Gryffydd, this is for you:
My certificates of graduation from BUD/S, Army Airborne, SEAL Qualification Training, SERE, CQD 1, and Blackwater...
And here are some documents that most people outside of NSWC probably could not easily acquire: Phase II and III training guides, Dive Physics guide, Hell Week gear lists, SEAL Core Values, and a NSWC Pre/Post Dive Checklist...
Also, I didn't say it takes 15 seconds to load a revolver. I said it would take about 15 seconds to load a revolver without the use of a speed-loader - especially in a SD situation in which the female in question, using a small .38 Special revolver, is under threat of attack while she is attempting to reload. I then stated that, if she were to carry the small revolver and a speed-loader, she might as well just carry a compact semi-auto - which would take up the same amount of space without presenting the difficulty of having to reload a cylinder after five or six shots. Just like in this thread - where people lack common sense about quality, people in the thread you mention seem to think that a small .38 special revolver would be a better CCW for a female than a semi-auto - despite the low capacity and comparitively more complicated reload procedure of the revolver. Wouldn't you rather your wife/daughter/sister/etc carry a compact semi-auto with, lets say, 12 rounds of .40 S&W than a small-framed revolver with 5 or 6 rounds of .38 special and a speed-loader? (Like I should even ask - since I'm sure many people here will always believe the revolver would be better for her no matter what contrary data and logic they're presented with. Many here really must think like one guy who wrote yesterday: "I never knew gun owners needed to be logical." Right. That's great.)
Wesessiah,
I typically only recommend commonly used, high quality firearms made by long-established companies. I would consider neither Walther nor Browning pistols to be among the more commonly used handguns in the United States, or in most other countries. I have handled and inspected both before, and I would consider them to be medium-quality, meaning that they are average and comparable to handguns made by most other decent firearms manufacturers. I do not like the fact that Browning's and the Walther PPK design are all steel (heavy). The Browning's hold fewer rounds than smaller and lighter designs by Sig, H&K, and Glock. Despite it's size, the Walther PPK only holds 7 rounds of .32ACP or .380ACP. I think that the polymer-framed Walther's are as ugly as Glocks, but that's a personal preference. The polymer-framed Walther's feature various oddities such as Glock-type triggers and slide-safeties. I find that all of these features and characteristics indicate inferiority compared to Sig's, H&K's, and actual Glocks. I have not really mentioned FN's yet in this thread because they were not a part of my initial data collection since nobody mentioned carrying one in the post where I acquired the list of pistols that I later used in this thread's poll. If you are wondering, I would consider FN to be a high-grade firearms manufacturer, but I would compare their Browning Hi-Power to Sig's 1911; it's not their greatest gun. I would consider the FNP9 to be FN's best pistol, as it is very high-quality, has very good features, and fires a common NATO round. I think the FN Five-Seven is equal in quality to the FNP9, but the ammo for the Five-Seven is much less common and more expensive. I have yet to hear of any U.S. LE/Military/Gov. agency using FN pistols, so I would still choose a Sig or H&K despite FN's very high quality.
I really don't plan to go through every mid-grade handgun ever made to list their disadvantages to high-grade pistols, so please don't ask me to compare any more.
