Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

by **LFS** » Tue, 31 Aug 2010 06:25:27

All,

I'm not a revolver guy and don't own any wheel guns. But I'm doing some research into a self-defense shooting and reading the press accounts. They indicate the caliber is .38. In all probability, this is a .38 special revolver, right? Auto-loaders generally are not chambered for this caliber, correct?

And generally speaking, revolvers do not have external safeties (as in, ones operated by the user separate from the trigger). That is a correct assumption, yes?

Thanks for the info. Just trying to confirm what I think I know.

by **gunderwood** » Tue, 31 Aug 2010 06:48:22

There are auto cartridges labeled as .38 (e.g. .38 Super), but .38 Special would be the most popular CC/OC of those labeled as such IMO. It is probably a safe assumption that it is a revolver/.38 Special. However, what isn't a safe assumption is that the reporter knew anything about firearms. The shear amount of non-sense that gets reported as fact is amazing. It is like they don't check basic facts anymore...either that or reporters have gotten so dumb that they can't comprehend anything mildly complex. E.g. read the various stories on military weapons or the latest and greatest sniper kill and it generally is comical. A grain of truth or fact, but not much else.

Generally, revolvers do not have manual safeties (like Glocks, most SIGs, etc.). It gets confusing because of marketing. Everything is getting marketed as a safety, when in the past it would have been just a good design feature.

by **allingeneral** » Tue, 31 Aug 2010 09:59:29

gunderwood wrote:The shear amount of non-sense that gets reported as fact is amazing. It is like they don't check basic facts anymore...either that or reporters have gotten so dumb that they can't comprehend anything mildly complex.

I'd say part of the problem here - especially with breaking news stories - is that reporters just want to get the story out and be the first to be heard. They don't care if their initial facts are correct or not. The assumption is that all of the real facts will come out in the wash. Let's just get the story out as quickly as we can, with as much information as we can - even if that information is slightly (or sometimes greatly) askew.

As for the .38 - the generalizations made in the OP are correct. .38 likely means "Revolver" and "no safety".

by **SgtBill** » Tue, 31 Aug 2010 10:43:03

I had a good friend that was a reporter and then editor for the Atlantic City Press years ago that would call me at home or the weapons range to make sure that he printed the right nomenclature of the diffrent weapons that were reported for story's in the paper. He did not want to look like a fool and did his proper research.
Bill

by **Taggure** » Tue, 31 Aug 2010 11:12:53

SgtBill wrote:I had a good friend that was a reporter and then editor for the Atlantic City Press years ago that would call me at home or the weapons range to make sure that he printed the right nomenclature of the diffrent weapons that were reported for story's in the paper. He did not want to look like a fool and did his proper research.
Bill

Hey Bill there is a key difference in your friend and that is that he was a REPORTER and not a Journalist. There is a huge difference between the two

by **newdovo** » Tue, 31 Aug 2010 11:50:51

On the issue of a revolver having no "external safety", there are points to note about how a revolver works.
If it's a single action gun, the hammer must be pulled back and then the trigger pulled for the gun to fire. This is a very deliberate act, and the gun cannot be fired without first pulling back the hammer. There are also double-action revolvers. With these, when the trigger is pulled, it turns the cylinder to get the round into place, moves the hammer back, and then releases the hammer. Most of the DA revolvers with exposed hammers can also be fired in single action mode as noted above. Some have an enclosed hammer and can only be fired double-action.
Many modern revolvers have some sort of transfer bar or transfer system. The hammer makes contact with this to depress the firing pin, and only pulling the trigger will engage this.
Revolvers also have a heavier trigger pull than most semi-autos.
So, again, concerning "external safeties" on a revolver, generally they do not have one. But firing a revolver is a deliberate act in that you must pull back the hammer for a SA gun or overcome a stiffer trigger for a DA gun.

Parry

by **SgtBill** » Tue, 31 Aug 2010 17:32:34

Taggure wrote:
SgtBill wrote:I had a good friend that was a reporter and then editor for the Atlantic City Press years ago that would call me at home or the weapons range to make sure that he printed the right nomenclature of the diffrent weapons that were reported for story's in the paper. He did not want to look like a fool and did his proper research.
Bill

Hey Bill there is a key difference in your friend and that is that he was a REPORTER and not a Journalist. There is a huge difference between the two

Trust me I know the diffrence between the two. I have read many book's that were written by journalist that never had any fact's checked on and looked like real fool's in my mind.
Bill

by **SgtBill** » Tue, 31 Aug 2010 17:36:11

newdovo wrote:On the issue of a revolver having no "external safety", there are points to note about how a revolver works.
If it's a single action gun, the hammer must be pulled back and then the trigger pulled for the gun to fire. This is a very deliberate act, and the gun cannot be fired without first pulling back the hammer. There are also double-action revolvers. With these, when the trigger is pulled, it turns the cylinder to get the round into place, moves the hammer back, and then releases the hammer. Most of the DA revolvers with exposed hammers can also be fired in single action mode as noted above. Some have an enclosed hammer and can only be fired double-action.
Many modern revolvers have some sort of transfer bar or transfer system. The hammer makes contact with this to depress the firing pin, and only pulling the trigger will engage this.
Revolvers also have a heavier trigger pull than most semi-autos.
So, again, concerning "external safeties" on a revolver, generally they do not have one. But firing a revolver is a deliberate act in that you must pull back the hammer for a SA gun or overcome a stiffer trigger for a DA gun.

Sorry Parry but you are wrong on the single action weapons. If you run into an old single action Colt and place a round under the hammer and hit it hard enough it will fire. They had no type of safety device. That is why most people in the old day's carried 5 rounds in their weapons and nothing under the hammer.
Bill

Parry

by **gunderwood** » Tue, 31 Aug 2010 21:47:26

newdovo wrote:On the issue of a revolver having no "external safety", there are points to note about how a revolver works.
If it's a single action gun, the hammer must be pulled back and then the trigger pulled for the gun to fire. This is a very deliberate act, and the gun cannot be fired without first pulling back the hammer. There are also double-action revolvers. With these, when the trigger is pulled, it turns the cylinder to get the round into place, moves the hammer back, and then releases the hammer. Most of the DA revolvers with exposed hammers can also be fired in single action mode as noted above. Some have an enclosed hammer and can only be fired double-action.
Many modern revolvers have some sort of transfer bar or transfer system. The hammer makes contact with this to depress the firing pin, and only pulling the trigger will engage this.
Revolvers also have a heavier trigger pull than most semi-autos.
So, again, concerning "external safeties" on a revolver, generally they do not have one. But firing a revolver is a deliberate act in that you must pull back the hammer for a SA gun or overcome a stiffer trigger for a DA gun.

Parry

Most of this could also be said about modern striker fired semi-autos. That aside, the real safety is between your ears...no designer can work around that safety not functioning properly. It may be "blasphemy", but I doubt John Moses Browning himself could design around that.

by **ProShooter** » Wed, 01 Sep 2010 00:07:20

The safety on a modern revolver is the fact that it probably has a 12 pound trigger pull, which requires you and a friend to pull it together. :clap:

by **CowboyT** » Wed, 01 Sep 2010 03:06:23

I haven't yet found a DA revolver with a "safety" like you'd see in a semi-auto, other than its long trigger pull (*cough* RUGER *cough*). But some of the newer ones have some kind of way to disable the revolver from firing, generally with a sort of key lock.

All new S&W revolvers,, apparently except for a few lucky J-frames, are now made with such a lock designed by Saf-T-Hammer. For this reason, I refuse, out of principle, to buy a new S&W. My money, my choice. Taurus revolvers also have a lock, but I find its design less intrusive and less dangerous. Rugers, except for the new LCR, don't have them at all, and I consider that a very good thing.

by **gunderwood** » Wed, 01 Sep 2010 06:51:47

CowboyT wrote:But some of the newer ones have some kind of way to disable the revolver from firing, generally with a sort of key lock...Rugers, except for the new LCR, don't have them at all, and I consider that a very good thing.

+1

Their guns. Their dangerous if you don't respect them and learn how to handle them safely. No amount of lawyers mandating glow in the dark stickers or little "disable" switches is going to change that.

When society generally taught competency rather than ignorance/fear/don't touch we didn't have so many accidents. We don't spend 16 years of a childs life telling them to not touch an car and then at 16 just hand them the keys and say have fun. That is a recipe for disaster and the stats are bearing that out for firearms. We let the anti-gunners dictate how to teach firearm safety for too long and it is killing children.

by **WRW** » Wed, 01 Sep 2010 07:24:07

I call that the "Bumper Car Mentality". Just had new windows installed that actually have a sticker on them saying that "Open windows can be hazardous. Insect screens will not stop children from falling out of windows."

by **LFS** » Wed, 01 Sep 2010 07:31:36

Thanks everyone for your answers. You have confirmed what I believed to be the case, the "reporter" didn't know at all what he was talking about.

by **newdovo** » Wed, 01 Sep 2010 09:48:20

SgtBill wrote:Sorry Parry but you are wrong on the single action weapons. If you run into an old single action Colt and place a round under the hammer and hit it hard enough it will fire. They had no type of safety device. That is why most people in the old day's carried 5 rounds in their weapons and nothing under the hammer.

I felt like I was getting a bit wordy in my response to a simple post, so I stated "many modern revolvers have..." rather than going into the whole history of newer wheel guns vs. the old ones. But you're correct, and I could have made that distinction.
BTW, my Ruger New Model Single-Six Convertable SA gun has a transfer bar; but it is a new model, ain't it.

It's all good. Thanks for fleshing out the thread a bit. :thumbsup:

Parry

by **chfaunce** » Wed, 01 Sep 2010 10:04:46

WRW wrote:Just had new windows installed that actually have a sticker on them saying that "Open windows can be hazardous. Insect screens will not stop children from falling out of windows."

That is awesome. I guess "Warning: your child may be an idiot with sh*tty depth perception" was too harsh?

by **Diomed** » Thu, 02 Sep 2010 00:57:19

CowboyT wrote:I haven't yet found a DA revolver with a "safety" like you'd see in a semi-auto, other than its long trigger pull (*cough* RUGER *cough*). But some of the newer ones have some kind of way to disable the revolver from firing, generally with a sort of key lock.

S&W has their lemon-squeezer with the grip safety. It was the first of their post-Saf-T-Hammer revolvers to omit the lock, wasn't it?

Rugers, except for the new LCR, don't have them at all, and I consider that a very good thing.

I was under the impression the newer GP100s and SP101s also have locks under their grips. I may have misunderstood.

by **CowboyT** » Fri, 10 Sep 2010 22:22:50

Oh...that would be bad news if Ruger did that. I'm glad mine are older. Next gun show, I'll ask Trader Jerry's if they'll let me look under the stock. If Ruger has done this and I can find that out conclusively...I will report that in this forum.

Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

Simple Revolver Questions

Simple Revolver Questions

Re: Simple Revolver Questions

Re: Simple Revolver Questions

Re: Simple Revolver Questions

Re: Simple Revolver Questions

Re: Simple Revolver Questions

Re: Simple Revolver Questions

Re: Simple Revolver Questions

Re: Simple Revolver Questions

Re: Simple Revolver Questions

Re: Simple Revolver Questions

Re: Simple Revolver Questions

Re: Simple Revolver Questions

Re: Simple Revolver Questions

Re: Simple Revolver Questions

Re: Simple Revolver Questions

Re: Simple Revolver Questions

Re: Simple Revolver Questions

Who is online