Would you carry a less than reliable auto-loader?

Status
Not open for further replies.
OP, let me answer your question with a question.

Whether you were unavoidably caught up in a self-defense situation, or placed yourself into said self-defense situation, you must ask yourself "Will I make things worse for myself and others if my unreliable firearm doesn't perform as advertised"? :scrutiny:

This question doesn't just apply physically, but also legally.
 
I wouldn't carry it. You might be able to clear a problem at the range, but under the stress of an actual incident...those skills might disappear.
 
Hmm, consider this. Most people could probably empty a mag from a Jericho including 1 unexpected jam faster than they can shoot 15 shots from a revolver.... under stress or at the range. And it's not like the OP doesn't have familiarity and practice clearing that particular jam.
 
Last edited:
It would depend on the failure rate, but my short answer is no. I prefer revolvers for carry, and all around dependability. I am not saying a revolver can't fail as well, but I think we can all agree for the most part, that they are less likely to bind up, than a semi-auto is to jam. I don't have any numbers to really back up this comment though, so if you do, please share.
 
I wouldn't carry a less than reliable ANYTHING.

Hmm, consider this. Most people could probably empty a mag from a Jericho including 1 unexpected jam faster than they can shoot 15 shots from a revolver.... under stress or at the range.
Click to expand...

OTH, I'd wager most folks with Jerichos probably aren't gun / shooting enthusiasts (not all, but many) and therefore probably don't train much. And that right there is a bigger problem than running out of ammo or experiencing a break down.
 
Would I carry something that hasn't been proven 100% reliable over several hundred rounds? No. Especially when I have something that is.
 
I just don't understand how "I don't want it if it might not work when I need it" makes more sense than "Having it, even if it might not work when I need it, is better than not having it."
 
I just don't understand how "I don't want it if it might not work when I need it" makes more sense than "Having it, even if it might not work when I need it, is better than not having it."
Click to expand...
That's because you're structuring the problem wrong. The choice is not between an unreliable gun and nothing, it's between an unreliable gun and one that you can be sure will work when the chips are down.

Most disasters occur because people plan to have a disaster, and this is a good example. If you wind up dead because you had an unreliable gun, it's because you chose to have an unreliable gun instead of a reliable one.
 
One of the stipulations in the original post is that he can't afford another gun. So it is a choice of having it or having nothing. I don't think he'd bother asking the question if he could just buy a reliable gun instead.
 
I think folks might be missing the obvious, there are reliable weapons available other than a pistol which would make much more sense than carrying a pistol that you know to be unreliable.

Depending on where you live, a cane or walking stick is excellent at the ranges most folks would deploy a handgun in self-defense...I would if it was a viable option in my circumstances. There is always a option of a knife also
 
"say, one or two jams a range session... Would you still carry this firearm?"

No.
 
Every autoloader I've ever carried has been regarded as "less reliable" by at least someone just because of its name, caliber, or price point.
 
I guess another question to the OP is, how many rounds have you put through the gun? How much experience to you have firing auto pistols? Have you had another experienced shooter try it? It's possible the failures you've had were due to break-in period or user error (e.g. limpwristing).
 
OP says he can't afford another gun. He states he likes his current gun, shoots it well, and has a good bit of practice with it. He has tried a couple things, and has a few more tricks to try before giving up on it. I don't think 90% of the people read the OP. He's in the process of fixing it. If/when he reaches the conclusion that it's not going to happen, he will trade it for something else.

It wasn't that long ago when 98% was pretty darn good for an autoloader. Go back a bit farther, and you'd a been happy if your cap and ball went off 98% of the time. There were a lot of idiots carrying paper weights, back then. I wonder how many people voted no actually carry a gun, at all, every single day. A gun that's not even there is even less reliable than a single shot flintlock.

I carry on my person roughly 10% of the time. If he carries his Jericho all the time, he's gonna be much better protected than I am.
 
Last edited:
yeah Gloob, post 93, you are right
9 out of 10 here are reading "conditions" into the "scenario" that are just plain contrary to the subject post, and assuming options unavailable

if you have that ONE and ONLY one right now TODAY
not tomorrow, next week, or next month, TODAY
and it functions 98% of the time (and it apparently goes bang every time one a live round loaded chamber, as in 1st round for certain)
would I carry it ?
YES it DOES beat a sharp stick and/or a cell phone whip antenna and/or a loud shout for help

just how many high end competition shooters, who have spent ooddles of bucks on best-in-class custom built autos have never ever had a failure or witnessed a failure on the line with money on the line ????

100% reliability is an oxymoron, there is no such thing built by the hand of man, no matter how well built... and you accept that every time you step on your car brakes, every time you board a airplane

cannot help but think too many here are just taking the opportunity to pose themselves as owners of perfect and infallible guns (which do not in fact exist)

hint for those who believe Mr Murphy is stalking them, you are doomed, because that gun you carry that has never failed you once in 10,000 rounds is guaranteed to fail you the one and only time in your life you desperately need it to be 100% perfection, made by the hand of god himself... don't tell me it won't, tell Murphy, he is out to get you, not me

with all that said, what would I really do ?

I would be looking to trade it in on a "highly reliable" revolver, an affordable trade-in, because like OP I don't have money unlimited and endless options and resident expert gunsmith living in house doing my bidding for free
and whilst I was driving and walking around town, looking for that, I would be wearing that 98% auto, darn straight

and after that trade... would I then fire 5000 rounds thru found revolver to prove to myself it is "100%" reliable before I carried it ?
get real
how many of the naysayers here have carried some new choice in newly purchased CCW weapon, with 500 rounds or less rounds put thru it first ?
at least some have, is my bet
I won't, but many do
most, in truth, do not put 1000 rounds a year thru their own CCW

reverse the scenario -
YOU own ONE gun, you CCW daily, you have put at least 5000 rounds thru it flawlessly
but this week, range trip, you have TWO failures to fire out of 100 rounds
now.. do you quit carrying until you can afford repair or replace ?
no money in the bank, do you sell your car for funds to repair/replace immediately ?
and if so, how many rounds do you put thru repaired/replaced before you do carry ?
how do you know it's "100%" reliable after 100 rounds or 500 rounds ??
ask Murphy ???

PS
well, truthfully unlike OP, there are 40 others in the gun safe and I would just carry other
some of which do have thousands of rounds thru 'em
but OP does not have that option

I am not disagreeing here with post #88, not overtly so
but if I can carry a knife and a walking stick, I can carry a 98% auto with both/either
if I pull the gun, the sight of it alone is likely to avert most threats
if must be fired, fired just once takes care of most of the others, CNS hit or miss
if especially unlucky, choice of 98% combined with 1/50 chance might mean I lose, but I would pull the gun in preference to the knife
you can only shade the odds in your favor just so much
there are foolish people who will not back away from a gun; those who will not, will not back away from a knife either
given the opportunity, which would you pull first, a single shot handgun, a knife, or a walking stick ?
(me, I would keep the walking stick in my off hand)
 
Last edited:
The point is, were you born with the gun?

If the answer to that is no, then clearly at some point you acquired it. Assuming that you had no chance to test before acquiring it and you have found it is not reliable, what are you doing about it?
 
NO, I would not.

I got rid of a Kahr Arms CW9, and then got rid of a Kahr Arms CW40... My PM9 by Kahr is great tho, not a hiccup after the initial break in that Kahr recommends. Hell, I trust the PM9 as much as my Glocks.
 
A partial quote from Vern Humphrey:

"...Most disasters occur because people plan to have a disaster, and this is a good example. If you wind up dead because you had an unreliable gun, it's because you chose to have an unreliable gun instead of a reliable one."

I give that a +1. Your post there, that last sentence, in 'nuff said!
 
If you wind up dead because you choose not to carry a less-than-reliable handgun that you did have, it's because you decided nothing's worth having unless it's perfect. As the saying goes, "best" is the enemy of "better."

If you have the option to get a reliable gun, obviously you should. The same applies to buying a quality meal instead of poor one. Starving because you can't afford the quality meal is foolish, though, if you have the other option in front of you.
 
my bersa has had 1 FTF in the last 100 rds. that is not acceptable to me. HOWEVER, i still carry it cause i have an LCP to back it up :)

the LCP also acts as a fast NY reload. so i am comfortable wit my set up.

if i am going out thru a rougher neighborhood i switch to a Glock 30....no LCP needed :)
 
Yes. 98% is better then 0% 100% of the time. I use the brakes on my car 100+ (probably more) per day. I've never had to use a firearm. In the unlikely event you'd need to use a firearm, wouldn't you'd rather have at least one shot then no shots?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

L
  • Locked
What would you carry?
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
flip180
F
M
  • Locked
Carry guns, carry ammo, reliability...
Replies
19
Views
1K
tbeb
T
soonerboomer
  • Locked
If you HAD both, which would you carry? 642 or PF-9?
2 3
Replies
70
Views
3K
LightningJoe
L
george burns
  • Locked
Which would you carry between a 357, 5 shot snubby, or a 9mm single stack 7 round pistol
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
137
Views
12K
Berger.Fan222
B
P
  • Locked
How do you rate reliability in semi-auto shotguns?
2
Replies
44
Views
5K
Owen Sparks
O
Back
Top