Page 3 of 36 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 354

Thread: Snub interview

  1. #21
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Quote Originally Posted by Lester Polfus View Post
    A 638 will get you a gun with a hammer spur you can ride with your thumb when you stick it in holsters and pockets but won't snag.

    Yea but it has a lock. Maybe I will give @Hizzie idea of the lock plug a chance.



    @Stephanie B


    This is certainly tempting.

    https://g4gguns.com/product/colt-mfg...ustom-g10-grip

  2. #22
    LE Forum Moderator BehindBlueI's's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Midwest
    Quote Originally Posted by Hizzie View Post
    If you’re feeling competent enough to bob a hammer and convert to DAO why not delete the lock? https://www.originalprecision.com/
    The reasons I can think of:

    1) Not wanting to risk having to deal with the "disabled a safety" argument in investigations/court. This is much less of a concern for me now thanks to recent legislation shielding justified shoots from civil suits.

    2) Employer rules. Still an issue for me.

    3) Aesthetics. Although, honestly the LCRx is somewhat challenged in that area as well.
    L'otters are not afraid.
    WWOMJD?

    Quote Originally Posted by UNM1136 View Post
    Maybe with talented students I would lube up with baby oil and then go at it.

  3. #23
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Quote Originally Posted by BehindBlueI's View Post
    The reasons I can think of:

    1) Not wanting to risk having to deal with the "disabled a safety" argument in investigations/court. This is much less of a concern for me now thanks to recent legislation shielding justified shoots from civil suits.

    2) Employer rules. Still an issue for me.

    3) Aesthetics. Although, honestly the LCRx is somewhat challenged in that area as well.


    #1 is the only serious concern of mine.


    That and screwing something up.

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by TheNewbie View Post
    Yea but it has a lock. Maybe I will give @Hizzie idea of the lock plug a chance.



    @Stephanie B


    This is certainly tempting.

    https://g4gguns.com/product/colt-mfg...ustom-g10-grip
    I've been rocking a 638 with the lock removed and plugged for 12 years with no problems I'm certainly not going to tell somebody they are wrong if they don't want to to do it for any of those reasons. #2 isn't a concern for me anymore. I think #1 is somewhat jurisdictional.
    I was into 10mm Auto before it sold out and went mainstream.

  5. #25
    I'm about 2/3 of the way through the podcast, I would be done except people keep interrupting me with abstract shit, like meals and weekend plans.

    Thank you for everything you put out there, it's an incredible wealth of knowledge tempered with experience.

    "Be a human being and adapt to things", great advice.

  6. #26
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    WA state
    I have always wondered if that is really a "safety". It isn't like you can flip that off and use the gun, it requires a key. If anything disabling the lock makes it more safe as it can be inadvertently enabled under heavy recoil (or so I am told).

    Quote Originally Posted by BehindBlueI's View Post
    The reasons I can think of:

    1) Not wanting to risk having to deal with the "disabled a safety" argument in investigations/court. This is much less of a concern for me now thanks to recent legislation shielding justified shoots from civil suits.

    2) Employer rules. Still an issue for me.

    3) Aesthetics. Although, honestly the LCRx is somewhat challenged in that area as well.

  7. #27
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    VA
    Quote Originally Posted by rathos View Post
    I have always wondered if that is really a "safety". It isn't like you can flip that off and use the gun, it requires a key. If anything disabling the lock makes it more safe as it can be inadvertently enabled under heavy recoil (or so I am told).
    The problem is that the prosecutor can bring it up in court so it can taint the jurors and even if you are supremely confident that your defense attorney can deal with that it will cost you more money. Not worth the risk in my opinion.

    @TheNewbie one other option is to carry a no lock 442 but use a bobbed hammer/internal lock gun with the same sights/grips as your training gun. That way you have a hammer for large amount of reholstering reps you’ll be doing in training but won’t have to worry about the lock for your carry gun. It would also allow you to have a heavier steel frame gun for high round count training sessions.

    Personally I’m OK with not being able to thumb the hammer on my 442 but I do make sure to “look” it into the holster each time.
    Last edited by sharps54; 06-09-2019 at 04:46 AM.

  8. #28
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    VA
    Quote Originally Posted by Stephanie B View Post
    Colt Cobra?
    Good call, the Kimber is also in that size category. Good for belt but too big for pocket.

  9. #29
    Site Supporter Rex G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    SE Texas
    DB, thanks, so very much.
    Retar’d LE

  10. #30
    Member 03RN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Quote Originally Posted by rfd View Post
    there is no need for an external hammer snubnose revolver. it serves no purpose whatsoever. learn to use a snubnose as it was intended to be used, DAO. if need be, with a good snubby, staging the trigger is relatively easy to accomplish, and allows for an external hammer-like single action with a very light trip to fire.
    Well, it does serve a purpose. Riding it while reholstering is a valid reason.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •