I suspect we have people voting for what they have, not the ideal handgun.
> Voting for what we have: You probably have a point there, but not for the reasons you are thinking. I'd say that those people who are voting for what they already have have already voted so with their hard earned cash. People have already bought what they feel is their "One Gun" choice, and are voting the same.
> Not the ideal handgun: Nope, that is an unjustified extension of the parameters of the thread. First -- there's no such thing as an ideal handgun. ALL handguns are exercises in compromise, never mind the marketing hype. Second -- if there were such a thing as an ideal handgun (which there isn't), a hypothetical ideal handgun would probably not make for a good selection as a good "Only" handgun. One obvious reason is that any handgun that actually was ideal would be so expensive to produce that it wouldn't be affordable. Yes, I factor affordability into the "One Gun" equation.
Everyone's criteria are different. An ideal handgun would have to do all things for all people better than anything does for anyone. Personally, I have my own criteria for what I want in a "One Gun". I was aware of that when I bought what I considered at the time to be my "One Gun". It still meets those criteria. And it is NOT an ideal handgun, it does not do all things for all people better than anything does for anyone.
Another argument against the concept of the "Ideal" handgun is that old adage of excellence being the enemy of good enough. Ideal means excellence in ALL fields, and that just isn't going to happen. It is more attainable to have good enough in the fields that are deemed significant. That is what guided my choice, both in this vote as well as with the hard earned cash that was spent on my S&W 686.
