I think what you're trying to say is that we need another 114 thread.I tell people I know of two solutions to every problem. One is my way and the other is the highway!
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I think what you're trying to say is that we need another 114 thread.I tell people I know of two solutions to every problem. One is my way and the other is the highway!
Methinks a Wilson Combat Beretta Centurion checks all the boxes.There are many essentials for a defensive pistol, among them, the reliable ability to NOT shoot, as well as absolute reliability TO shoot. A successful defensive handgun engagement may resolve without a shot fired, but there will be some extremely high stress gun handling, even if just for reholstering. So, to that point, I will cheerfully assert that an ideal defensive handgun will have:
- An initial trigger pull that mitigates the risk of a less-than-deliberate first shot.
- Second strike capability. Pull the trigger again for another primer strike.
- Completely ambidextrous controls. You may not have the luxury of using your dominant hand, or both hands.
- A hammer or striker control plate to prevent ND while reholstering.
- A decocking mechanism to revert to a deliberate trigger pull, which cannot be left in a no-fire "safe" mode; i.e., spring return to fire mode after decocking.
- If continuity of fire is expected after an initial shot volley, an easily loaded mag well. Not applicable for those relying solely on the rounds in the gun, with no other mags on person, or most revolver users.
- For "always cocked" guns (striker fired), a manual safety in event the gun must be off your person and control to comply with safety or control commands ("Police, drop your gun!"), or transferred to another person in crisis conditions.
My review of available options reduces the choices to two current models suitable for CCW, and although reasonably light, neither of them are compact. That's based on the requirement for completely ambidextrous controls; trigger, mag release, slide stop, safety/decocker, and hammer or striker control plate, and one-hand second strike capability.
Anticipating two common arguments:
If your finger is your safety, you're not safe. Proven by studies I'm happy to cite.
Second strike is not mandated in order to ignite a theoretical stubborn primer, agreeably so rare in factory ammo that it's not an eventuality that merits obsessive training. But the reality is that a primer struck once unsuccessfully in a defensive engagement will be overwhelmingly likely to ignite on a second strike, because the issue was never the primer, it was the failure to fully headspace or go into battery due to interference in cycling, with some of the energy intended for ignition instead absorbed by round motion relative to the chamber. This absorption itself tends to ready the round for a successful second strike. This phenomenon often occurs due to unusual movement or orientation of the firing hand, or interference with slide motion in grappling or close quarters. Not range conditions, gunfight conditions.
Fair warning: I don't like single action or striker fired guns for defensive emergency use. I do appreciate them for other purposes and reasons.
Well, this should set the fur a flyin'. Flame on!
Langdon Tactical. Ernest taught Bill how to Beretta.Methinks a Wilson Combat Beretta Centurion checks all the boxes.
Best,
Gary
I think what you're trying to say is that we need another 114 thread.
You mean the highway to hell? Yeah, no!I think what you're trying to say is that we need another 114 thread.
You mean the highway to hell? Yeah, no!
But, but, but, I don't have time to find my answer, or ask in an existing thread. I need a new one that's uncluttered.You mean the highway to hell? Yeah, no!
SEE!? In case it wasn't clear earlier why no one likes you.....I think what you're trying to say is that we need another 114 thread.
I have often pondered that while dropping a deuce. Then stopped caring as I flushed.SEE!? In case I wasn't clear earlier why no one likes you.....
So what you're saying is .45 is better than 9mm?I think what you're trying to say is that we need another 114 thread.
Ummmmm...... Yeah.... The newer powders and bullet designs make the old, antiquated 9mm obsolete with the newer, fatter 45acp.So what you're saying is .45 is better than 9mm?
How did you make that leap???So what you're saying is .45 is better than 9mm?
In his clarification it seems pretty clear he meant "Sh*t or get off the pot".I have often pondered that while dropping a deuce. Then stopped caring as I flushed.
Having never smoked pot, I wasn't aware it made you constipated.How did you make that leap???
In his clarification it seems pretty clear he meant "Sh*t or get off the pot".
.40 Short & Weak was just another attempt at making @Andy54Hawken's .38-40 relevant again.K..maybe it's just me, but addressing the reality behand the sarcasm..
As a .40 owner, I was surprised a few years back when LE types used that reasoning for trading in their .40's and going to 9mm..newer powders and bullet designs. Fine, but using that logic, doesn't it make sense that .40 would also be improving upward..thereby still maintaining a slight terminal ballistics advantage over 9mm? I mean..they should scale the same..same with .45.
So..I don't buy it. I think they really all went to 9mm because its easier for females to shoot and ammo is cheaper for the Departments.
We've been getting a lot of "those guys" lately must be something in the water.So basically what OP was saying was, "my first thread, I know everything, you guys are idiots, what do you think?"
Not a very good first thread there buddy.