Lomo.. what is the best one to get? I used to listen to G. Gordon Liddy and he always said the .45 caliber revolver ACP was the best. Mainly for stopping power but also, a manual pistol won't jam and is just the best one to get. Give me some recommendations. This will be my first and hopefully last gun.
I'm glad you asked. First, you have to consider what caliber you're looking for. What is the gun's primary application? Self-defense? That's a given. More importantly, where are you to store/carry said gun? Each caliber, as well as design, will have it's benefits and it's drawbacks. Before you consider ANY of them, please accept the fact that a firearm is only as effective as the skill and experience of the shooter behind it. No matter what you decide upon, you need to become completely familiar with the gun before you even consider using it for self-defense. There are a great many considerations to take into account: Practice, practice, practice. No matter what you decide upon, make sure you can use it as if it were as hard-wired in your brain as riding a bicycle. Ballistics. If you live in an apartment, or residential area, what are the chances of you popping off a round and it not finding a permanent home in the target? Vehicular security. Would you be able to both pull out your firearm, cock it, point it at a carjacker, and fire off a round before they could? Safety. Safety. Safety. - You can't allow anyone access to your gun(s.) Period. I'm sure there's many more considerations, but those are the first that come to mind. That being said, what purpose do you have for the gun? I've never listened to the Liddy guy, but I'm confused when he refers to the .45ACP as a "Manual" pistol. Yes, the .45 is an all-American favorite as far as guns go, but that can refer to two very different rounds. The .45 ACP found it's initial fame with the 'all-American' "1911" pistol, and the round would be for a semi-auto pistol (something you would 'cock' once, and it would automatically chamber the next round with every trigger pull) - but there is also a .45 LC cartridge (45 Colt, as it's often referred to.) - This one is quite a bit more powerful, and is typically reserved for rifle use (with one exception being my 'Judge' - add me on myspace, and you'll have a nice view of different calibers.) If I were you, honestly, I would not think along the lines of picking a first gun that will stay with you the rest of your life. What you should start off with is a .357 or .38spl revolver, familiarize yourself with shooting, and work up from there. Hell, a 9MM Taurus 24/7 would be a great starting pistol, it's a great value, well made, and it uses arguably the most common, and cheapest handgun ammunition available. For the pistols I have loaded, however, I keep "total fragmentation" rounds in them (bullets made from materials that crumble when they enter soft tissue, and do not exit the body, while causing maximum damage internally - just so I don't accidentially plug a neighbor with a round that goes through a potential burgular. Wikipedia can be a great source of information on ballistic information, etc. - but the BEST advice I can possibly offer you is this: PRACTICE, PRACTICE, PRACTICE. With whatever you decide upon. People like to get into caliber wars and what-not, but none of that is anywhere near as important as the shooter's familiarity and accuracy with whatever is in their hand. Whatever you pick out, study it inside and out, and practice until you can shoot a cigarette out of a child's teeth at 100 yds. without their parents pressing charges. Seriously, owning a gun is a great responsibility. It makes me very happy that you see the benefit involved in owning one (or several) and want to have your own. I talk a lot of shit on this forum, but rest assured, I mean what I've said here tonight. I know there are several others on this board that would quote me in saying: "Feel free to contact me if you have any other questions."
Naw... Longs you ain't killed no one in the last 24 hours an scores 20% o mo on tha written test... Usted conseguirá un arma.
Lomo is spot on with what he has written. There are revolvers that chamber the 45.acp round. This is made possible (seeing as that the round is rimless) by the use of half moon clips, I believe they are called. They are like speed loaders that fit right in with the rounds up against the face of the cylinder. If using one of these for defense it would be wise to have a bunch of extra clips available in case of damage to one. The 45.acp is arguably the best handgun round for self defense because of the large bullet going so slow. It almost never makes a pass through when contacting other than soft flesh. The FBI used them for a long time and switched to 10mm for a few years until they had a number of pass throughs that injured innocent people behind the bad guy. wanting a more modern cartridge to use in their auto loaders they got together with S&W and decided to cut the case of the 10 mm 1/10th of an inch and make the round subsonic. This was the birth of the 40. S&W round. I primarily carry a glock 23 in .40 and have never had a jam at the range or anywhere else like Lomo said, know your gun and kep it clean, you should never have a problem.
For home defense a gun to keep handy at the house either a 45 or 40 S&W, or a 10mm. don’t load your mags to the max and then let them sit for years on end the spring looses its tension. Keep some extra mags at hand. Get a big heavy gun that is easy to hold on target and when you practice do so placing always three rounds in rapid succession in a tight group. This is easier with a heavy firearm. For carry its a compromise. Either get a little 380, a 38 Special ultra light revolver. Or find a really small and compact lightweight 9mm. You see if it’s heavy and bulky you simply will not carry it. If you are not carrying it you cannot use it. Also a little derringer would be good for the same reason. Do not tell the world what you have and carry around. Dead attackers are not very good witnesses in court. Except to tell the caliber of round that killed them.
Get a little .22 pistol and get a concealed weapon permit. A .22 can fit nicely inside your clothes and it will do the job. You don't need a huge damn gun. A shotgun is always nice to have. That's actually the only gun I own, but I want a .22 pistol to tote around with.
Jim Brady took a .22 in the head and look where it's gotten us, Handgun Control Inc. is run by Sarah Brady. At the same time Brady got shot, Reagan took one to the chest that ended up next to his heart. Had Hinkley been firing a son of sam revolver (charter arms .44 bulldog) or a .45 acp things would have been considerably different, Brady's brain would have been MIA and Reagan's heart would have been mush. always use the proper tools for the job being done. A .22 long rifle might just piss someone off if you stung them with it. The more damage you do with the first shot, the better off you are. I have three small .22's and a .25 auto that don't go out in my pocket as self protection. I do have a .38 special double barrel derringer loaded with +P ammunition that is a very fine gut gun, not accurate much over an arms length away. I think Jefe should get a subcompact Glock 36 in .45 ACP. small, accurate and packs a wallop
For someone just starting out, maybe we should suggest a smaller caliber? I can distinctly recall Jefe asking, not even six months ago, "what's the point of having a gun?" While I've considered the 36 myself, I'm not so sure I'd recommend it as a "first gun" to just anybody. Two reasons: 1) Cost of ammo - A new gun owner, in the process of familiarizing themselves with not only their weapon, but with the ballistics of shooting itself, should pick a caliber that is relatively cheap to practice with. (Unless cost is no object, but last time I checked, Jefe was still a Jew.) 2) Unexpected recoil - the 36, much like my 26, being a sub-compact, relies on your middle and ring finger to hold the grip. This bitch in 45 ACP is going to kick like a pissed-off mule, especially in a 'new hand.' When accuracy is at stake with such a short barrel, I would be more concerned with grouping, rather than sheer stopping power (both of which can take more than one hit.) Don't rule out the Judge, either... One of my absolute favorite pieces. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jl-ZIo-Wztc
Shotguns are great - yes. In certain situations. Same as .22's -- I think what Jefe' was looking for was a nice all-around piece that could handle several different situations. Kinda like going to Foot Locker and asking for a "Cross-Training" sneaker when you're most likely to wear them out from walking alone. Better safe than sorry, I always say.
El Guapo! I have found your round of choice! 'course, you'll need a shotgun. Luckily, you'll probably only need one shot with these nasty things - They're almost $4 a shell.
Also available for your shotgun home protection pleasure; the bolo round (two smaller slugs with 9 inches of wire swedged between them. the flechette round (20 pieces of sharp steel in front of the charge) and last but not least, Dragon's breath (shoots flame from gun 30-40 feet @ 4000 degrees). These run about $6 a round.
I forgot the name of the bolo... I was thinking it might be a nice round for the Judge... Take a 000 buckshot round, remove one of the shots to make room for the piano wire, etc... I could really have some fun with... and probably get arrested from those Dragon's breath rounds... :biggrin: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzCYFg-gYUk
Have you heard about the British guy who went to Prison for shooting a burgler in his house armed with a crowbar coming at him? Apparently he shot and killed him. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTq2NEUlhDE
It is now closer to reality than you think. You're sound asleep when you hear a thump outside your bedroom door. Half-awake, and nearly paralyzed with fear, you hear muffled whispers. At least two people have broken into your house and are moving your way. With your heart pumping, you reach down beside your bed and pick up your shotgun. You rack a shell into the chamber, then inch toward the door and open it. In the darkness, you make out two shadows. One holds something that looks like a crowbar. When the intruder brandishes it as if to strike, you raise the shotgun and fire. The blast knocks both thugs to the floor. One writhes and screams while the second man crawls to the front door and lurches outside. As you pick up the telephone to call police, you know you're in trouble. In your country, most guns were outlawed years before, and the few That are privately owned are so stringently regulated as to make them useless. Yours was never registered. Police arrive and inform you that the second burglar has died. They arrest you for First Degree Murder and Illegal Possession of a Firearm. When you talk to your attorney, he tells you not to worry: authorities will probably plea the case down to manslaughter. "What kind of sentence will I get?" you ask. "Only ten-to-twelve years," he replies, as if that's nothing. "Behave yourself, and you'll be out in seven." The next day, the shooting is the lead story in the local newspaper. Somehow, you're portrayed as an eccentric vigilante while the two men you shot are represented as choirboys. Their friends and relatives can't find an unkind word to say about them. Buried deep down in the article, authorities acknowledge that both "victims" have been arrested numerous times. But the next day's headline says it all: "Lovable Rogue Son Didn't Deserve to Die." The thieves have been transformed from career criminals into Robin Hood-type pranksters. As the days wear on, the story takes wings. The national media picks it up, then the international media. The surviving burglar has become a folk hero. Your attorney says the thief is preparing to sue you, and he'll probably win. The media publishes reports that your home has been burglarized several times in the past and that you've been critical of local police for their lack of effort in apprehending the suspects. After the last break-in, you told your neighbor that you would be prepared next time. The District Attorney uses this to allege that you were lying in wait for the burglars. A few months later, you go to trial. The charges haven't been reduced, as your lawyer had so confidently predicted. When you take the stand, your anger at the injustice of it all works against you. Prosecutors paint a picture of you as a mean, vengeful man. It doesn't take long for the jury to convict you of all charges. The judge sentences you to life in prison. This case really happened. On August 22, 1999, Tony Martin of Emneth, Norfolk , England , killed one burglar and wounded a second. In April, 2000, he was convicted and is now serving a life term. How did it become a crime to defend one's own life in the once great British Empire ? It started with the Pistols Act of 1903. This seemingly reasonable law forbade selling pistols to minors or felons and established that handgun sales were to be made only to those who had a license. The Firearms Act of 1920 expanded licensing to include not only handguns but all firearms except shotguns. Later laws passed in 1953 and 1967 outlawed the carrying of any weapon by private citizens and mandated the registration of all shotguns. Momentum for total handgun confiscation began in earnest after the Hungerford mass shooting in 1987. Michael Ryan, a mentally disturbed Man with a Kalashnikov rifle, walked down the streets shooting everyone he saw. When the smoke cleared, 17 people were dead. The British public, already de-sensitized by eighty years of "gun control", demanded even tougher restrictions. (The seizure of all privately owned handguns was the objective even though Ryan used a rifle.) Nine years later, at Dunblane , Scotland , Thomas Hamilton used a semi-automatic weapon to murder 16 children and a teacher at a public school. For many years, the media had portrayed all gun owners as mentally unstable, or worse, criminals. Now the press had a real kook with which to beat up law-abiding gun owners. Day after day, week after week, the media gave up all pretense of objectivity and demanded a total ban on all handguns. The Dunblane Inquiry, a few months later, Sealed the fate of the few sidearm still owned by private citizens. During the years in which the British government incrementally took Away most gun rights, the notion that a citizen had the right to armed self-defense came to be seen as vigilantism. Authorities refused to grant gun licenses to people who were threatened, claiming that self-defense was no longer considered a reason to own a gun. Citizens who shot burglars or robbers or rapists were charged while the real criminals were released. Indeed, after the Martin shooting, a police spokesman was quoted as saying, "We cannot have people take the law into their own hands." All of Martin's neighbors had been robbed numerous times, and several elderly people were severely injured in beatings by young thugs who had no fear of the consequences. Martin himself, a collector of antiques, had seen most of his collection trashed or stolen by burglars. When the Dunblane Inquiry ended, citizens who owned handguns were given three months to turn them over to local authorities. Being good British subjects, most people obeyed the law. The few who didn't were visited by police and threatened with ten-year prison sentences if they didn't comply. Police later bragged that they'd taken nearly 200,000 handguns from private citizens. How did the authorities know who had handguns? The guns had been registered and licensed. Kinda like cars. Sound familiar? WAKE UP AMERICA , THIS IS WHY OUR FOUNDING FATHERS PUT THE SECOND AMENDMENT IN OUR CONSTITUTION. "..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." --Samuel Adams
That's good (well, not "good" - but, a damn fine post) - I'm stealing that to quote it on a myspace blog/bulletin/something.
