HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » benEzra » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next »

benEzra

Profile Information

Gender: Male
Hometown: Eastern North Carolina
Home country: United States
Current location: Eastern NC
Member since: Wed Dec 1, 2004, 03:09 PM
Number of posts: 11,527

Journal Archives

Why are you so hung up on military FMJ? We are talking about CIVILIAN JACKETED HOLLOWPOINTS.

" our friend Martin Fackler inter alios, contend the .223 55gr prior to 100 yds, will fragment in a Human target into one large fragment & the several particles you & wiki noted, but this does not take into account any losses of KE from passing thru a drywall, which, imo, would affect the fragmenting."

Why are you so hung up on military FMJ? In the HD context, we are primarily talking about *civilian jacketed hollowpoints or softpoints*, designed to fragment more consistently and more readily than military FMJ in order to limit penetration. Mine is loaded with Federal 55gr JHP. Even more prone to early fragmentation are the 40-grain small-game loads, but they penetrate even less than birdshot and are therefore no longer used by law enforcement or most non-LE civilians either. Ditto for AK's and for every other civilian rifle.

"Those are ak74's, right? You do confuse when you just write .22 rather than .223. I figure the 3 there for a reason. I looked at a few of the firing links, but don't come away with anything I can discuss with confidence. "

The bore diameter is the same for all American centerfire .22's, at .224. Russian .22's measure about .221, but that's too small to have any effect ballistically. There are only a few standard bore diameters used across the spectrum: .17, .22, .25, .27, .30, .32, .36, .40, .45, .50, .68, .73 cover almost all of them. I think .22LR usually uses .224 barrels also but I may be wrong, though .22LR shoots fine out of an AR with a chamber adapter.

The different numbers (.220, .221, .222, .223) are just shorthand used by manufacturers and standardized by SAAMI to differentiate the different cartridge shapes/lengths. For example, .22 Hornet, .221, .222 Remington, .223 Remington, .22-250, .220 Swift, and 5.56x45mm NATO all have the exact same caliber (diameter) barrel and fire the same bullets. The "3" in .223 Remington was put there to distinguish it from its parent cartridge, .222 Remington, when they slightly modified the shoulder geometry to give it a touch more powder capacity than the .222. But the bore diameter is .224. .223 is roughly in the middle of the pack with regard to case capacity and velocity; .220 Swift can push light loads beyond 4000 ft/sec, whereas some of the others are in the mid-2000's.

It's kind of like 9mm/.38 Special/.357 Magnum, which shoot the same diameter bullets, roughly .36 caliber. Shotgun calibers are named differently for historical reasons, but a 12-gauge is .729 caliber and a 20-gauge is about .68 caliber, as I recall.

As to the .22 AK's, yes, some are non-automatic civilian AK-74 lookalikes or derivatives in 5.45x39mm (.221), like the one in the video, and some are in .223 Remington/5.56x45mm.

Almost all Ruger Mini-14's are .223 Remington, FWIW, though a few were made in 6.8mm SPC (around .270 IIRC). The Mini Thirty is 7.62x39mm.

"But an increased temporary cavity is not necessarily a bad thing for the target, in that it can collapse sometimes with little contributing damage, or miss vitals, and fackler's wound chart shows the ak74 tends no fragmentation. Perhaps this ak74 a way to fly for HD. "

First, only Russian military 5.45x39mm 7N6 FMJ acts like that, and 5.45x39mm 7N6 FMJ is banned from further import because the BATFE considers it "armor piercing" (remember, what doesn't fragment tends to shoot through things). However, 7N6 achieves wounding similar to military .223 FMJ by being designed to tumble upon impact more readily than .223, thereby tending to travel through the target sideways and causing a much-larger-than-.22 wound.

Because it doesn't fragment, though, 7N6 would be more likely to shoot through walls, a bad thing from a HD standpoint. Using a civilian jacketed hollowpoint in that caliber would make a lot more sense in the HD role, to limit drywall penetration. I believe Hornady makes a civilian VMAX load in that caliber.

No, gun ownership has been steady since the mid-1990s, while murders decreased 50%.



http://www.gallup.com/poll/1645/Guns.aspx

What does change on short time scales is the willingness of gun owners to discuss a very private matter with some stranger who cold-calls you on the phone, claims to be taking a survey, and asks you if you own guns. Look at the two data points on opposite sides of the 1994 gun-control debacle; a thirteen point drop in one survey, and then back up to 42% where it's been for more than a decade now.

That doesn't mean that fifteen million households sold all their guns (or lost them in tragic boating accidents) in 1994 and then eight or ten million households bought them back a couple years later. What it demonstrates is that the more hostile the climate, the less inclined gun owners are to tell some random caller about what valuables they own and how they store them. I'm one of them; I talk about gun ownership here where I am relatively anonymous, but I damn sure won't tell some caller I don't personally know.

One thing some people also forget when looking at rates is that there are way more households than there used to be per capita, so the fact that per-household ownership rate is holding steady is actually growth in absolute numbers, as you know.

So if I understand correctly...

Possession of a stolen gun: misdemeanor
Stealing a gun: misdemeanor
Possession of an unregistered 11-round magazine: felony
Adding a handgrip that sticks out to a Ruger Mini-14: felony

Do I have it right, as the law now stands?


The FBI violence stats for 2013 are out.

I'm particularly interested in Table 20, Murder by State and Type of Weapon, because of its relevance to rifle and magazine bans. For percentages, go here, download the Excel version, and sum the columns.

Murder, by State and Type of Weapon, 2013 (FBI)

Total murders...................... 12,253
Handguns............................ 5,782 (47.2%)
Firearms (type unknown)............. 2,079 (17.0%)
Clubs, rope, fire, etc.............. 1,622 (13.2%)
Knives and other cutting weapons.... 1,490 (12.2%)
Hands, fists, feet.................... 687 (5.6%)
Shotguns.............................. 308 (2.5%)
Rifles................................ 285 (2.3%)



2012 and 2010, for comparison:


Murder, by State and Type of Weapon, 2012 (FBI)

Total murders...................... 12,711
Handguns............................ 8,813 (49.9%)
Firearms (type unknown)............. 1,848 (14.5%)
Clubs, rope, fire, etc.............. 1,637 (12.9%)
Knives and other cutting weapons.... 1,583 (12.5%)
Hands, fists, feet.................... 678 (5.3%)
Rifles................................ 320 (2.5%)
Shotguns.............................. 302 (2.4%)



Murder, by State and Types of Weapons, 2010 (FBI)

Total murders...........................12,996
Handguns.................................6,009 (46.2%)
Firearms (type unknown)..................2,035 (15.7%)
Clubs, rope, fire, etc...................1,772 (13.6%)
Edged weapons............................1,704 (13.1%)
Hands, feet, etc...........................745 (5.7%)
Shotguns...................................373 (2.9%)
Rifles.....................................358 (2.8%)



The 9-year trend in rifle homicides, 2005-2013:

2005: 442
2006: 436
2007: 450
2008: 375
2009: 348
2010: 358
2011: 323
2012: 302
2013: 285


And it's not just rifle homicide that's down over the years; *all* homicide is down over the last decade, even those by fists and feet. Good news all around. The declines in individual categories are probably exaggerated a little by the growth in the "type unknown" category (apparently some departments didn't get their paperwork in...) but the overall totals are down so the declines are real, just a little smaller than the raw category numbers would suggest.

Ummm, expansion/fragmentation is what keeps rounds from overpenetrating and killing your neighbors.

"When fired from a 20″ barrel at ranges of up to 100 meters, the thin-jacketed lead-cored round traveled fast enough (above 2900 ft/s) that the force of striking a human body would cause the round to yaw (or tumble) and fragment into about a dozen pieces of various sizes thus created wounds that were out of proportion to its caliber."

Ummm, expansion/fragmentation is what keeps rounds from overpenetrating and killing your neighbors. Rounds that stay together without deforming, instead of expanding/fragmenting, penetrate walls like nobody's business. That's a bad thing.

Also, you've been arguing for prefragmented defensive loads this whole thread (what do you think birdshot is?) and now you're saying that multiple small wound tracks is a bad thing? You do understand that a 12-gauge shooting birdshot at close range will produce from 200 to 1000 separate wound tracks depending on shot size, right? So you're complaining because a 55gr .223 FMJ can turn into a dozen pieces of birdshot upon impact and destabilization....yet upthread you approvingly posted a video of a guy dumping 600 grains of prefragmented lead into a pork loin at close range and said that was what we should be doing instead. Do you see the disconnect?

If the round doesn't fragment, here's what you get instead (from the article you cite):

"The AK-47's heavier 7.62x39mm round has superior penetration when compared to the M16's lighter 5.56x45mm round and is better in circumstances where a soldier has to shoot through heavy foliage, walls or a common vehicle's metal body and into an opponent attempting to use these things as cover."

Read it again, and let it sink in. Rounds that don't deform/fragment shoot through walls and into the bodies of people behind them. Like your neighbors. Don't do that. And that's why I use civilian JHP in my AR, because it fragments more reliably than military FMJ does and thereby greatly reduces the risk of overpenetration.

There's also that little tidbit that civilian HD rounds are not military FMJ. Unlike FMJ, civilian jacketed hollowpoint or softpoint doesn't have to tumble before it deforms and fragments, meaning civilian loads can be designed to fragment sooner and penetrate less. That's what you want in a civilian load, within reason. The military, on the other hand, tends to want *more* barrier penetration, which is why they eventually ditched M193 FMJ in favor of M855 which doesn't fragment as easily, especially out of 14.5" barrels.

"The 7.62x39mm M43 projectile does not generally fragment and has an unusual tendency to remain intact even after making contact with bone. The 7.62x39mm round produces significant wounding in cases where the bullet tumbles in tissue, but produces relatively minor wounds in cases where the bullet exits before beginning to yaw."

You do know that owners of 7.62x39mm carbines like the Mini Thirty and civilian AK aren't limited to World War II era FMJ loads, yes? Hornady makes a 124gr VMAX varmint load that penetrates a lot less because it expands and fragments instead of drilling through everything, just like the old Russian Ulyanovsk load (8M3) or East German FMJ. I know that because before I got up to speed on my AR, I shot a civilian AK (Romanian SAR-1, since sold, alas) with a Russian Kobra optic, and it was a neat little carbine---basically a magazine-fed .30-30, if you compare it to the lighter .30-30 loads.

"its most frequently criticized feature is its trigger mechanism. "The Kalashnikov trigger system (..) is all too often plagued with an objectionable, and sometimes quite painful, "trigger slap" and a creepy and unpredictable trigger pull"

Yup. That trigger discomfort existed in some early civilian AK's, too, but more recent civilian models have G2 style triggers that are much improved. I have to say that my SAR-1 trigger wasn't bad at all after a few hundred rounds through the carbine; after things smoothed up it actually had a better trigger than my Ruger did.

" It is much easier and faster to change magazines and get the M16 back into action than with the AK-47. "

In my experience, magazine changes aren't much slower with the AK if you know how to do it, whether you are reloading with retention or doing an emergency reload where you drop the empty magazine.

AK emergency reload (with annoying music to match):


AR emergency reload:


Mini-14 emergency reload:


So the AR is slightly faster than the AK and mini-14, but not really enough to matter. When I shot USPSA with my AK, I was faster than some AR guys on reloads and slower than others. I will say though that in that first video, the gloves aren't for show; when running the charging handle from under the carbine, you can scratch your hand up pretty good on the safety lever if you're not careful. Ask me how I know...

For fun, an M1 Garand reload] (no retention with that system!):


For more fun, Travis Tomasie reloading a 1911 racegun:


".. the M16's direct impingement gas operation system, straight-line recoil design and smaller caliber gives it less recoil than the AK-47 and makes it easier to control in full-auto - as well as more accurate & easier to control in rapid fire semi."

Good heavens, we can't have civilians owning rifles that are accurate and easy to control, can we? You seem to be arguing that I should only be "allowed" to own rifles that are inaccurate and hard to control, using nonfragmenting ammo that will shoot through my neighbor's house. No thanks.

BTW, semiautos in 7.62x39mm don't kick that much with lighter loads. It's an underpowered .30-30, not a full power rifle round. Full auto is a different story, but since full auto is limited to police/military/government and wealthy collectors by the National Firearms Act, under penalty of 10 years in Federal Prison, that's irrelevant to civilian defensive use anyway. And you do know they make .22 caliber AK's, right?

Yup, just like ALL small-caliber autoloading rifles and ALL full-sized pistols.

" CARBINES HAVE MINIMAL RECOIL WHICH ENABLES THEM TO SHOOT A LOT OF ROUNDS FAST, and with less rifle rise so as to produce more accurate shooting, at range."

You do realize he's comparing per-cartridge splits between a shotgun and a small-caliber carbine, yes? That's the tradeoff you make when you choose a smallbore carbine instead of a .729 caliber riot gun; you are trading less per-shot lethality (birdshot excepted) for lighter recoil and more precision. With a carbine or a pistol, you are launching small projectiles one at a time, but very precisely, instead of blasting them 8 or 12 or 50 at a time in a storm of lead with commensurate recoil.

The thing is, that isn't specific to AR's; that's a characteristic of all small-caliber autoloaders. From the Remington 597 and the Ruger 10/22 to the Marlin Camp Carbine to the AR-15 platform and Mini-14, as well as pretty much all mid-size and full-size pistols chambered in .22 LR through 9mm/.40/.45.

Do you want to ban all small-caliber autoloaders, then? How about all mid-sized and full-sized handguns? If not, why not?

Well I guess you have a point here, more proof that laws can be circumvented. Some families of gun violence victims say they are frustrated by what they believe are efforts to skirt the gun control law."

What did you expect? You didn't ban small-caliber autoloaders, you banned fricking handgrips that stick out. So if a company changes their rifle so that the handgrip doesn't stick out, that's not "skirting" the law, that's complying with the law.

If your state passes a stupid law that bans cars with tinted windows, so you go buy a car with untinted windows, are you "skirting" the law?

BTW, you never said what make/model of shotgun you keep for HD, and what size birdshot you use; I'm curious.

In other news, I notice that rifle homicide *fell* again in 2013, which coincided with the biggest spike in semiauto rifle sales in U.S. history. Rifles accounted for only 2.3% of reported murders in 2013.

The Remington 700 and Winchester Model 70 deer rifles...

"Not technically military weapons, but the full auto m16 was patterned after the AR15;"

The Remington 700 and Winchester Model 70 deer rifles are much closer to military sniper rifles than my Rock River AR is to a military M4, as I'm sure you know. The Army's M24 and M40 Sniper Weapon Systems are not just "patterned after" the Remington 700, they are Remington 700's, and the Model 70 was the U.S. Marines' combat sniper rifle in the Vietnam War.

Remington 700 in combat in Afghanistan:


Winchester Model 70 in combat in Vietnam:


And of course the military rifle that all civilian bolt-action deer rifles are based on, the German Mauser infantry rifle, originally designed to kill human beings at extreme ranges but also very good at killing deer and punching holes in paper:


"I think they are banned in 7 states where over 25% of americans live (~80 million people generally cannot own asslt rifles). "

Nope. AR-platform rifles are legal in every state. A handful of states regulate what they can be named, e.g. California bans using the "Colt AR-15" trademark on new guns, and a few regulate what few cosmetic or ergonomic features AR-15 variants and other civilian semiautos can have (e.g. requiring new ones to be fitted with nonadjustable stocks and bare muzzles or integral brakes, or requiring a stock without a separate handgrip), but the AR platform is popular in every state. Californians can even have new AR's with pistol grips and flash suppressors if they swap the regular mag release for a bullet button, and build the rifle or carbine on an off-list lower, or they can buy preban guns if they want to pay the price premium. And of course this straight-stocked AR-15 variant is legal in all 50 states and the District of Columbia under any current and proposed bans I'm aware of, since it has a 19th-century-style stock.

FYI, AR's weren't banned at the Federal level 1994-2004 either; they actually rose to their current popularity during (and in part as a result of) the Feinstein non-ban. The Feinstein law just banned use of the trademark "Colt AR-15" for new civilian guns, required that the stocks of new AR-15's be fixed in one position instead of adjustable, and mandated smooth muzzles or integral brakes on new guns instead of flash suppressors. Those restrictions were annoying, but they didn't affect the legality of the AR-15 platform one bit.

I'm sure you are also fully aware that actual assault rifles like the M16/M4 are banned at the Federal level, by the National Firearms Act of 1934 as amended by the McClure-Volkmer Act of 1986, punishable by 10 years in Federal prison. We are talking about non-automatic Title 1 civilian guns here, guns which the military AFAIK does not use and never has.

"And you have yet to provide a (reputable please) link contending that ARs are the most popular Home defense firearm, or did you say rifle. This gunguy makes some of my points: "

A majority of home-defense firearms are handguns (mostly semiautomatic), with the remainder split between carbines (small rifles) and shotguns. AR's are the most popular home-defense rifle, by far; they are the Winchester .30-30 of my generation. The NSSF has done a few surveys over the years bearing this out, but firearms trainers and institutions consistently report that the overwhelming choice of those purchasing defensive carbine training is the AR, which jives with my own observation. I'm not sure if Gallup or anyone has ever looked at the issue, but I'll see if I have any "neutral third party" polls on the subject. A few years ago I spent several hours going through the BATFE sales stats of defensive-style rifles, and the AR platform outsells the others by 5:1 or more, so make of that what you will.

As to the "gunguy" you quote, I don't know who Michael Piccione is or what his background is, but your endorsement of his recommendations is ironic since he says the "hottest selling" of his recommended defensive rifles is the AR-15, and 4 more of his recommended rifles are "assault weapons" per the Violence Policy Center and work just like the AR.

-- the one he says is "hottest selling" is, yup, the AR-15;
-- the Ruger Mini-14 (a .223 semiauto like the AR that also takes 20- and 30-round magazines)
-- one is a Ruger Mini Thirty (same as a Mini-14 but chambered for the .30-caliber AK-47 round, 7.62x39mm)
-- one is an actual military semiautomatic, the M1 .30 caliber carbine, similar to the Mini-14 and Mini Thirty but chambered for the .30 Carbine cartridge from WW2;
-- the Hi Point carbine that shoots the 9mm pistol cartridge (same as a civilian Uzi) or the .40 S&W pistol cartridge;
-- a .357 lever-action (the model he recommends is no longer in production, but you can still get other models).

He also says the following about carbines vs. shotguns, most of which I agree with:

But what is the best home defense gun? A rifle carbine.

Why? For the most part:

Carbines handle better than shotguns.
Carbines have more power than handguns.
Carbines have a higher magazine capacity than shotguns or handguns.
Carbines have a longer range than shotguns or handguns.
Carbines are more accurate than shotguns or handguns.
Carbines are easier to shoot for family members not so familiar with shotguns and handguns.
Carbines have minimal recoil which enables them to shoot a lot of rounds fast.
Handgun rounds in a carbine are much more powerful and offer a two gun, one cartridge option.



Since you cite him approvingly, are you agreeing with him?

BTW he is correct on the lethality of birdshot only at very close range (near grappling distance, where the shot column has not yet dispersed). A shot down the hallway of even my small home is beyond that range, and I can cite numerous peer reviewed resources in the LE and wound ballistics communities of why birdshot is far less than ideal for defensive purposes beyond that range. But that's ground we've been over multiple times upthread. Stick with birdshot if you choose, but you are in a very small minority in that regard (assuming you actually keep a shotgun loaded in the safe at all).

"If it's an assault rifle in your safe, to all of the above I would say generally yes, as being more of a hazard to communities, when other less potent firearms are available to satiate gun mongering."

It's a non-automatic .22 in my gun safe, not an assault rifle.

What in the name of Isaac Newton makes you think that a non-automatic .22 caliber is more "potent" than a .30 caliber with a 20- or 30-round magazine that you yourself endorse upthread as an alternative to the AR?, especially given that it has the exact same rate of fire? And why do you feel that a class of gun involved in 1-2% of murders is "more of a hazard to communities" than a class of weapon involved in 50% of murders? Do you think an AR-15 fires faster than a pistol or something? Or do you think it is as powerful as a full-on rifle like a .308?

The Ruger Mini-14 that you endorsed and Dianne Feinstein defends fires the same ammunition at the same rate as an AR-15 from the same sized magazines, and has been used in worse mass shootings than any civilian AR ever has. The Mini Thirty that you endorsed as an alternative to the AR fires AK-47 rounds at the same rate of fire as a non-automatic civilian AK-47. The M1 Carbine that you endorsed upthread is an actual weapon of war, albeit one that works like a civilian carbine and is therefore classified as a civilian Title 1 gun.

You are so stuck in your "AR-15's are of the debbil" paradigm that you can't see the irony in recommending AR-15 type guns as alternatives to AR-15's, nor can you seem to grasp that the AR-15 is the least powerful of common centerfire rifles and is among the least misused of all weapons despite its popularity.

Again, per the FBI:

Murder, by State and Type of Weapon, 2012 (FBI)

Total murders...................... 12,711
Handguns............................ 8,813 (49.9%)
Firearms (type unknown)............. 1,848 (14.5%)
Clubs, rope, fire, etc.............. 1,637 (12.9%)
Knives and other cutting weapons.... 1,583 (12.5%)
Hands, fists, feet.................... 678 (5.3%)
Rifles................................ 320 (2.5%)
Shotguns.............................. 302 (2.4%)


We own them, and we'll retain that choice; they are Title 1 civilian guns, after all, not Title 2 military weapons, and are rarely misused. If you don't like AR-15's (or civilian autoloaders in general), don't own one, but don't presume to choose for me, thanks.

No, I think that would be a crime even if your friend had passed a check the same morning.

"I would hope that your friend had previously passed a background check if he was also shooting on his property. If he had, you would be able to let him use your gun."

As I understand it, even if your friend had passed a background check for a purchase of a different gun---even that same morning---that wouldn't count, because the law doesn't just require passing a background check; it requires transfer through a licensed gun dealer as if the dealer were selling that gun to the transferee.

I-594 isn't just about a background check; it is about registering all transfers via Form 4473, as I read it.

From the law:

(3) Where neither party to a prospective firearms transaction is a licensed dealer, the parties to the transaction shall complete the sale or transfer through a licensed dealer as follows:

(a) The seller or transferor shall deliver the firearm to a licensed dealer to process the sale or transfer as if it is selling or transferring the firearm from its inventory to the purchaser or transferee, except that the unlicensed seller or transferor may remove the firearm from the business premises of the licensed dealer while the background check is being conducted. If the seller or transferor removes the firearm from the business premises of the licensed dealer while the background check is being conducted, the purchaser or transferee and the seller or transferor shall return to the business premises of the licensed dealer and the seller or transferor shall again deliver the firearm to the licensed dealer prior to completing the sale or transfer.

(b) Except as provided in (a) of this subsection, the licensed dealer shall comply with all requirements of federal and state law that would apply if the licensed dealer were selling or transferring the firearm from its inventory to the purchaser or transferee, including but not limited to conducting a background check on the prospective purchaser or transferee in accordance with federal and state law requirements and fulfilling all federal and state recordkeeping requirements.

(c) The purchaser or transferee must complete, sign, and submit all federal, state, and local forms necessary to process the required background check to the licensed dealer conducting the background check.

(d) If the results of the background check indicate that the purchaser or transferee is ineligible to possess a firearm, then the licensed dealer shall return the firearm to the seller or transferor.

(e) The licensed dealer may charge a fee that reflects the fair market value of the administrative costs and efforts incurred by the licensed dealer for facilitating the sale or transfer of the firearm.


So the procedure for letting your squeaky-clean-no-criminal-record friend try your gun on his or your property would be:

SCENARIO A:

(1) Pack up the gun and drive to the nearest gun shop. If they aren't open on the weekend, you are SOL.

(2) Hand the gun to the gun shop employee.

(3) Your friend fills out the Federal form 4473 as if he were purchasing a new gun from the dealer.

(4) Your friend pays the dealer whatever the going rate for FFL transfer paperwork is (around here it's $25).

(5) The dealer hands your friend the gun. It is now his legal property and you are not allowed to touch it.

(6) You drive back to your or his property and he shoots a few rounds.

(7) Pack up the gun again and drive to the nearest gun shop. Better get there before they close.

(8) Your friend hands the gun to the gun shop employee.

(9) You fill out the Federal form 4473 as if you were purchasing a new gun from the dealer.

(10) You pay the dealer whatever the going rate is for FFL transfer paperwork (around here it's $25).

(11) The dealer hands you your gun back.


SCENARIO B:

(1) You and your friend look around and make sure no one unfriendly is watching.

(2) You let your friend pick up the gun off the shooting bench and shoot a few rounds, since you know he has passed multiple background checks and has a CHL.


Which scenario do you think will happen? Of course, the people in Scenario B are now criminals and could go to jail for the heinous crime of sharing a gun on an informal range, but will probably never be prosecuted unless one of them has a stalker who turns them in.

If one is worried about that particular mistake, one can get a pistol with a magazine disconnects.

The downside of a mag safety is that it prevents the gun from firing even if your life depends on it if the magazine is dropped or not seated enough. That's why most LE agencies prohibit magazine disconnects. So weigh the pros/cons and choose accordingly.

The advantage of *some* revolvers is power; a single round of .357 is more powerful and more effective than a single round of 9mm. The downside of a revolver is that most revolvers hold only five to nine rounds, meaning you have little or no reserve capacity, whereas a typical full-sized 9mm holds fifteen to eighteen rounds even with flush-fit magazines and so offers a much larger margin of safety. From one standpoint, shooting a revolver is like having a semiauto that jams with every 6th or 10th shot. Revolvers shooting higher-pressure cartridges (e.g. .357) are also among the loudest of all firearms, due to the barrel-cylinder gap.

I guess it comes down to how a particular individual is wired and what they can handle most competently and confidently.

One other thing I'll mention is that regardless of what one shoots, one should never point an "unloaded" gun at another human being or any other unsafe direction. The majority of accidental shootings occur when people decide that because they think a gun is unloaded, it's OK to violate the basic rules of gun safety with it (never point it in an unsafe direction, never put your finger on the trigger until you are in the process of shooting). If you treat every gun as if it is loaded, even if you think it's not, you will never have one of those "I thought it was unloaded" gun accident.

Then don't own one. Your home, your choice.

My home, my choice.

FYI, you might want to look a little more closely at the Kellerman et al studies in JAMA that you obliquely cite, and their derivatives funded by the gun-control lobby. I've read a number of them. Weighing the risk factors, for me and my circumstances I conclude it's a net safety benefit to responsibly own guns; you obviously disagree and have chosen accordingly. Good for you; it's a free country, and I respect your choice.
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next »