Revolver capacity

[tipoc]

Face it, the revolver is dead for personal defense or law enforcement use.

Two things. The news that the revolver is not used in law enforcement as a primary handgun is 30 years old. Older in most of the rest of the world. They are still in use as backups and some special purpose cases.

As for dead for personal defense...? Seeing as how you are in the "Revolver" section of this forum and how most on line gun forums have a revolver section, and there are revolver forums themselves and wheelguns sell in a fairly large quantity still, it looks like your news that they are dead for personal defense has not reached all the people yet.

So on one thing the news is out a date. On the other, just wrong, premature based on fantasy scenarios.

tipoc

 

[TimSr]

Here's a case where a revolver wouldn't have been enough:

Wow! Sounds like a Glock wasn't enough either! That was an incredble read.


I still won't have to worry. The only guy in the world who could take 17 .40s in the chest is now dead! Or maybe I'll just switch to my other 5 shooter, the .454 Casull.

 

[OldMarksman]

Posted by Deja vu:

in situations like that revolver people will say that he needed to be hit harder, automatic people will say he needed to be hit more times. Which do you think it is?

Well, if the rounds penetrated far enough, one could not have hit him any "harder" with a handgun.

A .40 S&W most probably penetrated far enough.

The failure likely resulted in his not having been hit in the right place, or places, within the body.

Since that is almost always largely beyond the defender's ability to control effectively, that would lead to the answer "more times", since that would increase the probability of hitting vital targets.

 

[tipoc]

That's a memorable 5 year old case but it involves law enforcement and so is off limits in this thread according to our op.

tipoc

 

[southjk]

Face it, the revolver is dead for personal defense or law enforcement use.

Tell that to France's counter-terrorism teams.

Article here.

 

[OldMarksman]

southjk, do you have reason to believe that that photo is recent?

 

[the357plan]

southjk, do you have reason to believe that that photo is recent?

OldMarksman, looks like you didn't read the article Meet France's Elite Revolver-Toting Counter-Terrorism Units on the FOXTROT ALPHA website by Tyler Rogoway posted 1/12/15.

For decades, and apparently still to this day, GIGN favors the French-built MR-73 and the Smith & Wesson 686. The revolvers' heavy weight, fixed barrel, inline bore-axis, and lack of a moving slide give them an advantage over automatics. Nonetheless, times are changing and now GIGN operators are often seen packing customized Glocks, sometimes along with a revolver as a secondary sidearm.

 

[OldMarksman]

Posted by the357plan:

OldMarksman, looks like you didn't read the article Meet France's Elite Revolver-Toting Counter-Terrorism Units on the FOXTROT ALPHA website by Tyler Rogoway posted 1/12/15.

Of course I read it. The posting date is obvious; my question was whether the material in the post is current or anywhere near current.

The units did, of course, carry Manurhin, Ruger-based Manurhin, Ruger, and Smith & Wesson revolvers years ago, and this report indicates that there were revolvers still in inventory as recently as 2009. However, almost quarter of a century ago, the French bought an extremely large number of SIG Sauer pistols that they designated as the PRO SP 2022.

The videos in http://controversialtimes.com/news/raw-video-french-special-forces-eliminate-paris-terrorist/ link show semi autos in the hands of the counter-terroism units.

 

[the357plan]

OldMarksman, I don't put too much faith in one article on the internet. I would guess the picture above is a stock training photo, maybe a couple of years old and doubt any counter-terrorism units are currently issued revolvers as a primary sidearm. But being phased-out doesn't necessarily mean they're completely gone. Police and internal security might still use them. Shooting Illustrated put out an article with a picture of a policeman standing guard with a "phased-out" Mousqueton A.M.D (French Mini-14) in what looks to be a current picture. And yes, he had a semi-auto strapped on.

As to the OP, I have no first hand knowledge of a carry revolver ever failing. But then I believe in being very familiar with the gun, ammo and keeping them clean and in good working order. I carry both revolvers (more often than not) and semi-autos. I don't rate one over the other. If I think I'll need more capacity than a revolver and one speed loader, I won't go there. But if I still had to go there, then there would be a rifle/shotgun of some sort in the vicinity.

 

[Doug S]

I honestly think there are advantages and disadvantages to both revolvers and semi autos dependent on specific scenarios. Carry what works best for you given your lifestyle and concerns.

 

[turkeestalker]

newbie soured?

I am absolutely amazed that not only has this gone on for seven pages of posts but that like a fool.... I actually read all seven pages in their entirety! We'll not get into what that says about me thank you!

I carry a revolver daily, and yes it is only a five shot, and yes I carry one speed strip of five rounds in my right hand front pants pocket as religiously as the revolver under my left arm. Do I think that I will have the where with all to reload in a crisis situation? I don't know, but I've practiced and attempted to commit the process to my muscle memory. Do I think that I will expend all five rounds in a SD situation and have to reload? Again I don't know because fortunately I've never found myself in a SD situation (knock on wood).

First I'll preface this by saying that I am not fond of plastic firearms of any kind, not that they are not excellent reliably functioning firearms, I simply don't like them which is my freedom. I own numerous steel or some other metal alloy semi auto handguns in several calibers big and small and love them one and all. From the Colts, Kimbers, Rugers, Smiths, all the way through the Stars and yes even my lowly oddball Llama and that FI model D. I would not hesitate to carry any of them for personal protection, but I prefer a revolver which again is my freedom.

Ours is not a perfect world, and nothing we do can insure that things will go perfectly the way we want them to, much less how we imagine they will or might. Doesn't make a spit of difference if my faith is placed in a revolver or semi automatic pistol for SD regardless of the number or rounds at my disposal should the need ever arise. What matters is that I have faith in the tool I select and my ability to use that tool for the job at hand. As stated numerous times by others here, carry what you want to carry. Carry what you are comfortable with carrying and can use efficiently and effectively. Beyond that nothing else really matters much.

Gary, I am not trying to be condescending to you in any way here, but it does not seem to me that you are interested in what you claim to be, nor that what you say to be was actually the motivation for your initial post. From my perspective as a newbie to this forum, you seem to have made up your mind for yourself before you asked the question, that is your freedom. The hang up here seems to be that you're not satisfied with other people having that same freedom to hold an opinion of their own that differs from yours. Either that or you were and are still simply looking for an argument by posting a question that any reasonable person realizes that there is really no concrete nor black or white answer to. I'm betting any newbie like myself would get the same impression from reading this thread. I also believe that continuing this kind of tends to sour a person not only to the ridiculousness of the topic at hand, but to those posting as well as possibly to the whole forum and it's premise... I think that is a grave mistake and inherently foolish. We are all individuals with the freedom to individual choices, make yours and allow others to make theirs.

To paraphrase... STOP the insanity... it started to reflect poorly long ago.

 

[Model12Win]

Wow.

That's easily the best 1st post I've ever read. Welcome Turkeestalker, and by all means, keep it up!

I just shot my S&W Model 64 at the range yesterday. With speedloaders, it really made me take a second look at revolvers for defense. I was able to place all six rounds of Speer Gold Dot 135 grain loads on target, reload quickly, and do it again all in about 20 seconds. Pretty effective if you ask me.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

Odds are that a revolver will be enough for most people.

I disagree.

I don't know about in your corner of the world, but around here a lone assailant has become unusual. You may not be jumped by an entire gang, as in Gran Torino, but two or three assailants is fairly typical. Then consider that, in armed encounters, the hit rate (the percentage of rounds fired that actually struck the target, not necessarily incapacitating the perp) varies depending on who is reporting the statistics, but generally seems to hover around 25 percent and, for the NYPD in 2005, drops to as low as 17.4 percent. ( http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2007/12/police-hit-rates-on-shootings-as-low-as.html )

To make the math easier, let's just go with 25 percent. Remember, that's cops. Some armed citizens might do better ... and a lot of armed citizens wouldn't do as well. But we'll use it.

Suppose you are jumped by two armed assailants. You have a five-shot revolver. Assuming a 25 percent hit rate, out of your five shots only 1.25 shots will hit the target. (I don't know whether to count the .25 shots as a hit, a miss, or a grazing wound.) But there are two assailants, and you really can't expect the one shot that hits one of the assailants to stop him.

Basically, you're screwed.

It gets worse, obviously, if there are three assailants. You still only have five shots and you're still only going to score 1.25 hits ... if you're lucky. You may be fortunate enough to incapacitate one of the assailants with a single hit, but that leaves two assailants to ring your chimes once your gun is empty.

IMHO, the odds are that a revolver will NOT be enough for most people. Which is why I generally don't carry one.

Yes, I know -- the OP only want specific examples of a revolver failing or not being enough. I can't help you there; I don't offhand know of any examples.

I DO remember a couple or three years ago there was a shooter loose in a shopping mall in (IIRC) Salt Lake City. The shooter was driven to cover and pinned down until the cavalry arrived by an off-duty police officer from a nearby jurisdiction. The off-duty officer was shopping with his wife, and his carry weapon was a Kimber compact 1911 with seven rounds. When asked about the incident after it was over, the cop said he had just learned how important it is to carry a spare magazine. (In other words, seven rounds weren't enough.)

 

[Model12Win]

Wow, the above poster sounds like a bean counter if I ever heard a one.

If you train to connect, six rounds of .38 special +P or .357 magnum will do the job. Shot placement is critical, and as an armed revolver enthusiast just know you need to practice getting rounds on target. If you do your part, your revolver will do it's part:

 

[turkeestalker]

Alright, this is kind of off topic but....
Honestly if you think about it, the majority of people don't have keen situational awareness skills. When something happens is when they become aware that something is in fact happening.
If you are being jumped by two or three assailants... you probably won't know it until they are already on you, possibly meaning until you are already incapacitated depending on how they 'jump' you. A semi auto with more rounds in the magazine won't be much help at that point more than likely.
Being acutely aware of your surroundings and the possible threats to you that are present in it, might do more for your own personal safety than any firearm ever could regardless of the number of rounds available to fire.

 

[colbad]

I really get a laugh.....and a chill, out of some of the post on the forum. The guys (non LE) who post about carrying multiple guns and 5 reloads actually scare me....and probably outsiders who see the forum. IMO these dudes are out looking for trouble and an excuse to shoot someone.......or just plain paranoid nuts.

I think you are spot on about a revolver in civilian SD situations. Unless performing LE duty or out looking for a fire fight, a 5 or 6 shot S&W is more than adequate for most any non LE situation. In fact, most any FA of any caliber will fill the bill. In 25 years of law enforcement I have NEVER heard of a situation where normal civilians in a SD situation ever needed a reload. When people ask me about buying a FA I ALWAYS point them to a revolver.

 

[turkeestalker]

When people ask me about buying a FA I ALWAYS point them to a revolver

I am not LE but I agree with you whole heartedly on that note especially when we are talking about someone who is not necessarily familiar with firearms in general and not adept in handling them. With a revolver there is no slide to rack, nor concerns of having the strength or dexterity to do so. There is no concern over carrying one in the chamber when on so many pistols today there is no external safety to instill that warm and cozy feeling upon the owner regardless of the validity of such a concern. Hence there is no concern over putting on or taking off said safety, with revolvers typically your safety mechanism is not pulling the trigger. There is usually nothing more to moving on from a malfunction beyond just pulling the trigger again, note I said generally. As much as a handgun can be, a revolver is somewhat idiot proof and user friendly overall.
Of course that is my opinion and freedom.

 

[UncleEd]

Colbad,

Excellent post.