9mm v. .45

[bojulay]

Old saying--A handgun is what you use on your way to get a shotgun.

I much prefer my Benelli 12 Ga with 3 inch terminator rounds, it's a shotgun
round with a slug in front and 6 00buckshot behind that, suppose to
be 99% lethal to any living creature in the North American Continent.

[Gotyour6]

I have a custom carry kimber .45 and it is right for me.
It may not be right for you.

Pick one thats right for you.

[JD Barleycorn]

Not everyone can afford, or wants to spend, over $1000 on a handgun like the Kimber. What is the difference between the Beretta 92 and the Taurus PT-92? Give up? The name and the grip. Taurus (they weren't called Taurus then) bought the failed Beretta factory in Brazil. The used the same machines to produce the some weapon to the same specs. They put on a hard wood grip while Beretta put on a hardened black plastic grip. If a gun can hit a target repeatedly, doesn't jam, and is easy to carry then why be a snob?

I have a Kel Tec PMR-30 and it is light. Even with a full 30 round magazine it is lighter than most pistols.

[timpage]

A Taurus is certainly better than nothing but they do not produce high-quality weapons. They're cheaper because they're cheap. Quality of materials, QC, etc. I owned several Taurus pistols before I could afford decent hardware. They jammed, didn't hit to point of aim and had inferior finishes. They're junk....pimp guns. If you want to trust your life to one, that's your business.

How many law enforcement agencies or military organizations do you see armed with a Taurus? That would be....zero. Well, maybe the Bolivian National Guard.

By the way, there are PT-92's with plastic and rubber grips, and Beretta's with wooden grips. There are also multiple variations from Beretta. DA only, .40 caliber models, models with target sights, models with heavier slides, stainless steel models, etc etc etc. The sole difference is not grips. Not surprisingly, you know about as much on this topic as you do everything else: very little.

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Not everyone can afford, or wants to spend, over $1000 on a handgun like the Kimber. What is the difference between the Beretta 92 and the Taurus PT-92? Give up? The name and the grip. Taurus (they weren't called Taurus then) bought the failed Beretta factory in Brazil. The used the same machines to produce the some weapon to the same specs. They put on a hard wood grip while Beretta put on a hardened black plastic grip. If a gun can hit a target repeatedly, doesn't jam, and is easy to carry then why be a snob?

I have a Kel Tec PMR-30 and it is light. Even with a full 30 round magazine it is lighter than most pistols.

[JD Barleycorn]

I guess it really is necessary that I point out that I am talking about 30 years ago when the Taurus model first came out. As for the 9 mm. I have owned a Smith 59, a Browning, two Taurus, a Beretta, and a CZ-75 (whomever makes that). My favorite is still my Colt, Model IV, Series 80 1911A1, .45 ACP. The CZ felt good in the hand, the Beretta and Tauruses were very similar (for obvious reasons) but the Smith was a piece of shit.

You asked for an opinion and I gave mine. You decided that you had to do some attacking. Quit being a child!

[Jackie S]

I still like revolvers.

I have several, but for self defense, I like my old Smith &Wesson model 58 in 41 mag. Granted, you just about can't find ammo for it, but I load my own, so it's no big deal.

The Model 58 is a good defence gun mainly because it has plenty of power, and has no fancy sites to hang up or get broke.

If I have to shoot an Auto, I still like the 1911 45, I have two. But some good points are made in that if you can't hit what you are shooting at, all of the superior knock down power isn't of much use.

One interesting revolver I have is a Charter Arms Bulldog in 44 special. This one is vintage mid '70's, and is really a pretty well made wheel gun. My favorite load is a 240 grn hardcast semi wadcutter at about 800 fps. I shoot that same bullet in any of my Model 29 Smiths at about 1400.

[Guest032516]

Originally Posted by timpage

Not surprisingly, you know about as much on this topic as you do everything else: very little.

Lighten up, Francis. This whole fucking thread is about what people LIKE (at least as far as their budget goes).

If JD said he preferred redheads, would you say he knows very little about women because you prefer brunettes?

[Guest032516]

Originally Posted by bojulay

Old saying--A handgun is what you use on your way to get a shotgun.

I much prefer my Benelli 12 Ga with 3 inch terminator rounds, it's a shotgun
round with a slug in front and 6 00buckshot behind that, suppose to
be 99% lethal to any living creature in the North American Continent.

And what do the Gospels have to say about that, Preacher Bo?

[bojulay]

Taurus has greatly improved the quality of their firearms over
the past few years. I own a Taurus Tracker 357 Revolver and
the quality and finish are first rate, very smooth and accurate.

It only required a little sprig lightening for a lighter trigger pull.

[bojulay]

Originally Posted by ExNYer

And what do the Gospels have to say about that, Preacher Bo?

A person that is not willing to defend himself or his family,
or a stranger as I see it, is an idiot.

I don't care what your religious beliefs are.

Even someone like you that thinks a lizard used to be a rock.

[Guest032516]

Originally Posted by bojulay

A person that is not willing to defend himself or his family, or a stranger as I see it, is an idiot.
So, Matthew had it wrong then?
--------------------------------------------------
38 ¶ Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
--------------------------------------------------
Are there any other parts of the Sermon on the Mount that you think we should ignore?

I don't care what your religious beliefs are.
I'll say. Apparently, you don't care what YOURS are, either.

Even someone like you that thinks a lizard used to be a rock.

Thanks for clarifying, Preacher Bo.

[bojulay]

Originally Posted by ExNYer

Thanks for clarifying, Preacher Bo.

A slap is an offence, an insult, a slight.
It is clear that is what he meant.

In other words, don't challenge someone to a pistol duel at 30 paces
because they slapped you with their glove and called you an ingrate.

Don't be a person that seeks revenge.

Not someone coming after you to kill you or your family.

By your silly interpretation no one should ever defend themselves,
or their family, or a stranger.

Use a little of the intelligence and common sense that God gave you.
That is if it has evolved yet.

And don't make OHs post seem logical in comparison.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by bojulay

A slap is an offence, an insult, a slight.
It is clear that is what he meant.

In other words, don't challenge someone to a pistol duel at 30 paces
because they slapped you with their glove and called you an ingrate.

Don't be a person that seeks revenge.

Not someone coming after you to kill you or your family.

By your silly interpretation no one should ever defend themselves,
or their family, or a stranger.

Use a little of the intelligence and common sense that God gave you.
That is if it has evolved yet.

Back on discussion. Some people choose to own a gun to protect themselves, others choose not to. Different people look at the need differently. Very simple concept.

[Guest032516]

Originally Posted by bojulay

A slap is an offence, an insult, a slight.
It is clear that is what he meant.
Actually, it's not clear he meant that at all. It is traditionally interpreted to be call to non-violence and passive resistance. Period. Jesus set the example, too, when he did nothing to save his own life when he knew he was going to be killed. Or had you forgotten?

I couldn't follow that philosophy, but then I haven't advocate on behalf of the savior. You have.

In other words, don't challenge someone to a pistol duel at 30 paces because they slapped you with their glove and called you an ingrate.
Don't be a person that seeks revenge.
Not someone coming after you to kill you or your family.
What about if they are coming to whip you, beat you, nail you to a cross and let you bleed to death? What does Jesus say then? Can Christians fight back then?

By your silly interpretation no one should ever defend themselves, or their family, or a stranger.
It's not my silly interpretation. It's the silly interpretation of that 1st century Jewish carpenter from Nazareth.

Use a little of the intelligence and common sense that God gave you.
Does that mean God didn't give intelligence and common sense to Jesus either? Man, I'm in good company.

That is if it has evolved yet.
So you DO admit evolution is true.

And don't make OHs post seem logical in comparison.
You make hers look like PHD dissertations. No easy feat. My hat is off to you.

WWJS? - What Would Jesus Shoot?

[bojulay]

Originally Posted by ExNYer

WWJS? - What Would Jesus Shoot?

Oh Brother!

Well we're both kind of last word in guys, so we do have something in common.

I bet you were reading the red letter edition of the bible.

You might want to skip the part where he is talking about plucking your eyes out
and cutting off your hands.