"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 09 Dec 2005 16:19:07 -0600, Skipper wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:

I've fitted Crimson Trace Laser grips to my S/W .357 magnum on the
theory that once the perp realizes there is a bright red dot moving
about the middle of his chest a motivation change will result. Thus, no
need to pull the trigger...the ultimate *defensive* weapon.

When did you get a pardon? Ex-felons aren't usually allowed ownership of
handguns. Even wheel guns.

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.

And loaded with wad cutters with the hollow bottom. With the bullet upside
down. Otherwise you kill some poor neighbor 3 houses away after the bullet
has gone through the intruder and a few walls.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Skipper wrote:
Harry Krause wrote:

I've fitted Crimson Trace Laser grips to my S/W .357 magnum on the
theory that once the perp realizes there is a bright red dot moving
about the middle of his chest a motivation change will result. Thus, no
need to pull the trigger...the ultimate *defensive* weapon.

When did you get a pardon? Ex-felons aren't usually allowed ownership of
handguns. Even wheel guns.

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

--
Skipper

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.




This the same person who would not own a handgun and sent a Glock to the
police for disposal?

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Don White" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:
"Don White" wrote in message
...

Lord Reginald Smithers wrote:

Bill,
Harry is not anti-handgun, he likes to shot handguns. He just doesn't
want anyone else to own a handgun.



..or at least, none of the gun happy righties.


I resent that remark. I own a gun primarily to deal with a situation
which I know is coming soon: I will walk into the living room to discuss
something briefly with my son, who will be in TV coma mode. His only
response will be "Uh huh.....OK". You've seen this - you know the
teenager has absolutely no idea what you just said. I will then hand him
the shooting glasses and hearing protector things and tell him to put
them on. He'll say "Uh huh" and mindlessly obey. I will then shoot the
TV.

Televisions are so cheap that it would be worth $300 bucks just to see
the look on his face, and get perhaps get a week or three of
attentiveness out of him.

:-)
Might be better to take your angle cutter pliers and cut the plug off.

That would be cheaper, I guess, and not so much cleanup afterward.


But not point making!

Harry Krause wrote:


I've fitted Crimson Trace Laser grips to my S/W .357 magnum on the
theory that once the perp realizes there is a bright red dot moving
about the middle of his chest a motivation change will result. Thus, no
need to pull the trigger...the ultimate *defensive* weapon.


When did you get a pardon? Ex-felons aren't usually allowed ownership of
handguns. Even wheel guns.

What's the difference? By "wheel gun" you mean revolver? Felons can't
possess a Ruger 10-22. ANY handgun is also out of the question - as it
should be.

Dan

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Bill McKee 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.

This, by a person who is anti-handgun?

I'm not anti-handgun.
I'm anti-any-idiot-who-can-breathe-being-able-to-buy-one.
I used to be totally against private ownership of handguns, but
unlike your president, I am capable of learning and have modified my views
over the years. I am still, however, opposed to private citizens owning
fully auto handguns or rifles.
I prefer shotguns for home defense.
I've shot firearms for fun most of my life, mostly shotguns.



So gun nut lefties are OK.

On Fri, 09 Dec 2005 16:36:10 -0500, Harry Krause wrote:

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?

My bad aim is due to an eyeball that angles up four degrees from where it should. So, when I aim,
I'm actually looking at a different place than the target is. Now, that should be simple to
understand.

I've never said you were anything other than a most excellent shot, probably better than most
military marksmen. I'm sure you'd win medals in any shooting competition you entered.

Face it, Harry, you are the best! Of course, I don't go bragging about what I
shoot, how well I shoot, where I shoot, and with whom I shoot.

--
John H

MERRY CHRISTMAS!

Wishing you Peace, Fellowship, and Good Humor as we celebrate the birth of OUR Lord, Jesus Christ on the Christmas Holy Day.

Harry Krause wrote:

Skipper wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:

I've fitted Crimson Trace Laser grips to my S/W .357 magnum on the
theory that once the perp realizes there is a bright red dot moving
about the middle of his chest a motivation change will result. Thus, no
need to pull the trigger...the ultimate *defensive* weapon.


When did you get a pardon? Ex-felons aren't usually allowed ownership of
handguns. Even wheel guns.


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

--
Skipper


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?

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.

Dan

Dan

On Fri, 09 Dec 2005 20:44:30 GMT, "Doug Kanter" wrote:


"Don White" wrote in message
...
Lord Reginald Smithers wrote:
Bill,
Harry is not anti-handgun, he likes to shot handguns. He just doesn't
want anyone else to own a handgun.


..or at least, none of the gun happy righties.

I resent that remark. I own a gun primarily to deal with a situation which I
know is coming soon: I will walk into the living room to discuss something
briefly with my son, who will be in TV coma mode. His only response will be
"Uh huh.....OK". You've seen this - you know the teenager has absolutely no
idea what you just said. I will then hand him the shooting glasses and
hearing protector things and tell him to put them on. He'll say "Uh huh" and
mindlessly obey. I will then shoot the TV.

Televisions are so cheap that it would be worth $300 bucks just to see the
look on his face, and get perhaps get a week or three of attentiveness out
of him.

:-)


I love it!

--
John H

MERRY CHRISTMAS!

Wishing you Peace, Fellowship, and Good Humor as we celebrate the birth of OUR Lord, Jesus Christ on the Christmas Holy Day.

Skipper wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:


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


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.


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.

--
Skipper

Laser sights are worthless in the daytime. They are also worthless for
a gun purchased for personal or home protection. How often do you think
you have the time to draw the weapon, turn on the laser, and fire it?
You mention a "stressful situation". To me that means you have no
time to be pointing red lights.

Laser sights project a tiny dot on the target. Unlike the movies, there
is no fog or smoke to project a beam. It's a dot and the target would
have to see it. By that time you're dead unless you are confronting an
unarmed assailant or someone with a butcher knife who is 100 feet away.

Dan

Skipper wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:


Skipper wrote:

NOYB wrote:


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


I'd take the Glock 18C.


33 rounds in a second a half.


Is your goal to kill or defuse the defensive situation?


If you're a civvie pulling a handgun, you better be intent on using it,
not defusing with it.


Wrong. If its kids breaking in to your home and you're in a defensive
position, the laser is the best option. A shame that air cop didn't try
to defuse.

--
Skipper

If the kid is unarmed, what the hell are you doing with a gun in your
hand? Kick his ass and call his parents.

Dan