Sco Pro- that's the model where the hammer is shrouded correct? Not the hammerless right? My Dad has an airweight "detective special" that is completely hammerless and is light as hell. I coudl carry it like Denzel Washington using my underwear strap to secure it the thing was so light.
About Glocks, I heard somebody complaining about them because they don't have a safety mechanism. What are y'alls opinion on that?
Brntorg in correct..... No intruder wants to try to steal something when someone is home or knows they are breaking in. A dog is your best form of protection. As soon as they start their "break in" and the Poodle starts barking they are out. Plain and simple.
Don't get the point aboput non-lethal round followed by live rounds as being stupid, maybe you could explain further. I do have all live shells loaded in mine, but for a concerned parent it is just a little bit more assurance. Also, an attorney once told me that would help in a civil defense should you have to resort to shooting intruder. No safety (ie. Glock) is common on many automatic handguns carried by law inforcement. Safety mechanism is double action on first shot. Last thing a police officer needs to be doing when the need for his/her weapon arises is fumbling with a safety button. I wouldn't let the no safety button thing discourage you - why even have one chambered if you aren't ready to shoot?
The whole "sound of racking a shotguns scares the bad guy away." Is a myth from Hollywood movies. Teenage kid- yes, most likely. Home invader- not so much and you've just given away your location and how you are armed from the sound. A shotgun is difficult to keep handy but safe from kids. Get a handgun and a finger tip combination safe that you can bolt to the back of a nightstand. Spend the time to take some safety and shooting technique classes and time at the shooting range. You can do that without taking the 20 hour concealed carry class and paying all the fees involved in getting your concealed carry license. As it sounds like your not interested in carrying. Also, keep in mind you can easily squeeze off 2-3 shots from a pistol in the amount of time it would take to pump the shotgun if you needed to fire a second shot. What if there are 2 or more bad guys in your home?
The US population, as a whole, is pretty ******* stupid. So when considering UT alumni, you can be assured they will handle things more intelligently than others.
01 grad- re: non-lethal round 1) if you are defending your home inside your home you are not going to need a defense, so the lawyers argument is unnecessary. 2) a non-lethal round in nearly every case is a lethal round for a child, the most likely person to be injured by a chambered round 3) If I am going to point and aim my gun at a human I need to have a commitment to kill them if necessary. A non-lethal round does not do this. Or I guess you could shoot some 300 pound six five drunk and drugged with the non-lethal round for entertainment value to see how good you are at rechambering as he runs toward you...
Since this thread is about using a firearm for home defense, I wanted to make a comment. I see two distinct scenarios where your home could be invaded: 1) The petty thief who wants to get in and out as quickly as possible. This guy will most likely wait until you are gone to break in. He doesn't want trouble. Having a gun in this case would be useless as you will not be there to begin with. 2) The kidnapper or robber who means business. This guy (or more likely group) will not try to invade your house in the middle of the night while you are sleeping. They will wait for you to enter or leave the house and jump you when you are distracted with the keys or something like that. They will put a gun to your head, force you to open a safe, or maybe kidnap you for a ransom (happens often in other countries). I don't see any use for a gun here unless you a) carry it with you AT ALL TIMES, and b) are extremely well trained in tactical situations where you have to make split-second decisions, and c) are 100% aware of what's going on AT ALL TIMES. I would guess that 99.9% of all people don't have the training or the genes to be able to fend off a kidnapping attempt. So again, I don't see the point of owning a gun for this scenario. So I guess my question is: in what situation do you think having a gun at home will help you in any way?
Vacant, so you are suggesting that the denizens on this board would handle guns less intelligently than the general population? What is your comparative rationale?
The death rate caused by firearms in the US is about 1.2% those that can be ruled accidental is around .08%. The 5-14 age bracket does have the highest accidental rate of 2.2% and 15-24 is next at 1.4%. Motor vehicles, drowning and fire kill far more. I don't care if people want a gun in there house or not. That is there choice. But blaming guns will not stop accidental deaths from happening. And if there were not a gun on the planet people would still find ways to kill each other.
