<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PARAGON:
I didn't "knock" the 1911 per se. It's just not a good carry weapon for most applications. It is indeed heavy, is not very concealable, is more cumbersome on the draw, etc. It is about the application.
Advice is being discussed here and one has to take into account that you are talking an averaging of individuals and situations and what would fit most. A 1911 style just simply is not a friendly platform for a carry. I have an original Colt from WWII with the heavy, slopply trigger. But, I personally do not think the platform is the right one for the average person on a PD level.
Bondage, before you try to mouth off in any way, I would suggest you get your ducks in a row. Toadies made some comment about most engagements being made within 21 feet, hence my reference to feet. A handgun is for personal defense, period. You can't go around with an AR15 and a shotgun slung on your shoulders for personal protection. Optimum personal protection is to keep the target as far away as you are accurate and effective with your weapon. Since you can keep a target at much distance with a rifle it is the first choice of arms, second would be the shotgun, then the handgun, knife and lastly hand-to-hand. Since the first option most can have available to them at all times is the handgun, it is best to choose the one handgun that is the most applicable to the most possible situations. The fact that one can accurately engage a target further away and with more ammunition available without reload puts them at an advantage over the target in most situations.
At 5-10 feet the energy of the rounds of most large caliber handguns are sufficient to stop the target, so that is really a moot point as long as you have a handgun that is easily controlled in such an tense situation. You are no longer shooting at a paper target and taking out as many variables that would result in a miss or failed engagement has to be employed. This is why the Glock was developed. It is the easiest pistol to use and has a smooth profile. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yeah, I'd pretty much agree. But I wasn't "trying to mouth off"...I WAS mouthing off.
My ducks WERE in a row, but I popped 'em all.
It is a fact that in the VAST majority of "personal defense" situations, you have no choice on distance - it is almost exclusively "up close and personal." If I wanted to reach out and touch someone, I'd opt for an M14 or Rem 700BDL over the Mattel toy anyway. (See...I know how to piss off a Jarhead)
I was just trying to point out that your experience (and mine) is combat oriented and not really applicable to civilian self-defense - precisely because we cannot go properly armed with a rifle or shotgun!
You are most likely quite efficient with your Glock. But, even with these older eyes, you'd be happy for me to have your back in any realistic self-defense scenario with my 1911. Hell, together, we'd probably even hit something. As for capacity, there is no denying a statitical edge in sheer numbers. HOWEVER...for fun sometime, compare rounds expended to casualties in WWII vs. Vietnam. It is astounding. Hundreds to one vs. MILLIONS to one! No kidding! BTW - we won the former and lost the latter.....
I would go so far as to say that choice of weapon is the LEAST important factor in effective self-defense. Attitude, experience, and training make the real difference, huh?
Oh, and BTW, Toadies is a buffoon.
You are right about giving advice in a forum that includes the likes of him. You and I sitting down together would probably agree far more than not.
BTW, I like the Glock. Well, I respect it. It just doesn't fit me well and the balance is odd to me - but then the 1911 is such an extension of my hand and arm that ANYTHING else feels odd. Yeah, I've shot it that much.
Welcome back, Paragon.
Sean