The Rohrbaugh Forum
Miscellaneous => The Water Cooler -- General Discussions => Topic started by: justin2992 on September 11, 2004, 01:26:07 PM
-
(http://www.taurususa.com/mags/magsheader.gif)
-
Yep -- just think about the profound effect the AWB and the 10 round limit has had on the industry.
It has lead to the development of far more compact and semi-compact guns, and was responsible--at least in part--for the rejuvination of revolvers and single stack 1911s...
It will be interesting to watch the possible resurgence of the hi-capacity Wonder 9s.
-
I am watching - and waiting ........
-
Yep -- a great time indeed. To celebrate tonight, I ordered a NIB Bushmaster M4A3 -- once LEO, but now "ban free". The best part was it's $875 shipped!!! ;D
-
Fly
It's so neat to have that dumb law gone, but I imagine there are plans to replace it with something else.
Are you in the path of Irene on it's present track?
-
I went to a local dealer who told me they would be selling LEO marked Glock mags to civilians after the expiration of the ban for $24 each.
I went there this morning and they snubbed me. They said their reading of the law is that it expires at midnight tonight (Monday). A tried to argue with them, but they acted like I was stupid and/or trying to con them. I think I am going to buy my regular dealer's "pre-ban" leftovers instead.
-
The "renewal" of the ban would ban far, far more guns. All the more reason why we need to re-elect Bush. Kerry recently received a semiauto shotgun that would be illegal under a law he supported in his attempt to distort his record on guns. The ONLY vote he has made this year was to extend the ban.
As much as I hated the ban, the combination of the ban and the success of nondiscriminatory concealed handgun licensing laws has definitely resulted in better defensive guns than would otherwise be available. For example:
1) More single-stack guns that are thin and easy to conceal.
2) The mini-Glocks, like the 26 I carry.
3) Full-size guns carrying fewer rounds of harder-hitting ammo. Regardless of what I am up against, I'd rather be able to deliver fast, accurate, hard-hitting shots than deliver a larger number of less effective shots.
10 years ago I couldn't understand why the single stack 1911 was so popular. Now I consider it, along with Glock and the HK P7M8, to be among the best handguns ever devised. My wife shoots a Beretta 92 better than anything else so that is the better choice for her, but all things being equal, even without the ban, a 1911 with 8+1 rounds of .45 will still be a better fighting handgun than a 15+1 round 9mm.
-
Bill,
I agreed with everything you said, right up until the last sentence. That may be true -- but I wouldn't necessarily say a 1911 is a better fighting handgun than a (you say 15, I say:) 17+1 9mm. It really depends on the person and the application.
-
To a certain extent, the best gun is ultimately the one the shooter shoots the best.
Let's look at the worst case scenario: something from the Al-Quaida training tapes. Four opponents armed with AK-47's and grenates, with the attackers forming back-to-back pairs. Not a situation any sane person would want to enter with a handgun and alone, but still worth examining to see what will enable one to best survive it.
Clearly the problem here is that you have to neutralize 4 opponents before they figure out who is shooting at them and start shooting at you. Assume that whatever gun is chosen the shooter immediately heads for whatever cover is available, and that the attackers are distracted by the 50-100 other people in the immediate area - which is quite realistic. So, if you place your first 2 shots well, you have two opponents hit and hopefully down before the others realize what is happening.
The best chance of surviving is to minimize the amount of time required to neutralize each opponent. You need fast, accurate, disabling hits. Ideally you want a 1-shot stop, although I realize that such things are not easy to achieve with any handgun. So, you want the most accurate and hardest hitting handgun you can have, so you can make each shot count for its maximum potential. If the fight is still going on when you have reached round 10 or 12, you are in deep doo doo if not already dead. I'd want the .45 1911 instead of the 17+1 Glock because it gives me the best chance of ending the fight with 4 shots.
Consider another situation: you have time for 1 shot before your attacker reaches your wife with a knife. What do you want that one shot to be?
Consider the situation of a soldier in Afghanistan or Iraq, who has to carry maybe 80-100 lb. of gear and needs to maximize the amount of ammo while minimizing total weight. He may be quite some distance from being able to be resupplied. Now, the 17+1 shot 9mm makes a lot of sense.
Consider my wife. She is a novice shooter who is becoming less recoil-sensitive and muzzle-flash sensitive, but it is still an issue. She shoots well with big, heavy .38 spl. and 9mm guns, and shoots my 1911 with less complaints than she does most 9mm's, but she does her best shooting with a big, heavy Beretta 9mm or K-frame S&W. I'd rather see her place a 9mm or .38 in center mass than see her make peripheral hits with a .45. The 9mm makes sense.
Consider concealed carry. A 1911 with thin grips is a very easy to conceal gun, even in full-size configuration. Same with the magazines. However, a Glock 17 is only 1/10 inch thicker (and is actually thinner if standard grips are used on the 1911), and 17+1 rounds basically eliminates the need to carry spare ammo. A 9mm can always be made smaller than an equivalent .45. The 9mm makes sense.
-
I don't think we really disagree on any of that stuff. But your scenarios are self-limiting -- i.e., by reducing the amount of time available to shoot, the scenario emphasizes sheer stopping power over capacity. Of course, bigger is better -- but a premium 9mm +P or +P+ JHP is no slouch either.
It depends what we mean by a fighting handgun. If we are discussing nightmare worst case scenarios, consider both the 1911 packer and the Glock 17 (you assumed it was a Glock -- not me ;) ) packer with two spare mags. Now our 1911 guy has 9+8+8=25 rounds while our G17 guy has 18+17+17=52!
All that being said -- its mostly for the intellectual debate. I am not one to believe that capacity solves all ills, as least as far as concealed carry is concerned. I now carry an R-9, but have been known to carry a 5-shot J-frame for a long time.
However, I think 16 rounds in my G19 would handle most conceivable situations! 8)
-
I think what we all DO agree upon -- is that this "lady" is BAD NEWS...
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v250/flyandscuba/DianneAWB.jpg)
-
[size=13]I think what we all DO agree upon -- is that this "lady" is BAD NEWS...[/size]
Fly - that ''person'' ..... makes me want to .. ummm ...... sorry .. can't stop it ........ (http://www.acbsystems.com/images/smilies/puke.gif)
Ahhrrrr.
-
And to think that a couple of short years ago I could have bought what she is holding for a lousy $325. She drove the price way up. I can't stand her either.
Hi Bill and Duane,
I am enjoying the classic debate between the two of you over the advantages of a Colt .45 versus a high-cap 9mm spray and pray weapon. Can you guess which one I favor?
While the two of you are debating, I am going to slip my R9S in my pocket and head on down to my local dealer to get some Butler Creek steel lipped 25, or higher, round magazines for my Ruger 10/22. Life is wonderful. I already have hi-cap mags for all of my more serious guns that will accept them.
Best Regards,
Frank
-
Yep -- .45 v. 9mm is a classic debate that was somewhat on the shelf the last few years with the Clintonized mags. Now it can rear up again. Frankly, I could argue either side of the debate, depending upon my mood.
Having been the first in line this morning to buy formerly LEO normal capacity magazines at a local gun shop (they would not sell them yesterday, interpreting the ban as exipring at the end of the 13th), I am more attuned to the Wonder Nine argument right now!
I hate the phrase "spray and pray," which connotes that the user of the high capacity firearm will not care or bother to make his or her shots count. I certainly do not believe that capacity is a cure for lack of skill...or foolishness. ;D
This morning I purchased 3 G17 mags and 1 G19 mag -- brand new -- for $106. Pretty cool. 8)
-
Hi Duane,
Just kidding about the "spray and pray". I know that the people on this forum know better. No offense intended.
Frank
-
Personally, instead of the .45 and 7 or the 9mm and 18 -- I have opted for the .45 and 18 with my ParaOrdnance P-14-45 with the extended capacity magazine that holds 17+1 .45 caliber cartridges! ;D :P ;)
-
Hi Duane,
It is a pleasure to debate someone who views the debate as you do: viewing it as an intellectual exercise, and having the ability to recognize just how much we do agree on and how narrow the areas of disagreement really are. One person's well-informed choice often reflects circumstances that someone else can't account for.
Can you really think of any self-defense situations where time isn't sucn a big limiting factor?
For all of my advocating of the .45, I should point out that my present preferred carry gun is a Glock 26 9mm, and that more often than not my real "primary" is a North American Arms .380. The Cor-Bon in the Glock approaches the stopping power of a .357 magnum, so I am not worried about it doing its part if I do mine. A 4 to 4 1/4" barrel .45 with an officer-size grip is on my shopping list (I still go back and forth about whether I should get a Glock 30 instead), but will have to take a back seat to priority #1, which is something for my wife to carry. Haven't decided if the .45 must also take a back seat to a Rohrbaugh yet, and given how heavily I rely on pocket guns, it just may.
I can count on one hand the number of times per year I actually carry my full-size 1911 concealed.
-
45acp is just - a 9mm on steroids! :D - J/K.
Indeed Bill ... you and Duane have a very balanced attitude to this venerable debate ... and overall I guess we can say there is no right answer - never will be. There are pro's and con's .. plusses and minuses .. always will be. It is for the individual to ride with what he is most happy (and proficient) with.
I do place some importance on capacity but - find overall I do not choose my carry weapon soley on that parameter. I mean ... here I am most of time as primary - toting my SP-101 ... a mere five shots! But .... I know I can put em where it matters ...... plus the possible usefullness of the CT grips.
I recently bought a SW99 .. and so far having put some rounds thru find it a very satisfactory piece .... could well be I have yet another choice! Decisions ..... decisions!
-
Hi Mr. Jody Hudson,
If you don't mind my asking, where did you get a 17 round magazine for your Para P-14-45? I would love to get one for my P-14 Limited.
Hi Chris,
What caliber did you get the S&W 99 in? I almost bought one several years ago when they first came out and I was given an opportunity to buy one gun at a big discount direct from S&W. I bought a titanium Airlite Centenial instead. I was impressed though with the S&W 99 I shot at the S&W Academy range. I should give some more thought to getting one, or maybe I should be thinking about spending the money on a bigger safe.
Frank
-
Haha Frank .... I need a bigger safe too! Tho no extra space to accomodate one if truth known!
The SW99 is 9mm .... and I find has a good ''feel''. I am using the larger size palm swell. At 20 yds or so, it is not too hard to keep all hits within 3" .... very accurate gun, and thus far very pleased with it. Would like some hi-caps for it!
BTW I have a Para P12-45 .. which I keep meaning to send to Para Ordnanace . it is a dog .. not at all reliable.
(http://www.acbsystems.com/boards/thr/cb_gun2/sw99-s.jpg)
-
I bought all of my Paras used. Shoot them a lot, but I guess some people have problems with them as the resale value of them is horrid, for the seller, and good for me.
I got all of my maxcap magazines in gun purchases.
shooterjb, there is no name on the extensions I have for Para magazines. One is a plus two and one is a plus three, if I recall.
Chris, send it back or send it to me please... ;D
-
[size=13]Chris, send it back or send it to me please...[/size]
Hahaha .... yeah .... hmmmm ....... :D
I must actually get around to sending it off ... I bought it used but it had had little use (now I think I know why! :( ). The only used gun I bought sight-unseen that has proved to be somewhat of a lemon. Pity really because it has a lovely trigger, shoots well re accuracy too.
With all the other pieces I have, I guess this one's sitting in a rear corner of the safe is no biggie .... tho periodically I spot it lurking in the shadows and feel frustrated that it is not 100%. So yeah .. must engage ''carrier mode'' and get the danged thing shipped off... to PA BTW, not JH just yet!! ..... ;D
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
BTW also Jody .. Jamie has the range (W&W) booked for Oct 30 .. you probably knew but thought I'd mention.
-
No - no - no, Frank. I was not offended in the least. I took it in the spirit it was intended. The "spray and pray" rant was just an aside. ;D
Bill -- no, I think that time is almost always a limiting factor, but I also think that the most frequent number of targets is going to be "1." In that sense, you can generally engage that target until it stops. The .45 may kill the attacker faster, but even with a 9mm, he is going to be pretty busy receiving the impact of 9mms until I deem it adviseable to stop shooting. ;D
-
I will see you there Chris! ;D