For self-defense shooting, the revolver has been surpassed, EXCEPT...

[StrikeFire83]

Okay, I guess I'm not quite done. :banghead:

I think you're being intellectually facile here, WRS. But moving on.

Would you at least admit that your LEO friend was advocating leaving the scene of a shooting as a viable strategy so as to avoid possible persecution by an anti-gun DA?

Can we at least agree that leaving the scene of a shooting, without reporting it to the police, is in of itself a crime and not the best of ideas?

 

[.38 Special]

38 Special, frankly, I do think that the 1911 has also been surpassed.

You're a brave one, I'll give you that. Arguing that neither the 1911 nor any revolvers are as good as a Glock for self defense...

Hope your thread works out for you!

 

[StrikeFire83]

38 special, as you can see, it aint working out that well, but for different reasons.

We should all shoot what we like and what we're best with. In all honesty I should have re-thought the title of this thread before starting it.

Oh well, lesson learned.

 

[wrs840]

Would you at least admit that your LEO friend was advocating leaving the scene of a shooting as a viable strategy so as to avoid possible persecution by an anti-gun DA?

Absolutely not. Where in the HE double-toothpicks did you get that? Show it.

Les

 

[Slamfire]

A J frame revolver is a very compact package. The 38 Special round is just adequate out of a two inch barrel. I cannot think of an autopistol with as powerful a round that fits into a similiar small space.

Now if I was expecting trouble, would I even bother carrying a M1911, a Glock, or some high capacity pistol?

No! I would be carrying my M1a!!!



But until then, these small J frames are a lot easier to carry than all the above.

That's why I like them.

 

[StrikeFire83]

Okay, WRS, this time, I really am done with this.

Hopefully none of us will ever have to fire our weapons in self defense, and all of this will be moot. If we do, you handle it how you want and I'll handle it how I want.

By the way, WRS, I really like that Thomas Jefferson quote, never seen that one before.

 

[wrs840]

My best to you StrikeFire83, and thanks for your sentiments.

Les

 

[MCgunner]

Actually, this is how I heard it and who I heard said it, but good thought none-the-less.

‘‘Those who beat their swords into plowshares usually end up plowing for those who didn’t.’’ Ben Franklin

 

[wrs840]

Maybe the two jousted witty asides on THR occasionally?

Les

 

[r3volv3r]

I don't know much about defensive shooting but for recreational purposes the advantage of not having to pick up brass is a big one.

Too many people just leave empty autoloader casings littered around in random places, and that is a selfish/careless/disrespectful habit.

(I'm not talking about your local club/range, they have janitors)

 

[danbrew]

give a SINGLE short statement to the police "he was about to kill/maim me or my wife/daughter/son/friend, and I was in fear of my/their life, and I shot to stop the attack. I plan on cooperating fully, but I'd like to exercise my right to counsel at this time."

You'll learn this in law school - "I want a lawyer." Period, nothing else.

And while I hate to drag you back into the thread kicking and screaming, the entire discussion about whether you should stick around or hit the road really do depend upon the circumstances. 99% of the time you won't be able to hit the road. The shooting happened in your living room, for example. Where you gonna go? The shooting happened in front of a bunch of witnesses. Be kind of hard to pull off a disappearing act.

Yet... I could think of a few situations in which one might be involved in a self defense shooting in which you could simply walk away. Forensics aside, if one were involved in a justified shooting and knew that the local authorities were unlikely to see his point of view, it's not unreasonable to ask yourself the question "can I just walk away from this?"

You'd have to be prepared to deal with the consequences if it didn't work out, but that doesn't necessarily mean that you'd be convicted of murder.

 

[StrikeFire83]

danbrew, what have you heard about DAs trying to build a case in the media that people invoking their right to remain silent is a sign of guilt.

 

[David E]

Or a very smart and honest LEO, advising a citizen on how to minimize complications because the local prosecutor is an anti-gun zealot.

I am not talking about a bad shoot or murder, I am only speaking to a situation where the good guy used deadly force justifiably.

But I'm curious.....what scenario could be enhanced to the favor of the good guy that picks up some of his ejected brass at the scene in order to "minimize complications " by tampering with the evidence where the shooting had just occured?

Many (all?) officials frown on "tampering with evidence," especially the aforementioned anti-gun zealot DA. You tampered with evidence why? The only reason they will consider is that you had something to hide and cover up. What other lies are you telling them?

Using a revolver means nothing in this regard, especially if you perform a reload and fire one or more shots after the reload. Will you pick up the 5-6 cases on the ground? At least they're in one place....

As it was presented, that advice is stupid, unsafe and naive, not to mention stupid.......(yeah, I said it twice)

If I just shot for blood, the last thing on my mind will be to pick up my brass. Does he have armed friends? Is he really dead/stopped? Hell if I know! So I'm going to top off my gun so I have a full load to handle whatever else may come my way and, if it's safe to do so, call 911 for the cops and an ambulance. The last thing I'd do is pick up my brass in Condition White to "minimize complications!"

 

[Guillermo]

Not always. A XD or the like has a better trigger than a wheelgun

I love my XD45 but there I do not have a wheel gun that does not have a much better trigger than a spongy striker fire

 

[wrs840]

But I'm curious.....what scenario could be enhanced to the favor of the good guy that picks up some of his ejected brass at the scene in order to "minimize complications " by tampering with the evidence where the shooting had just occured?

Many (all?) officials frown on "tampering with evidence,"

Good God.

NO FOOGIN' ANYONE said "tamper with evidence" or "pick up brass".

It's just that a trail of uncontrolled words is generally agreed to be something that often WILL come back to bite you. The SIMPLE corollary posited by a seasoned LEO is that sometimes, just sometimes, a trail of brass can bite you too. THAT'S IT. PERIOD. GET IT? No advocacy of anything here. Just a presentation of a subtle nuance to CONSIDER.

Go ahead, be a reflexively-defensive auto-nut refusing to digest any ideas that counter the auto's unquestionable uber-perfection. Fine with me.

I love my autos, although there is a 442 in my pocket right now, as is the usual, 'cause that's what works most-of-the-time for my always-concealed-carry life. Do whatever works for you, by all means...


Jeez. Perry Masons everywhere...

Les

 

[David E]

Ok, let's look at what you DID say:

FWIW, I had an LEO once tell me there are sometimes SD situations in which it's "better not to leave a trail of little-brass pieces of evidence" all over the ground... Something else to consider.

Les

Why don't you do us all the favor of stating WHY it's "better not to leave a trail of little-brass pieces of evidence" all over the ground... when it's a justifiable/righteous shoot.

Try and keep the name calling out of it.....if you can.

 

[wrs840]

Sometimes. Sometimes... It can come back to bite. Like words.

Like mine just did.

Sorry about that.

Les

 

[David E]

Ok............so "little-brass pieces of evidence all over the ground" can come back to bite you?

How?

 

[weisse52]

I do think that the 1911 has also been surpassed. Personally, if I'm going to try and conceal a gun that large, I want something with more capacity then it has to offer.

Which means you have never tried. A 1911 is a very easy large frame gun to conceal. Flat and thin. Making the draw and hitting the target is the name of the game. Not "spray and pray".

Oh, I also carry a 642 in my pocket even with I do have the 1911 as well.

 

[wrs840]

Ok............so "little-brass pieces of evidence all over the ground" can come back to bite you?

How?

Minimize your statement. A brass trail is just another statement.

Les

 

[David E]

Minimize your statement. A brass trail is just another statement.

Dang, if I wanted to pull this many teeth, I woulda been a dentist !

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but what do you mean by "statement?"

Webster's says this:

Main Entry: statement !stAt-munt
Pronunciation: \ ˈstāt-mənt \
Function: noun
Date: 1702
Results

1. 1 something stated: as a. a a single declaration or remark : assertion b. a report of facts or opinions

2. 2 the act or process of stating or presenting orally or on paper

3. 3 proposition

4. 4 the presentation of a theme in a musical composition

5. 5 a summary of activity in a financial account over a particular period of time

6. 6 an opinion, comment, or message conveyed indirectly usually by nonverbal means - monuments are statements in form and space - O. B. Hardison, Jr.


I bolded the parts I thought made the most sense....but it'd be great if you clarified your entire point in one post.

 

[wrs840]

One's verbal statement at the scene of a SD shoot should be minimal: I don't think anyone here disagrees with that.

A brass trail is just another evidentiary "statement" at the scene of a SD shoot, which, under some circumstances, could benefit from being minimized, so as not to give a misdirected prosecutor some potential to twist it against you. Like I said repeatedly, this is a subtle nuance to consider, only consider, because, unfortunately, it comes into play sometimes. Less can be good... Just like one's words at the scene.

I'm unsure why this point is misunderstood here by those who insist that I'm advocating "tampering", or, incredibly, "vacating"... It's just not here, anywhere, not in my posts or any other members' posts, other than those who are misreading what's actually been written.

Les

 

[razorback2003]

Many Better Served By Revolver

There are some who have an autopistol who would be better off with a revolver, and that includes some law enforcement. An autopistol is mechanically more complicated and takes a greater skill to safely operate than a revolver. Those who do not want to take the time to learn how to disassemble, clean, and perform clearing drills do not need a pistol. Revolvers do well for folks who like to keep a handgun in a nightstand for years on end. They are also good for people who lack the wrist strength to rack a slide. They are also easier to load and unload for the less experienced. I have seen a few law enforcement officers at indoor ranges who couldn't even load their own magazines!!!! I thought how crazy that they were even carrying and then on top of it they jumped everytime they pulled the trigger....again better suited for a four inch 38 Special than a 40 cal autopistol. Those police that cannot devote the time to master the autopistol should be forced to master the revolver. If they can't master the revolver, then it is time for another line of work.

I myself enjoy both autopistols and revolvers depending on the situation. I shoot at least monthly and am amazed at gunhandling I see at the range!

 

[David E]

A brass trail is just another evidentiary "statement" at the scene of a SD shoot, which, under some circumstances, could benefit from being minimized, so as not to give a misdirected prosecutor some potential to twist it against you.

Ok, so if I have 6 pieces of brass on the ground, I might have a problem with the anti-gun zealot DA, but if I have 6 empties in my revolver I won't?

Or if I have 12 pieces of brass on the ground, I'm at greater risk of the DA's wrath with the auto than if I reloaded my revolver and shot 6 more times?

I understand that some people have been prosecuted simply because the idiots in charge thought the badguy was shot too many times, but they can do that with less than 6 rds fired....and they have.

Regardless, my first goal is it avoid the gunfight. If that's not possible, then my second goal is to win it. My third is to explain why in court, NOT at the scene. (at the scene, a brief "he tried to kill me, forcing me to shoot" will suffice)

I will shoot until the deadly threat has ceased. If one shot will do it, great. If it takes 31, then that's what I'll shoot, regardless of any "evidentiary trail of brass" concern.

 

[farscott]

While not condoning tampering, I think I see what wrs840 is trying to address. For the sake of the argument, let's say this was a "good shoot".

After a shooting, the location of "found" ejected brass may be used to say that the shooter was at or near a location. The shooter's account may not put the shooter at or near that location. This could be a difference of feet or yards. For those people who have never seen where brass can fly or for those people who are looking for any little thing to justify making this a "bad shoot", there now appears to be a discrepancy, one that needs further investigation as the evidence appears to contradict a statement.

While an experienced attorney and an expert witness could show that brass does indeed fly far and wide, more money and time would be expended in explaining this, and more doubt would be cast upon the shooter. We need to remember that many people believe ejected brass drops into a little pile right next to the shooter, and that many people have no idea what happens during and after a shooting.

With a revolver, there is no brass location to contradict a statement as suggested in the above. That is not to say there is no other evidence, but the discussion at hand was limited to brass.