Posted on 08/04/2006 9:29:09 AM PDT by 7thson
Alright, I am going to set myself up here for flaming and such - especially by certain @$$wipes who enjoy making themselves feel superior - by I have a couple questions concerning firearms.
Basic question one - what is the difference between a pistol and a revolver?
Basic question two - what is the difference between single action and double action?
Basic question three - which should a beginner go with - revolver, pistol, SA, or DA?
The Navy doesn't give much in the way of firearms training beyond bootcamp anymore. That is, unless your rate includes firearms handling (such as Gunner's Mate or if you are in SeaBees). If you're lucky enough to get into the SEALs, you get advanced weapons training. I know that this was the case as recently as the early 80's, and probably still is.
You're welcome.
They're only stupid questions if you've repeatedly been told the answers and refuse to learn. And in particular, if you're looking to compare answers to find particular gems of accuracy or profundity, you're well on your way to erasing any residual ignorance left over from before you asked.
Basic question one - what is the difference between a pistol and a revolver?
Sometimes it's derivitive from legalistic or linguistic definitions [the term is pretty generally accepted to have originated from the gunmaking town of Pistoia in Italy] but modern technical usages defines a pistol as a handgun with a single firing chamber, such as a single-shot or semiauto handgun, while a revolver utilizes multiple chambers, usually arranged axially. Note that there are also double and miltiple-barrel handguns that are neither revolvers nor pistols, and also multi-revolving barrel weapons that if handheld, do qualify as revolvers. Multi-barrel weapons such as the Gatling Gun are asls revolver or revolving-barrel weapons, but are not handguns.
Basic question two - what is the difference between single action and double action?
The terms are generally meant to describe handgun, a single-actionbeing one in which an exposed or mechanically accessable hammer must be manually cocked for firing, and a double action [sometimes also seen as *double-acting* or *trigger cocking*] mechanism as one in which a pull on the trigger also cams the trigger or striker to the rear. There have also been *hammerless* trigger-cocking mechanisms in which the external hammer is eliminated, usually replacved by an internal mechanical striker or concealed hammer, thereby requiring a long and hard but consistant trigger pull for each shot. There are also intermediate variations and mechanical exceptions, though the descriptions served well enough to describe the simple revolver action designs of the 1880s. Things have changed since then, however.
Basic question three - which should a beginner go with - revolver, pistol, SA, or DA?
It depends much on what you're trying to accoplish; the question is as broad as asking *what kind of car should I drive?*
For self-defence/ home defence purposes, a revolver is generally quite effective, easy to learn, reasonably cost-effective to feed, simple to maintain, and can be left loaded in a constant state of readiness with all springs at rest. Examples of the breed served most of America's police agencies through most of the XX Century, and now that those agencies have chosen to militarize their equipment, the leftovers can be found as real bargtains...or the manufacturing experience of firms that built the things for the last ten or twelve decades can be taken advgantage of if a new-built one is preferred. If needed, most versions can be simply picked up and fired, day or night, without concern as to the positioning of various safety devices or other mechanical function switches, though prudence demands checking the condition of the handgun EVERY time it's picked up after leaving your hand, whether revolver or otherwise.
The most usual alternative to the revolver is the semiautomatic or semiauto handgun [though I've been happily equipped with exceptions a couple of times such is really for those either very experienced or very desperate] The most proven version of which is the M1911 design, having been widely used by the US military from 1911 to 1984, and which remains in military use here and there. It's simple enough for even a relatively untrained Private to learn to safely use, and maintainance is similarly basic soldier-friendly. Though the first half of the XX Century found that design offered in only three primary calibers [.22, .45, and the .38 Super commercial version] there is now an almost bewildering array of calibers, variants and manufacturers from which to choose for those who favour Browning's 1911 design. More recent alternatives from Beretta, Glock, SIG-Sauer and others are certainly worthy and better suited to modern manufacturing methods. But the M1911 .45 handgun has withstood a test of time that most of them still require five decades of use to equal.
I did not receive much arms training in the Navy either when I went in 1968. During boot camp we all got to shoot was two magazines thru an M-1 and that was it, I guess the Navy didn't think you needed much training if you were going to be on a ship.
I also went to RM "A" school in San Diego in 1969. They don't have the RM rating anymore.
Your first answer would be correct if you were discussing a revolver made before 1890. Today's revolvers are either double action or double action only.
The second answer doesn't describe the most common .45 Auto which is John Browning's 1911. It's a single action and the hammer has to be back for the round to fire. Some of today's 1911's such as ParaOrdances are double action.
Congratulations you have taken the first step toward improved understanding of guns. Beware, however, as you cannot now ever become a journalist.
I went through to the end (post 50) and so far nobody has mentioned the -
Automatic Revolver.
Yes folks, there is one.
Italian made semi-automatic Mateba in .357 Magnum.
Check my profile page.
In the "Maltese Falcon", the murder weapon is a semi-automatic Webley-Fosbery.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BQY/is_10_50/ai_n6180939
Yup. Webley-Fosbery. How about the Dardick magazine-fed revolver?
Thank you.
Thank you. Cool pics.
What's good to use for a target?
Same here. I went in 1976 and I basically said the same thing to my older brother who did a stint in the Army - 64-68. When you are firing missles or big guns, they do not waste much time teaching you to shoot. When I went in 1976, that is when I first heard they were going to merge the RM rate with the DP rate. They finally did it in 1996, just as I was retiring.
Thank you.
See my post 57.
Thank you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.