Help me choose a gun

Rat, I disagree with your way of treating someone who posts their comments. There is no reason to call names and be rude. I could do the same with some of your comments also but I refuse to. In fact I'm not sure why you even posted at all. You offered nothing in response to the original post!
 
Some time ago the NRA did a study on lethality vs. caliber vs. shots fired. This was based on police statistics. The most lethal caliber? 9MM Luger. This is real world, not gun writers and blocks of gelatin. I seem to remember also a NRA study that showed that revolvers were not as reliable as semi-autos in actual (police) practice.
 
Dave Costin said:
Rat, I disagree with your way of treating someone who posts their comments. There is no reason to call names and be rude. I could do the same with some of your comments also but I refuse to. In fact I'm not sure why you even posted at all. You offered nothing in response to the original post!
Click to expand...

I did not call anyone a name.

Others have already suggested the same gun I would. I could post the same comments also but I refuse to. :D

You are free to sugar-coat and/or suppress your own opinions.
 
CUTS LIKE A KRIS said:
A little harsh perhaps??

Up here in the wilds nobody can carry a handgun, and very few get killed by the wildlife. Besides, he wasn't unarmed- he still had a knife. How is determining that he was carrying too much and adjusting for HIS personal tastes lazy? I have never had to carry a gun outside of hunting, and never felt that I needed one to protect against people. Your choices may be different but calling someone lazy and stupid was out of line IMO. Remember everybody has different circumstances- and it was not like he was saying it should be illegal to carry it, just trying to be rational about the risks he was facing.

Maybe it is different because I am Canadian but still a bit more tact would have been nice rather than an attack on someone sharing their opinions.
Click to expand...
I am in northern Ontario and with the black bear population making leaps and bounds ( because of spring hunt cancellation ) picking blueberry's in the summer with the kids mean I have a 12 gauge single shot and a few rounds in
my pockets. Lets face the facts, unless you have a cop in you backpocket
the only person thats going to protect you in the bush is yourself !
 
I think leaps and bounds is kind of an understatement. We'll see what these animal rights activists want us to do with these bears once they end up in their front yard eating their garbage.
 
Rat Finkenstein said:
Becoming lazy, complacent, and declawing yourself is pretty silly. Advising others to join you in being helpless is just plain stupid.
Click to expand...

No, it's a rational assessment of risk. And I'm not stupid, thank you very much.

Clearly there is no life without risk, but bears, wolves, and the like were not a big risk. I didn't say they presented no risk. Just that the risk they presented was not worth carrying a gun.

And that's my point. People are utterly unable to rationally assess risk. It's an emotional thing. They arm themselves against risks that are slight at best but which they fear, and then ignore risks that are much greater but are familiar.

I'm not saying everybody should avoid carrying. I'm saying get a rational handle of the real risk before deciding to carry. I don't think many people do, being scared of bears and all. Been there; done that.

About the seatbelt analogy: Do you wear a helmet when you drive? You should. The odds of getting brain damage from a car accident are way higher, even if wearing a seatbelt, than an attack by human or animal in the woods. So if you are going to be entirely rational (and you aren't) then you would start wearing as helmet when you drive to the woods long before you would arm yourself in the woods.

But you don't do that, do you? Thereby leaving yourself largely defenseless to brain damage. Why? Because car accidents are a familiar risk while the risks 'perceived' in the woods less so. An entirely irrational position.

Which proves my point.


* * *

I offer my sympathies for those who must deal with the two-legged type of risk, but I've defended myself in an entirely different manner. I moved to where the crime rate is low. Not zero. Low. Works for me. I never did like the idea of my young children choosing between packing or being defenseless. But there I go being rational again.

* * *

[Edit: There was literally a brain surgeon in Anchorage for a time who drove around town with a helmet on. He was the only brain surgeon in town, and reasoned that without another one around he needed the helmet.]

* * *

And for the record, I'm definitely a revolver guy. Something gets a hold of the slide on an automatic, i.e., you shoot it while it's still in your coat pocket, or you have a hand-to-hand battle and the bad guy gets a hand on the slide, or you've shoved it down the throat of an animal, and you are going to be real dissappointed when you learn that your auto is inoperative, right when you need it most. Glock or not.

* * *

OK, I'm done.
 
Ok, guys, now that you've both had your say, the thread IS about helping the OP choose a gun, not debate whether he should have one or not. He already has made the decision to have one. So, let's not let this thread get further derailed, shall we? :D

Thanks!
 
When I'm in the woods working, I always have a handtool (shovel, fire rake, axe) plus a pocket knife, usually the biggest threat is poisonous snakes. I am not allowed to carry a firearm while working (bullets and fire don't mix). When I am off duty and in the woods, I always carry a S&W J frame .357 for protection from two and four-legged critters. I try not to mess with snakes ( I wear snake boots), I figure it is their home so I leave them alone.
 
Ok. I'm not trying to open up a can of worms here, but where are you guys hiking downtown Detroit. LOL. That being said I carry the same gun in the woods that I carry on duty a SA. .45 Springfield. 4 inch barrel. Sure there are only 7 rounds but I've trained to hit things with in the first shot under stress.
 
Rat may have a point. Those same ideas and attitude led to the death of Chris McCandless and numerous "day hikers"
 
I didn't take the time to read through the entire thread. Here are my preferences:

1. I want something which is compact
2. I want something which is weather resistant
3. I want something which is relatively powerful

I don't like to carry revolvers, because their capacity to weight ratio is poor. They are heavy and generally limited to 6 rounds, often less.

9mm is the smallest caliber I like to carry. For quite a while I carried a Glock 26; I have also carried a Glock 36, and a Glock 30.

These days I carry a Glock 23.

All of these, I think, are perfectly adequate for backpacking. They fit my criteria.

Andy
 
Hiracer

Not to derail this thread any further, but I would like to point out that I never called you stupid, Only your rationale, and of course the suggestion itself.

If you want to discuss it further, then by all means- post about it in W&C. :thumbup:


Brian Jones said:
Rat,


Chill out, man. This isn't The Cove or W&C. :D
Click to expand...

No worries, I am aware of my surroundings. ;)
 
Andrew Colglazier said:
I didn't take the time to read through the entire thread. Here are my preferences:

1. I want something which is compact
2. I want something which is weather resistant
3. I want something which is relatively powerful

I don't like to carry revolvers, because their capacity to weight ratio is poor. They are heavy and generally limited to 6 rounds, often less.

9mm is the smallest caliber I like to carry. For quite a while I carried a Glock 26; I have also carried a Glock 36, and a Glock 30.

These days I carry a Glock 23.

All of these, I think, are perfectly adequate for backpacking. They fit my criteria.

Andy
Click to expand...

Nice evaluation Andy.

For personal defense involving 2 legged critters or anything on 4 legs up to black bear the Glock 23 is my top choice. If black bear are a concern I may substitute a 5 1/2" bar sto barrel and load with heavy +P 40 S&W rounds from Buffalo Bore. Makes the G23 very versatile.

If I'm going to be back packing a long distance or am carrying concealed I will compromise power for low weight and low profile. Thus the Kahr PM40 is also a favorite. And I find the 3" barreled SP101 in .357 mag has a lot of charm as well.
 
CUTS LIKE A KRIS said:
How many times have you had to use your gun in the wilds?? Just wondering about the "bubble of safety" vs paranoia about something that most likely will not happen. Do you carry fire extinguishers in the wilds with you too- after all people do get caught in fires and inadvertently start forests on fire? How about defibulators?

I guess I take insults differently than you do and try not to give a big "you are dumb if you think differently than I do" attitude and insult somebody who comments on what they have experienced in life (calling my society dumb when yours is perfect right?:confused:). But I guess the only way to survive is if you have a firearm right- there are no other ways to protect themselves? Nobody has ever faced wild animals without a gun and survived? Nobody with a firearm has ever died in the wild?

If you want to carry- that is your right, and I hope everybody returns safe from their travels no matter what they choose to bring with them.
Click to expand...

I suppose there is no point in carrying shelter or fire making supplies while in the woods, since I have never been lost or stranded or injured in the woods? :D

A gun is a valuable survival tool. It can easily provide food in addition to defense.

Any anti-gun society is utterly flawed, so yes, it is stupid. Not saying you support it, or embrace the lies. I never said where I live is perfect, but I could not even exist within your system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top