brings up a good point, a few companies do make carry variants, and I know Kimber actually makes ladies models.
No, my budget is limited. I'd probably be buying a Colt Government Model 01991, as I mentioned above. It's about 800 USD, which I consider a bit steep myself (color me poor), but it's gotten a lot of good reviews, and it's a common style with easy to replace parts and easy to find ammunition.
Colt has a shorter version, or more accurately, two of them, the O4091U and O4691 model colts .45s. The barrels are 3/4ths an inch shorter, lending to a total length of 7 3/4". Of those two, the second one is most likely, as again, I prefer the blued steel.
Well just keep in mind the comfort of it all, unless your going to open carry, then Im sure it wont matter to much But he is also a burly guy, so maybe its a gut thing that makes it uncomfy *shrugs*
For the love of god no, my Mom has one, I hate that pistol. You know that webbing in between your thumb and index finger? That area of skin right above it? Do you like it being there? If so, don't get a PPK.
Their what I consider a purse gun, great for CC but painful to shoot.
Considering how much many handguns cost, it's almost always a good idea to research. Research it like you were buying yourself a new TV or even a new car. Your research could save your life one day.
For the love of god no, my Mom has one, I hate that pistol. You know that webbing in between your thumb and index finger? That area of skin right above it? Do you like it being there? If so, don't get a PPK.
Their what I consider a purse gun, great for CC but painful to shoot.
Hm. Well, like I said. Lots of research to do.
Sorry if I came off harsh or dickish at all, I just really hate that gun
If your new to firearms and pistols in general, I suggest a Ruger Mk I, II or III. Good pistol to learn the basics with.
And Melissia, like I said that Colt will do you well, as long as your comfortable with it, the best gun is the one you practice with the most. And I do gotta admit, that is a nice looking pistol. Though I've heard the grip can rub you raw if your wearing IWB. How were you planning on carrying it?
I'm built like a antelope, so I ended up having to more of a over the kidney type carry with my pistol as I just have no hip area for the holster to rest up against.
I'm not sure. The concealed carry laws in Texas are somewhat labyrinthine, to say the least.
A concealed carry holster of some sort to be sure (that one looks good), and when weather permits, in my duster after a bit of modifying to put a holster in it (with the appropriate security to ensure it doesn't slip out) might be appropriate.
Hmm, I like IWB my self, not a huge fan of open carry honestly.
As I mentioned, alot of my friends of the female type are not fans of IWB due to the cut of yall's clothing and such, do you know anyone that can let you borrow a holster (with a 1911 would be best) to try it out?
I can't help you out on Tx's gun laws, from what I understand their pretty decent though.
And just because it's a gun thread, pictures of that Jericho I mentioned
Now for the record, I have shot the DE a bit, and I to loathe it, it's a over hyped gangbanger gun.
The Jericho is nothing like it, it's smooth, crisp and accurate as hell. Where as the DE was sloppy, cumbersome and just felt... wrong. Not to mention if you limp wristed it you would drop the mag from the gun... wtf
I'm the first to hate on a gun for being a POS, but besides some visual similarities, their very different. But, if you don't like how they look ya don't like em, one of the reasons I hate Glocks.
For my part, I don't like how most glocks look either (some models look okay).
If I was buying purely on aesthetics, I'd get a nice magnum revolver like the Raging Bull or Anaconda, heh. But this is a gun I intend to actually use, and it has to be affordable as well.
Have not held one in person yet, but I frequent a couple of more gun friendly boards and people seem to like it alot. It's a pretty decent looking gun, with a big round. Looks to be a full sized so that can either be a blessing or a curse depending. S&W has been making firearms a long, long time, I trust their name so I'd give it a fair shot if I was looking for a .45 that wasn't a 1911.
Also Melissia, have you fired a 1911 yet? I imagine Texas has a few indoor ranges where you can't rent a pistol for an hour, I'd recommend doing that and go through 50-100 rounds to see how you like it.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I carry a Ruger SP-101 from time to time, Revolvers have their place, but they do sorta take the back seat anymore. Glocks are just to...blocky for me, why I went with a Beretta, nice and pretty
I don't remember, actually. I've fired a wide variety of handguns, but most of them my father sold off (he received some hand-me-downs from his friends) and only kept the one he liked firing the most and a small heirloom pistol from his mother's side. I don't remember all of the guns he had at the time.
I should go do that, find one which allows me to rent out a 1991/1911 handgun for firing.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sckitzo wrote:Revolvers have their place, but they do sorta take the back seat anymore.
Indeed. Especially now that Colt stopped making all their revolvers except for their SAA.
Sckitzo wrote:Have not held one in person yet, but I frequent a couple of more gun friendly boards and people seem to like it alot. It's a pretty decent looking gun, with a big round. Looks to be a full sized so that can either be a blessing or a curse depending. S&W has been making firearms a long, long time, I trust their name so I'd give it a fair shot if I was looking for a .45 that wasn't a 1911.
Also Melissia, have you fired a 1911 yet? I imagine Texas has a few indoor ranges where you can't rent a pistol for an hour, I'd recommend doing that and go through 50-100 rounds to see how you like it.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I carry a Ruger SP-101 from time to time, Revolvers have their place, but they do sorta take the back seat anymore. Glocks are just to...blocky for me, why I went with a Beretta, nice and pretty
Been looking at both the S&W and the HK45...the HK price tag is a bit prohibative though, but the S&W looked and felt pretty good.
Melissia wrote:Considering how much many handguns cost, it's almost always a good idea to research. Research it like you were buying yourself a new TV or even a new car. Your research could save your life one day.
Of course. I'll certainly ask around, check websites, magazines, books, whatever I can get my hands on and only buy one after I have enough information to really know what the hell I'm buying.
Melissia wrote:Considering how much many handguns cost, it's almost always a good idea to research. Research it like you were buying yourself a new TV or even a new car. Your research could save your life one day.
Of course. I'll certainly ask around, check websites, magazines, books, whatever I can get my hands on and only buy one after I have enough information to really know what the hell I'm buying.
If you have any questions feel free to PM me, but I am just another random dude on the internet, the best place to start is
What is you firearm experience?
What are you wanting, a pistol, rifle or shotgun?
Why do you want this (what's it's intended use)?
Sckitzo wrote:Have not held one in person yet, but I frequent a couple of more gun friendly boards and people seem to like it alot. It's a pretty decent looking gun, with a big round. Looks to be a full sized so that can either be a blessing or a curse depending. S&W has been making firearms a long, long time, I trust their name so I'd give it a fair shot if I was looking for a .45 that wasn't a 1911.
Also Melissia, have you fired a 1911 yet? I imagine Texas has a few indoor ranges where you can't rent a pistol for an hour, I'd recommend doing that and go through 50-100 rounds to see how you like it.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I carry a Ruger SP-101 from time to time, Revolvers have their place, but they do sorta take the back seat anymore. Glocks are just to...blocky for me, why I went with a Beretta, nice and pretty
Been looking at both the S&W and the HK45...the HK price tag is a bit prohibative though, but the S&W looked and felt pretty good.
Went through a medical class with a Ranger in Iraq that had one, that pistol was stupid big, I was joking that if he ran out of ammo he could beat the other guy to death...he got a bit butt hurt but the point stood.
H&K make a damn fine pistol, but they know it, if you call their help line it goes like this
"Velcome to H&K, vhat Agency do you vork for?"
"Umm...none? I'm just a dude that bought one of you..
"VHAT?! A Simple mortal has vone of our precious vorks of art! I am calling the NSA!!!!"
I may be exaggeration, a bit, but still, their not all that nice
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Melissia wrote:I don't remember, actually. I've fired a wide variety of handguns, but most of them my father sold off (he received some hand-me-downs from his friends) and only kept the one he liked firing the most and a small heirloom pistol from his mother's side. I don't remember all of the guns he had at the time.
I should go do that, find one which allows me to rent out a 1991/1911 handgun for firing.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sckitzo wrote:Revolvers have their place, but they do sorta take the back seat anymore.
Indeed. Especially now that Colt stopped making all their revolvers except for their SAA.
I so want a matching pair of SAA's (damn you Steven King), but the price tag makes me hide in a corner.
Do you have a prference on single action vs. double action?
i personally prefer the double action since it might be my wife needing to use it at some point instead of me.
Have you looked at the Ruger series of guns? i used to reload. i had a Beretta 92 and a Ruger P89. the Ruger would
shoot anything i fed it, but the Beretta was a jam-o-matic. and the nice thing about Ruger is you can get it for around $450-$500.
leaves you a little money to buy the bullets with!
My grandfather has both the Luger his uncle brought home from the European Theater and the Colt 1911 he served with...I've had the pleasure of seeing and firing both and the Colt is definitely a good gun...
Its got a nice kick, just like my favorite Mexican food!
Joking aside, I would recommend a Ruger 9mm. Just your basic, nothing-fancy 9mm pistol. We've got one and it's easy to fire, not too big, and both the gun and ammo are relatively inexpensive. It's not really a looker, but it does the job, and that's what's important, right?
alarmingrick wrote:Do you have a prference on single action vs. double action? i personally prefer the double action since it might be my wife needing to use it at some point instead of me. Have you looked at the Ruger series of guns? i used to reload. i had a Beretta 92 and a Ruger P89. the Ruger would shoot anything i fed it, but the Beretta was a jam-o-matic. and the nice thing about Ruger is you can get it for around $450-$500. leaves you a little money to buy the bullets with!
TBH? I think single action would be better, as the trigger pull is usually a bit harder from my experience. Which may sound odd, but it's a safety thing (less likely to accidently fire it), and safety is rather high in my mind. May be getting them reversed though.
alarmingrick wrote:Do you have a prference on single action vs. double action?
i personally prefer the double action since it might be my wife needing to use it at some point instead of me.
Have you looked at the Ruger series of guns? i used to reload. i had a Beretta 92 and a Ruger P89. the Ruger would
shoot anything i fed it, but the Beretta was a jam-o-matic. and the nice thing about Ruger is you can get it for around $450-$500.
leaves you a little money to buy the bullets with!
DA all the way for me, I do like having the decock option though.
I like Ruger for their revolver's and .22's, not a huge fan of their SA's, but old man Ruger's politics pissed me off alot, now that he's rolling in the grave over what his son is doing the business is coming back up (though they make a hideous AR-15)
My Beretta even eats the nasty Russian steel case I feed it, but Ruger's do have that benefit of being about half the price of a new Beretta...
rubiksnoob wrote:Joking aside, I would recommend a Ruger 9mm. Just your basic, nothing-fancy 9mm pistol. We've got one and it's easy to fire, not too big, and both the gun and ammo are relatively inexpensive. It's not really a looker, but it does the job, and that's what's important, right?
That's what i'm talking about! Does a good job at a good price.
It also comes in the .45 caliber too if you really wanted to stay in that range.
Melissia wrote:I likewise generally dislike Rugers, although that one looks okay.
Well, if you really have the burning, insatiable desire to pay hundreds of dollars more for a pretty looking gun, more power to you!
However, my choice would be the cheap, reliable gun that does the job, even if it doesn't have supermodel looks. And plus, if you're going for concealed carry no one is going to see it anyway!
A quality 1911 (read not a Taurus ) is always going to be a bit pricey.
The Ruger's are about half the price, but their two completely different guns, 1911's are sorta in a class of their own.
I own three Ruger's but for self defense I'd rather spend the money on a name I trust a bit more, some of the Ruger's have been failing QA and end up going back to the factory a few times, which can rack up on FFA fees.
But sometimes their spot on and do great, I normally fire a hundred rounds a month or so through my main pistols (not the black powder as it scares the piss out of me) so I can recommend the ones I have, can't vouch for the Ruger's really, or even the Colt's but a few of my gun nut buddies seem to do pretty well with em.
Have to admit I'm a bit perplexed by your apparent dislike of Taurus sckitzo, I've owned my PT92 for well over a decade and have had absolutely no problems with it..
Melissia wrote:Uhm. What? The guns I listed were themselves relatively cheap.
You could probably get a quality used Ruger for under 200 bucks if you shopped around a little.
I could get a used 1911 for quite cheap too, as they're more common here than rugers. But I want to buy a new gun, which I own myself, completely and utterly, as it were. Perhaps I'll eventually even customize it, with a grip more suited to my hands and etc, but that's too far into the future.
FITZZ wrote: Have to admit I'm a bit perplexed by your apparent dislike of Taurus sckitzo, I've owned my PT92 for well over a decade and have had absolutely no problems with it..
Their getting better, but the 90's early 2000 was a bad time for them CS and QA wise
Here is one thread that sums up one dudes experience.
Though mainly my paranoia goes towards their revolvers, not the SA's, I fired one of their 1911 clones, it was decent but didn't feel that great to me.
I'm just picky, their a decent range gun at an affordable price, I just wouldn't carry one for self defense unless it was a brand I personally trusted, I've fired thousands of rounds out of Beretta's enough that I trust em and know their quirks, but alot of people hate them with a passion.
halonachos wrote:You want cheap, Russian surplus. You want dependable, spend a little bit more.
Hey my Mosin Nagant eats everything! Sure, it's heavy, kicks like a mule and looks like it saw service in Stalingrad, but if I run out of ammo I can spear someone with it
The Mosin Nagant, however, is somewhat unique amongst Russian firearms pre-AK47 in that it's actually good (heck, even German sharpshooters tried to get their hands on them in WWII).
Melissia wrote:The Mosin Nagant, however, is somewhat unique amongst Russian firearms pre-AK47 in that it's actually good (heck, even German sharpshooters tried to get their hands on them in WWII).
Nein, I'm talking about the 1895 Nagant revolver. Seven rounds, gas seal, special looking bullets, ability to be silenced. It was issued during the second world war and the NVA used silenced versions as assassination weapons, other notable groups to use it include the USSR, and secret police agencies. In fact it was issued to recon/scout units during the second world war.
Melissia wrote:I was responding to Sckitzo's post...
Oh, okay then yes I do agree with you.
Hell right now I'm in a pickle, do I get a 1895 revolver or do I get the M44 Nagant Carbine for $200.00?
M44, and this is just internet talk, but I've heard the 1895 is one of the most unpleasant pistols ever made to fire, and that ammo is pricey as hell, when you can find it. I have not shot one in person though, but I would like one to go with my 91/30
kar98's with matching serials are about as common as a black scottish cyclops according to the demoman from TF2. The weapon was taken from POWs and the bolts were thrown into one pile while the rifle was tossed into another one, then the ones they made later in the war lacked serial numbers and stamping.
The 91/30 is a fun Mosin, but the M44 looks fun too.
Melissia wrote:They're an option, but I'm very particular on my revolver aesthetics.
Not clean, but very rugged looking.
The cartridges are similar to a .32 and some of them can fire .32 but its not recommended. Ammo itself was not that bad actually, it doesn't come in huge boxes but I have a box of it for when I do actually buy one.
In regards to Taurus...the only real experience I have with those particularly is my Dad's Judge...its great for home defense because it can fire shotgun shells, so its handy to have something with that kind of stopping power in such a small package...
halonachos wrote:Nein, I'm talking about the 1895 Nagant revolver. Seven rounds, gas seal, special looking bullets, ability to be silenced. It was issued during the second world war and the NVA used silenced versions as assassination weapons, other notable groups to use it include the USSR, and secret police agencies. In fact it was issued to recon/scout units during the second world war.
reminds me of this...
Spoiler:
Its the Welrod pistol, had a one bullet magazine and the entire barrel was the silencer. It was cheap, easy to produce and it worked. Was used by the OSS in WWII.
If we start talking about bolt actions though, my favorite has to be the 1903 Springfield. The one my uncle has came with its bayonet, so you can stab stuff with it, but I'd rather use its accuracy to my advantage TBH...
Look up the ballistics data on the Judge, it's actually terrible for self defense.
The .45LC rounds loose to much pressure due to the elongated cylinder
.410 is a terrible round for self defense, even worse out of a pistol.
Slugs were the only thing that came close to meeting the FBI standard, and given the price of .410 ammo you can do alot better.
It's a Ranch gun, and a novelty gun. It does great as a ranch hand pistol, as it can deal with critters from snakes up to mountain lions, but no way would I use one for self defense, rather just have a shotgun for home defense and a pistol for when I'm out and about.
7 GRAND?! I could almost buy a Barret for that. That is a fine looking pistol, hit up pawn shops, every once in a while someone doesn't know what their selling...
7 GRAND?! I could almost buy a Barret for that. That is a fine looking pistol, hit up pawn shops, every once in a while someone doesn't know what their selling...
I know! It sucks, but because Colt only makes their fugly little SAAs nowadays (yes, I know, heresy, but I HATE how the SAA looks and feels in my hand) all their other revolvers have skyrocketed.
Ugly guns don't sell well and people like revolvers with nice looks or something that would look fun to have on a mantle. I personally don't like to show off my weapons, sure I'll talk about them but I'm more about functionality and history. A gun used by Russian scouts during the war and maybe some secret police sounds pretty nifty.
halonachos wrote:I look at price too though, I could get more than 10 nagants for the price of one 1903.
But once you have one Nagant... might as well buy a few more
I still want a 1903, but when I buy WW2 MilSurp, I only buy war issue... which makes buying the American guns a PITA as ever since Saving Private Ryan came out the prices on them have gone through the roof.
halonachos wrote:I look at price too though, I could get more than 10 nagants for the price of one 1903.
True...but I already have a springfield...
Sckitzo wrote:Look up the ballistics data on the Judge, it's actually terrible for self defense.
The .45LC rounds loose to much pressure due to the elongated cylinder
.410 is a terrible round for self defense, even worse out of a pistol.
Slugs were the only thing that came close to meeting the FBI standard, and given the price of .410 ammo you can do alot better.
It's a Ranch gun, and a novelty gun. It does great as a ranch hand pistol, as it can deal with critters from snakes up to mountain lions, but no way would I use one for self defense, rather just have a shotgun for home defense and a pistol for when I'm out and about.
-shrugs- Dunno what to tell you, fired it myself, seemed to do fine on the range, not saying its my favorite but it seemed like an alright gun to me. I'd rather use our Sig P226 anyway...
...Ha, I like the look of the Ranch Hand...reminds me of that old Steve McQueen series.
As to my own experiances with Rossi, no real complaints, reasonably accurate, nil on signifigant kick ( but I'm a big guy), easy to maintain...did have some misfire issues, but those have been corrected.
It's a Niche gun, if you feel comfortable with it then by all means, I was just severely disappointed in the data. The .410 isn't meant for 2 legged critters and that .45 got neutered tossing it in that pistol.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Don't know alot about Rossi...but man I want that Ranch hand
It's kinda sad, the semi-autos I like are relatively cheap, while the revolvers I like are expensive, despite the fact that the revolvers are simpler and cheaper to make...
Anyone ever shoot anything in .50 caliber? My uncle brought one of his friends to the range with us one time and he brought two pistols; A Desert Eagle and an S&W Model 500...
Originally I wanted to fire both of them but they insisted they do it first....afterwards I really didn't want to, my uncle wasn't ready for the recoil completely and the gun clocked him in the nose slightly...
FITZZ wrote: Honestly, when it comes to home defense I'll opt for the 12 Gauge every time.
Exactly, was using my AR for a while, then realized that was a horrible, horrible idea, especially since I had steel core ammo guns to damn complex for my wife to work reliably so I just stick the 12G there, that and shes stupid good with it.
Sckitzo wrote:I love mine, and I love my K98K, so much history behind both of em, I just wish the K98 had matching serial numbers.
Good luck finding that.
To Melissa, I would highly recommend a sub frame, DA 1911 variant for a carry gun. 1911's for all of their grandeur have three things going against them:
1: Single Action only, they must be carried cocked and with the safety on. Not a huge deal, but most of the guru's on CC don't like Single Action Only guns. I would contend that SAO automatics are a bit to "fumbly" for a quick situation like that.
2. Bulky, That's a full framed pistol there. About 2 and half pounds unloaded. Not ideal for a carry weapon at all. Okay for open carry, but Texas doesn't have that. Tucking into a waistband is not only uncomfortable but extremely hard to conceal without wearing really bulky clothes to go with it.
3. Don't feed hollow points worth a damn. Which is something EVERYCC guru recommends you have in a carry weapon. Not only are the stopping power levels greater but it greatly reduces the occurrence of "through & through's", which account for more accidental deaths by police officers than any other situation. The vast majority of police departments in the US (save for the ones cowed by idiotic District Attorneys and do gooders who think hollow points are inhumane or dangerous) use hollow points. Ask a local police officer what type of ammo they carry and do the same, so if you are ever in an incident and you need to defend yourself in court, you can say that you use the same type of bullets as the local police.
1911 Variants are are great guns, but not great carry guns however. I have 3 M1911A1's from the WWII era (A Colt, Remington-Rand and Itahca), they still work fine, but none of them saw hard use in the war. My Itahca and Remington-Rand are 98% original finish guns. The Colt was a Lend Lease over to Britain and has British proofs on the bolt and frame. Too bad those proofs knock off about 20% of the value.
FITZZ wrote: Honestly, when it comes to home defense I'll opt for the 12 Gauge every time.
Exactly, was using my AR for a while, then realized that was a horrible, horrible idea, especially since I had steel core ammo guns to damn complex for my wife to work reliably so I just stick the 12G there, that and shes stupid good with it.
Ophff, AR for home defense.. ...( I know you know that already )...yeah, just way to much risk of over penatration ...
Sckitzo wrote:I love mine, and I love my K98K, so much history behind both of em, I just wish the K98 had matching serial numbers.
Good luck finding that.
To Melissa, I would highly recommend a sub frame, DA 1911 variant for a carry gun. 1911's for all of their grandeur have three things going against them:
1: Single Action only, they must be carried cocked and with the safety on. Not a huge deal, but most of the guru's on CC don't like Single Action Only guns. I would contend that SAO automatics are a bit to "fumbly" for a quick situation like that.
2. Bulky, That's a full framed pistol there. About 2 and half pounds unloaded. Not ideal for a carry weapon at all. Okay for open carry, but Texas doesn't have that. Tucking into a waistband is not only uncomfortable but extremely hard to conceal without wearing really bulky clothes to go with it.
3. Don't feed hollow points worth a damn. Which is something EVERYCC guru recommends you have in a carry weapon. Not only are the stopping power levels greater but it greatly reduces the occurrence of "through & through's", which account for more accidental deaths by police officers than any other situation. The vast majority of police departments in the US (save for the ones cowed by idiotic District Attorneys and do gooders who think hollow points are inhumane or dangerous) use hollow points. Ask a local police officer what type of ammo they carry and do the same, so if you are ever in an incident and you need to defend yourself in court, you can say that you use the same type of bullets as the local police.
1911 Variants are are great guns, but not great carry guns however. I have 3 M1911A1's from the WWII era (A Colt, Remington-Rand and Itahca), they still work fine, but none of them saw hard use in the war. My Itahca and Remington-Rand are 98% original finish guns. The Colt was a Lend Lease over to Britain and has British proofs on the bolt and frame. Too bad those proofs knock off about 20% of the value.
Correct me if I'm wrong (I've never owned a 1911) but I thought polishing the feed ramp usually solved that HP feeding issue?
And that SIG Sauer 250 looks like the compact version my buddy carries.
Melissia wrote:What's your opinion on the SIG Sauer 250? The price on that is within my range, and I know SIG Sauer is a great name.
Do you have strong hands? SIG's are notoriously over-sprung in the slides and need some breaking in. Other than that, good choice.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sckitzo wrote:
Stormrider wrote:
Sckitzo wrote:I love mine, and I love my K98K, so much history behind both of em, I just wish the K98 had matching serial numbers.
Good luck finding that.
To Melissa, I would highly recommend a sub frame, DA 1911 variant for a carry gun. 1911's for all of their grandeur have three things going against them:
1: Single Action only, they must be carried cocked and with the safety on. Not a huge deal, but most of the guru's on CC don't like Single Action Only guns. I would contend that SAO automatics are a bit to "fumbly" for a quick situation like that.
2. Bulky, That's a full framed pistol there. About 2 and half pounds unloaded. Not ideal for a carry weapon at all. Okay for open carry, but Texas doesn't have that. Tucking into a waistband is not only uncomfortable but extremely hard to conceal without wearing really bulky clothes to go with it.
3. Don't feed hollow points worth a damn. Which is something EVERYCC guru recommends you have in a carry weapon. Not only are the stopping power levels greater but it greatly reduces the occurrence of "through & through's", which account for more accidental deaths by police officers than any other situation. The vast majority of police departments in the US (save for the ones cowed by idiotic District Attorneys and do gooders who think hollow points are inhumane or dangerous) use hollow points. Ask a local police officer what type of ammo they carry and do the same, so if you are ever in an incident and you need to defend yourself in court, you can say that you use the same type of bullets as the local police.
1911 Variants are are great guns, but not great carry guns however. I have 3 M1911A1's from the WWII era (A Colt, Remington-Rand and Itahca), they still work fine, but none of them saw hard use in the war. My Itahca and Remington-Rand are 98% original finish guns. The Colt was a Lend Lease over to Britain and has British proofs on the bolt and frame. Too bad those proofs knock off about 20% of the value.
Correct me if I'm wrong (I've never owned a 1911) but I thought polishing the feed ramp usually solved that HP feeding issue?
And that SIG Sauer 250 looks like the compact version my buddy carries.
Funny you mention that, I originally had that in my post. It requires more than polishing on some variants though. Some of the ramps need material removed and then they should be polished with sand paper.
halonachos wrote:I look at price too though, I could get more than 10 nagants for the price of one 1903.
But once you have one Nagant... might as well buy a few more
I still want a 1903, but when I buy WW2 MilSurp, I only buy war issue... which makes buying the American guns a PITA as ever since Saving Private Ryan came out the prices on them have gone through the roof.
Its normally by blade, and around where I live its legal to carry anything as long as your palm is wide or smaller. Of course switchblades are illegal to carry but assisted blades are okay to have.
halonachos wrote:I look at price too though, I could get more than 10 nagants for the price of one 1903.
But once you have one Nagant... might as well buy a few more
I still want a 1903, but when I buy WW2 MilSurp, I only buy war issue... which makes buying the American guns a PITA as ever since Saving Private Ryan came out the prices on them have gone through the roof.
Sure, if you live on the "Magical Money Tree Farm"
You're on a TT gaming/WH40K board. You live on that farm.
Honestly, If you have never fired a 1911 before...Go rent one. Rent one with the style of hammer and grip safety you are after, before plunking your hard earned money, for you may just be one of those people that gets bit by the Olde Style of hammer and safety. I am, and it leaves me cold on the 1911 without a generous beavertail safety, and this goes double if you opt for a high tang grip with your handguns.
Though I find Glocks grotesque to look at, I highly recommend them. I have several handguns that I find much more appealing to look at...my 92F, my Buckmark, even the Ruger KP95 I used to have looked more appealing than my glocks....but if I am carrying the thing, it is not to look at. It is to put holes in bad people until they decide to find something better to do with their time than hurt me, and they perform the function at least as good as any other.
I would also recommend the S&W 625 or 627, revolvers fed by moon clips not being more popular has always been something that has mystified me, they make reloading -almost- as efficient and fast as a magazine, and you don't ever have to worry about the slide being pushed out of battery if you must make a contact shot, you don't ever have to worry about a failure to extract, eject, or feed, and you don't have to worry about a dud primer either. Lot to be said for the modern revolver as a fighting platform. 6 shots of .45 ACP or 8 shots of .357 magnum, take your pick.
halonachos wrote:I look at price too though, I could get more than 10 nagants for the price of one 1903.
But once you have one Nagant... might as well buy a few more
I still want a 1903, but when I buy WW2 MilSurp, I only buy war issue... which makes buying the American guns a PITA as ever since Saving Private Ryan came out the prices on them have gone through the roof.
AIM surplus has some weapons, the 1903's they have were unissued I think though.
@ Melissia, it does look dorky but in a quote they said that if something wrong with the 19895 it can most likely be fixed with a hammer.
Your a bad man, if I buy that gun your answering to the old lady on why she isn't eating this week.
Also true on the feed ramp thing, my buddy did mention he had to grind his down a bit on his 10mm.
They also just got some M44's in stock, which is why I am now in a pickle, I planned to get the 1895 but they were sold out earlier and got their shipment back in along with the M44s. They also have Walthers and some other nice things, sorry about living on ramen for awhile though.
I wouldn't buy any vintage weapon listed as unissued off of the internet. Most of the US surplus one were slammed through arsenals after WWII and then sat in National Guard armories until 20 years ago or so. Most of them have replacement parts and cannot be considered unissued as a collectible. Mint working order perhaps, but not "unissued".
I just looked at the AIM website, those 03's are a damn rip off. A frankenstein of a rifle that is not even close to being worth $800. $450 at the most.
Stormrider wrote:I wouldn't buy any vintage weapon listed as unissued off of the internet. Most of the US surplus one were slammed through arsenals after WWII and then sat in National Guard armories until 20 years ago or so. Most of them have replacement parts and cannot be considered unissued as a collectible. Mint working order perhaps, but not "unissued".
I have a barrel manufactured in North Carolina on my 91/30, sometimes it helps to have replacement parts for the sake of them actually working.
My bad though, they're refurbished using original parts.
Revolvers CAN go out of battery, but my 101 was my truck gun for years. And that 8shot tactical .357 SWAT pistol both makes me laugh, and nash my teeth in jealousy, I forget the name of it, hell there could be more then one out now, but I feel so conflicted on it. And hell, I'll take 6 shots of .357 of 6 of .45 ACP
Also, if you ever plan on buying a K98 for historic value, don't buy from http://www.mauser.org/ >_< unless they cleaned up their act, they were restamping the guns claiming they were what they were not.
Melissia wrote:These are the ones I'm looking at now, still keeping the Colt model 01991 in mind...
Spoiler:
SIG Sauer P250, possibly the compact (but not subcompact) version for concealed carry.
Same company, but P220 DAK, designed specifically for concealed carry according to their website, but I am not familiar with SIG Sauer's DAK trigger.
I do recommend the Sig over the 1911, having fired only the Sig though (and not that model) but since you plan on carrying, I really think it will serve you better. Though rent both if you can.
Stormrider wrote:I wouldn't buy any vintage weapon listed as unissued off of the internet. Most of the US surplus one were slammed through arsenals after WWII and then sat in National Guard armories until 20 years ago or so. Most of them have replacement parts and cannot be considered unissued as a collectible. Mint working order perhaps, but not "unissued".
I have a barrel manufactured in North Carolina on my 91/30, sometimes it helps to have replacement parts for the sake of them actually working.
My bad though, they're refurbished using original parts.
For functionality's sake, certainly, but for collecting... Any time a rifle gets altered it loses most of it's collectable value. I cannot stand going to gun shows and seeing slap dash M1 Carbines with an IBM receiver, WRA barrel, Korean Marked Stock and an Inland trigger group be priced at $800-$1000. It's frustrating to no end.
I'm a collector first, shooter second and tinkerer last. I'll gladly restore a rifle to it's rightful condition, but I would never sell it as factory original. That's harmful to the gun community as well as posterity interested in buying said firearms.
@Stormrider, look up AIM surplus and look at their rifles to find the 1903's they have for sale. I like them for their Mosin's myself just because they come with a lot of stuff for about the same price including s&h and transfer fees.
This is true, but I have seen a lot more FTEx, FTEj, FTFs and doublefeeds in autos than with revolver timing going bad EXCEPT when some noobcake decides he wants to be a cool guy and start flipping his cylinder closed with one hand like he sees in the movies.
From what I understand it's DA Only, but with a lighter pull and reset, sorta like the glocks.
Reminds me of the pistol my aunt and uncle showed me. bought this pistol from a dude for $100 bucks, it's in horrible shape but the chickens were still visible as well as the FN logo, was confused as hell, turned out to be a war issue Browning Hi Power made in Belgium during the war.
Sadly, it's so trashed it's most likely worthless, but was very cool to say the least.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
SOFDC wrote:
Revolvers CAN go out of battery
This is true, but I have seen a lot more FTEx, FTEj, FTFs and doublefeeds in autos than with revolver timing going bad EXCEPT when some noobcake decides he wants to be a cool guy and start flipping his cylinder closed with one hand like he sees in the movies.
From what I understand it's DA Only, but with a lighter pull and reset, sorta like the glocks.
Sadly, it's so trashed it's most likely worthless, but was very cool to say the least.
If you really want to find out, you could take it to a gunsmith. Or get the bead blaster out, strip the frame and slide, and then replace the barrel and innards.
I always felt Glocks had horrible triggers my self, but I'm so used to the M9 with it's external safety that anything else feels wrong to me.
I always liked the long, consistent pulls of AK and Glock triggers, so it was a very easy jump for me. The 92F and Ruger...Eh. Hated the different triggers depending on whether it was my first shot or not.
Sadly, it's so trashed it's most likely worthless, but was very cool to say the least.
If you really want to find out, you could take it to a gunsmith. Or get the bead blaster out, strip the frame and slide, and then replace the barrel and innards.
I told them to take it to a smith, their kinda... back woods, so doubt they will. Maybe I can buy it off em eventually. I had some photos but can't find em, was a cool piece of history though.
Melissia wrote:Now, as far as fantasy guns I'd love to own but wouldn't want to use for self defense...
Spoiler:
But these two aren't gonna happen any time soon.
Well, if were discussing "fantasy gun" wants...put me down for one of these...
...
...All jokes aside, Mellisa good luck on your search, I suggest shopping around a bit and if possiable ,test firing the firearms that interest you to find what you are most comfortable with.
I have some hands-on time with the .44 Raging Bull...I enjoyed it. With that massive lump of metal hanging off the front called a barrel, which is ported, and the grip...it really didn't feel any rougher on my hands than my .40 Glocks or 4 inch S&W 66. Don't like the yoke and crane assembly though, which has a two handed set up of releases exactly to prevent one handing the cylinder and it seemed a bit...Delicate. I'd take a ported S&W 629 or Anaconda in a heartbeat though.
halonachos wrote:@Stormrider, look up AIM surplus and look at their rifles to find the 1903's they have for sale. I like them for their Mosin's myself just because they come with a lot of stuff for about the same price including s&h and transfer fees.
Those are all refurbished. Too expensive IMO. Original Remington 2-Twist Barrels that they probably found in crates, still sitting in the grease wrap. With Smith-Corona receivers, a great old mismatch.
Those Mosin's are many of the millions pouring in from the former USSR and aren't worth a damn since 99.9% have import markings. Nearly all of them have factory rebuilds and were pretty crude to begin with. I had a 1942 Ishvesk M91/30, It was okay, but it wasn't really worth keeping since it was an import. Sold it with ammo and the gear for $200.
I have held an original (save for one barrel band screw!) 1903A4 Sniper with a Weaver scope, it was $4000. Damn I would have liked to have had it, but the real thing is so much more expensive than a clone for $1,000.
None of those rehash US surplus guns on there are really that amazing. They're fine space fillers I guess. I have multiple local gun stores I could go to and easily could pick up a 1943 1903A3 with a maybe a slight rebuild (few small parts replaced at an arsenal) for $500.
I'm kind of a snob when it comes to collectible firearms, give me original or don't bother.
I'm picky about revolvers, I admit-- I don't like S&W's revolver visual styles most of the time. But their 629 model does look good. Just not as good as the Raging Bull or Anaconda.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sckitzo wrote:I so want a Scar 17....
Indeed, it looks like an excellent firing range weapon. Heck, one could possibly even use it as a hunting rifle, though dunno if it's over or underkill for that.
Melissia wrote:Heh, I used a different definition (IE, I fantasize about owning said weapons), but still.
I loathe how the phaser looks. For some reason it reminds me of a drug injector from a certain stealth-based first person shooter...
I could see that...I just love the "easy clean up" factor of the phaser, squeeze the trigger and *Poof*..no messy body at all...( y'know, unless you set it on "stun" or " bit of a cough" or something)
Aye, I love the look of the RB...Now if only they would strengthen their yokes a little bit, do away with the second release latch so that I can use my long alien fingers to manipulate the cylinder quickly in a pinch, I would actually go and buy one!
And having gone hunting with both a Bulgarian AK, and a HK91....They're no different than a .30-30 or .30-06...Aim, squeeze, oh a hole appeared in the target! SCAR-17S would be fine for any game that 7.62 NATO/.308 is good for to begin with, just don't try to suppress the deer.
I'm picky about revolvers, I admit-- I don't like S&W's revolver visual styles most of the time. But their 629 model does look good. Just not as good as the Raging Bull or Anaconda.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sckitzo wrote:I so want a Scar 17....
Indeed, it looks like an excellent firing range weapon. Heck, one could possibly even use it as a hunting rifle, though dunno if it's over or underkill for that.
Depends on what your hunting really. I'd use it on deer and down no problem, anything above that, well I better be starving to risk that shot (I'm one of those folks that thing if your gonna kill a critter you owe it to them to make it quick and clean)
Stormrider wrote: I'm kind of a snob when it comes to collectible firearms, give me original or don't bother.
I can tell.
Its a gun as far as I'm concerned and just because it has import markings doesn't mean a darn thing to me. Like I said, the barrel was replaced most likely due to the original suffering some damage but it is a 1942 Ihveshk as well with a Ukrainian Depot mark on the stock. Really nice weapon though with some history, if I want a gun with a lot of history I have my grandfather's service Garand which has a dark wooden stock that is pitted to hell(he was in Korea so I can imagine that did wonders for it). As far as you getting an original gun, good luck. I'll stick with my $70, nagant that comes with some nice accessories and is in firing condition over a rifle that was beaten to hell and never fixed as long as most of it is historical.
There's a county near me that doesn't specify what kind of weapons you're allowed to hunt turkeys with.
Game animals and game birds may be hunted with any legal firearm, EXCEPT:
white-tailed deer, mule deer, desert bighorn sheep, and pronghorn antelope may NOT be hunted with rimfire ammunition of any caliber.
shotguns are the only legal firearm that may be used to hunt Eastern turkey during the spring Eastern turkey season (see County Listing). Rifles and handguns may not be used to hunt Eastern turkey.
pellet guns and other air guns are NOT LEGAL.
fully automatic firearms are NOT LEGAL.
firearms equipped with silencers or sound-suppressing devices are NOT LEGAL.
a shotgun is the only legal firearm for hunting migratory game birds (see Definitions - Legal Shotgun).
Typically shotguns are the only firearms you can use to hunt an animal and as far as legal shotguns go its usually to do with barrel length(sawn-off is pretty much illegal although its terrible for hunting anyways) and if its a semi-automatic there is a limit of shells you can put into it. I think its five or six plus one in the barrel around near me.
Can only hunt turkey with shotguns, silenced weapons aren't legal most of the time because they're silenced, pellet guns and airsoft guns are illegal due to animal cruelty laws and of course automatics are for the same reason.
Hunting is frowned upon in some places so its good to keep a friendly representation of the hunter as much as possible and to do so they don't like it when people leave mutilated corpses behind. Anything that makes it seem like you're killing the animal just for the sake of killing the animal is normally illegal for the same reason as well.
Game animals and game birds may be hunted with any legal firearm, EXCEPT:
white-tailed deer, mule deer, desert bighorn sheep, and pronghorn antelope may NOT be hunted with rimfire ammunition of any caliber.
shotguns are the only legal firearm that may be used to hunt Eastern turkey during the spring Eastern turkey season (see County Listing). Rifles and handguns may not be used to hunt Eastern turkey.
pellet guns and other air guns are NOT LEGAL.
fully automatic firearms are NOT LEGAL.
firearms equipped with silencers or sound-suppressing devices are NOT LEGAL.
a shotgun is the only legal firearm for hunting migratory game birds (see Definitions - Legal Shotgun).
Dunno if you can make this legalese out. It's from the Texas Parks and Wildlife website, the "means" page for hunting.
white-tailed deer, mule deer, desert bighorn sheep, and pronghorn antelope may NOT be hunted with rimfire ammunition of any caliber. Easy enough, no .22's and non center fire
Stuff of birds
No suppressors or silencers
more bird crap
As long as the suppressor on the end of your rifle wasn't for noise, but a jackass game warden may ding ya on it.
Laser sights that actually project a laser onto the target are also a no-go as I recall, but a RDS like my aimpoint micro? I can throw that on top of my AR15 and go right out the door. Ditto with passive NV and most thermal optics.
Melissia wrote:If I was hunting, it'd probably be for the mutually important reasons of reducing overpopulation and sharing time with my father.
I would guess that would be the reason, its the same I go hunting with my dad. However there are people who like to go hunting just to kill something and those people making hunting look bad overall, and of course the biggest thing about hunting is making sure that it doesn't reach into animal abuse which is why I have yet to get a deer, I don't feel comfortable enough with my aim to make sure its a clean kill but I still enjoy going out there early in the morning.
Hm. I should set a date and ask my father to come along. We haven't gone to target practice in a while, so I'm sure he'd enjoy spending time trying out the guns I have in mind along with me.
Sig's a great guns. My dad has one in .45 caliber and shooting it is a lot of fun (so is his Walther P22!). A guy at my work recently purchased a Kimber and loves it. Haven't heard anything negative about a Kimber other than the price...ouch.
I would highly recommend researching if a local range has any of the models you are looking for and if they will let you test fire them. I'm pretty sure the gents behind the counter would have no problem helping a lady out.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
halonachos wrote:
Melissia wrote:If I was hunting, it'd probably be for the mutually important reasons of reducing overpopulation and sharing time with my father.
I would guess that would be the reason, its the same I go hunting with my dad. However there are people who like to go hunting just to kill something and those people making hunting look bad overall, and of course the biggest thing about hunting is making sure that it doesn't reach into animal abuse which is why I have yet to get a deer, I don't feel comfortable enough with my aim to make sure its a clean kill but I still enjoy going out there early in the morning.
Yeah that isn't hunting. That is infuriating, wasteful, and fething gakky. Pretty similar to bait soakers fishing in a catch and release body of water.
I'd recommend getting your rifle sighted in and then practice with it, get used to estimating correction for windage. A 5 inch group at 100 yards would be accurate enough to penetrate heart/lungs/vital organs for medium to large game, and be able to kill them quickly. The only work would be tracking to where your deer would set down after it expired. Oh and then getting your meat.
I recommend finding a good pack for the last part. Nothing like having to hump 65 pounds or more with a bad pack.
Handguns are a pretty double-sided thing. If you keep one for self protection, be sure to have it always with you. If you don't, someone could use it agaist you (a burglar, for example, if he found it downstairs)
Yes, I would do that. Especially since I'd want to get in the habit of cleaning and maintaining it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
VermGho5t wrote:I would highly recommend researching if a local range has any of the models you are looking for and if they will let you test fire them. I'm pretty sure the gents behind the counter would have no problem helping a lady out.
Taht's actually why I picked the SIG P250/P220Carry, those two I think are available at a local shop which I hope has a range that I can test fire them at. The prices listed for them are also fairly affordable, hopefully it's for a new one rather than pre-owned... and as you said, SIGs are pretty reliable, at least from the reviews I've read.
What would be the best way to do research on a handguns/rifles and ammunition? What would you all recommend for websites? Or should I go straight to a gun shop and ask questions there? I am curious as i have been contemplating buying a Mosin-Nagant/ M1 Garand/ Kar98k/ other historical rifle, and wanted to do my research before going to buy one.
Skycrawler wrote:What would be the best way to do research on a handguns/rifles and ammunition? What would you all recommend for websites? Or should I go straight to a gun shop and ask questions there? I am curious as i have been contemplating buying a Mosin-Nagant/ M1 Garand/ Kar98k/ other historical rifle, and wanted to do my research before going to buy one.
Melissia wrote:Yes, I would do that. Especially since I'd want to get in the habit of cleaning and maintaining it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
VermGho5t wrote:I would highly recommend researching if a local range has any of the models you are looking for and if they will let you test fire them. I'm pretty sure the gents behind the counter would have no problem helping a lady out.
Taht's actually why I picked the SIG P250/P220Carry, those two I think are available at a local shop which I hope has a range that I can test fire them at. The prices listed for them are also fairly affordable, hopefully it's for a new one rather than pre-owned... and as you said, SIGs are pretty reliable, at least from the reviews I've read.
One thing I would also consider if you are serious about owning and using a firearm, especially a handgun, is looking into an application for a conceal/carry permit. My father who lives in Washington state, has one and from what I understand this permit is honored in 39 or so states. This may be incorrect but I am sure Texas has these available to law abiding citizens.
Melissia wrote:Yes, I would do that. Especially since I'd want to get in the habit of cleaning and maintaining it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
VermGho5t wrote:I would highly recommend researching if a local range has any of the models you are looking for and if they will let you test fire them. I'm pretty sure the gents behind the counter would have no problem helping a lady out.
Taht's actually why I picked the SIG P250/P220Carry, those two I think are available at a local shop which I hope has a range that I can test fire them at. The prices listed for them are also fairly affordable, hopefully it's for a new one rather than pre-owned... and as you said, SIGs are pretty reliable, at least from the reviews I've read.
If you go the gun safe route, do not buy stack on brand, they are cheap for a reason, I can get in one in about 10 seconds with a crowbar or angle grinder. They are a huge waste of money...I use mine as a dummy safe now.
Skycrawler wrote:What would be the best way to do research on a handguns/rifles and ammunition? What would you all recommend for websites? Or should I go straight to a gun shop and ask questions there? I am curious as i have been contemplating buying a Mosin-Nagant/ M1 Garand/ Kar98k/ other historical rifle, and wanted to do my research before going to buy one.
A 91/30 or M44 Mosin-Nagant can be had fairly cheaply, I grabbed a 91/30 from a gun show for about 120 out the door. http://7.62x54r.net/ is a good place to start of Mosin's. That's how I cut my teeth buy collector guns.
If you've never fired a rifle before, I suggest you get a ruger 10/22 and practice alot, ammo is cheap and it's a good gun to learn the basics, even better if you know someone that is willing to teach you in person.
Skycrawler wrote:What would be the best way to do research on a handguns/rifles and ammunition? What would you all recommend for websites? Or should I go straight to a gun shop and ask questions there? I am curious as i have been contemplating buying a Mosin-Nagant/ M1 Garand/ Kar98k/ other historical rifle, and wanted to do my research before going to buy one.
I'm always a big fan of asking experts.
There is a lot of information available for this on the internet. I was under the impression collectible rifles were pretty expensive. I think Springfield Armory still manufactures M1's but they aren't what your grandfather was issued, and are pretty expensive. I've heard of surplus Garands being available at a discount from Civilian Marksman-ship programs if you are a member. I thought I recalled a thread on the forums here where this was mentioned, but I cannot remember it.
MKIIs range from 6-5/8 to 7 inches by blade, depending on year of make. Were it not for the, essentially cosmetic, serration they would be illegal nearly everywhere in the US.
As for the law in Illinois, intent to use is the barrier, not mere possession.
Skycrawler wrote:What would be the best way to do research on a handguns/rifles and ammunition? What would you all recommend for websites? Or should I go straight to a gun shop and ask questions there? I am curious as i have been contemplating buying a Mosin-Nagant/ M1 Garand/ Kar98k/ other historical rifle, and wanted to do my research before going to buy one.
I'm always a big fan of asking experts.
There is a lot of information available for this on the internet. I was under the impression collectible rifles were pretty expensive. I think Springfield Armory still manufactures M1's but they aren't what your grandfather was issued, and are pretty expensive. I've heard of surplus Garands being available at a discount from Civilian Marksman-ship programs if you are a member. I thought I recalled a thread on the forums here where this was mentioned, but I cannot remember it.
Sadly, CMP is sold out, that ship has sailed really, unless they get more stock in I wouldn't count on being able to get anything from them anymore Collectibles are fairly expensive, especially the American ones, and it's a lot of data to shift through to know what your buying, then you get 's like Mitchell's Mausers selling knock offs, and well it becomes a bigger pita.
black templar wrote:I dont own guns but i do collect knifes and crossbow. Guns are to dangers.
That's nice, but guns are only unsafe as the people handling them, if you follow the basics rules of firearms safety it's no more dangerous then a large club. It's not like they sneak out in the middle of the night and start gang wars on the streets.
Sckitzo wrote:... if you follow the basics rules of firearms safety it's no more dangerous then a large club.
That's an exaggeration. I know 2nd Amendment guys like to minimize the danger of firearms, but they really are more dangerous than knives, swords, clubs, and most other weapons due to ease of use, range of effect, and extent of damage to target.
There's a reason the world's militaries use them in lieu of other options.
Sckitzo wrote:... if you follow the basics rules of firearms safety it's no more dangerous then a large club.
That's an exaggeration. I know 2nd Amendment guys like to minimize the danger of firearms, but they really are more dangerous than knives, swords, clubs, and most other weapons due to ease of use, range of effect, and extent of damage to target.
There's a reason the world's militaries use them in lieu of other options.
I still stand that people are what make them dangerous, you get idiots that run around and kill people, rob people and generally give firearms a bad rap. Yes a firearm can be more dangerous in the wrong hands, but their just a tool. But not trying to start a gun control argument on here, some people like guns, some people hate em, it's w/e really in the long run.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
lord commissar klimino wrote:
"if your going to get a gun,get 2."
a guy at my school once said it,dont remember the point of it though.
That is sorta...odd. I've got prepper/survivalist buddies that sort of due this, one to practice with and beat up, one to keep in good shape. But for 90% of gun owners out there it seems a bit... odd.
@Sckitzo: Thanks, the closest thing to a rifle I have fired is a pellet gun so I'll definitely look into the Ruger.
Another thing I wanted to ask was; What about pawn shops? Would it be preferable to get a cheaper rifle from a pawn shop or a more expensive one from a gun&ammo shop? Thanks for answering all my questions.
If they weren't, I wouldn't own the <CENSORED> things.
But seriously, handled properly they really aren't more hazardous to the owner than most of the electronic outlets in your house. Or your garbage disposal. There are just four little rules to doing this:
1. Do not point the muzzle at anything you are not willing to destroy.
2. Keep your finger off the trigger until ready to fire.
3. Be sure of your target and what is beyond it.
4. A gun is always loaded. Especially when unloaded.
Now, sit down for a few minutes, and think of all those "Accidents" you hear about where someone shoots themself, a loved one, etc. that doesn't really boil down to someone being a moron. Accidental discharge due to manufacturing or design defect is rather unusual nowadays. Safeties like Ye olde SPAS 12 flag safety, and the original Remington 700 safeties which would occasionally go "BANG!" when flipped from "Safe" to "Fire" don't fly far in the Lawyer Age. and neither do modern firearms that are prone to slamefires.
None of this is to be construed as "Is less dangerous to the thing you intend to use it on" because...well...it's not. A firearm is an undeniably effective weapon. That said, do train hard. A good sized knife like a smachet or bowie will inflict wounds that a handgun can only dream of, and a club to the head might as well be a bullet to the temple if the user isn't intending to leave you breathing. Pointies and Smashies have been slaughtering people for thousands of years, and it is not because they are ineffective. Additionally, in most any legally defensible situation where you can employ a handgun, you will be close enough that these are going to be in range. You may want to consider some sort of hand to hand training in addition to everything else, and look up the Tueller drill.
Sckitzo wrote:
I still stand that people are what make them dangerous, you get idiots that run around and kill people, rob people and generally give firearms a bad rap. Yes a firearm can be more dangerous in the wrong hands, but their just a tool. But not trying to start a gun control argument on here, some people like guns, some people hate em, it's w/e really in the long run.
People make them more dangerous, this much is true, but they are still dangerous in and of themselves in the same way that anything that can harm you is; guns simply cause more harm more easily than say, a hammer.
But for 90% of gun owners out there it seems a bit... odd.
Why? Second rifle can be handed to a buddy or used for a backup in case of parts failure. Or a second pistol, identical to the first, in the event that it is ever confiscated as evidence should the unfortunate situation occur where you had to USE the first pistol.
But for 90% of gun owners out there it seems a bit... odd.
Why? Second rifle can be handed to a buddy or used for a backup in case of parts failure. Or a second pistol, identical to the first, in the event that it is ever confiscated as evidence should the unfortunate situation occur where you had to USE the first pistol.
wouldnt they give it back if it was proven it was self defense?
Eventually. Eventually might mean days, or eventually might mean Years. It all depends on the particulars of the case and how bad a day the powers that be have had. In my fathers case, he got a vaguely gun shaped lump of rust returned to him after 3 years. Once your weapon goes into that evidence bag, no human hands will touch it....for better or worse. No cleaning, no oiling, nothing.
SOFDC wrote:Eventually. Eventually might mean days, or eventually might mean Years. It all depends on the particulars of the case and how bad a day the powers that be have had. In my fathers case, he got a vaguely gun shaped lump of rust returned to him after 3 years. Once your weapon goes into that evidence bag, no human hands will touch it....for better or worse. No cleaning, no oiling, nothing.
It's better than the alternative, annoying as it is. I certainly wouldn't want them cleaning and oiling the forensic evidence right off the weapon in a case where people have died, it's just an eventuality that one should be prepared for.
Skycrawler wrote:@Sckitzo: Thanks, the closest thing to a rifle I have fired is a pellet gun so I'll definitely look into the Ruger.
Another thing I wanted to ask was; What about pawn shops? Would it be preferable to get a cheaper rifle from a pawn shop or a more expensive one from a gun&ammo shop? Thanks for answering all my questions.
Pawn shops are very hit or miss, most of the guys know what their selling, with everyone being on the internet their going to run a couple quick checks on any guns they get in to get a value for, if you find a great deal at a pawn shop, I'd be very wary, be sure you know what your looking for and if it's going to be safe to fire (very important with old milsurp guns) you are going to pay a premium at a brick and mortar gun shop, but they normally have checked the guns out and would tell you if it was going to explode in your face (normally....still check it your self or a buddy you trust who knows what he is doing).
Gun shows you can find some good deals at, but with the ticket to get in anymore it almost isn't worth the effort.
If your buying say the ruger, pawn shops should be fine, there so many of those guns floating around that their going to be fairly cheap, just look it over closely, hell WalMart sells em for like two or three hundred, if that normally.
I buy from brick and mortar when I can, normally I find a small shop in my area, and start doing my business there, you develop a rapport with the guys that work there, which can help later on down the road, it may cost you a bit more, but if you need to get a gun fixed they could hook you up with "good customer" discounts and stuff like that. I've gotten free ammo and magazines before, and your helping a small business out.
SOFDC wrote:It's better than the alternative, annoying as it is. I certainly wouldn't want them cleaning and oiling the forensic evidence right off the weapon in a case where people have died, it's just an eventuality that one should be prepared for.
i mean,after your proven innocent,they should give it back. if they know it was self defense,why keep it? its your property and you paid for it. guess they probably have a good reason,but it just seems unfair.
Ahh, see I just keep spare parts around, and if I use a gun in self defense I have others to go to while the police do their thing. In that situation I can understand having two, I was thinking more along the lines of "I just bought a 92FS, next week I'm buying another"
But I'm more a collector then anything, so having two of the same guns cuts into my budget way to much. I mean I have my self defense guns, but those are separate.
i mean,after your proven innocent,they should give it back. if they know it was self defense,why keep it? its your property and you paid for it. guess they probably have a good reason,but it just seems unfair.
I know what you mean. It took 3 years to prove my father was not in the wrong. Sometimes it takes longer than others.
Ahh, see I just keep spare parts around, and if I use a gun in self defense I have others to go to while the police do their thing.
I do both with my AR15s. Though I am having to rebuild them into CA-Legal formats, which is going to take a while. At least I have a pissy little SU-16CA while I do it.
I've heard that the best type of gun for self defense - and particularly carrying - is a spurless revolver with a barrel no bigger than 2.5" and .357 rounds. Revolver so you don't have to worry about mag issues (springs, etc.), no spur means it won't catch on anything, the small size makes it easy and comfortable to conceal and carry, and the .357 still packs a punch. Any thoughts?
snake wrote:I've heard that the best type of gun for self defense - and particularly carrying - is a spurless revolver with a barrel no bigger than 2.5" and .357 rounds. Revolver so you don't have to worry about mag issues (springs, etc.), no spur means it won't catch on anything, the small size makes it easy and comfortable to conceal and carry, and the .357 still packs a punch. Any thoughts?
Their not a bad choice, but they are very unpleasant to shoot and practice with due to their small size and big round, alot of police have something similar as a backup pistol. For me, I would carry one if I needed a backup, but not as my primary.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Melissia wrote:
SOFDC wrote:You may want to consider some sort of hand to hand training in addition to everything else, and look up the Tueller drill.
Maybe it's overkill, but I'm learning Krav Maga, myself. Mostly specifically because it teaches defense against knives.
We were doing Krav at work, I like it because it's very basic and fluid, it's not fancy or flashy. It's a dirty way to fight and teaches you to do whatever you have to get away from the person trying to hurt you, be that taking out knee joints or going for the eyes/genitals. It's also a hell of a work out, if you can find a place you can take it at I'd say go for it.
Melissia wrote:Maybe it's overkill, but I'm learning Krav Maga, myself. Mostly specifically because it teaches defense against knives.
If you want to learn how to fight with, and against, knives look into Eskrima.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sckitzo wrote:
We were doing Krav at work, I like it because it's very basic and fluid, it's not fancy or flashy. It's a dirty way to fight and teaches you to do whatever you have to get away from the person trying to hurt you, be that taking out knee joints or going for the eyes/genitals. It's also a hell of a work out, if you can find a place you can take it at I'd say go for it.
Krav Maga is good, but because its so brutal its also predictable. You always know where the guy who has only trained in Krav is going. This is opposed to other systems that use misdirection (Eskrima, Wing Chun, Aikido) as a deliberate tactic.
I've trained in other martial arts, mostly the basics of them. but the thing is, for self defense, you don't want anything flashy. You want to get the job done as fast as possible, and get the hell out of there.
More importantly, I'm naturally aggressive, and Krav Maga is also naturally aggressive
Sckitzo wrote:... if you follow the basics rules of firearms safety it's no more dangerous then a large club.
That's an exaggeration. I know 2nd Amendment guys like to minimize the danger of firearms, but they really are more dangerous than knives, swords, clubs, and most other weapons due to ease of use, range of effect, and extent of damage to target.
There's a reason the world's militaries use them in lieu of other options.
Sit a gun and a knife on a table and see which one kills a person sitting in a chair across from it first.
Guns and knives are both dangerous but you don't have to load a knife for example, its just that guns are more effective than knives.
As far as antique and older guns go, ordering online usually requires you to be 21. Owning a rifle is set at 18 and owning a pistol is set at 21, buying pistol ammo is also illegal to those under 21. I tried buying some .45 acp for my dad's reproduced thompson and was turned away before I was 21.
As far as rifles go, Mosin Nagants are usually the cheapest followed by Kar98's and then M1 Garands. Sniper variants are always more expensive than their non-sniper variants. The cheapest I've seen for a 91/30 nagant was $70.00 for the rifle, bayonet, ammo pouch, sling, and oil can/cleaning kit. The site sells surplus weapons, which were used at some point but were fixed up and then stored away. The one I have has the original bolt and factory markings along with a depot marking, but has a barrel clearly marked as made in N.C.. Kar98's will almost never have matching serial numbers, and some later produced ones lacked them altogether. There are added benefits to buying in person over buying online, the biggest being you can actually see the weapon before buying it, but in stores 91/30 nagants sell for about $125.00 with no accessories.
91/30's kick like a mule, Kar98's kick like a mule, M1s kick like a sick mule.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
warpcrafter wrote:
"Not as clumsy or random as a blaster, a more elegant weapon from a more civilized era."
"Hockey religons and ancient weapons are no match for a blaster by your side. "
SOFDC wrote:On a similar note, what is your firearms background exactly Melissia?
First time I held a gun was about ten, my father's hunting rifle. The gun wasn't meant for someone that size obviously, and the kick when he had me shoot at a target rather scared the sense into me and made me treat it with the respect it deserved. After that, I've periodically gone to shooting ranges with him, firing various weapons from a small purse gun to a glock to (I think) .45 semi-autos, or if not .45, an only slightly smaller cartridge.
Pretty normal I suppose given that my father was in the military and I'm from Texas.
Well, this is just a thought, perhaps you should also look into a .22 pistol or .22 conversion kit for whatever pistol you set your eyes on. Never hurts to have the ability to practice 5 or 6 times more than normal.
I think she's a bit used to things larger than a .22 from what she's said. If she's considering getting one then she might as well get used to ammo prices anyways.
halonachos wrote:Sit a gun and a knife on a table and see which one kills a person sitting in a chair across from it first.
Guns and knives are both dangerous but you don't have to load a knife for example, its just that guns are more effective than knives.
A story about a man who took on six gun armed men with a knife comes to mind...
It all really depends on the skill of the weapon user, there's and adage that its "Better to put a bad gun in the hands of am experienced shooter than it is to put a good gun in the hands of an inexperienced shooter..."
However in Russia/China/North Korea's case, you overcome this by having millions of inexperienced, bad gun toting guys...
halonachos wrote:I think she's a bit used to things larger than a .22 from what she's said. If she's considering getting one then she might as well get used to ammo prices anyways.
Besides, I would want to use the ammunition the weapon is designed for, even if the weapon is made to be modified (like many SIG weapons are from what I can tell) it was likely still designed with a specific bullet size in mind.
halonachos wrote:I think she's a bit used to things larger than a .22 from what she's said. If she's considering getting one then she might as well get used to ammo prices anyways.
Besides, I would want to use the ammunition the weapon is designed for, even if the weapon is made to be modified (like many SIG weapons are from what I can tell) it was likely still designed with a specific bullet size in mind.
The suggestion was not to imply a lack of ability. The suggestion was to lessen the wallet impact and still be able to shoot. I cannot speak for anyone else, but when I have an active year I am going through around 1000 rounds a month. Shooting rimfire with the same grip to put my hand on, the same trigger pull, and the same sight picture is invaluable, and still a step up from dryfire practice. If you can painlessly drop the coin for that much shooting, or you do less, by all means.
From what I gather, it's about ~15-20 USD for a 50 round box. Dunno if that's pricey, but I know peopel spend more on far less enjoyable entertainment (like going to the movies) for a day.
Sckitzo wrote:... if you follow the basics rules of firearms safety it's no more dangerous then a large club.
That's an exaggeration. I know 2nd Amendment guys like to minimize the danger of firearms, but they really are more dangerous than knives, swords, clubs, and most other weapons due to ease of use, range of effect, and extent of damage to target.
There's a reason the world's militaries use them in lieu of other options.
Sit a gun and a knife on a table and see which one kills a person sitting in a chair across from it first.
Guns and knives are both dangerous but you don't have to load a knife for example, its just that guns are more effective than knives.
As far as antique and older guns go, ordering online usually requires you to be 21. Owning a rifle is set at 18 and owning a pistol is set at 21, buying pistol ammo is also illegal to those under 21. I tried buying some .45 acp for my dad's reproduced thompson and was turned away before I was 21.
As far as rifles go, Mosin Nagants are usually the cheapest followed by Kar98's and then M1 Garands. Sniper variants are always more expensive than their non-sniper variants. The cheapest I've seen for a 91/30 nagant was $70.00 for the rifle, bayonet, ammo pouch, sling, and oil can/cleaning kit. The site sells surplus weapons, which were used at some point but were fixed up and then stored away. The one I have has the original bolt and factory markings along with a depot marking, but has a barrel clearly marked as made in N.C.. Kar98's will almost never have matching serial numbers, and some later produced ones lacked them altogether. There are added benefits to buying in person over buying online, the biggest being you can actually see the weapon before buying it, but in stores 91/30 nagants sell for about $125.00 with no accessories.
91/30's kick like a mule, Kar98's kick like a mule, M1s kick like a sick mule.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
warpcrafter wrote:
"Not as clumsy or random as a blaster, a more elegant weapon from a more civilized era."
"Hockey religons and ancient weapons are no match for a blaster by your side. "
Well played...I have avoided owning a gun because I would be unable to resist the temptation to thin the herd.
I use a .22 bolt for my AR-15, nothing wrong with having another option.
Also think of it like this, if there is another huge ammo scare, you might not be able to get common pistols calibers again, but .22 is usually still around, so you can still practice a bit, and if need be you could use it for varmints.
Granted, might want to look at a conversion kit on down the road a bit, but once you get comfortable with the gun it's not a bad idea.
Sometimes I can really only afford to dip into .22's, and if I shoot 5k rounds that year, I gotta supplement some of that with .22, or sell a kidney.
If you really wanted to thin the herd, then lack of a gun wouldn't stop you.
If you take proper security precautions(trigger lock for newer weapons, or a gun safe) then guns are pretty safe to own. Of course you could always not buy ammo for one, guns without ammo are pretty useless.
From what I gather, it's about ~15-20 USD for a 50 round box. Dunno if that's pricey, but I know peopel spend more on far less enjoyable entertainment (like going to the movies) for a day.
Also, I don't recommend the .357 Sig, ammo can be pricey and a PITA to find sometimes, unless your really want that caliber I suggest 9mm or .40, 45 would be fine and 10mm if your a masochist
Sckitzo wrote:I use a .22 bolt for my AR-15, nothing wrong with having another option.
Also think of it like this, if there is another huge ammo scare, you might not be able to get common pistols calibers again, but .22 is usually still around, so you can still practice a bit, and if need be you could use it for varmints.
Granted, might want to look at a conversion kit on down the road a bit, but once you get comfortable with the gun it's not a bad idea.
Sometimes I can really only afford to dip into .22's, and if I shoot 5k rounds that year, I gotta supplement some of that with .22, or sell a kidney.
Collect the brass afterwards, get enough and you can sell it for scrap. Its about $2.36 for a pound of brass in some places.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sckitzo wrote:
halonachos wrote:I pay 5 or 2 dollars when I go to the movies.
Misspost?
No, Melissia was saying that buying ammo is cheaper than seeing a movie.
Sckitzo wrote:Also, I don't recommend the .357 Sig, ammo can be pricey and a PITA to find sometimes, unless your really want that caliber I suggest 9mm or .40, 45 would be fine and 10mm if your a masochist
The weapon's available in .357 SIG, .40S&W, and .45ACP. I think the ACP is probably most common and probably cheapest of these ammunition types, right?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
halonachos wrote:No, Melissia was saying that buying ammo is cheaper than seeing a movie.
W7hen I'm not going to work I enjoy loose cargo pants (as in loose around the legs, not loose around the waist ) myself, but even still, most people who go to the movies spend more than just the price of admission
Melissia wrote:When I'm not going to work I enjoy loose cargo pants (as in loose around the legs, not loose around the waist ) myself, but even still, most people who go to the movies spend more than just the price of admission
Halonachos's guide to going to the theater and saving money.
1) Buy cargo shorts/pants. 2) Locate local dollar store or local grocery store with bottled drinks on sale. 3) Insert bottled drinks into cargo short/pants pockets. 4) Find theater with special deals(regal cinema franchises usually have 5 dollar movies on tuesdays or wednesdays). -4b) Join the military, all movies on base cost $2.00 for admission. 5) Enjoy cheaper movie experience.
*Note, if you want food it is easy to buy the movie packs at a discount in most grocery stores. It is also possible to sneak in a pizza. * If you have a girlfriend or have a large purse, it can take the place of cargo pants.
Sckitzo wrote:I use a .22 bolt for my AR-15, nothing wrong with having another option.
Also think of it like this, if there is another huge ammo scare, you might not be able to get common pistols calibers again, but .22 is usually still around, so you can still practice a bit, and if need be you could use it for varmints.
Granted, might want to look at a conversion kit on down the road a bit, but once you get comfortable with the gun it's not a bad idea.
Sometimes I can really only afford to dip into .22's, and if I shoot 5k rounds that year, I gotta supplement some of that with .22, or sell a kidney.
Collect the brass afterwards, get enough and you can sell it for scrap. Its about $2.36 for a pound of brass in some places.
I reload, but yeah I save my brass
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sckitzo wrote:
halonachos wrote:I pay 5 or 2 dollars when I go to the movies.
Misspost?
No, Melissia was saying that buying ammo is cheaper than seeing a movie.
Ohhh! Ok, I was so cofused
Melissia wrote:
Sckitzo wrote:Also, I don't recommend the .357 Sig, ammo can be pricey and a PITA to find sometimes, unless your really want that caliber I suggest 9mm or .40, 45 would be fine and 10mm if your a masochist
The weapon's available in .357 SIG, .40S&W, and .45ACP. I think the ACP is probably most common and probably cheapest of these ammunition types, right?
Not really, 9mm is most likely going to be the cheapest, but
The cheapest of these, are nasty russian steel cased ammo, alot of people hate it as it may wear our your extractor quicker and some people claim it causes throat erosion in the weapon.
The extractor part I can live with, that's a $5 part in my AR, and I'll save a couple grand in money over the life of the part. And I haven't seen any evidence of TE in my rifle so not worried about it.
Melissia wrote:Because it's easier to concealed carry a handgun without getting in trouble than it is to carry around a shotgun and not get in trouble.
It's a double barrel, you don't need to conceal it, you show it to people and they crawl back into their holes
Melissia wrote:Because it's easier to concealed carry a handgun without getting in trouble than it is to carry around a shotgun and not get in trouble.
It's a double barrel, you don't need to conceal it, you show it to people and they crawl back into their holes
snake wrote:I've heard that the best type of gun for self defense - and particularly carrying - is a spurless revolver with a barrel no bigger than 2.5" and .357 rounds. Revolver so you don't have to worry about mag issues (springs, etc.), no spur means it won't catch on anything, the small size makes it easy and comfortable to conceal and carry, and the .357 still packs a punch. Any thoughts?
Still .357, slight hammer, shooting goes through the bottom of the frame instead of the top, and the kick really isn't that bad.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Slarg232 wrote:
Melissia wrote:Because it's easier to concealed carry a handgun without getting in trouble than it is to carry around a shotgun and not get in trouble.
It's a double barrel, you don't need to conceal it, you show it to people and they crawl back into their holes
Have fun in jail after that brilliant maneuver.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Melissia wrote:
Sckitzo wrote:Also, I don't recommend the .357 Sig, ammo can be pricey and a PITA to find sometimes, unless your really want that caliber I suggest 9mm or .40, 45 would be fine and 10mm if your a masochist
The weapon's available in .357 SIG, .40S&W, and .45ACP. I think the ACP is probably most common and probably cheapest of these ammunition types, right?
Cheapest? Yes, but terrible for a carry weapon. The only reason militaries must use FMJ ammo is that hollow points are illegal to use under the Geneva Accords in wartime. They are terrible for CC. Use a Jacketed hollow point.
Melissia wrote:And then the police arrest you for open carry.
halonachos wrote:
Slarg232 wrote:
Melissia wrote:Because it's easier to concealed carry a handgun without getting in trouble than it is to carry around a shotgun and not get in trouble.
It's a double barrel, you don't need to conceal it, you show it to people and they crawl back into their holes
Melissia wrote:And then the police arrest you for open carry.
halonachos wrote:
Slarg232 wrote:
Melissia wrote:Because it's easier to concealed carry a handgun without getting in trouble than it is to carry around a shotgun and not get in trouble.
It's a double barrel, you don't need to conceal it, you show it to people and they crawl back into their holes
When the hell did OT become so serious :/
Sorry, but joking about brandishing a Sawed Off Shotgun isn't funny.
Melissia wrote:And then the police arrest you for open carry.
halonachos wrote:
Slarg232 wrote:
Melissia wrote:Because it's easier to concealed carry a handgun without getting in trouble than it is to carry around a shotgun and not get in trouble.
It's a double barrel, you don't need to conceal it, you show it to people and they crawl back into their holes
When the hell did OT become so serious :/
Sorry, but joking about brandishing a Sawed Off Shotgun isn't funny.
halonachos wrote:
Sit a gun and a knife on a table and see which one kills a person sitting in a chair across from it first.
Statistically, the gun.
halonachos wrote:
Guns and knives are both dangerous but you don't have to load a knife for example, its just that guns are more effective than knives.
halonachos wrote:
Sit a gun and a knife on a table and see which one kills a person sitting in a chair across from it first.
Statistically, the gun.
It has been statistically proven that ghosts will be more likely to pick up a gun and shoot someone, seriously statistically neither is more dangerous than the other until a person decides to touch it.
dogma wrote:
halonachos wrote:
Guns and knives are both dangerous but you don't have to load a knife for example, its just that guns are more effective than knives.
Ergo, dangerous in this context.
Guns and knives are equally dangerous, the gun in the hands of a careful and peaceful person is less dangerous than the knife in the hands of a crazed homicidal maniac.
Melissia wrote:Assuming the maniac manages to get within arm's reach, you mean?
Or has one hell of a throwing arm. Besides, a knife is meant for up close action and it is possible for someone to surprise the other. Knife cuts can also be more brutal than a bullet wound, all depends on force applied and all of those other factors. But like I said, weapons are not dangerous, its the people using them who are dangerous.
Yes, but a person with a gun can also surprise someone-- and from a greater distance.
Sadly, my knife was stolen by a d-bag I used to work with, was a rather nice and large (skirted the legal limit) pocket knife with a very sharp edge. Haven't gotten around to replacing it yet.
And if the guy can throw the knife, he can surprise someone from a distance as well.
Again, it all depends on the person holding the weapon. If the guy is a nice guy with a gun and a maniac with a knife comes up close, chances are the maniac is going to kill the nice guy because killing the maniac isn't something the nice guy is already considering.
halonachos wrote:And if the guy can throw the knife, he can surprise someone from a distance as well.
Very, very few people can lethally throw knives, and certainly not at the accuracy and reliability even cursory training with a gun can give.
I know a fair few people who can throw knives quite effectively, to be honest. Most of them are Military, but still. I myself can nail a target ~15 feet, though not well enough to hit the body part I am aiming for (shoulder, instead of the ribcage, for instance).
Mind you, I have never had to actually use that skill in a non-safe situation, either.
Slarg232 wrote:I know a fair few people who can throw knives quite effectively, to be honest. Most of them are Military, but still. I myself can nail a target ~15 feet, though not well enough to hit the body part I am aiming for (shoulder, instead of the ribcage, for instance).
Mind you, I have never had to actually use that skill in a non-safe situation, either.
My grandfather has the uncanny ability to throw things like axes and hatchets with unerring accuracy...and the guy is 75 years old...
of course, the targets never move and are the diameter of a large tree stump...
Apparently he cant throw knives though, I asked him to try it...the two skills were further apart than I thought...
Besides, where I am, throwing knives are illegal to carry license or no, while concealed handguns aren't FAR more likely to face someone with a knife or handgun than throwing knife, which requires a very specialized skill and is very easy to mess up, while not really having the same lethality as a defensive knife or a handgun.
Sckitzo wrote:Also, I don't recommend the .357 Sig, ammo can be pricey and a PITA to find sometimes, unless your really want that caliber I suggest 9mm or .40, 45 would be fine and 10mm if your a masochist
The weapon's available in .357 SIG, .40S&W, and .45ACP. I think the ACP is probably most common and probably cheapest of these ammunition types, right?
Cheapest? Yes, but terrible for a carry weapon. The only reason militaries must use FMJ ammo is that hollow points are illegal to use under the Geneva Accords in wartime. They are terrible for CC. Use a Jacketed hollow point.
Err I wasn't implying she use practice ammo for self defense. That type of ammo is a whole other ball game, but chances are, and just a wild guess here, she is going to shoot far more rounds at paper then flesh.
And missed the part where 9mm wasn't listed, but as you can see, Sig is the most expensive of the ones listed, .40 the cheapest.
.40's tend to be a bit...snappy. Alot of people hate on them, I like mine though.
.45 is going to cause a lot of muzzle jump, if it were me, I'd go with the .40, maybe the .45 but not the .357 Sig.
That's me though.
And actually, we do (well I did) carry hollow points in the military, just only state side, same with using frangible ammo for people, state side only.
ETA
I do love how that Chiappa looks though, nice to see something new with wheel guns, haven't gotten to try one yet though.
And my buddy, who barely fires told me who got to shoot a K98 today, told him to send me some pictures, it's a 1942 Steyr, SS markings, vet bring back, with 100% matching numbers from what I can tell and it's in amazing shape, now I just gotta talk him into selling it to me...
halonachos wrote:
It has been statistically proven that ghosts will be more likely to pick up a gun and shoot someone, seriously statistically neither is more dangerous than the other until a person decides to touch it.
halonachos wrote:
Guns and knives are equally dangerous, the gun in the hands of a careful and peaceful person is less dangerous than the knife in the hands of a crazed homicidal maniac.
Da Boss wrote:One thing I've wondered (as handguns are rare where I come from)- where would you store the gun, if it's for personal protection?
Depends on if I'm at my home or out about in the city. In the city, I'd be obeying the oddly strict concealed carry laws that Texas has for handguns (but not shotguns or rifles, go figure). In my home, I'd probably have it on a case on the top shelf well out of reach of my bratty nephews, with a loaded magazine ready in case of someone breaking into my home, but not actually inserted into the gun as a precaution against the kids.
Welcome to the Big Leagues.
1. Whats your price point?
Under $1,000 but over $500
*Colt. I'm biased against Colts in that the ones I messed with were all older, to the point of rattling. Colts are the more expensive of this grouping but generally are high quality.
*Ruger. Heard very good things about their new 1911. Accuracy tests are good and buyer reviews are very strong.
*Springfield. Yea they have about 20 types of .45 acps.
*Remington came out with a full size 1911 recently. Reviews are moderate but the price point is better.
*S&W also has a good selection of .45ACP. A little higher on the pay scale but they've been making them for a awhile and like Springfield have everythying from GI models (basically WWI style) through competion versions.
Cheaper.
Rock Island. Good reviews in the below $500 range. I am sure there are others.
Higher end.
*Kimber. All the bells and whistles of higher end at a cheaper price. However quality has fallen off recently.
*STI. Made by Texans for Texans against Yankees (er uh...target). Primarily competition pistols but have some carry versions. The little double column VIP has better stats than a performance Glock G34. PLus they also have a double column line who's width is about the same as standard 1911.
*Sig Sauer. Germans making 1911s since, well since after GIs introduced it to them the hard way.
*Baer, Wilson, etc. You pay to play thouugh as these aint cheap.
2. What size?
*Full size. Thats the standard issue 35ounce to 40 ounce baby. Its, well full size. Not good for CCL, but go for home offense or competition. Least recoil (duh) and best accuracy.
*Commander size. generally a 3.5-4.0 inc barrel. Decent for CCl. Good recoil control and accuracy. Colt Commander (I think its Commander), STI's VIP, Kimber raptor Carry, etc. Lots of makers
*Officer size. Smallest. Generally 23-25 ounces. 3.0 inch barrel. These kick but surpise the out of a BG in a CCL situation. Kumber Ultra Carry, STI (Eclipse-I think), Sig Sauer (SIG SAUYAH!!!) Springfield etc. Not as big of a selection at this size.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
rubiksnoob wrote:Joking aside, I would recommend a Ruger 9mm. Just your basic, nothing-fancy 9mm pistol. We've got one and it's easy to fire, not too big, and both the gun and ammo are relatively inexpensive. It's not really a looker, but it does the job, and that's what's important, right?
Ninja'd by alarmingrick!
Oh god no. The trigger on Ruger 9mm full size are crap and they refuse to fix it, even when they have the eminently superior Sr9c now.
A full size 1911 is dificult to conceal well unless you are a big dude.
I think it is important to find a shop with a range where you can test fire various models and calibers, no point in spending a few hundred bucks to find out that due to kick you can't put the full magazine into the perp fast. And make no mistake, you DO want to put the full magazine into someone if you have to pull the gun, no matter what caliber.
Look at the sights. Good low visibility sights (I like ones with tritium, like some of the Trijicon sights) are important. An obscenely high proportion of self defense shoots happen in the dark. The ability to get the front sight lined up fast is important.
I'm thinking of getting a Glock 36 as a conceal piece.
Knives are crap defense weapons. It is harder to stab a person than shoot them. Knives get stuck in clothes or rib cages or just don't do the damage quickly enough to stop a methed out crapbag from beating the snot out of you. It takes a long time to bleed out from even a fatal knife wound in most cases. Throwing your knife is asinine. You never throw away your weapon, and it only ever works in movies. Anyone that honestly thinks throwing knives are an effective form of defense or offense has never been in a real close in life or death fight.
halonachos wrote:And if the guy can throw the knife, he can surprise someone from a distance as well.
Again, it all depends on the person holding the weapon. If the guy is a nice guy with a gun and a maniac with a knife comes up close, chances are the maniac is going to kill the nice guy because killing the maniac isn't something the nice guy is already considering.
In your hypothetical: You're sitting at a table with your knife in your pocket. I am sitting at a table with an XDM in a kydex holster.
In the words of the immortal bard: call it friendo.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
CptJake wrote:A full size 1911 is dificult to conceal well unless you are a big dude.
I think it is important to find a shop with a range where you can test fire various models and calibers, no point in spending a few hundred bucks to find out that due to kick you can't put the full magazine into the perp fast. And make no mistake, you DO want to put the full magazine into someone if you have to pull the gun, no matter what caliber.
Look at the sights. Good low visibility sights (I like ones with tritium, like some of the Trijicon sights) are important. An obscenely high proportion of self defense shoots happen in the dark. The ability to get the front sight lined up fast is important.
I'm thinking of getting a Glock 36 as a conceal piece.
Knives are crap defense weapons. It is harder to stab a person than shoot them. Knives get stuck in clothes or rib cages or just don't do the damage quickly enough to stop a methed out crapbag from beating the snot out of you. It takes a long time to bleed out from even a fatal knife wound in most cases. Throwing your knife is asinine. You never throw away your weapon, and it only ever works in movies. Anyone that honestly thinks throwing knives are an effective form of defense or offense has never been in a real close in life or death fight.
Glock 36 are good. I'd recommend in similar vein:
*XDM 3.8
*M&P carry
*Ruger SR9c
*Kimber/Springfield ultra carry
*Beretta Storm X4.
Frazzled wrote:Higher end. *Sig Sauer. Germans making 1911s since, well since after GIs introduced it to them the hard way.
Oddly enough the shop near me has a SIG Sauer P250 for somewhere between 200-300 USD, which is cheaper than the prices I found for the Colt Government Model 01991. Looks to be a better size for concealed carry too. I need to go there and check to see if it's new (if so, yay?) or used (in which case I'd not want to risk any defects).
edit: ah, checked the site again... read the price wrong, it's 394, not 294. Still, that seems like a good price for a SIG if it's new. I'll have to go test fire it.
Melissia wrote:Because it's easier to concealed carry a handgun without getting in trouble than it is to carry around a shotgun and not get in trouble.
I don't really understand why someone would want to carry a concealed weapon of any type with them. IMO, it is more riskier to own a gun than not having one, because if you get into a dangerous situation, talking usually gets you off the hook. If you draw a weapon in a situation like this, you never know what the other guy has hidden in his pocket or under his clothes.
halonachos wrote:And if the guy can throw the knife, he can surprise someone from a distance as well.
Very, very few people can lethally throw knives, and certainly not at the accuracy and reliability even cursory training with a gun can give.
A person not trained with a gun are more of a danger to themselves, a person who isn't trained with a knife can understand the concept fairly quickly.
Dogma, not arguing against your point. A gun and knife, as you have shown as well, are perfectly safe unless someone or something acts upon it.
@Frazzled, it depends, if you came out planning to kill someone sitting across from you then having a gun instead of a knife wouldn't change a thing. Its the character of the person that matters, not the gun of the knife itself. Also a steel blade can split a lead bullet, so if you want to mention training the guy trained with a knife so well that he can do so.
Melissia wrote:Because it's easier to concealed carry a handgun without getting in trouble than it is to carry around a shotgun and not get in trouble.
I sincerely hope you're going to get a permit if you're going to carry a concealed handgun.
If I was going for a handgun to easily conceal to get me out of a sticky situation I'd probably go with a .380. They're small enough to easily conceal and will still "get the job done" as it were.
Melissia wrote:Because it's easier to concealed carry a handgun without getting in trouble than it is to carry around a shotgun and not get in trouble.
I don't really understand why someone would want to carry a concealed weapon of any type with them. IMO, it is more riskier to own a gun than not having one, because if you get into a dangerous situation, talking usually gets you off the hook. If you draw a weapon in a situation like this, you never know what the other guy has hidden in his pocket or under his clothes.
From what I've heard and seen (Family being in law enforcement) The usual raff are cowards and thugs. The purpose of a concealed weapon is to provide an advantage to yourself that normal people don't have. I've never tried to talk down a mugger or a carjacker or a burglar but I don't think it would work out too well unless there is a gun in your hand as well. People like that only respect power, and if you show them you are in control of the situation because you have a gun pointed at them they are more likely to cooperate than coming at them with just words.
Ever seen security videos from convenient stores that get robbed? The thugs who come in usually have a weapon yes, but what you see more often than not is that the cashier also has a weapon and due to this fact, the criminal is scared away, his previously thought easy pick turning out to be much harder than he bargained for.
Also, you never know, the other guy might be just making his fingers into a gun shape in his pocket to try and intimidate you, come back with a real one and he'll probably bolt.
Melissia wrote:Because it's easier to concealed carry a handgun without getting in trouble than it is to carry around a shotgun and not get in trouble.
I don't really understand why someone would want to carry a concealed weapon of any type with them. IMO, it is more riskier to own a gun than not having one, because if you get into a dangerous situation, talking usually gets you off the hook. If you draw a weapon in a situation like this, you never know what the other guy has hidden in his pocket or under his clothes.
When the guy is desperate, drunk, or overall just not listening to common reason. A firearm can easily dissolve a situation and if you have a weapon drawn and aimed at a guy, they tend to get the point of 'hey I better go away.'. If they have anything in their pockets and decide to pull it out, you already have an edge over them.
Yeh a colt or Kimner 1911 would be a great choice though ammo is going to hurt as .45 is some of the most expensive stuff out there. Other good choices are a gen 4 glock. They have a variety of available calibers and sizes and legendary reliability. I have one of each and currently carry my 1911 since I dont have a holster for the glock but the glock is great to shoot and holds 14 .45 rounds while the 1911 holds 8 or 9 (depending on the clip). What state would you be carrying in?
Melissia wrote:Because it's easier to concealed carry a handgun without getting in trouble than it is to carry around a shotgun and not get in trouble.
I don't really understand why someone would want to carry a concealed weapon of any type with them. IMO, it is more riskier to own a gun than not having one, because if you get into a dangerous situation, talking usually gets you off the hook. If you draw a weapon in a situation like this, you never know what the other guy has hidden in his pocket or under his clothes.
From what I've heard and seen (Family being in law enforcement) The usual raff are cowards and thugs. The purpose of a concealed weapon is to provide an advantage to yourself that normal people don't have. I've never tried to talk down a mugger or a carjacker or a burglar but I don't think it would work out too well unless there is a gun in your hand as well. People like that only respect power, and if you show them you are in control of the situation because you have a gun pointed at them they are more likely to cooperate than coming at them with just words.
Ever seen security videos from convenient stores that get robbed? The thugs who come in usually have a weapon yes, but what you see more often than not is that the cashier also has a weapon and due to this fact, the criminal is scared away, his previously thought easy pick turning out to be much harder than he bargained for.
Also, you never know, the other guy might be just making his fingers into a gun shape in his pocket to try and intimidate you, come back with a real one and he'll probably bolt.
Hmm, now that I think of it, you are probably right. The scare tactics work fine with just one person, I guess. But a whole gang of them? Not so sure...
Melissia wrote:Because it's easier to concealed carry a handgun without getting in trouble than it is to carry around a shotgun and not get in trouble.
I don't really understand why someone would want to carry a concealed weapon of any type with them. IMO, it is more riskier to own a gun than not having one, because if you get into a dangerous situation, talking usually gets you off the hook. If you draw a weapon in a situation like this, you never know what the other guy has hidden in his pocket or under his clothes.
From what I've heard and seen (Family being in law enforcement) The usual raff are cowards and thugs. The purpose of a concealed weapon is to provide an advantage to yourself that normal people don't have. I've never tried to talk down a mugger or a carjacker or a burglar but I don't think it would work out too well unless there is a gun in your hand as well. People like that only respect power, and if you show them you are in control of the situation because you have a gun pointed at them they are more likely to cooperate than coming at them with just words.
Ever seen security videos from convenient stores that get robbed? The thugs who come in usually have a weapon yes, but what you see more often than not is that the cashier also has a weapon and due to this fact, the criminal is scared away, his previously thought easy pick turning out to be much harder than he bargained for.
Also, you never know, the other guy might be just making his fingers into a gun shape in his pocket to try and intimidate you, come back with a real one and he'll probably bolt.
Hmm, now that I think of it, you are probably right. The scare tactics work fine with just one person, I guess. But a whole gang of them? Not so sure...
If you find yourself in a situation where there is more than one opponent...well its hard to say...but if I were in that situation I would have to swallow my pride and run, run to a public place and possibly shout my head off, that alone would probably dissuade the guys chasing me from following, if not, keep running until either someone does something or they stop following you.
A person not trained with a gun are more of a danger to themselves, a person who isn't trained with a knife can understand the concept fairly quickly.
Dogma, not arguing against your point. A gun and knife, as you have shown as well, are perfectly safe unless someone or something acts upon it.
@Frazzled, it depends, if you came out planning to kill someone sitting across from you then having a gun instead of a knife wouldn't change a thing. Its the character of the person that matters, not the gun of the knife itself. Also a steel blade can split a lead bullet, so if you want to mention training the guy trained with a knife so well that he can do so.
You've seen way too many movies. If (and that is a MIGHTY huge IF) a person could actually have a knife in the correct place to allow a bullet to strike the blade:
1. The split bullet still moves forward, just in more parts and a little slower.
2. The blade has been hit with a hell of a lot of force, no-one is holding onto it, and it will now be traveling the same direction the bullet was.
3. Not many people are just gonna pull the trigger one time.
The effective range of a knife is about 2/3rd the length of the user's arm. The effective range of the pistol will assuredly reach a bit further.
And again, a knife does not kill or even incapacitate an attacker quickly enough to assure the defender is not subject to harm/death. Knives get caught up in clothing, stuck in bone, etc.
I don't really understand why someone would want to carry a concealed weapon of any type with them. IMO, it is more riskier to own a gun than not having one
***Thats wrong. FBI statistics in the 90s denote 1MM+ events wherein weapons were "brandished" and stopped a crime.
because if you get into a dangerous situation, talking usually gets you off the hook.
***Also wrong. Else all those criminal statistics on rapes, murders, and robberies wouldn't be there. The stalker the Frazzled's have had to deal with would not be stopped by talking.
If you draw a weapon in a situation like this, you never know what the other guy has hidden in his pocket or under his clothes.
***If you draw in a situation like this, you need to meet criteria for reasonable self defense. If I have met the criteria for that as a valid legal defense, and he has not drawn something: 1). he must be a real bad mofo as generally it is required that I have a reasonable fear of death or imminent grave bodily harm (depending on jurisidiction); 2. he's a dead man.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
halonachos wrote:@Frazzled, it depends, if you came out planning to kill someone sitting across from you then having a gun instead of a knife wouldn't change a thing. Its the character of the person that matters, not the gun of the knife itself.
No it doesn't. If your knife is hidden and my CZ are hidden then you're at an incredible disadvantage. I'm just as fast as you, but can pop you without moving my upper body. If I miss I can try again, and again.
Lets see, I practiced quick draw and point shooting twice this month and burned 600 rounds doing it. How many times did your hypothetical super ninja?
And now for a trip down memory lane:
Also a steel blade can split a lead bullet, so if you want to mention training the guy trained with a knife so well that he can do so.
I've been in a situation where there was no talking. The incident started with violence (a blow to the back of my head), and ended with violence. In all honesty, if I or the person I was with that day had been carrying, there would have been less violence as the crap bag perps would have been scared off vice fighting. Instead, it got ugly.
'Gee kind Sir, perhaps we ought to discuss the implications of your intended assault' doesn't work in real life. Or at least does not work often enough for me to want to bet on it working.
Frazzled, bullets are made out of lead which is a soft metal compared to steel. Topshot had a challenge wear the shooter had to split a bullet on an axehead and pop two balloons.
Also Frazzled in your hypothetical you are using your own training as a comparison to a knife wielder. What if the person with the knife has had more training in knife fighting than you have in your quick draw?
I was simply saying that it all depends on who is holding the weapon. If you're sitting down with a gun and intend to kill someone, its not the weapon's fault that its in the hands of a malevolent person. Again, weapons are not dangerous until someone does something dangerous with them. You're not really arguing against that fact, just saying that you're a dangerous person when it comes to concealed weapons.
Bullets are not all made of lead. In fact, most self defense rounds are not all lead, only target rounds are. Most rounds have a steel/copper jacket, many special rounds have a hard metal penetrator. A lead only bullet will foul rifling in the gun barrel over time.
An ax head is a LOT different from a knife blade. A lot more mass, different angle, different composition. Note, in your example no one was holding the ax... No one, repeat No One has the reflexes to move a knife faster than a bullet comes at them. To get the knife in the way would be pure luck. And again, if the knife gets hit the knife wielder is gonna be hurting.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Your starship troopers example is perfect. It is a MOVIE. That is the ONLY place you will see thrown knives be effective.
halonachos wrote:Just because its finally somewhat relevant.
As much as I enjoyed Starship Troopers as a pulp fiction movie, this scene in particular really irks me. The book used the "knife/nuke" example as a great discussion into the proper use of force and the particular role solders play as a political tool. The movie...didn't.
Also, I like the S&W Sigma Series. Sig Sauers look wimpy. If you're going for maximum intimidation and boominess, Desert Eagle all the way. However, it might be cheaper to buy a new SoB Finecast army than a new Desert Eagle.
halonachos wrote:Frazzled, bullets are made out of lead which is a soft metal compared to steel. Topshot had a challenge wear the shooter had to split a bullet on an axehead and pop two balloons.
Also Frazzled in your hypothetical you are using your own training as a comparison to a knife wielder. What if the person with the knife has had more training in knife fighting than you have in your quick draw?
***Physics. I'd still rather a pistol than a knife, especially against someone better than I am. Now of course, none of us has yet asked, why exactly are we sitting down to table with a guy trying to cut our throat?
I was simply saying that it all depends on who is holding the weapon. If you're sitting down with a gun and intend to kill someone, its not the weapon's fault that its in the hands of a malevolent person. Again, weapons are not dangerous until someone does something dangerous with them. You're not really arguing against that fact, just saying that you're a dangerous person when it comes to concealed weapons.
***Agreed (unless its leaking radiation or hippy treehugger rays or something )
I tend to frown upon the whole " intimidation factor" where firearms are concerned (though of course I know it exist)...
I'm of a train of thought that one shouldn't draw their weapon( or at least aim it) with the intent of intimidation..rather they should draw/aim with the intent of putting their intended target down.
biccat wrote:
Also, I like the S&W Sigma Series. Sig Sauers look wimpy. If you're going for maximum intimidation and boominess, Desert Eagle all the way. However, it might be cheaper to buy a new SoB Finecast army than a new Desert Eagle.
If you're gonna intimidate go old school (I have one loaded with hand loaded extra hot loads in case the suburbs are attacked by grizzly bears and the Wife can't get to her minivan in time). It works good for bad guys too, at least until she gets to her minivan then its all raging orky battle deathwagon time...
"Hey where'd that lady get the giant wrecking ball attached to a minivan?"
FITZZ wrote: I tend to frown upon the whole " intimidation factor" where firearms are concerned (though of course I know it exist)...
I'm of a train of thought that one shouldn't draw their weapon( or at least aim it) with the intent of intimidation..rather they should draw/aim with the intent of putting their intended target down.
Amen. If I am forced to draw, it is gonna be a bad day for someone. Better the other guy than me. The other guy is properly intimidated when he is properly perforated.
FITZZ wrote: I tend to frown upon the whole " intimidation factor" where firearms are concerned (though of course I know it exist)...
I'm of a train of thought that one shouldn't draw their weapon( or at least aim it) with the intent of intimidation..rather they should draw/aim with the intent of putting their intended target down.
Amen. If I am forced to draw, it is gonna be a bad day for someone. Better the other guy than me. The other guy is properly intimidated when he is properly perforated.
Remember in Texas its required to fire at least two to four warning shots center mass.
Yes because a man with a gun will always beat a man with a knife.
But CptJake and Frazzled are not arguing against me really.
Two men are within range of each other, one is armed with a pistol and one with a knife. One plans to kill the other, while the other doesn't who wins? The answer is the one who plans to kill the other, if a man takes a knife and stabs someone and rips the knife upwards or in any direction its going to end the fight. If the homicidal man is the one with the gun then the man with the knife is equally screwed. It all depends on the motives of the person behind the weapon and not the weapon itself.
Frazzled can have all of the quick draw training in the world, but if a man of evil intent manages to get close enough with a knife Frazzled isn't going to make it. Same if the guy had a gun as well. I would hope that Frazzled is a nice enough person that he doesn't think about killing someone everytime he walks out of the house and if a guy comes up to him to ask the time, or does any other seemingly innocent action to get close to him then he's close enough.
Imagine walking in a grocery store, down a hallway, walking on the sidewalk and try to imagine how many people you come into contact with and how close they actually get.
Its not hard to get into close contact with somebody in today's modern age.
FITZZ wrote: I tend to frown upon the whole " intimidation factor" where firearms are concerned (though of course I know it exist)...
I'm of a train of thought that one shouldn't draw their weapon( or at least aim it) with the intent of intimidation..rather they should draw/aim with the intent of putting their intended target down.
Which is why I also mentioned boominess. Because nothing puts a target down like a 44 magnum. Well, at least in the handgun range.
Also, I agree that you should never draw a weapon unless you intend to use it, but IMO it's preferable to have a goon run away after seeing your weapon than have to shoot him. Intimidation may save a life.
However, the first priority should be always be a weapon you can handle comfortably and shoot easily. The best gun in the world is useless if you can't hold or fire it well.
FITZZ wrote: I tend to frown upon the whole " intimidation factor" where firearms are concerned (though of course I know it exist)...
I'm of a train of thought that one shouldn't draw their weapon( or at least aim it) with the intent of intimidation..rather they should draw/aim with the intent of putting their intended target down.
Amen. If I am forced to draw, it is gonna be a bad day for someone. Better the other guy than me. The other guy is properly intimidated when he is properly perforated.
Remember in Texas its required to fire at least two to four warning shots center mass.
I believe that "requirement" not only applies in the great state of Texas, but indeed in the entirety of the South...but I may have to go back and review critera.
If you can intimidate someone without firing, then you've used the gun in one of its many applications. It keeps both parties safe and alive, of course you should always be willing to fire at the other person should they continue.
biccat wrote:However, the first priority should be always be a weapon you can handle comfortably and shoot easily. The best gun in the world is useless if you can't hold or fire it well.
Or if, like the deagle, you're embarrassed to be seen with the ugly sack of gak and don't want to draw it
Two men are within range of each other, one is armed with a pistol and one with a knife. One plans to kill the other, while the other doesn't who wins? The answer is the one who plans to kill the other, if a man takes a knife and stabs someone and rips the knife upwards or in any direction its going to end the fight. If the homicidal man is the one with the gun then the man with the knife is equally screwed. It all depends on the motives of the person behind the weapon and not the weapon itself.
Frazzled can have all of the quick draw training in the world, but if a man of evil intent manages to get close enough with a knife Frazzled isn't going to make it.
Thats kind of the point. I tend to try to keep people who are trying to puncture me at a distance. I really hate that.
Imagine walking in a grocery store, down a hallway, walking on the sidewalk and try to imagine how many people you come into contact with and how close they actually get.
***This is true, but I don't generally have soccer attempting to pull out knives and repeatedly stab me. Ok, maybe an ex fiance' but thats another story...
biccat wrote:However, the first priority should be always be a weapon you can handle comfortably and shoot easily. The best gun in the world is useless if you can't hold or fire it well.
Or if, like the deagle, you're embarrassed to be seen with the ugly sack of gak and don't want to draw it
If you're embarrassed of the gun you're carrying just based on aesthetics then you've bought it for the wrong purpose. If my gun looks like a square piece of metal but functions well and will protect me then I could care less about whether or not the guy I'm aiming it at thinks its pretty. All a gun needs to intimidate someone is a hole at the end of the barrel that says "Hey bud, a bullet comes from this thing.".
FITZZ wrote: I tend to frown upon the whole " intimidation factor" where firearms are concerned (though of course I know it exist)...
I'm of a train of thought that one shouldn't draw their weapon( or at least aim it) with the intent of intimidation..rather they should draw/aim with the intent of putting their intended target down.
Which is why I also mentioned boominess. Because nothing puts a target down like a 44 magnum. Well, at least in the handgun range.
Also, I agree that you should never draw a weapon unless you intend to use it, but IMO it's preferable to have a goon run away after seeing your weapon than have to shoot him. Intimidation may save a life.
However, the first priority should be always be a weapon you can handle comfortably and shoot easily. The best gun in the world is useless if you can't hold or fire it well.
I can agree with this, overall i was basicly eluding to the "intent" of the defender in so much as it is never ever a good idea to draw/aim hopping to "intimidate"...
Now, if the attacker/intruder happens to become intimidated and flees/surrenders..so much the better, but, as you stated, one should never draw/aim a firearm unless they fully intend to use it.
halonachos wrote:If you're embarrassed of the gun you're carrying just based on aesthetics then you've bought it for the wrong purpose.
Oh no, I'm mostly just insulting one of the worst moern handguns ever devised more than anything. I'd rather have almost any other handgun other than that scrap metal that occasionally works as a firearm which is almost as dangerous to me as it is to the person I'm aiming at...
Sure, I exaggerate my dislike of the Deagle, but it's still a horrible gun.
FITZZ wrote: I tend to frown upon the whole " intimidation factor" where firearms are concerned (though of course I know it exist)...
I'm of a train of thought that one shouldn't draw their weapon( or at least aim it) with the intent of intimidation..rather they should draw/aim with the intent of putting their intended target down.
Which is why I also mentioned boominess. Because nothing puts a target down like a 44 magnum. Well, at least in the handgun range.
Also, I agree that you should never draw a weapon unless you intend to use it, but IMO it's preferable to have a goon run away after seeing your weapon than have to shoot him. Intimidation may save a life.
However, the first priority should be always be a weapon you can handle comfortably and shoot easily. The best gun in the world is useless if you can't hold or fire it well.
I can agree with this, overall i was basically eluding to the "intent" of the defender in so much as it is never ever a good idea to draw/aim hopping to "intimidate"...
Now, if the attacker/intruder happens to become intimidated and flees/surrenders..so much the better, but, as you stated, one should never draw/aim a firearm unless they fully intend to use it.
I'm of the opinion that intimidation is just an added bonus of intending to use the gun on someone who has the potential to be deadly dangerous...Case in point:
My Dad (who I've said before works in law enforcement) was serving a warrant one day with another deputy and basically the answer at the door was that the person in question had just left. When the deputy asked to enter the house, the guy in question ran into sight out the back door carrying a hunting rifle.
Long story short, my dad ran back to his car, grabbed his Remington 870 and then came back around to the back of the house where the suspect was trying to escape out of a window. He came around the corner of the house and was told to drop his weapon, he didn't comply immediately so my dad chambered the round on his pump action with the distinctively loud "Kch chk" of a shotgun....guy drops the gun upon hearing the noise and everybody lives...
He intended to use the gun but didn't have to in the end because of the way it intimidated the guy...In that situation intimidation results in non violent resolving of the matter, but if that doesn't work the only choice you have is to follow up with violence...its either him or you.
I've never gotten the concept of having a pretty gun for protection. If you plan on using it for protection then you need to find one with a big bore size because that's the part that's going to be pointed at the bad guy. Its why shotguns are so effective at getting people to back down, its a huge freaking hole that slugs and other things can come out of and when its staring at you, you tend to think that its a bad idea to keep messing with the guy holding it.
The sound of a pump-action does the same thing, people imagine the black pit of death at the front of a shotgun.
halonachos wrote:Yes because a man with a gun will always beat a man with a knife.
But CptJake and Frazzled are not arguing against me really.
Two men are within range of each other, one is armed with a pistol and one with a knife. One plans to kill the other, while the other doesn't who wins? The answer is the one who plans to kill the other, if a man takes a knife and stabs someone and rips the knife upwards or in any direction its going to end the fight. If the homicidal man is the one with the gun then the man with the knife is equally screwed. It all depends on the motives of the person behind the weapon and not the weapon itself.
Frazzled can have all of the quick draw training in the world, but if a man of evil intent manages to get close enough with a knife Frazzled isn't going to make it. Same if the guy had a gun as well. I would hope that Frazzled is a nice enough person that he doesn't think about killing someone everytime he walks out of the house and if a guy comes up to him to ask the time, or does any other seemingly innocent action to get close to him then he's close enough.
Imagine walking in a grocery store, down a hallway, walking on the sidewalk and try to imagine how many people you come into contact with and how close they actually get.
Its not hard to get into close contact with somebody in today's modern age.
Again, you very much over estimate how much damage a knife can quickly do, and how quckly that damage will incapacitate someone. The guy with the knofe may in fact kill the guy with the gun. Bu tnot before the guy with the gun gets off several shots. And at knife range, the guy with the knife may end up very dead too. In fact, because of the way the damage works, he may die before the guy he cut bleads out. Intent to kill is nice. Desire to live has a place in the argument too. Guys with knives don't win gun fights. ever. At all.
Do some research on how many stab wound victims actually die, and how many times they were stabbed, and how long it took them to bleed out.
Which of course is why you don't see a lot of armies skimping on issue of fire arms and replacing them with knives.
halonachos wrote:Yes because a man with a gun will always beat a man with a knife.
But CptJake and Frazzled are not arguing against me really.
Two men are within range of each other, one is armed with a pistol and one with a knife. One plans to kill the other, while the other doesn't who wins? The answer is the one who plans to kill the other, if a man takes a knife and stabs someone and rips the knife upwards or in any direction its going to end the fight. If the homicidal man is the one with the gun then the man with the knife is equally screwed. It all depends on the motives of the person behind the weapon and not the weapon itself.
Frazzled can have all of the quick draw training in the world, but if a man of evil intent manages to get close enough with a knife Frazzled isn't going to make it. Same if the guy had a gun as well. I would hope that Frazzled is a nice enough person that he doesn't think about killing someone everytime he walks out of the house and if a guy comes up to him to ask the time, or does any other seemingly innocent action to get close to him then he's close enough.
Imagine walking in a grocery store, down a hallway, walking on the sidewalk and try to imagine how many people you come into contact with and how close they actually get.
Its not hard to get into close contact with somebody in today's modern age.
Not always true, that's why I think the range we could shoot someone wielding a knife was something like 25m.
I thought it was BS until we ran drills using blue knifes and blue guns, someone with a knife out will the majority of the time reach and strike the officer before he can draw and fire his pistol. But I think we actually agree, a knife, like a gun or self defense training, is just another tool for your tool box.
And I know here in AZ, if you draw on someone, you have to have reasonable expectation to use that firearm to defend your self, others or to prevent certain types of crimes. I've drawn on people and been drawn on, what type of firearm they have doesn't factor into my mental process to much beyond "HOLY , then I lump it into pistol, longarm or shotgun" to know if I need to run or just tackle em. Press the threat and all that.
Different type of training though, and unless your wearing body armor most likely going to get you killed hell most likely going to get you killed even if you are wearing body armor.
halonachos wrote:Yes because a man with a gun will always beat a man with a knife.
But CptJake and Frazzled are not arguing against me really.
Two men are within range of each other, one is armed with a pistol and one with a knife. One plans to kill the other, while the other doesn't who wins? The answer is the one who plans to kill the other, if a man takes a knife and stabs someone and rips the knife upwards or in any direction its going to end the fight. If the homicidal man is the one with the gun then the man with the knife is equally screwed. It all depends on the motives of the person behind the weapon and not the weapon itself.
Frazzled can have all of the quick draw training in the world, but if a man of evil intent manages to get close enough with a knife Frazzled isn't going to make it. Same if the guy had a gun as well. I would hope that Frazzled is a nice enough person that he doesn't think about killing someone everytime he walks out of the house and if a guy comes up to him to ask the time, or does any other seemingly innocent action to get close to him then he's close enough.
Imagine walking in a grocery store, down a hallway, walking on the sidewalk and try to imagine how many people you come into contact with and how close they actually get.
Its not hard to get into close contact with somebody in today's modern age.
Not always true, that's why I think the range we could shoot someone wielding a knife was something like 25m.
I thought it was BS until we ran drills using blue knifes and blue guns, someone with a knife out will the majority of the time reach and strike the officer before he can draw and fire his pistol. But I think we actually agree, a knife, like a gun or self defense training, is just another tool for your tool box.
And I know here in AZ, if you draw on someone, you have to have reasonable expectation to use that firearm to defend your self, others or to prevent certain types of crimes. I've drawn on people and been drawn on, what type of firearm they have doesn't factor into my mental process to much beyond "HOLY , then I lump it into pistol, longarm or shotgun" to know if I need to run or just tackle em. Press the threat and all that.
Different type of training though, and unless your wearing body armor most likely going to get you killed hell most likely going to get you killed even if you are wearing body armor.
People arguing knives (or swords, yes I've had that conversation) generally start with the guy already having the knife in his hand, whilst the GG has his holstered. Of course, if the guy had his pistol out already too then its game over.
halonachos wrote:Yes because a man with a gun will always beat a man with a knife.
But CptJake and Frazzled are not arguing against me really.
Two men are within range of each other, one is armed with a pistol and one with a knife. One plans to kill the other, while the other doesn't who wins? The answer is the one who plans to kill the other, if a man takes a knife and stabs someone and rips the knife upwards or in any direction its going to end the fight. If the homicidal man is the one with the gun then the man with the knife is equally screwed. It all depends on the motives of the person behind the weapon and not the weapon itself.
Frazzled can have all of the quick draw training in the world, but if a man of evil intent manages to get close enough with a knife Frazzled isn't going to make it. Same if the guy had a gun as well. I would hope that Frazzled is a nice enough person that he doesn't think about killing someone everytime he walks out of the house and if a guy comes up to him to ask the time, or does any other seemingly innocent action to get close to him then he's close enough.
Imagine walking in a grocery store, down a hallway, walking on the sidewalk and try to imagine how many people you come into contact with and how close they actually get.
Its not hard to get into close contact with somebody in today's modern age.
Not always true, that's why I think the range we could shoot someone wielding a knife was something like 25m.
I thought it was BS until we ran drills using blue knifes and blue guns, someone with a knife out will the majority of the time reach and strike the officer before he can draw and fire his pistol. But I think we actually agree, a knife, like a gun or self defense training, is just another tool for your tool box.
And I know here in AZ, if you draw on someone, you have to have reasonable expectation to use that firearm to defend your self, others or to prevent certain types of crimes. I've drawn on people and been drawn on, what type of firearm they have doesn't factor into my mental process to much beyond "HOLY , then I lump it into pistol, longarm or shotgun" to know if I need to run or just tackle em. Press the threat and all that.
Different type of training though, and unless your wearing body armor most likely going to get you killed hell most likely going to get you killed even if you are wearing body armor.
People arguing knives (or swords, yes I've had that conversation) generally start with the guy already having the knife in his hand, whilst the GG has his holstered. Of course, if the guy had his pistol out already too then its game over.
The scenarios we used were domestic violence situations, potential robberies/rapes/ect.
It was pretty buch, knife=bad guy. I mean, if your gonna jack my wallet from me, you going to walk up empty handed or you going to be ready to stab me at the first sign of trouble?
ETA, gotta get to class, pick this up later if it goes on
CptJake wrote:
Again, you very much over estimate how much damage a knife can quickly do, and how quckly that damage will incapacitate someone.
Do some research on how many stab wound victims actually die, and how many times they were stabbed, and how long it took them to bleed out.
I believe that you are underestimating the damage a knife can do. A bowie knife inserted all of the way into a person will do a lot of damage compared to an icepick being stabbed into someone of course. However, I've seen two people get shot in the head and still live. Mind you it was a domestic murder/suicide attempt but the gunshots were at close range and directly to the head(actually the wife had a pillow in between her head and the gun), either way they both survived and the husband was actually perfectly fine albeit serving jail time now. The wife has some weakness on her left side now, but is recovering. It all depends on where you hit, and sometimes a bullet wound won't do anything besides make a nice hole in a guy.
..
guns to damn complex for my wife to work reliably so I just stick the 12G there, that and shes stupid good with it.
...( I know you know that already 
)...yeah, just way to much risk of over penatration ...
... 
's like Mitchell's Mausers selling knock offs, and well it becomes a bigger pita.
If you're gonna intimidate go old school (I have one loaded with hand loaded extra hot loads in case the suburbs are attacked by grizzly bears and the Wife can't get to her minivan in time). It works good for bad guys too, at least until she gets to her minivan then its all raging orky battle deathwagon time...
