3 ms·
I really like my 1911 (Kimber Target II, so ready for arguments about metal injection molding...), but it's really an enthusiast's gun at this point. I would no
by strlen 14y ago
I really like my 1911 (Kimber Target II, so ready for arguments about metal injection molding...), but it's really an enthusiast's gun at this point. I would not recommend it to a non-expert looking to use it for actual protection. I usually suggest moving, a dog, a shotgun, and CZ 75-B or Glock 17/19 (in that order).
An early-to-mid-20th century American soldier (US has always emphasized pistols as actual combat weapons more than other countries[1]) or a modern shooting sports enthusiast has the time and skill to clean one periodically (as to keep it in working state) and perform adjustments to prevent jams.
It's not reasonable to expect this of someone with no previous experience of firearms, but looking to protect themselves after receiving a death threat or seeing too many home invasions in their neighborhood. Doubly so if it's a Kimber or other model made to far tighter tolerance than was possible or intended in 1911.
These laws tend to benefit hunters, hobbyists, and target shooters like myself (who prefer muzzle brakes to flash hiders, match-grade full-length barrels to tactical coolness, etc...), but hurt people who want to use these weapons for self-defense.
[1] First trophy my grandfather (artillery captain in Soviet military) took during World War II was a Walther PPK in .32 ACP. Not ideal for defense, but far cry from a Nagant or a Tokarev TT (based on the 1911, but unsafe for carrying with the hammer cocked). Never heard of an American officer trading his 1911 for a Walther/Nambu/Luger/etc...
- hga 14y agoWell, some of the answers to your points are: Don't buy a target gun, buy one specifically made to looser tolerances for self-defense. The design is very forgiving after all, it was for the field and back in a period when ammo was often marginal (hence its grossly overpowered mainspring, Mauser style positive feed and claw extractor, etc.). I've never had to adjust any of mine to prevent jams or other problems once I got past one obnoxious one of my Kimber Pro-Carry flinging its brass into my face (slow and careful filing of the ejector fixed that). They can also get pretty dirty without needing cleaning. But, they are self-defense models, not target ones, they aren't super tight, although they're more accurate than I am with a handgun. As for your other suggestions: moving can be a good idea but you might stil be tracked down, a dog can be killed (it was recently joked that the police could solve their ammo shortages if they just stopped shooting dogs), a shotgun is a really, really bad idea for weapons retention. Someone can grab it outside of your grip and rip it out of your hands, as I demonstrated to a nephew who's bigger and fitter than me. If a M1911 is too advanced for someone to learn I do recommend an external hammer DAO design (since carrying is a consideration striker fired guns are right out due to the holstering accidental discharge problem (not being able to detect that until it fires)). And following the church of Martin Fackler, I recommend going for the biggest diameter that works for the person, i.e. .45 ACP > .40 S&W > 9 mm.
- strlen 14y agoI'll defer the self-defense suggestions to you: I live in a "carry is strictly a political favour" county, so I haven't looked at cary molds of 1911s... I think you're probably far more familiar with this than I am. I don't, however, think that a normal Stainless Kimber is better (tolerance-wise) than the Target model. The only distinction (afaik) are the adjustable sights (which are actually amazingly sturdy for adjustable sights, to my surprised). You clear know more self-defense than I do -- so I'll defer to you (especially re: shotguns, etc...) Re: other suggestions-- I was not covering the "I have a determined nutcase after me" scenario, I was covering the "increase in violent crime" (armed robbery, home invasions, etc...) scenario. I've had these questions recently because (for many reasons) San Jose has had a drastic increase in crime: moving to Saratoga/Cupertino/good part of Sunnyvale or to Fremont seems like a good long term strategy anyway. To clarify re: dog, I wasn't suggesting having the dog attack the assailant, but more in the sense of having a dog wake me (and the immediate neighbors) up if a stranger is around at night. Of course this is not a very reliable strategy, being in a safe neighborhood (with trustworthy neighbors), and having a firearm are far more important. However, it's useful: an alarm system only works if it's tripped, but a dog can smell from a distance. So far, the only times my dog has waken me up at night, was literally when there was a stranger directly in front of the downstairs living room windows. Not in any way perfect, but sufficient to alert the neighbors, scare away a robber that has purely financial motivation, let me call the police, etc... before they attempt to break in (best confrontation is one that never has to happen). I agree that the trend of police shooting family dogs is absolutely disgusting, but so is the trend of paramilitary police raiding family homes on shoddy evidence.