200 yds or so, 223 softpoint is 2400 fps (or so), works great.

2»

Replies

  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 10,067 Senior Member
    You're right, but this thread turned to LE agencies and issued firearms. But saying a Model 10 (or a 13) is a great personal defense weapon, as a private citizen I usually carry a 9mm pocket gun. It's flat and weighs about 1/3 as much as an all-steel Model 10.
    Not too many problems you can't fix
    With a 1911 and a 30-06
  • Mrs_ChiefMrs_Chief Member Posts: 292 Member
    Very true on the weight issue for CCW, however a S&W model 42 (?) Humpback with or WO hammer spur would work too. My brother has a handy little Glock pocket puppy 9mm that holds 9 rounds I believe it's light, quick and surprisingly accurate with mild recoil. BC
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 10,067 Senior Member
    A 642. I carried one for years. My buddy also a LEO was off duty Christmas shopping about 10 years ago and a robber shot the driver of a Brinks truck and fled. My bud got in a gunfight with him and wished he's had more than five rounds. I think he grazed the guy at about 25 yards, the guy temporarily took a hostage and was captured. The driver of the Brinks truck was wearing a vest and lived. But my bud was duty bound to engage the robber.

    Now I carry a Shield or a Kahr. More accurate and less felt recoil. When I carry at all.
    Not too many problems you can't fix
    With a 1911 and a 30-06
  • LMLarsenLMLarsen Senior Member Posts: 8,337 Senior Member
    Wife and I have a few .38 snubs around the house, but when we carry it's usually a S&W M&P. The .38s are tools of opportunity if someone barges in while we're home.
    “A gun is a tool, no better or no worse than any other tool: an axe, a shovel or anything. A gun is as good or as bad as the man using it. Remember that.”

    NRA Endowment Member
  • Mrs_ChiefMrs_Chief Member Posts: 292 Member
    Very personal choice, practice and feeling confident in you SD gun is paramount. BC
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,552 Senior Member
    Gene L wrote: »
    A 642. I carried one for years. My buddy also a LEO was off duty Christmas shopping about 10 years ago and a robber shot the driver of a Brinks truck and fled. My bud got in a gunfight with him and wished he's had more than five rounds. I think he grazed the guy at about 25 yards, the guy temporarily took a hostage and was captured. The driver of the Brinks truck was wearing a vest and lived. But my bud was duty bound to engage the robber.

    Now I carry a Shield or a Kahr. More accurate and less felt recoil. When I carry at all.

    Was the 642 your duty gun? Or did you mean it was your (and your buddy's) off-duty gun? I know investigators in large cities used to carry similar snub-nosed revolvers, because they believed they would probably not need a gun at all, but I can't imagine anyone carrying one who had potential to get into a serious shoot-out.

    I have a 642 and I like it a lot, but I think of it like the LCP .380 that I own - something I would carry when I am 99% certain I won't need anything at all, and with that 1% likelihood being that the armed offender will only have a knife. I know that .38 Special and .380 are both potententially lethal, but I lack confidence with either because my ability with them would limit me to very up-close and personal, as opposed to a slightly larger framed 9mm or .45 that extends my confidence out a few more yards.
  • VarmintmistVarmintmist Senior Member Posts: 6,461 Senior Member
    Gene L wrote: »
    That's the worst constructed argument I've ever read or heard. It's a conspiracy? "Wondernines?" I've never heard that term before today. There was a push for more mag capacity, there always was a desire to maximize the amount of available firepower.

    Edited to add: the big concern back during the change was (in urban settings) the fear of over-penetration. A big problem with 148 RN bullets. The 9mm moved a lighter bullet faster with less danger or a ricochet.

    Then S&W turned toward automatics and the revolver supply went down...it was a lot cheaper to make an automatic than a hand fit revolver, you just reached in a bucket and found parts that would work.

    I left the PD in 1986 when they were issuing L-frame Smiths. When I returned to LE work in 96, everyone was packing automatics. Cheaper, way more reliable, and with a wider selection of bullet weights and calibers. I came back to .40 S&W Glocks.

    The "cop killer" bullets are ancient history from about 20 years ago. They were some kind of coated bullets, Teflon I believe. Kevlar vests have come a long way since "killer bullets."

    Your case is riddled with wrong assumptions and kinda dated.
    And you case is devoid of facts and full of attitude.

    Was there ever a mention of conspiracy on my part?

    It was 20 years ago so it doens't matter????? WHAT? Saturday night special ban? Oh, I made that up because it was a while ago. Brady Bill? Must not have happened. Glocks being so undetectable that there was a bill that tried to ban them.

    FYI, the 80's was more like 30 years ago. About the same time that NYPD got glocks, the first PD in the country to adopt a auto, pusned by the "fact" that gang bangers were shooting up NYC with AK's and Saturday night specials.

    When do you think PD started getting 9's? The fact that you have never heard the term wondernine means that you were not aware of what was going on and are still uninformed, not that I am making assumptions. The huge push for mag capacity came ON THE HEELS of the scare tactics, before you left the first time, IAW your timeline.
    http://www.notpurfect.com/main/wonder.html
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wonder_Nine
    http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-129670.html
    http://smith-wessonforum.com/lounge/381672-wonder-nines-we-dont-hear-very-often-any-longer.html

    4 links, first bage, bing

    That you are refering to teflon coated bulllets as killer bullets, which was in the same era, and referancing kevlar vests means that A, you were not paying attention B, dont have a clue as to what the argument was, C, dont understand thet the teflon coated bullets NEVER were able to penetrate the kevlar of that or anyother day D, it was a scare tactic by Chuck Schumer to ban bullets that is easily found as documented, FROM THE 1980's and 90's. Anti gunners didn't just show up after you became aware. It was called the Law Enforcment Officers Protection Act and was a farce from day one. In its original form it banned all rifle and some handgun ammo including the teflon coated practice ammo that ONLY law enforcment used thats sole puropse was to cut down on barrel wear and WOULD NOT "slide through the fibers" because it was more slippery.

    This was also the same period where the politicos banned "undetectable" firearms. Ones that cannot be detected by scanners. It is called the undetectable firearms act and was implemented to ban the Glock. It is on the books right now even though as of this writing I know of no company that has ever or CAN manufacture a firearm without steel. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undetectable_Firearms_Act_of_1988 I guess that is just a poorly thought out conspiracy to that didnt happen.
    It's boring, and your lack of creativity knows no bounds.
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,051 Senior Member
    I thought that teflon-coated bullets were done so that the "penetrator" bullets of the 1980s: bullets made of brass with a hardened steel core. The bullets (according to the LEOs who I knew who carried them) would allow you to shoot into a car and neutralize the occupants. Problem was that the brass would wear down the barrels too quickly. The teflon was put on to make it easier on the barrels. But they weren't practice rounds, they were special-purpose duty rounds.
    Overkill is underrated.
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 10,067 Senior Member
    bisley wrote: »
    Was the 642 your duty gun? Or did you mean it was your (and your buddy's) off-duty gun? I know investigators in large cities used to carry similar snub-nosed revolvers, because they believed they would probably not need a gun at all, but I can't imagine anyone carrying one who had potential to get into a serious shoot-out.

    I have a 642 and I like it a lot, but I think of it like the LCP .380 that I own - something I would carry when I am 99% certain I won't need anything at all, and with that 1% likelihood being that the armed offender will only have a knife. I know that .38 Special and .380 are both potententially lethal, but I lack confidence with either because my ability with them would limit me to very up-close and personal, as opposed to a slightly larger framed 9mm or .45 that extends my confidence out a few more yards.

    It was my personal pocket gun, a back-up. My friend was off-duty and Christmas shopping when the Brinks truck was robbed. He pursued the shooter, leaving his two daughters in Wal-Mart. He was a Lt at the regional Police Academy, a Firearms Instructor, not a position where one would anticipate a gunfight.

    While I think the 642 is an excellent pocket gun, I couldn't shoot mine at much past bad-breath distance. Plus the .38s do not make a major hitter out of it in such a short barrel. The 9mm is a superior performer, compared to the .38 Special (which is why it was adopted, not politics) and because the barrels are generally longer for the overall length of the weapon. The 642 is a wonderful carry gun so long as you use it to realize its potential.
    Not too many problems you can't fix
    With a 1911 and a 30-06
  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    Mrs_Chief wrote: »
    Sam is falling down on the job, it PSEUDO not SUDO!
    Origin

    Naw, I long ago retired. I only correct bad English nowadays when someone trying to pick a fight with me but is kinda low on ammo.

    Tried to make sense of gaiman's post but simply was unable to understand what the point of it was.

    Outside of a dog, a book is a man’s best friend. Inside of a dog, it’s too dark to read. - Groucho Marx
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 10,067 Senior Member
    I think he was saying that a .45 at modest velocities works just fine for the intended purpose at handgun ranges.
    Not too many problems you can't fix
    With a 1911 and a 30-06
  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    Gene L wrote: »
    I think he was saying that a .45 at modest velocities works just fine for the intended purpose at handgun ranges.

    And ya see, you did that in 1 sentence. It took him a huge thick exposition that turned out to be turgid at best.

    Outside of a dog, a book is a man’s best friend. Inside of a dog, it’s too dark to read. - Groucho Marx
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,051 Senior Member
    Gene L wrote: »
    I think he was saying that a .45 at modest velocities works just fine for the intended purpose at handgun ranges.
    I thought he said the sheriff was near...
    Overkill is underrated.
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,263 Senior Member
    "I said the sheriff is a - - - - -Norwegian!"
    Jerry

    :devil:
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • DoctorWhoDoctorWho Senior Member Posts: 9,496 Senior Member
    Bullets should fall straight to the ground after 100 yards of flat travel?

    I never heard such an opinion. How is that even possible?
    "There is some evil in all of us, Doctor, even you, the Valeyard is an amalgamation of the darker sides of your nature, somewhere between your twelfth and final incarnation, and I may say, you do not improve with age. Founding member of the G&A forum since 1996
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 10,067 Senior Member
    Won't fall straight to the ground, it will be in a curve. If you shoot in the prone position with the bore of the barrel level, the bullet will hit the ground very soon, although I don't know why you'd do that. It will be the same for any difference the gun is fired from. The prone is the lowest distance from the ground to the muzzle I can think of.

    Drop a bullet from the height of the level bore and fire a bullet and both will hit the ground at the same time...gravity being what it is. Not the same distance from the shooter, but the same TIME...regardless.
    Not too many problems you can't fix
    With a 1911 and a 30-06
  • DoctorWhoDoctorWho Senior Member Posts: 9,496 Senior Member
    I used to shoot Nyclads, nylon coated bullets standard power lead ammo, was supposed to cut down on cleaning efforts not as an armor piercing round.

    Some factiods about the NYCPD transition from revolvers to Glocks, one of the approved duty sidearms was the S&W model 10 .38 special, approved ammo, non hollow point lead 158 gran semiwadcutter regular power only, no + P.

    There was much hype about being undergunned, the real problem was the substandard ammo approved for duty and off duty use, when the Ruger SP101 was approved for use, special factory run for NYCPD, some managed to slip in non approved guns chambered for .357 Magnum, some guys got caught by zealous supervisors using .357 Magnum test rounds on inspection.
    Finally after lots of PBA whining and public protest, the long testing & research phase, the Glock was approved for duty.
    "There is some evil in all of us, Doctor, even you, the Valeyard is an amalgamation of the darker sides of your nature, somewhere between your twelfth and final incarnation, and I may say, you do not improve with age. Founding member of the G&A forum since 1996
2»
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.