Repeat after me: real life is not Rainbow Six.
Sure, lots of guns have features of debatable utility that are somehow supposed to make them “tactical.” That doesn’t mean you need them. Nor should those be the basis for the selection of a self-defense firearm.
Essentially, the list of priorities should read as follows:
- Reliability
- Controllability
- Reliability
- Accuracy
- Reliability
- Ergonomics
- Reliability
- Caliber
- Reliability
- Capacity
- Reliability
See the pattern? The most important factors boil down to this: get a gun that works and that you can shoot well. Everything else is peripheral.
People frequently ask me why I carry a revolver in the age of high-capacity automatics, and if you read the list above, the question should answer itself.
Barring a catastrophic lack of maintenance, the traditional equalizers are among the most trustworthy machines manufactured by man. Most wheelguns are built on heavier frames than their automatic counterparts, and therefore mitigate recoil much better. The lockwork facilitates better mechanical accuracy than the cycle of automatics, and they’re capable of handling loads that would kill many other pistols.
“Well, what about capacity?” people ask. “My [insert ugly black polymer brand of gun] holds 17 rounds!” Good for them. The vast majority of self-defense confrontations only involve one or two shots being fired. Sure, the military and police have different methods of engagement and different priorities, but we’re talking civilian self-defense here. If I’m in a situation that isn’t going to be solved with six rounds, then it’s not going to be solved with 17.
In fact, the idea of firing that number of rounds makes me wonder where they’re all going. Remember, you are responsible for every bullet that comes out of your weapon. Spray-and-pray is not only irresponsible, it could have horrific consequences. Deliberate, accurate fire wins every time.
As Wyatt Earp said, “Fast is fine, but accuracy is everything.”
You’ll hear the caliber debates. They are categorically bullshit. Any of the common service cartridges will serve you just fine. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the 9mm, nor will the .45ACP send a bad guy flying across the room. Here’s a chart showing the terminal ballistics of several major cartridges:
Don’t worry, that’s ballistic gelatin. Notice that the depth and width of wound channels are pretty consistent, regardless of caliber. The .38 and .44 Special rounds show similar performance. You’re not outgunned with a 9mm, nor are you Hercules with a .45. Remember, shot placement is everything. Get a gun you can shoot well.
A word on the current fetish for “tactical” rails. For all but certain specialized martial applications, they are an astoundingly bad idea. They mandate special holsters, they drag on the holster when drawn, and they facilitate something that is not only useless, but possibly dangerous.
They’re meant, of course, to allow lights and lasers (and even bayonets) to be fastened to the gun. Both are a Bad Idea. Placing a flashlight on a gun might seem to be a good idea, but bear in mind that anything you cover with the flashlight is being covered by the muzzle of a gun. This is a big violation of Rules #2 and #4.
The other uber-cool application for the rail is the laser. We’ve all seen those in the movies. I’ll bet Jack Bauer and Chuck Norris use them, too. They make hair grow on your chest, and they turn you into an infallible shot, right?
Wrong. There are several myths about lasers that need to be debunked.
First is the idea of “intimidation.” We’ve all seen the TV shows where the bad guy sees the little red dot on his chest and realizes that he’s screwed, so he gives up. In reality, things will be happening very quickly, and it’s unlikely that he’ll stop to look at his chest.
Second myth is that they make for more accurate shooting. Not true. Watch anyone who uses one at the range. No matter how steady their hands are, that little dot bounces all over the place. That’s because it’s a laser, and it’s meant to travel in an absolutely straight line. Nobody’s hands are perfectly steady, and the laser makes it look like you’ve got a terminal case of the shakes. Not the most confidence-inspiring thing.
I’ve seen good shooting go horribly wrong with lasers. That’s because they impart and reinforce the very bad habit of watching the target, rather than the front sight. Traditional marksmanship involves focusing on the front sight through the entire stroke of the trigger. It’s a hard thing to master, and the laser throws it out of whack.
Why? If you’re watching the front sight, your muscles will make minute adjustments to keep the gun aligned without requiring conscious thought. If you’re about to throw a shot, you’ll be able to avoid doing so, because you’ll see the front sight jump.
Lasers throw this out the window, because now you’re not paying attention to the front sight. The human brain can’t focus on two things simultaneously very well (which is why shooting two guns at once with much accuracy is nearly impossible), so the visual cortex defaults to the easier-to-distinguish object, which would be the bright red light fifteen yards away. There goes trigger control.
I’m not saying lasers are absolutely irrelevant. In fact, they’re a huge aid in point-shooting, and they help unaimed fire while drawing from retention. They are not, however, conducive to building traditional shooting skills, nor should they be among the criteria for selecting a gun.