Originally Posted by
HeruMew
I believe it may be a preferential item.
I guess so? I think it's a matter of coming to conclusions first, then trying to justify our thoughts in retrospect.
If I were to generalize, revolver folks tend to be old-school traditionalists. They've settled on the idea of a small revolver as the "perfect" pocket gun, so will justify their decision by saying that these small semi-autos are too big (even though actual measurements might disagree with them).
In contrast, semi-auto folks tend to be younger and more pragmatic? So they're constantly on the lookout for the new and shiny (the Sig P365 being the latest and greatest pocket carry....)
There I go again, offending everyone =P
Originally Posted by
Ron3
Look at the shape of the images you posted. See the rear of the guns? The LCR is the one most likely to smoothly come out the pocket, and without taking the pocket holster with it.
I see. So it's not just length x width x height, but shape. Got it.
Originally Posted by
Ron3
Also, unlike those auto's, the magazine button will never get depressed randomly while in the pocket resulting in a single shot before a stoppage. And, when contact distance is involved, the LCR can be pushed hard into a BG and fired repeatedly. The autos will not. There are pro's and con's to each.
Oh, for sure. Not discounting that there are pros and cons to each; was just trying to answer the question:
- why do revolver guys say that revolvers are a perfect size for pocket carry
- whereas semi-auto guys say that single stacks like the G43, LC9s, Shield, etc say that they're too big for pocket carry
You answered the question. It's not so much overall size, but shape.
(That and the revolver guys are just old-school and want to justify their decisions....)
"The nation that will insist on drawing a broad line of demarcation between the fighting man and the thinking man is liable to find its fighting done by fools and its thinking done by cowards."
William Francis Butler
Bookmarks