The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: General Handgun Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old October 6, 2012, 10:51 PM   #151
allaroundhunter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 6, 2012
Location: Southeast Texas
Posts: 1,670
Quote:
You're right. I do apologize. But as I said, not what I would do. But you should go back and read the whole article. Or at least more than just the myth at the headline. It wss plausible, but it stated the bullet tumbles and loses momentum
Okay, I have let this dangerous statement go long enough before voicing my thoughts on the matter...

Fullsize, you are wrong, plain and simple. Unless the bullet is shot (and remains) directly vertical, it will not tumble and lose momentum. It will travel in a parabolic path, and it will hit the ground with enough force to kill any two-legged creature with ease.

Now, is it "plausible" for a round to remain at a perfect 90 degree flight path relative to the earth? Sure.....but it is so hard to do that you can shoot 1,000,000 and it will never happen. Even if you get the angle right for the shot, there will be wind that will push it off of the perfectly vertical flight path.

NEVER fire a round into the air (except birdshot). I am one who is against warning shots for the most part, but I am always against stupid advice. This was stupid (and very dangerous) advice.
allaroundhunter is offline  
Old October 7, 2012, 06:21 AM   #152
akguy1985
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 17, 2012
Location: Claremore, Oklahoma
Posts: 179
the compact is easier to conceal.
__________________
Marksman of the mezzanine
akguy1985 is offline  
Old October 7, 2012, 07:49 AM   #153
Constantine
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 5, 2010
Location: Miami, Florida
Posts: 5,182
Quote:
NEVER fire a round into the air (except birdshot). I am one who is against warning shots for the most part, but I am always against stupid advice. This was stupid (and very dangerous) advice.

100% agreed with this. That's for Hollywood and 3rd world country celebrations. Big no no.
__________________
Sáncte Míchael Archángele, defénde nos in proélio, cóntra nequítiam et insídias diáboli ésto præsídium. Ímperet ílli Déus, súpplices deprecámur: tuque, prínceps milítiæ cæléstis, Sátanam aliósque spíritus malígnos, qui ad perditiónem animárum pervagántur in múndo, divína virtúte, in inférnum detrúde. Ámen
Constantine is online now  
Old October 7, 2012, 07:59 AM   #154
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 5,084
Quote:
Originally Posted by fullsize only
to spat mcgee
I agree with what you are saying. My whole attempt was mostly geared toward the devil being in the details and if put in the position, do you trust what you carry. If you have to take a long shot, do you trust what you carry? Fullsize guns give you the most range of capability within the law. Not harping on statistics or retreating, but all laws and details in your favor, EVERYONE, especially sigcurious and rodeo roy, do you trust what you have to make the shot? If not, why carry compact? You have the right to carry what you want, for comfort, concealment, performance, etc. That's the beauty of this country. But because life can bring things as elaborate as the discussions, laws and scenarios we presented today, why not carry what can handle the biggest part of these?
fullsize only, I didn't get into this discussion until it took a turn into legalities. The short answer to "Why carry compact?" is: for concealability and convenience. In some sense, it's also a matter of weighing the odds of what one is likely to actually encounter.

A buddy of mine is fond of saying, "If I'd known I was goin' to a gunfight, I'd'a brought a rifle." If I knew that I was going to have to take that 50-yard shot that you've discussed, I would most assuredly go with a long gun for that. Few of us can conceal an AR on a daily basis, though, and LE tends to take a dim view of guys with semi-automatic rifles under their trench coats. So the next choice is a pistol, then.

Do full-sized pistols have better accuracy? Sure. Most modern full-sized pistols are capable of better accuracy than I am. Weather and wardrobe permitting, I prefer to carry a full-sized pistol, too. Like many folks, though, work and weather often force me to weigh several factors in my carry decision. For example, if I have to go to court, I have to either skip carrying, or leave my gun somewhere while I'm in court.

Is there some chance that, during the course of my usual workday, I will one day have to decide whether to take a 50-yard shot with my pocket pistol? Sure, but the odds are extremely remote. Much more likely is a scenario in which I am accosted at bad-breath-range by one of the homeless guys that lives downtown. At that range, the difference in accuracy between full-sized and compact isn't terribly important.
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman
Spats McGee is offline  
Old October 7, 2012, 12:21 PM   #155
sigcurious
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 25, 2011
Posts: 1,755
I trust that my carry pistol is mechanically accurate enough to make a long shot. I even practice at a variety of distances. However, I do not practice at longer ranges with the anticipation that I might need to shoot at those distances in defense of myself or others.

I carry a firearm to protect myself, and situationally, those that are with me(family/friends). My line of thinking is that as the distance to the threat increases the threat to me decreases, and more importantly as distance increases, the number of options to keep myself and others(family/friends) safe also increases, particularly those options that do not involve use of force.
sigcurious is offline  
Old October 7, 2012, 10:17 PM   #156
BillCA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 28, 2004
Location: Silicon Valley, Ca
Posts: 7,087
Quote:
So if some shoots a person, carjacks another, I watch see it and I engage him and stop him, by shooting his tire out, firing a warning shot, or neutralizing him, I go to prison for stopping him?
You sure might go to jail in California.

Typically, it's considered a bad idea to fire on a fleeing felon for several reasons. First and foremost is that shots are likely to miss and in {sub}urban areas which can endanger innocent people. If the person is in a vehicle, a hit on that person may cause the vehicle to become a projectile that kills or injures other innocent persons. These principles apply to LEOs and civilians alike.

As a general rule, California does not allow civilians to fire at fleeing felons. Police may do so, under specific circumstances. One exception is that the civilian must know (not suspect or believe) that a felony was committed and have a reasonable belief the subject committed the felony and that the fleeing person poses an real and immediate danger to persons after the crime committed.

Someone who carjacks a car, robs a liquor store or even stabs another person and is leaving the area does not necessarily meet that criteria. That is because, legally, the perp got what he wanted and is leaving the scene

One could claim that someone involved in a mass shooting or who boldly shoots several "random" people in broad daylight is likely to repeat the crime and/or to kill others to avoid capture.
__________________
BillCA in CA (Unfortunately)
BillCA is offline  
Reply

Tags
shoot to kill , shoot to live >

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:41 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.10438 seconds with 9 queries