Revolver vs. auto pistol

[Frisbee 0]

On polygraphs,I believe, if you answer the questions while artificially stressing yourself in the beginning,you can get away with lying in the actual test.(The first questions set your 'at ease' level)

[DarkLight 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Frisbee @ Dec. 14 2002,01:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">On polygraphs,I believe, if you answer the questions while artificially stressing yourself in the beginning,you can get away with lying in the actual test.(The first questions set your 'at ease' level)<span id='postcolor'>

This is actually true, someone once told me what exactly you need to do to avoid being 'detected'.

Oh well, i guess thinking about something nice all the time will keep you calm too. (beer, sex, ofp, there's a whole world full of fun stuff out there!

[dayglow 2]

True, but really you would need pratice at it. Since you can't just pick up a polygraph at Radio Shack it's kinda hard to pratice for the test. Also they can figure out that you are stepping on a tack, or tensing muscles or whatever because all your answers will show high levels of stress. It's not like a chiwowa is in the chair. The whole test will feel 'off' to them and that could be a concern as well. ie this guy is so high strung he would be a liablilty in the field.

Basically for me I decided that I wasn't going to fail myself by lying, but force them to fail me for anything that came up. Since I've been honest with them through the selection process there wasn't any problems during the test.

COLINMAN

[Kep Kelagin 1]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Dec. 13 2002,21:23)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (DarkLight @ Dec. 13 2002,20:55)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">That's rather nasty...<span id='postcolor'>

Criminals dont have scruples about who they hurt or how they hurt them.

Personally I love the idea of there being a special place in hell for criminals that kill/maim law enforcement officers.  Hopefully with lots of sharp things and sadistic minions tormenting said scumbags  <span id='postcolor'>

Great idea; mabye put them with the corrupt cops in one place in hell

[Mr. Snrub 0]

The police here in Western Australia are finally getting rid of their old S&W .38 revolvers, and are getting Glock 17 & 19 pistols. It's been a while coming, seeing as criminals have had these & other semi-auto pistols for years. As nice as it would be to not have to carry weapons (except for a nice, heavy truncheon perhaps ), as long as the crims have guns, the police should make sure their weapons aren't inferior.

[Badgerboy 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">(except for a nice, heavy truncheon perhaps ), <span id='postcolor'>

Ala, the infamous 'Bow Street Bastard'.

If you got hit over the head with one of those, you were not getting back up.... It was ideal for cutting off small cubes of flesh off suspects.

Those were the days.....

[FSPilot 0]

Well, when I lived on an Air Force Base, the MPs went around with M-16s.

SPs only had the Beretta 9mm.

[Frizbee 0]

It depends on your need for a handgun.

If you are a police officer, then a Semi-auto is definately the way to go, having a revolver is just asking for trouble in situations where you need more than 6 shots.

Even with speed loaders, revolvers take far too long to reload.

If you are just a security guard however, a revolver is enough for your day-to-day usage.

My preference is a semi-auto however, as if you keep your gun in good condition, and make sure you use good quality ammunition, the likely-hood of a jam in standard usage is very low.

[zverushka 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">That is, unitl 1998, when my partner became permanently paralyzed from the waist down due to his S&W 9mm semi-auto pistol jamming while he was firing a second shot.

<span id='postcolor'>

He got paralyzed because a pistol jammed? Was it out of shock or smthng? The everyone in vietnmam that had M16s would have been paralyzed

[CosmicCastaway 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (zverushka @ Dec. 17 2002,12:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">That is, unitl 1998, when my partner became permanently paralyzed from the waist down due to his S&W 9mm semi-auto pistol jamming while he was firing a second shot.

<span id='postcolor'>

He got paralyzed because a pistol jammed? Was it out of shock or smthng? The everyone in vietnmam that had M16s would have been paralyzed<span id='postcolor'>

He actually explained this earlier in the topic. Gun jammed, other guys didn't = nasty.

[pzvg 0]

My, and wasn't that a rather pathetic attempt at humor.

Btw, he said jammed, not "blew up in his face" so your reference to vietnam era m16's is not only out of place, but misquoted.

<down heah in Jawja, we call that a Jack slap>

[BaronVonRed 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Frizbee @ Dec. 16 2002,07:35)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It depends on your need for a handgun.

If you are a police officer, then a Semi-auto is definately the way to go, having a revolver is just asking for trouble in situations where you need more than 6 shots.

Even with speed loaders, revolvers take far too long to reload.

If you are just a security guard however, a revolver is enough for your day-to-day usage.

My preference is a semi-auto however, as if you keep your gun in good condition, and make sure you use good quality ammunition, the likely-hood of a jam in standard usage is very low.<span id='postcolor'>

Mostly true, but not entirely. I agree with the loading aspects, provided there are pre-loaded clips available.

My .357 Magnum revolver actually has seven shots, and a co-worker friend of mine has a .357 revolver that actually holds 8. But, you can still get more from a clip, so I will have to concede that point.

As far as reliablility, that is not an open and shut case.  Semi-automatic pistols have two major sources of unreliability which revolvers do not share - the automatic feeding of fresh cartridges into the chamber, and the automatic ejection of empty cases. Failures to feed are related to the exact geometry and surface characteristics of the parts of the pistol which the fresh round touches during its journey into the chamber, the geometry and surface characteristics of the fresh round itself, and the force with which the slide moves back and forth (this last factor is influenced by the shooter's method of gripping the gun). Failures to eject are influenced by the design of the extractor (the claw-shaped part which pulls the cartridge case out of the chamber), the surface characteristics of the chamber and cartridge case, and the geometry of the ejection port.

Failures to feed and eject can also be caused by any mechanical interference with the normal operation of the pistol's moving parts. For instance, care must be taken when shooting a semi-automatic pistol from behind cover. If the slide of the pistol touches a wall or other object, a jam of some sort is likely. If the ejection port is blocked in any way (by an adversary's hand grasping the gun, by clothing, by proximity to a wall or other cover, etc) a failure to eject is almost guaranteed. Firing the pistol with the muzzle in contact with an adversary is likely to cause a jam of some sort.

Thus, "just keeping the gun clean" is not a guarantee your next shot will not jam. While I cannot be too explicit about what I currently do, I can assure you I am not a security guard   My life literally depends on my weapon, and call me an old fart, but I like my ported/compensated 7-shot .357 magnum!

Taurus689

edit: ralph: pic size > 100k

[BaronVonRed 0]

Geeze - why did that image post so big?

[Balschoiw 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">While I cannot be too explicit about what I currently do, I can assure you I am not a security guard   My life literally depends on my weapon, and call me an old fart, but I like my ported/compensated 7-shot .357 magnum!

<span id='postcolor'>

Another secret service wannabe...  

Better fix the size of your pic or post another link.

http://www.felder-jagdhof.ch/bilder/Schiesssport/Taurus689.gif

Or post pics of your real gun.

[BaronVonRed 0]

"Another secret service wannabe... "

Who asked you, greasmonkey? We were having a nice little chat in here before you came in - get lost.

"Better fix the size of your pic or post another link."

I don't know how to change the size. That's why I posted immediately after asking how. (duh?)

"Or post pics of your real gun. "

I don't have any pictures of it; it never occurred to me to photograph my gun.... But I can if it will make you go away. I have a digital pen camera, how would I go about getting the picture here from my local computer?

[ralphwiggum 6]

alright alright, both of you take a step back.

how about pictures of you shooting your Taurus? have any that can be scanned?

[Mister Frag 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (RalphWiggum @ Dec. 17 2002,12:08)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">alright alright, both of you take a step back. <span id='postcolor'>

Why stop there? Let's each take ten steps back, turn around, take careful aim, ...

[madmedic 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (pzvg @ Dec. 17 2002,17:42)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Btw, he said jammed, not "blew up in his face" so your reference to vietnam era m16's is not only out of place, but misquoted.<span id='postcolor'>

"blew up in his face" wouldnt have anything to do with VietNam era M16s either.....They had failure to feed, and failure to extract problems...caused by the lack of a chrome lined chamber/barrel, lack of proper cleaning, and a sudden switch from stick powder to BALL powder.

[pzvg 0]

And a tendency to blow up due to rounds not seating properly,

which is why the M16A1 came with a forward assist.

And they DID blow up, I lost a bud that way.

[madmedic 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (pzvg @ Dec. 18 2002,03:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And a tendency to blow up due to rounds not seating properly,

which is why the M16A1 came with a forward assist.

And they DID blow up, I lost a bud that way.<span id='postcolor'>

It is entirely possible that you know someone who had a round discharge outside the chamber...with the number of M16s out there, there are BOUND to be some cases of catastrophic malfunction. In fact, you will be hard pressed to find any model of rifle that has never had that happen.

However, the frequent malfunctioning that the original M16 became notorious for were failure to fire, and "jamming" problems...not "exploding"

The forward assist is to "assist" the bolt carrier forward when the bolt does not fully engage the locking lugs...the round has to be fully seated in the chamber in order for the locking lugs to engage,...and if the locking lugs are not engaged, the firing pin will not protrude past the bolt face.

Generally...if the bolt has not fully engaged, and you pull the trigger......."click!"......failure to fire.

Like I said,...I am not denying that you know someone who had one "blow up"....And having not been there to see it happen, I cannot say what caused it.

But it is much more likely that it was caused by a barrel obstruction.

Possibly a squib, followed by another shot fired, maybe a broken shell casing that did not extract, or ....(particularly if it happened in the field) possibly even dirt in the barrel.

[shadow 6]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Failures to feed and eject can also be caused by any mechanical interference with the normal operation of the pistol's moving parts. For instance, care must be taken when shooting a semi-automatic pistol from behind cover. If the slide of the pistol touches a wall or other object, a jam of some sort is likely. If the ejection port is blocked in any way (by an adversary's hand grasping the gun, by clothing, by proximity to a wall or other cover, etc) a failure to eject is almost guaranteed. Firing the pistol with the muzzle in contact with an adversary is likely to cause a jam of some sort.

<span id='postcolor'>

To get failure to feed or eject you still need either a bad cartridge, a dirty pistol or a badly designed pistol.

So...if you get a well designed pistol, use unharmed and good cartrifges and clean your pistol properly, then you have removed atleast 90% possibility for the weapon to missfire.

"If the slide of the pistol touches a wall or other object"

hmmm.....Assuming is an object is to stop the slide from going backwards the object have to be behind the slide.

BaronvonRed: assuming you took a handgun-safety-course. Did'nt you learn that the shooter shall allways stay behind his weapon?

How are you going to get "a wall or other object" between you and your handgun then?

If the ejection port is blocked....

well just grab that slide, pull it back, tilt the weapon to your right, shake (the cartridge usually falls out) and release the slide again.

"Firing the pistol with the muzzle in contact with an adversary is likely to cause a jam of some sort."

Why would you want your muzzle to touch the object your are going to shoot at?

btw; you've seen way too many movies. Its very uncommon that the weapon fail to reload when the barrel is obstructed. Usually it means that the slide going harder and faster backwards (more wear on the rails on the frame and slide). If you manage to hold the gun hard enough at a object you might cause a blowback but you'll point that barrel through a person if you try, cuz you'll have to push it so hard

sidenote: I have now fired approx 2500 rounds with my 92FS. It has never failed me. The last 1000 rounds went without any problems and any cleaning. But then again the 92-series is also known for its reliability and wide ejection-port.

[Balschoiw 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The last 1000 rounds went without any problems and any cleaning.<span id='postcolor'>

Uh, oh ! Better give your gun some love  now  

They are in general very thankful for a little technical service.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I am at the range at LEAST once a month and there is always at least one jam while I am there but I cannot vouch for the maintenance of those guns.

<span id='postcolor'>

I dont understand this one. I am always using my own gun when I am doing my trainings. So how is this to understand Baron ? You go to range but dont use your own weapon to train with ? I dont understand that. And one jam per training is a bit much isn´t it ? During the last 12 years I had 4 jams. 3 of them were in the desert as G3 was not very compatible to sand. And one was with an old P1. The gun was very done...

One jam per training would really worry me. Or did you mean that the jams happen to other persons during training ? Most of the jams I have seen on the range were not gun- but user caused. For example bad fed ammo clips, movie style combat shootings that resultet in blocked ammo feds and so on.

[shadow 6]

hehe yeah, time to clean my gun

I too think one jam per training session is a bit too much. Even if the jam should happend to a different shooter each time.

That is alot of jamming

Definitly caused by user or those weapons should have been paperclips by now (worn out).

I'd start by looking at the maintenance. If maintenance is okay, I'd start looking at the cartridges. Maybe try a different brand and/or load.

I've seen two jams during the three years I've been a member of a pistol-club. Both were double-feeds on a old African Luger look-alike semi/full auto pistol. Both jams occured in full-auto only. The pistol was made around 1920 or '30

1 week later and some lube and cleaning-clothes the pistol worked fine even in full-auto

So there

[BaronVonRed 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Balschoiw @ Dec. 18 2002,11:39)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The last 1000 rounds went without any problems and any cleaning.<span id='postcolor'>

Uh, oh ! Better give your gun some love now

They are in general very thankful for a little technical service.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I am at the range at LEAST once a month and there is always at least one jam while I am there but I cannot vouch for the maintenance of those guns.

<span id='postcolor'>

I dont understand this one. I am always using my own gun when I am doing my trainings. So how is this to understand Baron ? You go to range but dont use your own weapon to train with ? I dont understand that. And one jam per training is a bit much isn´t it ? During the last 12 years I had 4 jams. 3 of them were in the desert as G3 was not very compatible to sand. And one was with an old P1. The gun was very done...

One jam per training would really worry me. Or did you mean that the jams happen to other persons during training ? Most of the jams I have seen on the range were not gun- but user caused. For example bad fed ammo clips, movie style combat shootings that resultet in blocked ammo feds and so on.<span id='postcolor'>

Ummm, well, uh, gee, there are like um, 12 OTHER SHOOTERS at our range, uh, is that okay with you? Um, should I draw a picture? Can you figure it out from there?

[pzvg 0]

His weapon was fouled by water and water only,

<crossing a paddy 5 km south of a place called Quan tri dop>

The forward assist was required on the weapon due to the light cartridge being easily unseated by anything, even a film of water on the mating surfaces- Not my words, Colt's

Anyway not going to get in a pissing match about it,

Do note when trying to pin a failure on cleaniness/maintenance, barring undocumented events during the wars in the Age of Reason, no enemy in history has ever allowed time for you to break down and clean your weapon, you try to do it as often as you can, but it's just not always possible.

Militaries understand this, which is why they place such a high standard on reliability, The M1911 met the standard for years, the AK went beyond the standard whenever possible, and until the A2 series, the M16 failed miserably, but don't take my word for it, any number of firearms writers of good repute would be happy to back that one up.