Dropped by the gun shop again last night. I actually handled a few guns, some likely candidates for a future purchase. The way it usually works out, however, is that it won't be there the next time I drop in and want to look at it again. But that's happened before.
The Colts are easily the most attractive and to me, the most desirable handguns they had, though not the most expensive by a long shot. That place had to go to the Wilson models they had. Still, the Colts I'd rather have were just a little out of reach, I thought, given my lean budget. But you know how it is. Someone here posed the question several weeks ago about what would you want if you had $1,000 to spend on a gun and I think I said I'd want something that cost $1,100. That's the way it feels now. When did Colt automatics get to be so expensive?
Seriously, a Colt can be a gorgeous work of art (I don't believe I'm saying that) but they will show scratches and rust overnight if you aren't careful and I'm not that careful. Oh, I know somewhere I said one of the most practical handguns was a stainless steel 1991 Colt .45 auto. I still hold to that statement but, when did logic and practicality enter into it?