• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Complying with armed criminals is a crapshoot. Be prepared to take them out before they take YOU out.

Mattel was on the right track - something like this might provide the element of surprise if being held at gunpoint (and it held a real derringer):
View attachment 67415603

If not, one of these billfold guns maybe? I have this exact setup, but find even it too cumbersome and rigid to carry comfortably 24/7 so it is in my home safe - shoots 22 Winchester Magnums...2 of em:
View attachment 67415604

I'd still prefer no such apparatus existed, and seriously doubt that if I had to use it, I would.
Imagine my surprise when issued my first M-16 rifle while in Marine Corps boot camp, only to find out that the rifle had a Mattel Toy Company logo stamped on it. It turned out that Mattel had made some of the rifle's stocks and hand grips for Colt. It did not help our opinion of the rifle to see a toy company logo emblazoned upon the rifle. Which may explain why it was later removed.

The billfold gun is a joke that wouldn't stop anyone. If used, it is more likely just going to piss off the person being shot. The Derringer, on the other hand, is another story. Derringers can fire .357, .410, and even .45 caliber rounds, so they are no joke.

Like you, I am not interested in trying to conceal my firearms. If I am carrying one or more firearms I want them readily available to me, not concealed. Besides, the firearms I carry cannot be easily concealed.
 
Depends on who is the faster draw.
Hard to out-draw someone with a cocked gun pointed at the middle of your chest already, which would likely be the case.

Many years ago when an avid black-powder shooter involved in doing Civil War reenactments, a good friend and I performed a Wild West gun fight just for grins and to see what it would be like (think High Plains Drifter). I have an 1860 New Model Army .44 with a quick-draw holster; he had an 1851 Navy .44 similarly equipped; we loaded each other's guns face to face with a wad of Vaseline soaked cotton balls for bullets to prevent any mistakes.

We started out about 40 feet apart, and drew at-will without prompting or warning; the results were most interesting. First, a hip shot was worthless, and neither came close to hitting our 'target' when instinct shooting; it took a careful eye-level aims to even get close, which easy doubled or tripled the time to get the first shot off (we tried multiple shots too). The first to draw often got the 1st round off before the 2nd gun even cleared the holster. Until 10 feet or less apart, a 'good' shot was nearly impossible; we came away convinced that a quick-draw gun fight was totally ineffective unless at point blank range and carefully aimed.

Claims that the shootout at the OK corral involved 30 shots and only 2 deaths are totally believable - one of the fatal shots supposedly came from a shot gun! The Rifleman is a much more believable western.
Every person should make the choice they feel is best in protecting themselves which a firearm. I will let you make yours and you can let me make mine and we will have a civil society
I do not agree with the Civil Society part in any case.
 
Imagine my surprise when issued my first M-16 rifle while in Marine Corps boot camp, only to find out that the rifle had a Mattel Toy Company logo stamped on it. It turned out that Mattel had made some of the rifle's stocks and hand grips for Colt. It did not help our opinion of the rifle to see a toy company logo emblazoned upon the rifle. Which may explain why it was later removed.

The billfold gun is a joke that wouldn't stop anyone. If used, it is more likely just going to piss off the person being shot. The Derringer, on the other hand, is another story. Derringers can fire .357, .410, and even .45 caliber rounds, so they are no joke.

Like you, I am not interested in trying to conceal my firearms. If I am carrying one or more firearms I want them readily available to me, not concealed. Besides, the firearms I carry cannot be easily concealed.
Haha, that's rich; something said about choosing a toy maker to achieve product durability though!

I'm not sure about what you said about the Billfold gun - a 22 Winchester Magnum (hollow point) is a fairly deadly round but lacks immediate stopping power...unless fired into an eye, or a face shot at point blank range, which could be pulled off before the perp actually recognizes it as a gun in a "gimme your dough" situation.

The biggest problem with a derringer of any caliber is barrel length; not enough contained explosion to achieve optimal velocity or hollow-point expansion. at waist height, a crotch shot with any firearm would be very effective, especially if it was a male on the receiving end.

In most situations, the most effective use of a handgun is the intimidation factor, and the bigger the hole at the end of the barrel, the greater the intimidation:
Handguns stop a threat in three ways. One is by causing enough pain that the bad guy submits. The 2nd is through incapacitation, which can be instant or it can take a long time.

The third way handguns stop evil intent is through fear. No one wants to get shot with any gun. Law-enforcement personnel will tell you that they point guns at bad guys much more often than they shoot them. The most common response when a gun is pointed at someone is that they stop being bad and put their hands up or run. This voluntary surrender is the most common and effective way handguns stop crime, whether in the hands of police officers or citizens.
Seems #3 is the best bet and the way I would prefer, but in my fantasy world, no gun at all is better way still.
 
I find that it's incredibly important to have a great roundhouse kick available at all times, even when in line in the food court at the mall. It takes about six tenths of a second to flick a gun safety. It takes three tenths of a second to land a roundhouse kick on a mother****er, though.
And if he's across the food court , hell I'll be magnanimous here and say out of range of your roundhouse or someones in the way. I can duck down and hope for a clear, shot what are you going to do try and get close enough to kick him? How the hell did I miss this?
 
You get robbed a lot do you?
I actually have been robbed. Fortunately there were no weapons involved. I had three unarmed perps converge on me in a parking lot and strongarm me as I was taking my restaurant's bank deposit into the bank. Have you ever been robbed?
 
Seems #3 is the best bet and the way I would prefer, but in my fantasy world, no gun at all is better way still.
That seems to be the preferred method for most people. Out of the 2.5 million criminal acts that civilians with firearms stop every year in the US, fewer than 8% of those firearms ever needed to be fired. I have never been robbed or mugged, and I'm not likely to be. My firearm needs are very different from most, and they are already visible when I carry. So the purpose of my firearms is not to intimidate, but to rather to stop whatever may be attacking me.

Guns are too valuable as tools to do without. Besides, I'm far too old you learn how to use a bow, and an arrow or bolt doesn't have the same stopping power.
 
You get robbed a lot do you?
Not alot, but plenty of unfortunate souls have been murdered during robberies. How do you suppose we keep law-abiding innocent citizens from being murdered by armed robbers?
 
Back
Top Bottom