jackmoser65
New member
That's 100% dependent on the individual in question. Which is more important, the tool itself or the proficiency?A single action revolver is just not the best tool for the job of self defense in todays world.
That's 100% dependent on the individual in question. Which is more important, the tool itself or the proficiency?A single action revolver is just not the best tool for the job of self defense in todays world.
Are there really those who would contend that there are individuals who, having practiced with single action revolvers and with other alternatives, would do better in realistic self defense drills than with other firearms?That [(whether a single action revolver is the best tool for the job of self defense in todays world)]'s 100% dependent on the individual in question. Which is more important, the tool itself or the proficiency?
As usual those passing judgment and making disparaging remarks are those least qualified to do so.
Now I have to ask, are you qualified to discuss shooting with a semiautomatic handgun? If a person would rather have his teeth pulled than use one, using one in this kind of emergency could be a problem.they'd rather pull their own teeth than spend five minutes with a Glock.
Uh, yeah. That's kinda the point. Believe it or not, not everybody has use for a semi auto or the desire to shoot one enough to be good with it.Are there really those who would contend that there are individuals who, having practiced with single action revolvers and with other alternatives, would do better in realistic self defense drills than with other firearms?
That is the single action's greatest advantage, if there is one.Consider only drawing from concealment and firing one-handed very rapidly at a fast moving target and achieving combat accuracy.
I guarantee that very few who disparage the use of a single action revolver have spent enough time with one to really know. Leisurely farting around at the range doesn't count.Nice work. mostly wrong.
Concealing a full size single scion reviver is a challenge. Drawing quickly is another.That [(drawing from concealment and firing one-handed very rapidly at a fast moving target and achieving combat accuracy)] is the single action's greatest advantage, if there is one.
I respectfully suggest that everyone who carries a firearm for self defense "has use" for one that he or she can handle effectively in the drill described above, and that one that need not have the hammer thumbed back between shots will likely serve anyone better.Believe it or not, not everybody has use for a semi auto or the desire to shoot one enough to be good with it.
That is a guarantee on which you would be most unlikely to make good.I guarantee that very few who disparage the use of a single action revolver have spent enough time with one to really know.
they'd rather pull their own teeth than spend five minutes with a Glock.
Firing rapidly with one hand is not the single action's forte.
I beg to differ with you there [(Firing rapidly with one hand is not the single action's forte)].Takes one more step and a change in grip. Simple human factors or methods-time-measurement issue.
First part is true but it's also a challenge to conceal a full size auto. Compact versions of either are preferable. Second part is false. The SA is quicker from leather to the first shot than anything else.Concealing a full size single scion reviver is a challenge. Drawing quickly is another.
Maybe in your hands.Firing rapidly with one hand is not the single action's forte.
If one is going to spray and pray then an SA is not a good choice....and that hitting them is a matter of chance that is enhanced by firing multiple shots quickly.
You think someone who shoots SA's all the time would be better served in a gunfight with a Glock they're completely unfamiliar with? So skill is irrelevant?I respectfully suggest that everyone who carries a firearm for self defense "has use" for one that he or she can handle effectively in the drill described above, and that one that need not have the hammer thumbed back between shots will likely serve anyone better.
Change in grip??? The hammer is cocked while coming down from recoil. If both hands are used, there is nothing faster. One handed the difference is manageable.Takes one more step and a change in grip. Simple human factors or methods-time-measurement issue.
So far you're making it easy.That is a guarantee on which you would be most unlikely to make good.
The discussion is about concealed carry. Fast draw for an open belt holster is not part of the equation,The SA is quicker from leather to the first shot than anything else.
For effective use of a handgun against a moving attacker, the likelihood of hitting anything critical timely with slow fire is much lower than that of hitting such body parts timely with controlled rapid fire. The latter is not "spray and pray".If one is going to spray and pray then an SA is not a good choice.
Why anyone would carry a concealed weapon with which one is completely unfamiliar is one issue, but choosing to carry and practice with one that is inherently slower that those that most experts recommend is what the thread is about.You think someone who shoots SA's all the time would be better served in a gunfight with a Glock they're completely unfamiliar with?
Where did that come from?So skill is irrelevant?
Firing one handed, moving the thumb to cock the hammer involves a change in grip.Change in grip??? The hammer is cocked while coming down from recoil. If both hands are used, there is nothing faster. One handed the difference is manageable.
I understand that, do you?The discussion is about concealed carry. Fast draw for an open belt holster is not part of the equation
Spurless hammers just prevent snagging, which is more an issue with pocket carry than belt carry. Having actually carried an SA concealed and practiced drawing it from leather for 40yrs, I don't think this is founded in reality.As a matter of fact, most trainers recommend that revolver users conceal carry firearms with no hammer spur at all. One reason is to speed the draw.
Sounded like it to me.The latter is not "spray and pray".
Why anyone would carry a concealed weapon with which one is completely unfamiliar is one issue, but choosing to carry and practice with one that is inherently slower that those that most experts recommend is what the thread is about.
According to yourself and others the tool is more important than the skillset. I'm just reading your words on the screen.Where did that come from?
No it doesn't. It's the moving of one finger. Not unlike flicking off the safety of a semi auto.Firing one handed, moving the thumb to cock the hammer involves a change in grip.
Then I would say you're imposing your own limitations upon others.I doubt that "there is nothing faster".
Most carriers will be best served with the tool they are the most proficient with. Since cops seem to miss 90% of the time, it might be a good idea to "slow down and have a more harmonious outcome". You can't miss fast enough to win a gunfight.Most carriers will, if given the choice, find themselves better served with a firearm that obviates the need for the extra step before each shot.