Harry Krause wrote:

Your average Happy Homeowner who hears something go bump in the night in
his house isn't going to be adept with speedloaders, and I doubt you
are, either. Remember, we were talking about ease of use.

I believe most folks who own handguns *are* familiar with
speedloaders...and they are easy to use.

As for your pimping for little red lights, that's your business. Anyone
who breaks into my house at night is going to be facing the business end
of a 12-gauge shotgun. If that isn't enough to give him pause, I doubt a
little red light held by a limpwristed old fart like you is going to do
the job.

As usual, we disagree again...this time on the better defensive arm. And
as usual, you are wrong yet again!

--
Skipper

Gotta wonder if those sky marshalls were ever in the National Guard or
Reserves. They sure do seem gun happy.

"Gun happy?"

This is the firest incident I've ever heard of an air marshal pulling a
gun...let alone shooting someone....

Bill,
Do they still make single action. I thought the invention of the double
action saw the end of the single action.


"Bill McKee" wrote in message
k.net...

"Dan Krueger" wrote in message
nk.net...
Skipper wrote:

Doug Kanter wrote:


Any auto is inherently dangerous for the occasional user *particularly*
in a stressful situation. The double action is much safer. Further, the
persuasive nature of the laser cannot be underestimated to defuse the
situation. The better *defensive* weapon is the S&W.


Why do you think an auto is more dangerous?


Far more likely to fire an unintended round while aimed at the perp.
Both guns can kill, the double action is the safer gun in the hands of a
nervous owner...for obvious reasons. There must be the threat of bodily
harm *before* pulling the trigger.

--
Skipper

You probably meant to say "Double action only" and they are safer but too
slow for home defense. How much time do you think you have to react to a
threat? If you have enough time, you avoid it and call the cops.

Dan

Single action would not be the greatest for home protection. May be
safer. Single action means you have to cock the gun, pull back the hammer
for each shot. A double action can be cocked like a single action, or
pulling the trigger also cocks the gun first. Cocking a revolver, also
indexes the cylinder to have the next chamber under the hammer. The
single action would be safer, as a kid would have to cock the gun first,
instead of just pulling the trigger to fire a round.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Dan Krueger wrote:
Harry Krause wrote:

Dan Krueger wrote:

I'd take a Glock 34 any day over that wheelgun. Fully legal mag on
the Glock holds 17 rounds, standard barrel is 5" long, and if you
need them, lasergrips are available. Oh, and my guess is the
semi-auto mechanism is inherently more accurate than the wheelgun's.

You have a single or double action wheelgun? If double, you keep a
chamber empty for safety's sake? If so, that means the G34 mag holds
more than three times the number of rounds.

How is that 17 round magazine legal? Pre-ban?
Nope. Perfectly legal in Maryland.

I always thought that was a federal law. Here's what I found on it:

"When Browning had to come up with a ten round magazine to satisfy the
demands of Clinton's 1994 law, they put a little spring on the bottom.
I don't mean to be uncomplimentary when I say it resembles a rat-trap."

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...112128013/pg_2

Dan

Thanks for the article. Massad Ayoob is definitely "the man," or at
least one of them. The "law" limiting the capacity of magazines expired.
States now regulate the max capacity. In Maryland, a 17-rounder is ok. I
think the limit here is a 20-rounder. There are 33-round mags available
(in Virginia, for example), but not in this state.

I've shot a couple of Browning HP's. They are fine pistols. But if I
were going to buy a handgun for defense, the first one on my list would
be a Glock in 9 mm, full frame. They are sturdy, elegantly simple,
reliable and accurate. They're not a race gun, but they're ideal for
their purpose.

The rule is that you're better off carrying a gun you're comfortable
with, as opposed to no gun. But still, you'd be better off with a .40 cal
or .45 cal Glock. 9mm is a pretty anemic round for defense, which is why
so many police departments have abandoned it.

Well, there's always lots of discussion about police and calibers. From
what I have seen on the local police range, the problem is not throw
weight but lack of practice.

There's a store here that sells only police accessories. There's a sign on
the door saying "No Loaded Guns Except Police". The owner says he's seen the
cops violate far more safety rules than civilians as they remove their guns
to try them in new holsters. But, his wife wants the sign left up.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Skipper wrote:
Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:

Skipper wrote:
So, which is the better *defensive* handgun, a S&W .357 mag fitted
with
laser grips or a Glock auto?
.357 mag revolver or a .44 mag revolver.
Simple, effective and never break down.
"I know what you're thinkin', punk. You're thinkin', did he fire six
shots or only five? And to tell you the truth, I forgot myself in all
this excitement. But bein' this is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful
handgun in the world, and it'll blow your head clean off, you could ask
yourself a question. Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?"

- Harry Callahan

--
Skipper

Great line, great delivery, but inaccurate. The .454 Casull, for one.
was and is "more powerful."

Not sure, but I don't think that load existed at the time the movie was
made.


Dick Casull developed the .454 Casull in 1957 and announced it in 1959 in
Guns and Ammo magazine. If I'm on your "holiday shopping list," I'd like a
454 wheelgun from Freedom Arms.

I stand corrected!

Harry,
This is a great thread. It is nice to see rec.boats rabid anti-handgun
promoter, rabid anti-owners of handguns has become such a big promoter of
the sport of target shooting targets.

What happened to bring about this conversion?


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Dan Krueger wrote:
Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:

On Fri, 09 Dec 2005 21:20:51 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:


Dan Krueger wrote:

I'd take a Glock 34 any day over that wheelgun. Fully legal mag on
the Glock holds 17 rounds, standard barrel is 5" long, and if you
need them, lasergrips are available. Oh, and my guess is the
semi-auto mechanism is inherently more accurate than the wheelgun's.

You have a single or double action wheelgun? If double, you keep a
chamber empty for safety's sake? If so, that means the G34 mag holds
more than three times the number of rounds.

How is that 17 round magazine legal? Pre-ban?
Nope. Perfectly legal in Maryland.


I'm not sure how you can say the semi-auto is "inherently" more
accurate than a revolver. A barrel is a barrel. The same bullets
pass through them.
How they get to the barrel matters.

True. However, I much prefer revolvers because they are simpler,
easier to reload (quicker actually) and easier to handle.

Their major disadvantage is number of rounds, but accuracy more than
makes up for it.

I own more than a few guns and I use them for sport. I do keep one or
two around for self defense but that's another thread.

I have revolvers and semi-auto's. How do you figure that the revolvers
are more accurate? Trigger pull is similar as are the lengths of the
barrels. What am I missing?

Dan


In a revolver, there is a bit of space between the business end of the
cylinder and the back end of the barrel, where the bullet enters after the
hammer strikes the round. The lineup between the bullet and the barrel
isn't always perfect. Off even a bit matters, especially in match
contents. In a semi auto, the round is fully in the barrel before it is
set off.

--
SUPPORT BUSH'S ENEMIES BUY CITGO GAS.

So, which is the better *defensive* handgun, a S&W .357 mag fitted with
laser grips or a Glock auto?

Either.

I ahve my .357 loaded with .38's because I can do without the racket.
and at close range they both do the same damage.

i ahve my .44 loaded with .44 Smith's for the same reason.

If I can't do it with a Special, I'm not going to do it with a magnum
either.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Skipper wrote:
Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:

Skipper wrote:
So, which is the better *defensive* handgun, a S&W .357 mag fitted
with
laser grips or a Glock auto?
.357 mag revolver or a .44 mag revolver.
Simple, effective and never break down.
"I know what you're thinkin', punk. You're thinkin', did he fire six
shots or only five? And to tell you the truth, I forgot myself in all
this excitement. But bein' this is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful
handgun in the world, and it'll blow your head clean off, you could
ask
yourself a question. Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?"

- Harry Callahan

--
Skipper
Great line, great delivery, but inaccurate. The .454 Casull, for one.
was and is "more powerful."
Not sure, but I don't think that load existed at the time the movie was
made.

Dick Casull developed the .454 Casull in 1957 and announced it in 1959
in Guns and Ammo magazine. If I'm on your "holiday shopping list," I'd
like a 454 wheelgun from Freedom Arms.

I stand corrected!

I'll email you the name of my FFL fella.

Why?

wrote:

So, which is the better *defensive* handgun, a S&W .357 mag fitted with
laser grips or a Glock auto?

Either.

I ahve my .357 loaded with .38's because I can do without the racket.
and at close range they both do the same damage.

i ahve my .44 loaded with .44 Smith's for the same reason.

If I can't do it with a Special, I'm not going to do it with a magnum
either.

I keep mine *unloaded* with filled speedloaders beside the .38 special
and .357 mag. in a locked gun case. Spare gun case key is high and
hidden, but at the gun case.

--
Skipper

"Narcissists are grandiose. They live in an artificial self invented from
fantasies of absolute or perfect power, genius, beauty, etc. Normal
people's
fantasies of themselves, their wishful thinking, take the form of
stories --
these stories often come from movies or TV, or from things they've read or
that were read to them as children. They involve a plot, heroic activity
or
great accomplishments or adventu normal people see themselves in
action,
however preposterous or even impossible that action may be -- they see
themselves doing things that earn them honor, glory, love, riches, fame,
and
they see these fantasy selves as personal potentials, however tenuous"

"Lord Reginald Smithers" Ask me about my driveway leading up to my
manor. wrote in message ...
Wow, Harry, you really seem to be great at everything you do.

I am impressed.

Not only are you great at everything you do, but your health is perfect.
Are you still 165 lbs?
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
John H. wrote:
On Fri, 09 Dec 2005 13:00:53 -0500, Harry Krause

wrote:

*JimH* wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
John H. wrote:
On Fri, 09 Dec 2005 09:26:50 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

Don White wrote:
Harry Krause wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:

"Jim Carter" wrote in message
...

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
. ..

It means they were properly trained to handle and use
firearms.

One shot, one kill.
I had heard on the news today that there were many shots
fired.
Does that
mean that several people were killed that we don't know
about?
It means that when you fire your weapon you hit what you are
aiming at.

If six guys aimed at the same person then that person should
have
six bullets in him.


Something you learned from your years of weekend warrior combat
experience guarding the loo, Bertie?

Bert would have lobbed half a dozen artillery shells at the
hapless victim...from a safe distance of course.
I have a feeling Bert would need a half dozen boxes of ammo to
hit
the side of a barn. Accuracy with firearms requires regular
practice. I go to one of three ranges at least once a month,
year-around. Most of the cops I see at the ranges are there about
every other week. I've asked them about that. It's fun to shoot
with
cops, because they sometimes have "unusual" guns with them, and
they'll let you pop off a few rounds if they recognize you and
you
ask.
LOL!

What a joke!

--

You planning to meet me at the Gilbert range near you, to show off
your military prowess with a handgun, Herring?

I also go out to the Blue Ridge facility in Chantilly. I've not
seen
you there, either. Or at the MSAR.

I suspect what you shoot off these days is...your mouth.
You are proud of your guns, rifles and shotguns, and rightfully so.
You stated you will use them to protect you and your wife against an
intruder, perhaps whose sole intention is only to steal your super
fast
computer.

Yet air marshals who are assigned to protect us should not use their
guns when confronting a suicide bomber.

Interesting.


A. I believe in home defense.

B. I would only shoot an intruder whom I perceived to
be a physical threat.

C. The dead guy was not a suicide bomber. Or any other kind of
bomber.

D. I suspect Herring, with his vision, would not be able to hit a
man-sized target with a handgun from 25 yards.

Not on the first shot, but I've learned how to adjust. Of course, I
don't
go bragging about what I
shoot, how well I shoot, where I shoot, and with whom I shoot.

--

Gosharoonie. I can hit a small pie-plate sized target at 25 yards with
a
semi-auto handgun the first shot and almost every shot, if I
concentrate,
and you have to adjust to hit a "man-sized" target?

I suspect you don't "shoot" at all, with a handgun or otherwise.

Is your bad aim another reason why we lost in Vietnam?




--
January 20th, 2009: Hang in there, America!