Whirlwind06
New member
I would think setting up a 1911 to shoot low recoil reloads would just a matter a wolff spring pack and finding a reloaded round that works.
Big but weak handgun calibers?
- Thread starter mapsjanhere
- Start date
Limnophile
New member
Then why doesn't everyone just qualify with a .22 LR? That would allow you to carry just about anything.
This makes no sense, particularly with what you wrote later.
Did you, perhaps, mean equal or larger caliber than your carry gun?
Because "equal or smaller" would mean you could qualify with a .22 and carry a .45.
Does it also restrict you to type? In other words, do you have to qualify with an auto to carry an auto? Could you qualify with a revolver and carry an auto of equal or larger caliber?
If not, then go with the .500 & trailboss (assuming he could qualify with that combination) or something like a .45SAA loaded with cowboy bunnyphart loads.
Aguila Blanca
Staff
Find someone who handloads for .45 ACP. Have a couple of boxes loaded up with 185-grain semi-wadcutters, to a velocity of under 800 fps. Get a "tuner's" assortment of recoil springs from Wolff and keep reducing the spring until you find one that allows the gun to function.
As an example, Colt Gold Cups come from the factory with two recoil springs. The 16-pound spring is for use for normal, full-power loads. The other spring is either a 10-pound or 12-pound, for use with light, target loads.
As an example, Colt Gold Cups come from the factory with two recoil springs. The 16-pound spring is for use for normal, full-power loads. The other spring is either a 10-pound or 12-pound, for use with light, target loads.
RodTheWrench
New member
I'll FFL you my S&W 4506 to use. PM me to set it up.
It's a freaking pussycat.
It's a freaking pussycat.
mapsjanhere
New member
Yes I did mix it up, it was to say you can carry an equal or lesser caliber than you qualified with.
NM rules require you qualify separately for revolver and semi-auto. So currently we use a 45 LC and a 45 ACP.
NM rules require you qualify separately for revolver and semi-auto. So currently we use a 45 LC and a 45 ACP.
Limnophile
New member
^So your carry permit specifies whether you are allowed to carry a revolver, semiauto, or both, and then what your caliber cap is imposed on each relevant type? Sounds like a government with far too much time on its hands.
How is the caliber cap specified? For example, do they differentiate between a .45 Colt and a .454 Casull?
How is the caliber cap specified? For example, do they differentiate between a .45 Colt and a .454 Casull?
Stupid rule?
Maybe.
But this kind of thinking is seen other places as well. The base intent is that people who are licensed by the state to do certain things are actually capable of doing those things, not just saying they are.
And also the idea that if you demonstrate your competence with the more difficult thing, it is assumed you would be equally competent with something of lesser difficulty.
My state has a motorcycle endorsement to your driver's license. It has classes (sizes) of motorcycles. What you pass the test on is what you get endorsed (licensed) for. That, and everything under it. Not for anything bigger.
Pass the test on a Honda 90, you are not endorsed for a Harley 1000. Pass it on the 1000 and you are endorsed for the little 90 (for example).
While I find the handgun rule you describe a bit excessive, I am experienced with handguns. There are a lot of people who really are not. I understand the state's interest in having them demonstrate a standard level of competence, before issuing a license.
Whether or not the required level of competence is appropriate is a different matter, and a question for a different thread.
Point is, if you can't physical meet the qual standards with what you plan to carry, maybe you shouldn't be carrying that....
Not because I think you are incompetent, or a danger, to others, but because doing a sneak around could backfire on you.
Using light loads in a large caliber so you can meet the letter of the law, when you could not pass the qual with the standard defense ammo, might be seen as meeting the letter of the law while violating the intent of it.
If you did that, and then later were in a defense shooting, with full power ammo in your gun, (which you had not qual'ed with) isn't going to help your case in court. Rather the opposite, I would think. Goes to you credibility, big time, if the info comes out.
I don't care if you are 25, 45, 75 or 95, if you cannot meet the state required qualifications, you should not carry that in that state, no matter what it is.
Maybe.
But this kind of thinking is seen other places as well. The base intent is that people who are licensed by the state to do certain things are actually capable of doing those things, not just saying they are.
And also the idea that if you demonstrate your competence with the more difficult thing, it is assumed you would be equally competent with something of lesser difficulty.
My state has a motorcycle endorsement to your driver's license. It has classes (sizes) of motorcycles. What you pass the test on is what you get endorsed (licensed) for. That, and everything under it. Not for anything bigger.
Pass the test on a Honda 90, you are not endorsed for a Harley 1000. Pass it on the 1000 and you are endorsed for the little 90 (for example).
While I find the handgun rule you describe a bit excessive, I am experienced with handguns. There are a lot of people who really are not. I understand the state's interest in having them demonstrate a standard level of competence, before issuing a license.
Whether or not the required level of competence is appropriate is a different matter, and a question for a different thread.
Point is, if you can't physical meet the qual standards with what you plan to carry, maybe you shouldn't be carrying that....
Not because I think you are incompetent, or a danger, to others, but because doing a sneak around could backfire on you.
Using light loads in a large caliber so you can meet the letter of the law, when you could not pass the qual with the standard defense ammo, might be seen as meeting the letter of the law while violating the intent of it.
If you did that, and then later were in a defense shooting, with full power ammo in your gun, (which you had not qual'ed with) isn't going to help your case in court. Rather the opposite, I would think. Goes to you credibility, big time, if the info comes out.
I don't care if you are 25, 45, 75 or 95, if you cannot meet the state required qualifications, you should not carry that in that state, no matter what it is.
9ballbilly
New member
^^^^^^ +1 ^^^^^^
Always cover your backside!
Always cover your backside!
As if a Harley Sportster = a Suzuki GXSR1000
That's like comparing a .45ACP to a .454Casull.Makes me glad I live in TX where a MC endorsement lets you ride anything.
However, if you qualify with a revolver here, you can only carry revolvers and you have to qualify with factory ammo so check the rules carefully before you decide to qualify with a .45 revolver shooting cowboy action gamer loads.
the law is kind of squirrely, it only addresses caliber, not power. so a 38 caliber revolver is treated the same if you shoot 38 special or 357 mag. guess it's one sop toward the applicants. likewise 44 special/44mag.
so if you want to shoot bunny fart loads, knock yourself out. i'm guessing most law makers that passed this many years ago didn't understand the finer points of calibers and power, but they understood bullet diameter.
at least you don't have to declare which exact gun you will be carrying. semi-auto SA (1911), DA/SA (92F), striker fired (Glock), all treated the same, even though their operation is different from gun to gun.
so if you want to shoot bunny fart loads, knock yourself out. i'm guessing most law makers that passed this many years ago didn't understand the finer points of calibers and power, but they understood bullet diameter.
at least you don't have to declare which exact gun you will be carrying. semi-auto SA (1911), DA/SA (92F), striker fired (Glock), all treated the same, even though their operation is different from gun to gun.
That is assuming you could pass the test in a larger, more powerful vehicle.
What you are asking for is more like, "I am not capable of passing my drivers test in my Cadillac so I'd like to take the test in my Honda so I can legally drive my Cadillac on the road. Where can I get Cadillac labels to put on my Honda?"
The law is dumb because most people who go to the trouble to get a CCW, will have the God given sense to carry something which which they are proficient. What your friend is trying to do, getting a lawful endorcement to carry something with which he is not proficient, is really justifing the existance of the dumb law.
I do understand the limitations of age, and I'm sure for your friend, its more about being told he is no longer qualified to do something he once did. Its traumatic when a person who has driven for 60 years loses his driver's license. I can no longer pass the driver's license eye exam with my glasses on, and my driver's license now says I'm required by law to wear them when I drive. Some people are restriced to daytime driving only. It may be indignant, but there is more dignity in passing with what he is qualified, than failing because he tried to pass with something with which he was not, that he wasn't going to carry anyways.
spacecoast
New member
A nice Colt or Remington .41 RF Deringer is what you need.
different instructors apply the shooting test differently. some just want you to shoot from low ready. others want you to draw, reload, and show a fair amount of proficiency with your gun before they will pass you.
at my last requal, i was asked to watch a guy who was shooting, to make sure he stayed safe (i had already shot, and shown my proficiency with handling and shooting).....ummm.....he needed A LOT of practice. he passed, but barely. but i would not classify him as proficient.
15 shots at 3 yards, 10 shots at 7 yards. 12" x 18" target. the entire target is the scoring zone.
instructor had to ask some of us better shots to spread them around so he could count holes. no problem. i think next time i'll draw a happy face with my holes.
at my last requal, i was asked to watch a guy who was shooting, to make sure he stayed safe (i had already shot, and shown my proficiency with handling and shooting).....ummm.....he needed A LOT of practice. he passed, but barely. but i would not classify him as proficient.
15 shots at 3 yards, 10 shots at 7 yards. 12" x 18" target. the entire target is the scoring zone.
instructor had to ask some of us better shots to spread them around so he could count holes. no problem. i think next time i'll draw a happy face with my holes.