Massad Ayoob: "Are revolvers still relevant?"

ASP. For those who may not know. John Correia of Active Self Protection, who watches thousands of defensive use videos, and posts many, stated that he has never seen a non-law enforcement reload during a defensive shooting.
Something to think about when deciding 5-6 or 10-12+. Having said that I am quite comfortable carrying my 638, and don't feel under gunned in the least. Truth of the matter is I don't shoot small auto well unless they are in small calibers, And I won't carry a large auto no matter how much I want to or should. Be prepared for zombies, ninja death squads, comforting not comfortable be darned. It's a J-Frame 100% of the time or maybe/maybe not auto I can constantly hit with.
The fact that an expert has never seen a non-LEO reload a weapon in a self defense situation would seem to point against revolvers in general. There is no time/skill to allow a reload during the event then that would seem to point to the idea that you need as many rounds loaded into the gun as is practical. Semi-autos do that better than revolvers.
 
Thus, the something to think about comment in my post. However, not to derail this thread, much like a .22/.32 in your pocket, better 5 you know you will have with you the 18 in the car or at home, that you carry most of the time but today ya just couldn't bother.
 
ASP. For those who may not know. John Correia of Active Self Protection, who watches thousands of defensive use videos, and posts many, stated that he has never seen a non-law enforcement reload during a defensive shooting.
Well, maybe not strictly a defensive shooting, but I'm familiar with one case up here in which one of our local gangbangers apparently fired 41 rounds from his Glock. Heckuva lot of misses, quite a few bullet holes in the outside wall of the AM/PM Mini-Mart. Anyway, he wasn't reloading, but some time back Mas Ayoob did an article about a jeweler who had stashed several handguns around his shop, and during the course of one robbery, he actually had to access, and use, at least three of the guns. And it wasn't the only time he was robbed and had to use deadly force. I'm pretty sure we could come up with some compelling accounts of citizens who've had to fire a lot more'n five or six rounds in DGUs.

Should be noted that a lot of the video Correia (and I do appreciate his work) goes through is from foreign countries, much from Central/South America. Most of the videos that make it on his YT channel involve only one armed assailant.

At any rate, my takeaway from Correia's work is how many rounds are fired that do not hit the shooter's adversary. Seems a lot of revolver-carriers are supremely confident of their abilities to shoot accurately under stress. The "rule of 3s" is a great sound byte, but those who only plan or are prepared for average situations and average outcomes typically demonstrate only average performance. When that outlier event happens, what's the outcome?

Most of us would rather have a few more chances to miss than have to worry about how many of our five or six rounds are gonna strike home. Those who feel confident packing a J-frame and justify their choice while stressing the importance of "the odds" and also shot placement typically haven't been on a two-way range at all or enough to figure out how difficult it is to provide aimed fire when there's a gun/s pointed at you and possibly bullets coming your way. And never been acquainted with any shooting incident where every round fired by each party struck its intended target.
 
As I age, I find that I enjoy revolvers more than I once did. I have enjoyed the new crop of diminutive semi-autos, but as many have noted, a handgun is always a compromise. It is never an optimal solution, but anything you have with you beats the gun left behind. All require practice and training, and that is IMO the biggest factor in "relevance".
 
Those who feel confident packing a J-frame and justify their choice while stressing the importance of "the odds" and also shot placement typically haven't been on a two-way range at all or enough to figure out how difficult it is to provide aimed fire when there's a gun/s pointed at you and possibly bullets coming your way. And never been acquainted with any shooting incident where every round fired by each party struck its intended target.
Thats quite an assertion. Got anything to back that up?
Again, I am not saying that a revolver is better than an auto. Both have advantages and disadvantages. It is up to the individual to decide what they feel is best for them. Do I like the idea of more ammo SURE. Am I willing to do what it takes to have that EVERY TIME, not so much. There is no wrong answer other than the idea of if you're not doing it my way your wrong and not serious about S.D.
Maybe a better idea is to be competent with both so the days you just want to take the easy way out and drop a J-Frame in your pocket. Alas then we have the " but you can pocket a, pick your favorite compact auto here, just as easy a j-frame and have more ammo" and we are right back where we started;)
 
One worst case scenario is six gang-bangers and you only have a 5-shot J-frame. You hope they all take off before you run out of ammo. Also good to have a BUG for the New-York reload.
 
jeweler who had stashed several handguns around his shop, and during the course of one robbery, he actually had to access, and use, at least three of the guns.
Yep, there is video of it somewhere, that guy was awesome. Not only did he take out the robbers, he calmly instructed his employee where to go for cover and was equally calmly on the phone with 911 during the whole thing.
 
One worst case scenario is six gang-bangers and you only have a 5-shot J-frame. You hope they all take off before you run out of ammo. Also good to have a BUG for the New-York reload.

Sorry but if you’re surrounded by six attackers in what scenario are you getting multiple shots off at each of them with your semi? Are you barricaded in somewhere?
Honestly some of the advice in this thread has got to be detrimental to people who read this crap and think I’ve got to have a clunky square semi for these ridiculous scenarios and then don’t actually carry it because of how uncomfortable it is.
The revolver wins because it’s on you because it’s comfortable. We’re not preparing for every fringe scenario because we can’t.
 
Sorry but if you’re surrounded by six attackers in what scenario are you getting multiple shots off at each of them with your semi? Are you barricaded in somewhere?
Honestly some of the advice in this thread has got to be detrimental to people who read this crap and think I’ve got to have a clunky square semi for these ridiculous scenarios and then don’t actually carry it because of how uncomfortable it is.
The revolver wins because it’s on you because it’s comfortable. We’re not preparing for every fringe scenario because we can’t.

Yes, some of the self-defense fantasies are a bit on the ridiculous side.

35W
 
I've lived in some bad places. We stayed with my first wife's family in a rough part of Dallas for most of a summer in the early 90's. People got assaulted and killed there a lot. All of the houses had burglar bars, and usually a scary dog living in the backyard. Working girls were out every night. You would hear gunfire every night or almost every night.

A big pistol and a billion rounds didn't matter there. One or two guys would suddenly jump you, beat you, and maybe stab you, to take whatever you had in your pockets. That was real crime and it happened every day.

My FiL was respected in the neighborhood (sort of a loan shark), but none of us walked around outside at night. The most important thing to carry was a knife or handgun that could be taken out and used very, very quickly. The only "gunfights" were between dealers and other gangsters.
 
Back
Top