If a certain firearm, component, or ammunition is commonly used, even by police, that does not guarantee that it won't be brought up in court. Also, 33 round magazines are available as Glock factory mags, so it is just as much a 'stock' component as the spare 17 round magazine that you can buy.
Also, by your own logic, someone who simply uses a different brand of magazine like Mec-Gar or Chip McCormick in his gun is setting himself up to be crucified by a prosecutor for "modifying" his firearm. The point is there comes a point at which effectiveness must outweigh liability. It makes little sense to say that 6 rounds is inadequate, 15 rounds is perfect, and 33 rounds is "excessive" because any of the three could be argued to be "excessive" by an overly zealous prosecutor.
i invite you to please quote where i said that using the same equipment LEOs use will make me immune to prosection
during your search for this, make sure you don't skip the post where i said that if this precaution didn't protect me from going to jail, that i would 'rather spend 10 years in prison than eternity in a grave'
and just because you order the magazine from the pistol's manufacturer doesn't make it 'factory' for your pistol
since you work in the automotive industry....
if i have a Mustang, a bare bones one, and i order Cobra wheels from my local Ford dealership then have them installed, i have officially modified my vehicle
i'm using parts manufactured by the company that manufactured my vehicle, but they were not on my vehicle when it left the factory, and are thereby considered a modification
there are not any Glocks that ship with 33 round magazines, therefore adding one would be a modification
now, if i were to carry a Mec-Gar magazine, as long as it was the same capacity as my factory magazine and built to the same specifications, i feel like i would be in the same position if i was carrying a Glock brand magazine
is it possible that i'm wrong? of course, but as i've stated before, if i am, i've done everything i can to assure that i'd be in the best possible situation given my options
You obviously do not understand the effects that certain drugs have on the human body, a person does not flinch from what he cannot feel. You can poke him with your finger, fist, gun, or anything you like, but if he doesn't feel it you're wasting your time.
and you're obviously basing your arguments on terrible logic, but that doesn't seem to matter to you.
through probably 10 posts towards each other, you've still not posed a situation where i won't have my hand pinned against something and not be able to withdraw my weapon a very small distance
that's what this entire part of your argument is based on, the fact that i said that if you were so worried about a giant attacker getting on top of you, you should learn some techniques to remove him from you
you assert that no matter what, he's going to be high, impervious to pain, and a solid mass of muscle that you are unable to move no matter how much effort you expend
First off, a semi-auto need not be shoved anywhere near 5" to push it out of battery. Secondly, if the cylinder of my revolver is grabbed I'm no worse off than if the slide of a semi-auto was grabbed (of course an already cocked revolver could still fire one shot, but for the sake of argument we'll say it's not already cocked). Grabbing the the barrel of the revolver, however, would not render it inoperable. Most semi-auto slides run the entire length, or very nearly the entire length, of the pistol. Grabbing a semi-auto anywhere on the top end allows one to push it out of battery.
i didn't say that it did, i said that i would need to shove it 5" into a guy's stomach to do it
when you push a solid object into another solid object without puncturing it the stationary object will flex around the moving object
since the skin on someone's stomach is attached to the skin everywhere else, it doesn't form directly around the gun, it forms a sort of crater (think of how your bellybutton is shaped more like a funnel than a tin can)
the gun must move deep enough into this crater for the sides of the crater to move the slide back on the gun
the slide may only need to move a fraction of an inch to be moved out of battery, but that crater isn't going to do that in a fraction of an inch
that's why i say you need to shove it 5" into his stomach, which is admittedly somewhat of a hyperbole, but it's really not that far off
the pistol is going to have to be forced into the attacker's body far enough for the crater formed by the pistol to move the parts of the pistol far enough back to 'jam' it
that's the thing you don't seem to understand, or seem to be ignoring
you seem to be asserting that just because a pistol is in contact with a surface, that surface is automatically going to conform to the front of the slide while simultaneously letting the barrel / guide rod / frame penetrate far enough in to move the slide to the rear
that's not the case.
and reading this part of your post kind of sheds some light on your state of mind
do that real quick, have someone point a pistol at your side and attempt to push the slide back
that's a fairly difficult thing to do, something much more difficult than simply grabbing a gun
it's definitely possible, the thing is though, it's still solved by simply moving your hand back
your entire premise of a semi-automatic being 'moved out of battery' is predicated on the fact that my hand will be immobile
you don't have to move it far enough to stop making contact with the attacker, you have to move it enough to move the slide back into battery
i can move it straight back, i can tilt it down, i can tilt it to one side, i can tilt it up, i can push the attacker to the rear, i can push the attacker to one side
if the guy notices there's a pistol in his stomach and decides to push the slide straight back, all you have to do is let him push you straight back
like i've said before, you're continuously presenting a single situation that has NUMEROUS outs and saying that it's the end-all-be-all and the most likely situation for anyone to encounter when that's simply not the case
First, if my attacker is far enough away that I actually have time to fire 5 shots at all, then he is also far enough away that I can attempt to retreat, seek cover, and/or reload. As I said before, I have absolutely no intention of standing still blazing away like Wild Bill in the streets of Deadwood if I can help it.
man, they should give you your own hotline...
your attacker is 7 yards away, you know the distance that you said could be covered in 1-2 seconds (which is true), with a knife.....you fire one shot and hit the attacker in the arm, he keeps coming and makes contact with you, stabbing you in the chest.......you pull your trigger 2 more times, hitting him once in the hip and again in his armpit, he stabs you again.........you pull the trigger to more times, hitting him once in the ribcage and once in the ear, he stabs you again
you had no way to move out of the way because after your first shot he came into contact with you
if i'm in that same situation, i have 6 more shots to put inside that gentleman before i'm completely out....
Secondly, the more powerful rounds of my revolver are more likely to stop the attacker in fewer hits than the less powerful rounds of most semi-autos. If the individual is as large as I fear he might be, the common service calibers may not have enough penetration to reach vital structures particularly if I must shoot him at an oblique angle or through an extremity. You can say the extra capacity of a semi-auto gives you more chances to hit something vital, but people can and have taken numerous bullets and failed to stop because none of them hit anything vital. Michael Platt was shot 12 times but failed to stop because all 11 of those bullets either missed vital structures all together or did not have enough penetration to reach them. Simply firing as many shots as one can and hoping that they hit something vital seems like a rather lackadaisical plan to me.
If the individual is not so large, then the ammunition that I prefer for my revolvers is quite likely to pass completely through him, creating more holes from which he can bleed. Assuming that all shots hit their intended target, 15 .45's that stop inside the attacker has caused 15 holes while six .44 Magnums that pass completely through have created 12 holes. Taking this into account, the .45 has just gone from creating 300% more places to bleed from to only creating 25% more.
didn't you tell me we're not talking about what 'should' happen?
you REALLY don't see how absurd it is to tell me that i may not hit anything vital while asserting that, because your cartridge is more powerful, you WILL hit something vital in half the shots?
Well, I've never seen nor even heard of this happening, but if it did I'd be a no more of a disadvantage than if some part of a semi-auto like the magazine catch or guide rod was damaged.
well, i've never seen nor even heard of a revolver jamming, but there have been a few examples of that in this thread
and i actually DID say that there was no way for me to be immune to that same danger and that i was more likely to experience it
No, I said I'm more likely to be attacked by a single large individual than by a group of people. Several people in the same place at the same time is quite different than a group of individuals all focused on killing one particular person. By your own logic, perhaps I should move to your neighborhood where people bigger than me don't exist.
there you go predicting things again....
you have absolutely ZERO idea who is most likely to attack you, none whatsoever
however, i'm willing to bet that you see groups of people more frequently than you see people that are close to 6'3" / 300lbs....
that's the point of my post, that you seem to think that you're more likely to be accosted by something you see less frequently than you see something else
if i constantly see pit bulls in my neighborhood, and i hardly ever see rottweilers, i'm not more likely to be attacked by a rottweiler just because it's a bigger dog and i'm a bigger individual
Taken completely out of context. I'm talking about the best tool for a particular person's circumstances, you're talking about what you think his/her circumstances should be. It makes much more sense to me to fit the weapon to the circumstances than to fit the circumstances to the weapon because weapons are easier to choose than circumstances are.
and i'm saying that you don't KNOW the circumstances that ANYONE is most likely to be attacked under, not even yourself
i'm saying that, since nobody knows what circumstances they will be attacked under, they should do their best to select a plan (in this case a weapon and a way to carry that weapon safely and comfortably) that will most effectively cover ALL POSSIBLE circumstances
a revolver prepares you for many circumstances, but a semi prepares you for most of those circumstances as well as circumstances the revolver does not prepare you for
There are several things which someone unfamiliar with firearms can do to cause a malfunction. Not holding a semi-auto with a firm enough grip can cause a failure to cycle properly. Placing the thumb of the off hand over the web of the shooting hand can impede the rearward movement of the slide and cause a failure to cycle, not to mention a very painful injury to the shooter. If you've never seen or experienced these things, then either you're quite lucky or the shooter's you describe aren't quite the novices you describe them as. I, on the other hand, have witnessed these things and am not so naive as to believe that everyone who buys a gun knows better, or will remember better during a stressful life-or-death situation.
i saw a guy shoot a Ruger P89 one time.......he held it so loosely that when he pulled the trigger, the recoil knocked the pistol out of his hand and onto the ground below.......he picked the pistol up, pointed it back at the target, and put another round down range
i've never in my life personally seen anyone limp wrist anything, ever.
it's also contrary to logic to think that, in a stressful life-threatening situation, someone's grip would be loosened rather than tightened
when i was 10, the first time i shot a semi-auto handgun (a Gen 1 or 2 Glock 22) i did what you said with my thumb
it was fairly painful, i cut my finger, i said 's***' (and got smacked later for it) and stuck my thumb in my mouth, then proceeded to fire the rest of the magazine without my thumb in that position
it in no way impeded the movement of the slide
i guess it could happen, but again, you want to talk about what IS happening and not what should or could, right?
and i've brought at least 6 people out to the range to shoot a pistol for the first time, i consider someone who has never shot a pistol before to be a 'novice', though you may have a different definition
I have, the person who leaves the old gun that belonged to their father or grandfather sitting loaded in the sock drawer for years is not nearly as uncommon as you'd think.
actually, i don't think it's uncommon at all........that's why i said that it was irrelevant for me to speak on those things as i didn't know any novice shooters that owned a pistol besides myself, and i didn't do that....
If your gun can fire, you at least have a chance of hitting, or at least scaring off, your attacker. If the gun doesn't fire, your only hope is that your attacker is so frightened by the mere sight of a gun that he runs away.
and unless my hand is pinned against something and pressed far enough into my attacker to move the slide to the rear far enough, my gun IS able to fire
No, my logic is that if someone is not going to maintain their car, they are best served by the car most tolerant of neglect. Likewise, if they are not going to maintain their firearm, they are better served by the firearm most tolerant of neglect: a revolver. You are attempting to take my argument to the logical extreme, your car/bicycle analogy would be more akin to saying that someone who doesn't maintain their firearm is better served by a baseball bat, something I've never said or advocated.
wait, i'm not allowed to take something to a logical extreme, but you're allowed to assert that every contact shot will push the slide out of battery?
makes sense.
Revolvers are much more tolerant to improper technique than semi-autos are. A revolver can't be limp-wristed and does not require as much empty space around it to work properly as a semi-auto does.
obviously, the technique i'm referring to is the one that allows you to place a round where you're aiming it, which is what matters in the end
if James has trouble doing that, he will need as many tries as he can get, and that's afforded to him by a semi-automatic firearm, not by a revolver
all you have to do to fire a semi correctly is grip the gun and pull the trigger, both things that are required for the shooting of a revolver
By and large, improper technique with a revolver degrades accuracy or makes the gun less pleasant to fire. Improper technique with a semi-auto, on the other hand, is much more likely to cause the gun not to work.
again, i have never in my entire life seen a semi-automatic pistol fail to cycle a round because of poor technique
if you have, that's great, and i have seen reports of it, so i don't deny that it's a possibility
but your argument here is based on the fact that you should plan on errors on your part, like not holding the gun correctly, while failing to plan on errors on your part, like missing the target
based on every experience i've ever had, and on numerous reports, missing a target is much more likely than having a limp-wrist accident
Also, I don't quite buy the "legendary reliability" of Glocks. I have, on two separate occasions, seen unreliable Glocks. The first was a G23 that couldn't make it through a 50-round box of Remington 180gr FMJ or Fiocchi 180gr FMJ without multiple failures to feed I suspect due to a weak magazine or recoil spring (the problem persisted in the hands of multiple shooters) while the other was a fairly new G36 that couldn't make it through a 50-round box of Federal 230gr FMJ without a failure to feed because the shooter was limp-wristing it (the problem didn't repeat itself with other shooters). In both of these cases, everyone who tried the guns in question was at least moderately experienced with firearms.
that's nice and all, but it's irrelevant to my point, which was that magazine springs and recoil springs don't wear out nearly as often as you're implying they do
and even if they did, like someone else in here said, it will be noticed by someone who uses their weapon on a regular basis before it becomes a problem
And yes, I feel that 12" groups are better than no group at all because the gun doesn't work.
a 12" group from a static position on a static target is MUCH easier than a 12" group on a moving target while moving
people who shoot 2" groups from a static position on static targets can't even hit a moving target while moving, much less position their shots 'well'
it's actually getting fairly tiresome that you continue to assume that just because someone doesn't clean their semi, that means it's not going to work at all
