Why do "saturday night" pistols have such a horrible reputation?, page 7

privacy

Pages: << 4 5 6 7 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 4 times

reply posted on 29-3-2011 @ 11:04 AM by nenothtu

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

From what I understand the .25acp and .32acp rounds were more popular in europe and thus the guns made there were more reliable. But of course europeans drive smaller cars, live in smaller homes, drive on smaller roads, etc.

Nothing wrong with either culture, they just have different outlooks of life. To be fair though, most law enforcement agencies have upgraded to .380acp and 9mm quite some time ago. I think the smaller rounds are a thing of the past with marginal acceptance in todays world. It has evolved into a poor man's gun and/or target practice.

The Lorcin in question was a 9mm. It was a brand new weapon according to him, and it's possible that he hadn't cleaned it up very well out of the box, but Lorcins and the like have reputations as jam-a-matics in those circles regardless of what you do to them, and he was too new to know that. He just thought he'd got a great deal on a gun.

As far back as I can recall, even when I was a kid, .25's and .32's had reputations as bar-room guns. The original "point and click" devices, and they had a bad reputation for accuracy. Accuracy, like reliability, is in the manufacture, so low grade guns got a bad rep on both accounts. On the other hand, I don't know any reason why a .25 or a .38acp can't be every bit as accurate as any other pistol, given a suitable manufacturer. I've heard it said time and again that .25's burn the barrels out fast, and so lose accuracy relatively quickly, but that's just anecdotal, and I can't figure out any reason for that to be, other than possibly thin barrel walls - again, a manufacturing concern. No reason that they would be inherently less accurate or reliable based on caliber alone.

To be honest, I think a hit with either of those would be a lot more discouraging than a loud miss with a Desert Eagle!

reply posted on 29-3-2011 @ 11:10 AM by projectvxn

Something that should be considered is that SNS weapons tend to have their parts fashioned with sub par metals, their construction often places all the moving parts too close to each other creating friction. This means that the more you use them the more you warp the crappy metal, the more jamming and FTF problems you get. A lot of manufacturers of SNS weapons also don't do a whole lot of measurement checking and because of this you have problems right out of the box.

Try taking apart one of these weapons and see how hard it is to put it back together.

These weapons are known for double loading(racking two rounds into the chamber at the same time) fail to eject issues, fail to fire issues. I don't care what anyone says, these weapons are more dangerous to the user than to the intended target.

edit on 29-3-2011 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 30-3-2011 @ 12:30 AM by MikeNice81

reply to post by EarthCitizen07

The truth was hit on very early in this thread. The whole "saturday night" special scare was a tactic of the anti-gun crowd. They made a huge deal of the scary guns that were small and cheap. They made up statistics and scary scenarios. It was an easy ploy to turn people against guns. When they figured out that they couldn't effect a handgun ban through scare tactics they switched to "assault rifles."

The thought was simple, it would be easier to confuse people about military looking rifles. Most people don't know the difference between automatic and semi-automatic. They also don't know that military looking rifles are changed for the civilian market and do not fire in automatic mode. So, with the ignorance of the public on their side anti-gunners attacked the "assault rifle." They believed banning "assault rifles" would lead to a snowball an they could then go after "saturday night specials" and all other handguns.

Locrins and such are ridiculed because of their low quality control. Locrin, Cobra, Jennings, and Jiminez are usually pittiful performers. Hi-Point is the best of the lot you mentioned. They are looked down on by many because of their price and cosmetics. It is possible to get a Hi-Point .45acp for about $200. It will work well shot after shot.

The reason many people go with 9mm or larger is because, bigger holes tend to end fights faster. However, when it comes to guns shot placement is king. In combative situations a heart or head shot is not easy to make. Some of the best target shooters and teachers have been in fights where they missed more times than they hit.

edit on 30-3-2011 by MikeNice81 because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 30-3-2011 @ 12:54 AM by MikeNice81

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by James1982
These smaller rounds have much less energy in the round, and loose that energy faster. If you shoot someone wearing a heavy jacket from 20 feet with .25 hollow points, it is very unlikely the round will even expand at all.

Sorry but this is baloney. If a .25acp hollow point can't penetrate a denim jacket at 20-30 feet then what can it penetrate? Of course you won't get the same penetration with a 9mm because the .25 exerts 65 pds/foot but still it will do enough damage to allow you a second shot which WILL kill him/her.

Its the same thing with shooting #8 birdshot out of a shotgun. First shot stuns and second kills.

Of course I WOULD prefer a 9mm anyday but since I am on a tight budget why should I have to shell out $550 when all is said and done?

Amy Fisher shot Joey Buttafuoco's wife at point blank range in the head. The gun was a .25acp. A head shot from a .25 is not promised to kill. There are many anecdotal reports of .25acp rounds being stopped by multiple layers of heavy clothing.

A .25acp hollow point may not expand (open up) as reliably because of the lower velocities. If they do, it will limit penetration to the point the bullet may not hit vital organs.

65lbs of pressure is almost nothing. Chuck Lidell one of the world's hardest punching men can generate 1,500lb/ft of pressure with a single punch. He has yet to kill a man by punching them in the head or chest. The vast majority of hand gun bullets don't generate that much pressure . Most of them never achieve enough pressure to cause hydrostatic shock that results in secondary wounding. They are not going to kill, or even slow down, because of the pressure they exert. Most people that get shot stop because of a psychological reaction to the pain.

Keep the bird shot for birds. Bird shot has horrbile penetration and is not a good self defense choice. I personally know some one that was shot (in the face and neck) from twenty feet with a .410 deringer. The load was birdshot. It did not kill. It didn't even pentrate enough to puncture the artery in their neck. They had time to draw, fire back, and drive off the attacker.

You can get a used Kel Tec PF-9 for less than $225. It holds 7+1 rounds of 9mm. It isn't a bull's eye gun. However, it will be more than accurate enough at 20 feet. Plus it is small and reliable.

reply posted on 30-3-2011 @ 01:06 AM by MikeNice81

Originally posted by DayKnightmare
reply to post by James1982

Ok fine everybody go out and buy a Taurus Judge and load it with flachette rounds. That would be cool too. All I was saying is at the ideal range an average person would be curled up on the ground after getting hit even with a .22lr.

I've seen a guy walk in to the emergency room under his own power after taking six shots to the abdomen from a .22LR pistol. He had the time and energy to, take the attackers gun, pistol whip his attacker in to a coma, walk to his car, drive to the hospital, go in, wait in the waiting room, and under go surgery.

It took hours for him to die. He finally died on the operating table. What killed him was the fact that several of the soft lead bullets had fragmented and cause secondary bleeding. There were too many wounds to close them all. It failed to do the job because the guy doing the shooting still ended up in a coma.

No handgun bullet is going to stop in one shot unless you hit (and severely damages) the heart, brain, spine, or pelvis. Even in some of those scenario's stopping the attacker's movement may not mean the threat is over. Most of the time a one shot stop is a matter of phsychological response more than phsyiological.

If you are counting on any gun to go one and done you are setting yourself up to be dreadfully mistaken.

edit on 30-3-2011 by MikeNice81 because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 30-3-2011 @ 01:26 AM by zerbot565

a .22 will do more damage bullet wise internally then a large size caliber ,
for example a .32 or 9mm will by all likely hood just go through you if your lucky (not counting single shot kill)
the .22 will just tear tissue and veins and be a slow death if it even kills you.

ive seen a .22 bounce of the forhead at close range cause of angle of projectile
ive also seen a .22 slow kill a fellow in 4 days from a self inflicted head shot,

.22 are made for hunting critters/ birds or range shooting , good tool to keep your hand eye co ordination from getting rusty ,

but i guess taste is like an ass , divided ,
my partner likes the .32

reply posted on 30-3-2011 @ 01:59 AM by MikeNice81

reply to post by zerbot565

No, a well constructed hollow point in a 9mm or .38spl+p will do more damage than a .22lr. You get a much larger hole. That means you crush more tissue, blood vessels, capillaries, and such. If it functions properly the bullet will expand and stay in the average adult body. (If you've ever seen a .357 magnum wound you will notice the difference.)

If you are using full metal jacket ammo anything .38spl and up may go completely through the human body. However, there is no advantage to using a FMJ over a HP in "service" caliber weapons.. If it isn't illegal in your area, and your gun can feed them, use hollow point ammo.

Pages: << 4 5 6 7 >> ^^TOP^^