Revolver or Semi in a gunfight?

If average revolver shooters could shoot that fast, with any semblance of accuracy, then most of us would never have heard of Jerry Miculek.
 
Going into a 'known' gunfight , I would want capacity as well as accuracy. I would then opt for say my 92fs, but....

...for daily CC usually has me packing either a 442 or 642 in warmer weather and a single stack .45 in colder months.
 
Due to my more than 3 decades of law enforcement I am somewhat jaded. When I am selecting an off duty carry gun or now a CCW I always use the same litmus test; Is this a gun I want to have with me if I get into a gunfight? Why do I ask myself that? Situations that I and my friends have found ourselves in. You cannot just say " I am not likely to get involved in a gunfight." It is meaningless rationalization.

They happen, kinda like spring thunderstorms sometime out of no where. If I knew I was going to a fight I would take a rifle and friends with rifles, however, in the parameters set by the OP it will be a handgun.

I have no bias against revolvers or autos and I am technically, equally proficient with both. The advantages of the auto are the reason in my first post for selecting an auto for a fight. I carry a revolver as a BUG J frame 357 mag. My EDC Glock is perfectly capable for any SD situation I may find myself in.
 
I have both autos and revolvers. I guess it would depend on whether the gunfight was against 1 bad guy or a platoon. Against 1 I'm happy with the revolver.
 
As Jeff Cooper wrote years ago, "if you expect to be in a gun fight, you need to have a shotgun or rifle in your hands not a pistol on your belt." So like so many wise folks I would make every attempt not to be anywhere I could expect to be in a fight. Lacking that ability I would take one of my revolvers and feel well armed in doing so. The reason for this is simple, I carried a revolver to work daily for 27 years, and they always worked just fine when I needed one.
 
When was the last time you saw a patrol officer with a revolver?

When was the last time you saw a USMC grunt with a revolver?
Click to expand...

You got a point, but the answer is real simple.

Now days people are more into "spray 'n pray' then learning to shoot.

Most police departments and the military just don't spend the time an effort to make the cop, soldier, or marine learn to shoot a pistol/revolver. It's much easier to just give them a 15 shot mag and tell them to get after it, hoping upon hope they hit something.

The problem being no one takes in consideration of where those missed rounds go.

Don't make your choise on what some one else carries. Thats like going to a match and coming somewhere down the list, then checking what the winner was shooting and buy a gun like his so you can win next time.

Brother, it don't work that way.
 
I have been shooting 60+ years. I have never had a revolver fail on the second pull of the trigger. I have had many semi-autos jam or malfunction. Having said that, I carry a semi for convenience & more ammo.
 
Assuming that "Run Away!, Run Away!" and "Count me out" arent options, I would want my Yugo AK, it hits hard to 300 yards and doesnt screw up. Or maybe an 870 12 ga Remington. Pistols only, it's a tough choice, but (until recently) the Colt Combat Commander or Browning HP would have been my choices. Now that I have seen the Glock, Id be carrying a Glock 21 .45acp. Wouldnt feel unarmed with a S&W .357 or Colt Python, tho.
 
Originally Posted by glen dee
Just because someone try's to take your gun dont mean you can shoot them.

If someone is trying to disarm you- assuming that you are in the right in the first place- shooting them may likely be the only viable option to protect yourself and others. For a peace officer, there is no option.. as you never give up your weapon. There are many "Officer down" calls where the officer is shot with his own weapon.
 
To anaswer the OP. If I were expecting to get into a gun fight I'd grab one of my AR's. Wouldn't mess with a handgun. This will never happen in my life time however.
 
Dun Ranull

I stand by my statement. If someone is trying to take your handgun does not mean that you are automatically authorized to use deadly force. A handgun is property. You cant use deadly force to protect property. It's a very rare situation where you can use deadly force for what someone might do.

I'm not saying it cant happen... just very rare. Sure someone who disarms you might shoot you... or he might not shoot you. Not being a mind reader we just dont know. You being armed, and brandishing a firearm may be percieved as being the bad guy.

I am painfully aware of how sometimes Officers are shot with their own firearms. It happens. Probably why cops today wear extremely snatch resistant holsters. This is I think the reason that most street cops carry a second gun. But even then not all Officers are shot after losing their gun.
 
I stand by my statement. If someone is trying to take your handgun does not mean that you are automatically authorized to use deadly force. A handgun is property. You cant use deadly force to protect property. It's a very rare situation where you can use deadly force for what someone might do.

I'm not saying it cant happen... just very rare. Sure someone who disarms you might shoot you... or he might not shoot you. Not being a mind reader we just dont know. You being armed, and brandishing a firearm may be percieved as being the bad guy.

I am painfully aware of how sometimes Officers are shot with their own firearms. It happens. Probably why cops today wear extremely snatch resistant holsters. This is I think the reason that most street cops carry a second gun. But even then not all Officers are shot after losing their gun.
Click to expand...

I must disagree with you.

He is demonstrating, intent, opportunity and means to harm you. If he is burglarizing your car or house, well maybe not. If he is violently wresting it from me, then he is getting shot.
 
Glenn Dee

Dun Ranull

I stand by my statement. If someone is trying to take your handgun does not mean that you are automatically authorized to use deadly force. A handgun is property...
Click to expand...

If someone is taking "property" in terms of my car, barbq pit, lawn furnitue, tv etc. I can see where I would have second thoughts regarding the implementation of deadly force absent the perp presenting a clear and present danger either by possessing a dangerous weapon or something along the lines of a drug-induced physical rage.

However, that is a FAR different scenario than if that very same perp is taking "property" of which within seconds can kill myself or family. With all due respect, you go right ahead and act as you see accordingly and I will do the same--suffice it to say that if I feel confident that I am in danger of the perp successufully taking control of MY deadly weapon, BANG.

And no, I am not either an attorney of LE and and do not play one on TV ;).

To each his own...

One final note, not that it will guarantee survival (but it will substantially increase the odds IMO) why everyone does not carry a little pocket/ankle BUG (I use either a Beretta 21A or Taurus PT-22/25) escapes me in that they are dirt cheap (I think by anyones definition) and easily, comfortably concealed in any attire.

-Cheers
 
Not playing the fantasy game of the High-noon gunfight...thats what rifles are for;) I will post my response based on a concealed carry being put into commission...
Reliability is a...if not the key factor. also, the gravest of social confrontations (your gunfight) statistically happens at mere feet and is over in mere seconds. High round capacity ranks lower on my desires from a defense carry weapon and I also do not desire any fancy do-dadds or safeties to potentially impede in the most crucial of moments. That being said, I believe a hammer-less double action revolver would suffice. Another sad factor many may not be aware of is that a surprising number of victims in a "gunfight" are shot by their own weapons... I'm not at all suggesting you carry with that mentality, however if anything, is a serious piece of information all should be aware of.
 
I used to carry autos exclusively... until I had to undergo open-heart surgery. The very first time I shot after that was VERY eye opening. Now I know that in a very weakened state I can't be counted to shoot autos without limpwristing- but I can shoot a revolver all right.

I just united the dots and thought that if I am ever in a gunfight, I might get shot and severely weakened- and I want to still be able to shoot back. So now I carry a service revolver as a main defense weapon and a smaller auto as a back up. YMMV.
 
Or you could go the other way (as other posters have noted), and carry an auto backed up by a small revolver. (I do this sometimes, with a 442 in BUG mode.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top