Why a Revolver for Home Defense

You make a solid argument. A good choice for a lot of people. For me, I want to be prepared for more than one person. So I want a lot of shots. How to avoid panic-induced screw-ups? Practice with the gun.
a reply to: semperfortis

I keep a 3" barrel Taurus Judge in a biometric lock box next to my bed which I alternate .45 shells with .410 personal defense rounds. Now all I need is a good laser grip. Any recommendations?

I also have a semi-auto Walter PPS 9mm with 8 hollow points in the same lock box to stick in the back of my underpants should my Judge run out.

I personally prefer a cz52 in 7.62 x 25. Although its a single stack, large grip pistol, it delivers that .357 mag performance in a semiauto and if you run out of ammo, you can beat the assailant to death with this, all steel constructed military combat pistol.

If you own a cz52, its best you order the updated stainless steel firing pin, and lose the old brittle one...and don't dry fire it...How old are you?

originally posted by: James1982
As a person with no military experience I ask you, why does the military not use revolvers as it's standard sidearm if they exhibit such an exceptional record of reliability?

Given that the military has different requirements, I wouldn't necessarily take their dismissal of the revolver as a reason for the average homeowner to do so. I would expect that a semi-auto will stand up to more hard use, misuse and abuse than a revolver will and will also be significantly easier for the average soldier to maintain in the field in a variety of environmental conditions. That, in addition to the magazine capacity issues, as well as political considerations both here and with NATO regarding the 9mm.

Now understand, while you can probably tell from my posts that I'm a revolver fan like the OP, I will concede that a good semi-auto generally IS a superior self-defense handgun except for round-to-round reliability versus a well maintained revolver, and even then, the vast majority of semi-autos being produced today by reputable manufacturers have what I would consider to be an inconsequential failure rate.

That being said, given the nature of threat that a civilian is likely to face, I strongly suspect that a full size revolver will serve most buyers quite well. I suppose what I'm saying is that I wouldn't feel under-armed with one if that's all I had.

I recommend a revolver for starters and first line homedefense. With a revolver, you have a reliable gun. If you avoid doing stupid things like swinging the drum into rest and such and keep it clean. Polish out the drum holes so expanding brass won´t stick so much, then you can rub it with oil.

I once let a young fellow shoot my S&W model 19 at the range. The first thing he did, after giving it (empty of course) to him was spin up the drum and snapped it in like an idiot while holding it upwards. Doing this, he managed to break the firepin and ruin the drumholder.
The typical hollywood shooter.

So I grabbed the gun and what´s he doing? Move his arms away from me like he won´t give it back to me. Well that escalated quickly with his head on the table and probably a broken index finger the way it was bent and him screaming. While I twisted it out of his hands, other hand on his backhead, he had his fingers on the trigger like he wanted to dryfire it. No jokes with guns. We threw him out of the club and I bet he´d never shot a gun accuratly after that. His father was kicking his ass the whole way down to the car. Poor father, never saw him again, too.


===========================================================================================
About burglary.
Some people here have no idea how it´s like to be in that situation.
I mean the guy with his 500 shooting 8 people in a row. Come on, get real.
They imaging theirselfes flying down the stairs in matrix style motion quickly taking headshots on every one, rolling up, blow away the smoke from their gun and do a cool western style move while they holster.

What would happen in reality is that guy with the .50 thinking he is rambo will not hit once, destroy his hearing while doing, penetrate several walls (if drywall or wood) and is blinded by the muzzle flash, all the while the resistant burglar is taking his change, or run.

I´m a hunter, son of a hunter and I go to the range club. I´ve been around guns so to speak. One night I heard something crack downstairs and someone walking around with heavy boots. So I went up, checked the kids bedrooms and it hit me -> there´s a stranger downstairs. So I woke them up and sent both into our bedroom silently (it´s directly on the opposite of our bedroom, took out my FS92 and let my oldest call the police and lock the door behind. As I turned on the light and screamed downwards who´s there, the noises stopped. I screamed down police is on the way and I have a gun so he better comes out backwards and slowly showing his hands.
He complied and I held him at gunpoint until police arrived about ten minutes later.

That sounded easy, didn´t it? Except that the FS92(.40) was getting heavier and heavier each step downwards, I could hear my blood pumping and my feet were like jello. Don´t ask how heavy it was when I had to wait that time until police arrived. The station in our little town just holds two people and at night, there is no one. That was another weird situation, handling them inside while explaining I have him on gunpoint. It´s not like I can´t hold my gun for a while keeping aim, but that night it weight like a ton. I had to grip so hard to not shake.

The best advice for keeping you alife is gather your family in a room, call police, turn on the lights, scream police is on the way already and lock yourself up in that room. If the one is still messing around and tries to enter the room with force without answering who he is, just fire through the door. That´s what they told me. It was stupid to go down just to get him caught!

So I really laugh at all those wanna be cowboys. It´s rediculous what some people think would happen and how they just wait the gut´s to fly and what not. In reallity they would be a shivering useless mess or dead. The majority of them for sure.


a reply to: SPECULUM
Multiple targets in the dark. One of them could be a member of your family as far as you know. You have lights in your house and if the first round goes on it´s way, half neighborhood is standing upright in their beds. If the invaders have a little value in their live, they will run for it. No point in engaging a full firefight for maybe nothing worth to die.

a reply to: Dragoon01

I agree with much of what you said, but not entirely.

Regarding the choice of weapons, I agree a .357 is wrong. Its too powerful. Line of sight has to be taken into consideration. You can put a .357 slug through an engine block. The bad guy, the drywall, the window, the aluminum siding, etc, are not going to stop that slug from going outside or next door. Especially true for people who live in apartments or condos, or in a neighborhood where houses are separated by a three foot wide breezeway. Just wrong.

However, I disagree with you regarding the semi auto over the wheel gun. If they are stored properly, unloaded and with locks in place, the wheel gun is faster. Once the wheel is pivoted and the lock is in place you are done. With the semi auto you have to make sure the pipe is clear, the mag is out, and the lock is on. With the wheel gun once the lock is off all you do is pivot the wheel and you are ready to go, a round already chambered. With the semi auto you have to remove the lock, ram the mag, and chamber a round. I win that race. As for dependability, yes new semi autos are dependable, but not as dependable as a wheel gun. You have more shots with a semi, but six should be more than enough for the average home invasion scenario. If you are being attacked by eight guys with full auto rifles, that semi auto isn't going to do much for you. My point is that excluding extreme scenarios a wheel gun should do just fine.

Regarding your statements about "shooting at the center of a dark blob", etc, I have deep concerns for you in that respect. You are openly admitting your interpretation of the events includes shooting at a target you have not identified. That is rarely, if ever, the right choice. The situation as you describe it qualifies as bad advice. It is a pretty big jump from arguing against the power of a .357 with regards to line of sight to shooting at a target you haven't even identified until you run out of ammo...

a reply to: YayMayorBee

I agree with much of what you said but not entirely.

With regard to the .357 being too powerful, I agree completely, and for the same reasons you listed.

As for your choice, a pump action shotgun, I disagree.

As you mentioned, a pump action shotgun is a large weapon, which makes it difficult and unwieldy in tight quarters. If the intruder gets close enough to you the weapon is useless. Not so with a handgun. I saw a great demonstration of why shotguns are not good in that situation. In that perceived moment of doubt before firing, the "intruder" was able to get close enough to grab the end of the barrel. He yanked the gun toward him as he turned to the side. This did three important things. 1) it discharged the round in the chamber. 2) it directed the blast away from him. 3) it pulled the man off balance making it easy to gain control.

Granted, this was a set up from the start and the guy doing it was a pro. That being said, you don't know who the other guy is or what kind of training he has had. No one can anticipate every potential in every type of encounter. The most you can hope to do is make the choice that gives you the most flexible response to whatever you encounter. That's why my first choice is the wheel gun, which happens to be right next to the semi auto...

a reply to: rockpaperhammock

.357 is a stopper. The reason why we want autos is the spray and pray mentality and the coolness factor SemperFortis mentioned. Not to mention what we see in movies...

I have a Sig P220, very good gun. Does occasionally jam; limp wrist it, crappy ammo, old magazine springs, any number of reasons. Revolvers rarely jam. Definitely not as cool any more. But don't think you'll be outgunned in most scenarios.

I think having a lot of ammo gives you options. You could possibly use it to to keep their heads down while you maneuver. Give covering fire for someone else. BUT, in most cases where civilians use guns, we tend to be very close to the potential target. So REALITY is a revolver is a better choice in MOST scenarios for the average user. I think a .357 or .44 is more than enough gun to get the job done for those that walk on two legs and those with four...

V

@Dragon

That's just as bad as selling someone a wheel gun.

That´s not true.
You did not write the following, but it falls into the same category like saying:
-All glocks are bad
-All polys (it´s not plastic) are bad
wich is simply not the case.

a reply to: Vroomfondel
Excellent post in my opinion!

Adding to that, why do so much people think half an army will storm their property/house with full-autos and riffles? If that´s going to happen by surprise you are dead either way, if it´s 6 or 16 bullets in your gun.

Just a quick question for those who advocate a shotgun as the best choice;

Where is your torch (flashlight)? It would be silly to start moving through a house in the dark and starting to engage live targets you can't identify. A light source is absolutely necessary.

A shotgun needs 2 hands. The only way to have a light source is with a 'tactical' flashlight attached to the handguard/pump. This means that you have to point a loaded and made ready weapon at everything you wish to illuminate. Hardly ideal if you are checking on the kids etc. Remember - never point a weapon at anything you aren't willing to destroy.

A seperate light allows you to search areas with your weapon in a low ready but without having to muzzle sweep. This means you can decide whether the 'dark blob' is a family member getting a drink in the night or a naughty man coming to nick your xbox and rape your kids without sticking a 12ga up their hooter.

originally posted by: PaddyInf
A shotgun needs 2 hands. The only way to have a light source is with a 'tactical' flashlight attached to the handguard/pump. This means that you have to point a loaded and made ready weapon at everything you wish to illuminate. Hardly ideal if you are checking on the kids etc. Remember - never point a weapon at anything you aren't willing to destroy.

This is true, but its not limited to just shotguns and rifles (not that I'd advocate a rifle for home defense). Most modern handgun designs incorporate a rail under the barrel for attaching a small flashlight. A lot of people prefer that to a separate flashlight held in the off hand.

a reply to: PaddyInf

Dude...really?

If you hear someone in another part of your house, ALL YOU NEED TO DO IS PUMP THE SHOTGUN!

You do not need to see anything, you do not need to shoot anyone. The intruder is already going to be on edge, is already going to have adrenaline pumping like nobodies business.

You do not need to confront, unless you just insist on it. All you need to do is pump that shotgun once and make some additional noise and the intruder will haul butt with all due haste.

Using an effing pistol, particularly something like a 357 is absolutely stupid to the Nth degree. The law of unintended consequences will, inevitably, come into play. With a 357 you will have to confront the intruder and if you shoot the intruder, or just pull the trigger once, can you know that the bullet will not strike an innocent in your house? In a neighbor's house? Out in the street?

There is stupid and there is effing stupid.

a reply to: vor78

My point is that if the light is attached to the weapon you can't search effectively without pointing a weapon everywhere you look. That is really very bad drills, particularly if there are family members at home.

a reply to: bbracken677

Mate if you want to trust the noise of a weapon being made ready, why even bother loading it?

I work on the assumption that if I have a weapon it is to put holes in people, not scare them. I have to assume that a noise will not work. If someone is willing to come into my house while I am there it is reasonable to assume that they are willing to impart violence on me or mine. It happens.

What if you rack the pump and the guy doesn't go away? What if he moves into another room? What if he pulls a weapon and starts shooting? What if he advances? What if there are a few of them? How's that for unintended consequence?

People automatically running away as soon as they hear a shotgun being racked is Hollywood stuff. Some do, but I wouldn't bet my life on it.

a reply to: PaddyInf

Meh... Most tactical flashlights are extremely bright and the reflection from the floor should be enough to illuminate the room for identification and that is IF you choose to use a flashlight... I have always been on the fence about that one. To me a flashlight seems more "offensive", but that is merely an opinion.

I have always been on the fence as to what I would actually do in a "dead of night" situation when it comes to a flashlight all together. I am sure it is different depending on the home and the person, but I personally have never been completely "dark blind" when walking through my house without lights on.

I think what has been grossly understated in this entire thread is the seriousness of the situation being debated. I personally own firearms but never, ever, ever, (emphasis for effect), EVER want to use them in a real situation nor do I even wish for the opportunity to even have to make the choice to use them. However, I also have catastrophic health insurance for the same reason.

I was one of the largest firearms dealers in the State of Arizona (Selling more than 2k firearms per month) and was presented this question more so than probably anyone here and the context of proper information, skill of the user, and situation of the person asking needed to be taken into account. These fantastical situations where Hollywood and reality are taken as one in the same needs to be quickly put into check in the interest of safety for yourselves, your families, and innocents that have the same rights protected by the Constitution as you.

When a firearm is discharged by a civilian, there is a ripple effect instantly; regardless of outcome from best to worst case scenarios. My original answer of "Shotgun" was my best answer based on my own personal assessment of risk taking into context the horizontal market of user base. And in my interests to eliminate as much risk as possible, I am completely open to counter arguments that make sense because the risk of discharge should outweigh any other variable of decision made by the purchaser in the interest of HOME defense.

And of COURSE the context of the user is a major factor. If you are a Navy Seal with thousands of hours of training with your Sig P228 then DRRRRRRRR.

I was only angered by the naivete of the original poster in addition to selling his expertise as absolute when in fact (and I am backed up by now dozens of comments) his advice was downright dangerous to make such a blanket statement that could actually hurt/kill someone.

a reply to: PaddyInf

This is a straw man argument. He said shotgun, not a tape recording of a shotgun being racked.

originally posted by: Vroomfondel
a reply to: Dragoon01

I agree with much of what you said, but not entirely.

Regarding the choice of weapons, I agree a .357 is wrong. Its too powerful. Line of sight has to be taken into consideration. You can put a .357 slug through an engine block. The bad guy, the drywall, the window, the aluminum siding, etc, are not going to stop that slug from going outside or next door. Especially true for people who live in apartments or condos, or in a neighborhood where houses are separated by a three foot wide breezeway. Just wrong.

However, I disagree with you regarding the semi auto over the wheel gun. If they are stored properly, unloaded and with locks in place, the wheel gun is faster. Once the wheel is pivoted and the lock is in place you are done. With the semi auto you have to make sure the pipe is clear, the mag is out, and the lock is on. With the wheel gun once the lock is off all you do is pivot the wheel and you are ready to go, a round already chambered. With the semi auto you have to remove the lock, ram the mag, and chamber a round. I win that race. As for dependability, yes new semi autos are dependable, but not as dependable as a wheel gun. You have more shots with a semi, but six should be more than enough for the average home invasion scenario. If you are being attacked by eight guys with full auto rifles, that semi auto isn't going to do much for you. My point is that excluding extreme scenarios a wheel gun should do just fine.

Regarding your statements about "shooting at the center of a dark blob", etc, I have deep concerns for you in that respect. You are openly admitting your interpretation of the events includes shooting at a target you have not identified. That is rarely, if ever, the right choice. The situation as you describe it qualifies as bad advice. It is a pretty big jump from arguing against the power of a .357 with regards to line of sight to shooting at a target you haven't even identified until you run out of ammo...

I didnt argue the caliber of the firearm. I dont go for that debate. You use whatever round you are comfortable shooting. I think you mistook my post for another.
Regarding A home invasion I didnt say anything about 8 guys with rifles either.
I explained why 6 rounds may not in fact be enough and probably are not enough.
My question to you is why in world would you store a fire arm unloaded if its your self defense handgun?
I win the race because my semi auto is in the drawer next to the bed with a round in the pipe. I put it there when I am in the bedroom for the night otherwise its on me or beside me all the time. I actually carry my gun all the time so...

The situation I described is what is likely to occur in a middle of the night incident. Turning on the lights and waiting to properly determine who is breaking into your home is a good way to lose your night vision and get shot by that bad guy. Obviously you need to be aware of who is supposed to be in your home. A child for example or your spouse, but you should have checked on them already. My description was to place emphasis on what people think is going to be the case and what is likely to be the case. Most people think it will be just like the square range. That you will have proper sight picture and sight alignment. That you will be in a perfect isosceles stance with a proper grip and that you will simply stand and deliver rounds center of mass. IT WILL NOT BE THAT WAY...PERIOD.

If you are not sure that the blob is a bad guy then, no shooting first may not be the answer. You have to make that call at the time.

originally posted by: verschickter
@Dragon

That's just as bad as selling someone a wheel gun.

That´s not true.
You did not write the following, but it falls into the same category like saying:
-All glocks are bad
-All polys (it´s not plastic) are bad
wich is simply not the case.

a reply to: Vroomfondel
Excellent post in my opinion!

Adding to that, why do so much people think half an army will storm their property/house with full-autos and riffles? If that´s going to happen by surprise you are dead either way, if it´s 6 or 16 bullets in your gun.

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.

originally posted by: bbracken677
a reply to: PaddyInf

Dude...really?

If you hear someone in another part of your house, ALL YOU NEED TO DO IS PUMP THE SHOTGUN!

You do not need to see anything, you do not need to shoot anyone. The intruder is already going to be on edge, is already going to have adrenaline pumping like nobodies business.

You do not need to confront, unless you just insist on it. All you need to do is pump that shotgun once and make some additional noise and the intruder will haul butt with all due haste.

Using an effing pistol, particularly something like a 357 is absolutely stupid to the Nth degree. The law of unintended consequences will, inevitably, come into play. With a 357 you will have to confront the intruder and if you shoot the intruder, or just pull the trigger once, can you know that the bullet will not strike an innocent in your house? In a neighbor's house? Out in the street?

There is stupid and there is effing stupid.

So what happens when you pump that shotgun and rather than the fleeing in terror that you think you will hear you hear another shotgun go "rack"?

Just put the gun down and spread your cheeks?

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.