I recently read a real-world account that changed my mind on the idea of semi-auto vs revolver. Previously, since I've only ever fired, through various handguns and long guns, a total of about 500 rounds in my life, I figured the simpler the better when it came to handguns (already have 12 ga Franchi semi-auto and 20 ga Remington pump), so go with a revolver. While the relative mechanical simplicity of a revolver might be good, the account I read made an important point about having to reload after 6 (or 7) shots with a revolver, whereas a high capactiy magazine and the ability to reload it quickly may be a crucial issue in a real fight. I think this is even more important with someone, like me, who isn't exactly a marksman. For a marksman, 6 or 7 shots may be all that's needed to deal with, say, two intruders. But given my accuracy, I sure would like to not be out after 6 shots, having to then take 15 seconds (more like 45 when the adrenaline and fear are running high) to reload another 6. Like Klook, I'm partial to the Springfield .45 ACP XD--with 2 high capacity magazines, that's 26 rounds of stopping power, with a reload time, to just change the magazine, of about 2 seconds. I think the .45 has stopping power without the sense of an explosion going off in your hand (and eyes) that the .357 S&W I fired gives.
The account I read is by an Argentinian in a true SHTF scenario in a developed country, when their currency collapsed with hyperinflation in 2001. I have no recollection of how I came across this--for all I know, it may have been linked by someone here--but whoever it was, THANK YOU. I think it is, while long, a must read
. He has alot to say about guns but, maybe more importantly, many other issues as well (like food, barter/trade, urban vs rural, health, etc) in such a scenario. Here it is:http://www.frugalsquirrels.com/cgi-bin/ ... 044387;p=1