Retiring discontinued guns from defensive duty.

[MikeJ]

Have you ever "retired" a gun from use as a defensive weapon because it was a discontinued make or model and you didn't want to take the chance of losing it to the evidence room? I did this with my Beretta 92D Centurion. I absolutely love this gun and feel it makes a fantastic defensive weapon with its buttery smooth DAO trigger. I just couldn't bear the idea of it being confiscated after an incident for evidence so I have relegated it to range use only. This is, in a sense, a moot point as I have gone to using revolvers for defensive purposes as mentioned on one of my other posts but I always felt it was a great home defense gun. The one good thing about this philosophy is that it always requires the purchase of another gun to take its place.

 

[stans]

I have yet to retire a defensive gun due to it being a discontinued model. I have retired a couple due to a lack of confidence in the caliber or reliability of the piece.

 

[doofus]

It seems to me that anything you're worried about losing in such a manner shouldn't be used as a defensive gun anyway. Put it in your safe as a collectors piece...take it out to the range once in a while.

A defensive gun should be looked at as a tool. If you're worried about dropping it, scratching it, breaking it, losing it, etc; pick another gun.

 

[Old Fuff]

I have never retired a defensive arm simply because it was a discontinued model, and that the moment I’m not carrying one that is of current production. This is not to slam new guns, but rather point out that I stick to old favorites of long standing because I’m very familiar with them.

I do avoid “flashy†guns that might attract undue attention in a courtroom. One example is an old S&W model 10-5 that is mechanically perfect, has clean chambers and bore, and an action that’s smooth as warm butter. On the outside though, where it doesn’t matter, about 50% of the finish is gone and there are some places with light pitting. It looks a bit doggy, and is intended too. Several other of my other personal carry guns meet the same description. If I had a choice I would never “carry†a handgun that’s principal value was as a collectable, nor one that was loaded with superfluous gadgets.

 

[SpikeEVO]

My life (and the life of my family) is worth more to me than any perceived value of ANY gun I have... I will not store away my $1000 pistols away in a safe and carry a $150 throw-away gun to defend my life and the life of my family ... even one of my father's guns that I cherish and would regret forever loosing, I would gladly carry it in defense of my life, and if I had to use it in that defense then so be it, and if the gun spends eternity in police lockup because of it, then I won't weep for the gun... it saved my life, did it's duty, that my father's gun saved my life would mean MUCH more to me than somehow keeping it locked up in some gunsafe forever mine, even if that means loosing it forever.

Ask yourself this:
Is my life really worth so little to me, that I should worry and obsess about the "forfeitable" $1000 investment in the device that saved my life??

 

[Zeke Menuar]

If a discontinued gun is the best tool for the job, then I'll use it. It doesn't matter if it is a $150 or $150,000 gun. if I have a specific need I'll pick what ever I have and use it.



I have a lot of $150 dollar guns. The $150,000 gun is on permanent layaway.

ZM

 

[PlayTheAces]

The short answer is no.

I retired a 547 to the safe, and while that's a collectible gun, it wasn't when I retired it. At the time I simply wanted a caliber change.

My current HD gun is a 60 , and I would really hate to lose it. In addition to being an early model, my dad used it as his BUG. But I shoot it well, it feels good in my hands, and disappears in a bathrobe pocket. It's been my primary defense gun for the last six years or so.

I'm thinking about putting the 60 back in the safe and getting out a 4" .357, but only because it gives me an extra round while allowing me to use the same load.

I'm sentimental about some of my guns, but not to the point I would allow that sentimentality to limit my choices.

 

[CZF]

I've retired my two CZ75s. Being Pre-B models. Parts like the safety and slide
stop are near impossible to replace. The Cee-Zed 75s gave me good service,
but are now replaced with the P-01 and RAMI.

 

[Mannlicher]

Personally, I think that is almost over the top paranoid.

I have put a few back in the rear of the safe though, if like has been mentioned, parts are scarce, or if they are getting a bit worn.

 

[obiwan1]

Actually I did. My Star PD. Since I wasn't sure that I could get new recoil spring assemblys I sold the gun as I started noticing that the spring was weakening. I think that old Star was a great .45 - light, accurate and an easy carry. The only other negative is that it used to give me hammer bites. However......... I made money on the sale and used it (plus a few more $) to buy my H&K.

 

[dsk]

It seems to me that anything you're worried about losing in such a manner shouldn't be used as a defensive gun anyway. Put it in your safe as a collectors piece...take it out to the range once in a while.

A defensive gun should be looked at as a tool. If you're worried about dropping it, scratching it, breaking it, losing it, etc; pick another gun.

100% Agree. Which is worth more, your life or the gun? It's not wise to use one you may have even the slightest attachment to.

Now, OTOH if you're worried about parts breakage and being able to find spares, to be honest there are a lot of current-production guns for which parts are impossible to find. For example, if the firing pin safety block breaks in your Series II Kimber (as happened to me) fat chance getting another one. It's a part proprietary to Kimbers, and they will not sell them separately to consumers. You have to send your gun back to the factory or find a gunsmith who can order it for you. The best guns out there regarding parts availability are mil-spec 1911's and Glocks. Because of that I use my Springfield WW2 Mil-Spec as my defensive piece now. Works great, easy to replace, parts are everywhere.

 

[Old Fuff]

Ah … Spike:

You missed my point. If you want to carry your $1,000.00 gun to defend yourself and your family then do so. But in the real world I not sure that it will serve you better then something that costs much less. For myself, I’m satisfied that something costing less that half that amount will do the job just as well. You’re apparently going on the theory that money is the answer. Not so. I suspect that a fair amount of the thousand bucks is tied up in cosmetics and “accessories†that are impressive in a gunrag centerfold, but aren’t all that important on the street. Back in the Wild West some carried fancy engraved revolvers with plated finishes and pearl grips. Others carried a much plainer gun. If both were in first-class mechanical shape “fancy†didn’t make any practical difference. I certainly hope your big-bucks gun is never confiscated after you have too use it. But by the same token I rather give up something that cost less but was still the mechanical equivalent of the expensive model. I would never suggest that someone should shave bucks on performance – just looks.

 

[one45auto]

I wouldn't hesitate to use a discontinued model for home protection because if I were ever forced to defend myself with it, and it was taken in evidence, once the charges were dismissed I would hire an attorney and reclaim it - even if it meant suing the police department. Unless you're convicted it's my understanding that they have to return it, although most departments prefer not to and most people won't press the issue. I would, though. Bet on it. What's mine is mine.

 

[Dienekes]

A self defense gun is a tool, period. I am fond of mine (4" Ruger Security Six, on its second barrel and the factory reblue is wearing off, too) but it IS expendable should the occasion arise.

I doubt that it would bring more than $150 at a gun show; but it will get the job done very well...perhaps better than some of those $1000 show ponies.

If it ever gets fired on a serious social occasion, the big bucks will no doubt go to a competent attorney to represent me in the ensuing legal fracas.

 

[lycanthrope]

My nightstand gun is a hard chromed, STI Edge ($2000). It has a high cap mag and a magwell you could stuff a fist into. It's also carrying frangible reloads. It's meant to be a very nasty beast and if I wanted to be politically correct I'd have a 4oz bottle of pepper spray (hypo-allergenic to boot). When the time comes, play to win.

A defensive weapon is like a pair of good shoes. You're worth it in the long run.

I'd pay 2K to save my own bacon, anytime.

 

[gp59]

I have to admit that I have a gun I would not like to loose as evidence because I had to us it to defend myself or my family. It's not that I paid a lot for this gun its the fact it would cost me more then double of what i paid for it to replace it and it is my favorite gun that fits my hand like a glove, it is also the most accurate and reliable gun I have. but I do carry it up in the hills where theres less chance of having to us it or lose it. but i didn't compromise on my full time carry gun, I trust It just as much as my favorite gun and it is a lot easier to replace and cost a lot less without sacrificing reliability

 

[Sunray]

"...after an incident for evidence so I have relegated it to range use only..." How would retiring it to range use only stop it from being required for evidence? If you were involved in something that required its surrendering for evidence, the local constabulary would already have it. If you weren't involved in anything, you have nothing to fear. You know you already have registration, Stateside, don't you? All those ATF forms you filled in is defacto registration.

 

[Amish_Bill]

Old Fluff - your comments weren't aimed at me, but they sound awfully close.

One of my carry guns is a $1k Kimber. The most 'fluffy' bit of it is the rosewood in the grips. Other than that, every extra dollar is in a practical upgrade.
SS slide for corrosion reistance
Ambi safety 'cause I shoot it lefty too
Full melt job for easier carry
Tritium sights
Higher-grade trigger
Lightweight frame
Extra checkering to help me hold on to it

It might be an expensive gun, but (short of the rosewood) every 'extra' that it has directly assists in how well and easily I can shoot it.

To be fair, I can see the other side of it... A $3k custom pistol is not in and of itself Medicine against all ills.

Aw, heck... now I have to go back and re-read what you said to make sure I'm not just spouting off at the mouth....

<added>
Yep - I read the wrong things into your last post. Oops!
... maybe if I go back and add a under-mag flashlight holder and a $50 special laser module and some HomeBoy NightSites from birdman Enterprises....

 

[MikeJ]

Just a note: nowhere in my post did I state that I would choose a less reliable or inferior gun, just a gun that could be easily replaced or didn't have the same emotional value.

 

[Old Fuff]

Amish_Bill:

I don’t take offense when someone questions or disagrees with my opinions. I am sure the gentleman who started this thread is looking for different points of view, not just mine. I was a bit surprised that my Smith & Wesson revolver would be seen by some as “inferior†or as a “$150.00 throwdown.†I see nothing wrong with your choice of a pistol, although I could duplicate or compensate for the features you listed for less money – but then I would be doing the choosing for you based on my perspectives, and that’s something I’d have no business doing. There are many arguments, pro and con, about using a highly customized handgun for a personal weapon.

In my part of the country you see a lot of men carrying guns that look like a dog dug them up. Never the less they are mechanically perfect and their owners are not the kind you’d really want to push into a fight. They are both fast and accurate and some have smelled gunpowder on occasions other then target shooting. We also have those who sport some very expensive handguns, and the locals, usually with good cause, suspect that such folks are trying to impress the others. They do, but not in the way desired or expected. What is noticed in a favorable light is the expensive pistol that shows a fair amount of holster wear, indicating that the owner just might be the exception to the rule and know what he’s doing.

Jeff Cooper once observed a long time ago when prices weren’t as high as they are now, that it would be wiser to spend $500.00 for a pistol, and the same for ammunition to practice with, then to buy a $1,000.00 gun. I got his point.

 

[Gunsnrovers]

retirement

I'd retire a handgun over concerns about parts for replacement/repair, but not for value.

I have a different handguns available to me, but the one I use for defense gets used more then the others. If I have to give it up or it breaks, I want to make sure I can readily get access to a like model in the interim.

Value isn't the issue, as nothing I own is out of my financial abilty to replace.

 

[Amish_Bill]

Olf Fluff - I have the same theory in cars. Mine are usually somewhat ugly or have little bits of "character" to them. They are also krpt in good running condition.

As I mentioned, I went back to look at your earlier posts and it turns out I pretty much agree with you. I just wanted to toss out an example of an expensive defense pistol that was more bang than glitter. If you have some good ideas on how I could get/build a similar gun for less, please drop me a PM. I'm always interested in a good bargain.

ps. you'd have to look closely, but your friends would be able to tell that this one gets it's fair share of use.

 

[dsk]

I agree that the discussion here isn't about using "cheap" guns for defense. Instead, we are talking about using a firearm that you won't give the slightest thought to immediately dropping on the concrete when the police scream at you to do, or worrying about what will happen to it after it's taken away. Use something reliable, that works well for you, but that you don't ever worry about losing or messing up.

 

[denfoote]

Retire??? NO!!!
Seldom carry for various reasons including lack of holster support by makers, YES!!
For example, I seldom carry my Walther P38 because nobody makes a decent concealed carry holster for it. The same holds true for my Walther P5.
Some of my guns are seldom carried for ergonomic reasons. Example: my Glocks 29 and 30 are just a twee to fat to fit my hand correctly.

I seldom carry any of my specimens of Pistolet Makarova because they were purchased as collector guns. (Hey some people collect old Smiths and Colts. I collect Makarovs...so sue me!!)

Mechanical defects and malfunction will cause me to seldom carry a gun real quick...until I get them fixed!!

 

[jimbo]

You ALWAYS buy 2 of your favorite guns. One to use and one for "you never know".