LeMal
Member
Posts: 1,118
|
Post by LeMal on Oct 17, 2016 19:33:56 GMT
Though I'm guessing if we have a human-caused "apocalyptic" scenario, the few places there are still brown bears they'll be saying "Oh... crap!" as much as people will. ;)
|
|
|
Post by Alexander on Oct 17, 2016 23:49:43 GMT
Durability is a hallmark of Ruger revolvers, regardless of caliber. I have both Ruger and S&W, the actions on my Smiths are just a bit smoother than the Rugers. Both are good, trustworthy guns. I prefer the .357 for a general round defense. The .44 is is OK, but like L Driggers said, it's a bit heavy to carry routinely. Hey, I even have Taurus snubby in 45LC... I still wonder occasionally why I bought that thing... The 45 Colt is an awesome caliber. Its capable of everything the 44 is and more, just need the right gun. Those Taurus snubbies are neat.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2016 1:08:24 GMT
Durability is a hallmark of Ruger revolvers, regardless of caliber. I have both Ruger and S&W, the actions on my Smiths are just a bit smoother than the Rugers. Both are good, trustworthy guns. I prefer the .357 for a general round defense. The .44 is is OK, but like L Driggers said, it's a bit heavy to carry routinely. Hey, I even have Taurus snubby in 45LC... I still wonder occasionally why I bought that thing... The 45 Colt is an awesome caliber. Its capable of everything the 44 is and more, just need the right gun. Those Taurus snubbies are neat. Yeah, it is a neat little piece, but as a carry piece, my old Charter Bulldog Pug gets the nod. The .44 Special also speaks with authority, and it's a lot lighter to carry. Recoil isn't too bad, either.
|
|
|
Post by howler on Oct 18, 2016 5:36:36 GMT
Though I'm guessing if we have a human-caused "apocalyptic" scenario, the few places there are still brown bears they'll be saying "Oh... crap!" as much as people will. Ya got a point, as I could imagine hordes of starving dudes running after them with knives and forks. Bear stew.
|
|
LeMal
Member
Posts: 1,118
|
Post by LeMal on Oct 18, 2016 6:10:10 GMT
Though I'm guessing if we have a human-caused "apocalyptic" scenario, the few places there are still brown bears they'll be saying "Oh... crap!" as much as people will. ;) Ya got a point, as I could imagine hordes of starving dudes running after them with knives and forks. Bear stew. I just read that and your image popped into my head and I swear I about passed out laughing!!
|
|
|
Post by darth on Oct 18, 2016 13:50:19 GMT
You can carry a hundred rounds of .22 or 50 of 22.Mag in your pocket. 22 kills most small critters and a 22Mag can kill a deer if you hit it in the brain, spine or heart or shoot in the lung and know you will track it, beats arrows.
22Mag kills people fine, not a great stopper, but not far from a 9mm performance there.
But if you have a .357mag or .44mag revolver, the 22 is just for small game, plinking, practising or putting more rounds down range. 22mags crack just fine and will get your head in the dirt if you hear one snap by your ear.
|
|
|
Post by L Driggers (fallen) on Oct 18, 2016 16:17:28 GMT
A 22mag not far from a 9mm are you serious.
|
|
LeMal
Member
Posts: 1,118
|
Post by LeMal on Oct 18, 2016 17:45:59 GMT
All in how you frame the question. In penetration yes; in stopping power, no. (But then involuntary stoppage with *any* handgun round can be unpredictable. That's why we have people who laugh at the 9s--and yet others who swear by them. I won't say which I am. You'll have to go take a gander at my Walther to know. ;) ) www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2015/6/8/the-22-magnum-for-self-defense/
|
|
|
Post by L Driggers (fallen) on Oct 18, 2016 17:58:24 GMT
I have and have carried almost every caliber you can name, come back to the 9mm every time. To bad my dept. makes me carry a 40 I hate it.
|
|
|
Post by darth on Oct 18, 2016 18:05:41 GMT
A 22mag not far from a 9mm are you serious. Very, you have a high speed, supersonic round not too far from the .223 or 5.56NATO vs. a handgun round. if both are standard ball .22Mag all day, at least the round going through will make vacum suck cavities. If 9mm is a HP? well then the 9 is better ( especially in urban scenarios) until you get past 70 feet, then have fun hitting anything, while the .22mag will hit accurately much farther out and keep it's energy much farther as well
|
|
|
Post by howler on Oct 18, 2016 18:42:11 GMT
Ya got a point, as I could imagine hordes of starving dudes running after them with knives and forks. Bear stew. I just read that and your image popped into my head and I swear I about passed out laughing!! And to think, I finally saw The Revenant, last week. The key...VERY long knives and forks.
|
|
|
Post by howler on Oct 18, 2016 18:45:37 GMT
I have and have carried almost every caliber you can name, come back to the 9mm every time. To bad my dept. makes me carry a 40 I hate it. Have you experimented with all the loads, as there are so many for that caliber. The great thing about the .40 is the performance with auto glass, car doors, etc...if your outside. I got a Glock 22...with 9mm conversion brl. as I like BOTH.
|
|
|
Post by L Driggers (fallen) on Oct 19, 2016 3:09:17 GMT
I have no problem hiitng a target at 50 yds with a 9mm. A 22mag is a long ways from a 223rem in velocity. It loses a lot of velocity out of a handgun barrel.
|
|
stormmaster
Member
I like viking/migration era swords
Posts: 7,695
|
Post by stormmaster on Oct 19, 2016 3:41:31 GMT
i dunno guys i prefer the Gatling gun revolver
|
|
|
Post by bluetrain on Oct 19, 2016 15:05:50 GMT
I have difficulty picturing an apocalyptic scenario, so my comments here may not speak to the original question.
The thing about a handgun is that, in theory, you will always have it with you instead of leaning against a tree on the other side of camp--or the house. My own vision of the future does not include fleeing, chiefly because there's really nowhere to go. I can only imagine how people living out in the country 200 miles from home might feel about a million people descending on them. That's how many people live in the county where I live. Apparently a lot of people seem to think that in the future, everyone will be an enemy. You can't fight the world.
Well, anyway, I like revolvers but don't own one. The last one I had was a S&W Model 13 with a 4-inch barrel. I thought that was a really nice combination of features but there are lots of nice revolvers out there. I don't recall the last time I saw a Colt--any Colt--revolver for sale. Nevertheless, I've owned a few, including a Single Action Army. Don't worry so much about the caliber, but start with .38 Special. Avoid anything that is extra hot and that goes for autos, too, although some cartridges, like the .38 Super, are all considered +P.
There should be no need to have lots and lots of guns, either, unless you plan on actually carrying all of them. It compliments your ammunition supply. There might be some point to having a .22 but make it a rifle, at least if you're staying at home. Remember that "hunting" implies finding something first. If you picture combat in the future, join the army. They will need you.
|
|
Zen_Hydra
Moderator
Born with a heart full of neutrality
Posts: 2,636
|
Post by Zen_Hydra on Oct 19, 2016 15:41:02 GMT
I have difficulty picturing an apocalyptic scenario, so my comments here may not speak to the original question. The thing about a handgun is that, in theory, you will always have it with you instead of leaning against a tree on the other side of camp--or the house. My own vision of the future does not include fleeing, chiefly because there's really nowhere to go. I can only imagine how people living out in the country 200 miles from home might feel about a million people descending on them. That's how many people live in the county where I live. Apparently a lot of people seem to think that in the future, everyone will be an enemy. You can't fight the world. Well, anyway, I like revolvers but don't own one. The last one I had was a S&W Model 13 with a 4-inch barrel. I thought that was a really nice combination of features but there are lots of nice revolvers out there. I don't recall the last time I saw a Colt--any Colt--revolver for sale. Nevertheless, I've owned a few, including a Single Action Army. Don't worry so much about the caliber, but start with .38 Special. Avoid anything that is extra hot and that goes for autos, too, although some cartridges, like the .38 Super, are all considered +P. There should be no need to have lots and lots of guns, either, unless you plan on actually carrying all of them. It compliments your ammunition supply. There might be some point to having a .22 but make it a rifle, at least if you're staying at home. Remember that "hunting" implies finding something first. If you picture combat in the future, join the army. They will need you. It's funny how many people wrongly think any number or type of weapons will significantly aid them in an apocalyptic scenario. Such ideas almost always come from romanticised notions found in literature and film. Anything that would truly break civilization for an extended period of time is going to destroy you in ways you can't fight with blade or bullet. There also seems to be a lot of crossover between doomsday-preppers and wackadoo militia/nouveau revolutionaries. Anyone who has actually served in a modern military can tell you that no amount of scrappy Red Dawn enthusiasts is going to be more than a bloody speed bump to the terrible might of modern military forces. Collect guns and what-have-you if collecting them pleases you (and is legal where you live), but don't fool yourself into thinking that you are anything other than a chap with a lot of guns.
|
|
|
Post by scottw on Oct 19, 2016 15:49:07 GMT
I have difficulty picturing an apocalyptic scenario, so my comments here may not speak to the original question. The thing about a handgun is that, in theory, you will always have it with you instead of leaning against a tree on the other side of camp--or the house. My own vision of the future does not include fleeing, chiefly because there's really nowhere to go. I can only imagine how people living out in the country 200 miles from home might feel about a million people descending on them. That's how many people live in the county where I live. Apparently a lot of people seem to think that in the future, everyone will be an enemy. You can't fight the world. Well, anyway, I like revolvers but don't own one. The last one I had was a S&W Model 13 with a 4-inch barrel. I thought that was a really nice combination of features but there are lots of nice revolvers out there. I don't recall the last time I saw a Colt--any Colt--revolver for sale. Nevertheless, I've owned a few, including a Single Action Army. Don't worry so much about the caliber, but start with .38 Special. Avoid anything that is extra hot and that goes for autos, too, although some cartridges, like the .38 Super, are all considered +P. There should be no need to have lots and lots of guns, either, unless you plan on actually carrying all of them. It compliments your ammunition supply. There might be some point to having a .22 but make it a rifle, at least if you're staying at home. Remember that "hunting" implies finding something first. If you picture combat in the future, join the army. They will need you. It's funny how many people wrongly think any number or type of weapons will significantly aid them in an apocalyptic scenario. Such ideas almost always come from romanticised notions found in literature and film. Anything that would truly break civilization for an extended period of time is going to destroy you in ways you can't fight with blade or bullet. There also seems to be a lot of crossover between doomsday-preppers and wackadoo militia/nouveau revolutionaries. Anyone who has actually served in a modern military can tell you that no amount of scrappy Red Dawn enthusiasts is going to be more than a bloody speed bump to the terrible might of modern military forces. Collect guns and what-have-you if collecting them pleases you (and is legal where you live), but don't fool yourself into thinking that you are anything other than a chap with a lot of guns. Ahhh, yes, like the destructive might of the US military in Vietnam..it's man's folly to not learn from history. The US contains the most well armed populace in the entire world. If you think we're just a bunch of people who have a lot of guns, you haven't thought it through. Just my own two cents on the matter.
|
|
Zen_Hydra
Moderator
Born with a heart full of neutrality
Posts: 2,636
|
Post by Zen_Hydra on Oct 19, 2016 15:58:16 GMT
It's funny how many people wrongly think any number or type of weapons will significantly aid them in an apocalyptic scenario. Such ideas almost always come from romanticised notions found in literature and film. Anything that would truly break civilization for an extended period of time is going to destroy you in ways you can't fight with blade or bullet. There also seems to be a lot of crossover between doomsday-preppers and wackadoo militia/nouveau revolutionaries. Anyone who has actually served in a modern military can tell you that no amount of scrappy Red Dawn enthusiasts is going to be more than a bloody speed bump to the terrible might of modern military forces. Collect guns and what-have-you if collecting them pleases you (and is legal where you live), but don't fool yourself into thinking that you are anything other than a chap with a lot of guns. Ahhh, yes, like the destructive might of the US military in Vietnam..it's man's folly to not learn from history. The US contains the most well armed populace in the entire world. If you think we're just a bunch of people who have a lot of guns, you haven't thought it through. Just my own two cents on the matter. There have been more than a couple of technological developments in the 40+ years since the Vietnam war. We don't fight wars now the way we did then. I am a military veteran and I live in Texas. I have no illusions about what American civilians can bring to bear, and it frankly isn't enough to matter in any sort of armed engagement with a 'first world' military. Don't kid yourself.
|
|
|
Post by L Driggers (fallen) on Oct 19, 2016 15:58:21 GMT
We are really getting away from the question the OP asked.
|
|
Zen_Hydra
Moderator
Born with a heart full of neutrality
Posts: 2,636
|
Post by Zen_Hydra on Oct 19, 2016 16:04:47 GMT
We are really getting away from the question the OP asked. Perhaps, but it could also be said that the OP's question has been pretty thoroughly answered at this point.
|
|