Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Weapons of the World Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Girly gun question
Cato    1/16/2006 4:19:47 PM
I'm investigating the purchase of a home firearm. The one criteria for said purchase is that the weapon must be easily usable by a rather small and not particularly mechanically inclined chick. So, sorry guys, the Desert Eagle .50 and broomhandle Mauser are out of the question. I'm thinking of a wheel-gun rather than one of the small-framed autos. Any suggentions regarding calibre and make/model would be greatly appreciated. Personal experience with reccommended weapon would also be greeted with many thanks. Thankee kindly, Cato
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7   NEXT
eu4ea    RE:I'll get flamed for this but...   1/25/2006 10:06:50 PM
Buzz, Dude, you *cant* be serious. Kleck is a likeable scoundrel (I have a soft spot in my heart for charaters like that), but to actually take his "groundbreaking data!" seriously is another thing entirely. Just look through the guy's biography; he's a *very* minor academic, (assistant prof. somewhere in U of Florida, I think), his primary contribution to his field is what has been laughingly refered to as the "Three-point Line Hypothesis". He wasnt making much headway with that. The reasons for that (aisde from the 3-point line hypothesis) come from his nototious penchnat for falsyfying data. What you post above is a primo example of that. It was "radical!" "groundbreaking!" new "research" he was doing under contract from another colorfull character called Neil Shulmann. It was a well-known fact that actual data meant squat to those two - Shuman's schtick is that he was writing a "tell-all" paperback about how guns are great in every ocasion, with the intent of selling it largely through the NRA's distribution channels. He was out to make a buck in publishing, consequences be dammed. So, he needed data as outlandish as possible - and that naturally drove him to Kleck. That's where both the figures you cited, and the "groundbreaking research" for the 1994 Kleck/Schuman paperback entitled "Stopping Power: Why 70 Million Americans Own Guns!". It sold fairly well for a while amongst the hardcore true-believer crowd, but a this point event those guys are getting pretty enbarrased by just how outlandish it is. You can get a brand-new one (the deluxe hadcover edition, too) at Amazon for the princely sum of $1.99. See: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1882639030/qid=1138236932/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/002-1634798-7458413?s=books&v=glance&n=283155 As for it's scientific merit and the credibility it carries in the professional criminology and statistics worlds, it would be generous to say it's 'nill'. It's actually a laughingstock. One way to express the respect participants in the field have for this book is to look at the work of another niche paperback writer, the French author Thierry Meyssan. I dont knoe if you remember the guy - he was the frenchman who after 9/11 also some "groundbreaking research!", just like Kleck/Schuman. He also published is "astonishing results" in a paperback, called "9/11: The Big Lie!". It too sold pretty well amongst it's target market. Better than the Kleck/Schuman opus maximus, actually. The interesting thing about both books was the tremendous similarities in the target market, and how the true believers actually went for this stuff - in large numer, hook line and sinker. I guarantee I can still find you a Frenchman who *truly* believe Mr. Meyssan's theories, just like you can find Americans who still think Kleck/Schuman "told it like it is!". It's a wonderfull tale. On the upside, think we're pulling ahead of them thou: the Kleck/Schuman book is now goign for $1.99 for the hardback, while Mr Meynard's theories still command $10.85 - in paperback :) See http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1592090265/qid=1138236744/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-1634798-7458413?n=507846&s=books&v=glance Heart, eu4ea. Hey, if you're interested in some actual (you know, fact-based) research on the topic, I can point you to a couple of good sources. I would recomend respected, peer-reviewed publication, like "Scientific American" or the "New England Journal of Medicine". For instance: - Arthur Kellermann and Donald Reay. "Protection or Peril? An Analysis of Firearm Related Deaths in the Home." The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 314, no. 24, June 1986, pp. 1557-60Sample conclusion: "...a gun kept in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a member of the household, or friend, than an intruder." - F.E. Zimring, "Firearms, violence, and public policy, Scientific American, vol. 265, 1991, p. 48". Sample conclusion: The use of a firearm to resist a violent assault actually increases the victim's risk of injury and death. - Arthur Kellermann et. al., "Gun Ownership as a Risk Factor for Homicide in the Home," The New England Journal of Medicine, October 7, 1993, pp. 1084-1091 Sample conclusion: Keeping a gun in the home carries a murder risk 2.7 times greater than not keeping one. That is, excluding many other factors such as previous history of violence, class, race, etc., a household with a gun is 2.7 times more likely to experience a murder than a household without one, even while there was no significant increase in the risk of non-gun homicides. I can easily provide several more, from some of our other top-tier peer reviewed publication and research universities in the Nation. "Nature" has some good stuff, too. Thinking of good ol' Kleck and his nitche paperback is kinda entretaining, you've got to give the guy some marks for showmaship, but to actually take that stuff seriously is pretty comical.
 
Quote    Reply

displacedjim    RE:Girly gun question   1/25/2006 10:49:10 PM
Cato, Please be sure to report back to let us know which firearm(s) you settled on, and how she's coming along in her gun-handling skills. Displacedjim
 
Quote    Reply

BasinBictory    RE:Girly gun question   1/26/2006 6:51:02 AM
I think BigBro mentioned the single most important aspect of this whole gun-no gun, pistol/carbine/shotgun debate. Mindset. Whatever arms or non-lethal means available, a person ready, willing and able to use them to protect themselves is in far better position than a hesitant person armed with an elephant rifle. I would reiterate that a gun must be the absolute, very last line of defense in a system that includes loud barking dogs, proper outdoor lighting, properly trimmed outdoor vegetation, locks on doors and windows, working knowledge of your neighbors and their typical visitors, and just general common sense. I've read some semi-facetious rants by gun owners saying something along the lines of: "If a burglar wants to get in my home, he'll have to defeat 1) my 10-foot cinder block wall 2) my two 100-pound Rottweilers 3) my triple-bolted doors and windows 4) my alarm system 5) my eight shotgun shells 6) my .357 Magnum and its 6 rounds. If he gets through all of that, he can have it!" The story is mildly amusing, because it is unlikely that in a home thus protected, the owner would ever have occasion to use his shotgun or pistol. This is the theory I subscribe to. I own a gun not because I'm gung-ho about wanting to kill an intruder, but because I treat it like I do my life or car insurance - I hope I never have occasion to use them, but it's better to have them and not need them than to need them and not have them. However, if Cato just wants a plinker, any .22 will do - the cheapness of ammo and the very small recoil will ensure that range sessions will be productive and enjoyable.
 
Quote    Reply

Bigbro    RE:A few concrete suggestions....Yimmy   1/26/2006 8:21:07 AM
"I just think pistols are crap." That is a common feeling, however I would say that pistols are more capable, if a person is trained and practiced with one, than most would think. From a rest, I currently own 3 pistols that will shoot, 5 shot, 6 inch groups at 100 yds. That is as good as a lot of carbines on the market. One of those will push 3 1/2 inchs at that range (629 with a scope). Time to draw and hit 6 8" plates at 25 yds 3.55 seconds. I did not win that day as others had better times. (1911 .45 acp) A .44 mag with 270 gr. bullets will give more penitration on a deer at 80 yds than a 30-06 with 150 gr. bullets or a 7mm rem mag. (Same day and I helped gut all three deer. you can figure out which one was mine.) .22 mag pistol, will completely penatrate a young horse's head (sick colt that had to be put down) and out performs a .22 lr rifle at all ranges. Pistols are tools that an operator needs to learn how to use and work with on a regular basis. They have limitations like any other tool and must be used as such. Bb (a good nights sleep does wonders for ones attitude)
 
Quote    Reply

ChdNorm    RE:Girly gun question   1/27/2006 3:00:19 PM
I know I'm a little late on this topic, but here is my standard advice. First of all, you have to really define your needs before deciding what type or model of firearm is best. If you're looking for dual purpose plinking and/or personal defence you might wind up with a different criteria than just strictly as a defensive sidearm. For the sake of being able to keep my occasionally long winded posts on the short side, I'll assume we're going with strictly defence. First of all, I do not agree with any statement that a long gun of any type is superior to a handgun for defence in a confined space (such as home defence). The length of even a carbine/riot gun gives any potential adversary much greater leverage than you in a disarm attempt. We all know the 21 foot rule, but in a home defence situation very few contacts can be expected as far away as 21 feet. Think of how many areas of your house give you more than 10-15 feet of space. Unless youre skilled more than average in clearing rooms and obsticals and pay very close attention, your muzzle will tend to break the plane before that area is covered (which is when youre most likely to be jumped). Also, the notion that someone willing to enter an occupied residence with malicious intent will immediantly surrender at the sound of a Pump action is pure fantasy. (you should already have a round chambered before an encounter is made anyway) A secondary concern that usually would not apply (but is worth putting out there) is the potential hinderance that a long gun is after contact is made. If the situation turns into one in which you must take custody and maintain control over a suspect, a carbine or shorgun will only get in the way. It's size dicatating that your'e forced to either retreat to a point where the suspect is held at gunpoint (never truly gaining control of them). Or, you will have to discard your weapon in order to subdue them (placing it at even greater risk of being snatched). Assuming that your better half is about as interested in all this sort of stuff as most wives, I think a revolver is the best choice. Not only is it simple enough to learn the basic manual of arms in a shorter period of time, the basic manual of arms is dramaticly easier to master from a beginners standpoint. With autos you run into clearance drills, having to manipulate the slide to load/unload, and safeties that seem complicated and counter-intuitive to beginners. Those kinds of things pose mental hurdles to someone not truly dedicated to mastering their firearm that can lead to a reluctance or refusal to train. Keeping it simple is the way to go with beginners for those reasons and a few others. As far as any sort of specific reccomendation, the first place I'd start looking is in the 3" barrelled Smith & Wesson K-frame series of revolvers in either .38 Special or .357 Magnum (example model Numbers include the model 10,13,19 w/2.5"BBL in blued and the models 64,65,66 w/2.5"BBL etc in stainless). My first choice would be a Model 65. These are fairly compact double-action 6-shot revolvers that usually fit a smaller statured individual's hands fairly well as they come. The 3"ers are a little harder to find, but worth the extra legwork. Going with the 3" gives you similar performance to a 4' tube, while being signifigantly more defensable from a weapon retention standpoint (I know, it's just an inch. But that inch is signifigant in terms of leverage when trying to retain it during a dis-arm compared to the same model with a 4" tube.) Most people usually reccommend the smaller J-Frame S&Ws, but they are dramaticly harder to shoot well as compared to a K-frame. Choosing a Stainless Steel model also has some advantages as compared to blued/black in a defencive sidearm. The more visible your weapon in this type of situation, the more likely your adversary isnt going to mistake it for a can of OC spray or a cell phone. Needless to say, they're usually less inclined to charge a Smith & Wesson than they are a Motorola. You dont have to do a lot of fancy customizing to have a servicable sidearm. Little if any is usually needed right out of the box with a S&W. There are a couple of things that could be addressed that do add a few advantages in usage. First of all, a good pair of grips is the difference between maintaining control of your sidearm and wrestling with it. Most decent gun shops have aftermarket revolver grip samples on display. If the ones fitted at the factory dont fit you both to a comfortable degree, go thru and see if you cant find a pair of grips that do. Personal reccomendation, Spiegel boot grips in wood or the hard rubber (which are factory standard on newer S&Ws). Houge rubber grips are slightly supperior in a retention point of view, and are also well worth looking into. They do tend to be more clingy and print more when carried concealed though. Another very worthwhile consideration is taking it a gunsmith (which you should definately do i
 
Quote    Reply

Cato    RE:Girly gun question...Update   1/30/2006 4:14:51 PM
Skipped the gun got an 11 week old blue pitbull. Think the action of a 12 guage sounds tough? Thanks for the advice, I think a Walther P-99 is in my not so distant future. Thanks everybody! Cato
 
Quote    Reply

Horsesoldier    RE:Girly gun question...Update   1/30/2006 4:47:50 PM
>>Thanks for the advice, I think a Walther P-99 is in my not so distant future.<< Can't go wrong with that.
 
Quote    Reply

Cato    RE:Girly gun question...Update...Horsesoldier   1/31/2006 3:26:11 PM
Horsesoldier, If I may ask, how do you have the trigger assembly set up in your P99? Do you rock the 9X19 or the .40? It was by far the most comfortable piece I tried out. Vielen Dank, Cato
 
Quote    Reply

Horsesoldier    RE:Girly gun question...Update...Horsesoldier   1/31/2006 5:55:59 PM
>>If I may ask, how do you have the trigger assembly set up in your P99? Do you rock the 9X19 or the .40? It was by far the most comfortable piece I tried out.<< I've got a 9mm with the DA/SA anti-stress trigger. I haven't tried the other trigger options they make, but they'd be a pretty hard sell with me, I think, since I really like the short, light trigger pull with the single action. As for the ergonomics, I have to agree, especially with the adjustable backstrap and the use of metal magazines that make it less chunky in the hand than some of the comparable designs out there.
 
Quote    Reply

greyghost       5/28/2007 6:50:20 PM
   A good weapon would be a small frame.357 magnum. I used a rossi 971 with 4 in barrel for my wife. It felt comfortable for her and I would take her to the range at least twice a month. 38 special WC make for cheap practice. After a couple of months she was on her own and fired a couple cylinders of full load .357 magnum's with no problem.If it is for home defense have her walk around her home and get used to aiming the waepon for different places in the house and go over some scenarios one what she would do.
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics