|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun May 30, 2010 10:42 am
I don't remember the exact details of it, but it goes something like this;
A dictatorship is the benevolent rule of a single person. This dictator, when corrupted, becomes a tyrant, one who rules their subjects without disregard for law or customs.
The benevolent rule of the people is a democracy. When a democracy becomes corrupted, a demagogue steps in. The demagogue is one who corruptly plays on their subject emotions to unrightfully extend their own power.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 6:33 am
That is a perfect description of America, a demagogue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 2:08 pm
death angel712 That is a perfect description of America, a demagogue. Yeah, unfortunately. Also unfortunately, McCain wouldn't have done much better. I don't see him as properly conservative. We could've done much better with someone like Fred Thompson. Also, a .45 is a big bullet, but it doesn't have much muzzle velocity. I prefer .357 or .41 magnum revolvers, which may not have quite the same ammo capacity, but are much faster to reload. Especialy if you have moon clips.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 2:12 pm
Not much up on current politics, I just know that anyone would be better than Obama. The a*****e isn't even American.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 2:14 pm
death angel712 Not much up on current politics, I just know that anyone would be better than Obama. The a*****e isn't even American. Aye. He was literally our most liberal senator.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 2:19 pm
Chaotik Joker RP death angel712 That is a perfect description of America, a demagogue. Yeah, unfortunately. Also unfortunately, McCain wouldn't have done much better. I don't see him as properly conservative. We could've done much better with someone like Fred Thompson. Also, a .45 is a big bullet, but it doesn't have much muzzle velocity. I prefer .357 or .41 magnum revolvers, which may not have quite the same ammo capacity, but are much faster to reload. Especialy if you have moon clips. Faster to reload? You're saying that it's faster to reload a cylinder than to drop out your empty magazine and slam in a new one? And the fact that it's a big slow bullet is what I like about the 45., it has more of a tendency to knock the target down. It also tends to expend all of it's energy inside the body, causing more damage in comparison with it's recoil than smaller bullets. Not to mention the faster rate of fire, and greater accuracy that come with having a single-action trigger pull for each shot. I prefer a revolver for hunting and home defense, simply because there is no safety and therefore nothing to have to take into consideration as to weather or not it's ready to shoot. But for combat, gotta have a pistol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 2:35 pm
death angel712 Chaotik Joker RP death angel712 That is a perfect description of America, a demagogue. Yeah, unfortunately. Also unfortunately, McCain wouldn't have done much better. I don't see him as properly conservative. We could've done much better with someone like Fred Thompson. Also, a .45 is a big bullet, but it doesn't have much muzzle velocity. I prefer .357 or .41 magnum revolvers, which may not have quite the same ammo capacity, but are much faster to reload. Especialy if you have moon clips. Faster to reload? You're saying that it's faster to reload a cylinder than to drop out your empty magazine and slam in a new one? And the fact that it's a big slow bullet is what I like about the 45., it has more of a tendency to knock the target down. It also tends to expend all of it's energy inside the body, causing more damage in comparison with it's recoil than smaller bullets. Not to mention the faster rate of fire, and greater accuracy that come with having a single-action trigger pull for each shot. I prefer a revolver for hunting and home defense, simply because there is no safety and therefore nothing to have to take into consideration as to weather or not it's ready to shoot. But for combat, gotta have a pistol. I'm not saying it's faster to put in a moon clip. I'm saying that reloading a cylinder after each round is much faster than reloading a magazine, especially considering that the last few rounds going into a magazine, unless you have extremely strong and nimble thumbs, take about ten seconds each. All rounds going into a revolver offer the same resistance (none). A revolver is much less likely to jam or give a squib, and give less recoil than a revolver. As for stopping power, a .45 is almost as likely to exit as any other round, and holopoint rounds, which are easier to find in .38 special than in .45, get rid of that extra possibility with a revolver. And if you're not using holopoints, two wounds bleed out more than one. Also, you seem to have gotten single and double action mixed up. Double action is draw back and fire with the same trigger pull, which almost all revolvers in the last several decades have. And with a semi-auto, you have to disengage the safety and hit the de-cocker before you can fire. Also, in most states a revolver is easier to get on your permit. They require less rounds to qualify, and one qualifies for all. Semi-autos on a concealed carry permit require make, model and caliber individually. For one more added bonus, a .357 magnum can fire .38 specials.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 2:47 pm
Chaotik Joker RP death angel712 Chaotik Joker RP death angel712 That is a perfect description of America, a demagogue. Yeah, unfortunately. Also unfortunately, McCain wouldn't have done much better. I don't see him as properly conservative. We could've done much better with someone like Fred Thompson. Also, a .45 is a big bullet, but it doesn't have much muzzle velocity. I prefer .357 or .41 magnum revolvers, which may not have quite the same ammo capacity, but are much faster to reload. Especialy if you have moon clips. Faster to reload? You're saying that it's faster to reload a cylinder than to drop out your empty magazine and slam in a new one? And the fact that it's a big slow bullet is what I like about the 45., it has more of a tendency to knock the target down. It also tends to expend all of it's energy inside the body, causing more damage in comparison with it's recoil than smaller bullets. Not to mention the faster rate of fire, and greater accuracy that come with having a single-action trigger pull for each shot. I prefer a revolver for hunting and home defense, simply because there is no safety and therefore nothing to have to take into consideration as to weather or not it's ready to shoot. But for combat, gotta have a pistol. I'm not saying it's faster to put in a moon clip. I'm saying that reloading a cylinder after each round is much faster than reloading a magazine, especially considering that the last few rounds going into a magazine, unless you have extremely strong and nimble thumbs, take about ten seconds each. All rounds going into a revolver offer the same resistance (none). A revolver is much less likely to jam or give a squib, and give less recoil than a revolver. As for stopping power, a .45 is almost as likely to exit as any other round, and holopoint rounds, which are easier to find in .38 special than in .45, get rid of that extra possibility with a revolver. And if you're not using holopoints, two wounds bleed out more than one. Also, you seem to have gotten single and double action mixed up. Double action is draw back and fire with the same trigger pull, which almost all revolvers in the last several decades have. And with a semi-auto, you have to disengage the safety and hit the de-cocker before you can fire. Also, in most states a revolver is easier to get on your permit. They require less rounds to qualify, and one qualifies for all. Semi-autos on a concealed carry permit require make, model and caliber individually. For one more added bonus, a .357 magnum can fire .38 specials. It is much faster to load a cylinder than a magazine, I'm not arguing with you there. I know perfectly well what single action and double action mean, when I say "single action trigger pull," I mean that the hammer is automatically cocked back by the slide after each shot, making a lighter trigger pull. If you want this advantage with a revolver, you have to manually pull the hammer down before each shot, which is more trouble than it's worth. While it's true that automatics can jam from time to time, it's still very unlikely that a good quality, well oiled gun firing good quality ammunition will jam. I do agree that it's cool that magnum revolvers can fire more than one type of ammunition, but that hardly matters in a gun fight now does it? Yes, there is something that is just cool about revolvers, but pistols are more practical for combat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 2:55 pm
death angel712 Chaotik Joker RP death angel712 Chaotik Joker RP death angel712 That is a perfect description of America, a demagogue. Yeah, unfortunately. Also unfortunately, McCain wouldn't have done much better. I don't see him as properly conservative. We could've done much better with someone like Fred Thompson. Also, a .45 is a big bullet, but it doesn't have much muzzle velocity. I prefer .357 or .41 magnum revolvers, which may not have quite the same ammo capacity, but are much faster to reload. Especialy if you have moon clips. Faster to reload? You're saying that it's faster to reload a cylinder than to drop out your empty magazine and slam in a new one? And the fact that it's a big slow bullet is what I like about the 45., it has more of a tendency to knock the target down. It also tends to expend all of it's energy inside the body, causing more damage in comparison with it's recoil than smaller bullets. Not to mention the faster rate of fire, and greater accuracy that come with having a single-action trigger pull for each shot. I prefer a revolver for hunting and home defense, simply because there is no safety and therefore nothing to have to take into consideration as to weather or not it's ready to shoot. But for combat, gotta have a pistol. I'm not saying it's faster to put in a moon clip. I'm saying that reloading a cylinder after each round is much faster than reloading a magazine, especially considering that the last few rounds going into a magazine, unless you have extremely strong and nimble thumbs, take about ten seconds each. All rounds going into a revolver offer the same resistance (none). A revolver is much less likely to jam or give a squib, and give less recoil than a revolver. As for stopping power, a .45 is almost as likely to exit as any other round, and holopoint rounds, which are easier to find in .38 special than in .45, get rid of that extra possibility with a revolver. And if you're not using holopoints, two wounds bleed out more than one. Also, you seem to have gotten single and double action mixed up. Double action is draw back and fire with the same trigger pull, which almost all revolvers in the last several decades have. And with a semi-auto, you have to disengage the safety and hit the de-cocker before you can fire. Also, in most states a revolver is easier to get on your permit. They require less rounds to qualify, and one qualifies for all. Semi-autos on a concealed carry permit require make, model and caliber individually. For one more added bonus, a .357 magnum can fire .38 specials. It is much faster to load a cylinder than a magazine, I'm not arguing with you there. I know perfectly well what single action and double action mean, when I say "single action trigger pull," I mean that the hammer is automatically cocked back by the slide after each shot, making a lighter trigger pull. If you want this advantage with a revolver, you have to manually pull the hammer down before each shot, which is more trouble than it's worth. While it's true that automatics can jam from time to time, it's still very unlikely that a good quality, well oiled gun firing good quality ammunition will jam. I do agree that it's cool that magnum revolvers can fire more than one type of ammunition, but that hardly matters in a gun fight now does it? Yes, there is something that is just cool about revolvers, but pistols are more practical for combat. And if you don't have a spare magazine and you miss? Do you think someone would give you about a minute to reload? The recoil of a semi-auto makes it less acurate. Speed-shooters can almost always get center-of-mass with a revolver, and are thus far less likely to hit bystanders, while semi-autos tend to shoot high to the left or right, depending on the shooting hand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 4:06 pm
Chaotik Joker RP death angel712 Chaotik Joker RP death angel712 Chaotik Joker RP death angel712 That is a perfect description of America, a demagogue. Yeah, unfortunately. Also unfortunately, McCain wouldn't have done much better. I don't see him as properly conservative. We could've done much better with someone like Fred Thompson. Also, a .45 is a big bullet, but it doesn't have much muzzle velocity. I prefer .357 or .41 magnum revolvers, which may not have quite the same ammo capacity, but are much faster to reload. Especialy if you have moon clips. Faster to reload? You're saying that it's faster to reload a cylinder than to drop out your empty magazine and slam in a new one? And the fact that it's a big slow bullet is what I like about the 45., it has more of a tendency to knock the target down. It also tends to expend all of it's energy inside the body, causing more damage in comparison with it's recoil than smaller bullets. Not to mention the faster rate of fire, and greater accuracy that come with having a single-action trigger pull for each shot. I prefer a revolver for hunting and home defense, simply because there is no safety and therefore nothing to have to take into consideration as to weather or not it's ready to shoot. But for combat, gotta have a pistol. I'm not saying it's faster to put in a moon clip. I'm saying that reloading a cylinder after each round is much faster than reloading a magazine, especially considering that the last few rounds going into a magazine, unless you have extremely strong and nimble thumbs, take about ten seconds each. All rounds going into a revolver offer the same resistance (none). A revolver is much less likely to jam or give a squib, and give less recoil than a revolver. As for stopping power, a .45 is almost as likely to exit as any other round, and holopoint rounds, which are easier to find in .38 special than in .45, get rid of that extra possibility with a revolver. And if you're not using holopoints, two wounds bleed out more than one. Also, you seem to have gotten single and double action mixed up. Double action is draw back and fire with the same trigger pull, which almost all revolvers in the last several decades have. And with a semi-auto, you have to disengage the safety and hit the de-cocker before you can fire. Also, in most states a revolver is easier to get on your permit. They require less rounds to qualify, and one qualifies for all. Semi-autos on a concealed carry permit require make, model and caliber individually. For one more added bonus, a .357 magnum can fire .38 specials. It is much faster to load a cylinder than a magazine, I'm not arguing with you there. I know perfectly well what single action and double action mean, when I say "single action trigger pull," I mean that the hammer is automatically cocked back by the slide after each shot, making a lighter trigger pull. If you want this advantage with a revolver, you have to manually pull the hammer down before each shot, which is more trouble than it's worth. While it's true that automatics can jam from time to time, it's still very unlikely that a good quality, well oiled gun firing good quality ammunition will jam. I do agree that it's cool that magnum revolvers can fire more than one type of ammunition, but that hardly matters in a gun fight now does it? Yes, there is something that is just cool about revolvers, but pistols are more practical for combat. And if you don't have a spare magazine and you miss? Do you think someone would give you about a minute to reload? The recoil of a semi-auto makes it less acurate. Speed-shooters can almost always get center-of-mass with a revolver, and are thus far less likely to hit bystanders, while semi-autos tend to shoot high to the left or right, depending on the shooting hand. If you're carrying a pistol, and you expect you may have to use it, you carry spare magazines; unless you're incompetent. The only time a semi-automatic is less accurate than a revolver is if you don't have any idea what you're doing, and you just pull the trigger as fast as you can. However, if you are a competent gunman, an automatic will be more accurate because of the lighter trigger pulls; the only time this isn't true is with double-action only pistols, which you wouldn't carry unless you were a cop and you had to. Besides, if revolvers are so much better than pistols for combat, why does the military use a pistol? This is my thing man, I know what I'm talking about. Of course different guns are better for different people, if you're more comfortable with a revolver, you're probably better off with one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 10:48 pm
death angel712 Chaotik Joker RP death angel712 Chaotik Joker RP death angel712 Faster to reload? You're saying that it's faster to reload a cylinder than to drop out your empty magazine and slam in a new one? And the fact that it's a big slow bullet is what I like about the 45., it has more of a tendency to knock the target down. It also tends to expend all of it's energy inside the body, causing more damage in comparison with it's recoil than smaller bullets. Not to mention the faster rate of fire, and greater accuracy that come with having a single-action trigger pull for each shot. I prefer a revolver for hunting and home defense, simply because there is no safety and therefore nothing to have to take into consideration as to weather or not it's ready to shoot. But for combat, gotta have a pistol. I'm not saying it's faster to put in a moon clip. I'm saying that reloading a cylinder after each round is much faster than reloading a magazine, especially considering that the last few rounds going into a magazine, unless you have extremely strong and nimble thumbs, take about ten seconds each. All rounds going into a revolver offer the same resistance (none). A revolver is much less likely to jam or give a squib, and give less recoil than a revolver. As for stopping power, a .45 is almost as likely to exit as any other round, and holopoint rounds, which are easier to find in .38 special than in .45, get rid of that extra possibility with a revolver. And if you're not using holopoints, two wounds bleed out more than one. Also, you seem to have gotten single and double action mixed up. Double action is draw back and fire with the same trigger pull, which almost all revolvers in the last several decades have. And with a semi-auto, you have to disengage the safety and hit the de-cocker before you can fire. Also, in most states a revolver is easier to get on your permit. They require less rounds to qualify, and one qualifies for all. Semi-autos on a concealed carry permit require make, model and caliber individually. For one more added bonus, a .357 magnum can fire .38 specials. It is much faster to load a cylinder than a magazine, I'm not arguing with you there. I know perfectly well what single action and double action mean, when I say "single action trigger pull," I mean that the hammer is automatically cocked back by the slide after each shot, making a lighter trigger pull. If you want this advantage with a revolver, you have to manually pull the hammer down before each shot, which is more trouble than it's worth. While it's true that automatics can jam from time to time, it's still very unlikely that a good quality, well oiled gun firing good quality ammunition will jam. I do agree that it's cool that magnum revolvers can fire more than one type of ammunition, but that hardly matters in a gun fight now does it? Yes, there is something that is just cool about revolvers, but pistols are more practical for combat. And if you don't have a spare magazine and you miss? Do you think someone would give you about a minute to reload? The recoil of a semi-auto makes it less acurate. Speed-shooters can almost always get center-of-mass with a revolver, and are thus far less likely to hit bystanders, while semi-autos tend to shoot high to the left or right, depending on the shooting hand. If you're carrying a pistol, and you expect you may have to use it, you carry spare magazines; unless you're incompetent. The only time a semi-automatic is less accurate than a revolver is if you don't have any idea what you're doing, and you just pull the trigger as fast as you can. However, if you are a competent gunman, an automatic will be more accurate because of the lighter trigger pulls; the only time this isn't true is with double-action only pistols, which you wouldn't carry unless you were a cop and you had to. Besides, if revolvers are so much better than pistols for combat, why does the military use a pistol? This is my thing man, I know what I'm talking about. Of course different guns are better for different people, if you're more comfortable with a revolver, you're probably better off with one. Most states have a limited number of spare magazines you can have on your person, and all live amunition must be concealed when not in use, which is hard with more than one or two. Unless you have next to no finger strength, a revolver trigger-pull is almost exactly the same a semi-auto. Double-action revolvers, ones that pull back the hammer and fire in the same trigger pull, are actually the most common and general preferance. The military uses semi-autos because non-civilians are not limited in the ammount of spare magazines they can carry. They hardly ever use it anyway, unless their rifles aren't available or they need point-blank and don't have the time to use a two-handed gun. My parents are certified CCW instructors for Nevada, Utah and Florida, it's my thing too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 8:52 am
Chaotik Joker RP death angel712 Chaotik Joker RP death angel712 Chaotik Joker RP death angel712 Faster to reload? You're saying that it's faster to reload a cylinder than to drop out your empty magazine and slam in a new one? And the fact that it's a big slow bullet is what I like about the 45., it has more of a tendency to knock the target down. It also tends to expend all of it's energy inside the body, causing more damage in comparison with it's recoil than smaller bullets. Not to mention the faster rate of fire, and greater accuracy that come with having a single-action trigger pull for each shot. I prefer a revolver for hunting and home defense, simply because there is no safety and therefore nothing to have to take into consideration as to weather or not it's ready to shoot. But for combat, gotta have a pistol. I'm not saying it's faster to put in a moon clip. I'm saying that reloading a cylinder after each round is much faster than reloading a magazine, especially considering that the last few rounds going into a magazine, unless you have extremely strong and nimble thumbs, take about ten seconds each. All rounds going into a revolver offer the same resistance (none). A revolver is much less likely to jam or give a squib, and give less recoil than a revolver. As for stopping power, a .45 is almost as likely to exit as any other round, and holopoint rounds, which are easier to find in .38 special than in .45, get rid of that extra possibility with a revolver. And if you're not using holopoints, two wounds bleed out more than one. Also, you seem to have gotten single and double action mixed up. Double action is draw back and fire with the same trigger pull, which almost all revolvers in the last several decades have. And with a semi-auto, you have to disengage the safety and hit the de-cocker before you can fire. Also, in most states a revolver is easier to get on your permit. They require less rounds to qualify, and one qualifies for all. Semi-autos on a concealed carry permit require make, model and caliber individually. For one more added bonus, a .357 magnum can fire .38 specials. It is much faster to load a cylinder than a magazine, I'm not arguing with you there. I know perfectly well what single action and double action mean, when I say "single action trigger pull," I mean that the hammer is automatically cocked back by the slide after each shot, making a lighter trigger pull. If you want this advantage with a revolver, you have to manually pull the hammer down before each shot, which is more trouble than it's worth. While it's true that automatics can jam from time to time, it's still very unlikely that a good quality, well oiled gun firing good quality ammunition will jam. I do agree that it's cool that magnum revolvers can fire more than one type of ammunition, but that hardly matters in a gun fight now does it? Yes, there is something that is just cool about revolvers, but pistols are more practical for combat. And if you don't have a spare magazine and you miss? Do you think someone would give you about a minute to reload? The recoil of a semi-auto makes it less acurate. Speed-shooters can almost always get center-of-mass with a revolver, and are thus far less likely to hit bystanders, while semi-autos tend to shoot high to the left or right, depending on the shooting hand. If you're carrying a pistol, and you expect you may have to use it, you carry spare magazines; unless you're incompetent. The only time a semi-automatic is less accurate than a revolver is if you don't have any idea what you're doing, and you just pull the trigger as fast as you can. However, if you are a competent gunman, an automatic will be more accurate because of the lighter trigger pulls; the only time this isn't true is with double-action only pistols, which you wouldn't carry unless you were a cop and you had to. Besides, if revolvers are so much better than pistols for combat, why does the military use a pistol? This is my thing man, I know what I'm talking about. Of course different guns are better for different people, if you're more comfortable with a revolver, you're probably better off with one. Most states have a limited number of spare magazines you can have on your person, and all live amunition must be concealed when not in use, which is hard with more than one or two. Unless you have next to no finger strength, a revolver trigger-pull is almost exactly the same a semi-auto. Double-action revolvers, ones that pull back the hammer and fire in the same trigger pull, are actually the most common and general preferance. The military uses semi-autos because non-civilians are not limited in the ammount of spare magazines they can carry. They hardly ever use it anyway, unless their rifles aren't available or they need point-blank and don't have the time to use a two-handed gun. My parents are certified CCW instructors for Nevada, Utah and Florida, it's my thing too. I already told you I know what double-action means, please don't condescend me. Now, in the civilian world, how likely do you think it would be that you would run into a situation where you need to use your gun, and 1 or 2 spare magazines isn't enough? And if you think that a revolver is just as fast as an automatic, you should take both to the range, and try shooting them both as fast as you can. You should also try setting your target at a long distance, and try shooting as accurately as possible using only double-action trigger pulls. Then, put a new target at the same distance, and do the same thing with all single-action trigger pulls.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 9:30 am
death angel712 Chaotik Joker RP death angel712 Chaotik Joker RP death angel712 It is much faster to load a cylinder than a magazine, I'm not arguing with you there. I know perfectly well what single action and double action mean, when I say "single action trigger pull," I mean that the hammer is automatically cocked back by the slide after each shot, making a lighter trigger pull. If you want this advantage with a revolver, you have to manually pull the hammer down before each shot, which is more trouble than it's worth. While it's true that automatics can jam from time to time, it's still very unlikely that a good quality, well oiled gun firing good quality ammunition will jam. I do agree that it's cool that magnum revolvers can fire more than one type of ammunition, but that hardly matters in a gun fight now does it? Yes, there is something that is just cool about revolvers, but pistols are more practical for combat. And if you don't have a spare magazine and you miss? Do you think someone would give you about a minute to reload? The recoil of a semi-auto makes it less acurate. Speed-shooters can almost always get center-of-mass with a revolver, and are thus far less likely to hit bystanders, while semi-autos tend to shoot high to the left or right, depending on the shooting hand. If you're carrying a pistol, and you expect you may have to use it, you carry spare magazines; unless you're incompetent. The only time a semi-automatic is less accurate than a revolver is if you don't have any idea what you're doing, and you just pull the trigger as fast as you can. However, if you are a competent gunman, an automatic will be more accurate because of the lighter trigger pulls; the only time this isn't true is with double-action only pistols, which you wouldn't carry unless you were a cop and you had to. Besides, if revolvers are so much better than pistols for combat, why does the military use a pistol? This is my thing man, I know what I'm talking about. Of course different guns are better for different people, if you're more comfortable with a revolver, you're probably better off with one. Most states have a limited number of spare magazines you can have on your person, and all live amunition must be concealed when not in use, which is hard with more than one or two. Unless you have next to no finger strength, a revolver trigger-pull is almost exactly the same a semi-auto. Double-action revolvers, ones that pull back the hammer and fire in the same trigger pull, are actually the most common and general preferance. The military uses semi-autos because non-civilians are not limited in the ammount of spare magazines they can carry. They hardly ever use it anyway, unless their rifles aren't available or they need point-blank and don't have the time to use a two-handed gun. My parents are certified CCW instructors for Nevada, Utah and Florida, it's my thing too. I already told you I know what double-action means, please don't condescend me. Now, in the civilian world, how likely do you think it would be that you would run into a situation where you need to use your gun, and 1 or 2 spare magazines isn't enough? And if you think that a revolver is just as fast as an automatic, you should take both to the range, and try shooting them both as fast as you can. You should also try setting your target at a long distance, and try shooting as accurately as possible using only double-action trigger pulls. Then, put a new target at the same distance, and do the same thing with all single-action trigger pulls. As I've said before, almost all modern revolvers have both double and single action, so single action trigger pulls have absolutely nothing to do with it. And I have taken both out to the range, many times. If you're going for accuracy as well as speed, the recoil of a semi-auto slows your firing speed down quite a bit. Almost everyone finds firing a revolver more comfortable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 12:41 pm
Chaotik Joker RP death angel712 Chaotik Joker RP death angel712 Chaotik Joker RP death angel712 It is much faster to load a cylinder than a magazine, I'm not arguing with you there. I know perfectly well what single action and double action mean, when I say "single action trigger pull," I mean that the hammer is automatically cocked back by the slide after each shot, making a lighter trigger pull. If you want this advantage with a revolver, you have to manually pull the hammer down before each shot, which is more trouble than it's worth. While it's true that automatics can jam from time to time, it's still very unlikely that a good quality, well oiled gun firing good quality ammunition will jam. I do agree that it's cool that magnum revolvers can fire more than one type of ammunition, but that hardly matters in a gun fight now does it? Yes, there is something that is just cool about revolvers, but pistols are more practical for combat. And if you don't have a spare magazine and you miss? Do you think someone would give you about a minute to reload? The recoil of a semi-auto makes it less acurate. Speed-shooters can almost always get center-of-mass with a revolver, and are thus far less likely to hit bystanders, while semi-autos tend to shoot high to the left or right, depending on the shooting hand. If you're carrying a pistol, and you expect you may have to use it, you carry spare magazines; unless you're incompetent. The only time a semi-automatic is less accurate than a revolver is if you don't have any idea what you're doing, and you just pull the trigger as fast as you can. However, if you are a competent gunman, an automatic will be more accurate because of the lighter trigger pulls; the only time this isn't true is with double-action only pistols, which you wouldn't carry unless you were a cop and you had to. Besides, if revolvers are so much better than pistols for combat, why does the military use a pistol? This is my thing man, I know what I'm talking about. Of course different guns are better for different people, if you're more comfortable with a revolver, you're probably better off with one. Most states have a limited number of spare magazines you can have on your person, and all live amunition must be concealed when not in use, which is hard with more than one or two. Unless you have next to no finger strength, a revolver trigger-pull is almost exactly the same a semi-auto. Double-action revolvers, ones that pull back the hammer and fire in the same trigger pull, are actually the most common and general preferance. The military uses semi-autos because non-civilians are not limited in the ammount of spare magazines they can carry. They hardly ever use it anyway, unless their rifles aren't available or they need point-blank and don't have the time to use a two-handed gun. My parents are certified CCW instructors for Nevada, Utah and Florida, it's my thing too. I already told you I know what double-action means, please don't condescend me. Now, in the civilian world, how likely do you think it would be that you would run into a situation where you need to use your gun, and 1 or 2 spare magazines isn't enough? And if you think that a revolver is just as fast as an automatic, you should take both to the range, and try shooting them both as fast as you can. You should also try setting your target at a long distance, and try shooting as accurately as possible using only double-action trigger pulls. Then, put a new target at the same distance, and do the same thing with all single-action trigger pulls. As I've said before, almost all modern revolvers have both double and single action, so single action trigger pulls have absolutely nothing to do with it. And I have taken both out to the range, many times. If you're going for accuracy as well as speed, the recoil of a semi-auto slows your firing speed down quite a bit. Almost everyone finds firing a revolver more comfortable. *facepalm* I'm saying if you want lighter trigger pulls with a double-action revolver, you have to manually pull back the hammer. With a pistol, the hammer is automatically cocked back by the slide. And saying that a revolver has less recoil than a pistol doesn't even make sense. I find a 45. automatic more comfortable to shoot than a 357. The only reason I can think of as to why you might think this way is that you have a good quality revolver and a piece of crap automatic. What brands are they?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 06, 2010 10:25 pm
death angel712 Chaotik Joker RP death angel712 Chaotik Joker RP death angel712 If you're carrying a pistol, and you expect you may have to use it, you carry spare magazines; unless you're incompetent. The only time a semi-automatic is less accurate than a revolver is if you don't have any idea what you're doing, and you just pull the trigger as fast as you can. However, if you are a competent gunman, an automatic will be more accurate because of the lighter trigger pulls; the only time this isn't true is with double-action only pistols, which you wouldn't carry unless you were a cop and you had to. Besides, if revolvers are so much better than pistols for combat, why does the military use a pistol? This is my thing man, I know what I'm talking about. Of course different guns are better for different people, if you're more comfortable with a revolver, you're probably better off with one. Most states have a limited number of spare magazines you can have on your person, and all live amunition must be concealed when not in use, which is hard with more than one or two. Unless you have next to no finger strength, a revolver trigger-pull is almost exactly the same a semi-auto. Double-action revolvers, ones that pull back the hammer and fire in the same trigger pull, are actually the most common and general preferance. The military uses semi-autos because non-civilians are not limited in the ammount of spare magazines they can carry. They hardly ever use it anyway, unless their rifles aren't available or they need point-blank and don't have the time to use a two-handed gun. My parents are certified CCW instructors for Nevada, Utah and Florida, it's my thing too. I already told you I know what double-action means, please don't condescend me. Now, in the civilian world, how likely do you think it would be that you would run into a situation where you need to use your gun, and 1 or 2 spare magazines isn't enough? And if you think that a revolver is just as fast as an automatic, you should take both to the range, and try shooting them both as fast as you can. You should also try setting your target at a long distance, and try shooting as accurately as possible using only double-action trigger pulls. Then, put a new target at the same distance, and do the same thing with all single-action trigger pulls. As I've said before, almost all modern revolvers have both double and single action, so single action trigger pulls have absolutely nothing to do with it. And I have taken both out to the range, many times. If you're going for accuracy as well as speed, the recoil of a semi-auto slows your firing speed down quite a bit. Almost everyone finds firing a revolver more comfortable. *facepalm* I'm saying if you want lighter trigger pulls with a double-action revolver, you have to manually pull back the hammer. With a pistol, the hammer is automatically cocked back by the slide. And saying that a revolver has less recoil than a pistol doesn't even make sense. I find a 45. automatic more comfortable to shoot than a 357. The only reason I can think of as to why you might think this way is that you have a good quality revolver and a piece of crap automatic. What brands are they? I have a Springfield XDM and and a Smith and Wesson Model 10.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
