New Guy Here

[MacNRA]

Hi Y'all,
I'm new to this forum, and I want to let the firearms world know where I'm coming from. I've been shooting, reloading, and hunting for over 40 years. I'm a Life Member of the NRA, as all gun owners should be.
I've read thousands of gun/shooting/hunting magazines and I have noticed a lot of inconsistency in firearms terminology. What one "expert" calls a bullet, another will say that's wrong, the bullet is only the projectile that comes out of the hole in the end of the barrel. Some refer to the whole cartridge as a "round" of ammo. Others say the "round" is the projectile. There are many other examples, like "clip" vs "magazine" and so forth.
I remember a few years ago, I was hunting deer in Indiana, where they don't allow center fire rifles for deer. The 12 Ga. slug is the most popular deer ammo there. I was using a Remington 870 with a Hastings rifled barrel and Winchester 2&3/4" sabots. This combination shot well from a rest, but not so much offhand. I built up a cheek piece and attached it to my stock, and once I got it whittled down just right, my offhand shooting improved greatly, and the gun was more comfortable recoil-wise. After doing this,I later read a chapter in a hard-bound book, written by a respected expert, in which this expert explained, in a blow-by-blow sequence, what happens during recoil, and why cheek pieces do absolutely no good, and we shouldn't use them. Hmmm...had I read that particular bit of hogwash before attaching my cheek piece to my 870, I might not have done it. What a shame that would have been!
My point is, everybody has their opinion as to what is called what, what works and what doesn't, and don't believe everything you read.
My closing thoughts: I like beautiful guns. I like engraving, and pearl grips, and well-done checkering or carving. I will be SOOOOOO glad when the word "Tactical" goes the way of the white-line spacer!!!
Revolvers are much more reliable than ANY semiauto pistol (An absolutely provable statement.) and finally, I will NEVER be so stupid as to attach a flashlight ("Tactical" or otherwise) to my firearm and then go into the dark place where the bad guy is hiding!!!
I welcome comments from all members of this forum.

 

[SHE3PDOG]

My point is, everybody has their opinion as to what is called what, what works and what doesn't, and don't believe everything you read.

Revolvers are much more reliable than ANY semiauto pistol (An absolutely provable statement.) and finally, I will NEVER be so stupid as to attach a flashlight ("Tactical" or otherwise) to my firearm and then go into the dark place where the bad guy is hiding!!!

Have you proven this yourself? If not, you are believing what you read. Both of these points and your tactical comment have been the focal point of many a spirited debate on these forums. You'll find that a lot of people find semis more reliable than revolvers, flashlights useful, and "tactical" things kind of nifty. Many of those same people also have a really varied collection with guns on all ends of every spectrum. This forum is a bunch of firearms enthusiasts for the most part, not just your average gun owner.

This is also a little off topic for the General Handgun sub forum.

 

[MacNRA]

Hey, it's really cool to get a reply so soon! I have proven my statement about semi vs revolver statistically at least. I haven't been able to find my old research on the subject, but I compiled a bunch of data from the American Rifleman Dope Bag column back in the middle to late 1990's. I recorded failures noted in gun tests reported in that column, and the failures of semiautos were something like 200 vs less than a dozen for revolvers. If you can, look at the Dope Bag columns from that era and you will see what I mean.
Make no mistake, I will fight for our right to keep and bear semautos just as much as revolvers. They are also fun to shoot. I love the 1911A1 just as much as anybody. But, all semiautos have more moving parts than revolvers, and more ways to fail, especially the magazine, the weakest link in any semiauto.
As for the tactical flashlight, I have read comments about blinding the bad guy so he can't see where to shoot. Ahhh...think about that. How likely are you to get that light in his eyes before he lays down a volley in the general vicinity of the light? I hope all gun owners will think this one through. We don't need to lose any 2nd Amendment supporters this way. I'm surprised the NRA publications don't try to discourage such "tactics".
And finally, yes, I guess some parts of my post were outside the scope of the General Handgun category, but I'm brand-new to this forum. I will get with the program in time.

 

[Sevens]

Mac, before you get yourself hip-deep in forum arguments, please consider that thousands of people have passed through here and had these arguments also. So you may have your 40 years of opinions, but you may have NEVER had an argument like the dozens of them you may run up against here if you go in to all your topics so fully anchored in your opinion that the opposition is going to be WRONG because you've already decided.

For example, your little soap-box on the revolver vs semi-auto debate.

Please keep in mind that we do this debate all the time. Sometimes, this debate is a snack before coffee, which is what we have before breakfast.

Me? I love revolvers, and have a bunch, and always looking for the next one. Yesterday, I put 397 rounds down range across four different revolvers to great effect! But my experience has shown me (VIVIDLY!) that although they don't stop too often, they do stop working sometimes and it's also been my experience that when they do stop working, it doesn't get rectified quickly or easily. Most semi-auto stoppages get cleared and the loud gun fire continues in less than two seconds. When a revolver stops, it sometimes needs a trip back home under bright light just to find out what the heck has gone haywire. And just for fun, and because it's a fact (anecdotal and no more than that), I also put 340 rounds down range yesterday across three semi-auto pistols. And those were flawless, with zero failures, just as the 397 rounds of revolver fun that I had. (yeah, it was a fun range day!)

So... as you adventure here through this fine forum, please remember that your 40 years of hands-on will be very helpful as you argue your side, but your lack of experience in arguing nonsense with other pigheaded gun cranks on a gun forum is going to get you buried under cheesy internet tactics (and some GOOD arguing tactics also) if you don't pursue a method of discussion that doesn't invite argument up front before any friendly discussion has even started.

 

[Theohazard]

MacNRA, welcome to TFL. But you've made a few blanket statements that are not always true. Seven addressed the revolver vs. semi-auto reliability issue, and I'd like to add that the average modern semi-auto has fewer parts than the average modern revolver.

Also, there are pros and cons to having a flashlight mounted on your weapon. But if it was always a terrible idea, why does almost every entry team in the world do it? I'm not saying we should all strive to be like a tactical entry team, but obviously there is some advantage to it in some situations or they wouldn't even bother. They're doing exactly what you described; they're going into a dark place where a bad guy is and they find flashlights on their weapons to be useful.

I find it interesting that you complain about bad information but then you make some blanket statements that help perpetuate this bad information. No, revolvers are NOT "much more reliable than ANY semi-auto"; this is a blanket statement that is not always true. Now, if you said, "the average revolver is more reliable than the average semi-auto" that would be a much better statement that would be much easier to defend. And as far as the lights; there are definitely some advantages to having a light mounted to your home defense weapon, provided you use it intelligently.

 

[Theohazard]

Also, while I agree that many people take the "tactical" thing too far, there is definitely something to be learned from the police and the military in terms of firearms and defensive tactics. The trick is to use the "tactical" stuff that actually translates well to civilian use, and to NOT use the "tactical" stuff that doesn't.

And, like SHE3PDOG said, some of us find "tactical" stuff kind of nifty. He and I are both Marines, so "tactical" is often what we're most comfortable with. The key is not to be stupid with it; "tactical" stuff that's either useless for civilians or is a detriment to good shooting isn't very tactical at all.

 

[OuTcAsT]

MacNRA Wrote;

don't believe everything you read.

Ain't it the truth.

Welcome, you're gonna have many an interesting discussion here, Thinks I.

 

[MacNRA]

My reply to replies

OK, guys, I introduced myself a few days ago and stated how I feel about gun related stuff. I have tons more to say, but I'm a little unsure about things. I got five replies to my original post, which I was thrilled to see. However, some were mildly hostile, others misquoted me, and one sorta suggested I should brush up on my debating skills. I know a little about debating (Though not a lot) and I know that a good debater can win an argument, even when he's wrong. I'm not into debating per se, though I don't mind an intelligent, spirited discussion on any topic. I believe an argument should be based on its substantive content, not the debating skills of the debaters.
I stated that I don't like the current "Tactical" fad, and I wish it would go away.
That's my opinion, but I will fight for our right to keep and bear tactical gear if the politicians try to ban it, even though it's not my cup of tea.
I stated that I thought the tactical flashlight was a particularly dumb idea.
I got a response to that, talking about trained entry teams finding the tactical light to be very useful. Well, I'm not talking about trained teams, I'm talking about Joe T. Homeowner, who hears something go bump in the night, and he goes in alone.
I am hoping to have many discussions with members of this forum, but if it's all about debating skills and following the (tactical) crowd, maybe this isn't the right forum for me.

 

[Theohazard]

However, some were mildly hostile, others misquoted me, and one sorta suggested I should brush up on my debating skills. I know a little about debating (Though not a lot) and I know that a good debater can win an argument, even when he's wrong. I'm not into debating per se, though I don't mind an intelligent, spirited discussion on any topic. I believe an argument should be based on its substantive content, not the debating skills of the debaters.

And we critiqued your post based on its substantive content. I never said you needed to change your debating technique, I simply pointed out that your revolver statement was extreme enough that it was simply flat-out wrong.

Also, I haven't seen anyone be hostile or misquote you here. What I have seen is a new member making extreme statements of opinion that he presented as fact. Well, we're simply arguing against those "facts" as you stated them.

I am hoping to have many discussions with members of this forum, but if it's all about debating skills and following the (tactical) crowd, maybe this isn't the right forum for me.

Once again, nobody is referring to your debating skills. You made several statements that we disagreed with. We presented the reasons why we disagreed.

You came on this forum and made several blanket statements that are easily refuted. If you can't handle our responses to those statements without taking it personally, then you may be correct that this isn't the right forum for you.

 

[Skans]

My closing thoughts: I like beautiful guns. I like engraving, and pearl grips, and well-done checkering or carving.

Cool. I like truly excellent engraving, but I'm very selective on the engraving I like. The really good stuff has detail and depth that rivals an exceptional painting; and a price tag to go with it.

I will be SOOOOOO glad when the word "Tactical" goes the way of the white-line spacer!!!

By "tactical", I can only assume you mean industrial looking doo-dads that folks like to bolt onto to their AR's, AK's, SKS's and whatnot. Some stuff is useful, some isn't. And, then some things like the Bumpfire stocks are just plain fun....for some. I like having the tactical crowd around because every now and then, I come across some neat stuff.

Revolvers are much more reliable than ANY semiauto pistol (An absolutely provable statement.)

That's just not true. I've fired Pythons with timing problems and I have a Sig X-Five that has yet to fail on me, even with all of the Wolf steel-cased ammo I feed it. Among the semi-autos that I've never experienced a gun related failure is my Glock 17 and Ruger LC9 (so far). The only failure I experienced with the Glock over the last 20 years was a squib. Fortunately, it wouldn't chamber another round. If I had this problem in a revolver, it could have been a big "Kaboom", if I was rapid firing it.

and finally, I will NEVER be so stupid as to attach a flashlight ("Tactical" or otherwise) to my firearm and then go into the dark place where the bad guy is hiding!!!

Not this again! This has been debated many times here and on other forums. I personally don't want a flashlight attached to my gun, but I don't care if others like them. There are valid reasons to have a flashlight attached to your pistol, even though I choose not to.

I welcome comments from all members of this forum.

I find it interesting that you start out by voicing your strong opinions on a number of things that have already been debated here and many other places. I guess my question to you is: "Why"?

But, all semiautos have more moving parts than revolvers, and more ways to fail, especially the magazine, the weakest link in any semiauto.

Another untrue statement: Steyr GB - 50 parts; Colt Python 52 parts.

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

Welcome to the forum!

As this thread is sort of a compilation of several topics, I'm going to go ahead and close it. Introductions should go in the New Members sticky thread and these other topics... revolvers, shotguns, tactics, all have a forum of their own.