Revolvers for home defense

[295linda]

I would recommend a good quality semi-automatic handgun over a revolver. With a six-shot revolver, you have to drop out the spent casings then individually hand-load each new round. This can be hard to do when you are scared and your hands are shaking -- those rounds are small and slippery. With a semi-automatic, you eject an empty magazine and push in a full magazine (10 or more rounds). I find that this is quicker and easier to do than loading six individual rounds into a revolver when I'm on the range -- I'd hate to try to reload a revolver when someone is actually shooting at me.

[lifelongMOgal]

Originally Posted by 295linda

I would recommend a good quality semi-automatic handgun over a revolver. With a six-shot revolver, you have to drop out the spent casings then individually hand-load each new round. This can be hard to do when you are scared and your hands are shaking -- those rounds are small and slippery. With a semi-automatic, you eject an empty magazine and push in a full magazine (10 or more rounds). I find that this is quicker and easier to do than loading six individual rounds into a revolver when I'm on the range -- I'd hate to try to reload a revolver when someone is actually shooting at me.

Uh, no you don't.

Speedloader:
HKS Model 10-A Speedloader - 6-Shot .38/.357 Revolver - Shooters Service

Speed strip:
Model 580 *Speed Stripsâ„¢ Bianchi Leather Holsters

[Northern Maine Land Man]

For the average homeowner, a revolver is safer and more reliable than a semi-automatic pistol. Hold it with two hands. If somebody needs shooting he needs shooting a lot! just point and pull the trigger until he is down and not moving. Then reload. Most homeowners are not going to have speed loaders or practice with their use if they do have one.

That said, my choice for home defense is a shotgun. Just racking the slide will put the runs to a burglar.

Now I'll go back and read other responses.

[Wilson513]

Originally Posted by Northern Maine Land Man

For the average homeowner, a revolver is safer and more reliable than a semi-automatic pistol. Hold it with two hands. If somebody needs shooting he needs shooting a lot! just point and pull the trigger until he is down and not moving. Then reload. Most homeowners are not going to have speed loaders or practice with their use if they do have one.

That said, my choice for home defense is a shotgun. Just racking the slide will put the runs to a burglar.

Now I'll go back and read other responses.

Both home and office I have the same combination. Shotgun and revolver.

Home, Mossberg 88 and Ruger LCR.

Work Remington double barrel 18.5" and S&W .357 4" barrel.

I CC the Ruger.

Reason is I am not a great shot with a revolver. So, time permitting I would always defend with a shotgun.

Trunk gun should be a 5.56 M16. If you have time to get it oout of the truck you want something that will reach out a ways.

[ChrisC]

Originally Posted by Northern Maine Land Man

Just racking the slide will put the runs to a burglar.

Or pulling the bolt to feed a round into the AK...

[rjyoungdos]

Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal

Consider your walls and what is beyond with any home defense weapon. Will the bullet from a handgun likely pass through? If so, you might want to stick with the shottie. If penetration is not as much of a concern, and you want to get away from a long gun, then, whichever handgun you can shoot the best with consistency.

You need to be able to keep any loaded weapon out of the possible reach/access of unauthorized persons, be they children or adults.

Great point. A slug can easily go through a wall, but a shotgun slug will more than likely won't. Especially if you are using buckshot.

[Mircea]

Originally Posted by Mac_Muz

Well by that I was 1/2 wrong. Governors have the National Guard, not the Feds. It has been that way since the Brits and French were here. At that time the Governor were supposed to serve their respective Kings. After the Rev War that same thing happened by the 13 first states. There was no National Guard.

There has always been a National Guard, even though they may not have been called "National Guard."

Governors do not have "the National Guard."

You might want to read the appropriately named Dick Act of 1905.

The National Guard is simply an extension of the Federal Army on loan to a governor.

Governors have no say in the National Guard whatsoever.

What I mean by that is a governor has no control over the type of units that form the National Guard. That is dictated by the Federal Army, and governors have no choice in the matter.

As the governor of Washington State, for example, being filled with mountains, armored and mechanized infantry cannot perform in mountains, so the ideal units would be a brigade of mountain infantry, a brigade of straight-leg or motorized infantry or a light cavalry regiment, perhaps even an air-mobile battalion, plus a field artillery brigade, an engineer battalion, a military police battalion and supporting units like transportation and medical companies.

That would allow the governor of Washington State to adequately defend his State, but that isn't the case.

It is the Federal Army who dictates to the governors how their units will be constituted. It is all done for the convenience of the Federal Army.

For example, the 39th Infantry Brigade (Light)(Separate), the 41st Infantry Brigade (Light)(Separate) and the 45th Infantry Brigade (Light)(Separate) are all assigned to the US Army 7th Infantry Division (Light) and augment the single Regular Army Active Duty infantry brigade that makes up the unit.

In plain English, the US 7th Infantry Division (Light) consists of one active duty brigade, and three National Guard brigades.

A governor can have a National Guard field artillery brigade, if and only if the Federal Army says he can.

So it's absurd to suggest that governors have any control whatsoever over the National Guard, when in fact they have had no such control since 1905.

The only thing a governor gets to do is call out the National Guard in the event of emergencies.

Originally Posted by Mac_Muz

These days there is no unorganized Militia I know of, other than all males aged 17-45.

That is NOT a militia. That is the individual ready reserve. States have no control over it.

There is an "unorganized Militia."

If you aren't aware of it, then it's because they haven't approached you. It's one of those "Don't call us, we'll call you" deals. They are not wackos, they are very level-headed and would only show their hand if the US Constitution were egregiously breached. They are quite powerful, and have control over a number of National Guard units who would defect. They even have Air National Guard members that would flee, and rebel air-fields to support their air forces.

Originally Posted by danielpalos

In my opinion, our Second Amendment only applies to a well regulated militia of the United States. Everyone else can simply purchase a form of private property that may include Arms, subject to the police power of a State.

"Well regulated" is subject to open interpretation. "Well regulated" could mean anything from requiring people to show up periodically for training, or it could mean simply keeping a list of members, or it could mean establishing a set of [loose] rules.

Why? Because the federal government has no say in how militias are regulated. That is left up to the several States, and it would be self-defeating to allow the federal government to interfere, since the whole purpose of having militias is a check on federal power.

Originally Posted by Gungnir

Well the supreme court doesn't agree with you, and they are the primary check and balance on constitutional matters, they state that the militia clause is purely preamble to the active clause. Which is broader than your definition.

Nor have you addressed the fact that assuming you're 18-45 and male, you're already part of the reserve militia.

That's a fairly good way of putting it.

As I said, the militia is a last resort check and balance against the federal government, and allowing the federal government to have any say in the matter defeats the whole purpose.

Anyway...

For those of you who don't know, we use different weapons for different reasons.

Handguns of all types are for personal defense, mostly due to the limited range.

If you want to defend your family, then you'll need a shot-gun.

If you want to defend your home, then you'll need a rifle so that you can destroy targets before they enter your property, or as they cross your property approaching your home, and should they be successful, at that point you'd switch to your shot-gun.

Some weapons can serve a dual purpose. Most rifles can be used to hunt, and many can be easily mounted with a scope to aid in hunting.

A good all purpose hunting weapon would be a .22/.410 over and under.

Shot-guns for defending your family should have short barrels (to increase scatter -- increase coverage).

If you're looking for a weapon for an Armageddon-like event, all you need is a decent hand-gun and some ammo (I use a Beretta 92F and have 5 boxes), a place to go and a plan.

You'll never make it alone. You have to band together with other like-minded people if you want any chance to survive. I live smack in the urban core of one of the nastiest places in the US, but a vet friend has a small farm just a few townships away, and his son (also a vet) has a farm adjacent to his, and then another has a farm close by.

We figure we can save a few thousand people, maybe even as many as 5,000 people, but the reality is that of the 1 Million people who live in this county some 450,000+ will be dead within 90-120 days and another 450,000+ will die in the 6-8 months following of starvation, disease and violence.

The most important thing is renewable food sources: a cow or she-goat, some chickens or geese, and dogs and cats. I understand people are squeamish about eating dogs and cats, but at least you won't have to eat other people, which is how most people will survive the first few months.

[brfire]

Originally Posted by rjyoungdos

Great point. A slug can easily go through a wall, but a shotgun slug will more than likely won't. Especially if you are using buckshot.

Your saying that a slug or buckshot won't go throught sheetrock? please god tell me you were kidding.