Thoughts and an epiphany on manually operated firearms

[Dagga Boy]

As I spend more time with revolvers and lately lever action rifles, I had sort of an epiphany about what attribute has made these types of guns so successful in actual use compared to how they should perform on paper against other systems. First, before everyone has a spaz, I am not advocating competent and well trained folks to dump their semi-auto pistols and semi auto carbines.

For an awful long time, folks have been very successful in both hunting of animals and in fights with other humans with manually operated firearms. So why is that? I have come to the conclusion that it is "deliberateness". What does "deliberateness" mean in this context. I believe that the operation of the firearms action in a stressful situation breaks an emotional response. I remember in my first shooting using a Remington 870, I was stunned when after firing my first round at a felon at fairly close range, he ran away like a Gazelle (he was hit with six pellets in his knee cap that literally destroyed his knee and he could never walk correctly again...yet ran about 40 yards at a sprint before succumbing to a second hit). Rather than just hitting the trigger harder and faster, I had to work the action. I remember thinking hard about "I need to see the sights, and I need to press the trigger correctly". This thinking was going on while working the action. The action creates a pause, a little break, and forces a pace that really is more in line with most people's abilities to re acquire sights....which tends to result in actually hitting things. Can you go speed stupid on these guns? Sure, but I honestly think the working of the actions forces a more controlled response. I have found those that can remain controlled and staying in a non-emotional state in shootings do very well. Many have been taught that shotguns do not need to be aimed (which is a crime) and revolvers as well. Luckily, any kid on a first deer hunt, rancher shooting varmints or protecting livestock, or a lawman dealing with criminals have all been schooled on sight use with the rifle and the lever and bolt guns seem to force it and give a little more time to stay on them. I have noted in my research that some of the top gunfighters bring their handguns to eye line, and those using single action revolvers seemed to really be into control of the sights and control of speed. These systems are also of limited capacity and difficult to reload, which also seems to force control as decisive hits are critical

I have discussed speed control before. I think some systems force it, and this may be what my appeal is to some of these guns for use in an anti personnel role even though they seem antiquated. This is especially true for those who are not super dedicated shooters.

[LSP552]

Yep, being deliberate is where we need to be, regardless of how we get there. Being deliberate doesn't mean going slow, just not out running your brain.

[johnson]

It could be a capacity issue as well whether you're consciously thinking about it or not. 'Deliberateness' could be also used to describe why many people recommend a .22 bolt gun instead of a 10/22 when asked what type of rifle they should start their child or someone new to firearms to learn on. It stresses the basics and to make the shots count.

[Totem Polar]

Interesting. Sort of tangentially, I feel that way a little bit about speedloading a wheelie; I have to be more specific, concentrated and deliberate to pull it off at all. Therefore, I tend to be very consistent, for better or worse. Speedloading an auto, on the other hand, either feels (relatively) slicker than goose shit, or like a complete and total failure, depending on what I'm thinking about at the time. Grain of salt; I do neither as much as many here, but there it is.[/shrug]

[LOKNLOD]

There is a feeling of finality to the thought of running a revolver or bolt gun dry before the job is finished; that feeling just isn't there when you're prepared to toss another 30-rounder into your AR.

[YVK]

Alternatively, these systems introduce another step than can be screwed up preventing a timely delivery of a follow-up. Like short stroking that 870, and I'd be more concerned with the group you mentioned

This is especially true for those who are not super dedicated shooters.

[nycnoob]

For an awful long time, folks have been very successful in both hunting of animals and in fights with other humans with manually operated firearms. So why is that? I have come to the conclusion that it is "deliberateness".

Are you saying that these manually operated guns are more successful (successful by what measure? percentage of first shot hits? hit ratio?)
than the semi-autos that (in general) replaced them?

Do you have anything to back up this assertion? I am not looking for hard data necessarily but even a good anecdote.
I would think someone has data about revolver/semi-auto use in self defense situations?

[Wheeler]

I came to the same conclusion years ago, it's why I prefer shooting lever actions and pump actions. Because of the manual reloading I'm forced to reacquire the sights every time.

Good stuff.

[PNWTO]

A lot of us Afghan vets know that some determined dudes usings Enfields, Mosins, and proper cover/concealment/movement can really supplement a larger force and create a huge pain in the ass for another force using autoloaders, SAWs, 240s, 40mm, etc etc. Having to "own" every shot from a small ammunition source creates the excruciating meditation needed.

[okie john]

As I spend more time with revolvers and lately lever action rifles, I had sort of an epiphany about what attribute has made these types of guns so successful in actual use compared to how they should perform on paper against other systems. First, before everyone has a spaz, I am not advocating competent and well trained folks to dump their semi-auto pistols and semi auto carbines.

For an awful long time, folks have been very successful in both hunting of animals and in fights with other humans with manually operated firearms. So why is that? I have come to the conclusion that it is "deliberateness". What does "deliberateness" mean in this context. I believe that the operation of the firearms action in a stressful situation breaks an emotional response. I remember in my first shooting using a Remington 870, I was stunned when after firing my first round at a felon at fairly close range, he ran away like a Gazelle (he was hit with six pellets in his knee cap that literally destroyed his knee and he could never walk correctly again...yet ran about 40 yards at a sprint before succumbing to a second hit). Rather than just hitting the trigger harder and faster, I had to work the action. I remember thinking hard about "I need to see the sights, and I need to press the trigger correctly". This thinking was going on while working the action. The action creates a pause, a little break, and forces a pace that really is more in line with most people's abilities to re acquire sights....which tends to result in actually hitting things. Can you go speed stupid on these guns? Sure, but I honestly think the working of the actions forces a more controlled response. I have found those that can remain controlled and staying in a non-emotional state in shootings do very well. Many have been taught that shotguns do not need to be aimed (which is a crime) and revolvers as well. Luckily, any kid on a first deer hunt, rancher shooting varmints or protecting livestock, or a lawman dealing with criminals have all been schooled on sight use with the rifle and the lever and bolt guns seem to force it and give a little more time to stay on them. I have noted in my research that some of the top gunfighters bring their handguns to eye line, and those using single action revolvers seemed to really be into control of the sights and control of speed. These systems are also of limited capacity and difficult to reload, which also seems to force control as decisive hits are critical

I have discussed speed control before. I think some systems force it, and this may be what my appeal is to some of these guns for use in an anti personnel role even though they seem antiquated. This is especially true for those who are not super dedicated shooters.

Reminds me of something that Jeff Cooper wrote in To Ride, Shoot Straight, and Speak The Truth: "With a rusty old Mauser a man knows he has to hold and squeeze. With a nice new Uzi he feels that all he has to do is spray."


Okie John