Range gun? Huh!

Most of my guns are range guns, shoot them for fun and some in IDPA. I do have 4 or 5 that are carry guns. Got 1 safe queen. Everything else I shoot including a 6" Python, not a carry gun. .22 target pistols, a 1911 with a red dot for Bullseye. Shotguns for Skeet, Trap and hunting, again several range guns. Seveal of the handguns are also usable as self defense guns but that's not why I have them. I bought them to shoot.
 
Wow! I have not bought any guns with any intent of doing harm to threats specifically.

Even my CCW pistols, it is about the total mission and they certainly are good for this carry and stopping a threat.

I also have pure fun guns. My blue S&W 19 was bought to have a blued S&W from the 70's to look at.....and shoot about 4-6 times a year. Sure, it would be a fine CCW.

I also have guns for other purposes. For every gun, a purpose, but some are mostly fun!
 
There is no dictionary definition of "range gun" but mine is:
A firearm, usually a handgun, which is not used for self defense, scored competition, or hunting.

My older and less complimentary term is "centerfire plinker."

Nothing wrong with it any more than spectator sports or light fiction.
 
I have 1.5 metric tons of .22LR pistols. All are target guns (from cheap to expensive). I'm not certain-outside of ranges or plinking-where a .22 with a 7 barrel is going to be useful.
Click to expand...

Most of my guns are range guns, shoot them for fun and some in IDPA. I do have 4 or 5 that are carry guns. Got 1 safe queen. [...] Seveal of the handguns are also usable as self defense guns but that's not why I have them. I bought them to shoot.
Click to expand...

I also have pure fun guns. My blue S&W 19 was bought to have a blued S&W from the 70's to look at.....and shoot about 4-6 times a year. Sure, it would be a fine CCW.

I also have guns for other purposes. For every gun, a purpose, but some are mostly fun!
Click to expand...

I'm in this camp for sure.

Basically, some of us are handgun/firearms enthusiasts who are interested in owning firearms for multiple and often independent reasons -- reasons seen as practical, such as concealed carry, SD/HD, and hunting, but also for motivations such as appreciation of craftsmanship and history, aesthetic appeal, collectibility, pure range fun, and so forth. We're interested in owning a very broad range of guns, many of which are mostly or even entirely unsuitable for carry, self-defense, or hunting. Others of us are only interested in owning firearms that serve as good tools for the aforementioned utilitarian purposes.

And all of these different motivations are totally legitimate, as far as I'm concerned. It's puzzling (and kind of amusing) to me that some people have some kind of inner need to feel that their reasons are the best and to denigrate those motivations that they don't share. Really, what's the point?
 
Hi y'all!
Just my .02, but when some of us have surpassed 30, 40 firearm or many more, they aren't being aquiered for protection any more. At that point one gets creative and inventive with the reasoning of why.
The become collectible, rare, one of a kind, wall hangers, safe queens and last but not least "Range Gun", just for the sheer pleasure of having, holding and shooting. That is all.
 
Your point is ? Maybe just to start a battle ? Different strokes for different folks. Some people have a hard times accepting, or understanding that. There are certainly some firearms I enjoy shooting more than others. Personally I enjoy revolvers more than semiauto handguns, and magnums more than specials.

Do I have a 'Range gun' ... one I only shoot at the range ? Yes it is a WWII Walther P-38. Standard 9mm, comfortable and pleasant to shoot and when I do, I can fantesize about the G.I. that took it away from some Nazi in 1944.
 
When I buy a handgun, I want it for protection and, yes, for sport.

But "just a range gun?"

Nope.

Depending on weather and clothing, any gun is more than just a range gun.
Click to expand...
I have several pistols that I would NEVER consider using for protection unless I somehow ended up owning only that particular pistol and no others.

Here's one example. The pistol is a blast to shoot. Very accurate and a pleasure to operate, but I've never made it through an entire range session without at least one malfunction. It's just a range gun. I'm not concerned with the malfunctions because I never intended to use it for protection. I've learned that I can minimize the malfunctions by using certain kinds of ammo, but I don't consider it reliable enough to do self-defense duty.

Here's another example. Again, it's a fun handgun, and I enjoy shooting it a lot, but the caliber (.22LR) isn't one I'd choose for self-defense unless I somehow ended up without any other firearms available. Not that it would be totally ineffective, it's just that I have other handguns that would be a much better choice in that respect.
 
Here's another example. Again, it's a fun handgun, and I enjoy shooting it a lot, but the caliber (.22LR) isn't one I'd choose for self-defense unless I somehow ended up without any other firearms available. Not that it would be totally ineffective, it's just that I have other handguns that would be a much better choice in that respect.
Click to expand...

Yup. I love shooting my Model 41 at the range and challenging myself to punch the smallest possible groups of holes into paper targets -- and that's about all the gun is good for. Certainly very far from an ideal CCW, home-defense pistol, or hunting gun (if I were a hunter).

The SIG P210-5 and -6 and the X-Five/X-Six SIG Sauer pistols are some of the very most well-built handguns ever produced. Not about to use these guns and their 2- to 2.5-lb. triggers for any self-defense application if I can help it, though. I'm not too crazy about the idea of having to surrender one of them to the police after a self-defense shooting, either. These are range/target pistols all the way, and they excel in that area. I don't have many (or maybe any) other centerfire semi-autos as well set-up for shooting targets at 50, 75, and even 100 yards.

I don't hunt, but I really enjoy shooting my big-bore revolvers. I love the recoil and blast, the accuracy, the fine triggers, and the stellar craftsmanship of these guns. But a .454 Casull single-action revolver with a 10" barrel is not an ideal CCW, to say the least. It's also one of the last guns I'd hope to have in my hand in a self-defense situation (against humans). For one thing, I find the sense of hearing a convenient thing to have. For another, I don't much fancy the idea of explaining to a jury why I felt the need to use a model of weapon that has been used to hunt the biggest game on the planet against a human threat.

My ComBloc guns are a load of fun to shoot -- particularly the ones that shoot the loud, fireball-throwing Tokarev round -- but I would prefer not to have to use these guns and their paleolithic sights for SD. The CZ 52 has a bad trigger, I'm not 100% confident in either Tokarev-firing gun's reliability, and, again, I also like being able to hear things. I trust the Maks' reliability, but there are a number of rounds I would prefer to use for SD before the 9x18mm.

I can totally understand why some people would see buying/owning these guns as a poor allocation of their resources, given their other priorities and interests in firearms and in areas outside of firearms. That, however, has no bearing on any assessment of the wisdom of buying/owning these guns for those of us with different sets of priorities and interests.
 
KyJim - Do they shoot whole chickens out of that thing?

My 53 oz. Buckmark Silhouette is a tad heavy for concealed carry, along with being longish with the 10 inch bull barrel, so I guess it would qualify as a "range gun", except I sometimes take it out squirrel hunting (when I'm not planning on squirrel for lunch).
 
I'm kind of with you OP. I only own stuff I have a practical use for (defense, hunting, backpacking, competition, etc.). That said, if I had enough disposable income, I wouldn't be philosophically opposed to buying something that was just fun to shoot, like those 20 shot 22 mag handguns (PMR I think is what they are called). I see no real use for it, but I wouldn't mind plinking cans with one if had the cash to blow.
 
Everyone of my handguns is a range gun only.

That's the thing with forums, you get members from all over the world.
Here CCW is not allowed. Owning a handgun for home defence is not allowed.

So just about every privately owned handgun here is a sporting firearm = Range gun.
 
UncleEd said:
Whenever I bought a pistol or revolver, I never thought of it as "just a
range gun." Yet I see this phrase all the time on forums.

When I buy a handgun, I want it for protection and, yes, for sport.

But "just a range gun?"

Nope.

Depending on weather and clothing, any gun is more than just a range gun.
Click to expand...

I certainly have guns I bought strictly as" range guns". A bull barrel Ruger MkIII with optical sights, a SA Ruger Single-Ten, and a pair of cap and ball 1851 Navy revolvers.

Sure, if by I happened to be attacked while holding one of these guns loaded, I could use it, but I have much better guns for concealed carry or home defence, so the only use those guns see is on the range.
 
There are some guns that I consider to just be range guns. One gun that I currently have that fits that bill for me is my M&P 22. I have never seen a point in pistol hunting(or small game hunting in general really) and I have much better handguns for self-defense so I see it as nothing more than a range gun.
 
I think the point of the thread is to see what guns folks consider to be "range guns". Sometimes the question is asked "let's see your safe queens" - different type of gun, but same concept.

It tends to highlight the difference between those who view their gun only as a defensive tool and those who have guns for sporting purposes. Even thought I object to the term "sporting purpose" being used in the context of pro/anti gun debates, I still recognize that some firearms are more for sport than they are for defense.
 
Whats the point of this thread?
Click to expand...
Knee-jerk response: same as the point of your post. Very little, just for fun, conversation, something to discuss. Much like every thread at this joint.

Better response: seems to me that the OP was annoyed with a nickname, moniker or "new-fangled" term so he opened up a thread on it and roughly ZERO people seem to agree with him. :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top