Revolver or Semi in a gunfight?

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.)
Click to expand...

That was my original idea, go the conventional way- 1911 and j frame in my case. But then I fell in love with this Dan Wesson and... :)
 
Nothing wrong with that, either. I sometimes carry a revolver as primary, but I always carry a BUG when I do that. (I am not particularly fast at reloading cylinders when I am not under attack, let alone...)
 
glen dee said:
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.
Click to expand...

LMAO.

You've got someone trying to forcibly take a loaded gun away from you and you aren't in fear of death or serious bodily injury? You believe that it's just like they were trying to take your ice cream cone away?
 
I think all we have to do is look around at those people who carry sidearms for a living, . . . anticipate the very real probablity that in their line of work, they may be involved in a shooting altercation, . . . and see what they do.

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?

The sad part is that if they both go bad, . . . tap rack and bang usually works for the semi auto, . . . but it is gunsmith time for the revolver.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm not a patrol officer or USMC grunt nor do I intend to be, so why should I assume that the best gun for them is also the best gun for me. But, for the sake of argument, how many partol officers or USMC grunts have a choice in what type of gun they carry? My guess is not very many.

Also, semi-autos can malfunction in ways that can't be quickly and easily rectified and revolvers can malfunction in ways that are quite easy to fix. For example, my CZ-75 once jammed so tightly due to an out-of-spec cartridge that I had to field strip the gun in order to clear it. Conversely, my dad's Ruger SP101 jammed once because of a backed-out primer and all that was necessary to get the gun back in action was to open the cylinder and eject the offending case.
 
...Also, semi-autos can malfunction in ways that can't be quickly and easily rectified and revolvers can malfunction in ways that are quite easy to fix. For example, my CZ-75 once jammed so tightly due to an out-of-spec cartridge that I had to field strip the gun in order to clear it...
Click to expand...

I'm a semi guy for all of the advantages they provide IMO (including the fact that I'm very competent with them). However, I will not deny the 'possibility' of a jam, mag issue etc.. I personally have never experienced a major malfunction requiring that the gun be broken-down to clear/resolve. Honestly I never feel insecure regarding the potential for a significant issue only because I know my gun as well as I know myself. However, my well conditioned CCW can fail in the same way that my well conditioned body "could" experience a major "unexpected" health issue (ever see someone drop in frot of your eyes from a heart-attack--probably not but it happens everday though it's almost always 'unexpected').

Thus, I do carry a BUG for numerous reasons and strongly encourage everyone to do so as well as the potential exists for anyone to lose their respective primary weapon capability.

-Cheers
 
I think you may be the only one who doesn't construe assault and strongarm robbery with the goal of obtaining a deadly weapon to be a potentially deadly threat.

(Edit: Then again, you are the one advocating slicing such an assailant with a razor honed front sight - which, if not justifiable, would also be assault with a deadly weapon; if justified, then shooting would be, too.)
 
...so you're in a situation where someone is trying to forcibly take a loaded deadly weapon from you.

What do you expect them to do when they've taken it away?

Kindly thank you and walk away?
 
glen dee said:
This thread is about surviving a gun fight.
Click to expand...

glen dee said:
Sooo many people here would automaticaly shoot someone for trying to take their gun away?
Click to expand...

You're in fear of death or serious bodily injury so you pull your gun. The bad guy grabs for it. Let's say you don't shoot him and the bad guy just took your gun away. So the gunfight is about to start. He's standing 2 feet away from you and he's the only one with a gun.

Just how would you propose to survive this gunfight??
 
Last edited:
It makes little difference to me.

In any gunfight I'm LIKELY to be in, a five shot revolver would be as useful as a Glock 17 with a thirtythree round magazine. The real issues are:

  1. Is the firearm AVAILABLE? A Smith 36 in your pocket is better than the Stechkin in the safe.
  2. Is it reliable? I've had failures with revolvers AND semi-autos. Know your gun and care for it properly.
  3. Is it accurate? Can you hit your target at normal engagement ranges with the ammunition you intend to use?

Lately, I carry a Smith 36 loaded with the Federal "FBI" load. I've also frequently carried a Smith 3" 65, a Norinco M1911, and a Glock 22, to name just a few.

If I EXPECTED a gunfight which I couldn't avoid, my choice is my AR carbine.
 
Revolver every day, and twice on Tuesdays

I have some experience with handguns, no professional experience, but I shoot better with a revolver and trust them more than any semi auto. In my limited experience, semi autos fail to cycle, load, eject, etc., without warning. I can not trust my life on that technology. Revolvers are simple to operate, easy to maintain, and reliable. Give me revolver any day over any semi auto and I'll feel safer and be more effective.
 
If I knew I was about to be in a gunfight and had the choice between revolver and auto I would choose a 12 gauge shotgun. No, a 30 caliber machine gun, belt fed. If I knew I was about to get in a gunfight I would go somewhere else. That's the correct answer. The next best answer is the gun you got. Whatever that happens to be.
 
I'll take more ammo, any day, over thinking I'm just so awesome I can take the bad guys with six shots.

"If someone is trying to take your handgun does not mean that you are automatically authorized to use deadly force"

Really? And what planet are you from?
 
I think for civilians either a revolver or semi is adequate. However, some people are implying that a semi is "unreliable" and in my 30+ yrs. of experience, nothing could be further from the truth. The ONLY time I have personally witnessed people having issues with semis at the range in due to unfamiliarity with the platform. I remember last winter I heard a couple cursing in the lane next to us because they just spent $600 on a what they deemed a POS semi becuase it was occasionally jamming. During the cease fire I had look and the brand new gun was literally loaded with packing grease. Also, limp-wristing is not the HUGE issue people make it out to be with the newer models (though it does happen and yet again it's a result of inexperience).

Bottom line for me is that if you understand semis and they way they function, you will rarely experience any issues (that is to say exponentially more so than a revolver). And yes, though 90% of us in the forum are most likely not a military/LE person, there is a reason they use semis and have migrated away from revolvers--they are not concerned with "unreliability."

YMMV.

-Cheers
 
If you take everything into consideration such as semi auto not chambering for whatever reason...I would take my Ruger GP100 357....That will always do the job...and it goes bang every time I pull the trigger....

I do think my HK USP is as reliable as anything I have have ever shot...so I would have a hard time not using it but I think I`ll go with the former....
 
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.
Click to expand...

Just because someone try's to take your gun dont mean you can shoot them. Just because you have a gun dont mean you should always shoot them.
Click to expand...

Sooo many people here would automaticaly shoot someone for trying to take their gun away?
Click to expand...

That is the least intelligent set of statements I have ever read on this forum. Wow - me replying and expecting YOU to use logic to understand is a fallacy.

Some guy physically disarms you, and you think they had that right? How do you know WHY they are doing it? We weren't talking a cop here, another person. What is their intent? Maybe if you pulled it because you have mental problems it would be a different story. This question is assuming you pulled it because of a legitimate reason. I also can gather you have no way of backing up your claim with a case? Likely because it never happened!

Ok I can respect your opinion that sharpening the front sight is stupid. However I disagree. I think it's kind of a nifty idea. About as smart as putting a bayonette on a rifle.
Click to expand...

Ok....NO......the idea of a bayonet is a STABBING weapon with reach. A snubnose with a knife blade sight does not accomplish that. If the BG was trying to wrestle the gun off this cop (I'd like to meet the guy with the knife blade sight) how can he know that sight would even help him? Couldn't it be used by the BG against him? He would stand a better chance of cutting himself than it ever coming in handy.
 
Inebriation?

I am of the opinion with this thread that some people may be posting 'under the influence.' It's all I can come up with...:confused: 2+2 will never equal five no matter how many times you repeat it...
 
If I expected to be in a gun fight and couldnt get out of the situation . . I'd carry a semi-auto rifle in .308 (likely a FAL because I've found them very reliable).


As to answering the OPs revised question - - why revolvers ? For me personally, I don't expect to be in a gunfight where I would be trading lots of handgun fire. I use both semi-auto pistols and revolvers. - But in working guns that I find myself carrying while working around the place or up in the mountains, I prefer the lower muzzle blast of the 45 Colt and 44 Special. They do the job without a lot of fuss. They are more effective on bigger 4 legged threats than pistol calibers (yes I also own 10mm pistols). My favorite cartridges are found in revolvers.- - In these situations, a real gun - a rifle - is also close at hand.

In the scenario you outlined, in an urban environment, I'd pick a high cap pistol in any of the major self defense chamberings using proven defensive ammo .
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top