The inherrent superiority of the revolver

[valkyrierdr]

I LOVE LARGE CALIBER REVOLVERS. If it don't start with a 4 it ain't a gun.
I ALSO LOVE THE 1911 STYLE .45 ACP. 100 years of dependable service is hard to argue with. In 2006 it is still the most copied firearm design in the world. Saying this I carry on my person a 5 shot S&W .38 revolver with lightweight frame because it is easy to carry. My favorite revolver is a 3 in. S&W .45ACP revolver with full moon clips, but dang its big and heavy.

I think the main thing is to carry what you can shoot well, and if you are going to carry, make sure you can shoot well.

Wild Bill was considered one of the most danderous gunfighters of all time with 1851, .36 cal. Colt Navies. All of his kills were one shot and to the head.
If you are going to use a small caliber, you had better be good with it.

[mathman]

I LOVE LARGE CALIBER REVOLVERS. If it don't start with a 4 it ain't a gun.

Saying this I carry on my person a 5 shot S&W .38 revolver with lightweight frame because it is easy to carry.

So, technically, you don't carry a gun.

Sorry, I couldn't resist...

[Webleymkv]

All kidding aside, I can see getting surprised by 4+ BG's. If they premeditate and block you off at either end of a block and advance as a group from either end with weapons ready, are you going to wait for the 7 yard distance? Or will you shout one warning and then open fire at the closest reliable range?

Also, just because they close with you doesn't mean you are immediately dead. I have studied martial arts for 14 years, and I think I will last for quite a while in a close-up fight. Even if they have knives, they have to stick me good enough that I start losing blood pressure and don't function.

That's an entirely reasonable situation but it still doesn't matter whether you have six or sixteen shots, if you can ninja-fu the badguys into submission the outcome is still most likely to be the same. Consider the prospect of clearing a jam with one hand disabled and the other slippery with blood, not a comforting thought. Also, there's still that nagging question: "would you please explain to the jury why it was necessary to discharge your firearm fifteen times?" I'm not saying that high capacity autos are useless because they most certainly aren't. What I am saying is that capacity is a very poor substitute for marksmanship. If you want to carry a gun with a whole bunch of rounds more the power to you. Just don't make the mistake of thinking that it will exempt you from getting killed.

[Handy]

For the life of me, don't some of you people get tired of the "capacity as substitute for marksmanship" line? My other, related, favorite is "Cops should be given 6 shot revolvers to make them better shots."

They're both crap. My marksmanship doesn't change when I'm firing my 19 round GB vs. my 9 round M/49. But I do reload less.


I honestly had never thought much about it before, but just like someone brought up getting your dogs shot, I think that the face of crime (or at least our perceptions) is changing a bit. Many criminals now act not for the booty, but for the thrill and social standing. This demands a group to be realized.

So the old "how many rounds for defense" question might truly have changed. While we might have said three rounds to be sure of incapacitating one hellbent attacker, now we have the strong possibility of a small group, all with a similar attitude - and all armed (with HiPoints).

At this point, many of you would say "Well I guess that's your unlucky day", but it isn't. We shoot better than people who fire their guns sideways, and I stand a very good chance of making it out against three young, inexperienced armed assailants. Given that, I'm wondering what the right tool for that job is.

The answer could well be a revolver, but it might be time to consider a 7 shot. And it could be a single stack compact auto, but I like the sound of 8+1 in a Sig 239 rather than 6+1 in a 245.

[18DAI]

I went through a thought process similar to what Handy was talking about. I carried a S&W model 19 for years , I got all the dinosaur remarks and all the other crap from the local Police Dept. My reasoning then was I can hit what I aim at, shot placement above all else, the 357 is a proven round, 3 shots exchanged and 1.5 assailants per gunfight. Well then the people who shoot sideways started carrying AK's ,SKS ,tech 9 and were being arrested with vests and multiple mags in their vehicles. My job involves going into those areas to locate bad guys and bring them to court. My back up is on my hip ,and the local police will be a while getting to me. I went to the S&W 910 for a few years ,then to a series of .45's ending up with the HK USPF 45. Fabulous weapon ,a little big. Then, despite all the errornet info I read on the .40 round, I purchased a HK USPF 40. FWIW the perfect weapon. Easily concealable under a suit coat, light weight, tack driving accuracy and 100% relible out of the box. Don't get me wrong I am a revolver guy, I love my model 19 & 66 as much as my Granny , and on days where I'll be in the office or off duty, I still wear it. But the times are a changin on the street, and 42 rounds of 40 makes me a little better prepared for social work in a crowd, than 18 rounds of 357.YMMV Regards 18DAI.

[Para Bellum]

That's an entirely reasonable situation but it still doesn't matter whether you have six or sixteen shots, if you can ninja-fu the badguys into submission the outcome is still most likely to be the same.

I am sorry, my friedn, but there's no sense in that. I practice martial Arts for 22years now and "ninja-fu" bla bla is nonsense. As said before, martial arts and a good sidearm give you good chances to fight off several people even at the closest (touching) distance at the same time. But what you described is - excuse me - nonsense and no argument at all... if.. fu....then...

Consider the prospect of clearing a jam with one hand disabled and the other slippery with blood, not a comforting thought. Also, there's still that nagging question: "would you please explain to the jury why it was necessary to discharge your firearm fifteen times?"

Take the time to read that thread and watch the video linked there:
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/...d.php?t=192679
then read this:
http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs3.htm

Trooper Coates emptied his 686 6-shooter into COM of his assailant. 5 bullets hit, one missed. Then the 686 was empty and the assailant shot once again at Coates and killed him with his .22lr. If Coates had had 10 Shots more (eg Glock 19) he could have continued firing and e.g. go for some headshots. But, he was empty and hit five times with Winchester Silvertip .357 Magnum bullets. How about that for an answer to the jury? Handguns don't stop. Placement does. Capacity imoroves your chances...

[juliet charley]

The actual weapon is just one of many variables involved (and certainly a long way from the most important variable). The weapon itself very seldom, if ever, actually determines the outcome. The operator (and very possibly luck) is the major factor in determining the outcome.

As to revolvers versus autoloaders, both have a distinct set of advantages and disadvantages that need to be weighed carefully. The revolver is not inherently superior to the autoloader, and neither is the autoloader inherently superior to the revolver. Each as a distinct set strengths and weaknesses of its own, and what is right (best?) in one situation could be totally wrong in another.

When it comes to multiple attacker scenarios, the odds of surviving or surviving unscathed (short of being in a strong, fortified position) are slim to none given the attackers are willing to take casualties and use the barest modicum of tactics (or even "street smarts"). The capacity of your weapon is truly moot in such cases.

The whole Trooper Coates incident is more an example of Murphy's Law (whatever can go wrong will go wrong) than a example of improper weapon selection (and there's absolutely nothing to indicate, other than pure speculation, that another ten shots would have made a difference). Another incident (which is also a prime example of Murphy's Law) which can be use to illustrate the relatively small role weapon selection plays in a multiple attacker scenario survival is the infamous Miami Massacre. For the purposes of this illustration, the good guys (FBI) were in the role of the attackers, but Platt (Mattix was disabled before he could play a role) had, by far, the superior weapon--magazine fed, .223 carbine versus handguns (and shotguns, BTW). Despite his far superior weapon and good tactics (versus rather poor tactics on the part of the FBI), Platt did not survive (though the FBI payed a tremendous price).

As previously stated, familiarity and confidence with one's handgun through routine practice, situational awareness, and action/contingency plans are far, far more important than actual weapon selection.

[FirstFreedom]

Actually, Para, I believe that Trooper Coates was shot with the NAA .22 BEFORE he ever pulled his revolver and unloaded 6, when he was initially on his back with the murderer standing over him. But point taken, he COULD have gotten shot after he had unloaded and before a chance to reload. But Mike I. apparently would contend that that scenario can't/wouldn't/hasn't happened to a non-LEO. I disagree. The fallacy of 'don't focus on capacity; focus on competence' is that it's a false dichotomy. One can have all of the above, without a tradeoff, as Handy points out. The other side of the debate seems to think that all you need to be prepared for is one assailant, and if it's more than 1, you're screwed anyway, if you can't run away, because it's just as likely to be 100 as it is 2 assailants. But Handy pointed out the error of that logic as well. The average street [color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color] bent on robbery etc., is probably roaming in packs of 2-5. Give me 17 euro-pellets, please! Having said that, I wouldn't want to try to rob Marko or Mike I - I'm sure I'd be taking a dirt nap if I did.

Para & Handy, we should harass the revolver nuts over here more often - it's fun. JK - I love revolvers too.

[OBIWAN]

Lots of fallacious (sp?) arguments here for certain

Since when does having more ammunition make you a worse shot

Next trip to the range I will only take 6 rounds and see how I do

It is funny how I shot my G26 a little better than my G19 .....perhaps those 5 extra rounds were the cause.

Maybe that is why I shoot 1911's a little better than other autos...they only hold 8-10.....I may buy some 7 round mags...I could become a crack shot overnite

What exactly are we trying to do?

Other than avoidance...which is always the best answer, we are trying to get multiple,good hits as quickly as possible. We need to be able to do that while moving (to cover I hope) and quite likely without the use of one hand.

So unlike the square range, we now have 2 (or more) moving targets shooting at each other...are we really certain that 6 rounds will be enough???


The reason most all of my revolvers now belong to someone else is because autoloaders simply allow me to perform better/faster than with any revolover

My last name is not Miculek and despite a fair amount of practice, I was never as quick and accurate with a wheelgun...I could generally manage one or the other....but not both at the same time....at least not as well as with a semi

And don't get me started on speed loading the wheelgun....even with 2 hands I generally had to decide between getting it done and target focus.

One hand drills with the revolver were...well ...entertaining at best

I attended a defensive shooting class where one couple actually showed up with wheelguns. They were capable of good accuracy but it was painful to watch any drill that required more the 6 rounds to be fired.

During one break they were introduced to the Glock autopistol and their smiles were a glorious sight...I am certain a future gun sale was made in that minute. They shot faster and better with a pistol they had never shot before.

Yes, of course being able to shoot well, whatever the platform, is most important. If that means a wheelgun for you then fine.

But just like the mousegun wars, can we please stop assuming that having a bigger caliber or higher capacity means that you can't hit your target?


And please stop assuming that my autos are less than perfectly reliable...if they were they would also belong to someone else. Any mechanical system can break down, but with SA's I have usually found problems to be magazine related

And I got a spare for that

[azspyder]

Interesting thread...
How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
I will say that my slingshot has never failed to fire and reloading is quick and easy.

[juliet charley]

Since when does having more ammunition make you a worse shot

I don't think anybody really made that argument. Isn't that what you call a "strawman?"

So unlike the square range, we now have 2 (or more) moving targets shooting at each other...are we really certain that 6 rounds will be enough???

Are we really certain an additional two, or four, or even twelve will be enough? Will make any difference? Some assume it will--others are less optimistic.

The reason most all of my revolvers now belong to someone else is because autoloaders simply allow me to perform better/faster than with any revolover

That may be true in your case, and if it is, you are better served with an autoloader. Of course, as you noted, just because it's true in your case does make a universal truth.

And please stop assuming that my autos are less than perfectly reliable...if they were they would also belong to someone else. Any mechanical system can break down, but with SA's I have usually found problems to be magazine related

Yep, most of today's autoloaders are reliable given good ammunition and good magazines--as to "perfectly reliable," I'll still have to give the edge to good, quality revolver. I've never had a magazine (or ammo) related problem with a revolver (and I've shot some pretty raunchy range ammo in my revolvers--some that definitely wouldn't work in my most reliable autoloaders), but assuming good magazines and good ammo, autoloaders for the most part are reliable enough.

[Handy]

I don't think anybody really made that argument. Isn't that what you call a "strawman?"

No, it was said here, by Weblymkv, and is definitely along the same tired saw about marksmanship and capacity having a mysterious inverse relationship.

What I am saying is that capacity is a very poor substitute for marksmanship.

[Te Anau]

Marksmanship or not,capacity is still good.

[Para Bellum]

The whole Trooper Coates incident is more an example of Murphy's Law (whatever can go wrong will go wrong) than a example of improper weapon selection (and there's absolutely nothing to indicate, other than pure speculation, that another ten shots would have made a difference).

All we do here is speculation. TFL - especially tactics - is a speculations club. Speculation and falsification/verification is the only way to learn and get better. IMHO this sad incident is a striking example not of Murphy’s law, but of poor tactics and bad luck (alone, not reacting to hesitation and hidden hand, shooting gun empty without cover, turning side to armed shooter despite the vest....).
If I listened right to the video, Trooper Coates was shot through his arm from the side in to the aorta as he moved away - with an empty 686 - and turned his side to Blackburn. This also was the only angle at which blackburns .22 could even find a way through the arm into the vest-covered torso. The video’s commentary shows the moment when he’s hit and draws your attention to when Trooper Coates arm drops (hit).
So - speculation - even with Coates tactics (shoot til your empty and then get cover) the 10 or up to 14 (Glock 17+2 Magazine) extra shots would very likely have made a difference. Coates hit 83% of his shots COM. That would be 16(.6) hits with said 9x19mm Glock or 15(.77) with a CZ. Harder to take and survive than 5 hits I'm confident. And: After seeing that Blackburn wasn't incapacitated after – say - 10 shots, Coates would still have had plenty rounds for headshots. Very short distance, Blackburn not moving, sitting on the street.... Great chance for headshots.

Para & Handy, we should harass the revolver nuts over here more often - it's fun. JK - I love revolvers too.

Anytime.

It is funny how I shot my G26 a little better than my G19 .....perhaps those 5 extra rounds were the cause.

As a matter of fact, the G26 is the most accurate of all Glocks. The angles and mechanics just cooperate perfectly in that little beast.

Of course, as you noted, just because it's true in your case does make a universal truth.

Wait a minute, I'm the one here in charge of the universal truth!

And therfore a slice of universal truth:
All handguns have poor stopping/incapacitating capability. So provided that there are similarily reliable modern revolvers and semi-autos, the only real advantage of one handgun over the other one is capacity.

[juliet charley]

All handguns have poor stopping/incapacitating capability. So provided that there are similarily reliable modern revolvers and semi-autos, the only real advantage of one handgun over the other one is capacity.

Not necessarily. There are differenences in ergonomics, fit or "shootability," sights (revolvers sights are generally better than autoloader sights), accuracy (particularly as the range increases), etc. Some of these variables are truly personal (e.g., fit or shootability), but we talking about personal weapons. We've yet to establish that capacity is an "advantage" (though it is certainly not a disadvantage if it can be gained without sacrificing ergonomics and fit/shootability--e.g., for example, the additional six rounds a G21 offers over a 1911 (or even a P220) is a distinct disadvantage for me given the pointing characteristics of the G21 in my hand. And, reliability for any autoloader assumes good magazines and good ammunition.

[Webleymkv]

For the life of me, don't some of you people get tired of the "capacity as substitute for marksmanship" line? My other, related, favorite is "Cops should be given 6 shot revolvers to make them better shots."

They're both crap. My marksmanship doesn't change when I'm firing my 19 round GB vs. my 9 round M/49. But I do reload less.

I never said that marksmanship did change. My point was not to become too over confident because of the capacity of one's weapon. If you can shoot accurately with your auto good for you, you've taken my point well and practiced a lot. I said that capacity is a poor substitute for marksmanship. If you can get the both then you're very well off indeed.

I am sorry, my friedn, but there's no sense in that. I practice martial Arts for 22years now and "ninja-fu" bla bla is nonsense. As said before, martial arts and a good sidearm give you good chances to fight off several people even at the closest (touching) distance at the same time. But what you described is - excuse me - nonsense and no argument at all... if.. fu....then...

My point was that if one is that proficient in the martial arts then you are probably a dangerous man no matter what type of weapon happens to be in your hand. I simply used the term "ninja-fu" because that's the term asredhawk44 used and it was to him that my reply was directed. I meant no disrespect to martial artists, in fact the statement was meant to be a compliment.

Trooper Coates emptied his 686 6-shooter into COM of his assailant. 5 bullets hit, one missed. Then the 686 was empty and the assailant shot once again at Coates and killed him with his .22lr. If Coates had had 10 Shots more (eg Glock 19) he could have continued firing and e.g. go for some headshots. But, he was empty and hit five times with Winchester Silvertip .357 Magnum bullets. How about that for an answer to the jury? Handguns don't stop. Placement does. Capacity imoroves your chances...

Yes Trooper Coates could have gone for more headshots with a high capacity auto. Then again his auto could've jammed and he'd have only had one shot. Or while he was engaged in this blazing gun battle the suspect could have simply run him over with the car. Or he could have had to shoot though the door panel and his auto not have sufficient penetration where a .357 Magnum would have. Or Coates could've gotten the suspect out of the car before he put his murderous plans into action and a struggle could've ensued where he might have had to fire his pistol at point blank range jamming an auto. As you can see there are a thousand what if's. What happened happened and this sort of speculation doesn't prove anything to me. I see a revolver as trading capacity for reliability and I personally feel better with six that I know for sure will go off every time than with sixteen that may be questionable. If you have a Glock that has eaten 5000 premium hollowpoint rounds and has never hiccuped good for you; you've got a fine gun. Just don't tell me that my six shot revolver is useless because I'm going to be attacked by a screaming hoarde someday. Multiple assailant attacks are rare. The average criminal is a coward and will usually change his plans after encountering gunfire. I nor is most of the population accomplished martial artists and neither are we capable of shooting multiple assailants at commont self defence distances regardless of what type of handgun we may have. I feel that six shots in a revolver and enough common sense to avoid a situation that has the potential to turn into a shooting will keep me reasonably safe. Yes I know we can't always predict when or where a gang of eight stoners fresh off a hit of methanphetamine will appear but in such a situation I am still very doubtful that another ten rounds will really make a difference for the average person.

[Handy]

His revolver could have jammed, too.

Let's stop pretending the things are infallible. I've seen both jam, and I've seen a fair number of autos that have NEVER jammed in thousands of rounds.

[Webleymkv]

His revolver could have jammed, too.

Let's stop pretending the things are infallible. I've seen both jam, and I've seen a fair number of autos that have NEVER jammed in thousands of rounds.

Well one thing can be said without speculation and that is that his revolver didn't jam. But just for kicks and giggles, how many revolvers have you seen jam as compared to how many autos have you seen jam? How many autos have you seen that never jammed as compared to revolvers that did the same? I am well aware of the fact that a revolver can malfunction as can anything man-made. However, its chances are far less than those of an auto. An auto is susceptible to the same things that would make a revovler jam (parts breakage, excessive dirt, etc.) A revolver however has fewer things to cause a malfunction than an auto does. There are to magazine feed lips to bend, there is no recoil spring to wear out and cause a misfeed, stripping pressure from the magazine is a non issue, extraction of spent cases is much more positive, A misfire requires nothing more than another squeeze of the trigger and a completely new round remedies the problem (how's that for second strike capability), there are no feed ramps to polish in order to make the gun feed hollowpoints, the list continues. The thing is you're missing the point: for every advantage that can be pointed out in favor of the high capacity auto pistol one can point out an equally important advantage in favor of the revolver. They're both quite servicable weapons. Just don't tell me that I have to carry an auto in order to be adequately armed because deep down I think we all know that that isn't the case.

[Chris Cullen]

I've had my Ruger GP100 Revolver lock up on me once before. Only once. I think it was just confused as to what I was asking it to do
Not that it had any whatsoever advantage to improving my shooting skills, I was trying to get 6 X Factory Winchester 128gr JHP down the range as quickly as I could pull the trigger. Bang Bang Bang you know the story. All smiles and laughs can be heard from behind my head. "Cool" I said.

The next bit confused me. I couldn't get the cylinder open. I released the button and pushed but it wasn't going anywhere. Everything was really really hot (Mind you - I had been shooting off about 50 of these rounds prior pretty close together). I thought about the principles of metals expanding and contracting from heat, but not in a revolver. I looked carefully to see if anything was caught or jammed in the mechanisms, and nothing was located. I thought... argh well... I'll test the theory of metal temperature and I let the gun sit still for 15 minutes.

15 Minutes later - the cylinder fell open.

Explain that one??

I've got my Glock really hot before from heaps of continuous fire, but nothing ever malfunctioned.

Chris Cullen

[Chris Cullen]

I've had my Ruger GP100 Revolver lock up on me once before. Only once. I think it was just confused as to what I was asking it to do
Not that it had any whatsoever advantage to improving my shooting skills, I was trying to get 6 X Factory Winchester 128gr JHP down the range as quickly as I could pull the trigger. Bang Bang Bang you know the story. All smiles and laughs can be heard from behind my head. "Cool" I said.

The next bit confused me. I couldn't get the cylinder open. I released the button and pushed but it wasn't going anywhere. Everything was really really hot (Mind you - I had been shooting off about 50 of these rounds prior pretty close together). I thought about the principles of metals expanding and contracting from heat, but not in a revolver. I looked carefully to see if anything was caught or jammed in the mechanisms, and nothing was located. I thought... argh well... I'll test the theory of metal temperature and I let the gun sit still for 15 minutes.

15 Minutes later - the cylinder fell open.

Explain that one??

I've got my Glock really hot before from heaps of continuous fire, but nothing ever malfunctioned.

Chris Cullen

[Handy]

Webley,

In the US you will likely see only 4 brands of revolvers, all are among are very nicely made. Almost all are completely stock, with only light modifications to the trigger system.

Of the autos you will see, there are likely 10 times as many brands as the revolvers. Add to that the amount of customizing, tweaking, tightening and fitting that is done to them. The result is an incredible variation in condition, design, clearance and ammunition specification than is ever seen in the revolver world.


So let's keep it basic. If you want a top notch defense gun, what are you going to get? For a revolver, likely S&W or Ruger.

For an auto, let's say Sig or HK.


Of those, I've seen three S&Ws lock up with factory ammo, no Rugers (they are a rarer gun though), and no jams or failures with any Sig or HK.

The best factory guns all work really well, yet my experience has been that of the best factory guns, some of the autos are more reliable.


Yes, I have seen many "tuned" 1911s, crummy Tauruses and other questionable products work poorly. But I haven't seen a single RG or Star revolver on the range to compare them to. Make a fair comparison and the differences evaporate.

[Haycreek]

Interesting thread, someone once said: its not the arrow, its the INDIAN! that all said, it can be summed up in one word: GLOCK.

[2ndamd]

I am new here and do not want to flame, but agree that wheelies rule!!!

Anyone can point to anecdotal evidence to suggest that more fire power is needed. But, statistically speaking it has been shown that you will not need more than 5 shots in a gun fight. Of course statistically speaking it is safe to fly. Yet we can all recall of someone being killed in a plane crash can we not??? Being able to recall a situation that was not statically the norm does not mean that you will ever find yourself in that weird situation. But it does not guarantee that you won't be put in that situation.

So, carry what you feel comfortable with. If you carry a wheelie you ARE well armed! Despite what some critics say.

I saw a gentleman from Michigan whoop some peoples tails with a J-frame. I thought Jerry Michulek was fast. But, this guy was doing it with a 5 shot snubbie.

It's not the gun....it's the shooter.

[2ndamd]

I am new here and do not want to flame, but agree that wheelies rule!!!

Anyone can point to anecdotal evidence to suggest that more fire power is needed. But, statistically speaking it has been shown that you will not need more than 5 shots in a gun fight. Of course statistically speaking it is safe to fly. Yet we can all recall of someone being killed in a plane crash can we not??? Being able to recall a situation that was not statically the norm does not mean that you will ever find yourself in that weird situation. But it does not guarantee that you won't be put in that situation.

So, carry what you feel comfortable with. If you carry a wheelie you ARE well armed! Despite what some critics say.

I saw a gentleman from Michigan whoop some peoples tails with a J-frame. I thought Jerry Michulek was fast. But, this guy was doing it with a 5 shot snubbie.

It's not the gun....it's the shooter.

[Para Bellum]

(revolvers sights are generally better than autoloader sights),

I don't know what you mean, but the best sights for fast defensive shooting I know are Steyr's and Glocks (white on black)

My point was that if one is that proficient in the martial arts then you are probably a dangerous man no matter what type of weapon happens to be in your hand. I simply used the term "ninja-fu" because that's the term asredhawk44 used and it was to him that my reply was directed. I meant no disrespect to martial artists, in fact the statement was meant to be a compliment.

Thanks for the compliment, but nobody actually is that good in the martial arts. It's like Jack Bauer's schooting skills in "24". What Seagal does in his movies is good quality but still coreographed dance. Even the best martial artist can't predict wehther he will come out of a fight on the street alive or not. So, as guns, martial arts just improve your chances but don't rely on them...

see a revolver as trading capacity for reliability and I personally feel better with six that I know for sure will go off every time than with sixteen that may be questionable.

Some pistols jam, some revolvers jam. If revolvers jam there's basically nothing you can do but grab your backup if you have one. If a pistol jams you can clear the jam in 0,5-3 seconds depending on the type of jam. Some pistols never jam. But, here in the revolver forum, this can't be true, can it?

The average criminal is a coward and will usually change his plans after encountering gunfire.

The average is irrelevant. We prepare for the worst. And as a matter of fact, the only criminal that struck my office was a 5"11, 30yrs, 176# man on speed with a knife. He only stopped because his cheap folding knife broke after he had stabbed a colleague of mine in the head several times. That's real. You can't stop a young strong guy on speed with reason or fear. massive blood loss from multiple massive wounds or CNS destruction. That's all that might prevent you from being stabbed in the head. And given the amount of physical force a guy on speed deploys, I surely wouldn't want to rely on my 22years of intense practice of several martial arts.