Revolver or Modern Hi-cap Pistol?

mcb said:

Just to follow up my whimsical photo in my first reply.

First up I can use the slide rule despite having not been born until after they became obsolete. I used it to do all my homework second semester of physic in college to the ridicule and chiding of my classmates and to the delight and humor of my professor. I also carry a revolver more often than a semi-auto for the past few years... My I am a novice with neither.

But... it is my opinion that if a new shooter has X amount of time to spend training/learning, whether X be an hour, a day, or a week of time, that at the end of that time period they will have gotten more out of the training and be more proficient and more effective using a modern double stack semi-auto handgun than a revolver in a self defense situation.

I agree that the manual of arms for a revolver is simpler than a semi-auto in concept but in practice it is immaterial. If you are unwilling to spend enough time training that the conceptually slightly simpler manual of arms of a revolver actually makes a difference to your effectiveness you probably should be looking for other self-defense strategies.

Capacity is King, you can never have too much ammo, unless you are drowning, or on fire.

Click to expand...

My response was meant to be equally whimsical. That said, placement is king. And while I have used that exact saying about too much ammo, you can certainly have enough ammo. With training, I have become more proficient with a revolver than I am with a semi. (While that statement is true, it also is meant to be whimsical, I'm well aware my shooting has been revolver heavy and I would probably shoot semis better if I practiced more with them and less with revolvers.)

The guy should get what he likes the most and will be most likely to shoot more. If he isn't going to shoot much regardless of what he acquires, then it really doesn't matter, the firearm won't be very useful regardless of capacity or simplicity or reliability or caliber or... In reality a semi would probably be better in that case, likely cheaper to buy, and certainly easier to leave unloaded (and safer for the household) by dropping the magazine and keeping it separate from the handgun. And with a loaded magazine, even I can have a semi ready to fire more quickly than I can an unloaded revolver.

Pudge said:

With training, I have become more proficient with a revolver than I am with a semi.

Click to expand...

What do you mean by "more proficient", exactly?

There’s a lot of sanctimonious going on in this thread. One would almost get the idea that it’s better for someone not to have a gun unless they plan to get to the range weekly.

Thousands and thousands of people who aren’t committed enthusiast gun owners dedicated to training “a lot” have still pulled an old Colt or Remington black powder, cheap top break, s&w, Ruger, or other revolver out of their dresser drawer when they sensed trouble and successfully defended themselves with it. Most of these folks probably never put more than a box of ammo through said gun, if that, in 20 years of ownership, before they had to use it.

Training and practice is wonderful, but let’s not forget that compared to a brawl with a baseball bat or frying pan or knife, a revolver is by design simple and almost effortless. Point at threat, pull trigger. “God made men. Sam Colt made them equal.”

I’m happy OPs friend is getting a gun. It’s a great first step and should be applauded.

Any gun when mishandled is as dangerous as any other.

If he’s concerned, choosing a particular type of gun isn’t the solution.

Charlie Martinez said:

This morning I received a call from a friend who wants to buy a handgun for SD & HD. He will not CC but wants to keep it at home or in the car for long trips. He asked me which 38/357 Magnum revolvers I recommended. I asked him why he wanted a revolver. He responded that he thought revolvers were "safer" to have around the house in case one of his grandkids or his wife happened to stumble across it.

Click to expand...

He should rethink having a CC if he's going to carry the gun in a vehicle, potentially crossing state lines. Laws between states vary regarding open carry, which he would have to do if he doesn't have a CC permit. With the permit, he can keep it in a console or glove box, and most states recognize permits from other states, with some notable exceptions he would have to learn.

As for his grandkids "stumbling" over the gun, to leave a firearm where a minor has access to it is a criminal offense, and he has to sign a paper when he buys the gun acknowledging that fact. At any rate, leaving a firearm out is irresponsible whether it's illegal or not, and I'd question whether he's up to that responsibility by his comment.

Mosin77 said:

There’s a lot of sanctimonious going on in this thread. One would almost get the idea that it’s better for someone not to have a gun unless they plan to get to the range weekly.

Thousands and thousands of people who aren’t committed enthusiast gun owners dedicated to training “a lot” have still pulled an old Colt or Remington black powder, cheap top break, s&w, Ruger, or other revolver out of their dresser drawer when they sensed trouble and successfully defended themselves with it. Most of these folks probably never put more than a box of ammo through said gun, if that, in 20 years of ownership, before they had to use it.

Click to expand...

Using a gun isn't like operating a vacuum cleaner or other non-lethal device. If you own one, it's incumbent on you to maintain familiarity with it. Sure, you can load it, throw it in your sock drawer and forget about it until some punk or druggie breaks in at 2am, and in the time it takes you to remember whether it's loaded or not, figure out whether the safety is engaged or how to cock it, said punk could take it away from you, or just beat you to death with a tire iron. There's muscle memory necessary to firearm use, as well as an automatic familiarity so you are instantly ready. It doesn't take a weekly trip to the range, but it does require occasional practice that can easily be done in the home, such as scenario enacting and dry-fire practice. If that sounds sanctimonious, fine with me.

Mosin77

I don't think there's anything sanctimonious in being concerned about someone going about home defense with such a lackadaisical approach that they think all they have to do is buy a handgun and all their worries are taken care of. My greatest concern with Charlie Martinez's friend is that he thinks getting a handgun is the be-all/end-all panacea for home defense. It sounds like this guy believes that all he has to do is buy a gun and some ammo, throw it in a drawer, and he's good to go. Yet there are many issues that must be considered like the safe storage of the gun with grandkids running about or getting proper instruction in how to use a gun or even how to come up with a plan of action should their home be broken into while they're there. This guy needs to do a lot of homework in this matter and the way Charlie talks about him, it doesn't sound like he's interested enough to do it for himself or his family.

Mosin77 said:

Thousands and thousands of people who aren’t committed enthusiast gun owners dedicated to training “a lot” have still pulled an old Colt or Remington black powder, cheap top break, s&w, Ruger, or other revolver out of their dresser drawer when they sensed trouble and successfully defended themselves with it. Most of these folks probably never put more than a box of ammo through said gun, if that, in 20 years of ownership, before they had to use it.

Click to expand...

An interesting statement. I could say that thousands and thousands of untrained or poorly trained people have shot themselves or had their gun taken from them and been shot with it. I have no documentation of that, but I suspect that you don't have any for your statement either so....... I suspect that the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

I suspect that the best the OP can do for his friend is to take him shooting.
Often.
And have a serious discussion on safety and safe storage.
A good thing, no?

Sometimes I think we get to hung up in the details of owning a firearm. I am not knocking training and all that, but no one trained me other than in safety. That had nothing to do with anything but long gun safety. I wonder who if anybody trained Bill Jordon when he first started shooting, or Skeeter, or Elmer Keith, or many other respected shooters of the past. Just a thought - no need to get exited as I fully endorse training beyond safety. I just don't personally feel its necessity as strong as many others . Back to the OP's original question . Yes, I do feel your wrong. I've started a few people down the road to hand gun ownership and have always done so with a revolver. A lot of comments before mine sort of lay out the arguments on why.

bearcreek said:

What do you mean by "more proficient", exactly?

Click to expand...

More hits in fewer shots/less time on steel, better accuracy on paper.

I asked him why he wanted a revolver. He responded that he thought revolvers were "safer" to have around the house in case one of his grandkids or his wife happened to stumble across it.

Click to expand...

Yikes..first, find a way to secure it or wear it when in the house..THEN, get a 9mm SA, like a Glock 17/19/45..

Charlie Martinez said:

I was wrong, a revolver is definitely the best choice for these folks.

Click to expand...

Given the discussion and your evaluation of the couple, think about recommending a full size SA/DA .357, 4" or longer barrel, no lightweights or snubbies. Advise them to load it in .38SP SD rounds rather than .357. The larger, heavier gun with the .38SP ammunition will be easier for them to deal with recoil. If you do get to go to the range with them, test both regular and +P rounds so he (they) have a feel fo which will suit them.

mnrivrat said:

Sometimes I think we get to hung up in the details of owning a firearm. I am not knocking training and all that, but no one trained me other than in safety. That had nothing to do with anything but long gun safety. I wonder who if anybody trained Bill Jordon when he first started shooting, or Skeeter, or Elmer Keith, or many other respected shooters of the past. Just a thought - no need to get exited as I fully endorse training beyond safety. I just don't personally feel its necessity as strong as many others . Back to the OP's original question . Yes, I do feel your wrong. I've started a few people down the road to hand gun ownership and have always done so with a revolver. A lot of comments before mine sort of lay out the arguments on why.

Click to expand...

For most of us who will never parachute into an Hamas command post, training to be an operator is of questionable value---fun, but questionable. Little of this would be applicable to a guy who works night shift at a minimart, a single mom or a senior citizen trying to survive in a sketchy neighborhood.
OTOH coming to grips with situational awareness can be a literal life saver.

Jordan, Skeeter and Keith likely learned how to handle guns from their fathers or uncles and further honed skills in the military and law enforcement academies.

mcb said:

View attachment 940820

Click to expand...

Slide rule with Pocket Protector

mcb said:

View attachment 940820

Click to expand...

Funny that a revolver doesn't have a slide but the other option does.

Where the revolver would by my logical first pick is if I lived somewhere with ammo capacity restrictions and I had plenty of hand strength to pull a double action trigger.

In that case, something like a S&W R8 (or 686 Plus) with some speed loaders ready might do just fine. For the home of course, since I'd assume that if I lived in such a place that getting a concealed carry license might be essentially unobtainable.

The S&W lock could be seen as an advantage to some prospective newbie gun owners in this situation, as well. Unload it and lock it. It wouldn't be ready to go under stress, but someone may want something exactly like this.

Bannock said, & it's worth repeating: "First off if there are grandkids around he's going to have to keep it locked up and not just hidden inside the nightstand. Secondly his wife also has to know about it and both of them will need some kind of training into how to use it. And they're going to have to develop some sort of plan in the event their home is broken into while they're there."

And I'll add, that for a new shooter, perhaps one that isn't going to spend the time to build and maintain self defense skills, I'd recommend a revolver...simpler to operate under stress with a simpler manual of arms is the primary reason. And I'll 2nd Bannock's caution regarding children in the house and of course his wife. Like owning a car, a handgun in the house demands certain precautions regarding its availability and a semblance of proficiency. Best regards, Rod

Simpler, yes. Safer? Not really.

If it's the trigger pull that makes it more desirable then a DA/SA is an equally "safe" (so to speak) option that offers significantly better capacity.

And for Pete's sake, have him get a quick release safe and some training!

If it’s going to be thrown in a drawer, with little practice, then a revolver makes some sense. No lessons needed on clearing ftes from limp wristing. If he wants to go inexpensive, a Taurus 66 will work. Otherwise a S&W 66 will be good.

Charlie Martinez said:

Am I wrong?

Click to expand...

I think you made a solid recommendation.
Revolvers are my personal favorite too, but the fact is the hi-cap autos are better suited today. Sadly.
The guy reached out to you, and you made a recommendation, but if the guy still wants a revolver, then that's what he should get.
.....and training, and safe storage.

I am curious what production revolver would be recommended to a guy in his situation.? Thats what he asked for.

Charlie Martinez said:

This morning I received a call from a friend who wants to buy a handgun for SD & HD. He will not CC but wants to keep it at home or in the car for long trips. He asked me which 38/357 Magnum revolvers I recommended. I asked him why he wanted a revolver. He responded that he thought revolvers were "safer" to have around the house in case one of his grandkids or his wife happened to stumble across it.

I am a revolver guy because that's what most people used when I started shooting in the early 70's. However I recognize the value of a modern hi-cap pistol for SD & HD especially in 9mm because factory ammo is relatively cheap. .

I recommended that he seriously consider a modern 9mm hi-cap pistol & added that a revolver would be as unsafe under those conditions as any pistol.

Am I wrong?

Click to expand...

Yes, you are wrong.
He asked which revolver you would recommend and you said a hi-cap semi auto. If you are a revolver guy it's not even a hard question.

Revolver is good advice under the condition as described.