micromontenegro
New member
As do blow-forward designs
In Reality - where the odds of getting into a citizen involved armed confrontation, and firing more than six(6) rounds to stop the threat, is only ~ 40% greater than ending up a Highway Fatality that same year?
Revolvers - are here to stay.
Red
curious design left me cold while the pistol heated up to the point of not being able to hold it after fifty rounds through it in short order.
I've had concealed carry 30+ years and never "needed" a single bullet.
Instead of odds, statistics, location, anticipated threat, I have a simple method one can use (if they are inclined) to select a carry handgun. Which I'll share:
Would I prefer this handgun* in hand if I had to defend myself, wherever (anywhere).?
For me, a Glock 17/22/34/35 meets my simple criteria of preferred in hand, a revolver does not.
There is no statistic, odds or discussion that would change my preference of Glock 17/22 > revolver
handgun* - A Glock 17/22 is easily concealable, a rifle or shotgun is not, selection limited to handguns.
Your "preference"... is a 1:6,000 statistical advantage.
Which makes your argument obfuscation.
As the Revolver is far from a Dead End firearm design.
You just don't like them... which is a subjective sample of One(1.0).
Red
The value in arguing a point isn't really in convincing the person opposed, rather it is in providing a viewpoint and supporting rationale for others who haven't already made up their minds.There is not a bigger waste of your time and internet than trying to convincemeanyonethat I'd be better off with a revolver than a Glockof something they're not already inclined to believe.
I'd like to know my pistol is loaded when I pick it up, with my G19 empty vs. full is quite apparent.
I like the fact that the ammo is a big part of the weight of my carry piece. That strikes me as efficient, and I love efficiency.
isn't the CZ 52 roller delayed like some machine guns?
Isn't the Hammerli Excesse just a Trailiside under a different badge?