Advice about first semi-auto handgun

Oldman,

You make a lot of generalized statements that you seem to want us to accept, on the basis that you are an expert. Do hostile lawyers let you get away with this when they cross-examine you?

I take minor issue with these:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oldman

It is a well known fact that the drive-by shooters do not practice. They use the same method as many in law enforcement, the simple spray and pray method.

---

None of them? Ever? Do cops hold their guns sideways, too? Sorry, but I am not going to assume that my assailant cannot shoot, or that he won't try to hit me with his first shot, just because his Hi-Point holds 15.

Quote:

---

In short, officers traded accuracy for capacity.

---

I'm betting that any officer who could hit a target 6 times with a S&W .38 revolver, can hit it at least six times with a Glock .40. People that take the time to learn to shoot, can shoot either, and anyone who does not practice with and properly care for the tool that may save their life, is an idiot, whether they carry a revolver or a semi-auto.

Quote:

---

Past that, a single shot firearm is more accurate than a semi.

---

This statement is not even relevant to the average handgun shooter, because most shooters do not become so proficient that they can distinguish between a gun that groups 2"and one that will only do 4". It takes practice to hit a pie plate at 25 yards, much less a bulls eye, and very few people will do it.

Quote:

---

The simpler the action, the better the shooter.

---

This might be relevant, if you assume that the guy will never progress beyond the beginner stage, but this guy just asked for advice on semi-auto pistols, and you are basically telling him to forget it, and just go along with your recommendation, because you are an expert. Sure, if a person can afford multiple guns, a revolver makes a lot of sense, to start off with. But if he can only afford one, there is nothing to say he can't go ahead and buy what he wants, and just keep it tucked away somewhere until he is good enough with it.

Semi-autos are not rocket-science. Any semi-intelligent soul who decides he wants to defend himself with a handgun can read and study, dry-fire, disassemble/reassemble, and top it off with a couple hours of basic handgun instruction. He just needs to set his goal for the end he wants to achieve, and pursue it diligently and rationally, until he achieves it.

A person who buys a self-defense gun is making a major decision, and he/she has many more complicated issues to resolve than just what specific mechanics are involved in operating the weapon of choice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bisley

Oldman,

You make a lot of generalized statements that you seem to want us to accept, on the basis that you are an expert. Do hostile lawyers let you get away with this when they cross-examine you?

I take minor issue with these:



None of them? Ever? Do cops hold their guns sideways, too? Sorry, but I am not going to assume that my assailant cannot shoot, or that he won't try to hit me with his first shot, just because his Hi-Point holds 15.



I'm betting that any officer who could hit a target 6 times with a S&W .38 revolver, can hit it at least six times with a Glock .40. People that take the time to learn to shoot, can shoot either, and anyone who does not practice with and properly care for the tool that may save their life, is an idiot, whether they carry a revolver or a semi-auto.



This statement is not even relevant to the average handgun shooter, because most shooters do not become so proficient that they can distinguish between a gun that groups 2"and one that will only do 4". It takes practice to hit a pie plate at 25 yards, much less a bulls eye, and very few people will do it.



This might be relevant, if you assume that the guy will never progress beyond the beginner stage, but this guy just asked for advice on semi-auto pistols, and you are basically telling him to forget it, and just go along with your recommendation, because you are an expert. Sure, if a person can afford multiple guns, a revolver makes a lot of sense, to start off with. But if he can only afford one, there is nothing to say he can't go ahead and buy what he wants, and just keep it tucked away somewhere until he is good enough with it.

Semi-autos are not rocket-science. Any semi-intelligent soul who decides he wants to defend himself with a handgun can read and study, dry-fire, disassemble/reassemble, and top it off with a couple hours of basic handgun instruction. He just needs to set his goal for the end he wants to achieve, and pursue it diligently and rationally, until he achieves it.

A person who buys a self-defense gun is making a major decision, and he/she has many more complicated issues to resolve than just what specific mechanics are involved in operating the weapon of choice.

---

Well, how often do you testify in court? How many agencies are you a consultant or advisor for? I was called out nine times so far this year for officer involved shootings. I have had interviews with gun publications, news media as well as qualifying in courts But acceptance of my qualifications by anyone other than those in the cases where I am involved is up to individuals.

Now for a lengthy reply to your concerns.

Nope, officers do not hold their guns sideways. They are trained not to do so for several reasons. Gangbangers doing drive by shootings do not practice for variousl reasons as well. One is they are often unable to do so at ranges because of legal problems such as felons in possession of a firearm, possession of a stolen firearm, etc. Many states have passed laws about shooting on unowned lands as well to prevent many gun offenses to keep people from shooting around residences, livestock, and such.

BTW: Has your area seen an increase in livestock being shot? Gangbangers were forced to shoot someone (a felony) to prove their guts but soon found they get caught and go to jail. Now they shoot livestock since it is a misdemeanor offense, usually with no jail time, even if they get caught. Their lack of practice is also a reason they often accidently shoot themselves or some fellow gang member. More than once, they have been killed or hurt by taking out a mag and then leaving a round in the chamber due to lack of experience with firearms.


As to officer's being able to hit targets, they often fail to qualify in their attempts for re certification until several tries later. Many NEVER shoot other than to qualify once a year. Are they bad officers? Not at all. They just have a job and do only as they have to so they can remain on the department but are not gun fanatics. They simply carry a gun as part of their job.

The statement about single shot weapons is revelant since it shows accuracy. Any movement, be it from a slide, flinch or distraction will effect accuracy. For maximun accuracy, the type gun will come into play as well as shooting skill.

A sad fact is most people will not practice for many reasons. We have become more busy with our lives than we should. There is seldom time to practice and there are fewer places to practice. Then there is the financial factor. Ammo can cost $30 a box and it would be easy to shoot two boxes during a practice session as well as the range cost, the expense of travel to and from the range and a lot of other costs. Money is tight for many and shooting is an expense that can be cut. Because a person buys a gun does not mean they will practice, at least regularly. I do not know you and have no beef with you at all but I will bet you washed your car more in the first three months of ownership than you did in the last year of ownership. It is the same with guns. People buy, people handle for a while and then forget about it until they need it. I took a neighbor to buy a new gun (Glock 27) five years ago. We then went to the local police range and he shot a box of shells. Since then, he has never fired it and never cleaned it. This same man is an educated professional that has the time and money to practice but does not do so and he is the typical gun owner. Not all gun owners are gun lovers.

Now for an additional comment for what ever it is worth. I think and investigations bear this out, people buy guns and then never show family members how to use them. The children want to play with the guns and do so when adult supervision is not present. Their natural curoisity about guns leads to an accidental shooting. This has also led to many communities to pass laws permitting prosecution of the adult gun owners for negligence.

Many of us grew up with guns in the residence and were accustomed to firing them as well as seeing them fired. This is no longer the way of life for most households. The guns are placed in a drawer and forgotten about until an incident happens. An example of this is my youngest daughter. She is 28 and was shooing regularly as a preteen. She last shot at about 16. She has her gun I bought her and I asked her last week where her gun is located. It is in her home, in a drawer and has been there since she moved into the house five years ago. Additionally she does not know if it is loaded or not. Her time is spent trying to get out of med school and maintaining a social life. She is a gun owner, knows how they work and grew up around guns. She is not gun responsible. Should her gun be involved in an incident, it would be her fault as an unresponsible owner.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oldman

Well, how often do you testify in court? How many agencies are you a consultant or advisor for? I was called out nine times so far this year for officer involved shootings. I have had interviews with gun publications, news media as well as qualifying in courts But acceptance of my qualifications by anyone other than those in the cases where I am involved is up to individuals.

---

Look, this is only the Internet. I'm perfectly content to accept that you are a brilliant expert, and if I knew you, I might be so impressed that I would wait breathlessly for your next pronouncement, before hazarding my own unworthy opinion.

But, unfortunately (for you), on an Internet discussion forum, your credentials won't win an argument for you. You have to back up what you say, logically, and sometimes you will get challenged. When that happens, you just have to get down on the level with the peons, and prove what you are saying.

I'm not trying to piss you off, and I don't really have that much of a disagreement with most of the things you have said. I'm just saying that a person of average intelligence can be safe and accurate with a semi-auto pistol. You keep going off on tangents from this main subject, and stating facts that I never disagreed with in the first place, as though that was the subject of the thread.

I'm old, too, and I also tend to ramble...but I at least try to stay on the topic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bisley

I'm perfectly content to accept that you are a brilliant expert, and if I knew you, I might be so impressed that I would wait breathlessly for your next pronouncement, before hazarding my own unworthy opinion.

But, unfortunately (for you), on an Internet discussion forum, your credentials won't win an argument for you. You have to back up what you say, logically, and sometimes you will get challenged. When that happens, you just have to get down on the level with the peons, and prove what you are saying.

I'm not trying to piss you off, and I don't really have that much of a disagreement with most of the things you have said. I'm just saying that a person of average intelligence can be safe and accurate with a semi-auto pistol. You keep going off on tangents from this main subject, and stating facts that I never disagreed with in the first place, as though that was the subject of the thread.

I'm old, too, and I also tend to ramble...but I at least try to stay on the topic.

---

Many of the best lawyers in the courty has tried to rile me without success. No one here will do it either.

But where did I say a person of average (or as the court says, a normal and prudent person) of intelligence would NOT be able to be safe and accurate with a semi? I often shoot semi autoloaders as do mnay of my friends.

All I said was a semi is not as accurate due to mechanics than single shot or revolvers.

For that matter, a poor barrel in a single shot will not be accurate either.
As to not knowing me, depending on what part of East TX you reside, it is possible to meet me as I work a lot in East Texas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oldman

But where did I say a person of average (or as the court says, a normal and prudent person) of intelligence would NOT be able to be safe and accurate with a semi?

---

Well, you seemed to be saying that, here:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oldman

As to the original poster, this is his first handgun and zero experience in shooting or being familar with handguns. The simpler the action, the better the shooter. A semi is more complex to learn than a revolver. There is also an added safety element in a revolver.

---

My only point is that if the guy prefers a semi-auto, he should buy one and learn how to operate it correctly. It will take slightly longer to understand how it works, and he will have to be a little more diligent with his maintenance, than with a revolver...but it isn't that big a deal.

You seem to be assuming that he will not do this, whereas I am assuming that he will. That is the only difference we really have, here. Let the guy get what he wants.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oldman

All I said was a semi is not as accurate due to mechanics than single shot or revolvers.

---

And as I said before, even if that is true, it doesn't matter, because the difference between a handgun that is dead-nuts accurate, and one that is only moderately accurate, is not even apparent to the average shooter, unless he is shooting off bags.

My most accurate handguns, at 25 yards, are a Ruger GP-100 and a Dan Wesson, both with lightly loaded .357 magnums. But at 10-15 yards, shooting freehand, I shoot neither one of them any better than my full-size semi-autos. So, for all practical purposes, it does not matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bisley

Well, you seemed to be saying that, here:



My only point is that if the guy prefers a semi-auto, he should buy one and learn how to operate it correctly. It will take slightly longer to understand how it works, and he will have to be a little more diligent with his maintenance, than with a revolver...but it isn't that big a deal.

You seem to be assuming that he will not do this, whereas I am assuming that he will. That is the only difference we really have, here. Let the guy get what he wants.



And as I said before, even if that is true, it doesn't matter, because the difference between a handgun that is dead-nuts accurate, and one that is only moderately accurate, is not even apparent to the average shooter, unless he is shooting off bags.

My most accurate handguns, at 25 yards, are a Ruger GP-100 and a Dan Wesson, both with lightly loaded .357 magnums. But at 10-15 yards, shooting freehand, I shoot neither one of them any better than my full-size semi-autos. So, for all practical purposes, it does not matter.

---

I did not give any reference to the OP or his choice of weapons.

Since you are a man if age and wisdom, I doubt you would give a new driver a high performance vehicle for a first car to learn on and I do not think you would give a new pilot a twin engine plane for his first plane.

The same with handguns. I have found through experience you never start a new shooter out with a .44 mag. They tire of it soon. Most shooters, you likely as well, start with revolvers in small caliber and work up. It makes shooting fun and as the person progresses, so does the type and quality of their choice of weapons.

None of this suggests a person of even less than moderate intelligence would be challenged by using a semi.

BTW: Since you are from East TX, did you see where the new rookie officer in Mansfield, LA shot another officer while showing the seasoned officer what he learned at the academy?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oldman

A person would think that after 30+ years of investigating and reconstructing firearm incidents, I would have ran across a revolver failure.

---

No, a person who understands concepts such as statistics, chance, etc. would not think that.

There are a few concepts that unfortunately you cannot grasp:

The incidents you have investigated do not encompass all that has happened in those thirty years. In fact, I would estimate that your experiences constitute such a small amount of incidences across this country that it is a mere drop in the bucket.

One person's experience has no bearing whatsoever on what can happen in the rest of the world. IOW, one person's experience is not predictive of a possible outcome, good or bad. It would take a number of persons experiences to become statistically significant and therefore possibly predictive. Your's has no significance at all, except of course to you and those mentioned in your investigations.

Your experiences, as well as mine and everyone else's, can only do two things: it can tell what has happened, and what can happen (and believe me, I tell people what can and has happened all the time). It cannot tell what will not happen.

If one day you decide that you want to broaden your range of knowledge and experience, you should visit an older gunsmith that has been around a while and ask them how many ways a revolver can fail. That way you can know what you are talking about, because right now, your limited experience shows that you do not.....

In my two years of owning a Super Blackhawk I did experience one revolver failure. Soot/grime collecting on the breech face and in the cylinder chambers can cause:

1) casings to not be seated fully-forward in the cylinder.
2) case rims to rub against the breech face.

A combination of these will eventually lead to a cylinder lock. I've experienced this first hand, so I cannot jump on the "revolvers never fail" bandwagon. They can and will fail.

To put things into perspective, I've run maybe 500-750 rounds of 44 mag/44 spec out of my Ruger Super Blackhawk and experienced one failure in that time. I've run over 2k rounds through my CZ P-01, H&K P2000SK and S&W 1076; no failures. My H&K USP 45 has seen over 4k rounds and experienced two failures, but both were from the same box of CCI Blazer "Ashtray-sized" hollowpoints at around the 2k mark. I never bought them again and it has since functioned flawlessly. My newer Sig P229 has about 1k through it now, a mix of 357SIG and 40S&W, and also has zero failures.

Essentially I have four semi-autos with less failures than my revolver, all of which have seen many times the amount of ammunition run through them. In my eyes I could technically bump that number to five (the USP) but a failure is a failure, regardless of it being due to my miserly disposition and [consequently] poor choice in ammo.

I suppose now is a good time to mention I'd put about 6k through my first semi-auto, a Glock 22, or what many refer to as Glock "Perfection©" and I experienced SEVERAL failures. Most of them were from single-hand or off-hand shooting. I brought it to the attention of other shooters and they generally refered to "limp-writing" as the problem. I refer to it as "I-don't-want-to-die-because-I-have-a-broken-hand," one of a few reasons why I traded it.

Still, I believe semi-auto is the way to go. They are built with high quality standards these days. Any semi-auto of repute will RARELY fail, and I attribute this to the fact that most are relatively easy to clean. Can you say cleaning a revolver is as easy? I know my single action Ruger is a PITA, and it could be this very fact that caused the failure. I love it to death but revolvers are not perfect. No man-made contraption is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by literaltrance

A combination of these will eventually lead to a cylinder lock. I've experienced this first hand, so I cannot jump on the "revolvers never fail" bandwagon. They can and will fail.

---

Exactly.

I have had more than one DA revolver fail, in similar fashion, after firing lead .38 Specials in a .357 magnum. As long as you continue to shoot .38's, you are fine, but the lead and grime will eventually build up enough inside the cylinder to force the longer .357 cartridge backwards, when the cylinder turns. Often, you will be able to load the .357's OK and close the cylinder, but when the cylinder turns, they slide back, restricting the ability of the cylinder to turn, or stopping it completely. And, it doesn't have to be due to not properly cleaning the cylinders, either, because I have had this happen in a single range session, starting out with a perfectly clean cylinder and forcing cone.

It's hard for me to accept that a person who has been shooting revolvers enough to be considered an expert would not have experienced this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PhilR.

No, a person who understands concepts such as statistics, chance, etc. would not think that.

There are a few concepts that unfortunately you cannot grasp:

The incidents you have investigated do not encompass all that has happened in those thirty years. In fact, I would estimate that your experiences constitute such a small amount of incidences across this country that it is a mere drop in the bucket.

One person's experience has no bearing whatsoever on what can happen in the rest of the world. IOW, one person's experience is not predictive of a possible outcome, good or bad. It would take a number of persons experiences to become statistically significant and therefore possibly predictive. Your's has no significance at all, except of course to you and those mentioned in your investigations.

Your experiences, as well as mine and everyone else's, can only do two things: it can tell what has happened, and what can happen (and believe me, I tell people what can and has happened all the time). It cannot tell what will not happen.

If one day you decide that you want to broaden your range of knowledge and experience, you should visit an older gunsmith that has been around a while and ask them how many ways a revolver can fail. That way you can know what you are talking about, because right now, your limited experience shows that you do not.....

---

My experiences and work is a small percentage of things that has happened. However the cite sheets we get as being in the business are quite detailed about what is being found by the manufacturers, saw in courts and uncovered by other means. Many of the items that are found preceed a recall by the makers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by literaltrance

In my two years of owning a Super Blackhawk I did experience one revolver failure. Soot/grime collecting on the breech face and in the cylinder chambers can cause:

1) casings to not be seated fully-forward in the cylinder.
2) case rims to rub against the breech face.

A combination of these will eventually lead to a cylinder lock. I've experienced this first hand, so I cannot jump on the "revolvers never fail" bandwagon. They can and will fail.

To put things into perspective, I've run maybe 500-750 rounds of 44 mag/44 spec out of my Ruger Super Blackhawk and experienced one failure in that time. I've run over 2k rounds through my CZ P-01, H&K P2000SK and S&W 1076; no failures. My H&K USP 45 has seen over 4k rounds and experienced two failures, but both were from the same box of CCI Blazer "Ashtray-sized" hollowpoints at around the 2k mark. I never bought them again and it has since functioned flawlessly. My newer Sig P229 has about 1k through it now, a mix of 357SIG and 40S&W, and also has zero failures.

Essentially I have four semi-autos with less failures than my revolver, all of which have seen many times the amount of ammunition run through them. In my eyes I could technically bump that number to five (the USP) but a failure is a failure, regardless of it being due to my miserly disposition and [consequently] poor choice in ammo.

I suppose now is a good time to mention I'd put about 6k through my first semi-auto, a Glock 22, or what many refer to as Glock "Perfection©" and I experienced SEVERAL failures. Most of them were from single-hand or off-hand shooting. I brought it to the attention of other shooters and they generally refered to "limp-writing" as the problem. I refer to it as "I-don't-want-to-die-because-I-have-a-broken-hand," one of a few reasons why I traded it.

Still, I believe semi-auto is the way to go. They are built with high quality standards these days. Any semi-auto of repute will RARELY fail, and I attribute this to the fact that most are relatively easy to clean. Can you say cleaning a revolver is as easy? I know my single action Ruger is a PITA, and it could be this very fact that caused the failure. I love it to death but revolvers are not perfect. No man-made contraption is.

---

As I understand, you are talking about having a dirty weapon or suffering from neglect problems. That is a different ballgame.

Just as a car with more features and electronics will be more prone to failure, the same with a sidearm. The more moving parts or the more complext, the more prone to failure.

I am certain that firing pins have snapped on both types of handguns. There are also other potential problems but overall, a semi will offer more problems such as the well know limp wrist problem built in by Glock that you mentioned.

My original point still stands. For a person beginning in the handgun world, a revolver is much simpler to learn with and offering fewer complications.

I also see and understand that some on here have their favored weapon of choice and lean toward that type as a bias and not due to functional ability. This is natural. Some here feel I shoot revolvers exclusively and that is wrong as well. I likely shoot autoloaders more than revolvers and have nothing against autoloaders as a whole.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bisley

Exactly.

I have had more than one DA revolver fail, in similar fashion, after firing lead .38 Specials in a .357 magnum. As long as you continue to shoot .38's, you are fine, but the lead and grime will eventually build up enough inside the cylinder to force the longer .357 cartridge backwards, when the cylinder turns. Often, you will be able to load the .357's OK and close the cylinder, but when the cylinder turns, they slide back, restricting the ability of the cylinder to turn, or stopping it completely. And, it doesn't have to be due to not properly cleaning the cylinders, either, because I have had this happen in a single range session, starting out with a perfectly clean cylinder and forcing cone.

It's hard for me to accept that a person who has been shooting revolvers enough to be considered an expert would not have experienced this.

---

Again, we are close enough that a meeting is possible and you can examine my credentials and I can get you connected to WestLaw to view my trial work and expertise.

Nor did I say I had been shooting revolvers long enough to be considered an expert. I am an expert in the field of firearms. This is a court qualified designation given based on education, work in the field, experience, specialized tools, research, published papers, accreditation by others established in the field. It does not mean the next Judge will allow the expert status but my credentials has been challenged hundreds of times and never failed to qualify yet.

But again, you are talking about failures from neglect, misuse or human induced conditions. I am talking about mechanical failure and complex operational failures.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oldman

Again, we are close enough that a meeting is possible and you can examine my credentials and I can get you connected to WestLaw to view my trial work and expertise.

---

Actually, the frequency of your use of the bait and switch technique lends credence to the idea that you really do spend a lot of time with slippery lawyers.

One more time...your credentials are not the issue. You can be everything you claim to be, and it won't make your all-knowing pronouncements any more correct. As PhilR has already explained, your expertise, however valid it may be in certain venues, and however well it may conform to the consensus of opinion among your peer group...is still not the final word.

It is just another opinion, in this venue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by literaltrance

In my two years of owning a Super Blackhawk I did experience one revolver failure. Soot/grime collecting on the breech face and in the cylinder chambers can cause:

1) casings to not be seated fully-forward in the cylinder.
2) case rims to rub against the breech face.

---

Other ways a revo fails -- a shrouded ejection rod unscrews and backs out against the forward wall of the shroud's cutout. While this doesn't prevent the revo from firing (AFAIK), it does prevent the cylinder from unlocking and therefore prevents reloading.

Timing of the hand can also get so out of whack that it locks up the cylinder in mid-rotation. This does prevent firing.

I've also read, but not seen, of the locks on S&W revos accidentally locking up (thought to be due to parts movement during recoil), requiring repair to work correctly. Hard to ask a bad guy during a gunfight to stop trying to shoot you while you fish out the key from your pocket and unlock your solidly-locked handgun....

This is addressed specifically to Oldman:

My tiny, slim, 100-pound wife was a complete novice, having never even touched a gun during her first 64 years of life. Then, one day, out of the blue, she asked me to teach her to safely manipulate and shoot my various pistols. She is a retired Physical Education teacher, and she learns complex physical actions quickly and well. She has been a professional dancer and is a dance teacher, so complex combinations of widely disparate movements are easy for her to master.
I am particularly adept at using the .45 ACP Government Model, so I started her off with that. After two weeks of dry-fire-only practice, she had sufficiently learned to safely handle, manipulate, and aim a full-size .45, so we went to a friend's property to do some real shooting.
At seven yards, all of her hits were center-of-mass, so we backed off to 10 yards. She continued to make center-of-mass groups without a fuss. At 15 yards, the same was true, so we stopped for the day and went home.
Next, I started her out with from-the-holster presentations. In two more weeks of dry firing, she had mastered the in-the-holster firing grip, the presentation stroke including clicking the safety off, and the confident first shot and follow-up. In live-fire presentations, she repeated her earlier performance out to 15 yards.
Next, I introduced her to the Smith & Wesson Bodyguard snubbie that her new concealed-carry permit allowed her to wear. Once again, we started with dry-fire practice, although this time she started off with from-the-holster presentations.
In the subsequent live-fire sessions, she has never been able to equal her performance with my Government Model. The .38's double-action trigger, as light as a gunsmith can make it but still hard for her small hand to pull, causes her groups to spread over the target at 15 yards.
Further, she has great difficulty accomplishing a smooth revolver reload. Unlatching the cylinder takes all of the strength her small hands can concentrate on the job, and using a speed-loader is time consuming. She is much more comfortable with the magazine release of my .45, and her reloads with that gun are smooth and quick.
So, here was a complete novice who found that learning to use a semi-auto well was much, much easier than learning to use a revolver with anything like equal proficiency.
Your comments?