Unz评论•另类媒体选择$
美国主流媒体大都排除了有趣,重要和有争议的观点
 博客浏览Saker档案
平民自卫神话与选择
通过电子邮件将此页面发送给其他人

 记住我的信息



=>

书签 全部切换总目录添加到图书馆从图书馆中删除 • B
显示评论下一个新评论下一个新回复了解更多
回复同意/不同意/等等 更多... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
同意不同意谢谢LOL轮唱
这些按钮可将您的公开协议,异议,感谢,LOL或巨魔与所选注释一起注册。 仅对最近使用“记住我的信息”复选框保存姓名和电子邮件的频繁评论者可用,并且在任何八个小时的时间内也只能使用三次。
忽略评论者 关注评论者
搜寻文字 区分大小写  确切的词  包括评论
列表 书签

介绍性说明:我想谈这个话题很久很久了,因为这是我非常关心的一个。 然而,它也完全偏离了这个博客的主题。 然而,由于在俄罗斯,新年和东正教耶稣诞生之间有一段平静的时间(温和地说),我决定在这些日期之间“挤压”它,而我们通常的话题不那么紧迫。 此外,我的一个朋友最近正在考虑购买枪支用于自卫,一个伪专家给她写了很多关于半自动和左轮手枪的废话。 我给她写了一封电子邮件来揭穿一些废话,然后又写了一封更长的电子邮件,然后我觉得“好吧,让我们一劳永逸地解决这个话题”。 结果是下面的文章。 我在这里的动机不是参与关于枪支权利的无意义的意识形态辩论——那里有足够的 100% 意识形态和 100% 脱离现实的伪“辩论”,它们让我流泪(枪支是,以及堕胎和毒品,这个话题往往会引发最糟糕的、高度情绪化的、而且主要是非常不知情的辩论,不仅在美国,而且在全世界)。 首先,我在下面写的是写给我们社区中那些因为不富裕而处于危险之中的人,因为他们住在不太漂亮的社区,那些生病和虚弱的人,老人,孤独的女人和所有那些那些典型的人被犯罪暴徒选中进行虐待和攻击(富人和特权阶层很少需要枪支,因为他们可以通过许多不同的方式支付安全费用;最需要枪支的人是弱者、穷人和手无寸铁的人)。 我是由一位单身母亲抚养长大的,我亲眼目睹了单身女性在我们所谓的“文明”社会中生存的艰难。 所以虽然这个博客绝对不是一个 2nd修正案 宣传博客,但我不能无动于衷,我们确实生活在一个非常危险的世界,即将到来的一年给我们的星球带来真正的重大风险。 坦率地说,由于美国对朝鲜或伊朗的袭击,国际经济体系很有可能崩溃。 如果发生这种情况,包括美国在内的许多西方国家很可能会进入其中之一。 崩溃的5个阶段 由我的朋友 Dmitri Orlov 定义。 如果发生这种情况,我aw 和 order 可以很快分解,坦率地说,在他们已经拥有的词的许多部分。 这些是 最新统计 今年芝加哥: 枪击和被杀:619 枪击和受伤:2911 总枪击:3530 总凶杀案:670 [通常,这是一个拥有最严格枪支政策的城市,因此只有罪犯才会武装!]。 这是我的底线:能够使用枪支进行自卫已经是世界许多地方生存所需的一项关键技能,在不久的将来,这些部分的规模和数量只会增加。 当然,我们非常欢迎您只用言语为自己辩护,但请理解其他人可能会有不同的感受。 碰巧的是,多年来,我学到了一些有关枪支的知识,并且我花了很多时间研究这个话题。 我决定发表这篇有点跑题的文章,希望至少有一些读者能从中受益。 如果我们能将评论部分集中在此处讨论的问题上,而不是针对无生命物体(枪支)或我们相信个人自卫的人(包括您真正的)的常见仇恨,我将不胜感激。 谢谢你。

萨克斯

•••

我们生活在一个几乎普遍存在的欺骗世界中。 我们也生活在一个积极鼓励人们轻信、不加批判地接受主流神话和谎言的世界,尤其是那些由企业界宣扬的谎言。 这个现实无处不在,从我们听什么,我们嫁给谁,到我们如何抚养孩子,到我们吃什么,我们信任谁的健康,我们信任孩子的教育以及许多其他领域。 今天我想解决一个非常狭窄的问题,它只与那些愿意并且能够在警察出现之前为自己辩护的人有关。 要清楚, 我不是为那些相信枪支是暴力原因的人写下面的讨论,我也不是为那些相信如果被犯罪分子袭击他们会打电话给警察并且警察会足够快地出现以阻止袭击者的人写信. 而且我绝对不是针对那些生活在安全地区(或认为他们是)的人进行以下讨论。 最后,我也不是为执法人员写作(这很重要,见下文!)。 我今天的目标受众非常狭窄。 满足这些条件的人:

1) 愿意为自己或他人辩护直到执法人员出现的人。
2) 愿意使用枪支保护自己或亲人的人。
3) “普通”平民,即*不是*受过高级枪支使用培训的人。
4) 居住在允许个人使用武器或自卫的司法管辖区的人。

我今天想要做的是揭穿一个非常危险的神话,这个神话几乎被普遍接受,几乎每个人日复一日地以一种近乎宗教的热情重复:半自动手枪更适合平民的自卫需要比左轮手枪。

首先,让我们介绍一下基础知识:半自动(又名“自动装弹机”)与左轮手枪(又名“轮枪”)。

在左上角,您会看到左轮手枪(Smith & Wesson .357 magnum 686P 型),在右下角,您会看到半自动手枪(Smith & Wesson 9mm 型号 M&P 9,带有手电筒/激光组合)
在左上角,您会看到左轮手枪(Smith & Wesson .357 magnum 686P 型),在右下角,您会看到半自动手枪(Smith & Wesson 9mm 型号 M&P 9,带有手电筒/激光组合)

我认为我们可以立即同意左轮手枪看起来更加过时,而半自动手枪具有明显的现代外观。 虽然相对现代,但左轮手枪在 OK Corral 中引出了牛仔的形象,而半自动手枪看起来像现代警察和军队携带的那种枪支。 确实如此,牛仔确实携带左轮手枪(尽管他们的主要武器是步枪),而现代警察和军队几乎只携带半自动手枪。 这是为什么?

半自动汽车有很多优点。 以下是主要的

1)半自动有更高的容量(里面有更多的子弹)
2) 半自动装弹更快更容易
3)半自动车要便宜得多(至少在大多数情况下)
4)现代9mm是拍摄人物的理想口径
5)半自动车可以轻松容纳手电筒或激光笔等配件
6)半自动车感觉更“现代”,而不是“OK Corral的牛仔和枪战”
7)半自动一般更容易拍摄

这都是真的。 但这不是问题。 问题在于在将这些事实作为半自动汽车优越性的论据时隐含地做出了假设。 实际上,这些假设在应用于平民时失败了。 让我解释。

文职人员和执法人员之间的主要区别是什么?

这不是他们携带的枪,也不是他们训练的质量(警察通常很糟糕)。 使用致命武力不是合法权利,在自卫中平民可以这样做(至少在那些允许平民携带枪支自卫的司法管辖区)。 那是什么? 这是以下关键区别:

当警察听到枪声时,他们必须去调查/干预,而当平民听到枪声时,他们必须躲避或逃跑.

这绝对是至关重要的:执法人员必须执法并保护每个人。 只有在执法部队出现之前,才允许平民保护自己(或受其保护的人)。 这一点非常重要,我想再次强调:平民没有逮捕任何人的义务(即使在所谓的“公民逮捕”是合法的司法管辖区)。 平民无权追捕罪犯,也不必与帮派、暴徒、流氓或小罪犯发生对抗。 平民不执行禁毒法(在我看来,警察也不应该执行,但那是另一个话题),平民不停止交通。 如果您是一名平民,并且看到三个暴徒一边吸食可卡因,一边挥舞着枪支走在一条单向街上,您应该寻找掩护并逃离那里。 警察有义务立即进行干预。 这是一个*巨大的*差异。

对于平民来说,枪支是一种 权宜之计的个人保护 的工具 最后一招。 只有当其他一切都失败时,你才能生产你的武器,如果这也失败了,就使用它。

执法人员和平民生活在完全不同的现实中。 平民的现实是这样的:

  • 平民需要保护自己的绝大多数情况(约 90%)发生在家庭入侵期间。
  • 在绝大多数情况下(大约 90%),仅仅展示枪支(不开枪!)就足以阻止攻击
  • 在绝大多数情况下(大约 90%),当平民不得不开火时,他们只射击 1 到 3 发子弹。
  • 在大多数情况下,此类武装对抗发生在大约 3 码的距离内。
  • 在大多数情况下,整个事件只持续几秒钟,然后一切就结束了

让我再补充一点:在大多数司法管辖区,一旦您通过展示或使用武器来阻止犯罪,就不允许继续开火。 请记住,平民无权使用致命武力逮捕罪犯。 这意味着一旦攻击停止(无论是因为犯罪分子害怕逃跑还是被枪杀),您就必须停止射击。 无论他的企图或犯罪行为多么恶劣,你都不能将你的枪支倒在一个有犯罪感的人的背上。 因此,即使您抓到某个试图强奸您 5 岁孩子的变态者,一旦这种犯罪行为停止,您也不能开枪射击 SOB,即使他罪有应得。 让我们再重复一遍,仅比阻止犯罪行为所需的严格最低限度多开一发子弹就会使您因以下任何一项受到起诉:使用致命武器攻击、过失杀人、凶杀甚至 2nd 度谋杀。

大多数生活在犯罪猖獗地区和警察的人都知道另一个事实:绝大多数罪犯都是小气、愚蠢和懦弱的罪犯。 据估计,其中有 20% 到 30% 的人携带甚至无法使用的武器(他们太穷或太便宜,买不起好枪,而且太笨,无法正确维护)。 罪犯撬动弱者和手无寸铁的人。 他们不是在赢得枪战。 我从来没有用过枪支来保护自己(感谢上帝),但我知道很多人都拥有并且他们一致认为:小暴徒一看到你的枪,他们就跑,特别是如果你开枪一次,甚至更多,击中其中一个。

是的,我知道,暴徒和毒贩可以使用非常有经验的“士兵”,并且有一些著名的案例,警察或联邦调查局特工在旷日持久的枪战中被枪杀。 但是,这种情况发生在您身上的可能性几乎为零。 对您最可能的威胁是两三个半文盲的白痴闯入房屋,他们没有注意到所有表明房屋已被占用的迹象,并且想偷走您的电视以获取毒品。 只是大喊“滚出去,否则我会向你开枪”会让他们疯狂地奔跑。 此外,如果你真的在锡那罗亚卡特尔的热门名单上,无论如何没有枪支能救你,即使是最大最卑鄙的半自动武器。

如果你在一家便利店,突然三个武装暴徒闯入并试图抢劫商店(和客户)怎么办? 你需要多少个镜头? 正确答案是“无”。 这不是你的事,除非你有理由怀疑你或其他人即将被谋杀,否则你不要开火。 如果发生这种情况,您的主要问题将不是容量,而是事实上,除非他们奔跑,否则三个不同的对手将从不同的方向向您开火。 请记住,赢得一场枪战并不是要射击另一个人,而是要从一开始就不会被击中。 因此,无论您是使用 5 发左轮手枪还是 18 发半自动开枪,这一切都会发生得如此之快,以至于您的能力将是您最不担心的。 但聪明的做法是举起手,闭嘴,给他们你的钱包,等坏人离开,不要和四个(你+三个坏人)人开火,无辜的平民站在各处.

好的,以上所有内容都是为了说明这一点:能力对执法人员来说很重要,而对平民来说则几乎没有。 当然,多轮总比少轮好,正如表达式中所说的“我宁愿拥有它而不需要它,而不是需要它而不拥有它”,但这种表达方式很可爱,但在现实世界中,容量根本与平民无关。

那是什么?

嗯,首先是可靠性。

在这里,我将揭穿另一个神话:左轮手枪比半自动手枪更可靠。 好吧,他们是。 但差距如此之小,以至于没有显着差异。 由优质制造商生产的现代半自动手枪与左轮手枪一样可靠(有时也会失败!)。 但这是非常糟糕的比较。 我们要比较的不是左轮手枪和半自动手枪,而是平民使用的左轮手枪和半自动手枪!

有故障和所谓的“射手引起的故障”。 后者主要取决于正确使用枪支的复杂性,尤其是在压力下。 虽然现代左轮手枪和现代半自动手枪在可靠性上的差异很小,但当包括射击造成的故障时,它们之间的差异就变得很大了。 诸如不取下保险或忘记在密室中放一发子弹之类的事情。 还有另一种类型的射手导致的故障是未能妥善保养枪支。 例如,弹匣是无法供弹的主要原因(在操纵枪支时,弹匣也往往会脱落,在某些型号中,这会阻止半自动射击)。

一个臭名昭著的射手导致了各种各样的故障是当有人抓住一个满载的(但不是 脱垂) 半自动并触动通常的轻触发器并无意中触发。 大多数(但不是全部)左轮手枪比大多数(但不是全部)半自动手枪具有优势,因为在 双动 它们的扳机要重得多(非常适合自卫情况),但在 单一动作 (完美的目标练习)。 用简单的英语来说,这意味着当你拿着半自动手枪而不是左轮手枪时,你更有可能无意中射击自己或其他人,尤其是在压力下。 这就是为什么半自动带有安全装置(在我看来,另一个可怕的想法)确实使枪支更安全地操作,但代价是增加了一个更关键的步骤来执行并且在不得不保护自己时可能会失败。

要使用半自动射击,您需要完全使用弹匣,在弹膛中放一发子弹,断开安全装置(如果您首先使用安全装置)并牢牢握住枪以使其完全循环。 如果你握得太轻,即所谓的“手腕无力”,那么半自动将无法循环,基本上会卡住(这通常发生在女性身上,尤其是那些身体较轻/较薄的女性)。 如果发生这种情况,您需要执行所谓的“敲击机架”程序(参见 此处 对于解释它的视频)。

“”武器手册”的左轮手枪如下:扣动扳机; 如果左轮手枪未能开火,请再次拉动。 就是这样。

除非你扣动锤子,否则扳机将足够重,可以在不使用额外“安全装置”的情况下安全(扣动锤子是你在自卫情况下永远不会做的事情 - 仅在电影中 - 这就是为什么纯粹的自卫左轮手枪通常会有一个“笼罩”(隐藏)的锤子(见下面 Ruger LCR 的照片)。

宣传员对半自动的回答是“训练,训练,再训练”。 我将在下面进一步讨论这个论点,但暂时问问自己,如果遇到犯罪暴徒,你更愿意做什么:再次扣动扳机或尝试“敲击”程序。 请记住,在大多数情况下,当平民需要使用枪支自卫时,他们的对手距离他们 3 码或更短吗? 所以坏人站在吐口水的距离内,他可能已经在向你开枪了,或者至少拉近了距离(在那个距离上只有几分之一秒!),而你要尝试“敲击声”? 真的吗? 我非常怀疑它,不管你在“战术训练”上花了多少钱(更多关于下面的内容)。

接下来,我们需要摆脱枪支技术问题,着眼于武器采购的大局。

这是官方版本:所有执法和军队都转向半自动,因为半自动更好。 真的吗?

再想一想。

您认为有多少人会参与为某个主要警察部门采购枪支的决定? 让我告诉你三种被忽视的类型:会计师、律师和政治家:他们都​​不太关心警察将携带的武器的质量。 会计师想要便宜的交易。 律师会希望避免诉讼。 至于政客,他们想看起来不错。 如果不是企业界,这一切都不会那么糟糕。

首先,一个简单的事实:通常,半自动比左轮手枪便宜得多。 第二个事实, 执法 客观上半自动更好。 第三个事实:主要警察部门的决定几乎成为公认的教条。 因此,如果,比如说,洛杉矶警察局和纽约警察局都将他们的全部力量转向半自动,那么我们这些平民一定会想要听取他们的智慧,也同样如此。 除了,正如我上面解释的, 我们不是警察。

所以让我问你这个问题:理论上,你会同意为更适合你需求的武器支付两倍的价格吗? 我想我们大多数人都会说是的。 我们不是主要警察部门的会计师,这是关于我们和我们所爱之人的生活。 你会告诉我 300 美元和 700 美元对你保护你自己和你的家人有很大的不同吗? 你的电视一年要花多少钱? 你的爱好或消遣呢?

接下来,律师和政治家:律师和政治家(实际上是同一回事)会想说他们为警察提供了尽可能多的火力,以避免诸如著名的案件 1986年迈阿密枪战. 因此,不仅需要半自动汽车,还需要霰弹枪、防弹衣、头盔、AR-15、装甲车,如果有机会,还需要坦克和重机枪。 我们都知道美国警察部队荒谬的过度军事化,现在将他们应该“服务和保护”的人视为危险的恐怖分子或叛乱分子。 你想要效仿的是他们的选择吗?!

再说一次,我确实认为半自动车更适合警察(对于军队来说,除了强制执行纪律外,它们几乎没有用处)。 我只想说的是,参与决定为警察(或军队)获得什么武器的人与平民的标准大不相同。 我们平民应该动脑筋,不要盲目听从他们的言行。

现在让我们看看公司。 他们想要的只是尽可能多地赚钱。 因此,如果您是一家制造手枪的公司的负责人,并且完全确定您所在国家/地区的所有警察部门和武装部队都将为您订购大量半自动手枪,那么您会有多感兴趣保留人们可能仍想购买但数量少得多的左轮手枪的生产线和库存? 事实是,整个武器工业都对“推”半自动手枪有着巨大的兴趣,而左轮手枪还在制造的唯一原因是人们愿意为它们支付更多的钱,因为有些人用它们打猎,有些人用它们足够聪明,可以看穿企业宣传。

现在让我们看看“专家社区”。 你认为他们更喜欢什么? 我可以告诉你,大约 95% 的人会认为“六射手”是“完全过时的”,并且会对半自动发誓。 现在你还记得关于“敲击声”程序的论点:如果你训练得很好,你可以在巨大的压力下在几分之一秒内学会如何做到这一点?

好吧,想一想,记住我上面提到的武器手册,如果你是一名枪械教练,你会赚更多的钱教授基础、中级和高级“战术”枪械训练还是简单的“扣动扳机,扣动扳机”?再次”?

整个“战术训练”的胡说八道真的让我很恼火。 好像我们这些平民都需要花费所有的空闲时间来训练(更不用说要花成百上千的钱来支付这一切)并试图成为一个伪装的特警队平民? 这完全是荒谬的,但由于所有“专家”都坚持定期培训(并通过出售这些类型的课程赚了很多钱!)那里的每个人都在模仿“火车,火车,火车”的废话。 看一眼 该视频 展示“专家”演示如何在与两名武装劫匪交火时执行单手“战术”重装。 是的,没错,单手杂志重装! 这就是所有这些策略性的废话变得多么荒谬。 但是有*很多*的“专家”以此为生! 他们都会告诉你,左轮手枪是我们的坏事。 事实上,对于他们和他们的商业模式来说,他们是!

那么您需要培训吗?需要多少培训?

S&W Mod。 60 与 Ruger ARX 38 特殊子弹对于后坐力敏感的人来说是一个很好的自卫选择
S&W Mod。 60 与 Ruger ARX 38 特殊子弹对于后坐力敏感的人来说是一个很好的自卫选择

是的你是。 您需要熟悉和舒适地操作、维护和射击您的武器。 我建议每年至少拍摄 4-5 次。 你需要习惯巨大的爆炸声和后坐力。 对于初学者,我根本不是在这里开玩笑,你需要说服自己你的枪支不会自行射击,除非你扣动扳机,否则它是完全安全的。 这对许多人来说可能需要一段时间(您可以很容易地发现他们:他们甚至会害怕触摸上膛的枪,就好像后者可以神奇地咬掉一两个手指一样)。 最后,您需要熟悉您的枪支可能出现的故障,以及如果发生故障怎么办,对于左轮手枪来说,这非常简单(再次扣动扳机)。 您不需要的是学习如何在进行“战术奔跑”的同时进行“战术”重装,同时在与几个武装对手的“战术”交火中找到答案。 好吧,如果你很有钱,喜欢玩,那么一定要去做。 但是对于我们这些难以支付账单并且几乎没有时间休假的人来说,还有更好的事情要做。

请记住上面的数字:在 90% 的情况下你根本不会射击,而当你这样做时,在大约 90% 的情况下你会射击 1-3 发子弹,可能会错过很多。 这将解决您生活中可能遇到的 99% 的情况(当然,除非您是警察或毒贩)。

那么除了“砰”的一声,你还想让我们的枪做什么?

你不在乎准确性。 首先,因为你的枪比你精确得多,其次,因为你的准确性对你的交火结果的影响可以忽略不计。 所有关于“位置优于口径”的说法都是真实的,但它也完全是理论上的。 在现实世界中,即使是 FBI 特工在真实交火中也有大约 80% 的失误率。 只要你的枪“砰”的一声响起并且你自己没有被击中,你就做得很好。

但是,如果您确实击中了对手,则您希望子弹产生最大的影响。 请记住,在现实世界中,在一切结束之前,您只会射击 1-3 次:要么自己被击中,要么阻止了攻击者。

我不会在这里对口径进行冗长的讨论,但我确实有两个关键事实要介绍:

首先,众所周知,左轮手枪将子弹保持在其圆柱体中。 半自动将子弹放在插入握把的弹匣中。 现在让我问你:为什么左轮手枪可以像 S&W500 而不是半自动? 原因很简单:左轮手枪是围绕特定口径设计的,而半自动口径则设计得足够小以适应枪的握把。 这意味着什么 当设计左轮手枪口径时,它们被设计为最适合这项工作而是 半自动机芯不得不做出妥协 数量与适应半自动的能力。 现在您是否开始明白为什么容量对半自动汽车至关重要?

接下来,我想提一个我从猎人那里听到的一个概念:失能曲线。 这是射击动物掉落所需的时间。 人类比动物脆弱得多,但这个概念与自卫完全相关:如果你开火,比如说 3 发子弹,并且只命中一发,需要多长时间才能使攻击者失去能力? 我在此强调,武装防御的目的不是杀戮,而是阻止进攻。 一个小的 .22LR 子弹可以杀死你,没问题,但它会慢慢地杀死你,而且它的制动力很小(如果你的攻击者在你射中他们 10 分钟后死亡/死亡,如果他们有时间先杀了你)。

现在让我们从法律的角度来看同样的问题。 我们都知道警察向某人开枪 5、10 或 15 次的无数实例。 如果检察官问你为什么向攻击者开了 15 发子弹,你认为你在法庭上会怎么看? 事实是,所谓的“喷洒和祈祷”是法院只允许警察做的事情,平民因此而入狱! 所以让我问你这个: 你更愿意在法庭上解释为什么你为了自卫而向某人开枪 1-2 次或 10-15 次 (更别提重装废话了!)?

再说一次,我们平民不是执法人员,法院不会给予我们与警察相同的权利。 也许不公平,但确实如此。 这对您的意义很简单:您希望每一轮都计数,真的很重要。

我确实保证不涉及口径问题,我不会。 您可以获得与左轮手枪射击能力非常相似的半自动手枪:10 毫米是一款出色的子弹(即使对于许多(但不是全部)最初为 9 毫米设计的半自动手枪来说太强大了)。 但事实是,在绝大多数情况下,出于各种原因或原因,大多数人使用的是 9 毫米,这是一个非常好的口径,但绝对不是最好的。 它对攻击野生动物也非常无效,这取决于你住的地方,这是另一个需要考虑的问题(我只想在这里说,我选择的个人防御口径是 .357 大酒瓶,我相信这是有史以来设计的最好的手枪口径)。

接下来,我想看看平民的一个特定子集:我们这些不仅在家里或汽车里有枪支,而且实际上每天都随身携带枪支的人。 这只是拥有枪支的人中的一小部分,但他们的人数增长非常快。

对他们来说,我会说你的枪支的尺寸不如它们的重量重要。 携带隐藏式枪支的方法有很多,有些方法比其他方法更好,但没有办法减轻枪支的重量。 所以轻型枪械绝对是平民日常携带的必经之路。

左:S&W 保镖; 右鲁格 LCR
左:S&W 保镖; 右鲁格 LCR

那里有很多不错的小型枪支,但在我看来,最好的两个是 380 的 S&W M&P Bodyguard 和 357 magnum 的 Ruger LCR。 保镖,特别是如果装载了 理海极限穿透器 rounds 是一种非常不错的自卫武器,重量仅为 408 克或 14.4 盎司(满载)。 它会给你7个镜头。 但将其与 357 大酒瓶的 Ruger LCR 进行比较,重量为 555 克或 19.6 盎司(满载),这将为您提供 5 次射击。 现在问自己这个问题:在你典型的自卫情况下 你更愿意发射 3 .380 发子弹并剩余 4 发子弹还是 3 .357 大酒瓶并剩余 2 发子弹? 没有把握? 然后看看这张照片比较回合:

一枚美国四分之一、一枚 .357 大酒瓶和一枚 .380。 你告诉我,大小重要吗?
一枚美国四分之一、一枚 .357 大酒瓶和一枚 .380。 你告诉我,大小重要吗?

让我也这样说:357 子弹可以处理美国大陆上除灰熊以外的任何动物。 .380 可以处理大多数人。 请不要误会我的意思:S&W 保镖 M&P 是一种非常好的携带武器:超轻,可发射 7 发子弹。 但是 Ruger LCR 虽然稍重一些,但具有更大的 5 发“拳头”,可以处理除灰熊以外的任何东西。 哪一个对你来说最有意义? 如果您在劫车期间需要通过门射击,比如车门怎么办? 您更愿意相信小巧的 380 还是强大的 .357 大酒瓶,它是专门为克服 38 特殊子弹的限制而设计的,警察无法射击在他们的汽车中逃跑的罪犯?

不服气? 您是否注意到在 Ruger LCR 上看不到锤子? 它隐藏在框架内,因此您不仅可以在没有锤子钩住任何东西的情况下取回它,而且还可以从口袋或钱包内发射武器。 试试用半自动的,每次开火时它的幻灯片都必须完全循环!

[侧边栏:比较口径/弹药筒功率的一种方法是使用 泰勒淘汰系数或“TKO”. 衡量这个的公式如下: (子弹重量×速度×子弹直径)/7000. 这是我们在比较中会看到的:

弹药: 理海 XTP .380:(近似数字)90gr * 850fps * .380in
--------
7000
========> 泰尔淘汰系数(TKO): 每轮 4.15
投篮数 7 因此总 TKO:4.15*7 = 29.05
弹药: 理海 XTP .357:(近似数字)140gr * 1100fps * .357in
--------
7000
========> 泰尔淘汰系数(TKO): 每轮 7.85
投篮数 5 因此总 TKO:7.85*5 = 39.25

这非常粗略地表明,使用 25 马格南的 Ruger LCR 比使用 357 的 S&W M&P Bodyguard 获得的火力高出约 380%。 如果我们比较自卫情况下的典型子弹射击量 (50-1),这种差异会变得更大(几乎 3%)。 同样,这绝不是任何事情的科学证明,但仍然是另一个比较标准,特别是如果你想确保每颗发射的子弹真的很重要。]

对 357 magnum 的 Ruger LCR 的一个公平的反对意见是,在如此轻的枪中,如此强大的子弹的后坐力是残酷的。 这是真的——确实如此。 对于对后坐力敏感的人,Ruger 还制造了多种口径的 LCR,包括 9 毫米甚至 22 LR。 但我认为,如果您对后坐力敏感,那么任何轻型枪都不会令人愉快地射击,除非您愿意降低口径,虽然这种口径具有很强的杀伤力,但以不能足够快地阻止攻击者而闻名。 对后坐力敏感的人必须接受物理定律也适用于枪支,如果制动力是质量乘以速度,那么后坐力将与以足够大的速度推进合适大小的子弹所需的能量成正比。

尽管如此,如果你真的想要所有选项中最好的,还有一个选项,虽然不是一个便宜的选项:

Chiappa Rhino 200DS 357 Magnum。

Chiappa Rhino 200DS 357 大酒瓶和短枪管
Chiappa Rhino 200DS 357 大酒瓶和短枪管

这把枪仅重 795 克 28.1 盎司(满载)。 但是,如果以 6 大酒瓶为您提供 357 发子弹。 但它最惊人的特点是其革命性的设计:这把枪从气缸底部而不是顶部发射。 通过将枪膛的轴线降低到几乎到射手的手掌,这大大减少了枪口上升和后坐力。 实际上,这意味着当您射击 357 大酒瓶时,感觉就像是 38。 然而,爆炸声仍然震耳欲聋,这在室外很好(它会吓到攻击者),但在室内则不太好(它可能会破裂你的耳膜)。 它*令人惊讶地*易于射击且非常准确(比 Ruger LCR 或 Bodyguard 更准确​​,即使它们都有短枪管)。 最令人惊奇的是,在同一目标上正确放置后续镜头是多么容易。 后坐力仍然存在,但它是水平的,而不是垂直的。 简而言之——这把枪的人体工程学设计优于市面上的任何左轮手枪或半自动手枪。 很难用语言来表达,人们必须尝试它才能真正相信它。 我个人见过两次无意购买新枪支的人,只用 Chiappa Rhino 射击了两三次,并立即决定购买一支。

最重要的是,有了 Chiappa Rhino,你就得到了一把小枪,不太重,很容易射击,而且这种小武器具有无与伦比的火力。

它的主要缺点? 价格,约800美元。 但考虑到它是由一块坚固的高强度铝加工而成(所有内部零件均由钢加工而成),它配备了光纤瞄准具和 月亮夹,您绝对物有所值。 但是,如果您觉得不需要整天随身携带枪支,那么您可以找到更便宜但更重的选项,这些选项很棒(包括第一张照片中显示的出色的 S&W 686P)。

我不想推荐特定的模型。 事实上,我什至不想让你相信左轮手枪是平民的更好选择。 我什至会欣然承认,一些半自动汽车,例如新的、移植的、 S&W M&P 盾牌,可以很好的日常携带武器。 我的唯一目的是揭穿公司和“战术专家”关于左轮手枪过时或半自动手枪优越的胡说八道。 甚至在某些情况下,精英警察部队更喜欢左轮手枪:一个很好的例子是 Smith & Wesson R8(见下图),它是根据美国特警队的要求设计的,该特警队希望装备特警队的队长进入一座带有强大手枪的建筑物,不会卡住或发生故障,并且在射击时不会击中“铅穿甲弹”携带的盾牌(就像半自动的自行车滑梯那样)。 史密斯和韦森的回应是制造了一把 8 发(!)但非常轻的左轮手枪(1150 克或 40.6 盎司满载),其框架由 合金。 这可以说是最先进的左轮手枪。 我认为它是“太空时代的 686”。

Smith & Wesson R8:可以说是有史以来最先进的左轮手枪(此处展示的是 Cor-Bon DPX .357 Magnum 125 Grain DPX 空心点子弹)
Smith & Wesson R8:可以说是有史以来最先进的左轮手枪(此处展示的是 Cor-Bon DPX .357 Magnum 125 Grain DPX 空心点子弹)

我个人的结论是,左轮手枪仍然非常适合民用自卫需要,无论是在家中、汽车中,还是日常携带。 半自动枪支确实更适合执法部门或军队的原因没有一个适用于平民。 目前几乎完全关注民用半自动枪的真正原因是企业利益、许多“战术射击”“专家”的自私谎言以及大多数人的从众心态。 我鼓励每个人都为自己和自己的利益着想。 我希望上述内容有助于这种反思。

(从重新发布 造酒者的葡萄园 经作者或代表的许可)
 
• 类别: 思想 •标签: 犯罪, 枪支管制, 枪炮 
隐藏286条评论发表评论
忽略评论者...跟随Endorsed Only
修剪评论?
    []
  1. theMann 说:

    Good article as far as it goes, but I will add a few points:

    1. When Saker says most people will fire 1-3 shots in a real firefight, he means one. Most people will have minimal training, outdoors, with hearing protection. Firing a short barreled .357 indoors without protection will result in most dropping the weapon and holding their ears screaming.

    2. Know your target, know what is behind your target. You fire a high penetration round in an apartment and it goes into the next apartment, you are responsible for the results.

    3. 在任何情况下,我都不会向大多数人推荐手枪。 他们需要经过大量培训才能以最低的能力使用。 老实说,对于大多数用户来说,他们最好的功能(如果有的话)就是能够在轨道上固定一个强大的战术灯。 在某人的脸上获得强光,尤其是在天黑之后,是非常具有威慑力的。

    4. 怎么强调都不为过:射击是一门技能,所有的技能都需要训练和练习。 枪支不需要像剑或手脚那样多的训练\练习(这就是人们使用它们的原因),但它们确实需要一些。 如果您不打算投入时间,那么一开始就不要考虑获得武器。 并记住这一点:最不致命的威慑是最好的。

    • 同意: Alden
    • 不同意: anarchyst
  2. peterAUS 说:

    Let me add one more thing: in most jurisdictions as soon as you have stopped a crime by showing your weapon or by using it, you are not allowed to continue firing it. Remember, civilians do not have the right to use deadly force to apprehend a criminal. Which means that as soon as the attack is stopped (whether because the criminal(s) ran in fear or got shot) you have to stop firing.

    Grey area.
    It IS possible to keep firing until the threat is not on anymore. Again, grey area.
    Attack is stopped: the perp is down but still holding his/her weapon..he/she can recover enough to try to fire again. Plenty of fine points here.
    底线不能 这么简单。

    Let’s repeat that again, firing just ONE SINGLE ROUND more than the strict minimum you needed to stop the crime in progress would expose you to prosecution for any of the following: assault with a deadly weapon, manslaughter, homicide or even 2nd degree murder.

    真正。
    But WHO is to decide how many rounds were really needed? There have been cases of unbelievable perp resilience and recovery and renewed threat. Again, truly grey (and dangerous) area with plenty of fine points.

    I have never had to use a firearm to protect myself (thank God for that), but I know a lot of people who have and they are unanimous: as soon as the petty thugs see your gun, they run, especially if you fire it once or, even more so, hit one of them.

    危险的 oversimplification. Truly dangerous.
    And…never? Well…..haha…..but keen on giving an advice?
    有趣。

    嗯,首先是可靠性。

    True, of course.

    在这里,我将揭穿另一个神话:左轮手枪比半自动手枪更可靠。 好吧,他们是。 但差距如此之小,以至于没有显着差异。 由优质制造商生产的现代半自动手枪与左轮手枪一样可靠(有时也会失败!)。 但这是非常糟糕的比较。 我们要比较的不是左轮手枪和半自动手枪,而是平民使用的左轮手枪和半自动手枪!

    同意。

    有故障和所谓的“射手引起的故障”。 后者主要取决于正确使用枪支的复杂性,尤其是在压力下。 虽然现代左轮手枪和现代半自动手枪在可靠性上的差异很小,但当包括射击造成的故障时,它们之间的差异就变得很大了。 诸如不取下保险或忘记在密室中放一发子弹之类的事情。 还有另一种类型的射手导致的故障是未能妥善保养枪支。 例如,弹匣是无法供弹的主要原因(在操纵枪支时,弹匣也往往会脱落,在某些型号中,这会阻止半自动射击)。

    同意。

    To fire a semi-auto you need to fully engage a magazine, put a round in the chamber, disengage the safety (if you used one in the first place) and hold the gun firmly enough to allow it to fully cycle.

    不完全是。
    Glock can be carried safely chambered and ready to fire just by pulling the trigger. The catch is a longer trigger pull.
    Colt .45 has extremely reliable safety so can be (should be) carried chambered and cocked; true, the safety has to be released but then the trigger pull is much shorter/lighter.
    反正…..

    And, here we are coming to REAL reason why semautos ARE better than revolvers:

    除非你扣动锤子,否则扳机将足够重,可以在不使用额外“安全装置”的情况下安全(扣动锤子是你在自卫情况下永远不会做的事情 - 仅在电影中 - 这就是为什么纯粹的自卫左轮手枪通常会有一个“笼罩”(隐藏)的锤子(见下面 Ruger LCR 的照片)。

    两个字: TRIGGER PULL.
    For anything above 6 meters the average DA/revolver trigger pull by untrained person will, likely, make a miss.

    The reason is simple: revolvers were designed around a specific caliber whereas semi-auto calibers were designed to be small enough to fit into a gun’s grip.

    As Colt .45, Desert Eagle and such!?
    在这里停止阅读。

    I am surprised, really. Saker wrote an article where he is giving , essentially, life and death advice to amateurs. And, apparently, he does not know much about the topic. That is a 危险的 组合。

    Now…..thinking about it….haha….actually…that’s not that bad idea.

    I strongly suggest to all Saker fanboys to take this article and the advice here very seriously and do exactly that if/when procuring a firearm for self defense.
    请。

    • 回复: @bluedog
  3. peterAUS 说:

    Have to put this (sort of disclaimer):

    Saker fanboys should follow the advice in the article to the letter.

    Those of you who are reading this and do know the topic/subject (I’d say around 5 % tops here), well, enough said…..

    Now, those of you who just have a gut feeling that, perhaps, advice suggested in the article isn’t quite correct, just one advice: find a good instructor (by reference) and have ONE to ONE conversation with the guy. He’ll do all the explaining, showing, even having you try this/that etc.
    Plenty…plenty of fine points there not even mentioned in the article.

    然后......然后......尝试制定一个基本的想法,这一切是如何运作的,如果你愿意的话,非常小心地从那里开始。
    Your life could depend on that. Or long prison sentence. Or both.
    自由意志。

    • 回复: @Johnny Rico
  4. Note to Unz readers in the USA – Europeans actually DO own a great many civilian firearms, contrary to USA myths; there are perhaps 75-100 million civilian guns in Europe … no ‘carry’ laws, but they are in homes and on farms … for statistics by country:
    http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/home
    Thus Europeans, too, say ‘I like guns’, as in the famous popular music video by Australian Steve Lee, 2min38s:

    • 回复: @peterAUS
    , @Gleimhart
  5. 总的来说,一篇不错的文章,虽然我得出了不同的结论。 我的观察。

    1. If you shoot regularly for fun, you will have already made your choice. Good, use it–the confidence that you have in a gun that you shoot regularly will outweigh any theoretical disadvantages of the weapon selected. The same observation also applies to people inclined to comment on this blog concerning their personal choice of a self-defense weapon–I agree with you. The issue is what recommendation to make to the non-combatant who does not wish to become a shooting enthusiast.

    2. The reason that revolver cartridges are typically much longer than autopistol cartridges is not power. Rather the revolver cartridges are based on 19th Century black powder designs, while autopistol cartridges took advantage of the more powerful and less fouling smokeless powder and are more compact. It is possible to chamber a revolver for an autopistol cartridge, although manufacturers typically don’t shrink the frame size to accommodate the shorter autopistol round, so that advantage is lost.

    3. If the choice is strictly one of home defense, then serious consideration should be given to a shotgun. It fires a cartridge more powerful than any practical autoloader or revolver and light loads (7/8 oz. of shot) in 12 or 20 gauge can be used if the shooter is very recoil sensitive. A double barrel model can be left loaded; you still have to move the safety to fire, but that’s fairly instinctive and doesn’t require too much mastery of the “manual of arms.” If you can’t solve your immediate tactical problem with two 12 or 20 gauge rounds, it’s probably past solving. I’ve seen commenters advocating a 5.56x45mm carbine in this situation, but I think the Saker’s arguments against an autoloading pistol are also cogent when the carbine is considered.

    4. If you don’t want to use a shotgun for home defense (they can be cumbersome), then the revolver is probably the best choice. If you won’t be carrying it, you can use a larger frame, heavier, longer-barrel weapon to soak up some of the recoil.

    5. Cartridge selection in a revolver is key. The Saker recommends .357 Magnum in a short barrel, lightweight revolver. That’s going to kick!! In addition, the blast from a .357 is loud!! The .357 and the .38 Super ACP, in my experience, produce a high-pitched crack that is very unpleasant. (Even being in the next station on a range, next to a shooter with a .38 Super was an experience I grew tired of in one short session.) I think most non-combatants would be demoralized very quickly by a couple of cylinders of full-house .357s. You can train with .38 Special wadcutters, but a recoil-sensitive person is apt to find even these unpleasant in a very lightweight revolver.

    6. My personal recommendation for a carry piece for a very recoil sensitive person would be a .22. Smith&Wesson makes both an eight shot (J frame) and a ten-shot (K frame) revolver. The lack of stopping power in a .22 Long Rifle is a factor, but, in addition to the physical damage inflicted by the bullet, there is the psychological and emotional impact associated with being shot. Someone in a frenzy won’t be stopped and someone intent on other things may not notice a relatively superficial wound, but a criminal who expected “easy pickings” and who discovers that his victim is not only armed, but willing to shoot and is a good enough marksman to land a hit, is unlikely to be inclined to push home an attack. Follow-up hits are easier with a .22 but subsequent hits with any cartridge are not generally as effective as the first one–someone inclined to push home an attack even after being wounded is a formidable, although happily not a typical, adversary.

    7. If you are not recoil sensitive, but uninclined to master the more complicated manual of arms associated with an autoloader, I’d consider a .44 Special revolver. A five-shot .44 is reasonably compact and while the .44 Special certainly kicks, it doesn’t have the blast and high-pitched crack associated with the .357 or even +P .38 Special rounds. The .44 Special gets most of its stopping power from the heavy, large-diameter bullet, so velocity loss from the shorter barrel isn’t as important as in the case of the .357. If you are carrying, however, you really need to much better trained than if you are contemplating a simple home defense.

    8. Although I’ve never used them, I wonder whether laser sights should be considered. The big problem in pistol marksmanship is that the focus must be on the sights, particularly the front sight, and not on the target when the gun is fired. That’s easier said than done, because up until that moment, the focus is on the target–that’s the threat after all. If you see your front sight when firing, you will probably hit; if you don’t you will probably miss, even at ridiculously close ranges. A laser sight that moves the focus to a red dot 在目标上 seems to me a much better optical arrangement. I think some laser sights can be mounted relatively co-axial with the boor as part of the side panes of the butt. Perhaps some readers can share their experience and observations.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
    , @Anonymous
  6. Renoman 说:

    Shotgun man myself. It’s hard to miss with a shotgun and the intimidation factor is huge.

  7. bob sykes 说:

    I agree that simplicity of operation argues for a revolver, and I keep one in my house. I do not carry outside my house, but I live in a civilized, rural area. If I were seriously in danger, I would use my semi-automatic rifle.

    Several years ago, Greg Ellifritz writing for the Buckeye Firearms Association reviewed a large number of gun shot incidents. The article is here,

    https://www.buckeyefirearms.org/alternate-look-handgun-stopping-power

    He concluded that if the only goal were deterrence then all calibers were equally effective, from .22 LR to .44 magnum. In general, gunshot wounds are so painful, even a .22, that the person shot will run away. Of course, with a .22 the person shot can run away, and if he is very motivated can continue the assault. With a .44, he is dead.

    Ellifritz’ recommendation was to carry something you are comfortable with and learn how to use it. A .38 spl is probably optimum for most people, but .22’s, .25’s, and .32’s will work in most home defense situations.

    If you are in war zone, get an autoloader in a powerful caliber, at least 9 mm, but many like the venerable .45 ACP.

  8. I confronted intruders in my home in the US (Los Angeles) on two occasions, the first time during the afternoon I heard a noise and went to check it out, I almost bumped into the intruder but when he clocked the M1 carbine I was carrying he was gone in a flash. The second time I watched the intruder taking the glass slats out of a window before climbing through. He was halfway in when I cocked the 12G Winchester Defender and the sound of that was enough to send him packing and very quickly. This was around 1am.

    One time in Australia, also around 1am, two intruders broke in but I heard them (we aren’t allowed to own guns in Australia so we’re practically forced to beat people to death) and confronted them brandishing a huge knife in one hand and a baseball bat in the other, I was screaming obscenities and pounding the wooden floorboards with the bat, I was also naked so I scared the crap out of them, they didn’t know whether I was going to kill ’em or fuck ’em (or kill ’em AND fuck ’em, but that’s a little kinky even for me) They split pronto, dropping the screwdriver they’d used to get in.

    Now I rely on my wary dog to keep guard and I also keep a golf club handy. Although I support the 2nd amendment for Americans I must confess it is much less stressful living in a place where gun violence is far less common. In Australia if you harm an intruder you are likely to be charged with a crime.

    • 回复: @Dirk Manley
  9. Daruma 说: • 您的网站

    喜欢你的作品并同意大多数。 我认为你在这里很好; 我在 +P 中使用带有激光握把的 LCR。 我拍了很多,自动装弹机没有问题,但它们超出了我妻子的能力,所以 LCR 位于我们的床架上。

    Keep up the postings!

    达磨

  10. TG 说:

    是的,说得好。 荣誉。

    1. You mentioned it, but I think that it cannot be emphasized enough: first, live in a safe area. That’s worth more than all the guns you can carry.

    2. I am not a gun-control nut, but guns ARE dangerous tools. Especially if children are running around (you know, children, those tiny self-destructive humans with no common sense and who bore easily and like to get into things), you should keep your guns locked up. Again, you need to play the odds: in a safe neighborhood, a gun unlocked in a nightstand is far more likely to be picked up by one of your kids (or the kid of a visitor, or an angry spouse) or stolen, than to save your life – but of course, it becomes less available in an emergency. In a bad neighborhood (if you just have no choice here) or things start to go to pot, the odds shift, you might be better off with the gun more accessible. No hard and fast rules here but should be kept in mind.

    3. Others have mentioned: shotguns. Yes, cumbersome, and the gun in your hand is worth infinitely more than the one over your mantle, but intimidating and hard to miss with (not so much from the shot spread as the length of the barrel).

    4. 暴动。 这些不会经常发生,但是当它们发生时,你会更喜欢霰弹枪或步枪。 问问洛杉矶的一家韩国店主。

    5. 养一只狗。 在大多数社区,它比枪更有价值。 问题不是要得到一只斗牛犬,而是要睡在大厅里并对陌生人吠叫的东西。 一只可卡犬就可以了。 正如您所提到的,犯罪分子大多是懦弱的,并且正在寻找容易的分数。 一个体面的看门狗总是“开启”。 对付一只会吠的狗很麻烦,犯罪分子很可能会转向一个更安静、更诱人的目标。 晚上不保护你的时候,狗会捡到流口水的网球。 谁是好孩子? 是的,你是!!

    • 回复: @bluedog
    , @Stan d Mute
  11. n230099 说:

    “When no one knows who is armed…everyone is”.

  12. @peterAUS

    谢谢你,彼得。

    I find the whole thing rather odd. The lack of a conventional safety on the Glock, one of the most popular handguns out there, seems like something that would have made it into a 6,300 primer on buying your first gun.

    Here’s a good book I chanced upon recently:

    战争的未来:劳伦斯·弗里德曼的历史

    It is an excellent survey of all the topics we discuss here including the many that the Saker misses or omits. Your comments are always very helpful.

    新年快乐!

    • 回复: @YetAnotherAnon
  13. bluedog 说:
    @peterAUS

    Hmm once you have shot the perp and he appears incapacitated you have to quit firing,well not true at least not in N.Y. for the minute he cross’s the threshold he’s fair game.Rochester N.Y. three would be gang banger’s out of NYC kicked in the door of a house only to be met by its owner with a 12 ga. the first one went down with the first shot got back up to receive a second which killed him,the second one got a gut full of bird shot he crawled out and hid under a truck, the third one got away,no charges were filed even tho the first one had been shot and shot again for the owner deemed he was still a threat, and so is the law at least here that is…

  14. anonymous • 免责声明 说:

    until the law enforcement officers show up.

    在正常情况下。 但是,请记住,在特殊情况下,它们不会出现。 让我指出一个事实,例如罗德尼金骚乱,卡特里娜飓风期间的新奥尔良,弗格森等,警察在最初几天就消失了,以照顾自己的家和家人,并没有去为其他人伸出脖子。 他们的第一忠诚是对自己和彼此。 您是靠自己的,还请注意,上述事件都无法以任何方式预见。 许多人很容易因为一次暴徒与警察的互动出错而导致另一场民事紧急情况并破坏了他们的房屋价值。

    These are the latest stats this year for Chicago:

    As of this writing, 11 am Jan 2nd of 2018 so far this new year there’s already 10 shot here in Chicago, two fatally, can you believe it? It’s freezing out so it’s not as if there’s a bunch of gangbangers loitering on the streets. However, it’s all a black thing, it mostly emanates from the black third of the population and secondarily from what’s classified as Hispanic. The white/other category provided less than 3% of the victims last year and who knows what they’re classifying as white/other these days.

    有理由怀疑您或其他人即将被谋杀。

    You never really know what their actions will be though, do you? Being just one light trigger pull away from death at the hands of some hype is an unsettling experience. There’s lots of videos of robberies turned into shootouts on the internet, many coming out of Brazil, so one can see how some of that plays out in real life.

  15. bluedog 说:
    @TG

    The mistake many gun owner make is they go out and buy a gun bring home and tell their kids now don’t you touch this and put it up high so little fingers can’t reach it.We have always had guns in the house and when the kids and grandkid’s got old enough to have an interest in them they were permitted to play with them to their heart content, the only stipulation was they had to ask me first, and they found why there is no mystery to them at all,especially after they pinched their fingers under the hammer a few times,from there they graduated to gun safety and pinking a few cans out back,I’ve always keep a loaded .38 SP in the night stand next to the bed but then again our kids were not permitted in our bedroom and lol a few swats on the backside would serve to remind if needed, oops not permitted in today’s sick society…

    • 回复: @anarchyst
  16. Bearing in mind that Saker is addressing persons who have little or no experience with firearms, I believe his is solid advice. Nothing wrong with a revolver and, as he points out, much to recommend it.

    I would like to draw people’s attention a much underrated round that would have a place for women or those averse to recoil and that is the 22 magnum. Not only are they comparatively inexpensive so that target practice is affordable, but they actually pack a wallop far in excess of what the 22 part of the name would lead one to believe. Lack of significant recoil makes follow up rounds doable. Small diameter bullets make for a small, light concealed carry even as a revolver.

    Here are the ballistics (approx, like the Sakers).

    muzzle velocity Ft.lbs Energy

    22 mag. 40 grain bullet. 2000 fps. 355 ft lbs.

    38 special +P 158 grain 915 fps. 294 ft lbs.

    9 毫米 115 粒 1200 fps 380 英尺磅。

    357 mag 158 grain 1400 fps 700 ft lbs.

    See? The 22 mag is nothing to sneeze at! However I believe that only Taurus is making a small revolver in 22mag.

  17. peterAUS 说:
    @Diversity Heretic

    Perhaps some readers can share their experience and observations.

    Well….concise and information packed comment with a reasonable request; good manner demands a reply.
    Personally, I am not fond of giving advice on Web re self-defense (armed or unarmed) for a couple of reasons. The most important is, it CAN affect one’s life (or lives he/she holds dear) and feels somehow….不负责任 ,它是 个人.

    This topic is dead serious and again, I am surprised that Saker decided to tackle it.
    Perhaps some inside joke I am missing!?

    Having said that, a couple of thoughts:
    Self-defense (armed or unarmed) is a highly 个人 matter. In practical terms it depends, mostly, on a person who is doing it.

    所有关于该主题的喋喋不休都缺少该元素。

    There are people who are natural fighters, people who will never fight and are natural victims, and everything in between. Each of them should have his/her own approach to the topic, and it’s highly individual.

    For handguns it gets even to a hand size, length of fingers, hand/finger strength etc.

    As I mentioned before….plenty of fine details that can be addressed only by person by person approach and by an 有经验 讲师。

    然后, 实践. If one wants to be effective he/she 必须 practice. More practice, more effective. As in everything we do.

    That “front sight” thing. Well…hehe…depends how far the “target” is. Again, a little detail missing from the article/”conversation”. If a perp is holding your left and is about to stab you, you can shoot him from a hip. If a perp is shooting at you from a cover (car) across a road, it’s two hand grip with a rest and front sight.

    Again…details…details…details….

    Caliber, again, another serious conversation. Books have been written about it. How much damage a human being can take.
    There have been innumerable examples of unbelievable resilience. Miami Shootout Saker mentioned is just one of them. A perp shall die in 60 seconds from a huge blood loss (severed artery) but in meantime he is firing, with skill, his semi auto rifle. Etc..etc…..

    Shotgun vs handgun. Personally, shotgun for home defense always, but, one can’t carry 12 gauge around in a shopping mall. Etc…etc….

    然后, 风险评估, another element missing from the article. WHO is the threat?
    An occasional petty burglar seeking money for a quick heroin/pick the drug thing ….or an organized “gang banger” team? Details…dangerous, deadly details.

    Back to practice. One MUST practice. It’s funny….actually.
    One can spend a certain amount of time doing a personal hygiene (health…life…), but can’t spend 10 () minutes every day practicing deadly self defense (health and life again). Weird, isn’t it?
    When I say deadly, one misses and the bullet goes into neighborhood kid playground….

    In general, gunshot wounds are so painful, even a .22, that the person shot will run away.

    Hell NO.
    A 6.4, 250 pounds guy high on adrenaline/drug, riddled with rounds can keep coming at you with a knife and gut you. True, he’ll die a minute later but too late for you. Plenty of examples like that.

    This comment thread can easily go thousand pages (that inside joke/intention Saker actually wants I suspect). Just go to any of “gun sites” and enjoy. Or get into conversations at gun clubs/ranges.

    Bottom line, AGAIN, advising an amateur about the topic by a Web article is not only amateurish but 不负责任.
    Feels even…immature.

    • 回复: @Diversity Heretic
  18. @ThreeCranes

    I think that both Smith&Wesson and Ruger offer revolvers chambered for the .22 Magnum. But energy isn’t usually a good measure of stopping power–that’s better measured by momentum and cross-sectional area. So the .22 Magnum isn’t all that much better than the .22 Long Rifle, despite those high energy figures. (2000 feet per second may be from a rifle, not a four-inch barrel revolver with a flash gap.) The drawback to the .22 Magnum is that it is more expensive than the .22 Long Rifle, so a person may not practice as much. A revolver chambered for the .22 Long Rifle can also be used with .22 Shorts, to introduce really recoil sensitive persons to sight alingment and trigger squeeze before you introduce any recoil; a revolver chambered for .22 Magnum will not accept .22 Shorts or .22 Long Rifle, although I think a Ruger Single Six may have an interchangeable cylinder. I don’t recommend a single action revolver for self-defense, however.

    • 回复: @Chris Mallory
    , @ThreeCranes
  19. @peterAUS

    当然,当你觉得这样的评论很业余、不负责任和不成熟时,你可以不评论任何话题。 是的,任何考虑使用武器进行自卫的人都应该接受指导,但基本的枪法和枪支操作不是击剑或深奥的东方武术。 顺便说一下,并不是所有的讲师都称职。 我记得几年前读到一所射击学校,该学校教学生在近距离使用隐形射击,在远距离使用隐形射击,并以某种方式在两者之间转换! 这个建议让我觉得很疯狂,当我写信给 美国步枪手 past the late Jeff Cooper, he commented that anyone can claim to be an expert and even open a shooting school.

    Reading an article such as the Saker wrote and the comment thread should give a “newbie” some basic information about weapon types and cartridges. It won’t substitute for hands-on experience, but it’s not a bad start.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  20. peterAUS 说:
    @Brabantian

    Hahaha…..so true.

    It’s always funny to hear Americans showing that 2nd Amendment into other people’s faces calling them “not free” and “unarmed”.
    Clueless doesn’t even begin to describe it.

    Now, it is true that most of Americans do have an easier access to firearms.
    It’s also true that in some parts of this world one can have weapons Americans can just dream about (or being very rich if one catches my drift).

    In those parts of this world where little people have a LONG history (longer than history of USA) of fighting against an oppression (domestic/foreign) a serious firearm is just a part of a household. Not necessarily registered or visible, but, my God it is there and those people are capable and willing to use it.

    Now, true, this article and consequent comments are about Americans, so focusing on them would make sense.

    Again, bottom line, there is so much expertise in USA about the topic that just doesn’t make any sense reading about it on the Internet.
    Just find a good instructor, PLENTY of them around.
    Having said that, even more true, plenty of fakes and straight idiots too.

    做出明智的选择。

    • 回复: @Gleimhart
  21. 不要相信警察的宣传。 警察是平民。 大多数警察对枪支知之甚少。 添加警察不会使任何情况变得更糟。

  22. @Diversity Heretic

    a revolver chambered for .22 Magnum will not accept .22 Shorts or .22 Long Rifle,

    You have this backwards. A 22 Magnum revolver will chamber and fire a 22LR, BUT the chamber is slightly larger and you will get split cases if you shoot a LR in a magnum.

    • 回复: @Diversity Heretic
  23. Dutch Boy 说:

    The Saker missed item #8 in the list of the advantages of a semi-automatic: you are more likely to hit what you shoot at (no minor detail).
    https://www.personaldefenseworld.com/2016/11/revolvers-semi-autos-comparison/

  24. @Diversity Heretic

    You’re right. When I multiply velocity x mass (= momentum) as Saker recommended, the value for the 22 mag is just a little over half that of the 38, 9mm etc.

    哦,好吧,另一个宠物理论尘埃落定。

    Still, the 22 round is smaller and cheaper so a person may be inclined to practice more and won’t have quite so much of that objectionable revolver cylinder bulge in their pocket. Cue Mae West quip….

  25. @Chris Mallory

    Amend my previous post to read: “A revolver chambered for .22 Magnum will not safely fire a .22 Long Rifle cartridge.”

  26. “Let’s repeat that again, firing just ONE SINGLE ROUND more than the strict minimum you needed to stop the crime in progress would expose you to prosecution for any of the following: assault with a deadly weapon, manslaughter, homicide or even 2nd degree murder.”

    In many places, the fact that you fired even one round may be used against you for daring to not surrender your well-being to the pros.

    Seriously, shoot with what you are comfortable with. If you aren’t comfortable shooting any gun, you probably shouldn’t have one. I have a Beretta 92 because that is what I carried and shot for years, but I was also proficient with 38 cal revolvers and could comfortably put one to use in self defense.

    对于训练有素的射手来说,Saker 80% 的失误率很高,但他们在 80 年代向我们展示的研究表明,在近战(<2 英尺)中,至少有 3/10 的射击失误,这主要是由于仓促射击. 这在第三世界的地狱洞中是有用的知识,在那里我们可以随身携带的子弹数量有限,但它很好地转化为这里的生活:训练以保持相对冷静(相对......毕竟你正面临威胁),充分瞄准(激光瞄准器是不错的玩具,但如果它是一个合理大小的质心,你可能会击中你指向的东西),然后扣动扳机(而不是在恐慌或匆忙中猛拉扳机,只是为了得到一个射击)将意味着浪费更少的射击以及阻止威胁所需的射击更少。

    • 回复: @Anonymous
  27. 我有一些狡辩。 我的资历:拥有 4 支左轮手枪、2 支半自动手枪、3 支杠杆步枪、2 支半自动步枪、1 支霰弹枪。 有3个携带许可证,并经过培训。 频繁的范围练习,包括我背上的范围 40。

    1. 并不是 90% 的攻击都可以通过展示枪支来阻止。 是 97%。 这是一个比看起来更大的差异。

    2. I prefer a revolver for the nightstand because there’s nothing to think about. If the gun comes from a quality manufacturer, it will ALWAYS work. Still, the article overstates the difficulty of semi-auto pistols. My winter-time carry gun, a FN Five-Seven, carries 20 very high velocity and quite lethal 5.7x28mm rounds. (The shooter at Ft. Hood, Texas used this gun to murder 9 people.) I carry with a round in the chamber and the safety on. Flick the lever, and you’re good to go. I don’t like the “safety-less” pistols, i.e. Glock, because of the possibility of mistaken discharge, as the author mentions.

    3. The article omits any mention of shotguns or rifles. They are ALWAYS more lethal than handguns — FAR more so because the long barrels allow the projectiles to attain higher velocity. A 12- or 20-gauge shotgun is highly lethal, and the shot won’t penetrate apartment walls. If, like me, you live in the country or in a single-family house well separated from neighbors, a rifle works very well too. My shotgun is an antique break-action that loads only one round, so my broom closet weapon is a Henry Big Boy in .357 magnum, with 10 rounds in the tube.

    You sure as hell do NOT want to be the tweaker who breaks into our house. My Henry rifle will come close to cutting you in half. My next purchase, a pump shotgun, will come even closer.

    4. Caliber is often discussed, heatedly. There is research (see the link in this post) that shows .22 to be a lot more lethal than most gunners realize. Make that .22 magnum, 45 grain “Critical Defense” from Hornady, and you’re fine. More than fine in fact; .22WMR (aka magnum) is infamous in emergency rooms, because once the bullet enters the body it’s anyone’s guess where it bounces around.

    If not .22, then .357 magnum in a handgun or rifle is highly lethal. The issue with .357 magnum is recoil, so if that’s your home defense choice in a revolver, you need a heavy, full-framed one. Mine is a Dan Wesson 715, but the Ruger GP-100 and S&W 686 are excellent. I like Dan Wesson for the swappability of barrels and superior overall quality.

    I have a Ruger LCR revolver in .357 magnum. It’s my least favorite gun. Even with lighter .38 Special, the recoil is punishing. I’d recommend that LCR buyers get that firearm in either .22 WMR or .327 Federal, to reduce recoil and the flinching and inaccuracy that stout recoil tends to cause. Too many men equate recoil sensitivity to lack of masculinity, when in fact it’s a reptile brain function only partly overcome by training.

    In any given caliber, felt recoil in a handgun is directly propotional to the gun’s weight. (Chiappa’s Rhino is a clever design that attempts to reduce recoil by slightly rechanneling it, but the recoil is still there.) This is why a 1-pound LCR revolver in .357 magnum is going to be a much tougher gun to fire accurately than a full-framed Dan Wesson, Ruger, S&W, or Taurus revolver, which weigh between 40 and 50 ounces unloaded. There is very little recoil from .22, either LR or WMR, and not much from the various .32 rounds. For someone who isn’t an enthusiast, this is why I tend to point them toward .22WMR.

    5. 不要忽视 North American Arms 的迷你左轮手枪。 它们重 6 盎司,通常为 22WMR,通常包括一个 .22LR 气缸。 它们可以毫不显眼地放入衬衫口袋中,并具有巧妙而有效的安全缺口机制。 缺点是它们只能单动,并且在大约 20 英尺后几乎没有用。 但大多数实际射击的枪战都发生在较短的距离内。 NAA mini 的 45 粒、Hornady Critical Defense .22WMR 子弹很可能会杀死攻击者。

    I bought my NAA “Wasp” for comic relief. But after shooting a few hundred rounds out of it, I have gained a lot of respect for it. This is a very well-made firearm, and with practice you can be more accurate than you’d think. And, very importantly, they’ll never see you coming. Not in my opinion a home defense weapon, but an excellent summer-time carry gun.

    This article at the link makes excellent reading regarding the caliber wars:

    http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/alternate-look-handgun-stopping-power

    • 同意: 95Theses
    • 回复: @RadicalCenter
    , @Poupon Marx
  28. Ofcourse surviving the ordeal is a first. But I am always intrested in the aftermath.
    When the trembling and the shaking starts. When realising you could have been killed or just killed someone. When trying to go to sleep.

    • 回复: @Avalanche-the-second
  29. Iberiano [AKA "firewalls7582"] 说:

    I’ve been a LEO my entire adult life basically, and I think the article is pretty good. Although I carry for a different reason and under different authority, as it were, the bottom line is, all you need is a 5-6 shot revolver and some basic (Gracie) Jiu Jitsu–and to train both routinely.

    All this high powered crap dealers sell to civilians and all the Krav in the world, will not serve you as well as going to shoot monthly at your local range, with a basic revolver, or if you must, some basic semi-auto (even a 22 cal). Then, practice (self-defense) BJJ, 2-3 times a week. Be aware of your surroundings, limit confrontations and be ready.

    Nothing is 100 percent failsafe, and you can get stabbed or shot standing in line minding your own business, but train in the basics, as LIVE as possible (thus BJJ over other TMAs) and you’ll be fine.

    • 回复: @anarchyst
  30. @ThreeCranes

    Agreed on the .22WMR round. The guy at the shop tried to talk me out of buying one for my wife, saying that the.22 mag wasn’t any more effective in terms of velocity than the .22LR in a short barrel. That wasn’t the advantage I was looking for. The biggest advantage of the .22mag that I saw was that you could get JHP rounds in .22mag at WalMart.

    In 2002, I bought my wife a Taurus 941 w/ a 2″ barrel in .22WMR because it’s a low recoil round that will deliver a JHP bullet with enough energy behind it to penetrate heavy clothing. Also, the .22mag is loud, which is a good thing if she has to use it. A single loud gunshot is likely to make an attacker back off even if she misses.

    Oh, and the Taurus cost \$225.

  31. Gleimhart 说:
    @Brabantian

    No such myths exist to any significant degree in America. To be perfectly frank, Americans just don’t generally think about Europeans very much, except when Europeans get in our face and leave us no other choice (like now).

    I don’t care if you have guns or if you don’t have guns. What I do know is that Europeans never miss an opportunity to lecture Americans on our own gun rights laws, as if it’s any of their business, or if they have any expertise in the matter.

    I also know that Europeans in public settings are easy prey to the 3rd World hordes who roam their streets in a way that most Americans need not be. Moreover, I know that “hot burglaries” (burglaries made while the occupants are at home) occur at monumentally higher percentages than they do in the U.S., because in the U.S. there is a much greater chance of a burglar walking in on someone aiming a barrel at their face, and criminals don’t like that.

    • 回复: @anarchyst
  32. Gleimhart 说:

    This article may be helpful to Europeans, Canadians and Australians, but this is all very basic introductory type stuff for Americans. There’re a number of excellent books out there that cover this ground and much more. Not sure why this article is imagined to be so necessary.

  33. Gleimhart 说:
    @peterAUS

    You’re full of it, but beginning your asinine post with “Hahaha…” was the tipoff that what was likely going to be pure bunk.

    首先,美国人对欧洲枪支所有权的所谓“神话”是完全不真实的。 我们真的只是不在乎欧洲人做什么或不做什么。 非美国人痴迷于美国人,但我们没有相应的爱管闲事的关于外国枪支或枪支所有权的好管闲事。

    Second, the notion that foreigners have access to guns that “Americans can only dream about” is one of the dumbest things I’ve ever read on the internet — and that’s saying something. Attending just one average American gun show would knock the likes of you back on your rear-end, and we have hundreds of them on a weekly basis. The variety, deep catalogue, and custom firearms gunsmith designs is staggering.

    No country on earth has more of a history of people defending themselves with modern firearms. Americans did more to invent modern firearms than all other peoples combined.

    This article is unnecessary for Americans. Just really basic stuff for us, but foreigners may find some use in it. There are whole books and courses and instructors that cover so much more ground than just these introductory comments by The Saker. Americans don’t need gun advice from foreigners. We’re the experts. There wasn’t even any mention about hollow points, for crying out loud. I know you don’t realize why that’s important, and I’m not going to tell you.

    You may want to dial it back a few notches before you play the fool again.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
    , @Alden
  34. peterAUS 说:
    @Diversity Heretic

    Just made a long and detailed reply, took a good look …and deleted it.
    我们不想在开放的互联网上教/培训人们。 或者我不想。 曾经。

    Re that sights thing, just:
    Range/peripheral vision.
    Board test.Try it.

    it’s not a bad start.

    Only as a realization that the topic is both dead serious and complicated, and has to be addressed as such.

    至于

    anyone can claim to be an expert and even open a shooting school.

    Takes ONE exercise to see how good handgun shot a person is. 5 minutes on a range, tops.
    That doesn’t necessarily mean he/she is good at passing that expertise to somebody.
    And shooting is just one of basic blocks of “handgun self defense”. There are other blocks, some of them even more important.

    反正…..

  35. BeB 说:

    枪是给枪手的。 也就是说,在实践和理论中都了解它们的人。 如果你不是枪手,你最好用砍刀。

  36. Bill Jones 说:

    And there’s your first error:
    “This is absolutely crucial: law enforcement officers have to enforce the law and protect everybody. ”

    谢谢你的笑声。

    • 同意: fish
    • 回复: @dearieme
  37. anarchyst 说:
    @bluedog

    The key to educating children and firearms is to reduce the natural curiosity that children have about these things. Allow them to handle an unloaded firearm when they are quite young, always reinforcing the fact that they are not to touch a firearm without permission or an adult being present. If they see someone else with a firearm, they are to “get away” and tell an adult. When handling a firearm, children will usually remark how “heavy” it is…
    When they are older, take them to a range or safe shooting spot and show them the destructive nature of firearms utilizing water-filled jugs or other targets, emphasizing the fact that shooting a firearm will destroy whatever they are aiming at. This also instills good firearm and range safety practices that will last for a lifetime.
    Marksmanship can be started with CO2, pre-charged or spring-type BB guns. There are BB pistols that simulate “blowback” firearms action which are quite useful in firearms training for children as they simulate the action of “real” firearms.
    The key is to relieve that natural curiosity that children have about firearms. Satisfy that natural curiosity and they will be competent firearms owners (and advocates) for life.

    • 同意: bluedog
  38. anarchyst 说:
    @Gleimhart

    There was a case in “merrie old England” a number of years ago where a homeowner defended himself against intruders with a baseball bat. The police and the “crown” (prosecutor) determined that he used “too much force” against the intruder, and in fact, transported him in the same police car as the intruder. He actually got a stiffer sentence than the intruder who broke into his house.
    You see, in most European countries, the “crown” is the only entity that has the right to self-defense.

    • 回复: @pyrrhus
    , @Alden
  39. anarchyst 说:
    @Iberiano

    Then why don’t YOU limit yourself to a 5 or 6 shot revolver… while on duty.
    It is FACT that most LEOs in the USA are notoriously poor shots. In fact, civilians who are firearms literate, quite often, train more frequently, and are MORE proficient than most LEOs.
    You bring up an excellent point about the importance of “situational awareness”–being aware of your surroundings, and always looking for a “way out”.
    Many people (LEOs and liberals included) have the mistaken assumption that a person who is legally carrying a firearm is going to be cocky, arrogant and reckless…nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, those who carry are MORE careful not to get into any confrontational situation.
    As civilians are more restricted in the use of firearms for self-defense and the defense of others, it is a testimony to their abilities, cautionary behavior and general firearms demeanor that they quite often put LEOs to shame, when it comes to defensive shootings.

  40. peterAUS 说:
    @Gleimhart

    I’ll reply, not because of you, but of some people reading all this.
    I know your type and I steer well clear of them but your types keep posting similar bullshit and it does need responding. You know, fair and balanced, opposing views etc.

    首先,美国人对欧洲枪支所有权的所谓“神话”是完全不真实的。 我们真的只是不在乎欧洲人做什么或不做什么。 非美国人痴迷于美国人,但我们没有相应的爱管闲事的关于外国枪支或枪支所有权的好管闲事。

    所有相反的证据。
    That …attitude…of yours can be seen, in spades, everywhere where people talk about violence, self-defense, guns and similar stuff. Your types are so thick that you don’t even register it.

    Second, the notion that foreigners have access to guns that “Americans can only dream about” is one of the dumbest things I’ve ever read on the internet — and that’s saying something. Attending just one average American gun show would knock the likes of you back on your rear-end, and we have hundreds of them on a weekly basis. The variety, deep catalogue, and custom firearms gunsmith designs is staggering.

    Toys for boys.
    Can you take down an armored vehicle with those toys? How about a helicopter gunship? Or a patrol boat?
    Belt fed machineguns with optics don’t even count here.

    Because in a lot of places of this world, Europe included, that weaponry IS in people’s hands.
    Not for showing of and feeding egos and grown men childish delusions.
    Well hidden, well maintained, and owned by people who do know how to use them. And are more than willing to use them should it come to that.
    I guess your types didn’t even register this fact before.

    No country on earth has more of a history of people defending themselves with modern firearms.

    I grant you that, for an individual/small group of people against other individual/small group of people.
    But, you have failed miserably in defending an individual/group against the power of the state.
    而且我确实相信 2nd 不是关于“男孩的玩具”和自卫。 这是关于国家的滥用。 你们最后一次尝试失败是在 1866 年。不要指望 Waco/Ruby Ridge。 或者这最后一个与 LaVoy Finicum。
    I could post here a LONG list of peoples who have been doing that, with firearms, before you guys even got your country.

    Americans don’t need gun advice from foreigners. We’re the experts.

    Ah….the attitude.

    here wasn’t even any mention about hollow points, for crying out loud. I know you don’t realize why that’s important, and I’m not going to tell you.

    Hahaha……oh man. Your lack of perception is staggering. But, expected from your types.

    You may want to dial it back a few notches before you play the fool again

    完全是我的观点。

    • 巨魔: Twodees Partain
  41. Gleimhart 说:
    @peterAUS

    It is significant to note that 每周 assertion made by you here is incorrect, delusional, and just plain odd.

    You didn’t actually 反驳 anything. Instead, you 摆姿势, and you’re quite poor at it by the way.

    You steer clear of my type? Son, you haven’t the faintest clue what “my type” is, as “my type” is not discernible on the simple account of my having pointed out your idiocy.

    The article was plainly about revolvers vs. semi-autos and you keep yacking on about toys for boys? — armored vehicles? — gunships? — and helicopters? You’re not even intelligent enough to understand the parameters of the topic, much less the facts pertaining to those parameters.

    And you didn’t list 什么 that is not in American hands or is not obtainable here. Yours were some jaw-dropping statements, one after the other. Seriously. How are people like you even formed. You can’t simply will phony facts into existence, little man. Tomorrow I will show your post to some of my fellow Americans who know even more than I do and I will enjoy gauging their reactions. Probably first their eyes roll before they break out into laughter at the poser foreigner who talks from the abysmal depths of his rectum. Yes, we will have a good laugh at your expense.

    You’re like so many anti-American lowlifes: You think you know what you’re talking about, and you laughably think you know more about the subject as it pertains to my country than I do. You go straight from the Civil War to Waco and Ruby Ridge. That’s your awesome “historical” knowledge on display. You’re a whack job if there ever was one.

    You seemed to take issue with my comment about hollow points, but you didn’t say why. All you did was jabber on about “perspective” and “my type” (again). Hollow points are 恰恰 关于本文的主题,在这里你表现得好像我没有提出它的正当理由,而你 仍然 don’t even know why I did, because you’re an amateur hour 波塞尔.

    Just admit it: You’ve never even shot a gun, have you? Your “toys for boys” comment told me quite emphatically that you are a wannabe “macho man” who suffers from some genuine hangups.

    What a nitwit. I told you to dial it back. You should’ve listened.

    你被解雇了。

    • 回复: @peterAUS
    , @FB
  42. @peterAUS

    C’mon Peter, the person you are responding to has you pegged. Most Euros cannot begin to fathom the difference between gun availability and ownership in the US compared to Europe. I found that people simply didn’t believe me when I mentioned the (meagre) collection of firearms that I had while living in the US.

    I just don’t see how you can even make the statements that you have and expect to retain any credibility here but then a brief look at your previous posts shows clearly just how wrapped up you are in your (former) military identity and how much it means to you to be perceived as one tough hombre. Maybe you are but usually the ones that need to be seen as such aren’t.

    Australians used to have reasonable access to guns but that was before the lying rodent war-criminal John Howard took them all away based on a single false-flag incident.

    • 回复: @bluedog
  43. pyrrhus 说:
    @theMann

    The Saker states that cops are required to enforce the law and protect people from violence. This is not true. The Supreme Court has specifically ruled that police have NO duty to intervene in a violent situation or protect you, even if it is happening right in front of them. Moreover, in many cases police arrive long after an “incident” (45 minutes in a case I am familiar with) or not at all….
    其次,他谈到了 1-3 次射门……荒谬。 在家庭入侵中,您将继续射击,直到问题得到解决,无论是通过撞击还是所涉及的罪犯的逃跑。 因此17发弹匣的巨大优势......至于教某人使用手枪射击的难度,如果他们相当聪明,根本不难。

  44. pyrrhus 说:
    @anarchyst

    Europeans gave up their innate human right to defend themselves a while back, and hence are headed for the ash heap of history…Americans didn’t. Hence, outside the ghettos America has very little violent crime, very little burglary or home invasion. And childish Antifas don’t scare us a bit…

  45. dearieme 说:
    @Bill Jones

    Quite. Did you see the recent youtube of the cowardly policeman murdering the sobbing man who was on his knees in the hotel corridor? I’d like to think it was faked but I assume it wasn’t.

    • 回复: @pyrrhus
  46. peterAUS 说:
    @Gleimhart

    Wow…..what a hostility there.
    My…my…..

    Now I am curious. Why’s that?
    I doubt it’s because I made some “stupid comment”. I make plenty of them all the time, according to many, and I have seen some testy replies/posts, but, yours is……next level.

    Whoah, really.

    What really bothers you? C’mon…please…tell me. I mean, after all that venom we got somehow “Internet intimate” I guess.
    Is that life in general? Or a wife? Divorce perhaps? Boss? Job? Middle age?
    The simmering rage just needs venting somewhere?

    I don’t know, but, feels a bit unbalanced. The animosity I mean. The balance between that anger and reason for a disagreement. Almost as you’ve just waited for….somebody…anybody…to unleash all that.

    You know that your government monitors all this, of course.
    显然,你是一个喜欢“枪”的人。 您的帖子可以轻松地对您进行简介。
    Are you sure that posting all that……..rage……….would sit well with “that person owning a firearm”?

    那么……你是怎么做到的? 我的意思是,在现实生活中拥有控制权?
    You, I presume, carry. And, obviously, have a very short fuse.
    How do you manage that control? Must be an impressive feat. Creates a lot of pressure too. And the pressure needs releasing. Like now.
    Impressive I give it to you.

    Now, actually, having said all that you do have a point, hollow but the point regardless.
    I did derail the thread and Saker did warn against it.
    If we talk about “revolvers vs autos” you were correct and I was not. I slipped into “2 Amendment” thing with that “Americans/Europeans” comment.
    A food for thought you, in all that rage, missed was access to military grade weaponry in some parts of Europe. I am sure that you have some contacts who did a stint in Balkans (even Ukraine), for example. Ask them about the topic if you wish.

    And, yes, hollow points…..and then custom loads, and then custom grips, with custom sights, blah…blah…I am sure you could talk for days about all that.
    Why don’t you give us a brief intro here?
    Could even help with that simmering “red” inside.

    You’ve never even shot a gun, have you?

    See, that rage can really affect your perception.
    And with all those guns at your disposal, and all that ammo, and all that expertise you probably have in handling that…I don’t know….feels as ….something just waiting to BOOM.

    Now, I guess you have fired a lot and are good with guns.
    这个怎么样:
    Standing, in a trench. Target is something as B-27 Black Silhouette, range 200 meters. No wind.
    Standing, two hand grip, elbows resting. 9 mm handgun, custom sights. 8 rounds fired.
    How many rounds could you put anywhere in black?
    C’mon, impress us.

    Ah, another one:
    Standing, in a trench. Target the same, range 400 meters. Weapon a version of AK-47.
    Iron sights. Single shots. Say, 10. How many hits you could comfortably make anywhere in “black”?

    Or we’ll have another outburst instead?
    没关系。
    有什么帮助。 只要该控件在现实生活中保持“开启”状态。
    Not easy, sometimes, a?
    And getting harder…..

    但是,如果你现在喜欢它,请......随它去吧。 我的意思是。文字,打字……甚至想象我们的……嗯……“辩论”……看起来像在现实生活中。 你怎么会真的……….make your point to me.
    喜欢…。

    What a nitwit. I told you to dial it back. 你应该听过.

    等不及了。

    • 回复: @peterAUS
    , @Gleimhart
    , @animalogic
  47. bluedog 说:
    @peterAUS

    Hmm damn you must be a troll as you twist things around to suit yourself, how in hell did we get from self defense to taking on armored vehicles gun ships and all the rest of the Bullshit,as the man said you may want to dial it back a few notches,at least if you can’t get on the same page at least stay in the same book…

  48. bluedog 说:
    @NoseytheDuke

    Could’nt agree more when England was attacked by Germany in WW2 they were begging the American homeowner to send them guns,which they did after the war they were confiscated and dumped then in the ocean,seems like those countries/goverments that fear gun ownership also fear their own people…

    • 回复: @HdC
  49. 在轮式炮与半自动中,许多人没有考虑的一个主要问题是可维护性。 除了基本的清洁之外,左轮手枪还需要一个枪匠(看看当弹药筒上的卷曲不够硬时会发生什么,子弹会因为后坐力而消失。这件会卡住,需要一个好的“枪管工”或Gunsmith 来解决您的问题)。 我在泥沙中看到了半自动药物,但仍然运行可靠。 轮枪不会发生这种情况。

    The late Bill Jordan, a retired Border Patrol Agent would strongly disagree with anyone asserting the superiority of a semi over a revolver. He carried nothing but a revolver during his long career, but a man in his situation is not as hard on his piece. Keep them out of sand and mud, and a revolver can be more reliable.

    The comparison, however, is not as clean as amateurs like Saker would like it to be. If one takes care of his weapon, it will take care of you. For example, trash mags that have been dropped on the feed lips and don’t use cheap mags, and that semi-auto will take very good care of you.

    On the other hand, if you don’t train with a pistol, regularly, and run through the drills one needs to be able to face certain malfunctions, then the piece will be useless to you and, perhaps, more dangerous to you then the crook. If I’m in the house, a 20 gauge is far more effective and a far bigger deterrent than a pistol will ever be. Just the sound of a Remington 870 being cocked is enough to end the overwhelming majority of confrontations with a criminal.

    The biggest thing to remember is that a pistol is what you use until you can get your long gun. Never assume the fight will be over in 2-3 shots. Making such assumptions is a good way to find yourself carried by 6.

    • 回复: @Diversity Heretic
  50. @Quartermaster

    我同意左轮手枪弹壳上的不良压接会卡住气缸,尤其是后坐力大的子弹,但在我看来,这似乎是与重新装填弹药而不是工厂子弹最密切相关的问题。 我在重新装填的左轮手枪弹药筒上见过两次的问题是爆管装填,它只装了底漆,没有装药; 子弹跳过闪光间隙,但卡在受力锥中,卡住了圆柱体。 用一根清洁棒沿着枪管向下移动,将子弹敲回枪膛,释放圆柱体,一切都很好。 与由后坐力从外壳中挤出的子弹相同,尽管我从未见过这个问题。 也许你需要一个枪匠,也许只需将它敲回枪膛足够远以释放钢瓶就足够了。

    I’ve never heard of a “walking bullet” jam happening in a .22. Agree with you that magazines are key to reliability in self-loaders and that a shotgun is superior to any handgun for home defense.

    • 回复: @Quartermaster
  51. HdC 说:
    @bluedog

    只是为了澄清你的断言:是英国和法国对德国宣战......

  52. FWIW: After many years of carrying various configurations and calibers (.32 – .45) of semi-automatic handguns, my current conclusion is the Ruger LCR in 9mm is optimum for me for most purposes.

    主要是因为它比 38 special 更强大,而不是 357,但我不必为它购买任何新弹药或装填模具。

  53. peterAUS 说:
    @peterAUS

    首先,我向 Saker 和在这里阅读/发帖的人道歉,因为我将要尝试的“线程脱轨”。
    The best is just skip over this post.

    I have a question for Gleimhart.
    So, after you “smash me into pieces” based on my previous post, maybe you could provide some insight into something that IS related to the article.

    I mean, you are definitely the man on the ground and have, apparently, plenty of related expertise.

    So…what would be YOUR take on this:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Las_Vegas_shooting
    I mean, it was, for a couple of weeks a staggering event. Especially for us, disarmed and generally “gun-dumb “non-Americans”.

    And, then……nothing.

    I’ve been waiting for detailed analysis etc. plenty of media attention, overwhelming “Internet prresence” but…………..blop……silence.
    Weird…….silence.
    I mean, weird for me, non-American that is. And all that you’ve written about me and probably more.

    所以......任何意见......对这一切有什么看法?
    请。

    • 回复: @Gleimhart
  54. nsa 说:

    All you budding pistoleros should consider the legal ramifications of shooting someone before selecting a piece. If you get dragged through the court system, you’ll soon wish you took the bullet instead.
    HOME DEFENSE: keep a 30-30 lever action “deer rifle” or 12 gauge “side by side” behind the kitchen door. You may end up in court and “your honor, I got real scared and grabbed my trusty deer rifle……” works a lot better than shredding someone with a street sweeper or tricked out AR-15. If you do shoot someone, try to ditch the body on a logging road. You may skate with the cops / courts but you may still have to deal with the cadaver’s living relatives and friends. Your choice depending on the exact circumstances. Incidentally, a 30-30 deer rifle is considerably more powerful than even the most powerful handgun.
    隐蔽携带:无论是否允许,早期的五枪 38 spl S&W 60 型……同一件温和的工程师,伯尼·戈茨,用在四个黑暗的地铁犯人身上。 不锈钢所以几乎不需要维护。 每次都熄灭。 主要是,它是一把左轮手枪,不会在任何地方喷出一堆证据(空的)。 如果您射击某人,如果您认为自己可以滑冰,请不要停留。 如果你被认出来了,你总是可以说“你只是被吓跑了”。 同样,与在美国法院系统中被拖走相比,短暂而甜蜜的抢劫毫无意义。

  55. Gleimhart 说:
    @peterAUS

    Your transparent and quite “Internet-y” attempt to gas-light me is noted and discarded.

    I committed the cardinal sin of telling you that 你错了, and now you doing a different dance altogether, with a number of sad tropes and attempts at deflecting from your manifestly stupid comments, which are in abundance here.

    Your gun range questions are silly. Real world self defense is not a static standing in a trench shooting at static paper targets on a relaxing afternoon at the gun range. That’s beginner, introductory stuff. All firearms purchasing decisions and training should be geared towards the fact that in a self defense situation you’re going to be firing during an adrenaline dump. Regular stress inoculation exercises, drilling and conditioning are essential, as is the ability to compensate for such an adrenaline dump. You and I both know you haven’t the faintest clue how to handle such situations, which is why you’re melting down now like a p*ssy.

    You still haven’t been able to tell me why me bringing up hollow point ammunition is entirely relevant to the original article. What you did instead was to attempt a lame bluff, by mentioning other terms you just now looked up on the internet. You’re not going to fool me, little man. None of those other things you mentioned have anything to do with the topic of ammunition choice I brought up. What happened to your earlier assertion that my reference to ammo choice indicated a poor “perspective”? Huh? What happened with that?

    And now you’re insisting, yet again, that foreigners — that is, those who have considerable trouble even getting their hands on basic weaponry — have all sorts of access to all sorts of awesome “military grade” whoop-ass that we Americans don’t. Now that’s an occasion for Hahahaha……

    I’ll say it again, what you can find on display or order from vendors at a typical American gun show and elsewhere here would knock you back on your heels. Grow up already and be man enough to admit you’ve been pulling cr*p out of your a** 并试图将其作为事实加以说明。

    Your going off into weird tangents about the gubmint “watching” me all because I pointed out your idiocy is some over-the-top posturing. What unassailable logic!

    Your going off on other tangents about “divorce, boss, job, etc.” is yet another sorry attempt at deflection. You strike me as spoiled and over-indulged, hardly anyone ever having contradicted you in your formative years, and now you’re throwing a tantrum because you simply can’t process it.

    I’ve been through this entire thread and have marveled at the thorough and increasing ignorance, combined with arrogance, in each one of your posts. You’re all over the map. You were having the time of your life as long as you were able to strut and pose and bluff and pretend, high on your own fumes. But the minute someone came along and put you in your place and exposed you as the poser that your are, you suddenly scramble in desperation to save face. Well, it’s far too late for that.

    But the most absurd of your absurdities was when you presumed — astonishingly — to tell ME what the 2nd Amendment was and was not about. It beggars belief. Truly!

    • 回复: @peterAUS
    , @Twodees Partain
  56. Gleimhart 说:
    @peterAUS

    You thoroughly forfeited any minimum threshold of respect I’d need to engage you in a normal discussion on any matter. It’s weird you need to be told that.

  57. peterAUS 说:
    @nsa

    Blah…blah…blah…
    If you do shoot someone, try to ditch the body on a logging road. You may skate with the cops / courts but you may still have to deal with the cadaver’s living relatives and friends. Your choice depending on the exact circumstances.

    !?!?

    Uh…almost forgot. An important meeting, sorry, have to run.
    BTW, nice 处理.
    See ya……

  58. @Diversity Heretic

    Walking bullets happen once in awhile even with factory loads. If care is taken, you can get away without a having to go to a Gun Smith. Many of us who are “gun nuts” are also what I have facetiously termed “gun plumbers.” We can handle the run of the mill stuff competently. If you have to open a revolver, however, you’d better know what you are doing. I’m not referring to swinging the wheel out to load it.

    • 回复: @Diversity Heretic
  59. peterAUS 说:
    @Gleimhart

    你的射程问题很愚蠢。

    Still, the questions remain.
    Just put the number there:
    1. 2….4….7…
    2. 3….6…..9…
    哪一个?
    Should take you 5 seconds.
    C’mon…give it a go.

    Actually, put some of your accomplishments here.
    当然,只有愚蠢的范围。
    Anything, really.

    Ever fired a belt fed machinegun?
    范围是多少? 2秒问题。 400?600?800?
    How many rounds?
    100?1000?

    How about RPG or similar?
    范围是多少? 200?400? 铁的还是光学的?

    And, a very simple one:
    Have you ever done your shooting in dark? You know, different levels of “dark”?
    And, The Question: how do you use a handgun in a dark room (can’t see sights, can’t use any light)?
    That would be a fine pointer for self-defense I guess.
    Something of a substance.

    All firearms purchasing decisions and training should be geared towards the fact that in a self defense situation you’re going to be firing during an adrenaline dump. Regular stress inoculation exercises, drilling and conditioning are essential, as is the ability to compensate for such an adrenaline dump.

    真正。

    本篇

    And now you’re insisting, yet again, that foreigners — that is, those who have considerable trouble even getting their hands on basic weaponry — have all sorts of access to all sorts of awesome “military grade” whoop-ass that we Americans don’t. Now that’s an occasion for Hahahaha……

    a typical American gun show and elsewhere here would knock you back on your heels. Grow up already and be man enough to admit you’ve been pulling cr*p out of your a** 并试图将其作为事实加以说明。

    mean no “contacts” and no experience there.
    当然。

    But, you did scale down the rage a bit.
    Becoming careful…nice.

    Still, all your posts are just about venting on me. You haven’t, except that paragraph I quoted, actually provided anything of a real substance here.

    As for your post below:

    You thoroughly forfeited any minimum threshold of respect I’d need to engage you in a normal discussion on any matter. It’s weird you need to be told that.

    一样……没什么。 对于一个非常简单的问题。

    You know, I got a strong impression that 美味 事实上, 所有 that you “channel” on me.
    Makes sense somehow.

  60. Gleimhart 说:

    Your umpteenth attempt to deflect from my criticisms is noted and discarded. It’s far too late for you to save face. You’re obviously a poser, as you have repeatedly shown throughout this thread, and with each post you become increasingly more desperate to convince me otherwise. It’s almost painful to watch you try so hard as you beg, “Believe me! Believe me! I’m a real-life expert!”, but no one is buying it. A number of people besides me have noticed, and there’s nothing you can do to extricate yourself from your self-inflicted embarrassments. You couldn’t even maintain the parameters of the original discussion per the content of the article. That’s how poorly you did. Okay? So stop trying. It’s not working. You’re a blowhard and no one takes you seriously, which is very likely the root source of why you act like this. Grow up already, little boy!

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  61. peterAUS 说:
    @Gleimhart

    My…my……..I think I recognize you now.

    This isn’t the first time we’ve….”debated” things a?

    哇。
    What a grudge. What….a…..grudge…….

    I AM impressed.
    Hahaha….actually I have to give it to you. A very good move.

    让我们回顾一下:

    你挽回面子已经太晚了。 你显然是个装腔作势的人
    ….you beg, “Believe me! Believe me! I’m a real-life expert!”, but no one is buying it.
    A number of people besides me have noticed, and there’s nothing you can do to extricate yourself from your self-inflicted embarrassments.
    You’re a blowhard and no one takes you seriously

    THAT is why you got into this, ahm, “discussion”.
    To prove I am all that ?
    Is that so important to you?
    Oh man……hahaha….

    Well, a learning experience for sure.
    What a character.
    This means so much to you? I mean……this “Web chatter”? Oh man……
    真棒。

    You’ve made my day.

    But, still, at the other hand….creepy.
    What other characters will crawl out from under the rock here I wonder?

    • 回复: @Gleimhart
    , @NoseytheDuke
  62. Gleimhart 说:
    @peterAUS

    Must you be wrong about 一切?

    No, we’ve never had any interactions with one another before this, you paranoid weirdo. I rarely even come here, and rarer still do I post.

    You are a very strange person, and not only because you hit the Return key after every sentence.

    Wanna hear a funny joke?

    Hey, did you hear the one about the Australian gun expert?

    ME: Australian gun expert! Ow, my sides!

    And he knows more about the 2nd Amendment than Americans like you do!

    ME: Stop it, you’re killing me!

    • 回复: @poop
  63. @peterAUS

    Give it up man, you write like a child and the projection on display is blatantly obvious. I recognise the very same lame tactics that you tried in your run in with FB. They didn’t work then either.

    • 回复: @FB
  64. @Quartermaster

    Agreed. Once you take the side plate off of a wheel gun, you’d better be beyond “gun plumber” expertise.

  65. Notax 说:

    The supreme Court has ruled various times that police have no constitutional duty to protect citizens. Your on your own. Police usually show up after the fact.

    Warren v. District of Columbia[1] (444 A.2d. 1, D.C. Ct. of Ap. 1981)
    Castle Rock v. Gonzales,
    DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services,

  66. M x V is vastly overrated. When I was at Soldier of Fortune, a guy who made ballistic vests would have someone shoot him with .45 ACP. Ballsy but effective PR. He didn’t go backwards a centimeter. Equal and opposite and all that. There is the wound-ballistic stuff about collapsing supersonic cavities but unless a vital organ is hit, such as the brain except in the case of NPR listeners, it is blood loss or blood pressure loss that is the discouraging factor. Or the realization of having been hit.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
    , @Quartermaster
  67. peterAUS 说:
    @Frederick V. Reed

    Well….that’s highly scientific stuff and I’ve seen huge debates about it.

    I believe it’s not even that simple. It depends on a target. Size, overall strenght and the most important mental state. A strong man high on adrenaline can take a lot of punishment. Or, more importantly, high on drugs. Thinking of which, on a drug withdrawal as well.

    I read, ages ago, a couple of mind boggling example:
    A petite woman, armed with knife, got shot once in a chest with 12 gauge buckshot, didn’t go down and kept coming. Only second shot put her down.
    A perp got more than dozen hits by .38..and kept operating. Young FAT male.
    Now, resident creeps will probably dispute this, but I saw with my own eyes a healthy young male got shot in a foot and went down in a shock; he didn’t expect it. Took around 10-15 seconds to make him responsive. In self-defense approach it would be perfect, wouldn’t it?
    I also spoke with a guy with a similar experience: he was responding to a call->he knew that an armed perp was there and he was young, fit, armed and ready; he didn’t clear a corner well and the perp shot him in a calf->he went down as knocked down. He actually said that it felt as being knocked down.

    Bottom line, there are zillions examples all across the board. Again, depends on a weapon/bullit/range/whatever, but, also, depends a LOT on that particular target.

    I agree that a shot in a brain, even with 22, will put a target down. Simply doesn’t apply to an amateur self-defense unless a freak accident.
    Even a head shot is unlikely in that high stress scenario. And, well, where in the head? Without going into macabre details there have been cases of people being shot in a head and kept functioning.

    That leaves that most common advice: shoot at the center of a body mass. That brings the blood loos approach (unless, again, a freak accident where a bullit severs spine…).
    But, again, there have been documented cases of a person being shot in heart and still operating for up to 5 seconds. That’s a long time if a perp has an automatic weapon and is 10 meters from you.

    Then, penetration vs expansion.
    We don’t want to miss the target, penetrate wall, and have a bullet hitting a passer by; at the same time we would like to hit the target if he/she is taking cover behind a drywall.
    Plenty of scenarios…plenty of possibilities.

    Again, for the article target audience, it boils down to a very 简单 建议:
    查找 非常好 instructor and go from there.
    Just do that.

    As one can’t become proficient enough in unarmed self-defense without a good instructor and enough practice, the exactly the same applies to armed self-defense. Including legal approach which is often overlooked in all that.
    And, yes, a good instructor will give a plenty of advice for follow up, individual, training.
    If the instructor is really good a day…一天…..course will be good enough. After that the trainee can keep doing all necessary just by himself/herself. Demands occasional visit to range, but that’s the part of the fun.

    Just….get…..a….非常好….instructor.

    • 回复: @The Alarmist
  68. @Frederick V. Reed

    The amount of tissue damage is one of the largest factors in “stopping power.” The Thompson LaGarde study was done in 1905 because of the performance of the .38 pistols that replaced the old Colt SAA .45 pistols before the Philippine Insurrection. They found the largest factor was bullet diameter. A lot of the theory about terminal ballistics, such as supersonic cavities, and such, apply only at high velocities with rifle bullets. Even so, impact instability, which causes bullet tumbling, is what the 5.56mm bullet depends on for its stopping power, and at close range, is not dependable. Even with rifles, the bigger the bullet diameter, the more effective it is in taking someone out of a fight.

    I remember you from SOF as well as your Colleague Susan Katz Keating. IIRC, you wrote under pseudonym.

  69. peterAUS 说:

    Now…I just feel we all have been skirting here around the most important element of all this.
    A weapon, a round, training, tactics, blah….blah…..but not about the most important: WHO is that amateur we all are trying to help?

    Happened to me plenty of times:
    “Oh, you are into that….you know…I’d like to learn about it so can defend myself….blah..blah…”.
    Nice….a normal person in all this “bad guns” brainwashing around.

    Then, I say:
    “Well, come to my place and we’ll have a conversation and we’ll go from there”.
    The keen amateur agrees.

    Then we start talking about the topic.
    And then you hit the wall 9 times of 10.

    They want to defend themselves against a BAD guy.
    Makes sense. So…WHO exactly is that bad guy? Rule no. 1 , “know your enemy”. And you see that they simply can’t do that. I’ve found that fascinating.
    9 次中有 10 次他们无法想象/描述一个年轻的黑人男性。 他们不可以。

    That’s just for starter.
    Then we move on to, well….a 杀害 of a human being.
    9 times of 10 a person can NOT talk about it. And there are plenty of details there.

    If we somehow pass those two then they see a weapon as….something repulsive.
    We “gun nuts” know how we feel when we handle our weapons. Man……
    And then you give the same weapon to him/her and they look at it as ..literally….piece of shit. Handle it as something……unclean….inherently bad.

    9….times….of….10……..

    I, personally, actually, came to a conclusion that a lot of people simply can’t do that.
    Why, I don’t care. They just can’t.
    Maybe a part of natural selection; cleaning a gene pool.

    Yes, they are scared. Yes, they SAY they’d like to be able to defend themselves.
    But the “blocks” are still there.

    A good thing is that 10th person. My impression, and I’d love to be wrong, it looks there are less and less of them around.

  70. @Gleimhart

    Gleimhart, please don’t feed the trolls. Trolls are like stray dogs. If you give them what they want, they hang around. This site has a great function, the ignore feature. I put trolls on ignore as soon as I recognize them for what they are. peterAUS is a troll.

  71. @Johnny Rico

    That’s the same Lawrence Freedman who wrote great chunks of Tony Blair’s speech to the Economic Club of Chicago on 24 April 1999, in which he outlines the “doctrine of the international community” which justified the violation of Serbian sovereignty over Kosovo and the invasion of Iraq.

    (Professor Freedman was then a member of the “independent” Chilcot Inquiry into the Iraq War)

    • 回复: @Johnny Rico
  72. peterAUS 说:

    对于“主题”的真正粉丝 仅由:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Stopping_power

    And, creeps wise (from the same page):
    有礼貌,欢迎新用户
    Assume good faith
    Avoid personal attacks

    Interestingly enough, apparently, plenty of “attitude” there too.
    一些引号:
    meaningless terminology
    无能
    rather silly

    Feels as the topic attracts certain…..types.
    Makes you think a?

    Time off for some reflection and introspection.

  73. @YetAnotherAnon

    Thank you. Good to know. I picked this book up at the library a couple weeks ago but was unfamiliar with “Sir” Lawrence Freedman. I’m reading up on him now. I’m gonna go back to the sections on the conflicts you mention and see how his politics colored his coverage.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/jan/28/chilcot-inquiry-martin-gilbert

    • 巨魔: FB
  74. poop 说:
    @Gleimhart

    Take it from an expert: peterASS is a piece of crap.

  75. TT 说:

    萨克

    我不是枪支专家,但我只想说,为您的家人找到一个像您出生在美丽的瑞士一样更好的家,您永远不需要拥有枪支。 我相信那里有足够多的体面工作,即使是公交车司机或学校教师,或者在一些第三世界国家祝福和平。 生活更加幸福安宁。

    US is becoming such a sick place, with so much violent and hatred, opiods abuse, LGBT glorifying, msm propaganda, social problems, psychopaths electing lunatic leaders seeking atrocity wars. Why wait for implosion crisis that you foreseen to defense love ones hopelessly?

    • 回复: @RadicalCenter
    , @Hu Mi Yu
  76. Truth 说:

    US is becoming such a sick place, with so much violent and hatred, opiods abuse, LGBT glorifying, msm propaganda, social problems, psychopaths electing lunatic leaders seeking atrocity wars.

    Yeah, and when you get away from this website, it even gets worse!

    • 回复: @RadicalCenter
  77. I’ve been carrying a concealed firearm since the 1980s, and in about 1987 I had to show it to a third-world savage at a bus stop in order to to dissuade him from robbing me at knife point.

    我很想开枪打他,但我知道一个白人即使是为了自卫而射杀一个黑鬼也会让我获得一定程度的不受欢迎的名声,并且可能会在愤怒的黑猩猩陪审团和/或懦弱的嬉皮士。

    即使那时我们的“司法系统”也是如此,我没有报告这起抢劫未遂事件。 我将不得不解释为什么它只是尝试。 但考虑到社区,许多白人最终会成为受害者是值得怀疑的。 我只是因为一个非常糟糕的决定而在那里。 黑鬼要自相残杀,我全力支持。

    At any rate, my weapon of choice has always been something that can be easily carried concealed. If you can’t carry it, you can’t use it.

    I’ve carried a range of small pistols from a .38 snubnose wheelgun to a .32 automatic to a .25 automatic to a .380 auto. I know I can make any of these work for me.

  78. @nsa

    “如果你真的开枪了,试着把尸体扔到伐木路上。”
    “If you shoot someone, do NOT stick around if you think you can skate. ”

    That is some really good advice, if you want to spend several decades in prison. You would be better off not giving legal advice.

  79. Joe Stalin 说:
    @peterAUS

    “It’s about abuse of the state. The last time you guys tried that failed in 1866.”

    尝试1946:

    “雅典之战(有时称为麦克明县战争)是 1946 年 XNUMX 月由美国田纳西州雅典和埃托瓦的公民领导的反抗当地政府的叛乱。包括一些二战老兵在内的公民指责当地政府掠夺性警务、警察暴行、政治腐败和选民恐吓的官员。”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_%281946%29

    Made into a movie that was broadcast across the US:

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0103673/

  80. Joe Stalin 说:

    The only gun that counts is the one that you have with you; personally, I like the Kel-Tec .32ACP pistol.

    Lots of people don’t have the strength to pull back the slide; I know someone’s wife whose husband ended up buying her a .38Spl Ruger LCR because of that. He also purchased an aftermarket laser designator which he will install at some point. Hubby ended obtaining a .380ACP Ruger LCP 2 for pocket carry and a 9mm Ruger SR9 Compact. I volunteered at a place where some Black guy said he carried a Charter Arms .44Spl. before CCW was legal in Chicago. Myself, I have a Charter Arms Undercover .38Spl.

    My suggestion is for everyone to slowly acquire “Insatiable Gun Lust syndrome” and start buying guns, because you like them, damn it!

  81. peterAUS 说:

    Thread derail warning!

    It’s about abuse of the state. The last time you guys tried that failed in 1866.”

    尝试1946:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_%281946%29

    不坏。

    Still, my point stays say, 70/30.

    While the power that be WAS successfully challenged by armed citizens it was at town/county level.
    Not exactly a state.
    The weapons involved, from the authority side, were equal to the weapons of the armed citizens. If we really want to be picky the issue was resolved not even by firearms but (improvised) satchel charges (effectively industrial explosive).

    The powers that be didn’t deploy full power of the state, National Guard.
    THAT would’ve been interesting to watch.
    然后是联邦政府和联邦军队。

    As I just posted in a different article comments:
    不是数字,而是数字 组织 和硬件。
    一名武装公民可以轻松招募一名士兵。
    十名武装公民可以参加小队。 (使用SMAW或类似产品)
    160名武装公民将很难成立公司。(使用迫击炮)
    在大多数情况下,有800名武装公民将在一个营中丧生(三脚架上的机关枪,重型迫击炮和制导系统,导弹)。
    3000名武装公民几乎每时每刻都会损失一个旅(包括加农炮和榴弹炮)。
    15000名武装公民将始终失去与军团(如MRLS等)的对抗。
    甚至不包括装甲和空中力量,尤其是直升机武装直升机。

    So, while 2nd does give US citizens legal access to decent firearms it can’t be compared to (not quite legal) access to military grade hardware in certain countries of this world.
    Bottom line, combination of not having access to military grade hardware plus inability to organize and train at certain level make the very point of 2nd (fight against abuse of the power of the state) rather moot.

    Now, I do concede that having access to all that weaponry as we speak, with, more importantly, being proficient in using them, with ease to organize, say, a militia up to level of platoon in a couple of hours in necessary, give US citizens big edge compared to most countries of this world.

    Say, “gun fans” in USA could be, if needed, a first class militia in a blink.
    The catch is…..the opposition is also a first class.

    In practical terms, a small town somewhere in Red States could organize self-defense against any Third World military in a week and resist, likely, for a couple of weeks, even a month. Quite a feat I admit.
    You get US Army brigade combat team at the other hand, well, I’d give the defenders 48 hours tops.

    Now….truly SHTF scenario when military starts to disintegrate is, probably, a scenario when that could work, but that’s in distant future if ever.

    回到文章。
    2nd does give weak a chance to have a big equalizer; 5.5 granny with a .38 能够 defend herself against a vicious intruder. Most of countries of this world can’t offer that.
    The catch is….the intruder can also get a firearm easy. Serious criminals can get automatic weapons and ballistic vests. Even more importantly, without any desire to denigrate vets, a lot of criminals can have previous military, even LEO, experience. Even more of a catch: ex-military have exactly the experience to take out armed civilians; COIN since 2001 has given them exactly that skillset and experience. Ex-LEO even more.

    There are countries where an average citizen can’t have a firearm. Well, he/she can have a well trained dog because a potential threat also has a hard time getting a firearm.
    Those a bit more “physical” can have a blunt/edged weapon close at hand all the time. The intruder(s) won’t have anything stronger either. A smart person can make, literally, home a castle of a sort, especially against an average punk.

    As pointed out several times here:
    The purchase of a firearm should start with honest appraisal of WHAT the firearm is really for. WHO is a potential threat.
    Then,WHO is a person who is going to get involved in that self-defense.
    And, really, all those questions and more are best answered by a 胜任 instructor. Plenty of them in USA.

    Simple advice for an interested reader: forget the article, forget all these comments: get a 非常好 instructor and go from there.

    • 回复: @Joe Stalin
    , @Miro23
  82. @peterAUS

    “That leaves that most common advice: shoot at the center of a body mass.”

    Dude, the point of shooting CBM is to knock the adversary down, hopefully to render him harmless, or at least to make a kill-shot relatively easy. In the current environment, anything less is asking for more trouble than it is worth.

  83. dkshaw 说:
    @theMann

    I fired a .357 at an outdoor range having forgotten to insert my ear plugs. I can not imagine what that would be like in an enclosed space. It deafened me for a couple minutes. Never ever forgot my hearing protection again. I sure hope those home intruders will give me a half a minute or so to put my ear plugs in.

    • 回复: @Chris Mallory
    , @Alden
  84. 我完全同意。 我有一把 3 英寸枪管 Ruger SP-101 左轮手枪,我认为它是完美的民用自卫工具。

    It’s a bit bigger and heavier that a tiny “snubnose” revolver which makes it easier and more comfortable to shoot, but it’s also not too big that you can’t carry it if you need to. I have a permit but basically never carry, I like having the option.

    It will fire .357 magnum but I just keep it loaded with .38 special +P. It’s not horrible firing magnums, because of the extra weight of the gun, but it’s still a bit much.

    I actually personally know a guy who used a semi-auto handgun in self-defense against a home invasion and it didn’t fire. He kept it unloaded with a full magazine next to it, and in the heat of the moment he just put the magazine in but forgot to rack the slide. He pointed it at the intruder and pulled the trigger but it just went “click”.

    It worked out ok for him anyway though, the intruder still ran away.

    • 回复: @Joe Stalin
  85. @dkshaw

    For under \$50 you can pick up a set of electronic ear muffs. Lets you hear quiet noises, some even amplify quiet sounds. They also muffle the sound of loud noises. Keep a set at your bedroom door. Easier to wear than plugs and if you don’t have time to turn them on, they still work to dampen the gunshot.

    • 回复: @Joe Stalin
  86. @Jake Jackson

    Yes, per you and TG in comment ten, we favor a shotgun for home defense. That’s in reliance on the advice of people who are much more knowledgeable and experienced with guns than my wife and I — including a retired military officer who’s a great shot, and a former instructor of a firearms self-defense class.

    Unlike us, our kids will learn safe, responsible, effective handling of both handguns and shotguns while they are growing up. We expect this country to become a lot more dangerous, and not just here in California, so sadly it’s more important to be prepared in this regard than when I was a kid.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  87. Bischkva 说:

    Excellent article. Unfortunately gun ninjas who fantasize about fighting door to door in Fallujah will not appreciate your common sense. Also wish you’d written more about the Glock cult, particularly as exemplified by “Glock leg.”

  88. @Truth

    Now that’s funny right there. Gotta admit.

  89. @TT

    See your point, but as to the specific example of Switzerland, are we confident that it will not become Muslim and African like the rest of western and Central Europe?

    Anywa, the Swiss have pretty good gun rights still, right? Someone living even in beautiful Switzerland would be wise to keep a few guns on hand for defense of home and family just like the rest of us. More so IF the population becomes less civilized and more aggressive & hostile a la Germany, France, Sweden, Etc.

    • 回复: @TT
    , @TT
  90. Joe Stalin 说:
    @peterAUS

    Well, in fact Americans did invent a program to arm and train civilian militia:

    The Civilian Markmanship Program, created by the US Congress:

    http://thecmp.org/

    美国政府将向公民出售用于训练的战斗步枪。

    但是现在有一项广泛的私人计划来培训美国公民使用 AR-10 和 AR-15 等半自动步枪:Appleseed 计划。 (RWVA.org)

    “Project Appleseed is an apolitical[1] rifle marksmanship training program that focuses on teaching traditional rifle marksmanship from standing, sitting/kneeling, and prone positions over a two-day weekend shooting clinic for what is termed an “Appleseed”. It is one of the major activities of The Revolutionary War Veterans Association (RWVA), a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization that teaches and promotes traditional rifle marksmanship, while also teaching American heritage and history with the intent of encouraging people to become active civically.[2][3][4]

    除了 Appleseed 计划之外,RWVA 还开展了一项名为“Liberty Seed”的附属附属活动,这是 Appleseed 计划的美国遗产和历史部分。 “自由种子”被称为“变相的公民课”,并以启动美国独立战争所需的“三击”为特色。 [2]

    The emphasis on teaching traditional rifle marksmanship within Project Appleseed centers around traditional rifle marksmanship techniques using a rifle sling coupled with a concept termed “natural point of aim” (NPOA). Project Appleseed uses reduced size scaled silhouette targets that enable a shooter to assess their effective range with their rifle using a reduced length shooting range only 25 meters (82 feet) long, while simulating firing at full size targets at ranges up to 400 yards.[5]

    As part of teaching traditional rifleman marksmanship skills, Project Appleseed also teaches the rifleman’s cadence. This consists of learning to fire at respiratory pauses every 3–4 seconds, shooting in synchronicity with one’s natural rhythm of breathing thereby enabling improving one’s marksmanship.[6]

    Some commentators have questioned the political aspect of the self-empowerment of shooting.[7]”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Appleseed

    There have been over 100,000 citizens that have gone through this program. People who not only own a rifle but can effectively engage targets out to 400 yards. People who have basically created their Designated Marksman rifle when SHTF.

    http://looserounds.com/2015/01/24/how-does-the-designated-marksman-concept-apply-to-the-prepared-civilian/

    “In practice, the Designated Marksman concept revolves around additional training more so than additional equipment. Sure the different branches have “accurized” versions of DMR style rifles such as the SAM-R, Mark 12 SPR, and the SDM-R, but they all accomplish the same goal: enable an individual soldier with additional marksmanship training to better engage targets at intermediate ranges. So how does this apply to the prepared civilian? Can any rifle function as a DMR? Can a civilian shooter ever take advantage of a long shot? The first part of this series will define the gun. Hint: It’s not that special.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  91. Joe Stalin 说:
    @Loveofknowledge

    I recall an article in the New York Times in the 1990s where an engineer and his daughter were victims of an attempted robbery in an elevator. The engineer was killed because his Walther pistol, presumably a PPK was being carried UNCHAMBERED, even though he could have safely carried it chambered due to it’s DA/SA system of operation.

    Someone made the apropos comment that “he was educated beyond his intelligence.”

  92. peterAUS 说:
    @RadicalCenter

    in reliance on the advice of people who are much more knowledgeable and experienced with guns than my wife and I — including a retired military officer who’s a great shot, and a former instructor of a firearms self-defense class.

    很高兴。

    Re instructor, ideally, it would be, related to

    fighting door to door in Fallujah

    from the post below, a former LEO with considerable experience not only with firearms and such, but the 法律程序 after a self-defense event.

    Even more important, IMHO, an experienced former LEO would be able to give an invaluable insight into the mindset/mode of operation of a potential threat.

    Ex-military, most of the time, do lack that particular element. Even former MPs actually didn’t work with civilian perps in local environment.
    Ex-cop from LA,for example, running self-defense course in the city, does have that advantage.

  93. Joe Stalin 说:
    @Chris Mallory

    Massad Ayoob states he has a flashlight, electronic muffs and body armor for bedroom use. That’s preparedness!

    • 回复: @nsa
  94. peterAUS 说:
    @Joe Stalin

    Well, maybe we are derailing the thread a bit but, that you posted is 有声有色.

    I must say, Americans can really disappoint a lot, but, well, they can really impress a lot too.
    The land of extremes a?
    No wonder people look up to them.OK…some people. Minority on this Web site.

    You know, you try something like that in plenty of countries around the world you get imprisoned in a second for a long time.
    令人印象深刻,真的。

    Don’t get me wrong, but, I do have sort of opinion.

    Have those guys thought about extending that project into re-enacting?

    Nothing spectacular, say, “Bastogne”, for example.
    Like, a weak platoon of besieged US Paras being attacked by a reinforced company of bad, (mechanized) Nazis?

    That would, sort of, 完成 事情。

    仅仅是一个想法。

    • 回复: @Joe Stalin
  95. , a former LEO with considerable experience not only with firearms

    You do realize that the average cop knows next to nothing about firearms and is a a horrible shot. Your average gun owner probably shoots more rounds a year than your average cop. Your typical cop knows very little about the law either, usually limited to “The law is what I say it is”.

    Petey, you know very little about anything. Maybe you should join the IDF and quit trolling the internet.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
    , @pyrrhus
    , @Alden
  96. TT 说:
    @RadicalCenter

    Switzerland has very professional army, they can defense very well. I read that all their reserved is abled to keep their military gears with weapons at home. Swiss people are sane, you never hear any mass shooting. Its not in EU, they won’t be stupid or forced to let in terrorists enmass.

  97. TT 说:
    @RadicalCenter

    I was contemplating to get a pistol and rifle when i moved to Australia decades ago. I stay at safe upper class area, but police can only come after 1hr, so i prefer to fend off druggie breakin myself to defend my family(gun law is another matter).

    I am military trained, shooting isn’t too difficult. But i gave up altogether, its insane to kill someone in any name. So i moved on to a safe country that i no need a gun at all. If you aren’t rich enough to live in safe estate, any place in Switzerland is better than US imo.

  98. Joe Stalin 说:
    @peterAUS

    There is a Canadian counterpart for USA’s Project Appleseed:

    https://mapleseedrifleman.com/

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  99. peterAUS 说:
    @Joe Stalin

    非常好。

    从站点:

    SIX STEPS OF FIRING THE SHOT

    ….Follow Through
    HOLD THE TRIGGER BACK, and TAKE A MENTAL “SNAPSHOT”.

    很高兴。

    和这个

    …being able to put all shots into a 20 inch target at 500 yards. ….

    非常好。

    Impressive really.

    感谢您分享此信息。

  100. @peterAUS

    Gee Pety, you can cut and paste URLs for people trying to sell a service. I have over 40 years of handling firearms. I usually put a 1000 rounds downrange every month. I don’t have much need of listening to some tatted bro in tac pants telling me how to shoot.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  101. peterAUS 说:

    I have over 40 years of handling firearms. I usually put a 1000 rounds downrange every month. I don’t have much need of listening to some tatted bro in tac pants telling me how to shoot.

    也许。

    You definitely have exactly the attitude newbies are well advised to avoid, at any cost.

    从拳头链接:

    5. 他们是 friendly, open-minded and non-militaristic?

    If you’re like me, I know you’ve come across this type of instructor: The one who says “this is my way and there’s no other way to do it.” Or the instructor who finds it necessary to intimidate people to stroke his own ego. If you haven’t come across these folks just visit your local gun shop, as many of these types work there. When looking for an instructor you want someone who is humble and willing to learn from others and take their advice, as well as share their own wisdom.

  102. peterAUS 说:
    @Chris Mallory

    你知道,也许我在这里评判你是错误的。
    为我感到羞耻。

    凭借您显然拥有的所有专业知识,为了新手,您愿意在这里分享您的智慧吗?

    A couple of paragraphs if possible.

    场景:
    Say, a mid thirties white female, single, 5.1, 55 kgs, small hands…petite all over. Intelligent, educated, office worker. Short sighted, contacts. Concerned about neighborhood getting bad. Asks YOU about armed self-defense…rapists (plural) threat in particular. Gang rape happened to a friend of hers recently around. Breaking, entering, rape……

    What would you tell her?

    请。

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  103. peterAUS 说:
    @peterAUS

    And, to be fair and balanced, blah, blah….. this is what I’d tell her:

    “You know, I don’t think I am the right person to advise you on that.
    Armed civilian self-defense is a bit more complicated than guns, shooting, tactics and such. There is much, much more to that, especially for a person like 美味.
    If you want, I will try to find you a 非常好 instructor and we can go and visit him together. If you feel he could deliver, we could make a decision together and you go from there.”

    Now, if she really wants me to do that I’d do my best, knowing it wouldn’t be quite the best in her case and legal advice in particular, I’d really ask her to seek somewhere else.

    • 回复: @Chris Mallory
  104. Joe Stalin 说:

    “Like, a weak platoon of besieged US Paras being attacked by a reinforced company of bad, bad (mechanized) Nazis?”

    We actually have stuff like that in America. There was a WW 2 reenactment at an airport outside Chicago years ago where I actually saw a genuine Škoda/Praga Lt vz.38, or Panzer 38(t) tank on display.

    I know, how would us dumb Yanks deal with that in an internal civil war? One advantage of having a large smallarms industry is that smokeless powder is available to citizens over-the-counter in one pound cans. In addition to smokeless powder being a low explosive, smokeless powder is also a High Explosive. That means you can construct shaped charges to create armor piercing weapons using blasting caps. America. F Yeah.

    http://www.guns.connect.fi/gow/nitro.html

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  105. peterAUS 说:
    @Joe Stalin

    Thread derail warning again; 2nd related.

    I know, how would us dumb Yanks deal with that in an internal civil war?

    砰!

    Well, I guess that both of us know that we can’t, or better, shouldn’t talk about that here. Or anywhere in public. Call me paranoid but, better be safe than sorry.

    Not only it could attract unwanted attention from authorities but we really don’t want to train, say, “ragheads” here. I could be stupid but I am not irresponsible. Or at least I am trying not to be.

    Having said that, there is a proven methodology how to do that. I guess I could write a couple of pages about that, but, of course, won’t.

    有志者,事竟成。 尤其是当想要这样做的人是聪明且受过教育的当地人时。 平民生活中有惊人的专业知识,很容易转化为“民兵”。 这不仅仅是“有枪的硬汉”。 实际上,在真正的严重冲突中,这些人只是……说……安全细节……对于真正重要的人。 商人(某些行业)、科学家(某些科学)、业余爱好者(又是某些行业)等等……即使是普通的管理也可能是无价的,因为组织所有 最重要的.

    Actually, a smart “militiaman in waiting” would be well advised to carefully study cases around the world when such things happened.
    通过一些努力,可以从顿巴斯民兵那里获得最新的大量信息,尤其是从冲突一开始。
    There were some very smooth and neat tricks locals pulled over there to face, say, a combined arms adversary just with local resources.

    There, (un)fortunately, we often come to that “American exceptionalism”.
    Such experiences are deemed, most of the time, worthless.

    I personally find that idiotic, but, free will is what a man is all about.

    • 回复: @Joe Stalin
  106. Miro23 说:
    @peterAUS

    As I just posted in a different article comments:

    It’s not about numbers, it’s about organization and hardware.
    一名武装公民可以轻松招募一名士兵。
    十名武装公民可以参加小队。 (使用SMAW或类似产品)
    160名武装公民将很难成立公司。(使用迫击炮)
    在大多数情况下,有800名武装公民将在一个营中丧生(三脚架上的机关枪,重型迫击炮和制导系统,导弹)。
    3000名武装公民几乎每时每刻都会损失一个旅(包括加农炮和榴弹炮)。
    15000名武装公民将始终失去与军团(如MRLS等)的对抗。
    甚至不包括装甲和空中力量,尤其是直升机武装直升机。

    How about 3.000.000 armed citizens? ( less than 1% of the US population).

    And how would the US military feel about destroying their own towns and families?

  107. No sidearm will defend against proactive, authorities-encouraged, government-sanctioned, genocidal rapid-fire assault and home invasion.

    Rules-based, law-abiding, society-approved, reactive, one-on-one ‘gentlemanly’ deployment of defensive lethal force is not the destiny of America.

  108. Alden 说:
    @dkshaw

    The noise will scare the intruders as much as it does you

  109. Biff 说:

    1) 愿意为自己或他人辩护直到执法人员出现的人。

    Bwaahh! Good one.
    Where I’m from in Colorado, if you are taken hostage by a criminal you are 50% more likely to be shot by law enforcement than by your hostage taker(remember when to duck).

    The cops in the U.S. are the most trigger happy people on the planet with no regard to some of the most basic fundamental safety issues there are: know your target, and what is behind your target.
    砰砰砰。 “我担心我的安全”
    Case closed(never mind the dead people).

    Yea, I got plenty of guns – really big ones, but I still feel defenseless against the career criminals – they simply just out number you.

  110. @Miro23

    I read an article, I cannot remember which, that suggested that one of the reasons why citizenship was being offered in return for military service was to encourage foreigners to enlist and that they would feel no special connection to American traditions or its people and would simply obey orders. I wonder if anyone can add to that?

    • 回复: @Alden
  111. peterAUS 说:
    @Miro23

    Questions felt sincere so tried to reply.
    Gave up.

    That’s what I call “civilian question”.
    The proper answer requires a perceived scenario.

    One keyword: 业务组织.

    I believe the first question is meaningless.
    Can’t imagine such scenario.
    I could imagine, at most, a county declaring something of an independence and Administration going for restoring own authority.

    Based on that the second question is complicated and requires a serious post. We can 不能 have such posts here.
    If you are really interested think “magnitude/scale” and go from there. I, personally, believe that it wouldn’t be a problem for US Administration. Military will execute the order.

    Everything more than that, organized (say a state or group of states declaring independence), would 不能 look as citizens armed per 2nd. That would be 一个新的水平 and not relevant to the topic.

    A scenario where there is total breakup of law and order in, say, several states and military, still ORGANIZED (the key) is tasked to, say, disarm all civilians there, no problem at all. 1 000 000 armed civilians in 小团体 against an organized US military effort…..a joke.
    It wouldn’t even be much of a fighting. People are not that stupid.

    • 同意: Alden
    • 回复: @Dirk Manley
  112. SOL 说:

    “Cops are duty bound to immediately intervene. ”

    No, not in the US?

    • 回复: @pyrrhus
  113. Living in Europe where you need a licence to own a gun, any gun, an amazing article.
    If I were to apply for a licence, I would not get it.
    But indeed, since the EU open borders, we have a lot more shooting, often Kalashnikovs smuggled from Balkan countries.
    There is no defence against a planned Kalashnikov murder, as we see here.
    They’re cheap, it seems, around € 150.

  114. @Miro23

    There seem to be more guns in the USA than citizens.
    I suppose therefore the militarised police, armour piercing, thus wall piercing, ammo, and armored personnel carriers.

    • 回复: @Avalanche-the-second
  115. @Miro23

    Militia’s and federal troops never, or hardly ever, hesitated to break up demonstrations and strikes.
    FDR sent federal troops often to break up strikes, many times with casualties.

  116. map 说:

    For a new shooter, I do not thing Saker’s advice is very good.

    The decision for a self-defense weapon should start out with the round you want to fire. In general, the round should not be smaller than a 9mm and, really, does not need to be bigger than a 9mm. Keep in mind, .38, .357, 380, and 9mm are all pretty much the same size, so focusing on the 9mm as your “reference” round won’t make you under-gunned.

    也就是说,38 和 380 动力不足。 .357 功率过大。 您在钪或小框架左轮手枪中运行 .357,您将体验到惩罚性的后坐力。 这会阻碍你使用新枪的练习,所以不推荐这种回合。

    The 9mm is a standard NATO round. It is available everywhere, being one of the most common calibers around. Choose 115 or 124 gr jacketed hollow-point, preferably firing the Barnes bullet. The Barnes bullet is a heavily expanding round that will dig into the body and not over-penetrate. You can see how these bullets perform at sites like LuckyGunner.com. Use Winchester White Box FMJ ammo to practice, since hollowpoint ammo is to costly to train with outside of a few rounds.

    Once you’ve selected the the proper collection of 9mm hollow-point and FMJ ammo, it’s time to select the gun through which to deliver the bullet. Here, guns are highly personal, but it is useful to start with a reference standard: the Glock 19 and it’s equivalents. These guns are big enough to fight with in a home-defense setting and they are small enough to carry concealed. They are fairly easy to manipulate, whether racking the slide or loading the magazines. It is a good gun to start with but most certainly sample as many pistols as you can get your hands on.

    You can get 9mm revolvers and I would certainly recommend you try those, but, in general, I would not recommend a revolver. They shoot harshly. The long 13-lb trigger pull means that you will end up shooting low and to your left. It’s an uncomfortable gun to practice with, especially in its polymer variants. Again, try things out, but you will need to filter out your choices.

    On the reliability of semi-autos vs. revolvers, both are so well-made nowadays that you would not need to worry about it. The revolver, however, is more complicated mechanically. The hammer and the cylinder are timed together, which means the cylinder has to align the bullet exactly to where the hammer needs to hit the primer. If it is off by a little bit, the gun will not fire. Complications reduce reliability. Again, see what you like.

    I do not recommend 1911’s or DA/SA pistols. 1911’s are not reliable unless you get an expensive gun, although they are the nicest shooters with the nicest triggers. The DA/SA’s have a heavy trigger pull on the first round, much like a revolver, with a light trigger on every subsequent round, so there is a greater chance of missing on the first shot. DA/SA’s also have a high “bore axis” meaning the height of the barrel from the trigger which detracts from shooting. Again, try them out, but they require more training to fire correctly. They are also larger and heavier because of the steel construction. The striker-fired pistols are usually the ones you want to start with.

    一些提示:

    1) Smaller guns are harder to shoot and handle, even though they are easier to conceal. Keep this in mind if you’re a woman. I would look at the S&W and Glock smaller-frame, single-stack pistols.

    2) I prefer proven designs that have been around awhile. Chiappos Rhinos look gimmicky and the ARX ammo design has not been field-tested. That looks like an over-penetrating round. Time will tell.

    3) Fanboys love Glocks because they are customizable. Grips, frames, barrels, triggers can all be modified. You can build Glocks out of kits and mix-and-match whatever features you want.

    4) 12-Gauge Shotguns in a bedroom or living room distance will take off the head and half the torso. You will turn your room into a biohazard.

    5) Rifles 30 caliber and above will penetrate a wall.

    • 回复: @Chris Mallory
  117. @Jake Jackson

    I reviewed as much analytical-both Government and private-regarding guns as I could. I especially paid close attention to Masad Ayoob. From gel penetration freeze frames to shooting pig heads, and much more.

    An issue not discussed here is the energy that a bullet carries must be totally released inside the body of the shooter. If the bullet comes out the other side, energy and lethality are wasted and reduced. Over penetration does you no good.

    1. That’s why the .357 is not ideal. It has a small cross section with a lot of energy (=1/2mass X velocity squared). It is very fast. The small cross section makes a corresponding small hole. Law enforcement has sidelined it for good reason.

    2. The 9mm is simply a weak round. It also has a small cross section, is relatively fast, but real world results for a single shot are lacking. The selling point of the 9mm is the low recoil (think small hands and wrists of females), and thus gained wide acceptance with political considerations. Soldiers I’ve taken to want the .45.

    3. The .45 is a smacker. Large cross sectional area that makes a larger hole. Therefore it rips up soft tissue, breaks bones (and is less deflected by a hard object, such as a slanted windshield). It expends all of its energy in the body of the shootee. A .45 shot to the hip of a perp will most likely break the pelvic bone and cause the perp to rotate or tip forward. Thus the opportunity for a second shot. Those that have taken tactical training know that a first shot to the mid torso is the easiest. The natural recoil of the .45 means that you can fire the second shot immediately and hit the the upper torso, without aim, just on reflex.

    The second issue is scare ability. I have had to point my Sig Sauer double action .45 at a potential perp(s) several times with the hammer cocked and pointed directly at the POSs nose. That way, he can look down the barrel at the BIG HOLE and get an idea of what is coming at him. Try it yourself. Look down the barrel at the .45 and then lesser calibers.

    The .44 mag is not as effective as the .45. “With my .45, I can put two in you before you can shoot again” is how a retired Marine Gunnery Sergeant put it.

    4. The .22 is a joke for stupid people. If a squirrel is you adversary, then use it. “Shot placement” is likewise DOA. You must assume that you will be accosted, have barely enough time to squeeze one off, and that it should make a general shock and either slow down or shock the attacker. Even if it is in the arm or leg, a .45 will smack hard and cause significant damage, even breaking a leg bone.

    大多数关于防御性枪支的评论缺乏足够的逻辑和理由,肤浅,只是主观偏好。 很遗憾。

  118. blaster 说:

    Data I saw about two years ago shows that for home invasions a family member is 21x more likely to be shot than an invader. Semi-autos not that reliable: Depending on model, unless they are kept scrupulously clean you will get a FTF – failure to fire.

    • 回复: @Chris Mallory
    , @Alden
  119. George 说:

    “would you rather explain in court why you shoot somebody in self-defense 1-2 times or 10-15 times”

    您将如何解释您选择 357 Dirty Harry 机芯?

    • 回复: @Chris Mallory
    , @gdpbull
    , @Alden
  120. @Poupon Marx

    Your point about passing through soft tissue vs. hitting a bone and leaving all the momentum within the body cavity is the key issue in this whole debate about stopping power.

    The problem with this debate revolves (sorry) around, as you allude to, the issue of accuracy of a pistol fired by a frightened amateur in a stressful situation. The debate is irresolvable because the uncertainty of inherent accuracy exceeds the conditions of scientific debate on lethal characteristics of diverse rounds and loads. It’s one of those precision vs. accuracy things. We can specify with great precision the characteristics of ballistics etc. but if we don’t hit the right part of the target then all the calculations are in vain.

    Yes, we can mull over cross sections, momentum etc. but a 22 mag that hits bone will do much more damage than a 45 that passes through soft tissue of fat hanging under someone’s arm. And a pistol in the hands of a scared amateur is so inaccurate that the luck factor outweighs the precision of calculating velocity, momentum etc. factor. Reducing this uncertainty is why experts recommend aiming at the torso, the big area containing the vital organs.

    Commenter above mentioned how shot to a foot put the intruder down. Yes, and a Judo sweep to the leg does the same thing spectacularly. Not because the foot is some special target, but because of leverage. The foot is at the end of a 3 foot lever plus it is all bone so a hit is liable to be 100% transmitted. Any force is magnified by this lever arm. But aiming for the foot is a foolish option.

    Common sense is best guide and easily available. Round must be handleable by shooter. No good putting elephant gun in hands of 86 pound woman etc. Most important thing is familiarity with the chosen weapon. We all know this stuff.

    Most important factor is handling fear. I’ve seen and been the victim of one armed robbery. We (a group of us) were held up by a gang of three. Two revolvers and one sawed off shotgun. I can personally attest that some of us froze and some of us cooly took care of business, talking with the robbers, moving with calm and so on.
    That’s the X factor. How you behave under stress. Some people literally freeze. Some don’t. I believe that that’s more important than all the discussion about caliber and velocity.

    And aiming and firing a pistol true requires that all attention be concentrated on the target. The attacker-is-just-a-target mindset and not a threatening human being or any of that crap. It’s the same with fighting. You don’t hate your opponent. You treat him like a sack of potatoes and you methodically pound the crap out of him. Some of us can do this and some of us can’t. And, as someone said above, training does help. The motions of handling the gun must become automatic because the conscious mind will have its hands full processing all the novel stuff that’s going on in a violent confrontation. It’s all about tuning out extraneous noise and focusing. And having a pistol held to your head does indeed focus the mind wonderfully (to paraphrase Johnson). I speak from experience.

  121. nsa 说:
    @Joe Stalin

    Ayoob is a 5′ tall part time small town cop who for 30 years has been making a living by consulting, performing as an expert witness at civilian shooting trials, and scribbling \$300 articles for gun rags like Guns & Ammo and American Handgunner. He recommends: 1) if unarmed and being mugged, give the perp whatever he wants and hope you don’t take a beatdown, 2) if armed, toss a \$20 bill on the ground and start to back up, 3) avoid shooting anyone at all costs as this kind of event has ramifications far beyond the cops and courts, even if the shooting is “righteous”. One of you budding Wyatt Earps offs the neighbor’s worthless drug addled kid in a late night burglary….you will end up having to move at a minimum.

  122. @peterAUS

    1) Unless she is a government employee not in the military she is a citizen, not a civilian.
    2) If rape gangs are an issue, move. Avoiding the fight is always better than fighting. Your mama and daddy will gladly take you back in for your own safety.
    3) Get a dog. Crooks don’t like barking dogs, no matter the size.
    4) Shoot several different kinds of firearms. Find the one you like and that you shoot well. There is no cookie cutter answer to what is the best gun for you.
    5) Shoot often, practice.
    6) Don’t hang out with Petey. He is a known member of rape gangs.
    7) Most instances of firearm self defense never result in the weapon being fired. The mere sight of the weapon is enough to make most thugs run. Unless it is personal, most don’t consider it worth getting shot.
    8) Tactics are situational.
    9) Have good locks on your doors.
    10) The #1 thing I have taught my daughter, “DON”T BE A DUMBASS!” Life is much harder if you are stupid.

    You know Pety, I have never heard of an armed woman being gang raped. Gang rape is not that common in the US. Maybe in your country, where arms are very limited it is more prevalent.

    • 回复: @Alden
  123. @George

    “would you rather explain in court why you shoot somebody in self-defense 1-2 times or 10-15 times”

    您将如何解释您选择 357 Dirty Harry 机芯?

    Dirty Harry used a 44, not a 357.

    If it is a good shoot, it doesn’t matter how many times you shoot them or what gun you used. You fire the weapon until the threat is stopped.

  124. @blaster

    Depending on model, unless they are kept scrupulously clean you will get a FTF – failure to fire.

    Ammo selection is probably more important. And it will be a failure to load or eject, not a failure to fire. Failures to fire are pretty uncommon with modern centerfire ammo. Rimfire is a different story due to how it is manufactured.

    Some Glock boys brag of never cleaning their pistol.

  125. gdpbull 说:
    @George

    The dirty harry gun was a .44 mag. But that would be ok too for self defense except it heavier and bigger.

  126. gdpbull 说:

    Great article. Couldn’t agree more, except for the part about not continuing to shoot if they are not down. The possibility of being killed trumps the possibility of a court battle.

  127. @Poupon Marx

    1) The 357 is usually rated as the best man stopper among the pistol rounds.
    2) All pistol rounds are weak when compared to long guns. With modern ammo the 9mm is just as good as anything else. There is a reason why most armies and police agencies use it.
    3) The 45 is a good round. But it is not a death ray or black hole of doom. If the thug is falling forward and you are counting on the recoil to hit him in the upper torso with the 2nd shot, you will miss. You have to bring the weapon back into shooting position and aim. Unless you have really practiced your point shooting, then you just have to bring the pistol back into shooting position.
    4) How many times have YOU been shot with a 22? If a 22 is all a person can handle and they can shoot it accurately, then they need to be carrying a 22. The 22 in your pocket beats the 45 in the drawer at home.

    • 回复: @Poupon marx
    , @Alden
  128. pyrrhus 说:
    @dearieme

    It wasn’t faked, and still the jury somehow acquitted this psycho.

  129. gdpbull 说:

    携带枪支的另一个优势 - 它为您感到舒适的地方提供了更多的自由,例如在恶劣的社区。 实际上,这种自由允许人们与大多数人无法接触的人进行交流。 它会导致更好地了解彼此。 即使在那些糟糕的社区,95% 的人都很友好,而且大多是善良的。 偶尔,会有一些帮派分子变得具有威胁性,但即便如此,几乎总是可以通过自嘲的笑话和不以敌对的方式回应来化解局势,每个人都笑着继续前进。 多年来,我只有一次真正需要挥舞手枪。 它让流氓停下来,让我像蝙蝠一样从 h_ll 中跑出来。

    I should point out however, one usually cannot legally carry a firearm in these bad neighborhoods, but I would carry anyway. Some things come before the law, like your life for instance.

  130. Hu Mi Yu 说:
    @TT

    find a better home like your beautiful born place Switzerland for your family that you never need to own a gun ever.

    Last time I was in Switzerland, all males were required to have military training and keep a rifle in their home. Many think that is 为什么 Switzerland is such a safe place.

    • 回复: @TT
  131. @map

    1911 是不可靠的,除非你得到一把昂贵的枪,尽管它们是最好的射手,有最好的扳机。

    False. I have owned \$400 1911’s that ran 1000’s of rounds with no failures. I currently carry a Ruger 1911 as my daily carry. No issues out of it at all. The expensive Kimbers and Colts I have owned did have problems.

    5) Rifles 30 caliber and above will penetrate a wall.

    The only round that will not penetrate multiple interior sheetrock walls is birdshot. Every other round will go through.
    Even frangible 5.56 will go through 8-10 sheets of sheetrock set up as framed walls 10 feet apart. 22LR will penetrate several sheets of sheetrock.
    Birdshot 将通过一张纸,通常会在第二张纸上停止。

    Check out the Box O’ Truth for their experiments on penetration.

    • 回复: @Twodees Partain
  132. pyrrhus 说:
    @Poupon Marx

    9mm hollow points are highly effective, as are high velocity rounds in general because of the shock they tend to generate….

    • 回复: @Poupon marx
  133. Joe Hide 说:

    萨克
    Your article was amazing! This was one of the most practical, realistic, and truth driven releases of personal weapons information I’ve ever read. You touched on point after point of the huge complexity of gun ownership in convincing manner. I will definitely use your info in my home defense purchases. Thank You!

  134. pyrrhus 说:
    @SOL

    Cops don’t have to do anything in the US, and the Supreme Court has ruled that they can’t be sued even for failing to stop your murder….

  135. pyrrhus 说:
    @Miro23

    Taking on the military directly is insane. Fourth generation (guerilla) warfare is effective by cutting supply lines and harassing the authorities and collaborators. Plus some hit and run attacks and sniping…think Viet Nam.

  136. pyrrhus 说:
    @Chris Mallory

    Well said.. Australians, having allowed themselves to be gelded by their government, love to give advice to Americans on subjects about which Australians know absolutely nothing.

  137. Joe Stalin 说:
    @peterAUS

    That’s the difference between the USA and Australia. It’s our right to talk about stuff like that, and we do. The first rifle in our household was a mail order Lee Enfield .303 in the 1960s. Australia will jail you for having a computer program to print 3-D guns. Australia has laws against having body armor to protect yourself. (So does the People’s Republic of Massachusetts, unfortunately.)

    http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/lawreport/3d-printed-guns-and-regulation/8388672

    In America, Cabelas advertises “tactical gear” in Chicago radio ads (They are NOT a “cop shop” so those were aimed at the normal American.). DSA and FN advertise advertise assault rifles and handguns on radio. Wal-Mart had a Thanksgiving Black Friday ad a couple of years ago that had a Sig AR. I can go to on the internet and order Gen 3 night vision riflescopes, thermal imaging weaponsights, smallarms ammunition and body armor and have them delivered to my door. No questions asked.

    We trust ourselves as Citizens. We trust ourselves as civilian militia.

    美国。

  138. J1234 说:

    Revolvers can generally be designed to handle heavier loads without structural or cycling problems. That’s why people carry them for bear protection when camping or hiking. I agree that .357 is often too powerful for home defense – partly because of the permanent hearing loss and partly because of the short distances. 9 mm in an enclosed space is probably going to be too loud, as well. The best thing to do to protect hearing is to get electronic muffs and keep them with your gun.

    • 回复: @Joe Stalin
  139. 当街头斗殴在美国城市成为现实的时候,长枪是最重要的。
    Once the dollar will fall it will be initiated.

  140. peterAUS 说:
    @ThreeCranes

    好帖子
    同意大多数。

    You’ve touched the most important issue in all this:

    Most important factor is handling fear.

    That’s the X factor. How you behave under stress. Some people literally freeze. Some don’t. I believe that that’s more important than all the discussion about caliber and velocity.

    Some of us can do this and some of us can’t. And, as someone said above, training does help. The motions of handling the gun must become automatic because the conscious mind will have its hands full processing all the novel stuff that’s going on in a violent confrontation. It’s all about tuning out extraneous noise and focusing.

    I, personally, believe that training helps.
    That’s actually how I assess how serious a (civilian) trainee is.

    In military it’s easy; you drill the man until he can’t do it anymore; short break and again. And again. So, when that stimuli happens he’ll react automatically and efficiently. Or at least that’s how we did it to our men, and ourselves, before all this “sensitivity” thing came in. Does it work that anymore I am not sure.
    In a couple of situations when I had to use a handgun it was automatic, with no thinking at all. But, yes, I did train/practice a lot. A 很多.

    The problem with most civilians, especially that type the article points to, is that they do not want to practice that much.

    • 回复: @TT
  141. Anonymous [AKA "kevink4"] 说:

    I have 3 handguns that I feel are reliable.

    When I carry, I carry a .38 J frame revolver. Fits best with the clothes I wear. Reliable.

    At home, if I hear something suspicious, I would grab my .45 ACP 1991A1 gun. The gun I’ve shot the most through the years, super reliable. Familiarity and trust.

    The third is a Glock 27, which I’ve taken on trips and would be the gun at hand in a hotel if necessary. More capable than the 38, easier to travel with than the 45.

    Luckily, I’ve never needed to use or display a gun for my personal safety.

    • 回复: @J1234
  142. TT 说:
    @Hu Mi Yu

    There are over 20 countries have mandatory military service. Take Israel, Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Switzerland as examples.

    Israel encourage all soldiers to keep weapons (with ammo) even off duty, so you find civilian clothing with assault rifles walking around. Is Israel safe? You know better.

    瑞士允许将军用武器保留在家里,弹药数量有限。 但是 5 年前的一次大规模枪击事件和一些家庭暴力事件促使新的法律限制实弹只能由保留的特种部队保留。 瑞士安全吗? 在美国,被枪杀的人可能比被狗/刀杀的要少得多?

    而新加坡、韩国、台湾都不允许保留服务武器。 持枪抢劫在新加坡是死刑,所以没有白痴费心去拿。 然而,它们是最安全的国家。 在新加坡、香港、台湾、中国、韩国、日本、泰国、缅甸……天黑后人们仍然走在街上。 警察通常会在 10 分钟内接到紧急电话。

    So, military training and keeping weapons got nothing to do with safe society, its the people & government policy. US people need to carry a gun wherever they go or sleep to feel safe. No amount of mass shooting and homicides will make US gov restrict gun ownership. Its a insane country to live in, esp people can buy any military assault rifles with unlimited ammo for shooting birds or mass killing at their pleasure.

    • 回复: @ThreeCranes
  143. TT 说:
    @peterAUS

    嗨,伙计,我很担心你可以使用军用武器。 下面有许多比军队更好的体面工作,将士兵洗脑成杀人机器、射击、炸弹……伙计,考虑找一份放松的工作,让你的头脑保持健康,这比沉迷于如何屠杀 25 万朝鲜无辜者的生活更有意义。 认真考虑一下。 军人的职责是为保卫祖国而战,而不是为侵略而战。

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  144. Anonymous [AKA "Shrek"] 说:

    It quite obvious that the Saker is way out of his field of expertise. In fact it reminds me that I really shouldn’t take anything he writes too seriously. I can’t remember the term for when you read an article on a subject you are familiar with and realize that the author knows little to nothing about the subject and has it all wrong then you read the next article about something you have no knowledge of and take it for the truth. I’m reminded not to put much faith in any of the Sakers’ writing.
    Buy a Glock in 9mm and be done. Reliable and easy to shoot in an intense situation. Lots of rounds for when you actually need more than one to three rounds. Can’t be rendered ineffective in a struggle by holding the cylinder or blocking the hammer. He’s correct that most self defense shootings are at extreme close range , often in a physical struggle and the weapon is used as “get off me” tool with the weapon pressed into the attacker’s body. Twenty three states have explicit stand your ground laws and several more interpret their laws in a manner that there is little to no duty to retreat. If you live in a People’s Democratic Republic type state then you deserve what the Marxist do to you for defending yourself as you are infringing on their power over all aspects of your life. Marxist are very jealous of anyone exercising powers they have appropriated for themselves.

  145. Sollipsist 说:

    I’d love to see some proofreading here. I don’t need everything that I read on the Internet to be 100% perfect, but The Saker’s average in this post is approaching one misspelled word per sentence.
    The advice may indeed be good, but I can’t help questioning the authoritative merit and attention to detail. Please accept this as a sincere plea rather than grammar Nazi trolling.

  146. peterAUS 说:
    @TT

    You don’t need to worry about me. You “read” me here so badly it boggles the mind. Plenty of people here got it bad but you are at around the very top.
    没关系

    You are probably new to Internet. I say that because you believe that smart people would post, on related subjects, material that can, 容易, lead back to them.

    I know that Five Eyes, if they want to get into my systems/home can do that; but, giving all that on a platter would be idiotic. That I could see that intrusion is also possible.
    Anybody else would have a bit of hard time passing my IT security. Or if/when into my systems, well, that game works both ways. OSI layers and exploits are peculiar thing.

    As some people posted here, if I had an access to military grade hardware in Australia I would be either in Armed Forces or arrested in a day.

    But, see, you posted that you lived a bit here and bit there. Why it would be inconceivable that some other people could to the same? I could’ve lived “there”, then “there”, then USA, then Australia, then “somewhere else”…and just move around. Maybe I am just about to move somewhere else from the place I am in? People do that, you know.

    Ah, you mean my handle? Yeah……….
    Or an IP address being traced back? Yeah……sure…..

    Now, all this so far is..”who cares” for this very topic. Citizen armed self-defense.

    The below is not:

    This from one on your post re this article:

    its insane to kill someone in any name.

    I almost felt from my chair reading that.

    Insane does describe that belief well.

    • 回复: @Sean
  147. J1234 说:
    @Anonymous

    I like to say that an average revolver on an average day is as reliable as a good semi-auto on a good day. However, semi-autos can still be plenty reliable. A .380 is great because of the very small pocket size, and a good choice, but even though semi-autos have been made more reliable over the last few decades, they are still less reliable in some close quarter scenarios – such as shooting through a coat pocket in which the gun is carried (which can give a person an enormous tactical advantage) or when in actual physical contact with an attacker.

    The semi-auto has two disadvantages in these scenarios: 1) it needs enough space for the slide to cycle the ammo (usually a couple of inches, at a minimum) and…2) it can be taken out of battery when the slide is pushed back, even just a little. Of course, reloading quickly is the semi-auto’s biggest advantage…even more than capacity.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  148. Sean 说:
    @peterAUS

    its insane to kill

    Kant: virtuous behaviour has value even if it dooms you to defeat

    Re security system. In many robbery situations now, a camera might be recording what you do. Something to think about before doing anything that could be interpreted as a coup de grâce shot.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  149. @TT

    You do realize that you contradicted yourself, don’t you. First you gave examples of gun tolerant countries that experienced little or no gun violence. Then you criticized the US as a Wild West culture for tolerating guns.

    尽管你的推理有这个缺陷,但当你说“在新加坡,持枪抢劫是死刑,所以白痴不会去拿它时,你确实触及了要点。 然而,它们是最安全的国家。”

    Precisely. Mandatory death penalty for any low life that commits an armed robbery would bring gun violence against innocents to a grinding halt.

    On the other hand, yoofs in our darker communities will go on shooting one another with abandon irrespective of the consequences. Killing is, for them, a rite of passage, an initiation into manhood. In other words, the lives of blacks hominids are organized around different priorities than yours and mine and, as multiculturalists constantly remind us, we cannot judge them by our standards. Judge them we won’t; we can however, protect ourselves from their depredations. Mandatory execution for gun-related violence sounds laudable.

    • 回复: @Alden
    , @TT
  150. peterAUS 说:
    @J1234

    Good post, especially re firing from a pocket.

    Talking about “hand to hand”, well, one can also get a good grip on the cylinder, jam a thumb/finger on both revolver and semiauto between hammer and striking pin (true, except 一些 versions of both revolver and semiauto…no visible hammer or no hammer at all).

    Now, when we are onto it, didn’t FBI/police have that 7 meters rule gun/knife thing?

    Or, close enough, “good guy” goes for the gun and a perp simply unloads a good right on the “good guy” jaw?

    Scenarios, training, practice……as with anything we do.

  151. @Chris Mallory

    完全是胡说八道和主观姿态。 无用的喋喋不休。

    • 回复: @Chris Mallory
  152. @ThreeCranes

    Your comment is the most useful, objective on this topic. As well as mine, of course.

    做得好。

  153. Sbaker 说:
    @theMann

    Concerning point 1: my experience and others I have talked to; the one pulling the trigger when there is a strong adrenalin surge on board, is rarely bothered by the explosion of the shot. Many deer hunters report never having noticed the sound from a high powered rifle when they shoot the big one. I know this is not a closed space in most instances, but neither is a pistol a 7 mm magnum. Worrying about ear protection during a confrontation with a criminal should be the last thought on your mind.

  154. peterAUS 说:
    @Sean

    Hahahaha…….Kant you say?

    I am sure that 95 % of people into violence, self-defense and guns would have hard time getting Kant on the best week with a good lecturer.

    And, in self-defense situations, mind operates from the hindbrain most of the time.
    Even philosophical types preach “no thinking, just flow/reaction”.

    In real, there is the THREAT, adrenaline dump, tunnel vision, time distortion and just reaction (good or bad).

    I’ve been in a couple of those. Or at least I 喷口 我有。

    One lasted about 2 minutes they say.
    我记得,总共可能有 20 秒,最多。 只是不连贯地闪现了所发生的事情。 有些闪光几乎是荒谬的(就像一个小女孩的尖叫;错误的时间和地点)。
    I did have shakes after that.
    Have to say that Kant, Plato and the rest didn’t even register at the time. All night actually and the “event” happened around midnight.

    True, in the next couple of days I was thinking about mortality, afterlife and such.

    Interview 10 people watching the car crash, . Could be an interesting experience.

  155. Bill P 说:

    I personally prefer revolvers for shooting, so it’s nice to see this article. I’m not an expert, but I’ve shot a fair number of guns and revolvers just feel more “right.” Semi autos feel like the recoil is less consistent to me. Maybe it’s because of the slide snapping back and forth.

    As for .357 as a self-defense round, I guess, but it seems like a bit much. There’s no way I can get two shots on target as quickly with a .357 as with a .38 special. I doubt anyone can. With adrenaline pumping the recoil and blast might not be all that noticeable, but physics being what it is the magnum round is going to cause the barrel to jump a lot higher and the muzzle flash could be blinding at night. The .357 is better as a handgun hunting round/wilderness gun IMO. It’s optimized for a six-inch barrel, and there are some beautiful .357 six-shooters out there.

    I like a .38 special +p on a 5 shot solid steel j-frame for self defense. I’ve practiced with that gun to the point where I can get five shots in a pie plate at 50 feet in about a second. With the copper jacketed target ammo, if the sun’s at the right angle, you can actually see the bullets flying to the target. That helps me aim for some reason, kind of like tracers I guess.

    One more thing about revolvers: They make better blunt objects for bludgeoning than semi autos if it comes to that.

  156. @ThreeCranes

    There are several reasons the Sig with hammer in .45 is my first choice. One is the long double action trigger pull to cock and release the hammer. Same as on the revolver. Two. I ALWAYS HAVE one chambered and can simply and quickly cock the hammer for single and quick action.

    I will never have a primary defense gun with an external safety. I chose the Sig like my life depended on it.

  157. “In real, there is the THREAT, adrenaline dump, tunnel vision, time distortion and just reaction (good or bad).”

    简而言之。

    And then there is still that little part of the self that is outside the self, looking down at the scene from above noting all the effects you just described, aware even that it is doing so….ah, the curse of consciousness.

  158. Alden 说:
    @Chris Mallory

    You’re right, especially as the average street robber is not some Superman who’ll keep charging after being hit.

    A big part of attack and defense is surprise and shock. A small effeminate gay man coming out of a bar or a middle aged woman walking home who shoots and misses a big bad black bully will shock him so much he will get out of there as fast as he can.

  159. Sean 说:

    Kant is the basis of what Western law calls morality. My point (which was agreeing with you) is that after shooting someone, you may be held to a totally unrealistic standard of what would have been proportionate self defence, and there may be a video recording to trip you up in your (as you say confused) recollection.

    One lasted about 2 minutes they say.
    我记得,总共可能有 20 秒,最多。 只是不连贯地闪现了所发生的事情。 有些闪光几乎是荒谬的(就像一个小女孩的尖叫;错误的时间和地点)。
    I did have shakes after that.
    Have to say that Kant, Plato and the rest didn’t even register at the time. All night actually and the “event” happened around midnight.

    True, in the next couple of days I was thinking about mortality, afterlife and such.

    Interview 10 people watching the same car crash, separately. Could be an interesting experience.

    是的,这就是为什么如果要伤害某人(或者可能只是用枪威胁他们),你会为他们求医,然后打电话给警察,然后当他们到达时说你感觉不舒服,什么都不说(任何事情都可以)被用来在法庭上把你钉在十字架上),除非你在与律师交谈后会立即合作。 警察只需用一个谎言将您抓获(保证是否有发生的事情的视频),他们就可以定罪。

    • 回复: @Alden
    , @peterAUS
  160. Alden 说:
    @Chris Mallory

    You are right that the average cop is not an expert. Many only go to the range to qualify once a year. Their gun is just a tool if their trade. But unlike other people who use their tools all day long, cops seldom or never use their guns

    But there are many officers who are experts. Many southern and western cops come from generations of hunting and gun owning families

    Most departments have all sorts of shooting contests

    So some officers only shoot once a year, but others are experts with handguns at least.

    The thing is, police aren’t defensive. They are offensive and come from a position of power. In robbery home invasions etc, the criminals are offensive. So I really don’t know if police know much about defense.

    Most PD defense courses consist of give it up keep your mouth shut do what the robber says and get it over with and you’ll survive.

  161. Alden 说:
    @blaster

    Most of the studies that show people who defend themselves with guns shoot themselves rather than the criminals comes from the gun control lobby.

  162. Alden 说:
    @George

    Simple, I was scared, the adrenaline was pumping, finger caught in the trigger, gun kept firing by itself, NO PRIOR INTENT irresistible impulse, I’m a woman, I’m old I’m smaller than the attacker, kids in the house.

    That is why every gun owner should belong to the NRA and gets gun owners legal insurance. There are other companies that issue gun owner insurance. They have lists of defense attorneys all over the countries familiar with the defenses I listed above.
    NRA can send a gun owner an entire list of explanations for shooting a would be robber 10 times.

  163. Alden 说:
    @Sean

    I’m sure people are tired of this and I don’t want to repeat myself

    Buy NRA gun owners insurance when you buy your first gun. It will pay your defense attorney fees. It will provide experts to explain why you shot the person because you feared for your life.
    It will provide you with all the state, county and local gun regs.

  164. Alden 说:
    @Chris Mallory

    One thing I think would help in home safety would be to have locks on bedroom doors

    Most American houses built since 1945 don’t have locks on bedroom doors. So intruders can just walk in and jump on a woman. Bedroom locks and a gun would give a woman a chance to wake up and grab a gun.

  165. Alden 说:
    @ThreeCranes

    Not to argue, but I don’t think black hominids are advanced enough to think of rites of passage.

    它只是发生。

  166. peterAUS 说:
    @Sean

    My point (which was agreeing with you) is that after shooting someone, you may be held to a totally unrealistic standard of what would have been proportionate self defence, and there may be a video recording to trip you up in your (as you say confused) recollection.

    没错。

    say nothing more (anything can be used to crucify you in court), except you’ll cooperate just as soon as you have spoke to a lawyer. The police only have to catch you out in one lie (guaranteed if there is a video of what happened) and they can get a conviction.

    真正。

    那个 is why I, here, kept posting that about:
    一个好的教练,最好是前 LEO,他知道这一切。
    In short, as a part of training, giving a complete overview of 法律程序 post self-defense event.

    He can, if truly experienced, go from BOTH sides of the story. After each shooting a LEO goes through the process “why, how” etc. He knows 深入研究的各个方面,并可以相应地提出建议。 一个好的导师甚至会有一个现实的 行使 for that very element. Etc.

    Instructors coming from military/competitive shooting simply lack that fundamental element.

  167. @Poupon marx

    I agree, that is what your post was. All nonsense.

  168. Dr. X 说:

    Wow… what a long, rambling and exhausting essay. I hardly know where to begin with my response.

    First, it is superficially true that revolvers are better for self-defense — for those who do not frequently train. 简单地说,左轮手枪更防白痴 - 无论如何,六轮。 对于真正花时间训练现实场景(例如 IDPA)的人来说,自动手枪要好得多。

    其次,左轮手枪比自动手枪更难装填,这在需要多次射击的情况下有很大的不同。

    Third, a revolver is not necessarily easier to carry than an auto pistol (unless it is a small 2″ S&W J-frame) because an auto pistol is flatter, lighter, and conceals easier.

    第四,对于自动手枪更适合警察的观点,我有非常严重的疑虑。 相反,我希望看到更多的警察携带左轮手枪。 警察通常根本不是很好的射手,拥有带有大容量弹匣的自动手枪的警察通常会采取“喷雾和祈祷”的方法,很少命中。 有许多警察向嫌疑人发射数百发子弹的例子。 在克利夫兰发生的一起事件中,警察认为那是中枪……但实际上,一辆汽车的消声器适得其反。 警察向车辆开了113枪,基本上处决了两名手无寸铁的乘员,每个人都被击中了二十多次。 (不过仍然低于 50% 的命中率……)

    Fifth, another very serious misgiving I have is that Saker believes that a couple of shots out of a revolver is all that is ever needed for self-defense. In most — perhaps 95% — of defensive scenarios this is true. But what about the Detroit Riots, the LA Riots, Katrina, etc? When the cops completely disappear, and gangs of numerous (perhaps thousands) of individuals rule the streets engaged in looting, arson, and murder, five or six shots out of a .38 revolver ain’t gonna cut it. If you are ever in a bug-out situation where there is mass anarchy or a mass exodus and you need to grab a gun that you will need to pack concealed for a long time, there is no substitute for a good 9mm auto pistol, a half-dozen loaded hi-cap mags, and 100-200 rounds of spare ammo, all of which can easily be toted in a backpack for an extended duration.

    我喜欢我的左轮手枪,就像任何枪一样,我对它们非常熟练,但是当我进行竞争射击并且需要快速与多个目标交战并完成快速装填时,没有什么可以替代优质、可靠的自动手枪。

    • 回复: @Chris Mallory
  169. Joe Stalin 说:
    @J1234

    Some historical background from American Rifleman:

    “The .357 Magnum is definitely not boring, obsolete, nor is it useless. It came about in 1934 as the result of experimental work of Elmer Keith, along with some technical assistance from Phil Sharpe who some 20-plus years later served with the Technical Department of the NRA, and Winchester. Douglas B. Wesson, grandson of Smith & Wesson founder Daniel Wesson and president of the company at the time, coordinated the effort and produced heavy N-frame revolvers for the project. After the cartridge was made available to the public, Wesson did double duty serving as a public relations proponent of the gun and cartridge by taking it all over North America on hunting expeditions.

    “Whereas the .38 Special cartridge offered a slight improvement over its parent, the .38 Long Colt cartridge—a 25 percent heavier bullet at nearly the same velocity—the .357 Mag. virtually doubled the velocity of the .38 Spl. and nearly tripled the muzzle energy. This allowed law enforcement officers the advantage of a revolver, which most were comfortable carrying at the time, with the capability of penetrating a motor vehicle body and disabling suspects using that automobile to shield themselves. It also allowed hunters the capability of humanely taking big game with a handgun. Wesson demonstrated that by taking animals as small as coyotes and as large as walrus with his .357 Mag.

    https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2016/11/16/the-357-magnum-anything-but-boring/

    It’s powerful to deal with steel car doors.

  170. @Chris Mallory

    Yep, I have several .45acp pistols including two Colt Gov.Models, a Ballester Molina and a Taurus. The Taurus is my favorite, BTW. I once owned a Colt Double Eagle, but it was kind of awkward feeling in hand. It was accurate, but heavy. I sold it to a friend and he likes it fine.

  171. Anonymous [AKA "jsmithesq"] 说:

    Since the supreme court of the U.S. eliminated the “fleeing felon” rule it has been illegal to use deadly force to apprehend a criminal or stop a crime.

    A correct analysis is that you put yourself in the shoes of the victim, and if he or she would be justified in using lethal force from their standpoint, you may use lethal force as against the perpetrator.

    Accordingly, one can only use lethal force when a threat of death or very serious bodily injury is threatened. Of course, police and other law enforcement officials are included in this analysis since they are the ones charged with apprehending fleeing felons. Accordingly, I disagree with the statement within the article by The Saker, which states that a citizen has no ability to use lethal force to apprehend a criminal, which of course, implies via innuendo that a police officer, could use lethal force to apprehend a criminal or stop a crime. Anyone can use lethal force, but the law no longer makes a distinction between a law enforcement officer and anyone else.

    A proper instruction would be to tell someone that only if they are in reasonable fear that their life is in danger of being ended immediately, are they justified in using lethal force against another human, and in that instance the lethal force must be directed only to the human or humans who pose such a threat.

    至于我如何以及为什么从权威角度讲法律,我是一名执业 20 年的刑事辩护律师,在我参加律师考试时,在多州律师协会的宪法部分获得了 93d 百分位的分数大约 21 年前。 我还刚刚参加了俄亥俄州隐蔽携带法的 6.5 小时律师继续教育课程,上述内容与我在课程中所教的内容一致,也与我在法学院学到的内容一致。

    That said, it used to be that law enforcement folk could use lethal force to stop a fleeing felon, so this is a common misnomer.

    • 回复: @Chris Mallory
  172. Svigor 说:

    You really can turn any topic into a TL;DR, can’t you. You say with 1k words what others say with 100.

    that semi-automatic pistols are better for the self-defense needs of civilians than revolvers.

    They are. They’re more ergonomic, have better firepower, they’re easier and faster to reload (and thus train with), and most important, they’re a lot more affordable.

    Let’s repeat that again, firing just ONE SINGLE ROUND more than the strict minimum you needed to stop the crime in progress would expose you to prosecution for any of the following: assault with a deadly weapon, manslaughter, homicide or even 2nd degree murder.

    Firing more than 0 rounds exposes you to prosecution.

    Your whole argument is based on the idea that someone willing to put in the work to become psychologically ready to kill in self-defense can’t be trusted to use a slightly more complicated form of firearm. It doesn’t really make sense. Lots of SA pistols are pretty simple, you just pull the trigger and they fire. And again, they’re a lot cheaper than revolvers.

    Stuff like not taking off a safety or forgetting to put a round in the chamber.

    So buy one that doesn’t use a safety. And a weapon without a round in the chamber is not a ready weapon. You’re supposed to keep a round in the chamber. Otherwise it’s only a little better than an unloaded gun for self-defense.

    (they also tend to drop out when the gun is manipulated which, in some models, prevents the semi-auto from firing at all).

    Yeah don’t buy one of those models.

    One notorious shooter caused malfunction of sorts is when somebody grabs a fully loaded (but not de-cocked) semi-auto and touches the typically light trigger and inadvertently fires.

    If you’re not a gun guy, don’t buy a SD pistol with a light trigger.

    This is why semi-autos come with safeties

    A great many do not.

    To fire a semi-auto you need to fully engage a magazine, put a round in the chamber, disengage the safety (if you used one in the first place) and hold the gun firmly enough to allow it to fully cycle.

    So shoot with it until you get it through your head not to limp-wrist it (assuming you have a model prone to limp-wristing; the easiest solution is not to buy a model prone to limp-wristing). PS, it’s usually pretty easy to clear these.

    The answer of the propagandists for the semi-auto is “training, training and more training”.

    It’s just basic familiarity; it’s not like you have to train all the time to use a SA properly. If you have the presence of mind to point a gun at someone and pull the trigger, you can remember “don’t limp wrist it” too, I think.

    There’s no easy button for self-defense. To truly prepare yourself (as opposed to just carrying a gun) takes some mental work for most people. If you can handle that, you can handle a semiauto pistol.

    Revolvers are fine but so are SAs.

  173. Spud Boy 说:

    Seems to me a shotgun has a huge advantage if you have children in your house: You can load the first round as a blank, second as rock salt, and 3+ with regular loads. Worst case your kid gets the crap scared out of them vs. blowing their own (or a sibling or friend’s) head off with a revolver.
    .
    .

  174. TT 说:
    @ThreeCranes

    Sorry Saker for not limit on weapon selection topic per your writing. I promote solve at root cause. Eg.if You know pesticides will cause your love one cancer, let’s debate whether chemo or radiotherapy is better? I goes organic.

    [You do realize that you contradicted yourself, don’t you. First you gave examples of gun tolerant countries that experienced little or no gun violence. Then you criticized the US as a Wild West culture for tolerating guns.]

    ★Cranes, can’t you derive something from below:

    Israel weapon tolerance with ammo (mix defence policy needs for military & civilians?) -> vicious.

    Switzerland weapon tolerance with ammo ( military defence only) -> safest, 1 mass shoot/ a few domestic violents -> gov policy control ammo -> safest

    US weapon tolerance with ammo (guns & military grade assault weapons & ammo free for all)-> multiple mass shoot / violent -> *gov can’t control -> more NRA lobby, more lethal weapons, more mass shoot / violent -> go back to *

    Asia countries zero tolerance regardless of military training needs -> safest

    [尽管你的推理存在缺陷,当你说“在新加坡持枪抢劫是死刑,所以没有白痴费心去拿枪抢劫时,你确实触及了要点。 然而,它们是最安全的国家。”

    Precisely. Mandatory death penalty for any low life that commits an armed robbery would bring gun violence against innocents to a grinding halt.]

    -> Just for case study only, mandatory death penalty is not what i promoted or agree on. Its another form of killing, justification is another topic. Violent begets violent, only love alone appease.

    [On the other hand, yoofs in our darker communities will go on shooting one another with abandon irrespective of the consequences. Killing is, for them, a rite of passage, an initiation into manhood. In other words, the lives of blacks hominids are organized around different priorities than yours and mine and, as multiculturalists constantly remind us, we cannot judge them by our standards. Judge them we won’t; we can however, protect ourselves from their depredations. Mandatory execution for gun-related violence sounds laudable.]
    -> allow them more weapons access, out gun them with more lethal weapons by higher purchasing power? Vicious cycle.

    -> read my comment last part again. I only want clarify to Hu Min Yu, its not about gun tolerance or military training, its the people & gov policy make up society. You have people can’t control violent usage of gun(add a legalized opiod factor if you wish), you elected a gov unable to restrict, NRA lobby & promote more lethal assault weapons ownership for school as solution, didn’t all these alarm you? No? Go back to ★ again.

  175. Svigor 说:

    One thing I think would help in home safety would be to have locks on bedroom doors

    Most American houses built since 1945 don’t have locks on bedroom doors. So intruders can just walk in and jump on a woman. Bedroom locks and a gun would give a woman a chance to wake up and grab a gun.

    Not a bad idea, but if you aren’t going to make bedroom doors as stout as exterior doors, it won’t help all that much. *Quietly tries the bedroom door, finds it locked, kicks it in and jumps on woman who didn’t hear a thing because she was sound asleep*

    Dogs really are the best, followed by alarms.

    Now, when we are onto it, didn’t FBI/police have that 7 meters rule gun/knife thing?

    What I find odd about self-defense discussions is how everyone goes right from talking about firearms to talking about unarmed combat. Have none of these people heard of knives? Carrying a knife is much easier and far more effective than any form of unarmed combat expertise.

    • 回复: @Alden
    , @peterAUS
  176. Alden 说:
    @Svigor

    is It really that easy to kick in a door, even a flimsy interior door? I don’t think so. however long it took, its longer than just opening the door. And the few minutes might give someone the chance to call police or grab a gun.

    The article isn’t about self defense in general, but the best kinds of guns for different people in differebt situations.

    Knives require getting close. Guns can stop the criminal before he gets close.

    • 回复: @Alden
  177. Anonymous • 免责声明 说:
    @Diversity Heretic

    Thanks for your thoughtful, informative, and comprehensive contributions in this thread.

  178. Anonymous • 免责声明 说:
    @The Alarmist

    Will someone explain to me why the use of a laser sight doesn’t also illuminate you as a target as well? Seems to me that red light would give your target something to aim at, but unlike most here I readily admit to knowing virtually nothing about this topic.

    • 回复: @Chris Mallory
    , @The Alarmist
  179. peterAUS 说:
    @Svigor

    What I find odd about self-defense discussions is how everyone goes right from talking about firearms to talking about unarmed combat. Have none of these people heard of knives? Carrying a knife is much easier and far more effective than any form of unarmed combat expertise.

    当然。
    But, as you said

    To truly prepare yourself (as opposed to just carrying a gun) takes some mental work for most people.

    using a knife in self-defense scenario is a peculiar matter.

    Of course that for true fighters everything is just a tool.

    But for an average citizen, well, from 心理 point of view I guess that using an edged weapon is not easy. The very idea of stabbing somebody is, for most people, repulsive.

    And, also, using a knife against a perp does require some physical ability. Say, granny with a knife vs granny with .38.

    I guess what I am trying to say that a knife is very efficient in “bad guy” hands and in person hands (especially 瘾君子…。)。

    But, for an person’s self-defense I don’t think it is.

  180. FB 说:
    @NoseytheDuke

    Hey Nosey…

    I just stumbled on this thread a bit late it seems…

    Man oh man…our boy Pete has dug himself in pretty deep again…[no surprise there…]

    I actually feel kind of sorry for him…this ‘Gleimhart’ chap is letting him have it with both barrels…

    在我看来像一个 ‘takes two to tango’ kind of thing…‘Gleimhart’ looks to be some kind of nutcase himself…a more aggressive version of our ‘GameBoy Pete’…

    FWIW…LOL

  181. Jim Moore 说:

    One point I think is important is liability. I was a federal law enforcement officer for over 30 years and also worked as an investigator for a City Attorney’s office helping defend local police officers who were being sued, usually relating to use of force.

    If a law enforcement officer uses force (shoots, tases, clubs with a baton, pepper sprays) someone they usually have a free defense attorney provided by their agency to try to justify their actions. Most of these attorneys I have seen are pretty good at it.

    If you as a civilian use the same force you have a very good chance of getting sued. You have to pay for your own attorney and hopefully you get a good one who is competent in this area of the law and does not soak you in your hour of need.

    I knew of a federal agent who saw a rape in progress. He intervened and ended up clinging to a car door as the rapist drove off. The agent shot and killed the bad guy. Shirt tail kin came out of the wood work and sued the agent. It took years to resolve, luckily in the agent’s favor. He had an Assistant United States Attorney to defend him because it was ruled duty related. What if that were you?

    Yes, “better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6.” I have heard that my whole career. But we live in a litigious society where people view lawsuits as being like the lottery. Maybe your homeowners insurance will cover any award, maybe it won’t. Juries almost always give cops more benefit of the doubt than civilians. Especially when the plaintiff attorney tries to compare you with wanna-be cop George Zimmerman

    So think twice before you shoot. Do it if you have to, but it is better to avoid bad areas, especially in the dark. I have heard of silly disputes over a parking space that end up with someone being shot.

    I know of a case of an off-duty federal agent shot and killed by a 60 year old white guy on his way to dialysis in Florida. It was a “you cut me off in traffic” thing. The agent died in front of his child that he was taking to school. He was armed but the bad guy shot first. My point is the shooter was an otherwise law abiding person who got angry and shot over something silly. He went to jail.

    Just be careful, walk away if you have to. If you shoot, the odds are you will get sued and even if you prevail it may cost you a bundle.

    As a final note, I vote for a wheel gun as a home defense weapon. The S&W model 60 is great in my opinion. I have owned one since 1977.

  182. @Jim Moore

    There was a situation in LA (near Barham Blvd going into the Valley) a few years back where two guys got into a traffic beef due to neither being willing to yield to the other in merging traffic. One guy was white and the other was black but unknown to each was the fact that they were both cops working undercover, driving unmarked vehicles. The black cop flashed his weapon to signal to the white cop that he’d better back off or else. The white cop then shot through the door and killed the black cop and it was only later that it was discovered that both were cops.

    • 回复: @Alden
  183. animalogic 说:
    @peterAUS

    Hey, PeterAUS. This not a criticism, but a question.
    I assume, from context etc that the AUS in your username (UN) refers to Australia. Now, naturally, I don’t know your life/story etc, however, my question is: is it really necessary to reference your nationality in your UN ?
    Problem is, by using Australia in your UN, your personal critics can then easily transfer that criticism to Australia. No, maybe it’s not common – nor is it fair, nor right etc but it DOES happen. So — why offer the temptation ?
    I’m proud of Australia too — but NOT of our governments. Many of their acts I can not – will not defend. Can you ?
    So, I hope you can have a rethink on the AUS thing.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  184. This annoys me so much when I see it.

    People starting to use the police’s self-serving false dichotomy of “police” and “civilians”

    Civilians are EVERYBODY who is not military. Which INCLUDES THE POLICE.

    Police use the term “civilian” in a derogatory manner. Please stop accepting and perpetuating their mindset that anyone not wearing blue or brown is to be treated as boot-licking subservient scum.

  185. @peterAUS

    “1 000 000 armed civilians in small groups against an organized US military effort…..a joke.”

    You’ve obviously never been to Iraq. circa 2003-2010.

  186. @NoseytheDuke

    “In Australia if you harm an intruder you are likely to be charged with a crime.”

    Which is a crime in itself. Against the aggrieved party (the person whose home has been broken into by someone with obviously ill intent).

  187. Anonymous • 免责声明 说:

    Everyone says “get a dog” and dogs are great but relatively few people seem to be up to the task of ‘canine companionship’ –instead they appear to think dogs can be like appliances, and they store them in cages while they work long hours, go out to dinner and movies, go shopping, sleep, what have you…

    This is cruel and doesn’t produce good results for dogs or humans. I see so much of this and it’s so depressing. Then these same people send their dogs to “trainers” who visit further cruelties upon the dogs as well as violate the bond which should be connecting the dog to the family.

    • 回复: @Alden
  188. Alden 说:
    @Jim Moore

    I bet the old White guy had diabetes.

    So many bar fights, parking lot fights domestic violence fights road rage are caused by diabetics and their “volatility and irritability “

    Diabetics will never back down. They start fights and just keep going.

    I fired 2 managers in the past 5 years because they flew off the handle and squabbled with everyone. A couple months after I hired each I noted their diabetic behavior and asked if they had diabetes. They were schocked and asked me how I figured it out.

    Personally, I think diabetics are worse than drunks as far as starting fights all the time.

  189. Alden 说:
    @Gleimhart

    When my sister and her husband lived in Germany they met lots of guys who had military weapons

    They got them from corrupt American soldiers who worked in the warehouses on the numerous American army bases There was a regular trade going on.

    France has as much or more of a hunting culture as we do.

  190. @TG

    5. Get a dog.

    答对了! 入侵家庭的类型不喜欢大狗。 斗牛犬吓坏了他们。

    Get an American Bulldog, any of the mastiff breeds, a big hunting dog like Chesapeake or Newfoundland along with a small nervous alarm dog. If the sound of a gun cocking will scare off intruders, the sound of a 250lb (or three) mastiff will make them wet their pants.

    不要误会我的意思,枪很棒。 如果我的大狗不阻止某人,他们会有更大的惊喜,但至少我的狗让我有机会醒来并在我的耳朵里塞满棉花,然后在室内发射大口径武器!

    • 回复: @Twodees Partain
    , @Alden
  191. Svigor 说:

    is It really that easy to kick in a door, even a flimsy interior door? I don’t think so.

    是的,这很容易。 我同意这总比没有好——只是没有好多少。

    The article isn’t about self defense in general, but the best kinds of guns for different people in differebt situations.

    刀需要靠近。 枪支可以在罪犯靠近之前阻止他。

    至少有一条评论提到了手无寸铁的自卫。 你必须非常接近。

    And, also, using a knife against a perp does require some physical ability. Say, granny with a knife vs granny with .38.

    The context was explicitly knives vs unarmed combat, not knives vs guns. Knives are a better backup than empty hands, no matter how trained, was the point.

    Will someone explain to me why the use of a laser sight doesn’t also illuminate you as a target as well? Seems to me that red light would give your target something to aim at, but unlike most here I readily admit to knowing virtually nothing about this topic.

    据我所知,激光瞄准器是一种几乎已经结束的时尚。 没有人没有得到报酬来推动他们再推动他们。 然而,灯是重要的配件,它们也有同样的问题。 从好的方面来说,他们往往会使目标失明,你可以在晚上识别他,这样你就不会误炸无辜。

    特工开枪打死了坏人。 衬衫尾巴的亲戚从木工中出来并起诉了代理人。

    据我所知,这些西装是远射。 开枪打死他,他可以争辩说你毁了他的就业前景。 如果他死了,他无法反驳。

    • 回复: @Joe Stalin
    , @Alden
  192. @Jim Moore

    如果你开枪,你很可能会被起诉,即使你获胜,也可能会花费你一大笔钱。

    A growing trend is for the states to limit or outright ban any civil suit rising out of a true self defense shooting.

    一篇关于此事的文章列出了在自卫案件中具有不同程度民事豁免权的 32 个州。 最好的办法是阅读您所在州的法律和/或与当地律师交谈。 我没有查看所有 32 个州,但我知道我所在州的法律。

    https://legalinsurrection.com/2013/07/self-defense-immunity-laws-which-states-protect-you-best/

  193. @Anonymous

    Will someone explain to me why the use of a laser sight doesn’t also illuminate you as a target as well? Seems to me that red light would give your target something to aim at, but unlike most here I readily admit to knowing virtually nothing about this topic.

    其中很多将取决于环境。 我在手枪上玩过激光瞄准器。 在雾天或薄雾中,您可以看到激光像箭头一样指向您。 如果没有反光气氛,您可能会看到手枪末端的红灯,但我怀疑除非是漆黑一片,否则您无论如何都能看到持枪的人。 大多数自卫射击发生在 10 码以内。 激光可以轻松进行点射,减少反应时间。

    • 回复: @Joe Stalin
  194. @Anonymous

    因此,只有在受到死亡或非常严重的身体伤害的威胁时,才能使用致命武力。

    Depends on state law. Texas does (or did) allow force to stop some property crimes. Kentucky allows me to use deadly force to stop an arson of a habitation. Know your state’s laws, they are all different.

    • 同意: Alden
  195. @Dr. X

    that a couple of shots out of a revolver is all that is ever needed for self-defense. In most — perhaps 95% — of defensive scenarios this is true. But what about the Detroit Riots, the LA Riots, Katrina, etc?

    By all means have a back up plan and a bug out bag. But even better stay the hell out of areas where dindus might riot and if the forecast calls for a hurricane, make some plans before hand.

  196. FB 说:
    @Gleimhart

    你为什么不呢? 回拨 a little yourself…?

    Nobody needs to listen to hissy fits here…

    Your shrill tone tells me you’re just as much as a 姿势 as Peter…and that’s 姿势 e...

    I have read this entire exchange between yourself and Peter…and you went off like some kind of grenade for no reason…

    That kind of hysteria tells me you are mentally unstable…and should not even be talking about guns…

    Your whole shtick is…you don’t care about the gun situation in Europe…blah blah blah…

    Well guess what…you sound like you have never been outside of the United States so what makes you think anybody here is interested in hearing you prattle on about things you know nothing of…

    Peter has a valid point about gun ownership in certain parts of Europe…little Switzerland ranks 世界第二 in gun ownership [behind the US] with 45 firearms per 100 people…

    不同之处在于 更多 Swiss households actually have firearms than in the US…reason being is that the high US number [88 per 100] is skewed by the fact that there are a lot of ‘gun nuts’ who own huge collections…I know many myself…

    You don’t see these fanboys in Europe…but many households do have a gun or two…

    I say this from personal experience having traveled widely on the continent…I remember walking into a gun shop in Belgrade and seeing assault rifles on an unsecured display rack in the middle of the store…you don’t see that in the US…

    Serbia btw is number four on the list…Finland number three. Sweden and Norway nine and 10…

    Peter is also correct about the Balkans ‘gun culture’ which is very different from the US…many of those guns have been used by militias that saw heavy duty action during the Balkan wars of the ’90s…

    Military service is mandatory in many European countries…which means every male knows how to use a firearm…and these guys are ready to go to action if need be…as was the case with the Balkans wars…

    City violence and petty crime are not a big problem there…so it is a completely different picture…people have guns for more fundamental reasons…as in defending their political rights…something that is yakked about ad nauseum in the US but is just a figment of the imagination in tough-talking gun collectors…

    Of course many EU countries do fit the stereotype of a completely disarmed populace…but nobody needs to hear some claptrap from a know-nothing…

    Peter can be…and regularly is…quite obtuse here…but personal attacks with such a shrill tone don’t look good on you either…especially when you’ve got nothing to say…

  197. Joe Stalin 说:
    @Chris Mallory

    Laser sights are illegal in the Grand Duchy of Chicago. But I can see them having a use in certain situations. Someone pointed out if it’s dark, like in the case where of an active shooter in a movie theater and they were wearing body armor, a head shot attempt might be feasible. Ian at Forgotten Weapons runs through a contest with an assault rifle with his partner and at the end, they come the conclusion if you have a big magazine, you can afford tactical-wise to take iffy shots at targets that you wouldn’t consider if you were limited, like with a revolver. Reading Ayoob’s articles in American Handgunner having a large capacity magazine is certainly advantageous in a running gun battle.

  198. peterAUS 说:
    @animalogic

    Hey, PeterAUS. This not a criticism, but a question.

    我明白。

    I assume, from context etc that the AUS in your username (UN) refers to Australia.


    Why not Austria? I could be an Austrian living, for a time being in Australia. Or was living in Australia. Actually, my father could’ve been German and mother Estonian. Or vice versa. Etc.

    Now, naturally, I don’t know your life/story etc, however, my question is: is it really necessary to reference your nationality in your UN ?

    Don’t know? Is it?
    Austrian or Australian?
    Nationality or current living location?

    Problem is, by using Australia in your UN, your personal critics can then easily transfer that criticism to Australia. No, maybe it’s not common – nor is it fair, nor right etc but it DOES happen. So — why offer the temptation ?

    Haha…..yeah….
    员工 criticize you because of plenty of reasons; quite a few out of realm of logic, science and common sense.
    My advice to you: do not take people on the Internet too seriously. Me included.

    I’m proud of Australia too — but NOT of our governments. Many of their acts I can not – will not defend. Can you ?

    如?

    So, I hope you can have a rethink on the AUS thing.

    Austria or Australia?

    On a more serious note….has the word “censorship” occurred to you, while you were typing that post? Or….”compulsive control”?

    I’ve been..hehe….criticized here a lot, called all sorts of names, even my mother was mentioned a couple of times (in certain, rather violent, sex scenes), but, so far, nobody wanted me to change my handle.
    Always interesting around here.

    • 回复: @animalogic
    , @Anonymous
  199. peterAUS 说:
    @Jim Moore

    We’ve been presented here with plethora of advice re the topic.
    Not many from the legal point of view.
    Nice to see your comment.

    Would you be so kind to post here a simple, say, “drill” as to what to do/不能 做,和 形成一种, post shooting event?
    jsmithesq could chime in, of course.

    Like, a homeowner is in his home, perp is down from multiple wounds, the owner is holding his gun an listening to police sirens, going through the shakes.

    What would be advisable course of action in the next couple of hours from the legal point of view?
    In USA, of course.

    • 回复: @Dr. X
    , @Alden
  200. Joe Stalin 说:

    “I remember walking into a gun shop in Belgrade and seeing assault rifles on an unsecured display rack in the middle of the store…you don’t see that in the US…”

    Sure you do. I was in an Illinois gun shop a couple of years ago and they had a large display of assault rifles in the front of the store. A relative was looking to buy an FN SCAR-H. They had it on display where anyone could pick it up. I handled a Beretta .223 AR and Armalite AR-10 straight straight off the rack. Apparently this store was well known as an assault rifle shop; relative spotted a person who looked just like Roe Conn, WGN radio personality. I’ve heard Dan Proft, WIND radio personality state he has a S&W AR.

    I’ll stretch out my neck and bet most guns in Europe are long guns intended for hunting, are registered and permitted, are not military caliber and basically unsuitable for militia use. Suitable for self-defense in a pinch, sure. Limited magazine capacity as well?

    • 回复: @peterAUS
    , @FB
  201. Joe Stalin 说:
    @Svigor

    “is It really that easy to kick in a door, even a flimsy interior door? I don’t think so.”

    I am able to see through a sliding wood bedroom door using a the 100w illumination of an incandescent lamp ceiling fixture on one side and viewing it through an old US Army infrared Metascope. Thin enough?

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  202. animalogic 说:
    @peterAUS

    You equate what I wrote with censorship & (Jesus wept) “compulsive control” ? Keep your “handle” you monumental smart arse….hehehe & hahaha

  203. peterAUS 说:
    @Joe Stalin

    Warning: “militia” thread in progress here. Proceed with caution. Better, still, skip it.

    I’ll stretch out my neck and bet most guns in Europe are long guns intended for hunting, are registered and permitted, are not military caliber and basically unsuitable for militia use. Suitable for self-defense in a pinch, sure. Limited magazine capacity as well?

    The “American exceptionalism” as it best or worst.

    There is no Europe.
    There are groups of countries over there.

    Difference between United Kingdom and Bosnia and Herzegovina is……huge.

    What you posted is correct, as far as I know, for Western Europe.

    绝对是 不是 correct for the East Europe. Balkans in particular.

    I guarantee you, a village in Kosovo, as we speak, has somewhere handy, but well hidden, a cache of weaponry to give US Army battle group hard time. The village has the structure in place to form a light infantry company in an 小时. Trained and experienced guys too.
    The same in some other parts of Balkans too. Can’t and won’t go into details, of course.

    So, yes, you are correct up to a point: legally, nobody on this planet beats US citizens in having access to serious hardware.
    At the same time, some other countries, Europe included, have peoples/ethnic groups already “militarized” to a hilt, just, well, not quite legal.
    Which is exactly the point. That capability is not for self-defense and “big boys toys”, but exactly what the 2nd was/is all about. Challenging the power of the state.
    Details: AAA cannons up to 3o mm, MANPADs, heavy machineguns with optics on tripods, rifle grenades, grenades, LAND MINES, etc. MORTARS up to 120 mm. And plenty of ammo for all that. Or better, for, say, 48 hours of intense fighting.
    Now, all that is just a step one. The first step.
    I can’t, won’t talk here about the 2nd and 3rd.

    As I said before, taking a look how it all worked in real (not in a book/movie) could be a good learning experience.
    And especially the latest in Ukraine. There was some really cool “militia” stuff there in 2014.

    • 回复: @FB
  204. FB 说:
    @Joe Stalin

    ‘I’ll stretch out my neck and bet most guns in Europe are long guns intended for hunting, are registered and permitted, are not military caliber and basically unsuitable for militia use. Suitable for self-defense in a pinch, sure. Limited magazine capacity as well?’

    取决于 country in Europe…big differences there…if we get into countries where there is police corruption and start talking about unregistered weapons then that is a whole other can of worms right there…

    But I would agree generally that getting a sidearm In Europe can be more difficult in some jurisdictions than a long gun…

    In some countries it does not appear difficult at all to get sidearms…

    Again my point here is that in the Balkan countries especially there is a long tradition of gun ownership…

    This is most visible in rural areas where both long guns and sidearms are in practically every household…not all are necessarily registered and enforcement is either lax or nonexistent…

    新的 民兵 tradition here is also noteworthy…this is a part of Europe where an armed populace has been a way of life for centuries of political upheaval…

    Other places have their own type of gun culture…ie Sicily…

    I already mentioned Switzerland and this too goes back to the country’s fierce independence…

    The point is that there is more to gun culture in Europe than some US hayseeds could ever imagine…so they should keep quiet about things they don’t know…

  205. peterAUS 说:
    @Joe Stalin

    You know, you strike me as a guy into “militia” thing.

    I guess I was that type once upon a time. Or just a blowhard would be idiot. Probably 20/80 as far as “audience” here is concerned.

    We can’t talk about that topic here.
    How about you get a quick email account, post the address here and we go from there?

    Now, of course will be monitoring that “conversation” but at least we’ll have creeps, “ragheads”, gung-ho types and and would-be idiots with death wish out of conversation.

    You, Americans, are very good at individual/team level, “militia” thing wise.
    You are not good at anything above that and really bad where it really matters. Just a “blowhard” opinion.

    So, from a pure academic approach, maybe we could talk about a couple of things there?

    Could add something to what you know and do and, well, isn’t Internet all about sharing information and bettering ourselves?

    I mean, even if 90 % I’d say will be sheer idiocy, a smart man could pick up that 10 %.

    仅仅是一个想法。

    • 回复: @Joe Stalin
  206. FB 说:
    @peterAUS

    Peter…put down that crack pipe for a minute and exhale slowly…

    What you are describing with that kind of military hardware may certainly exist in certain 热点 like Kosovo, maybe even Bosnia…and certainly exist in active conflict areas like Donbass…

    But you are conflating apples and oranges here…

    Forming an infantry platoon in an hour is reality in some places…but this kind of stuff is allowed to happen only with tacit approval from whatever ‘authorities’ may be in place there…

    And this is a function of the 稳定性 of the area in question…we do still have unstable areas due to the hostilities we have had in recent times…the political questions are far from settled…and people are keeping their powder dry…

    But this has nothing to do with ordinary folks in stable areas…and their longstanding gun culture…

    There is no need to get into a lot of crazy talk to know that even countries like Germany where police corruption is nil and political stability is rock solid…there is still gun ownership among the people…especially in the rural areas…

    I am talking here of things I know firsthand…

    No you are not going to get an assault rifle legally…and you will need to be a member of a gun club to get a sidearm…

    But lots of capable rifles and shotguns are there in people’s homes…that is a fact…

    I already talked about Switzerland…where the citizen militia played a key role in discouraging a Nazi invasion in WW2…every man was part of the Swiss militia…and kept his gun battle ready at all times…that militia is active to this day…

    Finland has 45 guns per 100 people…just a hair behind Switzerland…and again another case of probably more households with guns than the US…

    Just recently they are bringing in aptitude tests and such…but here again nobody is going to take away people’s guns…especially in the rural areas…the same to varying extent is true in the other Nordic countries…

    We don’t need to go into hyperbole about what is tucked away in some barn in Kosovo…true as that may be…it’s not an accurate picture of the overall situation on the continent…

    But one thing you said is absolutely true…Europe is a fiction…even some countries within Europe are a fiction…so it is pointless and quite uninformed for Americans to talk about Europe as some kind of monolithic entity…

    And quite ridiculous to apply stereotypes about gun culture…

  207. Dr. X 说:
    @peterAUS

    Like, a homeowner is in his home, perp is down from multiple wounds, the owner is holding his gun an listening to police sirens, going through the shakes.

    What would be advisable course of action in the next couple of hours from the legal point of view?
    In USA, of course.

    The advisable course of action would be the following:

    1. Call 911 and say “There’s an emergency, someone’s been shot. Send an ambulance.” Then hang up and say NOTHING more.

    2. When the cops show up say “This person burglarized my home and I was forced to defend myself. I would like to exercise my Fifth Amendment right to not answer any other questions, and I would like to exercise my Sixth Amendment right to have an attorney present.” Say NOTHING else. NOTHING.

    The biggest problem most people have is keeping their mouth SHUT around the cops. Cops are NOT your friends.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  208. peterAUS 说:

    “Militia thing” warning with apology.

    You know F.B. how our ….”conversations” go. That “crack pipe” actually started one post too early.
    But, because the topic is important to me, I’ll bite.
    Yes, I am aware how your reply will look like so don’t flatter yourself; reply is just for a couple of guys reading this, not because of you.

    But, to be clear here:
    One thing in West Europe. As you said. Citizens and firearms.
    Another thing in East Europe. As you said.Citizens and firearms.
    And, another thing in “hot spots”. As I said.Militia “in waiting”. And, also, there is much more there which I won’t post here.
    All of Bosnia and Herzegovina, part of Montenengro, part of Serbia, all of Kosovo, all of Macedonia.
    Quite a few “spots” I think.
    And, of course, Ukraine.

    this kind of stuff is allowed to happen only with tacit approval from whatever ‘authorities’ may be in place there…

    没有
    The top authority in Balkans is West.
    The next authority are, mostly, stooges of the West.Or, at the very least, very careful people balancing between the imperial power and own people with LONG memories.

    Those authorities do not approve of that, on the contrary.

    The real authority is the clan, tribe and the Church/nation. And the memories. Always the memories. They go to 16th Century and beyond.
    等等

  209. Joe Stalin 说:
    @peterAUS

    I’m just a guy interested in firearms, nothing more, nothing less. I am not a member of a gun club, nor a member of any organized “militia” group. I don’t shoot very much. I am, however, very much interested in keeping American gun rights alive. You learn a lot reading and listening to the arguments of American and foreign gun controllers for decades. So I’ve decided to see what answers there were to the voluminous attacks gun controllers have presented via “The Megaphone,” as Steve Sailer calls it.

    Does that satisfy your curiosity about me?

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  210. peterAUS 说:
    @Joe Stalin

    确实如此。

    Mea culpa。

    Just felt that the conversation was getting too serious for public and wished to make it private.
    Some details could’ve given certain types wrong ideas, for example.

    谢谢你的澄清。

  211. peterAUS 说:
    @Dr. X

    看来, 可以 be integrated into a training session.

    A trainee fires->clears/secures the gun->picks up a dummy phone, does that.Instructor plays the other side, tries to trick the trainee->two minutes nothing->instructor plays a cop->says that. Probably break the second sentence into two.->instructor tries to trick the trainee….etc.
    重复。
    一次又一次
    Get it smooth.

    Induce stress.Some tricks to do that.
    重复。
    Get it smooth.

    Induce adrenaline dump. Some tricks to do that.
    Repeat (carefully, long rest in between, health wise).
    Get it smooth.

    等等

    只是一个主意。

  212. @Stan d Mute

    Stan, I agree about having a dog. Big breeds are more intimidating to crooks, but the dog doesn’t need to be very big to be effective. I had a great dog years ago, an Irish Terrier. He was my wife’s bodyguard. That breed is typically fearless and they have a deep voice and rather large teeth for their size. Mine weighed about 34 pounds. He chased away an intruder in our garage once, and he scared the shit out of anybody who came near my wife when she was walking him around town.

    A 60 pound dog is big enough to fight off two unarmed human attackers at once. I have a mixed breed who weighs 65 pounds or so and he’s a very good guardian. I found him playing in the road when he was about 7 weeks old and he had huge feet and weighed 18 pounds. He looked like a Boerboel puppy but he didn’t grow to 150 pounds like that breed does.

    Of course, most crooks are afraid of dogs. The old folks said, when I was a kid, “Don’t trust anybody your dog doesn’t trust”. That has served as good advice.

    • 回复: @Alden
    , @Stan d Mute
  213. Anonymous • 免责声明 说:
    @peterAUS

    We’ve got to get these childish, personal vendettas under control around here. They’re irritating everyone and taking up way too much space. They end up having little to nothing to do with the topic at hand, and make the site look bad.

    Perhaps those who persistently engage in these antics should be limited to 100 words per post, or (even better) five posts per day.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  214. Alden 说:
    @NoseytheDuke

    The White cop was on the radio for a good 10 minutes asking for help and back up because the black guy was pointing a gun at him.

    There was no cut off thing that would start a rational conflict. The black just stared harassing and pointing the gunI might be wrong, but as I remember it, the affirmative black officer was off duty.

    Blacks and their Jewish enablers were still very powerful in Los Angeles then.

    Had the White officer not called in that he was under attack it would have been a Darren Wilson Mike Brown situation.

    • 回复: @NoseytheDuke
  215. peterAUS 说:
    @Anonymous

    We’ve got to get these childish, personal vendettas under control around here. They’re irritating everyone and taking up way too much space. They end up having little to nothing to do with the topic at hand, and make the site look bad.

    Perhaps those who persistently engage in these antics should be limited to 100 words per post, or (even better) five posts per day.

    Good idea, but, “road to Hell…”.
    那里 is The Catch 22 there.

    And, well, maybe you give readers here just a little too much credit.
    I am sure some just love flame wars and such.

    Even posters. Some love to argue. Some, well…..there are deeper issues there.
    A couple, well, in real life I’d give them 泊位。

    A lot of people communicate on Internet not to learn but to socialize, to be part of some community. And in community, well….you have all types. And what you can’t say in real life (fist or worse) you can in forums.
    And, I guess for more and more, that communication is some sort of therapy.

    I mean, this is “alt-right” site. By all metrics all of us posting here are sociopaths. Ask any sociologist/psychologist. People who don’t, actually, fit well into this world.
    I mean, this very article and comments aren’t exactly what’s talked about in “polite company”.
    So, some unsocial behavior is expected here.

    And, there is “ignore” thing here.
    Or, just skip over some handles.

    • 回复: @NoseytheDuke
  216. @Alden

    I think you are mistaken, ten minutes is a very long time with a gun pointed at you. My recollection is that it all happened quite quickly and that it was largely due to macho posturing. The black cop’s vehicle ended up careening on into a gas station or fast food place and it was then that a call for assistance was made, I think. I could be wrong but I wouldn’t be surprised if you managed to dig up what was reported about the incident at the time. I’m thinking it was around twenty years ago. Cheers

    • 回复: @Alden
    , @Alden
  217. @peterAUS

    “I mean, this is “alt-right” site.” I refer to it as a free speech site and while there are many who might identify themselves as alt-right I would say that there are many who don’t.

  218. Joe Stalin 说:

    “You, Americans, are very good at individual/team level, “militia” thing wise.
    You are not good at anything above that and really bad where it really matters. Just a “blowhard” opinion.”

    You know, I’ve heard exactly the same opinion applied to the Iraqi Army during the 1991 Gulf War.
    It’s so broad that I can’t really argue that point without some sort of reference.

    I’ve heard the opposite really throughout my life. For example, the Hoover Dam has been given as an example of a large American project being excellent. Surely, the Apollo missions must count for American excellence in a large project. Does the Golden Gate Bridge count as excellence of a large project? US corn belt outshines the Amazon when it comes to biological activity during the growing season; doesn’t that make us pretty good at growing food? ( https://www.nasa.gov/press/goddard/2014/march/satellite-shows-high-productivity-from-us-corn-belt/ ) The USA put weather satellites into orbit and allows other countries access to that weather data. Certainly a large technical achievement by US taxpayers, US scientists and US engineers. Do we get any credit for that? Does Gen. McArthor’s Inchon Korea landings count as military genius? Does the US Evacuation of Hungnam in 1950 (100K UN personel & equipment, 98K North Korean refugees) count as large American managerial success?

    Believe it or not, Americans have feelings too.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  219. peterAUS 说:
    @Joe Stalin

    It’s so broad that I can’t really argue that point without some sort of reference.

    我们有一个 通讯 问题。
    I was talking about “militia/survivalist/prepers” community in USA . Guys heavy into 2nd.

    I can’t really get into serious conversation about it here but just a hint or two:

    A fire team has, say, 4 men.
    Each of them has to be qualified in his role.
    Top weapon they have is belt-fed machinegun. They also have some AT weapons etc.
    They, as team, have to TRAIN realistic scenarios.
    I guess that people into 2nd can do that. A couple of mates into that and off they go. A bit of stretch re machinegun and even more with AT launchers, but, with a bit of ingenuity can be done.

    An Army squad has 2 fireteams and is led by a Sargent.
    Weapons are similar but, I am not quite sure its easy to get all that together and train realistic scenarios.

    Now, the most important and at the very border of sensible Internet conversation is tactics.
    WHO is the expected opponent?

    Correct me if I am wrong but most of tactics is COIN based and, even more important, executed in the same way…....... ..方式….the current tactics of US Armed Forces is.
    想想 一秒钟。

    I have seen, from hundreds of available public examples, guys in proper gear clearing rooms etc. They move and work EXACTLY as US Army moves and works in Afghanistan, Iraq etc.
    Think about that for a second……..

    On individual level, marksmanship, fieldcraft, WEAPONS and GEAR, guys into “militia” thing are at the level of First World military. Well, because most of them ,那恭喜你, ex-military. Save fitness I’d say. Being fat isn’t actually……..practicable…….for a combat militaiaman but let’s not get bogged into such details.
    TACTICS is, mostly, not correct. And let’s leave that there.

    Moving on the platoon.
    Well, I’ve seen some platoon exercises of US “militias”. Actually not bad, but, haven’t seen, for obvious reasons, indirect fire weapons. MORTARS. At least 60 mm.
    So, let’s stop here, because even if you get 100 guys to try a company you won’t get 81/82 mortars and let alone not 120 mm mortars.

    Fact of life. The very essence of organized society having armed forces.

    So, again, “militia/survivalist/prepers” .

    FFS, USA is the world first superpower. You don’t need foreigners to tell you how great your country is.
    Hahaha….and I am one of those guys who get on people’s nerves here by saying how USA is much better place to live than Russia and China. Or anywhere else for that matter if you are good.
    The names people have been calling me for posting that on this very site.

    See, I don’t live in USA. A couple of reasons. With age one tends to try to find a less…intense…..environment and life. More beer and beaches less rat race to the bottom. And I am not that good in what I do now. The switch from military into civilian life…..had difficulties. And, can’t compete with “young lions” in my line of work anymore.
    But, I really believe: “If you are REALLY GOOD, go to USA. You’ll make it good there, but…you have to be really good.”

    Haha..and now we both just need to wait a bit to have all “USA haters” jump on us here.

    • 回复: @Joe Stalin
  220. Joe Stalin 说:
    @peterAUS

    About all I can tell you is what I found in some ROTC US Army training manuals I found in High School way back when: the “L-Shaped” ambush. Tried and true. Militia most likely have to resort
    to obtaining government force crew served weapons. As I understand it, Vietcong militia were capturing US-supplied munitions at rates enabling them to sustain themselves.

    But that does not mean they cannot produce crew served munitions on their own. I recall reading an article in Soldier of Fortune magazine where some South American insurgents were manufacturing mortar shells/ RPG rounds (I don’t recall which.) where it was stated that the ability to make professional looking plastic nosecones contributed greatly to moral.

    Producing military-grade ordnance is a true industrial undertaking. First and foremost would be the manufacture of explosive fills and detonator compounds. For that you need a chemical engineer. BATF has a list: https://www.atf.gov/explosives/qa/what-%E2%80%9Cexplosives-list%E2%80%9D

    Then you would need to design, test, QC, find materials, find production tools and manufacture said items, all the while with the government looking for you. I once at the International Machine and Tool Show at McCormick Place and there was a display there for making some part of an M-79 grenade. Trust me, making munitions safely is a true undertaking.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  221. peterAUS 说:
    @Joe Stalin

    Militia most likely have to resort to obtaining government force crew served weapons.

    Well…..how about this:
    Demands a bit of toning down that “American exceptionalism” a bit, first.

    如果…if…one can manage that, then, why not visit official documents from Hague court related to “events” in Balkans in 90’s?
    Demands a bit of , but, could be 有用。

    Say, how did Croats do that in summer ’91 in Croatia.
    Or Croats and Muslims in summer ’92 in Bosnia.
    Or Kosovo Albanians in ’98/99 in Kosovo, before “Merciful Angel”.

    铲球

    making munitions safely is a true undertaking.

    了。

    And, for those who can handle a bit of Russian (or can find somebody who can speak it), trawling, 小心, available data about 第一天 of “Donbass” and Ukraine could be useful too.
    Good thing about this explosion of self-love and social media on Internet (which I don’t get) is that one can find, with relative ease, data only a well placed humint could deliver before.

    Even digging in events in early 90’s upon breakup of Soviet Union could deliver a lot. Plenty of fighting in some parts of Soviet Union too then.

    Overall, that is 复杂 subject. A 很多 of variables, a lot of scenarios…a lot of possibilities.

    But, if Israelis could carefully study Blitzkrieg why guys into “militia” in US can’t study how those Slavic “untermensch” did that over there?

    仅仅是一个想法。

    And, well, I think we’ve reached the “red line” on the topic here.

  222. You keep bringing up nations of the former Yugoslavia as something Americans should emulate. You don’t seem to realize that the US is vastly larger in land area and much less densely populated.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  223. Alden 说:
    @anarchyst

    There are many cases like that in England. One case got in the news only because the homeowner was a well known news presenter.

    She and her young daughter were in the kitchen at the back of the house at night. She saw 2 intruders jump over the fence and come towards the house.

    She screamed “ I already called police” grabbed her phone and daughter ran out to the street and called police.

    Intruders didn’t break in. Must have run off because she yelled she’d called police.
    When police took report she mentioned that she had thought that she would defend herself and daughter with a kitchen knife if they got in the kitchen.

    Police informed her that if she had defended herself with a kitchen knife they would have had to arrest her even if she didn’t touch the intruders

  224. Alden 说:
    @NoseytheDuke

    Right it was around 20 years ago. I don’t remember anything about a gas station. What I do remember is that the black targeted and chased the White for a long time and that from the first the Black was pointing his gun at the White.

    The White got on the radio right away with officer needs assistance calls. Those calls were the only thing that saved him from a lynching by the black activists.

  225. peterAUS 说:
    @Chris Mallory

    You keep bringing up nations of the former Yugoslavia as something Americans should emulate.

    不是真的。
    Sounds as:
    “You keep bringing up Nazis as something Israelis should emulate” re IDF, Arabs and wars there.

    But, although we are really into “red” zone re the topic, how about this:
    Any proper military organization needs officers.
    People with intelligence, intellect and related education. Now……..how many of those are in “militia” thing in USA?

    My impression is that the “militia” thing is mostly populated by ex-troopers and NCOs. Oh,yes, some of them are people with extraordinary skills and experience. In specific areas and, the most important, up to a certain LEVEL of ORGANIZATION.

    Because, in order to utilize the material I was pointing to, you don’t need an ex=SAS or Detachment “D” sergeant.
    You need a staff Colonel, first and foremost.
    You need a history professor with a vision. A retired LEO. A good ex-con too. A senior manager. A very good tradesman.Etc.
    Food for thought, maybe?

    You know, when I see “militia” thing in USA I see an auxiliary paramilitary force which will be employed as augment to National Guard and Federal troops.

    Before jumping with mouths foaming, a simple observation: in order to see what a unit is for see its training curriculum and observe them in exercises.
    95 % of drills, SOPs and tactics of “militia” thing in USA are exactly the same as US military operating in Afghanistan and Iraq.

    And, well, this is just a “Web chat”. I have ZERO expectation anything of I’ve said will even register.
    A man just has to say what’s on his mind….sometimes.

    • 回复: @Chris Mallory
    , @Joe Stalin
  226. @peterAUS

    It is simple, conditions on the ground in a large, sparsely populated nation like the US will be different than the rats in a box situation you had in Yugoslavia.

    As for the rest of your babbling, they are just that, babbling about things you have no experience about.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
    , @FB
  227. Alden 说:
    @Twodees Partain

    What right does your wife have to walk around town with a dog that scares the shit out of other pedestrians lawfully walking on the public sidewalks?

    That kind of dog and that kind of attitude are the reasons so many towns have strictly enforced leash laws and forbid dogs in city parks except for designated dog parks

    If your town was so dangerous she needed a guard dog, why not just get a trained well behaved guard dog that didn’t scare the shit out of other pedestrians.?

    Before the leash laws, I often encountered untrained unleashed dogs that as soon as they saw me half a block away charged snarling barking wildly and charging.

    I handled it by charging towards the dog screeching as loudly as possible. Almost all the owners were dork nerd beta makes. who loudly protested that the dog wouldn’t hurt me and how dare I object to their dog trying to attack me.

    I’d just scream right back and the encounters usually ended with the beta nerd and his aggressive mutt retreating.

    It’s my opinion that people who own aggressive untrained dogs who charge at pedestrians are wimps at heart.

    Everyone has the right to use sidewalks streets and parks. No one has the right to strut around with an aggressive untrained dog that threatens, intimidates and menaces other pedestrians who have every right to use the sidewalk.

    If you live in such a dangerous area that you need a guard to go for a walk, get a guard dog that is trained not to charge at every other pedestrian.

  228. peterAUS 说:
    @Chris Mallory

    As for the rest of your babbling, they are just that, babbling about things you have no experience about.

    三种选择:

    1. Dumb (80 %) related to

    I have ZERO expectation anything of I’ve said will even register.

    2. Gatekeeping (18 %).
    3. Damage control (2 %)

    If you don’t get this 1.2.3. “blabbing” explains it.

    Back to perfect caliber re “stopping power”. Or similar.

  229. Alden 说:
    @peterAUS

    Totally depends on the specific laws of the state and city and county ordinances.

    Generalizations are useless. Get gun owners insurance and read the information they send you.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  230. Alden 说:
    @nsa

    What happens if the nearest logging road is 500 miles away?

  231. Alden 说:
    @NoseytheDuke

    I’ve read that too. I think it’s just to get more cannon fodder and support troops for our endless wars.

    We’re running out of Whites. Too many blacks, 40 % have IQs below 80. But Mexico has a huge supply of 90 + IQ young guys for whom enlisting especially for support rather than combat is a great deal.

  232. Alden 说:
    @NoseytheDuke

    I was still reading the LASlimes then. The Slimes and the blacks led by
    ((( multimillionaire Stanley Sheinbaun))
    really went after the White officer.

    I followed the story until the White officer was exonerated. The coverage started on the front page about racist White officer shoots black off duty cop.

    It ended hidden in the back pages that the black officer chased and threatened the White officer pointing his gun for a while before the White officer shot him.

    And the White officer was on the radio all the time before the shot. White officers defense was helped by the fact that black officer worked off duty for one of those Rap stars involved in some killings

    和平

  233. peterAUS 说:
    @Alden

    Totally depends on the specific laws of the state and city and county ordinances.

    Generalizations are useless. Get gun owners insurance and read the information they send you.

    Well….I don’t think it’s that simple.

    I believe that Dr.X advice holds here.

    You, I think, aren’t taking into account the most important element of legal process: the 第一 contact with the Law.
    If you mess up that first contact the subsequent contacts, even with very good lawyers, could be problematic to say the least. Especially the first statement to Police. A cop can take it while you are still shaking. “What happened here”…BANG…you said it…he wrote it in report. Even body language, intonation, attitude…everything….That’s it.

    I can’t emphasize the importance of the 第一 contacts here: call to emergency services (recorded of course) and the first contact with police.
    That process is of paramount importance.
    An average citizen in high level of stress…and those several sentences he/she speaks up there will be the very basic of everything what happens later on.

    The tragedy of all that is that an average law abiding citizen is prone to get screwed by system more than a perp.
    It was mentioned in one of comments above: the propensity of an agitated person to speak to Police.
    And…..I was watching, plenty of times, how an experienced perp does it.
    16 years old, semiliterate kid from ghetto…..does that much better than an university professor,mathematics, in suburbia.
    Tragic, really.

    A smart citizen should take into account your

    Totally depends on the specific laws of the state and city and county ordinances.

    Generalizations are useless

    and, then, (I am getting repetitive here):
    -find an instructor in your local area who knows all that
    -PRACTICE that. Practice firing, under stress and that FIRST CONTACT. Practice everything that can happen at the scene. Even a statement.Everything.
    Drill it until becomes smooth.

    Special Forces aren’t really supermen although people love to see them that way.
    What makes them that good is combination of two things:
    -realistic exercises
    -practice until it becomes automatic.

    Well, a citizen could do the same in this scenario.
    I believe he/she should.

    • 回复: @Alden
    , @Alden
  234. Alden 说:
    @Svigor

    No, but all his relatives can sue you for wrongful death. Relatives who are dependent can sue you for loss of income over his lifetime. Not that most criminals have much projected income
    Lovers can sue you for loss of consortium.

    Even his landlord or mortgage holder could probably sue you for loss of a couple months rent or mortgage payments.
    “Judged by 12 or carried by 6”

    If you are a black lowlife prison isn’t so bad. You get 3 hots and a cot and lots of leisure time.

    If you are a White in jail or prison surrounded by black criminals and affirmative action black guards you’ll wish you were dead.

    • 回复: @Chris Mallory
  235. Alden 说:
    @Stan d Mute

    Where do you live that you need such protection? Are you black and you live in the south side of Chicago?

    • 回复: @Stan d Mute
  236. Alden 说:
    @Anonymous

    Depends on the trainer. Some of the so called trainers use what they call positive reinforcement. That means waving a treat 6 inches from their mouth while begging them to do what they are supposed to do anyway.

    不起作用

    Dogs do seem to have an excessive need for love and attention. One dog I know goes out to the gate every day about an hour before sunset and waits for his mommy to get home. If she’s not home by 7 winter, 9 in summer he gets really anxious. That dog has a husband and 3 kids around but he really wants his beloved mommy home on time.

    But they also need food and shelter. I’m sure they are happy lying on the couch or next to a heat vent waiting for their beloved humans to get home.

    I’ve done a lot of dog sitting in the last 10 years. They sleep most of the time when their owners are away.

  237. Alden 说:
    @peterAUS

    Join the NRA. Get their gun insurance. What happens depends on your state laws. Learn about your state laws and what the gun insurance tells you to do.

    I was in law enforcement most of my working life. I had a lot of criminal lawyer friends I’m sure they would give me better advice than you

  238. Alden 说:
    @Alden

    Neither you nor the average criminal knows the proper way to kick in a locked door.

    Here’s how the police are trained to kick in a locked door. Get a bit sideways. Pull your knee up to your waist. Kick your heel hard as you can on the doorknob. If the lock doesn’t break the first time, repeat. It should work after a few times.

    The movies all show smashing the door, not the lock with the shoulders. Doesn’t work. Kicking the door not the lock won’t work either.

    Even those honeycomb foam doors covered with a 1/8 inch layer of cardboard will take a while unless the perp kicks in the lock.

    At least the householder won’t wake up with an intruder in the bedroom or on top of her. At least householder would have chance to grab a gun if the door were locked.

    No gun? Scream “ I’ve already called the police “ would be effective.

    Rember who the average burglar intruder is in The United States. A below 85 IQ Black with an existing criminal record and probably outstanding warrants.

    I know woman who walked into her kitchen about 9/pm and saw a black man working on her kitchen door. She was shocked and screamed. The black guy ran off.

    Problem with that expensive White neighborhood is that it’s near a freeway. The blacks used to get on the freeeay, drive to White neighborhoods get off the freeway and rob and burglarize a few blocks off the off ramps.

    That neighborhood is very safe now. Reason is that Hispanics took over the neighborhood and established a defense perimeter between the Whites and criminal blacks.

    • 回复: @Joe Stalin
    , @FB
  239. Alden 说:
    @peterAUS

    I mentioned NRA and other gun owners insurance companies that give advise and provide attorneys for gun owners

    You just had to jump in and ignorantly assume that the insurance companies don’t provide information about what to do; in accordance with your state, county and city laws every step of the way.
    Just what makes you think the gun insurance companies don’t inform their customers on what to do in callling and dealing with the police?

    发布有关您所知道的信息。

    You don’t know about the advice specific to federal state county and city laws the gun owners insurance companies give to their customers

  240. Joe Stalin 说:

    Just discovered that President Trump has an Arex Rex0 9mm that was presented to VP Pence in 2016.

    http://www.guns.com/2016/11/11/fime-group-presents-trump-pence-campaign-with-custom-pistol/

    Custom silver grips with MAGA engraved on them.

    Pretty cool to have a gun made by your wife’s country.

  241. Joe Stalin 说:
    @Alden

    I dunno; around 1970 we called the Chicago Fire Department because the abandoned apartment above us was leaking water on the ground floor. A muscular white gentleman came and did indeed kick the door twice and it broke open.

    • 回复: @Alden
  242. Svigor 说:

    Poupon: .45 is overrated. Apparently too big to double-stack, with no compensation for the lowered capacity. An antiquated round.

    No, but all his relatives can sue you for wrongful death.

    Obviously, but these are long-shots, relatively speaking. No one present can claim he has had his earnings potential curtailed for life.

    Most self defense shootings take place at under 10 yards. The laser allows ease of point shooting, cutting down on reaction time.

    I think this is debatable. It might be true overall, but I can conceive of using the sights as being faster, instead of trying to “walk” the laser onto the target.

    • 回复: @Chris Mallory
  243. Svigor 说:

    On loss of support – it’s pretty abstract. It’s ordinary life that support that was there, isn’t anymore. Any one of the dead people could simply decide to stop supporting the people they’ve supported previously. Sitting in court in a wheelchair is concrete.

  244. Svigor 说:

    I dunno; around 1970 we called the Chicago Fire Department because the abandoned apartment above us was leaking water on the ground floor. A muscular white gentleman came and did indeed kick the door twice and it broke open.

    Two kicks for an 外观 door. Interior doors are much less sturdily built and framed.

  245. Svigor 说:

    In some cases, putting your shoulder to a door might actually work better. The danger of kicking an interior door is that your foot will go clean through it, instead of kicking it open. That’s probably less of an issue if you shoulder it. I would not recommend shouldering a sturdily-built exterior door, though. Great way to hurt yourself.

    • 回复: @Alden
  246. FB 说:
    @Chris Mallory

    I never cease to be amazed at the 纯粹的愚蠢 on display on this website…‘Chris Mallory’ in #227 said this…

    ‘You keep bringing up nations of the former Yugoslavia as something Americans should emulate. You don’t seem to realize that the US is vastly larger in land area and much less densely populated.

    Then in #231 said this…

    ‘It is simple, conditions on the ground in a large, sparsely populated nation like the US will be different than the rats in a box situation you had in Yugoslavia.”

    It is little wonder that US is failing on many levels…especially education…

    30 seconds spent with wikipedia is all it takes to at least learn basic facts about geography and population density…

    The population density for the entire US [including Alaska] is 90.6 people per square mile…

    But if we look at major states…we see that 俄亥俄州 has a density of 282 / sq. mile…

    Serbia…about the same size as Ohio by area…has a density of 235 / sq. mile…which is 20 percent 降低 ...

    宾夕法尼亚 is 284 / sq. mile…25 percent denser than Serbia…

    伊利诺伊 is 232 / sq. mile…about the same as Serbia…

    佛罗里达 is 384 / sq. mile…half again as dense as Serbia…

    纽约州 is 416 / sq. mile…nearly twice that of Serbia…and more than twice that of Bosnia…which is 178 /sq. mile…

    甚至 加利福尼亚州 is 240 /sq. mile…slightly more dense than Serbia…

    克罗地亚 is only 196 / sq. mile…less than half of New York or Florida…

    新的 Yugoslav Partisan militia during WW2 was a huge thorn in the side of the 威马特 and 舒茨斯塔费尔 [SS]…the Germans were able to occupy the cities and to a lesser extent the towns…but never held any countryside…similar to today’s US occupation of Afghanistan…

    ‘…[Yugoslav Partisans] is considered to be Europe’s most effective anti-Axis resistance movement during World War II…’

    The Partisans tied down 20 German divisions…about the same number of infantry divisions to occupy all of France…the entire Western front never had more than about 50 German divisions [in 1942 it was only 27]…reaching a height of about 75 after the 1944 Normandy invasion…

    The Yugoslav Partisans were not alone in terms of European militia…the Spanish Civil War…the Swiss militia and many more played historic roles…

    PeterAus is absolutely right when talking about these things…it is the know-nothings here who are doing a lot of ‘babbling…’

    Especially spot on is his comment about the importance of officer-level leadership in any effective militia…something where fanboy US militias have zero content…

    There is an old saying that it is better to remain quiet and be thought a fool…than to open one’s mouth and remove all doubt…

    • 回复: @Chris Mallory
    , @TT
  247. @Alden

    Where do you live that you need such protection? Are you black and you live in the south side of Chicago?

    Born in Detroit, now just an hour away from the Afro shenanigans. But it doesn’t matter, they’re everywhere.

  248. @Twodees Partain

    A 60 pound dog is big enough to fight off two unarmed human attackers at once. I have a mixed breed who weighs 65 pounds or so and he’s a very good guardian.

    It depends in large part on the person and how well they know dogs. That and the dog itself of course. I like small nervous dogs for their alertness, but big natural guard dogs like the mastiff breeds for intimidation. Absolutely nobody will engage a pack of 200# dogs intent on protecting their home. Plus the giant breeds are really the best family pet if you’ve got the room and can afford to care for them.

    Remember the ghetto denizens are dull witted so to them, an American Bulldog is a 180# pit bull and an English Mastiff a 250# pit. A 60 or 80# boxer or shepherd can be highly intimidating but nothing compares to facing down a pack that outweighs you individually by 100#ea.

    The safest home in America:
    https://goo.gl/images/bvnGac

  249. @Alden

    At least 32 states currently have protections against civil suits in cases of self defense. Many of them have outright bans. Kentucky bans them and by statute if you are sued after a self defense case you can recover damages from the plaintiff.

    • 回复: @Alden
    , @Alden
  250. @Svigor

    That is where knowing how to point shoot comes in handy. A basic human ability is to point our finger at an object. It works the same with a firearm. Except we are using the barrel instead of our finger. The red dot just lets you know you have the firearm pointed center of mass. The laser is just a backup to your natural ability. You do have to make sure the laser is regulated with the gun. That the bullet will hit within an acceptable MOA from where the dot is. As with everything else firearm related, practice, practice, practice.

  251. FB 说:
    @Alden

    ‘Neither you nor the average criminal knows the proper way to kick in a locked door.

    Here’s how the police are trained to kick in a locked door. Get a bit sideways. Pull your knee up to your waist. Kick your heel hard as you can on the doorknob. If the lock doesn’t break the first time, repeat. It should work after a few times.’

    This is the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard…

    Kicking a door…especially the lock…is attacking the strongest point on that door…

    The weakest point is the wood door frame surrounding the door…not the metal lock…

    Kicking is likewise quite ineffectual against a solidly built door…

    I speak from experience here…years ago when I was living in an apartment building…one of the girls on the floor had lost her keys late one night and the superintendent was not answering…

    Desperate to get in…she went knocking on neighbors’ doors and I was woken up by the commotion in the hall…when I stepped out I saw two large guys trying to kick in that door without the slightest effect…

    I knew that I could breach that door without effort…but I explained to the young lady that it would cause damage to the door frame…and asked her to give me verbal assurance that she would not hold me responsible for the damage…

    Your body’s center of mass is in your chest…holding onto the door handle with your hand you simply throw your shoulder at the door at a point near the door frame…

    As in breaking boards in martial arts…the key is to aim at a point 以外 that which you wish to break…not the actual surface itself…this is due to the fact that your hand, foot, shoulder or whatever body part you are using to break the object will still be accelerating if you aim beyond the 平面 of the target object…

    I stood with my inside foot flush with the door…and simply leaned my shoulder back several inches from the door…probably only about six to ten inches…

    I then threw my upper body weight against the door [near the frame]…aiming specifically at a point about six inches 以外 the door plane… and it just gave way on the first attempt…the inside of the door jamb wood was completely splintered…

    You could never bring as much force to bear with a kick…that is simple physics…ie = mass times acceleration [Newton’s Second Law of Motion]

    …the mass of your foot is tiny compared to your upper body…no matter how strong your leg and how well placed the kick…you will never get even a fraction of the of a well-placed shoulder swing…

    Also by using your shoulder you can be much more accurate in placing the force exactly where it will do the most good…as near to the door frame as possible…

    Also you are making use of leverage…by placing the force at shoulder level which is about two feet higher than the door lock [typically]…this part of the door will bend in and place a moment [force times distance]…ie 杠杆臂 of about two feet at the door lock…

    It is like using a long handle on a wrench to loosen a lug nut…the force placed at the end of the lever arm is multiplied by the arm distance…

    By kicking at the lock itself you have zero leverage…and you will never breach that door…

    Police usually use a battering ram…and the shoulder method if the matter is urgent and the door is not fortified…

    • 回复: @Alden
    , @Alden
  252. @FB

    Obviously your reading comprehension is lacking.

    我说的是 US AS A WHOLE is less densely populated than Serbia. You proceed to cherry pick out some states that are not. But 38 states, including both Alaska and Hawaii (!!!) are less densely populated than Serbia. I use “Yugoslavia” as short hand for that whole group of “nations” that split out after the fall of communism. If you want to talk about Croatia, then 35 states are still less densely populated, throwing out Hawaii, North Carolina and Virginia. If you want to throw out Alaska and Hawaii, that is still 36 and 34 states less densely populated than Serbia and Croatia. Still a majority of the nation.

    There are only 14 US Army divisions in the continental US currently and 8 of those are National Guard. No where near enough to pacify and hold the continental US if there is widespread rebellion.

    We were not talking about WWII. The conversation was about the 1990’s civil wars and ethnic cleansing in those rat boxes.

    Petey is an idiot who knows next to nothing about the US, our people, or our firearms culture.

    • 回复: @FB
  253. FB 说:
    @Chris Mallory

    Look…I’m not going to get in a ‘discussion’ with an obvious 肉头...

    Your comments are quite clear…you talk about a ‘rat’s nest’ of population density in the former Yugoslavia…which I have shown to be total BS…

    Your nonsense about number of states that have lower densities is meaningless…

    …how much lower…?

    …how big a population lives there…as a fraction of total US population…?

    Even if you take the whole US [including Alaska]… population density is just slightly more than half that of Bosnia…that’s not the huge difference you were babbling about…

    Texas…the second most populous state has a density of 104 / sq. mile…that’s more than half of Bosnia at 178…

    Georgia…which is ranked eight in US population has 165 / sq. mile…

    North Carolina…which is ranked ninth…has a density of 209…

    Michigan ranked 10’th…has a density of 174…almost identical to Bosnia…

    New Jersey…11’th in population has a density of 1,210 people per square mile…

    Virginia…12’th…has a density of 207…

    Those 12 states contain 194 million people…nearly two thirds of the US population…

    Their combined average population density = 326 people per square mile…

    That’s nearly twice that of Bosnia…and 50 percent greater than Serbia…

    So the bottom line is that two thirds of the US by population is more densely packed than the former Yugoslavia…and by a fair margin…

    But here is the 重要 观点…

    Even comparing the figure of 326 people per square mile in the 12 largest US states…to say an average of about 200 for the Yugoslav states is 不能 a significant difference in terms of military operations…

    That is obvious to anyone who has actually driven or flown over [I have done both] of all of the regions under discussion here…there is lots of open space between settlements…more than enough to make direct comparisons of population density quite 无意义 in regard to guerilla operations…

    The Balkans is not the Gaza strip as your inane comments suggest…Gaza has a density of 13,000 people per square mile…ten times as dense as New Jersey…the densest US state…
    and about 50 times more dense than the Yugoslav states…

    That kind of density difference is significant…

    As I would have expected you are blowing smoke out your kazoo…

  254. peterAUS 说:
    @Joe Stalin

    绝对是。

    相当 interesting, actually.

    Fundamental question, which can’t be answered at the moment, would be: where their true loyalties are?
    It appears it’s with the Governor, so, it’s state level.
    But, they appear to be tightly integrated into local communities too.

    At the end of the day, really doesn’t matter. What matters is expertise and the real 潜力 to form county, even city/town defense force, if necessary.
    Not a bunch of guys in cammo playing games, but serious, brigade level, outfit.

    感谢您的分享。

  255. Joe Stalin 说:

    The official definition of the US Militia:

    10美国法典§246 –民兵:组成和阶级

    (a)美国民兵由所有身体健康的男性组成,这些男性年龄至少17岁,并且除标题313的第32条另有规定外,年龄在45岁以下或已宣布意图的男性成为美国国民和国民警卫队成员中的美国女性公民。
    (b)民兵的职等是-
    (1)有组织的民兵,由国民警卫队和海军民兵组成; 和
    (2)无组织的民兵,由不属于国民警卫队或海军民兵的民兵组成。
    (Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 14, § 311; Pub. L. 85–861, § 1(7), Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1439; Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title V, § 524(a), Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1656; renumbered § 246, Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title XII, § 1241(a)(2), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2497.)

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/246

    I believe your concept of the “militia” is the “organized” whereas mine is the “unorganized,” so we are basically talking about two different kinds of nominal concepts.

    I will refer you to:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_%28United_States%29

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  256. peterAUS 说:
    @Joe Stalin

    I believe your concept of the “militia” is the “organized” whereas mine is the “unorganized,” so we are basically talking about two different kinds of nominal concepts.

    不完全是。

    I definitely do not talk about any “armed outfit” which, in certain scenarios, would be used by Washington. Plenty of those already around and, I believe, not quite for the benefit of an average citizen of United States.

    What I mean by “organized” is not “political”. It’s “operational”.

    The mission, assumed, is to defend a big town/average city/small county against external armed, serious, threat. I’d leave to you who could present that threat. Several options there, actually.

    In very simple language it would need a force of around 3000 men/women capable of working 一起, in combat.
    In order to be effective that force must be 有组织的. It has to become a unit, not just 3000 humans with weapons and equipment.A brigade.
    That takes plenty of expertise, lot of effort and often neglected……lot of 时间.
    Actually, all that community (town/city/county) must be organized too, just not quite on that level.

    No need to keep reinventing the wheel.
    All military, since Babylon, have had the same principle.
    Successful ones, that is.

    • 回复: @Joe Stalin
  257. Joe Stalin 说:
    @peterAUS

    I guess the most famous use of US militia as per your definition was the Battle of New Orleans:

    “The last major battle of the War of 1812 was the Battle of New Orleans. On January 8th 7,500 British soldiers marched against 4,500 U.S. troops led by General Andrew Jackson. The British were defeated in just 30 minutes. The Treaty of Ghent, which ended the war, had been signed two weeks before, but the news had not yet crossed the Atlantic

    On 20 December 1814 a force of about 10,000 British troops, assembled in Jamaica, landed unopposed at the west end of Lake Borgne, some 15 miles from New Orleans, preparatory to an attempt to seize the city and secure control of the lower Mississippi Valley. Advanced elements pushed quickly toward the river, reaching Villere’s Plantation on the left bank, 10 miles below New Orleans, on 23 December.

    In a swift counter-action, Maj. Gen. Andrew Jackson, American commander in the South, who had only arrived in the city on 1 December, made a night attack on the British (23-24 December) with some 2,0000 men supported by fire from the gunboat Carolina. The British advance was checked, giving Jackson time to fall back to a dry canal about five miles south of New Orleans, where he built a breastworks about a mile long, with the right flank on the river and the left in a cypress swamp.

    A composite force of about 3,500 militia, regulars, sailors, and others manned the American main line, with another 1,000 in reserve. A smaller force-perhaps 1,000 militia-under Brig. Gen. David Morgan defended the right bank of the river. Maj. Gen. Sir Edward Pakenham, brother-in-law of the Duke of Wellington, arrived on 25 December to command the British operation. He entrenched his troops and on 1 January 1815 fought an artillery duel in with the Americans outgunned the British artillerists.

    Finally, at dawn on 8 January, Pakenham attempted a frontal assault on Jackson’s breastworks with 5,300 men, simultaneously sending a smaller force across the river to attack Morgan’s defenses. The massed fires of Jackson’s troops, protected by earthworks reinforced with cotton bales, wrought havoc among Pakenham’s regulars as they advanced across the open ground in front of the American lines.

    In less than a half hour the attack was repulsed. The British lost 291 killed, including Pakenham, 1,262 wounded, and 48 prisoners; American losses on both sides of the river were only 13 killed, 39 wounded, and 19 prisoners. The surviving British troops withdrew to Lake Borgne and reembarked on 27 January for Mobile, where on 14 February they learned that the Treaty of Ghent, ending the war, had been signed on 24 December 1814.

    https://history.army.mil/news/2014/140108a_newOrleans.html

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  258. peterAUS 说:
    @Joe Stalin

    的确。

    Although, I believe that more relevant examples for this particular topic would be:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boer_Commando
    with emphasis on:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Boer_War#Concentration_camps_(1900%E2%80%931902)

    而且, 特别:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_siege,
    with emphasis on paragraph starting with “Controversies”.

    That happened under a certain President and his 妻子. The wife certain cycles in Washington just love, with huge swaths of general public too.
    Maybe they’ll come back in 2020.

    也许很有趣。

    • 回复: @Joe Stalin
  259. Joe Stalin 说:
    @peterAUS

    One big difference between Boer Militia and the US is that eventually the Boers eventually ran out of ammunition. The American public has more ammunition than the US Army. The US had to obtain ammo from other countries like Israel in order to conduct the campaign against Iraq.

    https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2016/6/1/the-guns-of-the-boer-commandos/

  260. TT 说:
    @FB

    Agreed. I think this time Peter has better understanding than the rest in using Yugoslavia(Donbass too) as case study, pointing out a small well established militias(we called reserved army) is absolutely more superior than a big bunch of untrained US civilians equipped with some little weapons, waving flags shouting & shooting at hurricanes.

    Longman Dict: Militias are civilians trained as soldiers but not part of regular army.

    Countries that have mandatory national service for all abled men, come with 3mths basic follow by 1~2yrs of full time specialist training. Each militia then trained regularly with his attached unit involving war games, some up to 45yrs old. These are essentially millions of regular army except they spent more time as working civilians to support economy than wearing uniform wasting time in camp.

    In war time, these well organized trained militias can be mobilized quickly, definitely outperforming any newly drafted soldiers. So Swiss or Yugoslav trained militias familiar with home ground can well hold 20 German Divisions or even beat a large Nato attacking force if they could deny enemy airspace control. Every man is a trained soldier forming a well organized reserved army of millions.

    If anyone try bragging in a gathering of these nations(who are all militias) how good he shoot regularly in range, likely he will get many peters asking him how many belts he ever fired with machine gun, a RPG, 100~800m targets…

    May be now i can concurred with what Hu Mi Yu said:

    “Last time I was in Switzerland, all males were required to have military training and keep a rifle in their home. Many think that is why Switzerland is such a safe place.”

    not only because such countries are hard to over run, we also no longer interested in weapons, since that stupid machine gun that torment us for many years in forest is the last thing we want.

    • 同意: FB
    • 回复: @FB
    , @peterAUS
  261. @Anonymous

    Laser sights are pointless if you pull the trigger too hard and jerk the gun. Yeah, you might hit the target, but you might not.

  262. peterAUS 说:
    @TT

    absolutely more superior than a big bunch of untrained US civilians equipped with some little weapons, waving flags shouting & shooting at hurricanes.

    Well….well….not exactly. Close but not exactly.
    I wouldn’t use the word “superior” (we do try to live in post-modern world caring for other people feelings).

    and

    asking him how many belts he ever fired with machine gun, a RPG, 100~800m targets

    it is true, but, at the same time, guys into the 2nd do have a very practicable skill set and overall capability. A huge 潜力 如果可以的话。
    各向同性 失踪 there is…well, I’ve already written here. And it is missing for 明显 原因。
    Now, will it keep that way, well, remains to be seen. We do live in interesting times.

    trying to say and nobody was, as expected, paying attention is age old adage in military: learn from examples, don’t reinvent the wheel and such.
    All smart warriors, through the history of humankind, have been very keen on that principle.
    Not here.I think I know why and it does make sense.

    I KNOW that US military carefully studied all those conflicts and took lessons from them. It keeps studying Ukraine as we speak.
    But…people into the 2nd don’t do that.
    Make sense when one realizes a thing or two.

    It’s obvious that people into 2nd Amendment simply do NOT care about that topic.
    THAT is the point I was trying to make here.

    Now, why is that is a peculiar and interesting issue and I do理论 but let’s pass it here.

    I get into this topic every now and then all over Internet and in person/email, and, almost always, looks the same: no interest.
    Now, a couple of times where there was a sort of interest, it was a fast ban (without explanation), as expected too.

    Well…I do believe in free will and that smart people rule and not so smart are ruled, by any means necessary.

    If all this doesn’t make sense, no prob. That’s exactly why a couple of things do make sense.
    Ignore and move on.

    • 回复: @TT
  263. TT 说:
    @peterAUS

    Call a spade a spade. Militias are mentally & physically trained for real wars over years, not some flabby wannabe civilians. If US fall into chaotic civil war, its those US army veterans that gonna do the real job.

    Militias are not only infantry mens that most imagine, its comprised of entire spectrum of Air Force, Navy, Army(incl armoured, tanks,..), intelligent, special force, command chains all embedded in whole nation of civilians.

    Peter, it may be better if you can organize your thought abit. Most of the time its so confusing, that’s why many are calling you trolls. But there are occasion you do know & write clearly.

    Ok let’s leave this topic to the real gun experts. US has long history of private gun ownership and experience, they do know better. Saker wanted to hear their opinions on revolver vs auto pistol.

  264. @Willem Hendrik

    Read Dr. Peter Levine (brilliant, brilliant stuff!!!) on treating PTSD soldiers — he points out the shaking/trembling is — in fact — PART of the recovery from the “brush with death.” You see an antelope after it had run for its life and succeeded — it goes back to eating grass, but also shakes and twitches… That FINISHES the mammalian recovery process (built-in!!!) from a brush with death.

    Our guys, instead of getting to twitch and shudder — and FINISH — instead have to lie still with their ears ringing from the IED/shots and try to still their bodies enough to aim and fire back! Then when they get to escape, and go somewhere safe-ish; they push down/try to STOP the shuddering and twitching — and so do the medics! And the psychs… and by never finishing, they become more and more wound around the mammalian response…

    “Waking the Tiger: Healing Trauma” — fascinating, superb book!!! and his second “In an Unspoken Voice: How the Body Releases Trauma and Restores Goodness” is also brilliant! (He has some YouTubes too.)

  265. @nsa

    Old old stupid advice. Unless you live a mile or so from your nearest neighbors, you’re probably on Candid Camera (security camera) from somewhere around! That’s why the old joke about shoot him on the porch and drag him inside is beyond stupid! And, ever heard of CSI your-city-here? THey can TELL where you shot him!

    If you shoot someone — or even just pull your weapon (“brandishing” in some states) — DO NOT run away, hoping you’ve not been seen. The first person to call the cops gets written in the “victim” block on the police report — the SECOND person who calls goes in the perp block!! DON’T be that second person! As soon as you’re safe, call the cops and say you were required to draw your gun to protect yourself. (It HAS happened — and has led to a VERY bad time in court! — where the bad guy calls and accuses the GOOD guy of being nuts and ‘pulling a gun on innocent little him for no reason’! IF you RAN AWAY as soon as you could and did NOT call the cops — guess which block your name goes in!!

    Get educated if you’re going to carry — Andrew Branca, Esq. (“Law of Self Defense” book and website and classes; I took his Georgia-specific class after reading his book) does great state-specific classes (cause it’s not only the LAW in your state, but equally if not more important, the JURY INSTRUCTIONS — how the judge tells the jury to apply the law!! — in your state that matters)! Also, watch Mas Ayoob’s talks on YouTube — expert witness, really experienced gunnie. That HAS to be part of your decision making about whether or not to buy a gun!

    • 回复: @Alden
  266. @jilles dykstra

    No. The problem is NOT gunowners! If we were (oh, dear God, if ONLY we were able!) to get the damned negros and hispanics (and moslems) OUT of the U.S., our “gun violence” rate would drop to the FOURTH LOWEST ON THE PLANET!! There are more guns than citizens; and the smart citizens are loading up, because the cops CANNOT be there in time — and the idiot-liberals who’ve had the run of the place lo these many years, have imported many hundreds of thousands of savages.

    The militarized police are globalist preparation for the oncoming race war! The damned subverted treasonous govt and lefties and globalists have imported all these horrifically violent freeloaders — and the free ride is about to disappear! Arm up, ammo up, and lift!

  267. Alden 说:
    @FB

    They are taught to kick in the door knob which breaks the lock.

  268. Alden 说:
    @Chris Mallory

    So don’t get gun owners insurance. Depend on your 2nd amendment bravado and pay out of pocket for your legal expenses if you ever get in trouble over use of a gun.

  269. Alden 说:

    The Florida self defense and stand your ground statutes didn’t help George Zimmerman and his family who had to help pay the legal fees much did it?

  270. Alden 说:
    @FB

    We don’t carry battering rams in our patrol cars. We are trained to kick the door knob because it breaks the lock and as you say, the weak points are the sides close to the frame.

    We are trained to not use our shoulders because they have no protection and shoulders, necks and forearms can be injured which leads to work men’s compensation, already high for law enforcement.

    Our feet are protected by thick soles. And more protected than shoulders.

    • 回复: @FB
  271. Alden 说:
    @Avalanche-the-second

    Your post is proof it’s possible to be pro 2nd amendment and a gun collector and still have some sense.

    All the internet bombast and bravado won’t help at all if you are charged with a gun crime. Only money to pay an attorney will help you.

    Better yet, learn the laws and city ordinances of your city, county and state. Blathering about Vermont gun laws won’t help if you live in Boston.

  272. Alden 说:
    @Chris Mallory

    “If you are sued in a self defense case you can recover damages from he plaintiff”

    Can you recover your legal costs to defend yourself? Do you have money for a retainer and further legal costs to get the case dismissed?

    And when you win, do you have the money to file a lawsuit against the opposition? Unless an attorney thinks there is a chance of getting some money it will be hard to find one.

    And when you win the lawsuit against the lowlife what makes you think he has any money or assets that will reimburse you for your defense attorney fees and any damages you win?

    The criminal you shoot in self defense is likely to be a lowlife with no assets or money. He will find a hard scrabble contingency attorney who will file a case against you in hopes of getting a \$5,000 fee

    And you will not get a contingency attorney. You will have to pay your own fees.

    Laws on paper won’t defend you against tort attorneys constantly trolling for clients.

  273. Alden 说:
    @Joe Stalin

    Did you notice his boots?

    Never mind, it’s much safer to have an unlocked door and wake up with an intruder standing over you than to have a few minutes warning to grab a gun, phone, or at least scream..

  274. Alden 说:
    @Svigor

    My department taught us to never try to open a door with the shoulder. Too much chance of work men’s compensation injuries.

  275. cat_hair 说:

    Thanks for this wonderful article which provides much needed and long overdue information about firearm choices for home and personal defense. I personally have a .357 revolver for home defense and a small semi-auto 9mm pistol for carry purposes.

    The pistol requires much more attention and care than the revolver. For instance, this pistol lacks a loaded chamber indicator. So I have to drop the magazine and check to verify that a round has been fed into the chamber after racking the slide. Then I must reinsert the magazine. My life could depend on having a round in the chamber. Yet no article, book, or Internet source that I have ever seen mentioned this critical advantage of a loaded chamber indicator.

    Another problem I have with “expert’ advice is that many of these “experts” seem to offer no criticism of very small pistols. And yet, if the grip on a gun is so short or small that you can’t get a firm grasp when you draw it, then your shots will be much less accurate. And with a grip that is too small, the chances that you will limp wrist a pistol are greatly increased. This in turn means that the pistol may not chamber a second round. This could be very bad news.

    When a shot is fired, any pistol or revolver with a small grip tends to rotate in the hand. This rotation can cause the trigger to rest under a different part of the trigger finger from shot to shot. After three or four rounds have been fired, the trigger may end up contacting the finger under the middle joint. In that case, accuracy and reliability will be much worse, and the chance of being wildly inaccurate goes up. This also could be very bad news.

    So here is some sound advice. The size of the grip on a firearm should be a good fit for the size of your hand. Then to the extent necessary, dress around the firearm. Duh!

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  276. FB 说:
    @Alden

    Thanks for your comment and professional perspective…

    My father spent his entire post-military career in law enforcement…but I don’t ever recall him mentioning that he ever broke down a door…

    What you say about the training does make sense from a bureaucratic cover your ass perspective in regards to the PD administration…where there is an obvious interest in avoiding injury to personnel…and the costs associated with that…

    However…I still maintain…based on my own admittedly one-time experience…that the shoulder method is more effective…

    If done right the chance for injury is minimized…ie if you break the door on the first attempt…otoh you get injured if you blow the attempt and bounce off…again just like breaking boards…

    I also believe this applies to the kicking method…even though your footwear is protected…the bounceback energy of your kick will be absorbed by your foot in the event that you don’t break the lock on the first kick…

    This is the physics of momentum…which I believe police are also trained to understand in regard to auto collisions…

    I will also emphasize again that by placing the force of the blow above the lock will act like a crowbar due to the leverage distance from the impact point to the lock…which might be about two feet…

    I notice that home security experts recommend that deadbolts be installed at about shoulder level…which would confirm my thesis…

    I should also note about that particular incident years ago that this was a condo building with 24 hour front desk/security…and that security was present when I breached that door…

    The young lady had every right to break down her own door since it was her property…

    I tried to talk her out of it…but it happened to be early morning on new year’s day…and there were no locksmiths available…and I seem to remember that she had tried to get a hotel room but was not able due to the holiday situation…

    In any case…she got a carpenter in to fix that door jamb and later said it was less expensive than getting a locksmith…

  277. peterAUS 说:
    @cat_hair

    For instance, this pistol lacks a loaded chamber indicator. So I have to drop the magazine and check to verify that a round has been fed into the chamber after racking the slide. Then I must reinsert the magazine.

    有趣。
    Why not just push or slide the slide 一点点 to check is the pistol chambered or not.
    Try it one day.

    Speaking of loaded/unloaded pistol will a slide in back position after the last shot fired.
    Revolver won’t show any sign that the last shot has been fired.

    I believe you got the thing other way around here.

    The size of the grip on a firearm should be a good fit for the size of your hand.

    真正。
    That’s another advantage of a pistol. SA action is always shorter than DA, so, for people with small hands/short fingers (smaller people, women….) firing Colt Python cold be a problem.
    Especially one handed.

  278. cat_hair 说:

    To PeterAUS,

    Thanks for the suggestion to pull the slide back to see if there is a round in the chamber. Yes, that method works well and it is more convenient than dropping the magazine.

    I agree, another potential disadvantage of revolvers is that when you have fired their last round they don’t give any advance warning. But the vast majority of home defense shootings end before 4 rounds, so I don’t think that is a big disadvantage for home defense.

    I also agree, almost every handgun has different grip dimensions and a different length to the trigger. Some pistols and revolvers are just too big for some hands. Similar logic applies as in cases where the gun is too small for the hand.

    But I am still suggesting that Goldilocks had the right answer and that the majority of the “experts” are too eager sell something even if it is not “just right”.

    干杯

  279. @theMann

    The most important thing for a CC gun is to buy the gun you will ACTUALLY carry. Most people, especially women, aren’t going to want to lug around a .357 revolver.

  280. @Poupon Marx

    I replied so late that I don’t expect an answer, so I will be brief.

    1. Comments from you and others about the merits and demerits of .22WMR are interesting. I tend to recommend it for a brand new shooter due to low recoil and high lethality for such a small round.

    2. Which .45 do you refer to, ACP or Colt? I know virtually nothing about any caliber beginning with a number above 3.

    3. The prior point notwithstanding, I’m not going to swap out the .357 in the bedstand because some guy online told me that a .45 Whatever is “a real smacker.” The intruder will be in bad shape, no matter what gun I use. But I am curious which .45 round you were talking about.

当前评论者
说:

发表评论-对超过两周的文章发表评论,将在质量和语气上进行更严格的判断


 记得 我的信息为什么?
 电子邮件回复我的评论
$
提交的评论已被许可给 Unz评论 并可以由后者自行决定在其他地方重新发布
在翻译模式下禁用评论
通过RSS订阅此评论主题 通过RSS订阅所有The Saker评论