Why a Revolver for Home Defense

a reply to: YayMayorBee

But if it doesn't work you need to have something that allows you to move freely in a confined space. You need to be able to open or (more importantly) close doors. You may need to guide a child back into their room. You may wish to shine a light around without muzzle sweeping a room.

I prefer a pistol inside a building. I've used a rifle at close range when house clearing in training and for real. Even with a short weapon you don't get the freedom of movement that you do with a pistol inside a house. The muzzle gets hung up on stuff and it is slower to move with. It is slower to index a target with and it uses up both hands.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not advocating going all die hard. I am saying you may need to move or clear an are inside your house. A pistol makes this so much easier.

A pistol loaded with hydrashocks or such like is a decent choice for home defence.

If a shotgun works for you then great. I'm not totally opposed to it, I just have a different point of view.

originally posted by: YayMayorBee
a reply to: Dragoon01

Owning a firearm for self defense only accomplishes two things...

1. Gives you the advantage
2. Makes you even

You rack a shotgun and in turn hear a reciprocal rack means the other person was there for serious business.

However, I will always opt for the initial rack at the statistical probability the auditory determent of the rack will deescalate the situation Vs giving up the tactical advantage of the perpetrators awareness of yours.

It makes my jaw clench in absolute rage at the large proportion of gun owners that (I feel) WANT to use their firearm. Like they cannot wait to play Mel Gibson in Lethal Weapon or something. If there is an even 1% chance that the racking of my shotgun will deter a perp from committing the crime... I will side for the rack 100% of the time.

And like I said before, its shotgun, not a tape recording of a shotgun. You still have 6+ rounds of catastrophic insurance at your disposal. There is no logic in this argument to me unless there is some statistics saying something like 50% of home invasions are perpetrated with 4 or more people whom's prime purpose of entering the home was to violently harm the occupants.

Once again I will also bring up context. If you are a member of a street gang or drug cartel... then you will probably opt for more than 6 rounds of shotgun bird shot. If you are a Nuclear family with a two blonde hair blue eye toddlers... then the reason why someone would be entering your home changes dramatically.

Yes there are a lot of folks who have gunshop bravado that makes it seem like they cant wait to use their firearm. i dont think its real at all. Most of these people are not actually serious about self defense. They shoot, and they may even carry but they have put very little thought into what would happen if they actually had to defend themselves. These are people who will not train, they will not seek instruction, they dont know what they dont know.

a reply to: PaddyInf

Thanks for response and I completely understand your points...

Another variable (especially for those whom side for a large capacity semi-auto pistol)

Every video I have seen of gun fire exchanges (even heavily trained police) the person firing completely empties the magazine (maybe a LEO or someone with training can elaborate as to why) and I also notice things like proper muzzle discipline and line of sight goes completely out the window.

Now, I assume in a situation like this, the mind goes blank, instinct takes over, and adrenaline is pumping, etc.

So... the question goes back to you, taking this as an additional variable, is having 18 rounds and a high rate of fire in the situation being described proper risk assessment?

Either way, I encourage everyone to spend a half hour on youtube and watch videos where gun fire is exchanged to see how even highly trained people react with their firearm... it is very eye-opening.

a reply to: PaddyInf

That's why, in the course of the search, you keep your fingers off the trigger. It takes a split second to find it if it, God forbid, should become necessary.

I don't have "formal" training, just what my dad, granddad, and a couple of uncles, all combat veterans of various conflicts have taught me.

Finger off the trigger until it's time to shoot. To do it otherwise is to risk a horrific event that no sane person wants.

a reply to: PaddyInf

Obviously, you have no experience in that kind of situation.

You dont "have to trust in the sound..."

What if, what if... you still have a shotgun in your hands, right? It's not like you are holding an effing broomhandle.

You have a shotgun and if the guy, or guys (yeah, home invasions by 5 or 6 guys is very commonplace lol ) does not vacate the place then you are fully justified in shooting.

Main thing is: 1) just chambering a round into a shotgun will send most running. 2) You wont have to worry about a stupid 357 round killing the kid next door or across the street. 3) YOU WILL STILL HAVE THE SHOTGUN LOADED IN YOUR HANDS IF YOU NEED TO USE IT!

A pistol is a piece of # when it comes to home defense. Anyone with ANY experience and knowledge concerning home defense will tell you a 357 mag is about the worst choice you can make. That a shotgun is the weapon of choice.

Ask someone who is a professional in virtually any kind of security. Ignore morons who have an opinion and an arse hole and nothing else.

originally posted by: PaddyInf
a reply to: YayMayorBee

But if it doesn't work you need to have something that allows you to move freely in a confined space. You need to be able to open or (more importantly) close doors. You may need to guide a child back into their room. You may wish to shine a light around without muzzle sweeping a room.

I prefer a pistol inside a building. I've used a rifle at close range when house clearing in training and for real. Even with a short weapon you don't get the freedom of movement that you do with a pistol inside a house. The muzzle gets hung up on stuff and it is slower to move with. It is slower to index a target with and it uses up both hands.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not advocating going all die hard. I am saying you may need to move or clear an are inside your house. A pistol makes this so much easier.

A pistol loaded with hydrashocks or such like is a decent choice for home defence.

If a shotgun works for you then great. I'm not totally opposed to it, I just have a different point of view.

You are saying a pistol is the weapon of choice to "clear a room"? Are you daft? First off, who the hell are you dealing with in a home invasion? Trained terrorists or, more likely, some drug using junky looking to steal something to fuel his habit? In either case, a pistol is NOT the weapon of choice to "clear a room".

I guess that is why any organization chooses a pistol to clear rooms, yup... that's how I was trained!! Specially with loved ones in the house with you and innocent people living next door.

rofl

a reply to: bbracken677

Actually fella my initial training for home invasion WAS for home invasion by armed terrorists. We don't all live in the US. Some of us are from places where the main threat is from CQA (close quarter assassination). I trained as a member of the security forces in N Ireland where if someone comes into your house in the night it was to kill you, not nick your TV. I have had colleagues killed in these circumstances. I've also had mates defend themselves in thes situations with a pistol. Sitting in your bedroom and hoping they go away is not an option.

As for experiences with room clearing, I've done more real life clearences than most of the people on these forums put together, mostly in Afghanistan but a few in Iraq and Kosovo. I've also done lots of police assistance clearances in N Ireland during high risk raids on suspected terrorist houses. I am well aware of the advantages and disadvantages of different weapons in buildings. I'm not saying a pistol is the ideal room clearance weapon, I'm saying I prefer it to a pump gun.

And what is it with your obsession with the. 357? I've never even used one, never mind advocate its use for a home defence weapon. Where I'm from houses are built from concrete and brick. A 9mm does not pass through this any more than a shotgun round does. Even most indoor walls are made of brick.

Maybe you need to remember that this is a global forum, not just an American one.

a reply to: PaddyInf

Alrighty then: If this thread is about defending your home from armed terrorists then I am in error. Obviously such an invasion will not be scared off, but will have to be put down.

If it is regarding burglars come to steal your stuff (such as where I live... the odds of being invaded by terrorists are considerably less than that of being run over in your bed by a tank) then I stand by everything I have posted.

Regarding the 357... that was mainly about previous posts by others. The 357 for home defense is just stupid and I will stand behind that statement until hell freezes.

So..bottom line is if you feel you have to be prepared to fight people whose purpose is to kill you, then I can see your point, but I think I would invest in an Uzi or 3 if I think I am going to have to clear a room. Or perhaps an HK designed for such a purpose and leave the semi-auto for personal protection away from home where you have few other options.

The right tool for the right job, I always say

Hats off to ya for having to live in a place such as you describe.

originally posted by: Dragoon01
What do you mean its not true? What kind of nonsense is that. I stated an opinion, which is all any of this really is anyway. I stated it was my opinion that selling someone a really expensive handgun for their first time firearm is just as bad as selling them a wheel gun and telling them its "all they will need for home defense" Both of those positions are opinions and neither true nor false.

First of all, calm down, then go look in the mirror. As you state it´s all opinions...
In your first sentence you leash out "there´s so much wrong". So try respect others opinions, instead of calling me out on nonsense! See what you did there? Kind of double morality. You can point out others but if someone points out you, it´s opinions.

Now back to what you fabricated above.
You didn´t wrote this:

...and telling them its "all they will need for home defense"

nor did you wrote this

that selling someone a really expensive handgun

That´s what you thought, but did not wrote down.
What you really said was this:

There have been plenty of times that I have seen new gun customers being sold guns that I felt were clearly too much for what they asked for. I have seen retailers recommending Kimber .45's to folks who have never owned a gun. That's just as bad as selling someone a wheel gun.

You wrote nothing about expensive guns. If Kimber is a pricey manufacturer, how can I know? When someone writes "clearly too much for what they asked" and mentions a .45 caliber that´s what people think! And you are perfectly right with that.
But you are totally wrong saying "that´s just as bad as selling someone a wheel gun". With this sentence you state selling someone any wheelgun is a bad idea. It might be your opinion but it can be false. And it is. That´s what my point was! Because I´m not saying every wheelgun is superb. See the difference? I´m close to the truth than you.

That´s kind of childish to say something like this and when get pointed out back off to "but it´s my opinion so it´s neither true or false". Come on please. But ok, it´s your opinion, I respect that.

Now I hope we can talk/write without any attacks now. All good.

+A wheelgun, is always fire-ready after safety is off. No chambering needed.
+No ejection issues, hindering you from firing another round.
+A wheelgun has much lesser parts that can break.
+You could drive a nail into a wall and it´s still accurate.
+A bad round? Just pull the trigger.
+Single loose rounds can be carried in the pocket, even if I do not advice it, it can come handy.
-Brass can stick in a wheelgun
-Bad handling will break the gun (drumm spinning and such)

+ A semi is more shielded to dirt and more reliable in the field overall. Of course not everyone. My FS92 has some reliability issues.
+A semi can hold more ammo.
-A semi can jam.
-Needs more maintanance & training in handling (take it apart, clean it).
-A semi has a magazine that can be dropped by accident in the hassle by a starter.
-Ammo can stick together in the magazine.
-You need more time figuring out if the barrel is empty and free. On a revolver you can almost look down the barrel straight from behind, depending on the hammer you can look through the hammer space.

Those points are geared toward easy use. Don´t get me wrong, I use my Beretta FS92 more often than the S&W M19. I shoot other ones who belong to the club, too. And the best example I can give you:

If you´ve a semi in store for a year and take it out, you can´t really rely on it, if it will function or not on the first try.
A wheelgun or revolver on the other hand is much more reliable with this. Because you just have the trigger group, hammer and the wheel, where as a semi has springs, pistons, slide, hammer, more complicated trigger group. I´ve NEVER had a revolver that would just stop functioning in my life, without a pre-cause.

Revolvers can be reloaded pretty quick. I´ve even seen beginners reload their revolvers faster than others who were fiddling with the magazine intake and even ruined their magazine slides and holders. I go to the range since 30 years and hunt since around 22 years I think, I saw it all.

I´m agreeing with everything on your post I answered first, except for the last sentence. That´s really not true and a ‎generalization. ‎Generalizations are prone to be false/wrong.

But I stand by my point, for a beginner, a revolver is a good start. They are easy to understand and handle.
In a self defense scenario, you´re not underpowered with six bullets. If you won´t hit with six bullets or scare them away, your semi wont do much change either. You´d probably waste them in the same time. Most of the people I trained in shooting practice switched to a semi pretty fast. They hold more ammo and are fun to shoot but can be a pain in the ass.

However, I think no one here said a revolver is all you need. Just a good advice for a beginner and they are cheap, too. If someone in the club is introduced (you need the be in a club for one year+test to buy your own here), and had nothing to do with guns in their life, I would give them a revolver for the first shots, just to get him into it. There are ladys that can´t pull back the slide properly on a semi so for them a revolver makes much more sense, if not the only option.


PS: I know the FS92 is prone to failure after some time the recoil springs are junk. Please do not think I base my opinion completely on that gun alone.

a reply to: bbracken677

Obviously, you have no experience in that kind of situation.

lol, an internet authority. Get a grip and calm down. .357 is a great gun for home defence. If your worried about recoil put .38's in it, you know there are diggernt types of ammo now right? If your trying to put someone down it is very effective. It was the main cop gun for years until the Glock 9mm caught on and became de rigueur in US "lawr Enforcement". Shot gun is nicht gut if your trying for a precise shot. Cowering in your closet alone with the shotty pointing out the door - yep a good fight ender to be sure. No argument there. But...its a shotty. It has limitations.

Opinions are like, well you know...


V

originally posted by: verschickter

originally posted by: Dragoon01
What do you mean its not true? What kind of nonsense is that. I stated an opinion, which is all any of this really is anyway. I stated it was my opinion that selling someone a really expensive handgun for their first time firearm is just as bad as selling them a wheel gun and telling them its "all they will need for home defense" Both of those positions are opinions and neither true nor false.

First of all, calm down, then go look in the mirror. As you state it´s all opinions...
In your first sentence you leash out "there´s so much wrong". So try respect others opinions, instead of calling me out on nonsense! See what you did there? Kind of double morality. You can point out others but if someone points out you, it´s opinions.

Now back to what you fabricated above.
You didn´t wrote this:

...and telling them its "all they will need for home defense"

nor did you wrote this

that selling someone a really expensive handgun

That´s what you thought, but did not wrote down.
What you really said was this:

There have been plenty of times that I have seen new gun customers being sold guns that I felt were clearly too much for what they asked for. I have seen retailers recommending Kimber .45's to folks who have never owned a gun. That's just as bad as selling someone a wheel gun.

You wrote nothing about expensive guns. If Kimber is a pricey manufacturer, how can I know? When someone writes "clearly too much for what they asked" and mentions a .45 caliber that´s what people think! And you are perfectly right with that.
But you are totally wrong saying "that´s just as bad as selling someone a wheel gun". With this sentence you state selling someone any wheelgun is a bad idea. It might be your opinion but it can be false. And it is. That´s what my point was! Because I´m not saying every wheelgun is superb. See the difference? I´m close to the truth than you.

That´s kind of childish to say something like this and when get pointed out back off to "but it´s my opinion so it´s neither true or false". Come on please. But ok, it´s your opinion, I respect that.

Now I hope we can talk/write without any attacks now. All good.

+A wheelgun, is always fire-ready after safety is off. No chambering needed.
+No ejection issues, hindering you from firing another round.
+A wheelgun has much lesser parts that can break.
+You could drive a nail into a wall and it´s still accurate.
+A bad round? Just pull the trigger.
+Single loose rounds can be carried in the pocket, even if I do not advice it, it can come handy.
-Brass can stick in a wheelgun
-Bad handling will break the gun (drumm spinning and such)

+ A semi is more shielded to dirt and more reliable in the field overall. Of course not everyone. My FS92 has some reliability issues.
+A semi can hold more ammo.
-A semi can jam.
-Needs more maintanance & training in handling (take it apart, clean it).
-A semi has a magazine that can be dropped by accident in the hassle by a starter.
-Ammo can stick together in the magazine.
-You need more time figuring out if the barrel is empty and free. On a revolver you can almost look down the barrel straight from behind, depending on the hammer you can look through the hammer space.

Those points are geared toward easy use. Don´t get me wrong, I use my Beretta FS92 more often than the S&W M19. I shoot other ones who belong to the club, too. And the best example I can give you:

If you´ve a semi in store for a year and take it out, you can´t really rely on it, if it will function or not on the first try.
A wheelgun or revolver on the other hand is much more reliable with this. Because you just have the trigger group, hammer and the wheel, where as a semi has springs, pistons, slide, hammer, more complicated trigger group. I´ve NEVER had a revolver that would just stop functioning in my life, without a pre-cause.

Revolvers can be reloaded pretty quick. I´ve even seen beginners reload their revolvers faster than others who were fiddling with the magazine intake and even ruined their magazine slides and holders. I go to the range since 30 years and hunt since around 22 years I think, I saw it all.

I´m agreeing with everything on your post I answered first, except for the last sentence. That´s really not true and a ‎generalization. ‎Generalizations are prone to be false/wrong.

But I stand by my point, for a beginner, a revolver is a good start. They are easy to understand and handle.
In a self defense scenario, you´re not underpowered with six bullets. If you won´t hit with six bullets or scare them away, your semi wont do much change either. You´d probably waste them in the same time. Most of the people I trained in shooting practice switched to a semi pretty fast. They hold more ammo and are fun to shoot but can be a pain in the ass.

However, I think no one here said a revolver is all you need. Just a good advice for a beginner and they are cheap, too. If someone in the club is introduced (you need the be in a club for one year+test to buy your own here), and had nothing to do with guns in their life, I would give them a revolver for the first shots, just to get him into it. There are ladys that can´t pull back the slide properly on a semi so for them a revolver makes much more sense, if not the only option.


PS: I know the FS92 is prone to failure after some time the recoil springs are junk. Please do not think I base my opinion completely on that gun alone.

I am perfectly calm.
I didnt lash out, however forgive me for leaving too much up to implied meanings in my posts. I said there was so much wrong with this thread because to many people were stating opinions as facts. X gun is best for Y situation, so on and so forth. To many people who clearly to me anyway are basing that opinion on very little information and fewer facts. I gave my opinion and implied some things that I did not state outright. For one, Yes Kimber manufactures extremely good .45 caliber handguns and they are expensive. Typically $1200.00 USD or more.
I made an assumption that people interested in guns would be aware of that and understand my statement.
I dont have time right this second to address the other items in your post so I will get back here later to do that.

a reply to: Variable

No, I am not an authority on the internet. I have a general idea how it works and that is where my interest ends.

After reading your post 3 or 4 times I think I understand what you are trying to say.

Your ignorant assertion that I would be cowering in my closet with "the shotty sticking out the door" is nothing more than an attempt to belittle me. Sorry, but I also do not subscribe to your implied image of John Wayne and his six shooters striding through his own home mowing down intruders right and left as the bullets fly and his family remains safe.

There is stupid, and there is stupider.

originally posted by: semperfortis
a reply to: rockpaperhammock

Well I've only been a Police Officer for over 28 years and intimately aware of how the statistics are skewed that are available for the general public..

But you probably know best being as you looked it up on the internet and all

I don't care how long you were a police officer, your experience is still anecdotal.

The FBI crime reports say that you are wrong.

A little humility goes a long way. There's nothing worse than someone who thinks they know it all because of their own life experience.

a reply to: Answer

So you are saying that most burglaries happen at night?

You are saying that a burglary that occurs when you are home is not a home invasion?

I will say that someone with life experience beats out the person with no life experience... it may be anecdotal and not representative of the whole picture but that in no way invalidates the anecdotal experience. Specially when it is some guy sitting in his mom's basement looking crap up with google and pretending he knows what he is talking about.

a reply to: Dragoon01

Finally a post that I can agree with.

originally posted by: bbracken677
a reply to: Answer

So you are saying that most burglaries happen at night?

You are saying that a burglary that occurs when you are home is not a home invasion?

I will say that someone with life experience beats out the person with no life experience... it may be anecdotal and not representative of the whole picture but that in no way invalidates the anecdotal experience. Specially when it is some guy sitting in his mom's basement looking crap up with google and pretending he knows what he is talking about.

The majority of burglaries occur during the day. When you happen to be home for that burglary, it is now a home invasion.

We can argue semantics about the definitions of the terms but logic dictates that if most burglaries happen during the day, and you're often at home during the day, then you are more likely to be the victim of a home invasion during the day. The "home invasions occur more often at night" statistic is because people happen to be home more often at night than during the day. Home invasions happen at all times of the day so stating "it's going to happen at night, it'll be dark, and you'll be asleep" is not an accurate statement.

Regardless, the OP's 28 years of experience don't mean he knows the nationwide statistics, it just means he's a know-it-all because he's "been there/done that." I've met a lot of guys like that who talk out of their ass and refuse to accept that they're wrong. They're usually the same guys that spout loads of nonsense about guns and tactics because they think that the wrong information they've relied on for years is infallible. They're also the same type of guys who are terrible shots but refuse to accept help because they're too damn stubborn to admit that they might be capable of improving.

Your last paragraph is monumentally idiotic and I hope you weren't directing that at me because you have no idea who I am or my background. If it was directed at me, you've made a fool of yourself.

originally posted by: bbracken677

Main thing is: 1) just chambering a round into a shotgun will send most running. 2) You wont have to worry about a stupid 357 round killing the kid next door or across the street. 3) YOU WILL STILL HAVE THE SHOTGUN LOADED IN YOUR HANDS IF YOU NEED TO USE IT!

You might want to do a little research on how buckshot penetrates walls. If you think that the .357 magnum projectile will "over-penetrate" worse than a 12 gauge with buckshot, you're perpetuating a myth.

A pistol is a piece of # when it comes to home defense. Anyone with ANY experience and knowledge concerning home defense will tell you a 357 mag is about the worst choice you can make. That a shotgun is the weapon of choice.

While I won't disagree that a shotgun is a good choice, a semi-auto rifle is a better choice for someone with the knowledge and training to employ it properly. There are multiple legitimate reasons why nearly all SWAT teams have gone to the M4 or similar M-16 style rifle with shotguns only around for breaching.

a reply to: bbracken677

As experience appears to be an important factor to you, care to enlighten us to yours? I only ask because as far as anyone else here is concerned, without any practical experience, you are no better than the guy sitting in his mothers basement and looking things up on Google.

I don't know you or what your background is (you could be some sort of uber ninja assassin throat slashing underwater knife fighting instructor for all I know), but you shouldn't bang on about how others know so little when you have not demonstrated any more credible credentials than they have.

Just saying, like...

a reply to: Answer

Apparently I misread/understood your previous post, since I thought you were asserting the opposite.

I know that most burglaries happen during the day and that a burglary that happens when you are home is a home invasioni.

Glad I asked for clarification there....

Regarding your remark about his 28 years exp doesnt mean he knows the national stats is absolutely clear. I as much stated so myself. However, one should not discount the experience of a 28 year vet. That is the error of youth. Even if his experience does not reflect national averages that does not mean his experience is worthless.

My last paragraph is monumentally ignorant?

Really? How much have you read on this website? How long have you been a member? (rhetorical question, since I can see when you registered). There is stupid crap posted every minute by people who dont know sheist from shinola yet pretend they do.

There is a huge number of people here who, apparently, never leave mom's basement. The paragraph was not directed at you, specifically. I have not exchanged discussions with you sufficiently to be able to categorize you as a nut, a basement dweller or whatever. I drew a comparison between the former and the latter, so to speak. 28 years experience, anecdotal or not, beats the basement dweller any day of the week.

There are truths in experience that exceed "national statistics". If one cannot tell the difference between the truths that hide in experience and what is simply anecdotal information then one will lose out on much wisdom. I am not suggesting that you take everything someone tells you who claims decades of experience to the bank, but if they really have that experience then show some respect instead of being a google douchebag who may know how to spell manners but has no practical experience with the concept.

originally posted by: bbracken677

Regarding your remark about his 28 years exp doesnt mean he knows the national stats is absolutely clear. I as much stated so myself. However, one should not discount the experience of a 28 year vet. That is the error of youth. Even if his experience does not reflect national averages that does not mean his experience is worthless.

His experience is definitely not worthless. It's the arrogance I have an issue with.

My last paragraph is monumentally ignorant?

If directed at a particular person, yes. Since you weren't speaking about anyone in particular, I agree. There are plenty of keyboard commandos without a clue who pretend to be experts because they play Call of Duty and saw some videos on YouTube that one time.

There are truths in experience that exceed "national statistics".

Agreed.

If one cannot tell the difference between the truths that hide in experience and what is simply anecdotal information then one will lose out on much wisdom.

Agreed.

I am not suggesting that you take everything someone tells you who claims decades of experience to the bank, but if they really have that experience then show some respect instead of being a google douchebag who may know how to spell manners but has no practical experience with the concept.

I think the issues in this particular instance arose from how the OP presented the information and how he responded when questioned.